Does Iskar -20% XP affect AA points?

[Raseir]

I've been wondering this for some time. I'm not an uber necro as I had leveled a Iskar up to lvl40 on MM and then I had some trouble with my account, and lost him.
So I never got to find out for myself.

Now I am starting over again (on MM) and created a Iskar Necro, my question is simple- does the 20% XP loss from using the Iskar effect you when gaining AA points?

I have always been one to believe the Iskar is the best choice for a Necro, but if it does affect AAs then I would probably be using delete and creating a DE.

Thanks in advance.

[Fizzleplink]

I believe AA points are the same regardless of race and class. It's seemed the same with my post-60 folks.

[Skova]

I can confirm that the iksar exp penalty does NOT affect AA points. Tested this at 51.

[Raseir]

Ah, thank you! :D

Skova, I've been told that it does affect AAs when you dont have 100% going to AAs instead of XP. But that it does not affect AA when its set to 100% on them.
?

[Skova]

At 51 i had exactly 20% into level and exactly 20% into my first AA point. I usually do 100% one way or the other. So I decided to turn AA on 50% to test and see. The reg exp bar moved so much slower than my AA bar. By the time i dinged my first AA i was still approximately 16% from level.

[DogMeat]

Well I found out something last night. me(64 iksar necro), a 65 DE necro and a 65 shaman were kiting in HoH last night farming AA's. on the one mob both me and the other necro dinged AA at same time. So i asked him what his AA was set to and he said 100%, then i turned my AA up to 100%(was at 30% cuz I need to level) well to say the least I had gotten my next AA 2 kills before he did. I think level has alot to do with it.. just weird that a lev 64 can get an AA faster than a 65 while in the same group. Anyone answer this one?

[Fizzleplink]

Part of the odd way that EQ handles xp. Mobs give less xp the further below your level they are. Even cons have a bonus, as do yellow and red mobs.

It's enough of a hit per level to even out the level 65s in your group getting slightly larger % of the overall xp. If you'd been able to eat a steady diet of level 65 mobs you'd likely have made it even faster.

It isn't as noticable doing regular xp, since each level takes more xp to go through than the last one, but with AA it really shows. When my monk was 61 she was getting an AA in about 2/3 the time as a level 65 in the group was.

[Nigyl]

Even cons have a bonus, as do yellow and red mobs.

Actually, from what little analysis I've seen I believe it's something like 2x for mobs 4-5 levels below you and higher. This would explain why people complain so much about slow XP at 59 when they're soloing in PoN or other Tier-1 planes with low-50s mobs... at 59 they get half the XP from the same mob as they'd get at 58, whereas with old world mobs that never gave the XP bonus the difference is much smaller.

[Xavier]

I can make this pretty simple actually. As per soe written archives. Exp for AA is the same exp as you would recieve at 55 no matter the lvl. Once you are past 55 that is. At 51 you recieve aa as you would at 51. But after 55 all aa exp counts as 55. Thats why if you solo a forrest frog at 65 with 100% you would get 6-8% like you would if you successfully soloed one at 55 with 100% exp. No penalties apply to aa exp at all. Ever. The only thing that effects aa exp as per stated by soe is group exp. If you do not have at least 5 members you do not recieve the group exp bonus. And bonuses are the only thing that affects aa exp. Due to the large number of aa's we must obtain they figured it was better to allow bonuses to the aa exp. But no penalties. The only real penalty there is and its not considered a penalty is being the lower member in the group. The lower member in a non bonused group recieves more exp than a 65 would. Only because of the level difference and not the class or race.

[quik2]

Thats why if you solo a forrest frog at 65 with 100% you would get 6-8% like you would if you successfully soloed one at 55 with 100% exp. No penalties apply to aa exp at all. Ever.

WRONG! at lvl 56 I soled forrest frogs gave exactly 2.5percent normal a kill. at lvl 58-59 frogs gives exactly 2 percent a kill. so ur theory is wrong.

[Skova]

Actually the post was about AA exp not regular exp.

[Antilight]

Originally posted by quik2@Feb 10 2004, 12:38 PM
Thats why if you solo a forrest frog at 65 with 100% you would get 6-8% like you would if you successfully soloed one at 55 with 100% exp. No penalties apply to aa exp at all. Ever.

WRONG! at lvl 56 I soled forrest frogs gave exactly 2.5percent normal a kill. at lvl 58-59 frogs gives exactly 2 percent a kill. so ur theory is wrong.
Foot, meet mouth.


Antilight :ph34r:

[Fizzleplink]

If you solo the same frogs for AAXP, you'll find that at 59 the AAXP per kill is less than at 56.

Again, each fribbit is worth the same base XP. Each fribbit, though, is now lower in level to you than before, so you take a penalty. This penalty isn't bad if the critter's still close in level to you, but it grows as it gets further below you. The color-cons are an indication of where major "breaks" are in level. Up-and-coming necros try this: At 55, go solo a couple things (rats would make a good base comparison mob) in PoJ. Put all xp to AAXP and see what you get. Come back at 61 and solo them again, and again putting all to AAXP.

Contrary to Xavier's post, if you're the lowest level in the group you'll get least xp. Total levels are added up, and you get a % of xp based on how much of the group's total levels you are.

Say you're a 61 in a group of 65's.
65+65+65+65+65+61=386 levels there
61 of 386 levels = 15.8%
65 of 386 levels = 16.8%

Not much of a difference in this group, agreed. Hugely noticable when you have one group member who's way ahead of the rest (say a lev 57 in a group full of lev 51s).