I'm 100% in favor of boosting being nerfed and 5 man exp better. Maybe that's the "get off my lawn" attitude because I've leveled many 5 man teams via dungeons VS boosting
I'm 100% in favor of boosting being nerfed and 5 man exp better. Maybe that's the "get off my lawn" attitude because I've leveled many 5 man teams via dungeons VS boosting
If my goal is end game with my team I will take the route of least resistance. If my goal is enjoying dungeons then it doesn't matter how long leveling takes because once I hit max level I will just start a new team.
That sounds reasonable to me as well. In general you guys are describing a world that sounds acceptable (1.5 levels per dungeon?), maybe need to try my dungeon teams again.
My problem with "If my goal is end game with my team I will take the route of least resistance. If my goal is enjoying dungeons then it doesn't matter how long leveling takes because once I hit max level I will just start a new team." as an argument is that I LOVE leveling through dungeons, but if you get stuck in an expac where you are getting the same dungeon over and over and it is a shitty one, I don't want to run dungeons I hate more than once on a team.
At level groups should definitely reward more experience than boosted groups per completion. I even agree that it should be slightly more in a xp per hour sense. Specifically, at level random dungeon groups should not be worse than boosting. At level specific dungeon groups should also be "not worse" than boosting.
I also think leveling secondary characters should be significantly faster than leveling first characters. On par with all alts have 300% RAF ish XP, but not level grants (make heirlooms grant a much bigger bonus).
Connect With Us