well, you do lose a lotta exp...I was surprised at level 25 when I died, I lost 60-ish percent. Even though it doesn't take that long to get back up, it's still freaky thinking what it could be at higher levels.

Imperian XP loss got downgraded significantly to encourage PK, or so I was told.

Decent XP loss is good IMO... actual incentive not to die instead of "Oh, well I'll just lose X". Though either way it just comes down to time.

That's a possibility as well....it just seems like, at this rate you are going to lose a level and a half at higher levels and at level 90, losing a level and half is NOT easy to get back I don't think.

Yeah, I think the EXP loss really needs to be decreased or nobody with high levels will participate in PK, because you would probably lose like, 1.5 levels as Felemar said, and at high levels that'd be *really* hard to get back especially considering the lack of bashing zones.

To reinforce the point.. I was 30% through level 62. I prayed instantly, and after praying I'm at 86% through level 61..

If I'm remembering my lower levels right, I lose a significant amount more when I die in Lusternia than in Achaea. Losing 75% is about average when I pray immediately. However, my class in Achaea rarely uses mana, at least in bashing, and when I die in Lusternia my mana's generally running on empty. That's not necessarily the case for everyone else, but it could explain some noticeable differences.

15% into level 42, down to 27% in level 41. Yeah, I'm done fighting in PK.

This attitude just doesn't do. I love the fact that when you die, it hurts in the lower regions with a fury. It hasn't stopped me from raiding or fighting, because death just means about another hour of ratting. While the exp loss might be large, so the exp gain higher to average it seems. As for higher levels losing massive exp when they die, well, it's gonna be hard to _beat_ a high level character in the first place eh?

So, judging from Achaea and what I see here, people won't fight if there's no decent loss to their opponent, because there's no point. But people won't fight if there's decent loss to themselves, because they don't want to risk that loss.

Anyone have a solution?

Depends, but for the most part, no. As a Mugwump, the difference between level 60 and level 70 just means I have more mana and a little bit more health. That is to say, it means nothing, since I never run low on mana. The health gain is so slim that I'm almost as easy to kill..

The exp gain may be higher than average where you are, but exping is much more limited at the higher levels than other games.

For a lot of the mobiles, partciularly the ones in Astral which offer just about the only bashing location, it wouldn't be overly difficult to kill a higher level character. They hit for a lot of damage and chase making it possible to find yourself in a crowd of them before you know it. So, it isn't unrealistic for higher levels characters to go down by any means.

Judging by the multitude of deathsights i've seen, and defences against raids or raids i've seen or taken part in, people are dying a hell of a lot more to other players, and more frequently, than on Achaea or Imperian. Less experience loss would doubtlessly mean more people take part in these, though i'm sure they'll still happen on a regular basis simply due to the village system and how that ties in to power and commodities.

Wow, you mean... it will actually be difficult to make it to really high levels, and to make 99? Its not just a matter of bashing, bashing, bashing, there may actually be some skill necessary to stay alive as well?

This is the way it should be. You should all stop whining about the exp loss and take it the way it should be - an actual discouragement from dying. This was one of my big problems in Aetolia - especially during the early Spirokai wars. Some people you could kill 10 times over. And that was no solution, they'd just keep coming back til they got you. Violence should be a threat, in my opinion, just as powerful as politics and economics. When there isn't enough consequence from it, though, its just a distraction. I think its reasonable for a strong character to command some kind of power for that, instead of, "Ok, you do this, or I will kill you." "So what? I'll be back in 2 minutes anyway, nyah nyah".

Death really should have a little more impact than found on most MUDS. I hear everyone talk about RP, an incentive to be more wary of death is a wonderful RP tool.

If we're to see the exp loss as a discouragement to die, then we're going to see less and less players get involved where it really counts.

Personal gain is where it's at, how about increasing the exp gained from killing someone? What about a 60 minute increased exp defence after dying?

In short, if exp loss isnt getting decreased, there needs to be something to balance the potential loss with the potential gain.

This just reminded me of a preview of the game Guild Wars I played last weekend (it was an open preview thing). Their system was, you lose no EXP or gold, but instead, you get a penalty to your stats. It reduced your HP and Power (their Mana equivalent, not our kind of powerpower) by a certain percentage. If you died more, that percentage went up. When you killed monsters or were just alive for a certain amount of time, it gradually decreased. Not sure if it would be possible or practical to do anything like that, but I figured I'd mention it.

Personal gain is not the only reason for PK, especially if we are committed to good RP.
I do not believe PK as a method of gaining XP should be encouraged. PK should be valid in terms of RP. Lets take raids for instance, if the penalties for death are low, then everybody will be prepared to join the raid. On the defenders side, everybody will be prepared to defend. It just becomes a big mess over and over where winning is the only visible success.
Lets take the same situation with high death penalties. Only those who are "heroic" will join the raid/defense. You will see acts of heroism on the battlefield that affect things outside the battle such as standing within the city/guild, morale, etc. eg. The little novice who bravely defends to the death, or the Guildmaster who rushes to the aid of his guildmembers taking a death so they can escape, or the Prince who deserts his fellows rather than take a death. All these things have ramifications beyond the battle because of the "stakes" involved that you just don't get when the value of death (and value of life) is cheapened.
Thinking that XP loss/gain is the only benefit/penalty is a little shortsighted. A big death penalty will quickly show who is more concerned with their stats than with their RP. I am more than happy to mess up my chars numbers if it means good RP.

It isn't really that simple. Let's throw in the monkey wrench that people will be calling the Avenger even when killed for RP reasons.

So to take your example, the guildmaster rushes to the aid of his guildmates and kills someone in their defense. He dies 1-2 times to the Avenger.

Keep in mind that not all RP-related fighting occurs in specified "enemy" territories. For example, Bob kills Dave in defense of the sea outside of his city or a forest outside of his commune. Bob dies 1-2 times to the Avenger. Not only that, but he has to pray both times if the Avenger takes his body.

The xp loss penalty for dying can be far more of a dis-incentive (is that a word?) to engage in RP-related conflict than in the examples given in the previous post. Not only are the xp penalties harsh, but they can often be applied multiple times, and without resurrection.

This is of course assuming that Bob doesn't examine his pk status in the middle of each conflict so that he can ask his allies to "please attack Dave because Dave has Suspect on me". But err.. we were talking about promoting RP, right?

EXP loss seems to be toned down. THANK YOU.