Please bring back surplus

[Yves]

thing is, rested bonus is basically surplus except the word 'bonus' is used instead of 'penalty.'

...which makes it inherently the opposite when using the English language. ^^

P1: Surplus in the XIV world is either a penalty that is imposed upon players for playing (A) or a reward imposed upon players not playing (B).
P2: Surplus in the XIV world, as it stands now, is not a penalty imposed upon players for playing (A).
C: Therefore surplus in the XIV world, as it stands now, is a reward imposed upon players for not playing.

P1: A > B
P2: ~A
C: -> B

Boole says this passes.

[Alhanelem]

...which makes it inherently the opposite when using the English language. ^^

P1: Surplus in the XIV world is either a penalty that is imposed upon players for playing (A) or a reward imposed upon players not playing (B).
P2: Surplus in the XIV world, as it stands now, is not a penalty imposed upon players for playing (A).
C: Therefore surplus in the XIV world, as it stands now, is a reward imposed upon players for not playing.

P1: A > B
P2: ~A
C: -> B

Boole says this passes.

get bonus -> Play too much -> Bonus used up -> get less EXP
Unless you're leveling up constantly, it's pretty easy to have bonus on all the time, thus a 'penalty' is imposed on you for playing too much (long enough to use up the "bonus.")
-or-
get "normal" exp -> play too much -> enter "surplus" -> get less Exp

The difference between the two is subtle at best.

You know, WoW did this too after beta, they had a 'fatigued" EXP tier, then people coplained, so they made "fatigued" the normal tier and called what used to be the normal tier "rested EXP" and everyone was happy even though they didn't actually change the parameters of the system at all.

When a bonus tends to be active more often than not, you become used to it, so you start to perceive the time without the bonus as a penalty.

Granted, in FFXIV, surplus was a little different, because it was possible to go down to zero EXP gain, whereas that's no longer possible. Just saying, these two things aren't really as different as people perceive them to be.

[Yves]

get bonus -> Play too much -> Bonus used up -> get less EXP
Unless you're leveling up constantly, it's pretty easy to have bonus on all the time, thus a 'penalty' is imposed on you for playing too much (long enough to use up the "bonus.")
-or-
get "normal" exp -> play too much -> enter "surplus" -> get less Exp

The difference between the two is subtle at best.

You know, WoW did this too after beta, they had a 'fatigued" EXP tier, then people coplained, so they made "fatigued" the normal tier and called what used to be the normal tier "rested EXP" and everyone was happy even though they didn't actually change the parameters of the system at all.

Your missing the point that surplus penalized standard EXP. The argument that surplus, as it stands today, is standard is incorrect. It may be common but it isn't standard. The difference is about as subtle as going putting a car in drive in reverse. The car is moving but in totally different directions.

Today: play too much, revert to standard
Before: play too much, standard is penalized

[Alhanelem]

You're not doing the math correctly. You are using different formulas for each scenario, when in WoW the same formulas were used for both scenarios.

In FFXIV it isn't exactly the same because EXP was totally rebalanced and different amounts of EXP were given for different things (and they introduced chains and other effects), and the surplus EXP wasn't constant (it would get worse if you kept pushing it)

In the example I gave, the "penalized" EXP of the old system and the "normal" EXP of the new system were the EXACT SAME AMOUNTS OF EXP. The amount of EXP after the bonus was applied in the new system and the amount of exp before the penalty was applied in the old system were EXACT SAME AMOUNTS of EXP.

That is:

Old: Get 100 EXP a kill, degrades to 50 EXP. Degredation recovers with inactivity.
New: Get 50 EXP a kill, bonus is 100 EXP. Bonus accumulates with inactivity.

LITERALLY THE SAME FORMULAS WERE USED. I REPEAT- the SAME formulas. The only difference was what they called each tier of EXP.

I realize that what I described about "having the bonus most of the time due to my circumstances" isn't something that everyone experiences. But when you always have a bonus, it's as if the bonus is the normal tier and you are being penalized after you play for so long (when you don't normally play that long). This is just a perception that occurs by having a bonus always applied.

Again- in all fairness, FFXIV didn't do things exactly the same way, and since it was possible for EXP gain to stop completely, FFXIV's surplus was a shitty thing to have- now even in the worst case scenario, you're still gaining EXP. So it's a massive improvement and everyone was rightfully happy. I'm simply describing to you how when a bonus becomes the norm, the norm can be viewed as a penalty.

[Yves]

Old: Get 100 EXP a kill, degrades to 50 EXP:
New: Get 50 EXP a kill, bonus is 100 EXP.

LITERALLY THE SAME FORMULAS WERE USED. I REPEAT- the SAME formulas. The only difference was what they called each tier of EXP.

I'm calling BS on this. The EXP was actually increased per mob with the introduction of the new surplus system. EXP per mob was absolutely not reduced in order to balance the same equation. Remove linking bonus and go back to the post-coblyn/doblyn nerf. Kill a r50 dobyln at level 49 and it gave you around 198 EXP. Go kill one now and you're not getting <198. Based on that information there was no such adjustment made.

Either I'm not understanding your point or you're using incorrect information. No offense intended, btw.