XP gain - the gross exploit

Nope. Also, I agree with you.

Yeah, definitely agreed, this is an old problem. The game really doesn't need more incentives to group everyone up all the time, particularly not unintuitive incentives like free xp for everyone near a battle, regardless if they actually did anything during it, with no reason not to include them. At the very least the xp needs to be split, so players have to consider whether they really want all possible units in every battle, and ideally (not necessary, but it'd be nice) the split would be weighted based on damage done or some other measurement.

Eh, this doesn't really bother me.

Agree that this could be done better. Simple split would go a long way and should be pretty easy to implement.

I think the OP has a point, though I think it fails to make a strong enough point. In general, we will group experience systems into one of three groups - Participation based, Individual Event Based(IEB), and Split Battle Event Based(SEB). The current experience system is a participation based system which evenly rewards units for their participation in the battle, regardless of their action. This system gives players a heavy incentive to create the largest parties possible and to prefer small lopsided battles to even or tactically difficult battles. Players who take advantage of the system are not exploiting it, but merely maximizing the systems potential.

If one was to make a change to the experience system, an IEB system would not be preferable. This is the type of system found in games such as Final Fantasy Tactics or Shining Force, where in each individual unit is given experience based on their actions. In an IEB system where actions garnish experience gain, ranged units would have an incredibly experience advantage over melee units, while in an IEB system where kills garnish experience, melee units would have incredible advantages over ranged.

In general, a SEB system is preferable as it is a system in which all experience gaining events are pooled and split evenly amongst participants. In this system, the player is given incentives to fight fair and even matches when attempting to gain experience, while always maintaining a equal experience gain no matter the party size.

Fight fair?  This is war.  And you should have every encouragement to create the most lopsided victories possible.  It's not good war to go fight even or difficult battles all the time.  I was on the fence, but now I am convinced it should stay the same.

Lord Xia, You are totally correct. War is not about fair, but then again, War is not really about experience gain either. The only good reason to change the experience system is to make experience farming a bit less exploitative.

Thats fair too.  Not sure I would put this as a top priority though.

Oh I completely agree about that.

I genuinely believe that dividing the experience gain by the number of participants or survivors would be enough. That should really not take long to implement in the code (and I'm a developer myself, if you ask 'and what would you know about that?' ).

I think the game handles XP just fine as it is.  If it worked for MOM, don't fix it.

Except, it worked in a bad way.

The XP system has become a dealbreaker for me. Age of Wonders have the IEB (Individual Event Based) kill system and MoM the PB (Participating Based) system where you just show up and gain experience. I can't recall exactly how that system worked though....

Both systems aren't good enough.

A SBEB (Split Battle Event Based) system like Kenata says sounds the very best. "all experience gaining events are pooled and split evenly amongst participants".

I actually don't know about a better system in a TBS like this.

Does this mean all participants who have done at least one experience gaining event, or any participant that survived the battle on the winning side?

Best regards,
Steven.

In any case, I would gladly welcome any other system than the current one

If you refer to me, then it is any participant that survived the battle. I think that would be the most fair.

What about those that fled the battle?  Do they get any experience?

Best regards,
Steven.

Yes they do, but if other XPgaining actions are done after they've left the battlefield then only the ones left in battle get that XP.

Would this be difficult to program?  And do losing but surviving units get any experience from their side's actions?

Best regards,
Steven.

i agree largely, so long as this can be done without making it difficult to level up new champions. personally i find the adventure/champion side of the game very fiddly atm. getting 4 champions 3 children, 2 spouses and 6 grandchildren up to a level where they are even useful/safe in the midgame to late game requires a lot of micro management and one of the easiest ways is to take them on battles they don't participate in.

splitting xp is a much better way, but i'd want a few other changes to come with it. for example, children getting a few free levels based on their parents level, and some slow base xp gain for inactive heroes.

Those would both be fine,  The 2nd has been suggested before, and was in MoM & AoW:SM, so it plainly doesn't exactly ruin games it is in.

Mostly I still think the existing system is ok.  Rookie units should gain some XP from just being there and seeing it for real with arrows whistling overhead even if they don't accomplish much themselves.

SEB would be ok, but they would have to increase the amount of XP you get from killing any specific monster so the dilution effect wouldn't slow leveling to a crawl.

IEB could suck big-time.  The AoW:SM system was too fiddly while I tried to arrange it so the hero I was trying to level-up would strike the fatal blow.  Please don't.

But don't waste time with big changes to the XP system until everything else is fixed.

What the best system is depends on the game. Age of Wonders had a combat system that made arranging who gets a kill interesting; E:WoM not so much.

It also depends on what type of game you want. Splitting exp evenly is better for games geared towards large numbers of units/parties while basing it one who makes the kill is better for games that focus on having elite troops.

Having the exp gain be based only on the value of slain enemies and having the events in battle and the size of your force not matter is always blah IMO.

In general, an IEB system can add interesting decisions to combat, but typically give a huge advantage to direct damage units over supporting units or indirect damage units. Looking at AoW, the IEB experience system featured in that title was the weakest form of IEB system. Not only did the game give an incredible advantage to direct damage units, but as higher tier units became more frequent participants in combat, leveling lower tier or support units like archer became drastically more difficult. One of the best IEB systems was that of Final Fantasy Tactics, wherein experience was given per action, thus minimizing the gap in experience gain between damage units and support units.

I completely agree with this sentiment. While I think this is a fun and interesting discussion, the need for changes to this system over other aspects of the game is minimal. I would rather see some kind of happiness system for cities implemented over any changes to the experience system.

I agree with the original poster. 

Participation-based XP does not make any sense. How much experience you can get from watching your colleagues beating someone up, standing in the back rank? Probably same amount as watching a boxing match in TV - none at all.

Those who deal the blows and block the attacks should get the experience. Wesnoth does it well, for example - for a combat round, 1XP, for killing an opponent, 8*Level of the slain foe.

This is grossly incorrect. A man who sits at home watching a boxing match may absorb the forms of various punches and combinations and may even gain some understanding of the the various strategies for engaging and opponent in hand to hand combat. Yet, this man experiences these things vicariously without any of the real sensations of either being the boxer or even being in the crowd. The man in the back ranks may not be fighting directly, but this does not take away from his overall experience of the battle. This man watches the battle field turn from green to red, smells the musk off fresh corpses, and faces the palpable dread of those facing a life or death struggle. Even without lifting his sword, this back rank individual is hardened by his experiences and it is this which is abstracted in an experience system.

And the way healers get experience in Wesnoth is by having other units do most of the damaging and then the healer landing the killing blow.  But this is compensated by the healers becoming quite a bit more powerful each level up.  Surviving an attack or defense only gives 1XP per level of unit, finishing off a unit gives (8*Level) XP or 4XP for Level 0 (weak but numerous) units.

Best regards,
Steven.