We'll do it this way then...
If both artists in a group votes on their own pieces, it will count as a 1/2 vote. (i.e. if you vote 10 on your own piece, it will be marked as 5)
If only 1 of the 2 artists in a group votes then their vote will be removed at the end of the voting round.

 

And if you don't like this alternative, well you're just gonna have to suck it up, buttercup.

 

This seems unecessarily complex and still doesn't solve the problem at hand. Consider now that you've got 4 people - 2 people in a group A, and 2 people in group B. So, the 2 people in group A vote for everyone - lets say everyone gets a score of 20, for simplicity. Then the people in B don't vote. However, now, with this system, each artist in group A will only have a score of 10, while the people in group B who didn't vote (but had others vote for them) have a score of 20. There's a problem here.

I'd say to keep the entries cheerful and to reflect something positive.

 

Cheerful to a sadist, perhaps? .

 

Both highly subjective terms

 

Just messing with you though, I'll come up with something nice. Hopefully I'm still in.

What if your child is a perverted sadist? o_o.

AA has a point. However, I fear that without the activity level the forum used to have I doubt many votes would be placed that isn't by the participants. 

 

Off topic, I think the theme should go ahead and be posted. We already had artists barely make this time frame. The sooner the better imo. Good luck guys!

 

Exactly my point chagryn. By discouraging the artists themselves to vote through the current system, it makes entries' ranks dependent heavily on the votes of a few players who decide to vote without being in the competition. Encouraging more votes (rather, not dissuading them) would help make the pieces more stratified, which is really what we want in a competition anyway.

I don't think they should. 

 

We, the artist, should still give ourselves a score so people won't know who made what. In the end, subtract our points from our score and that should be our total score.  Something like that, cause i can give myself a 10 even though it's not worthy and thats a lot of bonus points for me

 

One thing I want to bring up though. This system as it is discourages voting on the whole - think of it this way:

 

I vote, but someone else doesn't. So say with my vote, there's 10 votes total. So, with my vote, I've got 10 people voting for me, and so does the other person. However, if my vote gets subtracted, I get 9 votes, whereas the other guy gets 10 votes, and so it's in his benefit to not vote for people so that he doesn't boost others up without boosting himself up. When it gets down to the wire at the very end, every single point will matter. So, to stay competitive people need to be able to vote for themselves, or they're losing out on points that are rightfully theirs. If we're going with this logic we might as well as just reduce everyone's vote by a set percentage, though that serves no purpose so we're better off just leaving them as they are. Besides, lets have some faith in the community. The good ones will get bubbled out anyway, so even if crappy pieces have 10s from their artists it won't make a difference in the end, and I'd imagine that most artists are honest to themselves and I've seen that pretty much throughout this voting so far.

 

My 2.

1A - 6/10 - I like the concept here, and the execution is pretty nice. The colors all match up pretty well, and there is a good amount of blending. I'll point out that it is a bit undersaturated (maybe could do with some more colors in general) and a bit too bright on the top right (so you can't read the text effectively. You should have made it a bit darker so it's still readable while not being so dark as to be confused as the main text.) It seems that her right shoulder is a bit pointy ... not sure if that was a mistake with the eraser tool, but that is a bit obvious. Overall, pretty decent.

1B - 5/10 - Decent attempt, but there's a few flaws here that really detract from the general sig. I'm not familiar with the character so I'm not sure if there's an element of the time travel theme that is being followed here, so I won't comment on that. However, with the clock and the Eiffel tower, their blending is a bit off - they seem to be just pasted in without any regard for blending (some effects on top of them around the edges would help make it appear as if it was in the background). The fire effects are too bright, and a bit too sharp. Some blurring would have been nice, but it seems as though the foreground was sharpened without the background being blurred. Also, I think the choice of font for text could use a little work. Either way, I enjoy the effects. By the way ... what's with that face to the bottom right of the subject?

 

2A - 3/10 - To be honest, I'm not quite sure what is going on here. There's way too much blue just ... everywhere. I think the goal here is that there is supposed to be a sorceress looking through a portal of some sort at a futuristic time, but that's not what I'm getting here. What it looks like to me is there is a scene of rain that has been whitewashed at the bottom and ripped in the left side to reveal something else underneath (referencing the jagged edges). I think the biggest thing here is the white light - it's just way too overpowering relative to the brightness of all of the other aspects (rather, lack there of). One thing that would have helped a good bit is a thick black border, probably just the horizontal bars. That would introduce some contrast to the white light and make it less overpowering. Additionally, the top right corner is quite bare - I'd suggest putting some sort of moon in there, maybe a few space stocks set on screen to just add some diversity to the background. One thing I must say I like is the text though, good job on that.

 

2B - 4/10 - While it is a decent sig, I'm not quite sure how much work was done here. My guess would be that there are two distinct backgrounds which meet at the white light (which might explain why there seems to be a bit of a blending problem to the left of the bridge), and then some dinosaur renders and that person (archer/hunter, maybe?). The background does look nice, and the green dinosaur to the left has colors that blend pretty well with the entire scene (though the blueish tint to the left of the dinosaur is a bit off. Mess with curves /levels to try and fix that). The biggest thing for me here is the RED portal on the blue/white background though. It simply doesn't fit - it's a huge eyesore. It is a better attempt at a portal than some of the other pieces, but it could use some work. Also, it seems like it was just "placed there". There's no interaction with the background - I'd suggest you try and make the portal light blue (replace the reddish color on the outside), and greyish-white (replacing the yellow). Then, maybe use a liquify tool on the background to try and distort it slightly to reflect a disruption in space-time. Other than that, decent idea, but a bit too simple for my taste.

 

3A - 1/10 - This is little more than a text slap. It seems like there's a stock background image off of google (which was placed incorrectly, there's an extra white pixel border on the bottom, though that could be due to the magic wand on the time machine which was then shifted up one pixel), which then has a render placed on it with some lighting that's way too bright and some text that just doesn't fit. Sorry if I'm being a bit harsh ... but there's just really nothing to like here. My assumption is that the artist here is submitting this as one of his or her first pieces ever, which is then acceptable. My advice would be to try and work on blending first and foremost, and then try and tackle the issue of color balance and lighting. Blending in this case could have been achieved by having some elements of the background brought to the foreground (maybe some lightning/ripples in front of the time machine), and a different color background could have worked better (unless a different effect was being attempted, but I would doubt that).

 

3B - 3/10 - This is roughly on the level of 2A. While it is a little easier to understand what is going on here, and with the theme fitting slightly more directly with the assigned topic, there's quite a few technical flaws that make this a very low scoring piece from me. First of all ... rule of thirds. NEVER  (with very few exceptions) place a render in the center ... always have the center /main part of the render 1/3 or so of the width off either edge, depending on the orientation of the render. For the background, I like the colors, though the blur is a bit extreme. Also, you'll notice that there's a bit of a failed effect on the right - I think the overlay stock that was used to color the entire image wasn't wide enough, or was shifted a few pixels to the left by accident. Either way, it's an eyesore. The large white building to the right is way too distracting, though I do want to point out that it fits the lighting scheme, so that's good. It's just that when you blur things, the lighting becomes more prominent (lighter things become even lighter, darker things become even darker), so because it already had a bright light on it that effect just got compounded and it becomes an eyesore. Finally I want to point out the terrible cut on the doctor ... that should have been fixed by blending the hair a little bit. And he's too blurry anyway. Oh, and fix the text while you're at it.

 

4A - 6/10 - Pretty obvious back to the future sig ... but I'll take it. No points lost for that. My main problem with this is that there is SO much going on - which isn't always a problem - in this case. The effects are pretty decent, and there's a good understanding of blending and lighting and such. I would have liked to have seen the character (Marty, is it?) be a little sharper and have the background have a bit more depth of field, which, in an item like a car, is pretty easy to achieve. Another bit to consider is that the entire left side is just too bright, and that brightness doesn't really follow a flow of the image (ie the general line of the car), it's just ... there. Same thing for the bottom right. While the colors are mostly spot-on, they're generally oversaturated. And I'm not exactly sure what's going on in the top right corner. Oh, and finally I think the sig is a little small for everything going on in it, but that's just personal preference again.

 

4B - 7/10 - I quite like this, actually. The colors are nice, the concept is great, but there are a few things that throw it off for me. First and foremost is those few lines coming from the white source of light ... it seems that there was a stock image off of a site that you forgot to erase lines from to purchase legally. Also, this does fit to the rule of thirds better than an example earlier, but it's still a bit off. The thing that I really don't like (and that might just be a problem with the way the renders are arranged) is that the guns go basically to the edge of the canvas, which is a problem in my eyes. Also, the blending for the renders, while interesting, needs some work to match the rest of the sig. The biggest thing was probably the text though - I think you can fix that bug by saving, closing PS and restarting. Other than that, I don't have much to say about it. Good piece.

 

5A - 7/10 - While I like the piece, I think it's overall a bit too dark. It seems like you just took a giant grey layer and set the opacity a bit low, darkening the entire thing while also "greying" it out. So the colors all seem a bit off to me. As for the piece itself, I think the abstractness of the entire image is great, it's well developed and it all fits. The two bright spots are REALLY overwhelming though, especially considering how dark the rest of the image is. Also, I think this might have been better served with less text and a slightly wider canvas.

 

5B - 6/10 - This one is just WAY too bright for me. While lighting is good, too much lighting can obviously kill an image, as seen here. I like the idea of using the blueprint/sketch of the deLorean in the background, but I don't particularly like the caricatures of the characters. The colors themselves are pretty good, actually, and they reflect nicely onto the characters. However, there's just light EVERYWHERE. There needs to be some contrast, some dark area in this image, of which there is none. Your eyes are constantly redirected to different locations due to the multiple sources of light, so the characters don't get the focus they deserve. Instead of having light at the edges, you might want to consider having light behind the characters, throwing light at them while having the edges blackened/darkened/burned a little bit.

 

6A - 6/10 - I'm not quite familiar with this character, so as before, I won't be judging based on how well this fits the theme directly. However I will mention that the clocks and such overlayed in the background are a nice touch, they're implemented well. What sets me off about this one is how far the character is angled - if it wasn't fitting in the slot, try not to rotate it to do so next time, and just choose a different character. This might have been better suited to an avatar. Either way, I like the text a lot, this is probably one of the finest examples of text in this selection of signatures. I absolutely love the colors on the bottom right, but since those basically only work because of how far the character is rotated ... I'm feeling slightly neutral about them. You should work on improving the bottom left and top left though, basically the areas in the left apart from the big (perhaps too big) bright light. They're just a bit dull right now in comparison to the rest of the image. Also, on a whole I think the entire thing could do with a bit more black instead of the greenish brown that you've got in dark areas.

 

6B - 8/10 - I'd say this is one of the better pieces in this round. The first thing that strikes me is that there's a lot of fire ... while it is executed nicely in that it does flow and it does have some blur to add depth, it might have been more interesting if the fire started to thin out toward the top left and we got to see more of the space that's near Dastan's head (to his left). The text is done pretty well, though the "of" is slightly difficult to read - perhaps a stronger drop shadow was needed. The other thing I'm noticing is that the bottom right corner is just slightly too blurry, but that's a minor detail. You'll also notice that inside the border corners there's a bit of a bend in the inner glow, which means that there were better ways to get this effect than the technique used here (and as such to avoid those corner points). But, overall I'd say it's a pretty nice piece. I'd consider using this as a sig .

 

7A - 5/10 - It's a good signature, perhaps just with an unfortunate pairing. The placement of the various objects is pretty good, and there is some flow established with the moving particles. The render seems to stick out like a bit of a sore thumb, however, even though the colors match up nicely. Some more blending (through smudging, other various effects laid on top of him or otherwise) could really have helped. This is also the first sig that I think really does the clock aspect well, so kudos to you for that. The biggest thing for me here is the text though ... black text on a black background just doesn't do too well, even with a white outer glow. The subtext is nice, but that font and that color on the main text needs to go. One final note, I think this could have done well with a border, because with so much of the clock visible it leaves me wanting more, but that is almost cheated out of me with the sig with a lack of a border - an explicit denial of "more" would be less hurtful, and better for the sig overall.

 

7B - 8/10 - In this case, the best really is saved for last. I've ranked this as the same as the 6B, simply because I'm not going to give decimal ranks. However, if I were I'd give this a slight edge over 6B, calling this the best in the group. I love the concept and the execution, it's done very well. There are a few things that stick out to me that prevent me from giving it a higher score, however. First and foremost it's that border around the entire sig ... for me, at least, when the large horizontal bars are used there shouldn't be any vertical bars - if there are, they should both be the same thickness. So that's a problem in my book. Also, looking at the bubble c4ds placed around the tardis in the 1886 version (and less visibly so in the 31440 side), I can see that they basically don't match the background. There are better ways of making the tardis stand out, of which I'm sure the artist is aware. I think it might have looked fine without those particular c4ds, perhaps even better. I do really love the split between the two halves though, very nice effects that I can't find any problem with. So good job. As a final note, the text is just crap in both. I understand that text is needed to prevent stealing, but I think in this particular instance the sig would look a LOT better without the text to distract you from the glory of the rest of it.

 

Sorry if I was a bit harsh guys ... but hey, it's the GGT. It's not meant to be easy . Hopefully people see my comments as helpful more than hurtful, even if people's egos aren't necessarily stroked by these comments. Sorry again .

Very nice updates hoof, thanks. I really have no complaints .. and while I *would* like that first multiple potion slot to be at level 5 instead of level 10, I'll be level 10 eventually, so I'm not going to complain about that. Nice new medals too, those are shiny . Templates are amazing!

 

One thing I would suggest though, as an addendum, is reducing the delay in instant composing timeout from 24 hours to 23 hours 50 mins or something, even 23h55m, just so people can compose at the exact same time each day without having to worry about getting it pushed further up. Other than that, changes look great .

 

AA

I'm pretty sure a cap was suggested at 1000, 1500, and now 2000 ... I personally would have preferred to see this at level 1000, but yeah, I'm all in favor of creating a level cap. Let people run through content as many times as they want . I'm a bit opposed to the second idea (at least, the rewriting of all of the quests). Alternatively what could happen is a name and graphical change for each of the creatures after the fallen sword corrupts them ... so "Corrupted Rat" or something of the sort, with a negative image. I think it would be pretty simple to implement, and would keep people busy for the next 2 years or so. 

Since composing is first on the list, I'd like to propose a small change to the functionality of the instant gold potion make feature.

 

Currently, there is a 24 hour timeout from when you instantly make a potion to when it is removed from your history, allowing gold costs to return to normal. I'm proposing that this be dropped to roughly 23 hours and 45 mins, to allow for people to spend those last 15 minutes making potions instantly (for more info on how to instant-gold compose, see my previous composing threads). This would prevent the issue where the instant gold composing start time is pushed back 5-10 minutes every day (by however long it takes you to make your potions).

I have 7 combat sets. They are very useful for different setup combinations. I had hoped to make a empty set so I could hunt naked for frags but also to reset for creating another and was kind of disapointed I couldnt save a empty one.

 

the better solution here might be to add a "remove all gear" button and leave combat sets working the way they are.

you wonder why i am pushing its because i love to invent its a buzz i havent felt in along time

You could always try and invent RP items or something of the sort if you're simply looking for that "buzz". That "buzz" of one player isn't enough to justify releasing the chompers again to crush profits.

if i profit brilliant if i dont ohwell recently i tried scavenging again lost around 600fsp its one of them things its the thrill not the profit that does it for me

By and large people won't lose money scavenging - the market will adjust to allow scavengers to at least break even in *most* cases, so your case must have been bad luck ... or, you were too impatient. Either way, that thrill is available at any time in the caves.

..your not bothered over the market being staurated your worried on the losses you will take as you have some many spikes left over i sold mine cheap compared to most because again i wasnt worried in holding out and making loads small profits soon add up.

Sure, I have some vested interest here. Fine. I'm not afraid to admit it, nor do I see anything wrong with that. The FSP here is basically the last thing I'm concerned about - I've got enough to tide me over for a while. Here I'm really trying to suggest what's best for HCS here, which in turn means the best for the game. After all, without HCS you don't get FS.

but when gnarled horns hit 60fsp each which they have done not every player can afford to buy 10 to try there luck nor can every player afford a omacaz pot which adds around 28-29% so still under the 50%plus claim you made

That 28-29% figure you made seems accurate for the inventor 575. However, you also need to consider the inventor II buff which adds a significantly higher number of attempts which is a de facto way of increasing the invention rate. But for a second consider that I was wrong here - even the 28-29% you report plus the 20% originally means a rate of *basically* 50%, which is still significant. Also, my point here was exactly what you're saying - not everyone can afford to spend the FSP needed to make a large number of spikes/amulets/rings, but those than can will, and will do so under the effect of an omacaz potion, without exception. Maybe we'll get a few successful attempts from those who don't use omacaz, but the real market changers will be those using omacaz, enough to make the other effects negligible. So we can consider the spikes to have an effective invent rate of 50%, essentially.

..grim already said epics over time lose there value and then thats when new ones come out its why the ammy and ring came out the spike is pretty useless otherwise..

You might want to look at the ridged legion breastplate. Or the vine tendril gauntlets. Or the other higher end, hard to invent epics. After settling at a certain value (~1000 and 1200 respectively) they haven't fluctuated much from that value. As for your second point - take a look at the Pyramid Amulet of King Sothad. That one came out as the gnarled amulet was still rising in price. And it isn't the only example. But hey, find me a quote from BG and I'll be forced to reconsider.

it wont bother me if its 6 months from now they come out or if they come out this week either way i will still be making what i will make but i do need my inventing fix .

In that case I don't see why you have a problem waiting the 6 months you suggest .

as for the period between critter cycling one thing has changed COMPOSING we might not be using crystaline yet but some are using le items already so wont be long b4 the demand is there ..again grim said he wanted more events it was only due to market saturation we had such long periods between events ..

Grim wants more events, and he's delivering on that end. Just check the content roadmap thread he posted. I've linked it here. So the events that Grim wants ARE coming. As for the period between events, there were many other reasons we had such a long time. For example ... consider the possibility of us having events every weekend or two. That would not only desensitize us from how special these events were, but would also detract from the time/stam players could throw at other aspects of the game.

You mentioned composing, I want to point out that people won't be using crystalline fragments until they reach a skill which can get to level 251+. So, ignoring doubler, this means that until level 12, no one will be able to use crystalline fragments to make useful potions. And, even then it will only be 1-2 crystalline fragments ... that, coupled with the time that people will need to get to those kinds of levels (largely hardcore composers are at level 6-8 right now, and xp per level increases every level) and the fact that the last mass crystalline event was specifically with the intent of people being able to collect fragments for composing means that people have quite some time before they'll be out of crystalline fragments, providing that they had the foresight to stock up on crystalline fragments when it was specifically announced that the event was for that purpose.

PS: Sorry for hijacking the thread pardoux.

the epic series still will hold value well the ring and amulet will ppl farmed the be jesus out of the linens it was fun and is plenty ppl out there waiting on the horned guy so they can try make there own epics...the spike has a 20% invent rate so i dont see a need to nerf the drop rate after all not everyone has millions to throw in the caves if it ended up there..

 

Lets be honest, me and you both know exactly how nice the invent rates were with the omacaz pots. Anyone with enough FSP/space to make a difference in the market will be using an omacaz chest, which means that the large majority of spikes made will be done with a 50+% chance of invent. That, combined with the huge success rates and save rates of the other components mean that if the horns are released right now, the prices will crash and the market will be saturated. Let me now explain why this would be bad:

 

• Prices would tank. This means that more people would be able to afford the epics off of FSP that they're simply making in game, whether those FSP are from hunts or otherwise. IE, the existing FSP stack in the game won't be altered. On the contrary, if prices were to stay up, there is a much higher chance that people will not be able to afford these epics on their own and will instead choose to donate to HCS to achieve these epics. LESS DONATIONS MEANS LESS MONEY FOR HCS.
• In the long run, this is better for inventors as well. During the event, we saw prices for these gnarled epics dip down to below 170 FSP per epic, nearly 150 FSP each in the FSbox at times. The large majority of people with an interest in these epics would have bought at this time; releasing the gnarled horns would mean that inventors would be stuck with a large number of epics that they'd need to price gouge the hell out of just to sell, and I've already shown how low prices are bad. Allowing the market to recover a bit will give time for more people to get into the levels where they can use these epics as well, so that creates higher demand.
• Looking at your own personal interests, it would be better for you to wait some time before asking for horns to be released, as this would allow more people to level up to 300+ to get to the point where javs and hammers are cheaper. So, this would reduce your cost per item and, combined with the increasing prices per time, increase your profit per item. So I really don't see why you're pushing for this anyway.
• From HCS' perspective, they will be releasing a large number of events in the near future. The timeline from now until roughly the new year is basically saturated - adding creatures would really just detract from the glory of the other events, which is a terrible idea as HCS spends so much time and effort on making these events enjoyable for us that we should be able to give them the attention they deserve. Lets not do that to HCS, shall we?
• There's no point in releasing the gnarled chomper/any other legendary/crystalline creatures in either the caves or the realms now that EVERYTHING legendary that was to go in the realms and all crystalline creatures have been cycled through in the past 6 (or less) months. It would in fact break precedent to do so - we've seen breaks of roughly a year with most creatures, so I'd really expect to not see crystalline creatures (old ones, at least) until the middle of next year at some point.

I believe the purpose of this is so that you can add sets of 2 items ... ie if you save a combat set "Harvester Set", you can have it just equip the harvester set without modifying any of the other items. Seems more useful to me that way, as by and large you will be hunting with a full set of gear. Besides, I don't think we need to scar the monsters of FS with the sort of imagery that a naked grendeldog brings.

I'll have to see what my school schedule is like, but put me down as a tentative participant.

 

Same for me.

Damn, this is what I need to compete against in the GGT? Looks like I stand no chance . Nice shop you got going here mate, and really nice work .

All good additions - only question is the 'b' from any page - would this just open the backpack manage page?

 

 At this point, yes. Should the idea that UrcK and others came up with (Ajaxified BP similar to the GS), I'd suggest "b" opening that menu instead.

In regards to possible upgrades to composing:

 

• Change the default potion bottle/potion color to be randomly assigned every time you load the page, to add some variety
• Adding an option to save your composed potion selections
• An unlockable way to obtain multiple potions in a queue
• Possibly the ability to make multiple potions simultaneously
• Medal for the number of potions created, or some other form of public display of composing achievement

Not exactly an "new feature" but:

• Composing event, in which xp is multiplied by some amount, or creation times are reduced, or fragments are increased, etc.

There are a few minor additions that I'd like to see that are currently features of FSH:

 

• Folder selection on the secure trade/send items screens
• Quick item selection on the secure trade/send items screens
• Check all option in backpack management
• Pressing b from any page to access your backpack (and other similar keybinds)
• Adding the [Reply|Buff|Trade|ST] option to every message, similar to the way FSH does it.

I'm going to put the rest of my suggestions regarding composing in a separate post, to allow for different "Like this" usage.

Yeah, I tried looking in the CSS and I couldn't find anything to block ... 

Some people said they were having errors, I've updated the link in the first page to a newer version. Note, if it says that you're missing DLLs you *may* need to download http://www.microsoft...s.aspx?id=30679 or use the other forum post (composing calculator v 1.0.2.1)

I've made a calculator which can do the following:

=====================================================================

 

ONLINE VERSION:

(Use for different OS or if you don't want to download)

 

While this isn't an optimal solution to the problem of some people not being able to run it, it does work well enough.

 

Go to this site:

 

http://www.compileon..._cpp_online.php

 

and in the left hand side paste the code from here:

 

http://pastebin.com/zdceMzdT

 

Then, on the bottom right hand side (where it asks for STDIN), enter something of the following format:

 

(composing level) (y/n) (goldtospend)

 

If you choose y, then you can simply go to gold to spend.

If you choose n, then you'll need to enter another 6 values to replace fragment costs ... not recommended for most users.

 

A sample input would look like this:

5 y 1500000

It MUST have the spaces in that specific order or the program will break.

 

Hopefully this helps.

I've updated the main post to include a link to my now functional calculator. The program will yell at you if you try and mess with it, so don't do that ... just use it as it was intended and you'll be fine.

i get that each level we get a boost in skill levels but can you fix doubler is no point it going up in 25 as the buff only works in jumps of 50 ....also looking at the above posts is this even practical in how long and at what cost it will eventually take to get to the lvl buffs most of us are after

 

First of all, even if doubler works in increments of 50, all an increment of 25 means is that you'll get a higher doubler every 2 levels instead of 1 . As for the posts above, yuuzhan's numbers are slightly flawed - the time taken is cumulative, so really it would take you about a year and a half to hit level 50 assuming max efficiency and some instant. Same thing applies with the gold cost.

 

Also looks like the leveling formula is:

 

CurrentLevel^2 * 250

(That is (currentLevel to the power of two) times 250)

to describe the amount of XP you need to get to the next level.

 

EG:

You are level 1: 1^2*250 = 1*250 = 250 XP needed to get to level 2

You are level 2: 2^2*250 = 4*250 = 1000 XP needed to get to level 3

You are level 3: 3^2*250 = 9*250 = 2250 XP needed to get to level 4

You are level 4: 4^2*250 = 16*250 = 4000 XP needed to get to level 5

You are level 5: 5^2*250 = 25*250 = 6250 XP needed to get to level 6

 

Hey, that's interesting. Can also be represented as (level-1)*(500) + 250 needed - that's the difference between the two levels. 

Strictly from an avatar standpoint, B gmv. I like the color, the composition is nice and it's one of my favorite renders ... so yeah, I'm a little biased.