Defense only needs one thing now

[Babyfark McGeez]

With the "Reinforcements needed" spawn spots and the improved base design (that could be further refined, but imo has the general idea right) defending has recieved some well-deserved attention.

In my opinion there is only one thing needed to make defending a perfectly viable option for both ("casual") solo players and coordinated teams:

A static XP reward once you successfully defended a facility.

Because the underlying defense-problem still is that "15% more xp" of 0xp is 0xp. And 250/500/1000 xp guaranteed is still 250/500/1000 xp guaranteed.

The solution here lies in making the one-time xp-reward more dynamic, and this system should be applied for both the one-time attacking reward and the one-time defending reward (as suggested by psijaka).
Base it on the time factor, taking into consideration how long you personally have been there AND how far the capture bar had allready ticked down the most before it started being resecured.
Also scale it according to the numbers of actual attackers/defenders, as in "more opposition = more xp" (as suggested by Canaris).
And regardless of defending or attacking reward, maybe even factor in the overall duration of a fight (with back and forth capping and resecuring a full capture/resecure can take quite a long time).

The result would be that even an unskilled defender who has not the prospect of making lots of xp with only the "%" bonus on actions will have a (fair) reward for (successfully) defending a base, and thus a motivation to do so.

[HiroshiChugi]

I'm not meaning to sound attack-ish or to seem like I'm coming at you, but I'm pretty sure that this is on SOE's list of "things that don't mean shit to us right now." They are so busy on making more guns and vehicles for the so-called "meta game," that they could care less about the "dynamic XP system" that so many players are wanting. If you have noticed, and I dont know you have or not, they only made extremely little changes to the XP system that I know of. It saddens me to know this, because I know that Planetside 2 could be so much more than it already s right now.

[Sledgecrushr]

Hiroshi, soe completely revamped the xp system with the last big patch. But yeah a xp buff for defending that is dynamic and accounts for the ferocity of the attack and the tenacity of the defenders would be awesome.

[HiroshiChugi]

Hiroshi, soe completely revamped the xp system with the last big patch. But yeah a xp buff for defending that is dynamic and accounts for the ferocity of the attack and the tenacity of the defenders would be awesome.

Thanks Sledge, I must've gotten wrong intel. Thanks for giving me the correct info! :D

[Canaris]

I agree but it would have to be scaled for sure.

Did a single infil sneak into your back water outpost and hack it, then you gun him down and resecure, well that should give either nothing or something very low like 10xp for instance.
Did the enemy bring a squad - then you deserve some more XP

Did the enemy bring a platoon - even more

Did you defend the base from a massive wave of zerg monsters hell bent on your destruction and the stealing of everything (including the nailed down stuff)? - Then you deserve a big ol' boot of XP.

[psijaka]

I would certainly like to see a "Successful Defence" reward, scaled to the base size and how far the capture bar advanced during the attack.

Linking XP to time sounds a lot more involved though, and a similar system would have to be implemented for attackers; it is all too easy to deploy just before the capture and bag the 1000XP with no effort at all.

Even a simple system, like awarding half the attack XP reward upon completion of a defence would be better than what we have now, and would be very simple to implement.

[Babyfark McGeez]

Good points Canaris and psijaka; I agree that the system should also be applied to attacking. And i also agree that the numbers of attackers should play a role there.

I'll try to edit these into my op.

[Brusi]

Although giving exp for re-securing ghost hacks is wide open to exploits, it sucks running around and cleaning up those hacks...

Given some form of a carrot for that tedious job would probably be clever.

[Stanis]

Certs and XP are the only long term reward that matter.

For that old skool metagame we need encouragement to fight for territory without looking at the xp meter.


Reward for defending a base is thinking too small in scope.

We need a reward for *keeping a continent locked*. This is supposed to be resources but they hardly matter in the grand scheme of things.


Fix 'why we fight' in the continental domination.
Make it possible to actually defend with organisation and a smaller team against a more numerous but less organised foe.

Then worry about rewarding us for each little fight.

[Varsam]

A reward system based on time spent in a defense region would be too easily abusable. A player could sit in the corner of a base and do nothing, and be rewarded (unfairly) for simply being in the zome for a long time.

Players would also be encouraged to intentionally let enemies partially cap a base before re securing it in order to maximize cert gain for the defense, at the expense of dynamic game play.

If you incentivize defending over attacking, the game becomes more static and ultimately more stagnant.
This is not to say that I think the current reward mechanic is perfect, but simply throwing more rewards into the equation is not the answer.

[Obstruction]

just a small amount of xp/minute while sitting in an empty base waiting for an attack would be enough to make it through the downtime. it's already worth sitting in some places waiting for attacks, the incentive doesn't need to be that dramatic.

it could be akin to the amount of xp you get for someone emptying clips on an ammo pack or that you would get repairing damage to an ESF or Lib once a minute or so.

then the real scaling xp reward can be an incentive to find and eliminate defense forces that are set up and flagged this way, insuring that a fight comes to a place that is behind the lines and not just reliant on the movement of front lines.

the behavior it would create would be solo, small, and medium forces moving in ahead of major offensives, and hardened defenders waiting in ambush to receive them.

[Rolfski]

I can remember it was removed from beta because it was getting exploited.

[Babyfark McGeez]

Yeah, but in beta it was simply the same amount of xp as for an assault. No thought put into it whatsoever.

And Varsam...your points are kinda moot. As opposed to letting the enemy partially cap the base for xp currently people let the enemy FULLY cap the base so they can cap it back for xp.
The problems with abusing defensive xp (atleast in the way you're mentioning it) would be countered by the ideas in this thread anyways, so i really have a hard time seeing your point here.

Also this is not about "throwing more rewards into the equation", it's to balance the current reward system so that it is less one-sided and there is actually ANY static (/guaranteed) reward for (successful) defenders in the end.

Should you have any better idea though, feel free to post it here.

[psijaka]

I can remember it was removed from beta because it was getting exploited.

True, but it was a really cack handed implementation, giving full XP for defence if the enemy so much as sneeze at "A".

That's not to say that it couldn't be implemented properly; either only award sucessful defence XP if the progress bar thas turned the attacker's colour (ie more than half way), or (better) a reward proportional to the XP gained during the defence; given upon "completion" of the defence.