Incentives and Rewards are Broken

[LupeFiasco]

I feel that the way XP is rewarded in PS2 is incorrect. Some parts of it encourage people to avoid competition with the other factions and this is one of the big reasons why we have so many people ghost capping bases.

I made a larger post about it on the Planetside 2 Forums:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/incentives-and-rewards-are-broken.176475/

Please have a read and if you're so inclined after the fact, comment on it or give it a thumbs up.

Thanks

[Illtempered]

Agreed. One of the major mistakes the devs have made since day one was not removing the substantial reward for ghost-capping, or rolling a base with no resistance. In Planetside, if there was no resistance, there was no xp for the cap. They obviously still don't get it with the implementation of the WDS system.

Having said that, defenders should also be given substantial motivation for defending important bases, which is a bit more-complicated an issue.

[Edfishy]

Having said that, defenders should also be given substantial motivation for defending important bases, which is a bit more-complicated an issue.

How about anarchy/democracy voting? ;D

*consults the helix*

[War Barney]

Jup completely agree, the exp a base is worth for defending and attacking should be worth the amount of exp gained by players in the area while it was being taken. That way if you take a base and nobody defended its worth nothing, if its a huge hour long struggle its a epic pay off. And if the pay-off applied like that for defenders and attackers it would really encourage people to join big fights and want to win for the pay off.

[AThreatToYou]

Been an issue since beta. Will probably never be solved for one unthinkable reason or another.

[mrmrmrj]

The reason is not unthinkable. It is clear. Capping an empty base can have important strategic repercussions. If XP is only rewarded based on the intensity and duration of the immediate conflict, big fights would only get bigger.

Not all of us like to battle on the front lines.

[War Barney]

The reason is not unthinkable. It is clear. Capping an empty base can have important strategic repercussions. If XP is only rewarded based on the intensity and duration of the immediate conflict, big fights would only get bigger.

Not all of us like to battle on the front lines.

So you want to encourage people to avoid big fights? isn't that what ghost cappers are doing? This is a thread about stopping ghost capping not encouraging it

[AuntLou]

I do believe I read somewhere that they are working on giving more XP to base caps with resistance and bigger battles.

I think this is something they should have implemented back when it was the hex system. This way bases could be taken only for their strategic value and not to just cheese the system for xp.

[AThreatToYou]

I had a few paragraphs here. But I could sum it up in this phrase: "beating a dead horse".

[Emperor Newt]

The whole system is bullocks as it promotes farming (instead of playing the game) and make better players get way more certs then beginners or "bad" players. And no, I am not saying that everybody should get the same amount, but the difference between them is ridiculous.

But hey, people said that during beta and I doubt they will find any space for that on the Roadmap. Maybe on the next one...

But good luck with your thread. I simply do not have any hopes with that going somewhere as people have been talking about that for ages now. SOE simply seems very happy in the "Kills make certs" mindset, no matter how often we tell them how stupid that is.

[War Barney]

Sadly true, biolabs are always full of people camping the land pads shooting at each other and never pushing, I've taken to just avoiding biolabs entirely unless its part of a platoon push.