Population bonuses/penalties?

[kaffis]

In Planetside, there were bonuses and penalties based on relative empire population as a percentage of the total pop.

Empires fighting outnumbered would get bonus health and damage (IIRC), empires with a population advantage would get a penalty to health and damage.

Should such a practice continue into Planetside 2, and if so, what kinds of systems should it entail?

Should bonuses be offered to disadvantaged empires? Or penalties applied to advantaged ones? Or both?

What form should the modifiers take? Bonuses or penalties applied to resources gain? Equipment cost (in resources)? Health? Damage? Equipment timers? Respawn timers?

How should the populations be counted for such metrics -- should it be instant (who has more players on RIGHT NOW)? Should it be a floating average, or a weighted floating average (who has more unique players over the last day/week? Or who has the most player-hours over the last day/week?)?

Should there be no modifiers based on population at all, and just rely on statistics or recruitment to balance it out? Should the modifiers have an effect only for new players, to encourage the balance to be upheld by skewing the preferences of new players, or should it apply to everybody, as a sort of handicap?

[Bags]

Originally Posted by kaffis

In Planetside, there were bonuses and penalties based on relative empire population as a percentage of the total pop.

Empires fighting outnumbered would get bonus health and damage (IIRC), empires with a population advantage would get a penalty to health and damage.

I don't recall this happening at all. I just remember the underdog getting more XP. I think bonus health came from having a cave mod, but there was never bonus damage.

And the game should never penalize or buff in the form of damage or health due to faction imbalance.

[kaffis]

Hrm. Okay, you might be right. My memory's hazy, I haven't played in over 5 years. Either way, XP or Health/Damage...

[Otleaz]

Troop distribution is part of the game so you can't make it based off of anything but players per continent.

I think the best way to handle it is capture times are increased based on how many more players you have. If you have two times as many players, increase the capture time by 200%.

[jabber]

only thing i see possible is a small xp bonus, like ps1. the individual soldier should never be more powerfull because his playing the underdog. includes respawn/resource income and equipment cost.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Otleaz

Troop distribution is part of the game so you can't make it based off of anything but players per continent.

I think the best way to handle it is capture times are increased based on how many more players you have. If you have two times as many players, increase the capture time by 200%.

This is a means I hadn't considered. Interesting. Not sure how I feel about it aside from that, yet.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by jabber

only thing i see possible is a small xp bonus, like ps1. the individual soldier should never be more powerfull because his playing the underdog. includes respawn/resource income and equipment cost.

I tend not to favor XP bonuses, because they have no influence or effect in the immediate term, nor do they operate as an incentive for max-rank characters.

The latter part may not be an issue based on the claimed depth of the cert tree, but we can't really judge that yet. It's also worth noting that xp bonuses aren't good incentives for players who have certed everything they *care* about, even if they're not max rank yet.

[Khrakhan]

Respawn timers I feel are the only viable option here. That way the underdogs will respawn faster making up for the fact that they are outnumbered and make it to where the 'overdog' feels as if they're still fighting against an empire and not just the stragglin remains of one.

[Saifoda]

I don't think there should be any negative modifiers for population -- there shouldn't be anything that punishes people for playing just because other people are playing, but if you are playing for the underdog empire then you should get xp or resource boost (dunno about the health thing) and/or maybe reduced resource costs for equipment and vehicles.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Khrakhan

Respawn timers I feel are the only viable option here. That way the underdogs will respawn faster making up for the fact that they are outnumbered and make it to where the 'overdog' feels as if they're still fighting against an empire and not just the stragglin remains of one.

This is, indeed, the reason I think they have the potential to be the most effective modifier. However, equipment timers and equipment costs (or rates of resource gain, as the inverse of equipment cost) follow similar arguments, just to point out.

[Sledgecrushr]

I voted no population modifiers because I still have hope that we will be able to move servers whenever we want to.

[indirect]

There was never a penalty.
There was only +XP% for lowest pop.
The health was from lattice benefits.

[Otleaz]

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

I voted no population modifiers because I still have hope that we will be able to move servers whenever we want to.

Yeah, because everyone switching servers when they are outnumbered will fix things.

[Khrakhan]

Originally Posted by kaffis

This is, indeed, the reason I think they have the potential to be the most effective modifier. However, equipment timers and equipment costs (or rates of resource gain, as the inverse of equipment cost) follow similar arguments, just to point out.

Yeah but the problem with that is that it hinders players a little more than just the respawn timers. I dont want to have to pay more resources just because my team happens to have more players

[QuantumMechanic]

The poll doesn't have an option to give the low population empire an XP bonus, which is what I would have voted.

The underdog doesn't necessarily need an advantage - not all fights are even. But he does need a reason to log in and fight anyway, that's what the XP bonus does.