Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: We take no bathroom breaks to bring your more updates
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2013-03-16, 03:21 AM | [Ignore Me] #1 | ||
Major
|
XP in this game is the primary driving force for where people go and what they do unless they run with an outfit that's doing operations that ignore XP.
That's why the region based capture XP is just a really bad system when it comes to creating a smart metagame. Restricting the capture XP to just the region you are in is a bad system, because it creates incentives for bad behavior. For example, when a major facility is being flipped oftentimes hundreds of players just stand around waiting for it to cap, with dozens of aircraft hovering just overhead so they can get the cap too etc. That's just stupid, it makes people wait around for the reward for no good reason. If they could move on and still get the reward they would get going much quicker, which would give the defenders more of an incentive to actually stick around and make trouble. It also punishes people for working on the fringes of their main force, which supports the Zerg gameplay. Since you miss out on a ton of XP if you work as a picket to the force that's capturing the major bases the game actively punishes you for thinking on a grander scale. For example, tonight I was on Vanu assaulting Hvar, my group of people pushed on to Indar Bay Point, and established an air defense there. We kept any Reavers and Liberators taking off from the warp gate in check and did heavy damage to them if they wanted to rush to Hvar to relieve their troops there, so we definitely helped to flip the tech plant, but of course we didn't see a single point of XP for it. Capture XP should be less than it currently is, but it should be globally applied if you aren't in the warp gate. Sure, that would allow people to soak up some XP that they didn't work for, but it would also not so blatantly punish people for playing the bigger tactical game, taking a forward base to shield the main operation from incoming enemies, or making trouble elsewhere to disperse enemy forces away from where the main capturing is happening. Global capture XP would allow people to leave the giant zerg and find their own trouble without missing out on all that extra XP you currently get for running with the biggest group you can find instead of doing the most useful thing you can think of. The system could simply check if you gained XP of your own accord in the last 10 minutes and only grants global capture XP if you have, so that there isn't an incentive to just log in and sit in a remote base to soak up XP. But as far as I'm concerned, if you're fighting a hand full of enemies in some backwater base that's a hand full of enemies that didn't defend their Biolab when it flips, so why shouldn't you be rewarded? Last edited by Rothnang; 2013-03-16 at 03:27 AM. |
||
|
2013-03-16, 04:05 AM | [Ignore Me] #2 | ||
Major
|
Zergs waiting for bases to flip instead of doing the stuff that is needed is a horrible mechanic indeed that promotes the wrong game play.
Not sure if global/continental XP for capping bases is the solution to this problem though. It would probably promote wrong game play as well. I could sit all day farming at the Crown, getting all the base cap and kill XP while my team is doing the dirty work for me. Not really an incentive for objective play if you ask me. |
||
|
2013-03-16, 04:20 AM | [Ignore Me] #3 | ||
Second Lieutenant
|
We all know this, and we all know it's horrible. Theoretically, if a major facility is half-way capped, any opposing faction could cut off influence from the cappers, and chances are the average non-outfit, non-squad player will simply stay in the base, and wait EVEN LONGER until the base flips. Because influence works that way.
We all know this on a much smaller scale. If the enemy are holding one point of three, with 50% or greater influence, and two people standing on it, how many other people in your faction will be struck with brilliance and stand on one of the remaining capture points? Assuming the average 30-odd people defending a tower base, the answer is precisely: Zero. Only you, and if you're lucky, one other person, will attempt to buy time or even completely deny the efforts of the enemy to cap the facility from one point. We NEED a mechanic that rewards contributing to DIRECT facility capture/defense. Because no Zerglings are willing to retire to a control point, because heck, as long as they stick around the places where they can see enemies, they will both get kills AND capture XP. Meanwhile, you bore yourself to death at the CP. |
||
|
2013-03-16, 06:17 AM | [Ignore Me] #4 | ||
Major
|
Yea, but if you really think about it, isn't tying up a ton of enemies at the crown helping the other guys take that base? The whole point of global XP is to make a point out of the fact that everything that happens on a continent is interconnected. An outfit that's capturing empty bases while most of their faction is holding on for dear life on the other front would suddenly generate XP for people who are fighting harder than them also.
|
||
|
2013-03-16, 07:18 AM | [Ignore Me] #5 | ||
Contributor First Sergeant
|
Hi Rothnang,
I like this idea. I hate how people feel like they need to hang around doing nothing. I like the idea that it should only apply to players who have done something to gain xp in the last ten minutes. How about we expand that rule to include those who been killed by an enemy in the last ten minutes. They're still trying even though they haven't been able to get any xp . Also, anyone who has been in enemy territory should be included - I wouldn't want ESF pilots who are doing air patrols not to get this exp, despite the fact they haven't gained any xp in the last 10 minutes. Do you think that capture exp bonuses should be reduced to compensate for the overall gain in xp that this would bring for everyone in the continent? So that everyone on the continent gets 1/3rd of the xp you do now every time that an enemy base is taken, or a friendly base is resecured. Otherwise, everyone's exp gain overall will probably be multiplied by 2. But maybe that's a good thing . Sonny |
||
|
2013-03-16, 07:48 AM | [Ignore Me] #6 | ||
Second Lieutenant
|
So basically, you get X% of Capture XP if, within the last 10 mins, you've:
-Killed someone -Gotten killed -Entered enemy territory -Gained repair XP (Discuss.) And by the way, if by "resecuring" you mean actually flipping a base that has been fully captured, then yes, that is a standard capture. No complete flip= No XP. |
||
|
2013-03-16, 07:58 AM | [Ignore Me] #7 | |||
Contributor General
|
@op your first sentance encapsulates one of the problems with this game. What incentive is there to continue playing after you have everything you want? PS1 managed to provide an incentive so we know pure XP isn't the only motive out there. |
|||
|
2013-03-16, 08:26 AM | [Ignore Me] #8 | |||
Contributor First Sergeant
|
In terms of resecuring xp - i want to see xp bonuses if you resecure a base from the enemy that is still yours when you resecure. The idea for this is to stop defenders waiting for the attacker to take a base then move out before retaking it. But I guess that's a discussion for a separate thread . Sonny |
|||
|
2013-03-16, 01:00 PM | [Ignore Me] #9 | ||
I've been saying for a long time that the current base static XP reward system needs to be redone. See the thread in my signature; at least the Devs listened to our requests for dynamic kill XP, but I feel that dynamic base capture XP, similar to how it was implemented in PS1, is very important.
I'm not sure I agree with Global capture XP, but I do agree the current system needs to go. It only provides incentive for everyone to rush to the next base that's about to be captured instead of investing in a battle because you've generated a lot of capture XP potential fighting there. |
|||
|
2013-03-16, 09:48 PM | [Ignore Me] #11 | ||
First Sergeant
|
I wouldnt want too much xp tied to cont capping. I would worry that we will end up with a different faction with a massive pop on every cont as people want to as easy cont. cap for xp instead of defending territory.
Truly owning conts and kicking factions off continents was more than motivating in PS1, and a much healthier motivation IMO. Maybe tie some XP in but I wouldnt like to see allot. It would have to be tied to how long its been since you owned the cont last, increasing the longer its been. |
||
|
2013-03-18, 07:40 AM | [Ignore Me] #13 | ||
First Sergeant
|
tbh what would benefit us all more is decent xp for defending and actually making a fight of each base rather then letting it get flipped so you can flip it back and get the xp after why not just give the xp for preventing the flip in the first place
|
||
|
2013-03-18, 09:14 AM | [Ignore Me] #14 | ||
Captain
|
Experience/Cert gain AND resource gain should be global.
Just like in a RTS game. That way the game would become more focused on how your faction performs rather than how you perform yourself. EDIT: For example, i wouldn't feel the urge to go out of my way just to "cash in" on a cap in progress. I would rather do what i originally planned to do, probably being more helpful to my faction than standing around for a handful of certs. Last edited by Babyfark McGeez; 2013-03-18 at 09:15 AM. |
||
|
2013-03-18, 09:21 AM | [Ignore Me] #15 | ||
Agree that hanging around waiting for capture just for the XP is a lame mechanic.
A global XP gain upon capture would be better than what we have now, but there are alternatives: - Passive global XP reward/minute based upon how much territory is held by your faction. This could include other continents (perhaps less), and could include a bonus multiplier for fully captured continents. - Dynamic XP based bonus upon capture. Award a bonus of say 20% of the XP you earned within the hex region during the capture, irrespective of whether they move on before the base flips. A similar bonus could be awarded upon completion of a defence! But any of these would be preferable to what we have now. |
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|