... upping the amount of xp you get for defending a point? Currently it is very hard to get any one to stay and defend a cap point as all the action and xp is in pushing a contested one. I usually end up trying to do the smart move and cover a cap point away from the action but you get very little xp and usually face overwhelming odds when they arrive. I have quite often won a game as I defended a point when no one else would and prevented it being lost but even though we win I end up with less rewards than if we had lost and I just follow the action around the map. Im not sure what a decent amount would be but can we try upping it a bit to see how it pans out
I posted last year on the founders lounge that we should simply get bonus XP for killing near capture points that are currently owned. I'm not really a fan of the current system that continuously rewards a player with points for camping. These bonuses could be more significant than +15xp--maybe the +40 or +50 that we get for doing squad kills.
I like this idea or some sort of xp reward for defending a point. Ultimately, winning is the best reward over any amount of xp, but I believe the game should strive to prevent conflicts between winning and getting xp. Another suggestion, a little differnent, is to grant bonus xp to the winning side based on how many points they had that went completely uncapped the entire game.
Maybe have a system where you get additional xp when you obey an order (squad leader order and warlord order). If your squad is tasked with "holding C" you get additional xp for obeying that command. Problem I have with current Xp is that, if you want to win and play as a team, it does make a lot of sense to have scouts and spotters that act independently from the whole team to just warn of incoming enemy. You don't need a full squad at each point you own if no enemy even bothers to deploy around that point and take assault to it. Having at least one guy deployed slightly in the vicinity can help to warn the whole team however (like hey, 2 enemy rhinos incoming at C, need backup). The thing is, those poor guy will lose a lot of xp because they did not engage much, because they were acting as sentry. The cost of not using a sentry can be far worse for a whole team however. It's sad that you end up helping your team win, and end with very few xp because you did what the team needed rather than go kill kill kill to farm for XP. Also, just trading capture between enemy teams to get that extra xp (even when unintentional), if you only play ATTTACK ATTACK ATTACK, and don't hold and defend a point, you get more xp because the game becomes very offensive and less defensive, however it wasn't necessarily the best strategy to WIN to the objectives.
Yeah because asking for more free xp is better right?Its not as if you are afk on that point ...oh wait!
Well this is tricky, because on one hand you don't want everyone just camping out for a defense. On the other, defending isn't lucrative at all because either no one comes, or it's you against 10 enemies and you just die instantly anyways. That's kind of the reason that since I hit level cap, I stay back and defend so that other people can go get more exp than me (since I don't really need it anyways except for loot boxes). Truthfully, the best solution, as it would be for many problems, would be better map design. Currently, you can take a point, move up, and then be completely flanked by a redeploying enemy team to some other point that no one was at in the first place. And yes, you could argue that those are good tactics...all the way until you remember that we can just redeploy to defend anyways. That kind of dynamic really lacks "battle-flow", and really robs players of the feeling of 2 front-lines moving/pushing against each other. Basically, it's like Planetside 2 with the old hex system, instead of the 2 armies fighting, you end up with the 2 armies avoiding each other the majority of the time. Instead of actively defending a point, a team is likely to say "fuck it" and sacrifice said point just to take another empty point from the attackers while the attackers are busy taking the empty defender's point. In a good map design, it would be a bit more linear, where you move up, contest/take a point, then when you continue to move up the point ends up behind your team's front lines. And the only way the enemy would feasibly get to that point is by pushing their own frontline against yours until you fall back, again to the point, and it is contested/taken by the enemy. This would really eliminate the need for "defending a point", and would really cut down on so many ghostcaps (especially on those matches where there's only 15 people on each team in the first place).
