The absolute worst part of this game is the spawn rooms

I would suggest that the shield be at least 20 meters clear around the shield allowing those in the respawn room to kill off the tankers and respawn campers that are silly enough to hang around a shield where they can shoot out but you can't shoot in. That would put a stop to respawn camping pretty easily. The reason its so fruitful right now is that you have only a small door way to go out and at times no way to see or get at your enemy while in the room. But if you could go outside and had an area of shot clear around the entire respawn room above and at all sides people would not go there to camp kills as they get camp killed instead. Just my opinion.

Gayve, clearly you haven't spent much time on BF3. Spawn areas are just as bad as spawn rooms. Those areas get camped just like the rooms, its called spawn trapping. There are several games that have spawn areas and they get camped just like on PS2.

Exaggeration.
I've played a long time, and I know for a fact that NOT every fight ends up in a spawn camp. Spawn camps usually only happen when one side drastically outnumbers the other. Ghost capping involves ZERO spawn camping.
The old Crown fights never ended up in a spawn camp. It was always a heated battle, almost always with even numbers. The attackers couldn't push in, but the defenders couldn't push them out either.
There. Just one example disproves your point.

It depends on the map you are on, and majority of the actual spawn camping that occur in Battlefield games are when defenders are pushed back to the original spawn. Which is the equivalent of an empire being warpgated. The thing is we aren't talking about warpgating, we're talking about every single base in this game, large or small.

People can complain all they want but I think a majority of people who enjoy multiplayer games play due to their choices they can make, their actions can impact the battlefield for good or bad. These spawn rooms are absolutely terrible, in PS1 in the big bases atleast you had multiple exists from your spawn room, enabling you to access the base from different floors. Those however were underground and had places that broke your LOS, ie walls/tunnels. This game has you in a box in the open with little obstacles to break LOS near spawn rooms, limiting exits for defenders limits a squad vs a huge army.
What Higby said in one video before release of PS2 was 10 men could defend a base against 100 ( lets take that with a pinch of salt but 10 vs 20-30 is reasonable) that could very well be doable provided the defenders were offered a chance with multiple exits. Its not about empowering one side or the other it's about choices. Risk for reward. Bases need more exits with obstacles breaking Line of sight and adding angles so defenders can attempt to push out while attackers can try and attempt to block their movements, without actually just playing wack the mole.

You're a waterson Vanu you should be for multiple spawns considering the huge numbers we face on a daily basis on that server.

Okay. Then I guess TR owns every territory on every continent, since they outnumber VS and NC.

I see a wall of complaint but no solution. So, how do you solve the problem?

The trick to kill spawn camping is to not rely on fixed spawn points as your primary spawn mechanic, but rather allow players to place dynamic spawnpoints anywhere on the map. For example, AMS sunderers. One spawn point being camped? Self-destruct/deconstruct it and build a new one somewhere else.

Obviously you can't get away from the need for at least *one* static spawn point (the Warpgate) since you need to get onto the map before you can start placing new spawns, but a warpgate is much easier to break out of than a spawn room.

Due to the distances involved, a good compromise would be to also have spawn rooms in specific large, highly defensible facilities where spawn camping can at least be made extremely difficult due to tunnels, multiple spawn points, and the size of the base.

Meanwhile, remove the spawn points from the tiny little outposts that consist of little more than a spawn room and a control point: those are just an instant camp-fest and would be far better served by AMS sunderers or by spawning from the next base back.

No, its spawn-trapping, which is the exact same thing you get on PS2. Spawn-trapping is spawn-trapping. There is no difference whether its at a base or a warpgate. And it happens frequently on BF3 because of the constant team-stacking, which is a major reason why I became bored with BF3. I always had to switch to the other team to try to help them win. There aren't many things in gaming that I hate more than team-stacking.

I don't care because I don't think it will make any difference in the end. The real problem is that once an enemy has control of a base, no one wants to leave the spawn room. And it won't matter how many exits there are, they will still just sit there and try to pick people off outside the shields rather than help you try to take back the base. I deal with this problem every day and as long as K/D exists so will this....

No offense, I see this tossed around a lot on the forum, as if it's our job as paying customers to figure things out. This isn't SOE's first FPS gig, this definitely isn't the first nor the last FPS game out there. It's up to SOE to figure out how to resolve these issues. It's their game that is losing players and having a hard time retaining players.

It's up to us players and paying customers to tell them about the problems we're experiencing. But it's really SOE's job to figure it out and resolve these long term issues. This issue has plagued the game since launch, and it is one of the commonly complained about problem from new/old players alike.

Again choices. I don't care if those guys want to cower in their spawn rooms, I want a chance for myself and my squad to push out and give a good fight not be resorted to abandoning the base, spawning elsewhere trying to get a sunderer that will be instantly blown up because we have no stealth generators on this game for AMS anymore. I've seen more choices available in linear games than this current spawn system. I'm literally repeating myself now but I think the point is made.

PS1 had already solved this issue. The spawn rooms could be entered by the attackers, and then the spawn tubes could be destroyed.

Many times this would end the fight, but then sometimes the defenders could rally from an AMS, push back into the spawn room, and repair the tubes.

The main reason we probably don't have destructible spawn tubes inside spawn rooms the attackers can actually enter is because the bases have the terrible design where spawn rooms are totally exposed above ground. In PS1 the spawn rooms were underground, so they couldn't be camped by vehicles.

Even if the devs can't (or refuse to) put the spawns underground, they could at least place them in areas where they can't be camped by vehicles. Like the biolab. Then just give the attackers a way of disabling the spawn shields, then allow them to go in and destroy the tubes.

That would be immensely better gameplay than what we have.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "Every FPS has spawn camping". In CoD, if you move into the enemy spawn area, their spawn area changes. You pretty much can't spawn camp in CoD.

Regardless, even when FPS games do have spawn camping, it's like in PS2, where you have these ridiculous one-way shields.

But your choice would have the same result as your current choices.... Either redeploy or try to take back a base with just a few people and get crushed while everyone else sits in the safety of the spawn room.

That's kind of what I was thinking, rather than having spawn rooms in all outposts and bases, they should have "spawn stations" that are located on specific spots on the maps. They should be in locations close enough for defenders to spawn and get back to the base under attack, but far enough that defenders can't rez zerg. Warpgates are indeed too far to spawn for most bases, so these spawn stations could work out well.

Spawn stations should have tunnels, multiple exits, multiple layers. I suppose they would be like mini warpgates located on various locations on the map.

I guess we approach issues differently. If I'm going to throw up a wall of text rant, I would hope that I had an alternative solution that would possibly solve my problem or alleviate some of the pain the problem causes, otherwise what is the point of the rant? I wouldn't get my knickers in a twist over a (perceived) problem that has no viable solution or simply creates a new problem.

..and the solution in your opinion is?

Not entirely, if we had the choice of exits ie Teleport rooms/tunnels it would mean the enemy would have to split their forces up if they wish to camp, if they're truely organised and holding back to protect the point then well played, otherwise a small team could easily push out destroy the enemy sunderers and make a push killing the remaining forces. Obviously the current squad leader/spawn/switch nonsense still makes it hard but atleast they're not able to respawn every 5 seconds or so. It puts a choice on the attackers, risk splitting up to farm essentially or stay on point and take and hold the objective at hand while risking being assault from multiple angles. Both come with risks both are choices. more choices than the one we have now which is to die in a stupid room.

The flow of battle at every base has to involve the attackers taking the capture points. Once those points are captured, and once the defending AMSes are destroyed, where do the defenders spawn? There is only one place.

There are always defenders hanging out inside the spawn room trying to pick off defenders. I have never seen a single fight where that isn't happening.

If the attackers don't camp those people, those people will push out and take the capture points.

So, how exactly did these fights flow where there was no spawn camping?

The solution is obvious. All you have to do is look at PS1. I explained it in a post above.

PS1 did it pretty well (as with a lot of things).