The state of PS2 and what I feel must change.

That is not a crazy idea, you know.

Why can't we have XP bounties for taking high-value bases, territories and continents the same way we get bonus XP for eliminating high-threat enemies?

• The longer a territory is held, the higher the XP multiplier there is for taking that territory.
• In the same vein, the longer your faction has held a territory, the larger the XP multiplier is for doing any actions in the hex when it is under attack. This multiplier then also stacks with a multiplier based on the size of enemy presence in the hex.
• Also grant "jackpot" XP bounties for all players continent wide upon continent capture, and special multipliers for defenders as well.
• Make all of the above information readily apparent to all players. You'd take a look at the map and icons in the form of percentiles are on every territory. Lower value territories icons are more transparent. This makes it easy for players to tell where the money bases are at a glance.
• Lower the XP earned for doing anything in lower-value territories. Lower than the current, non-boosted rate. This is to discourage constantly streaming at one particular area, but it does not eliminate the possibility of activity happening there.
• All multipliers and bonuses would have a cap. People shouldn't be going up a BR every capture.

What would happen:

• Factions that continually fight over one territory will cause it to flip control often, which makes the territory have no XP multiplier, or even a penalty.
• In the meantime, other bases in the area that have been ignored now start to have a steadily increasing bounty.
• One base or another becomes too tempting of a target. The zerg swims in for a feeding frenzy.
• Defender zergs also surge in, as they stand to gain a sizable bonus of their own. They may even learn to anticipate an attack and get there before the attackers.
• The attackers win and reap a nice XP bonus. They will then likely set their sites upon another, riper target. Or, they may now need to fall back to one of their own high-value territories in order to defend it.
• Eventually, every territory becomes a target for this activity. Large battles are going to happen at EVERY location on a map.
• Continents that have been "won" by a faction suddenly become the juiciest targets of them all. The deeper into enemy territory you go, the longer a territory has been preparing its anus.
• Zergs will also tend to swarm on continent capture/defend bonuses. This helps ensure a maximum turnout for those pitched final battles at the enemy's gate.

Is something going to be done after this thread? i mean, suggestions or ideas that the devs took and are going to implement? A thread like this take months to appear in the forums and it would be pretty sad if they dont take any feedback from here.

totally agree with you buzz.

I'd add 1 more thing: Facility benefits can be removed if their gens are knocked down similar to PS1.

+1

Reflexes don't have anything to do with lower TTK, because you die before you have time to react. That's the point.

That or reflexes have something to do with it because you spot the person first then aim and shoot.

Ofc they take feedback from it .. But they have to decipher that feedback and then judge if any of it fit's into what they want or even if it's any good

Well, since this thread ...

Server merges before server transfers
Reducing screen shake

Not saying its because of this thread but clearly some issues are going to be rectified shortly.

TL;DR

A lot of stuff needs to be fixed.

I played in 12vs12 arenas in Quake quite a lot, even 32 a side in some of the playermade maps, back in the day.
Not really relevant.
A gladiator-themed game Planetside is not.
Except when you drop pod on Bio-Lab roof.

I support these changes 100%

Bump, hey SoE, you didn't already do it? Rolf you can earn lot of money for making that, you know, make a real awesome game

Pretty sure they can't change all those things in a couple of days. We're assuming here that they are actually doing it but that's another problem

^^^ THIS PLEASE, 2000 UPVOTES

I like most of the ideas suggested.
I just fear that SOE doesn't really want to improve the metagame aspect of the game all that much. At least, that's the vibe I'm getting from them. It seems like they just want a modern FPS where people will buy their microtransactions for instant gratification. They want everything to go fast and go pew pew for their players, not grand strategy tactical play.

Defenders are camped inside the spawn because they are outnumbered outside. Your "solution" would just make people defend even less, or not at all. You're "solution" would accomplish the exact opposite of your intended goal.

The real solution is the PS1 cloaking AMS, PS1 mines, PS1 spitfires, and PS1 motion detectors.

You guys have no idea what you are talking about. What's with all these up votes? This idea is insane.

Oh his outfit up voted for him.

Lower TTK puts more emphasis on out-spawning your opponent, higher TTK puts more emphasis on maneuvering and tactics. Unfortunately higher TTK can only happen with a PS1 style inventory/class system, not a BF3 class system. Medics/Engineers have unlimited healing, PS1 you had to use up ammo in your inventory to heal/repair, so if we had higher-TTK you could theoretically keep someone alive forever and that would be kinda lame.

Or you react before the other guy, have a better position, and have played more tactically.
Don't agree with the statement higher TTK is more skillfull. It's basically saying that skill
increases as time to react and think endlessly about a decision increase.

In fact I think the opposite is true. Reacting QUICKLY under timer pressue is far more skillfull.

Tired of arguing it thou, seems obvious to me.

Another fault with the BF3 class system. IN PS1 you could carry jammers in your inventory and chuck them on minefields to blow them up, and you weren't restricted to any "class". Which class would you give jammers too in PS2? Light assaults? Why? What about everyone else?