The fallacy of the Ghost Capping argument

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Sapare, May 26, 2013.

  1. Sapare

    you owe me a comment!
  2. Sapare

    You played planetside 1, so? If I recall I have seen Planetside 1 players(or at least a planetside(planetside univers?) wiki) state those two as being two different terms(I believe they used back capping as what I defined as ghost capping and used ghost capping as what people generally use it now.

    Point is, termonolgy is undevined and can be changed by the will of the people, and this term ghost capping has too much of a bad annotation for it to be thrown around as it is, not to mention that the name makes no sense for what people use it for. It is rather obvious in the wording of the name that this was not the original intent of the word.
  3. Takoita

    The funny thing is that both things can and still happen on the new Indar. During double exp weekend. So, regardless of terminology issues, any and all cases of bringing this up as an argument for the rush lanes system don't hold water.
  4. Jex =TE=

    Or too busy playing somewhere else. There's plenty of reasons people won't leave where they are, they may not even notice there's an issue because they're having too much fun where they are and not paying attention. They might be in a squad in a major battle and withdrawing could lose the fight.

    I don't think people should instantly go with " lazy *** holes" because i doubt it's the case - they're playing the game elsewhere and it's up to the devs to come up with ways of spreading the fight out and currently they're trying the lattice system in this Alpha release of PS2.
  5. IamDH

  6. PyroPaul

    Ghost Capping is the process of initiating a point transition then simply leaving it.
    The term is Derived from the idea that 'Ghosts' are capturing the territory.
  7. LahLahSr

    PS2 had this "problem" (in captions because I think it's debatable) in particular because the number of objectives that can be captured is too high, especially when compared to the population sizes, which were waning on a per-server basis when this was debated hotly here on the forum.

    So, the lattice system was invented - and implemented about the same time as most server merges took place.

    This was "overkill": the lattice system is too narrow and all fights are now too massive for the server to handle, leading to craptastic performance issues.

    SOE should back off and open the lattice system or dispense with it completely. Or, do both - which would mean that owning territories connected by the lattice gives an extra bonus..or give the ONLY bonus..but still allow the other territories to be captured. This would potentially lessen the performance issues and also give smaller groups/outfits something to do that seems meaningful for their size.

    I would have preferred if there simply were fewer territories/provinces to cap and if each territory was larger with 2-3 outposts that had to be owned at the same time to achieve territory-ownership/territory bonus.

    Ghost capping was mostly an annoyance when the continent population was too low, thus changing a frontline game into a game of tag, which admittedly held only limited appeal.
  8. Inu

    I consider this a valid tactic until they implement changes.