[Suggestion] Biggest problems with the game and the single, simple solution.

I agree. there should be some type of dynamic defense XP awarded. I dont think it needs to be too complex though, but there definitely needs to be more incentive to protect a base.

i also agree that vehicle vs infantry xp should be adjusted accordingly.

1. more EXP for defensive kills - you get more if you kill an enemy on the terittory controlled by your empire
2. less EXP for offensive kills - also based on teritorry control - but your EXP bonus will come if you cap the base

this way defending a base makes sense, it gives you more EXP on regular basis, attacking can give you even more but only if your attack is successful

and no, I do not think that this is a single, simple solution to everything, just an idea to think over, how would it work in the world full of people trying to farm EXP instead of playing the game

I love the idea of scaled XP, I just don't think it would get people out of their vehicles, they are stat queens even with reduced XP per kill I think they'd just continue using vehicles.
It would take a major redesign of bases and outposts to get them out of their metal holes and back into the light of day.

I'm on board with all of this, except for the varying exp per kill depending on how you got the kill.
The point is, regardless of how you kill an infantryman, he is always worth the same amount of tickets on a capture point. A person in an ESF who kills 5 guys rushing a point is just as valuable as a Heavy Assault who lands the grenade that kills 5 guys rushing a point. In both cases, the point was defended, why should the ESF pilot get less exp when his actions affected the battle just as much as the Heavy Assault's?

If you're looking to discourage aircraft and other vehicles from farming infantry I would take a different approach: raise the EXP reward for killing vehicles and base defenses. This would encourage tanks and aircraft to target other tanks and aircraft (and base turrets )before targetting infantry, unless circumstances apply. At the end of the day though, they're still going to farm infantry when there aren't any vehicles (or organized AV/AA infantry) to oppose them.

I haven't read everything on this thread, but just wanted to say I also think the way XP is gained could be adjusted.

Right now you can cap bases easily as a solo or with your squad and gain a lot of territory to your faction. But it's not worth it, because you gain more XP by going with the biggest mass into the biggest fight and just fight/repair/revive/spawn camp. The game doesn't encourage for being smart and defending or capping strategically important bases.

My suggestion would be to increase the XP from capping and defending based on how few players there are on the area. After small battles more XP would be gained. And if there have been > 100 players in the area, you wouldn't even get any XP from capping. That way the big army would split and some would start to move on to the next base before the cap. Now it's boring and stupid when hundreds of players are spawn camping and practically waiting for minutes before they can move on, just because they want to have the XP from cap.

Killing a foot soldier while in a vehicle is still important and a contribution to the fight at large. The reason it should be worth less exp in my opinion is two fold.

1. The difference in destructive power. The HA example you gave using a grenade is a good one, except that the HA only has 1 grenade (may more, RARELY more) while the ESF has multiple shots and plenty of reloads. The destructive capability on vehicles is just higher, especially those with HE weapons in an infantry situation.

2. The difference in survival. The soldier is pretty squishy and dies in single shots to HE vehicles. The only infantry that can reliably damage a tank is HA (ignoring C4 which requires you to close the gap and is only usable on drivers dumb enough to get close). Even then it is several shots from a rocket launcher. Getting killed in a tank is harder than dying on foot, no doubt about that. Therefore the risk of being on foot is higher than being in a tank.

Last thing to keep in mind, with these two benefits together, while each individual kill will be worth less exp, the capacity for killing is higher, resulting in the capacity for earning more or the same exp overall. You see videos of tanks farming spawns and things such as that. Basically they will make up for the lower exp per kill with the number of kills rewarding exp. It's quantity over quality while in a vehicle. They have to kill more because they have the capability of killing more. (of course a tank killing a tank should yield a completely separate, higher amount of exp).

I feel this would punish players. This game promotes large battles. I don't think there is anything wrong with everyone fighting at one base. If the stakes were higher for say, capturing an entire continent (as my suggestion) then people would naturally and strategically split off on their own to take the easy bases and further their control of the continent.

i disagree,problem is people dont know how to play the game,and are lazy,thus crying to soe.

Mattherson NC here too man.

For the HA example, I'd like to point out that an HA also has a perfectly usable LMG that can gun down 5 infantry in a single clip, and he carries multiple clips.

It think you're missing the point. This isn't a 1v1 or small scale game. The difference in power and survivability doesn't matter one bit. It's the RESULTS that matter the most. Why does it matter that the ESF can kill more than the infantry man? Why do you want to equalize exp gain between infantry and vehicles, when vehicles have a bigger impact on the battlefield?

You'd basically be saying to the tanker or pilot "Hey, you're only worth as much as that one infantryman over there, even though you've spent resources to pull your vehicle and time to position it on the front. Even though you cause much more destruction and contribute more to the battle than that infantryman, you're going to get the same EXP as him because he doesn't enjoy playing the same role as you and was jealous of your EXP gain."

What you're advocating is basically infantry welfare, more or less. This idea is born of frustration and jealousy, rather than reason. The EXP system is results driven, not effort driven, just like the american economy.

Why is making a post about the mechanics of the game being flawed a problem? I will admit I've crashed a couple of times 3 times total since launch but for the most part this game runs really smooth for me.

IMO

Infantry Farming:

No matter what you do to the experience there will always be camping from bombers and tanks. People will sit outside of shield doors all day if it means free kills no matter how much experience they get. Remember lots of people really only care about their K/D. I think the only viable solution for farming is a complete base redesign. There is no reason whatsoever that Spawnrooms should be outside from a game mechanic stand point and as a freaking Auraxian base designer stand point. Why would a general sign papers to put spawn rooms outside to have his troops bombed to death? When people spawn they need to be at somewhat of an equal footing.

Bases need to have spawn rooms indoors and connect to main control area in someway (Think Planetside 1). Also a couple but not all of the generators should be located in doors. Tanks, Bombers, and Vehicles will still rule the courtyards but when its time to actually capture the base they have to dismount and enter the facility.

I feel tanks should be tanks. Bombers should be bombers. They both should be strong and they should destroy infantry like they currently do. I just think they should be separated when it comes to capturing the base and spawn rooms. The more SOE nerfs them the less fun will be had in them.

Lack of Base Defense.

More Experience needs to be given for defending a base, Also stationary guns need to be buffed. Along with that I think with a very intensive base redesign infantry will actually be able to defend a facility and will WANT to. Noone wants to get bombed to bits every time they get out of a spawn room.

Lack of purpose

Create Sancs again and let us push empires off of a cont and back to their home sanc. Then let us take that.

Overall I would just say that the current base designs are poop and we need a heavy redesign they encourage camping like crazy. Biolab was a good start but I think takes it a little to far. We need something inbetween a biolab and a amp station. An interior and a courtyard that way everyone is happy.

A new map system wouldn't hurt either to add more a flow to the battlefield. Currently its just a whack a mole and gets really boring really fast.

I like most of these. I don't like the thing about vehicles though.

I had a look through the thread and I've seen support and opposition to the idea of reducing exp earned by vehicles - here's my own take, as a pilot of both Liberators and ESFs.
Teamwork in this game is essential. Don't even try to argue with that (although I'm pretty sure you agree already). This isn't a game in which you can hop in, kill a bunch of people and pogo-stick away to pony land on your giant e-*****. This game requires communication and coordination - not just between a squad, but ideally between a platoon or even the whole continent. How does this relate to vehicles? I'll use planes as an example.
Flying an ESF is pretty easy, until the enemy starts shooting back. Those frames are fragile and will break if looked at for too long. It takes me about 20 seconds to shoot down the average pilot in a dogfight, one on one, and in that time period I'm ineffective against ground targets, and will have to resupply afterwards. Its tough against skilled pilots, especially when the enemy has lock-on A2A missiles, which replace your A2G ordinance. Its doable but likely to get shot up in the process. Does this parry your point? No, I haven't addressed the point against ground. When an ESF comes in for a strafe run, they largely sit still to get shots on target, unless they're good at aiming those waterbombs. Heavies get a rocket launcher - hell, any class can shoot at an ESF and damage its airframe, even with the default guns. Get a team to look up every so often and you'll scare off enemy fighters. Hiding between buildings makes our job even harder. Getting those infantry kills as an ESF isn't something we just do - it takes skill to aim, track, and a bit of luck to avoid enemy AA, which hurts. True there are better pilots than me who undoubtedly get more kills than me, but that's my 2 cents. A typical A2G run on my ESF will maybe reap about 4 or 5 kills provided I don't run into too thick enemy AA or get distracted by vehicles (which we're a bit crap against now). If you're fighting in an open field with no air superiority, well... that's your fault. Sorry.

As for Liberators, its a different story to ESF's altogether. Those things are still versatile in skilled hands and I don't have those hands. Even so, maximum combat effectiveness needs a full complement aboard - pilot, bellygun and tailgun. To land those anti-ground shots accurately, the craft has to move at a speed the gunner can cope with, and we have to avoid AA, which also hurts. It takes one enemy fighter to attack from above/sun to get us running, most of the time, if they have the right gun. What's worse, we're also vulnerable to lock-ons, which infantry and aircraft alike can do. Yeah, I can see how it might be seen as unfair when one Liberator with a Zephyr is capable of wiping out a closely-grouped-together bunch of infantry, but again - why arent you in cover, why are you grouped up? A grenade launcher/rocket launcher can do a lot of damage. One nutcase with an assault rifle can probably take out a couple if he gets the jump. The birds are expensive on resources and time, our payoff is that we can destroy enemies who don't tell eachother theres a bird in the sky that needs shooting down. Maybe I'm being unsympathetic, but it's really not hard to shoot down enemy aircraft, provided you have an engi who knows how to repair AA turrets, or you have heavies with rocket launchers, or a lightning with skyguard, or people who know how into AA MAX, or a team who responds to calls for air support. Myself and one other once helped defend Quartz Ridge by manning two AA cannons and shot down 4 aircraft between us by concentrating our fire, rather than picking random targets.

On the topic of ground vehicles - I can't make huge input as I don't use these often, but I know they are less agile than aircraft, and that they are more susceptible to dumbfire rockets, and ground-armor tracking rockets, and MAXs, and mines, and ground artillery turrets - all of which are manned by infantry.
See where I'm going with the communication thing? It wins wars. I don't believe discouraging vehicle use through nerfing xp is a suitable solution to a lack of coordination. In honesty I think the xp is balanced - what needs fixing are the tacky vehicle-damage systems and the classes to be rebalanced.

Yep...

no, it's born out of fun and equivalence of fun and this idea was born far beyond the simple concern for exp. This is more of a problem with the game design but they've gone too far at this point. Infantry should be a valid play style, it should not dominate or be on par with tanks but it is the basic mode in this game, but due to almost no indoor bases there is very little if any infantry based combat. The issue is more with base design and vehicle turrets. The HE turret is too overpowered but nerfing it to the point of fixing it would render it almost useless compared to other turrets and as people have spent money on this, that is not really an option. Discouraging its use by lowering the rewards it yields would be a decent deterrent. You can not honestly say that the amount of effort killing an infantry in a vehicle is the same amount of effort as killing an infantry as infantry with all the factors being considered.

This is not an economy. This is a game. Just because someone pulled a vehicle they get to dominate the battlefield and get rewarded out of their mind? 30 exp may have been too little but the HE turret is ridiculously...well, ridiculous. 50 or 60 may be more in line for any infantry kill using an HE turret.

There is something certainly and clearly wrong with a HA that is able to take out a tank and then only get 100 exp. As we have both pointed out tanks and planes play a large roll in combat, and for removing this important threat they should certainly be rewarded more.

I'm not opposed to using vehicles, infact I use them more than I'm on foot as I play to win. but my play sessions have quickly become either sitting in a spawn room surrounded by tanks and vehicles with anti infantry weapons or sitting in a tank surrounding a spawn room/door with a HE turret and this is a problem. Personally I do not find current game play fun and I'm sure many would agree. I'm open to other solutions but SOMETHING has to change and this would be the simplest and quickest solution as it would just be changing around some integer values in the code.

Are my suggestions or ideas perfect? No, but as I said, something needs to change, any suggestions?

Fair enough. my suggestions are thus:
Covered spawns that are safe from bombardment, or teleporters within spawn rooms that lead to other areas of the base. You'll still get killed by spawn camping infantry, but at least its not a Lib or tank right? As it is, spawn camping is a hard issue to solve. The solution is to disallow spawning once the enemy force occupies the base. The hard part is coming up with flawless logic that determines when to flip the base or switch the spawn room off. As we learned in beta with SCU's at small outposts, if spawning is disallowed too soon, defenders cannot respond. If spawning is allowed for too long as is currently you end up with stupid people spawning at a lost battle and getting farmed by the attacking force. Theres also the issue that even when given the chance to stop the defenders from spawning, most attackers won't take it once the spawn is on lockdown. perhaps this could be partially resolved by SCU's with much longer overload times than we saw in beta. Short enough that attackers will want to overload it right when they attack, but long enough to allow the defenders to defend. Of course, players could just learn to stop spawning at a camped spawn and instead regroup somewhere and counterattack. But that will never happen with random players will it?

There should be XP in general for vehicle destruction. Vehicles play a major role in the game, more so than any single infantry, therefore any vehicle kill should be worth much more than an infantry kill, even if you don't kill the driver. Sundies have an appropriate reward for their destruction, the other vehicles should be bumper up closer to the sunderer.

If you want to encourage defense, part of that is making "mindless" attacking less rewarding.

Strategic change: Resource ramp-up, Deferred XP

While I agree that every base should give some type of advantage and not just cap a continent, you need to balance it to prevent the winner side to become too much powerful.
One thing I'd like to see is if a faction cap all continents the game should make a big announcement, the other factions should be humiliated by the superiors, the winners should hear a band or something like if they won the war and then the game resets all the capture and the game start all over again but the winners gain something to show like a flair or a armor that increase the look of it every time the owner win the war.

It's not about the game crashing at all. It's about the million other bugs which are both technical mistakes and gameplay issues.

I'll list a few examples just so you see what I mean by technical issues:

Rendering distance, Burster MAXes are still invisible to aircraft at most of the ranges which the MAX can see the aircraft.

Netcode needs optimized, find yourself one of these erratic body-poppers and you'll know what I mean.

Abilities still cease to work entirely and the cause is still left to guesses, not truly known.

LA jumpjets are downgraded by unlocking upgrades. Levels 3-5 are worse than levels 1 and 2. Level 6 is better than level 1, but not NEARLY representative of it's tooltip.

Flares cost same on TR and VS ESFs, but more on NC ESFs. I think this is a bug, don't see why it would be intentional.

Touching a railing still causes random suicides. You'll be walking around, barely touch a railing.. And you die by suicide. Happens relatively often.

Players still fall through the map.

Unguided rockets still hit ESFs: Detonating on impact, giving shooter a hitmarker, but do NO damage. Making a skilled shot wasted.

Pain shields in spawn rooms can be still be exploited by C4 and grenades to kill people inside the rooms.

And about a million more. These are bugs, exploits, and technical oversights. I think the balance of classes and vehicles is fine as-is, and can me tweaked at a later date.. But something that is not fine is this mess.

But in the spirit of sticking with this topic..

Tanks and bombers should be the beasts they are intended to be.

Spawn rooms are decent, but they should incorporate a tunnel system.. So at least the attackers have to spread out to cover all exits.

Defending should NOT give any XP. Seriously I get a ridiculous amount of kills while defending: And THAT is your bonus XP. You do realize taking a large base gives 1,000 XP? That's 10 kills with deaths between. Get 10 kills without dying and you have more than 1,000 XP. On the typical defense of a large base I can get an easy 30 kills, and sometimes you get WAY more. Give any more of a bonus to defense and that's all anyone will be doing..

Vehicles should get the same XP they do now for killing infatry. But infantry should get a MUCH larger reward for killing vehicles. Seriously if some HA kills my Magrider/Scythe/Lib a measly 100-300XP plus 100 for me being in it.. He could've killed 10 infantry in the time it takes him to take out my tank.. So he's being punished for helping his team remove a powerful threat. Yeah I don't agree with these rewards being so low.

As for the rest, haven't read into it enough to respond.

EDIT- Perhaps Vehicles should also be given more XP for taking out other vehicles: Similar to the suggestion to bump up XP for infantry killing vehicles. Reasoning behind this is that then, maybe more vehicles would go for anti-armor instead of farming the easy infantry kills 90% of them do now.

One simple change: Vanilla

If people want a fair game then all weapons, all classes, all vehicles do the same exact damage as well as mitigates the same amount of damage. Sounds completely insane doesn't it? Well, that's the way a lot of the original shooters were designed. The best players always rose to the top while all the rest of the players fell somewhere in the middle or lower end of the spectrum.

People can wax eloquently about changes and can present some very well founded as well as convincing arguments for change, but the bottom line is, skilled players will out preform other players. There are some changes that could be made to make the game a little more "enjoyable", however the simple fact is there are going to be players that are simply going to have more guile, better reflexes, amazing ADS (aim capability), gun control and survivability.

Um...was mostly focusing on vehicle and plane vs infantry balance...sooooooo, yeah.