I'm reading posts and thread left, right and center about the issues of ghost-capping and here's the two similar but different definitions I've gathered from everyone else. Ghost Capping A: - Player(s) flip point(s). - Player(s) leaves. COUNTER A: - Hit the [Del] key to redeploy or have a friendly ESF do a quick fly by and recap it. You own the base, they're not going to respawn in (unless it's more than one guy and unless they do it more frequently - which is NOT a ghost cap: it's small scale battle). - If the guy's hiding somewhere perhaps, go Infilitrator and shoot a Recon Dart. Ghost Capping B: - Player(s) flip point(s). - Player(s) stay and assault, but with lesser numbers than a platoon. COUNTER B: - Hit the [Del] key to redeploy or have a friendly ESF do a quick fly by and recap it. You own the base and they're not going to respawn after death in unless they have a spawn beacon (which is destroyable), a Sunderer (also destroyable) or squad deploy in (which has a cooldown of every 5 minutes). - This has officially become a small scale fight if you cannot prevent them from spawning and according to some, is not a ghost cap. It's a battle that you're too busy cert farming/spawn camping other enemies on that you can't handle a few players yourself (or with some back up). This is the result of a reliance on numbers to save you rather than being capable of taking out the enemies yourself. - The former, I can see as a problem that can be easily solved with the touch of a button (Del key to redeploy). The other, is an actual fight - where if you call that a "ghost cap", I'd like to think you're sadly mistaken if you're being outdone by a few others who consistently spawn in to take you out.
I think that sounds about right. Ghost cap implies nobody around...hence Ghost. Sticking around to cap and non defended base/outpost...I usually call a Back Cap or a Sneak Cap (Ninja cap? lol) Once defense shows up, they are small battles.
My problem is the complaints of ghost-capping and how people are talking about how much of an issue it is. If it involves no enemies inside the base anymore, it wouldn't be hard to have one guy willing to want to look for a potential fight (which is usually what I end up doing because sometimes I get free vehicle kills), to redeploy or fly over with an ESF to reclaim what's lost. The latter of "ghost-capping" where there are smaller battles .. it's just a fight and it shouldn't be disregarded as a fight not worth going for. Not everyone's apart of some super duper huge outfit or zerg nor do some want to be apart of one.
The thing is that its so easy to do when a single hex can have 5 adjacent enemy territories-you aren't able to defend them all at once. With the lattice on Indar an empire will have around six different places to attack, one will be a 4 platoon v 4 platoon two others at platoon v platoon and the other 3 will have squads. Lattice helps create a front line so that capturing a territory is a fight rather than a whole bunch of outfits dropping platoons on empty bases.
Back in beta, they had a mechanism which made it so that you couldn't "cap a point" after the base has been captured for five minutes. Everyone had to wait until the points were unlocked. Another easier solution is to do something similar to lattice and hex and just limit the amount of connectors from 5 to 3 or so. That keeps front lines relatively simple and doesn't allow for a multitude for ghost caps.
