3 replies to this topic

[Tuonela]

To sum it up, conquest doesn't reward a player for doing what you're supposed to, which is capping points. The c-bill and exp rewards should reflect the game type, not be the same across the board for all games.

Real life example. On Frozen City the cap points changed hands a few times for each point. I was running around in a Jenner and probably was responsible for 40-50% of the captures on our side (By myself, with no one else capping). But I didn't end up killing anyone or really dealing any damage.

At the end of the round, I was second to last on the team in points. But I did the most to help my team win in terms of capping points. Therefore, in my opinion, the points don't match how you are supposed to play the game style. The game style is rewarding the same way that assault is, which is mostly by damage done, kills and assists, which doesn't reinforce the point of the conquest game mode at all.

[LogicSol]

Since you do get directly rewarded for the amount of resources you gathered, I'll assume you mean actually capturing the points.
So in otherwords you want a capture/assist bonus.

It's a good idea, though you may want to make that a little clearer.

[Fabe]

I think the OP has a good point,if the primary objective of conquest is to capture the harvesters then there should be a bonus for capping them. Also the resource payout per minute should be a bit higher ,at least equal to a kill if not higher to discourage all out team deathmatch style play. Don't worry shoot em up fans ,fighting will still happen since you will need to have more harvesters to win which will mean taking and holding them by force

[Taurick]

Yep, terrible as it is, why bother capping when you can just secure theta with your group and mow the other team down in a brawl

Needs to be a cap or assist bonus, maybe 250cbill * number of seconds parked on hostile base, and 100cbill * number of seconds parked on neutral base

Edited by Taurich, 20 December 2012 - 12:26 AM.