So yes my suggestions is to GIVE EXP rewards! for not die every second! or K/D ratio??
here is just my last 2 games where people get similar score , with similar kills , etc, but dying 3x more !
they just go rambo/COD style kill whatever and spawn again, they take team tickets, in many occasion they have negative KD ratio and almost no support point (no building no assists, no cap) , and get the same reward that people trying to play with strategy.
I think you get more XP for multikills, so that could also be the reason.
But Rambo style all the way!
Multikill gte more rewards are you sure?
32/3 = 10.6
36/12 = 3
still they got more or similar points
No, not sure, I just don’t think you get any XP for dying, so it has to be something else.
Sadly yes, kills are all that matters. Or at least kills give you the most xp.
Rambo will always get more xp. Punishig players for dying would be bad.
Maybe getting bonus xp for more kills per soldier, or their time being alive. Even better if staying on point longer would get you better bonus.
But seeing laughable 3xp for engineer per spawns i doubt they will add anything to change this.
If You want to level up fast, set up spawn as close as possible but still protected to points. Maybe throw all nades everywhere and just send squads to meat grinders. You can’t command them from distance, unless ordered to attack/defend the point.
your points should get something like a 0.1 multiplier for every kill you get without dying and when you die the multiplier should reset back to 1.0
I have no problem with players that have a lot of deaths, as long as they don’t suicide on purpose to get into a tank or plane instead of playing with an infantry squad.
I die a lot too, but I never suicide and I always die because I push beyond the comfort zone of my team. You know what they say: “The best defense is a good offense.”
As for the “support points”, I can assure you that in over 95% of my games I’m first in all 3 categories and 1st or 2nd per total points/kills, so generalizing and putting everyone into the same pot is pretty stupid.
Also, on conquest mode you can have maximum 10 respawns, so what you said in your post applies only to invasion/assault modes, where you can definitely lose more than 10 squads if you don’t have a team to back you up.
Rewarding KD in and of itself would only encourage worse gameplay.
“it’s not about how much you spend it’s about on what you spend”
People can have bad/low KD in still be 10 times more effective on ze battlefield than someone with great KD.
If you play on the objective you die a lot and kill a lot.
If you sit in spawn with a sniper you kill a lot but dont die.
I rather have the first player on my team tbh.
People are already allergic to the objective and would rather corner cap leaning around a stairwell farming kills.
I’m surprised no one here mentioned drop shotting meta.
The change pose perk makes the drop shotting meta super effective.
The meta in general here is super stale and super solidified, mainly because this game has such easily abused mechanics there’s pretty much only one way to excel easily.
That is absolutely normal. Get the most with the least effort. Isn’t it how things work here?
I mean… It is not the players’ fault. Obviously, most players would not choose the harder or more difficult way if they can cheese it.
I would put the blame on the bad design. Make the objective areas much larger. We have a seriously big map to play on.
So suggestion making the game a camping fiesta? Great idea 
Ultimately yes, it’s flaws in game design. Humans are inherently lazy creatures, and all sense of honor and sportsmanship are contrived notions we ourselves have invented. By instinct we will always choose the path of least resistance despite how annoying, scummy or unfun it makes us to play against/with.
You have a point and I agree, on the other hand it’s quite unrealistic to happily run into your death like a lemming.
It feels weird to me to rush a point that I did not scout first. Too bad imo that the game pace does not allow for a more tactic approach.
Excuse me, I don’t run. I bunny hop into the room while hip firing my M1 garand while spinning around.
r e a l i s m
So suggesting a more realistic and less CoD-approach to WW2? Guess that would be an awesome idea. Just right now - at least in my POV - many aspects of the game dont work together quite well. E.G mortars. Theyre only really useful if they can abuse something, like dropping at a spawn. Otherwise its just not worth the effort since the gameplay is just too fast and does not give you enough time to even aim your mortar BEFORE the enemy is 50 meters further away. Same goes to close air support. Even if you get pings by your team, the average map is a city map (or CQC), so dropping your ordnance with only 5 seconds delay (approaching the target) is enough for the enemy to get out of the dropzone. Unless you can just drop 4 250kg bombs (or something similar) literally carpet bombing the whole map from one end to the other.
Same applies to MGs or tanks. Same applies to TDs (just announced). Why on earth would you play the weapons as they are intended to be used (preparation time, ambushs, suppressing fire, etc. etc.). Same goes to arty (arty spam ftw i suppose?). Most problems of said weaponry can easily be fixed by reducing the gameplays speed. But no thats too boring for the average “i-can-only-focus-for-10-seconds-player”? This game HAD (i am quite confident i already have an accurate vision of where the game is going …) awesome potential. Yet they throw in another CoD-stylish game, yeeehaaa …
Besides that: try to understand games like squad / ps / hll and you might be able to understand why these games are x-times better than any CoD / Battlefield …