In Trem, even GPP, camping is very common, but it stalls the game and thus makes it boring. Various forms of "Anti-camp" have been tried and AFAIK, they all failed, due to misunderstanding the problem. The problem is not that players camp, it's that camping stalls the game. You can't solve it by annoying campers, but by making camping no longer stall the game. They made defending more difficult or more frustrating, but it was still better to have your entire team at or near your base, than anywhere else, and it was still possible to stall the game.
If you want to eliminate camping, provide a significant enough advantage to the team that controls the map to let them easily beat a completely camping team.
The advantages given for map-control should depend on the map / layout, instead of on the number of structures you can fit in some area, like GPP repeaters (5 reps in several default bases and 19 at karith outside...).
I oppose determining anything based purely on the area covered by creep / power. I think the mapper should define how useful each location is, independent of the size of the area. Otherwise everyone will try to go for the largest rooms, reducing variety, and reducing the effectiveness of domination (which is splitting players up or starving them of res). Aliens would also have a good reason to eggspam everywhere. And the total income would depend on the map size.
So let the mapper add domination points (DPs, preferably 8+ total) to potential base locations which give a certain amount of resources to the team that controls them. The amount of resources should be adjustable by the mapper to balance out different locations (i.e. locations that favour humans give more resources to aliens and less to humans, and vice versa) so players wouldn't avoid the less favourable locations, thus making the games more varied.
A team that controls only 1 location can easily be overwhelmed, and a team that controls more than 1 location will have players spread out to several areas (while the other team can focus their attacks on a single location), and thus will also be unable to stall the game. DPs should be placed so as to force a team to defend at least 3 locations before they control half the map. For example on karith if a DP was placed in the usual base locations, a team could end up controlling the path from A default to H default with 4 DPs, and would have to defend only 2 locations, while the other team would have to defend 3-4 for a similar number of DPs (human front entrance and large stairs room are not easy to defend (and shouldn't be)). Instead, each path should contain 3 DPs, with the res from each adjusted to make each location worth considering for both teams.
There is also the issue of starving the other team, thus the resources gained from DPs should allow a team to both advance (stage up or whatever it will be replaced with) and evolve / buy equipment. I'm not suggesting completely removing funds for kills, however they should be reduced somewhat (by 30% ?) to prevent both teams from ending up full of chainsuits/rants/goons due to the extra funds from domination points. This will also make feeding less of a hindrance to your team, making the game slightly more newbie friendly (reducing funds gained from killing free classes would help too).
BP queue can also be replaced (and max bp limit can probably be removed) with a small income of bps over time from each DP a team controls.
