What behaviors (desirable or not) are encouraged by an incentive system based on publication throughput?
This is a terrible question, because it presumes that publications are the goal of science, as opposed to an indicator of actual meaningful intellectual contribution.

Therefore, I will provide a solution that proves the metrics are meaningless per se:


Generate a sequence of N meaningless papers using Sci-Gen.
Have each of the meaningless papers cite K of the other meaningless papers in the sequence. 
Identify a set of crap journals that do not perform meaningful peer review with the aid of Beall's list.
Publish the meaningless papers in series in the crap journals, thereby obtaining an i10-index of N and an H-index of K (assuming N>=K>=10).


If self-citations are excluded, then enlist (or fake) a colleague to do the same and cite each other's meaningless papers rather than one's own.  If Journal Impact Factor matters, then sequence the papers over three years.

Citation metrics are the shadows on the wall of Plato's cave.