Low TTK versus High TTK (Time to Kill) - You Opinion?

#1 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

Most Battlefield games had a distinctly high TTK, a design paradigm of DICE's balancing eversince BF2 (earlier BF games had a lower TTK). If the damage model stays as it is, this is quite a huge gameplay shift.

I was concerned at first about the the low TTK damage model, but color me a convert. It works out awesomely. Getting way less cheap deaths and kills. It's just when I have the inferior plan or execution I lose. When I have the superior plan and execution, I can kill a whole army on my own. Got pretty good a going ninja on M-COMs. Must have gotten 3-4 crates alone versus around 10 defenders, because the guns actually kill. So that's where I'm standing.

Low TTK = My Gun Kills A LOT = I love it when a plan comes together!

P.S. Excuse the shoddy title. I am playing too much and not sleeping enough currently. Between being hooked on Vindictus and my regular obsession with Battlefield, I'm just putting too much energy into my gaming habit right now. I'm almost afraid to get a beta key for SW:TOR, which seems more likely with every day that passes. DANG YOU VIDEOGAMES!

#2 Posted by Spoonman671 (4711 posts) -

I wish players could take just the slightest bit more damage, but I'm not terribly offended with the status quo.  I'm an easy man to please.  Just let me set up my bipod and mow dudes down.

#3 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@Spoonman671 said:

I wish players could take just the slightest bit more damage, but I'm not terribly offended with the status quo. I'm an easy man to please. Just let me set up my bipod and mow dudes down.

I'm quite the opposite. Unless I win and dominate and my team works together like cogs in a Swiss watch, I'm going increasingly MAD. Then I turn off the game and do some push-ups like a boss.

#4 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@Spoonman671 said:

I wish players could take just the slightest bit more damage, but I'm not terribly offended with the status quo. I'm an easy man to please. Just let me set up my bipod and mow dudes down.

I'd rather just get 100% tracer rounds like we had in the Bad Company games. There's just so many dudes using suppressors and silencers. The unseen and unheard death can feel a tad bit cheap.

#5 Posted by Spoonman671 (4711 posts) -
@Seppli said:

@Spoonman671 said:

I wish players could take just the slightest bit more damage, but I'm not terribly offended with the status quo. I'm an easy man to please. Just let me set up my bipod and mow dudes down.

I'm quite the opposite. Unless I win and dominate and my team works together like cogs in a Swiss watch, I'm going increasingly MAD. Then I turn off the game and do some push-ups like a boss.

Well that's what I like about the LMG class.  It's the only one (so far) that seems to be inherently teamwork-oriented, what with the suppression mechanic and the zone control aspect brought into play with the use of the bipod.
#6 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@Spoonman671 said:

@Seppli said:

@Spoonman671 said:

I wish players could take just the slightest bit more damage, but I'm not terribly offended with the status quo. I'm an easy man to please. Just let me set up my bipod and mow dudes down.

I'm quite the opposite. Unless I win and dominate and my team works together like cogs in a Swiss watch, I'm going increasingly MAD. Then I turn off the game and do some push-ups like a boss.

Well that's what I like about the LMG class. It's the only one (so far) that seems to be inherently teamwork-oriented, what with the suppression mechanic and the zone control aspect brought into play with the use of the bipod.

Must give it another shot. Played like 80% recon with shotgun or a PDW and 20% Assault. I was always falling through the ground using the bipod. Never tried it since the most glaring bugs got ironed out.

#7 Posted by Marz (5659 posts) -

The damage does feel similar to Medal Of Honor, guns kill fast in that game.  I kind of like the damage but it definitely makes it harder to penetrate a rush map as attackers when you get smoked in seconds in a cramped up tunnel.

#8 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@Marz said:

The damage does feel similar to Medal Of Honor, guns kill fast in that game. I kind of like the damage but it definitely makes it harder to penetrate a rush map as attackers when you get smoked in seconds in a cramped up tunnel.

There's sooo many routes to go ninja. It usually doesn't take many kills to get you past the frontline. Keep a low profile. Drop a radio beacon. Go for the M-Com. Win.

Operation Métro is narrow, but even at the narrowest spots, there's always at least 3 'separate routes/chokepoints' and those open up quickly to 10+. Some BF:BC 2 maps had singular chokepoints and Medal of Honor Combat Mission was more like one single chokepoint (albeit I enjoyed it as a kind of doing 'american football plays' kinda frontline shooter). The K/D generation just doesn't get that and the old school players don't appreciate hardcoded teamplay by restriction. They like their teamplay by discipline in freedom. Medal of Honor was also extremely barebone in features and maps and weapons and customization, which professional critics cannot stand.

BF3 is BF3. It will make a name for itself.

#9 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6789 posts) -

After playing more, I'm a bit more alright with the high damage on guns. I still prefer the damage model in BFBC2, it's perfect or at least as perfect as a military FPS has come in my opinion.

#10 Edited by AhmadMetallic (18954 posts) -

The damage is high, and it works perfectly for aggressive kill enthusiasts who play TDM and Rush. I'm glad that they got this higher bullet damage to kill moar, rack up kills and score dat awesome KD/R and have a good time.
 
This bullet damage will not work in Conquest. Driving to a flag for two minutes then arriving there, being as cautious as you can, and having some random dude see you (since you can't be invisible) and tap tap kill you after your effort to reach this control point, is utterly ridiculous. 
You have 64 people carrying guns, thats a lot of bullets flying everywhere, and Conquest mode is about being quick and smart enough to evade being fired at, or be able to kill your attacker, but dying in two taps before your slow heavy soldier can get up is extremely absurd for a game mode that has a lot of traveling.
 
What puzzles me about DICE is their laziness and refusal to set two different standards for CQ & Rush/TDM. Two sets of values for the guns and the rest of the stuff, each for a different mode. They use the same shit for close quarters pew pew camp fests, and 64 conquest.. Just doesn't make sense.

#11 Posted by easthill (351 posts) -

@AhmadMetallic: That's why you're supposed to bring a medic.

#12 Edited by mosdl (3229 posts) -

Are there any unlocks for medic to take more damage? That would help balance.

I played a lot of Caspian when it was up, and honestly didn't have many annoying deaths. Being able to spawn on anyone in your squad helps (unless they are all jet camping) in conquest.

The more annoying thing is dieing while behind cover, which I hope is a bug they will fix.

#13 Posted by Clonedzero (4200 posts) -

i'd prefer if it took 1 or 2 more bullets to kill. its too camper friendly right now where no matter how good you are you'll instantly die when they see you.

#14 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@AhmadMetallic said:

The damage is high, and it works perfectly for aggressive kill enthusiasts who play TDM and Rush. I'm glad that they got this higher bullet damage to kill moar, rack up kills and score dat awesome KD/R and have a good time. This bullet damage will not work in Conquest. Driving to a flag for two minutes then arriving there, being as cautious as you can, and having some random dude see you (since you can't be invisible) and tap tap kill you after your effort to reach this control point, is utterly ridiculous. You have 64 people carrying guns, thats a lot of bullets flying everywhere, and Conquest mode is about being quick and smart enough to evade being fired at, or be able to kill your attacker, but dying in two taps before your slow heavy soldier can get up is extremely absurd for a game mode that has a lot of traveling. What puzzles me about DICE is their laziness and refusal to set two different standards for CQ & Rush/TDM. Two sets of values for the guns and the rest of the stuff, each for a different mode. They use the same shit for close quarters pew pew camp fests, and 64 conquest.. Just doesn't make sense.

RADIO BEACON.

Always spawn Recon first until you manage to push for a nice vantage point. Drop beacon. Attack and Respawn and Attack and Respawn and Attack - until the defenders either catch on to your beacon or you get the capture point.

You are a social gamer Ahmad. You'll have no problem having a dude in your squad doing the radio beacon duty. I just spawn Recon until I get a foothold with a beacon, then I roll with whatever kit suits my plans the best.

Just imagine how easy it is to hide a nice radio beacon in the vercinity of a capture point and how awesome the firefights will be. Constant action and big-ass maps. AWESOME!

Your argument is pure conjecture, zero fact. I imagine the current TTK will be just fine on large maps, since TTK does increase more drastically at range due to more damage drop-off and spread and bullet drop than it was the case for BF:BC 2.

#15 Posted by Akrid (1356 posts) -

I think I like it this way. I dunno. I get pretty frustrated playing this game, partially because I suck at it, partially because there's no killcam, partially because bullet damage seems a bit unfair at times. It's not about gunfighting any more, it's about being in the right place at the right time. 
 
On the other hand, I do like the dynamic that the high TTK brings to the game. It makes suppression actually work, and all around makes for a much more unique experience that stands apart from it's predecessors.

#16 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18954 posts) -
@Seppli said:

RADIO BEACON.

Always spawn Recon first until you manage to push for a nice vantage point. Drop beacon. Attack and Respawn and Attack and Respawn and Attack - until the defenders either catch on to your beacon or you get the capture point.

You are a social gamer Ahmad. You'll have no problem having a dude in your squad doing the radio beacon duty. I just spawn Recon until I get a foothold with a beacon, then I roll with whatever kit suits my plans the best.

Just imagine how easy it is to hide a nice radio beacon in the vercinity of a capture point and how awesome the firefights will be. Constant action and big-ass maps. AWESOME!"

My initial reaction to this advice was "That's not my style / we might not always have a sniper on the squad / etc.." But after playing Caspian and seeing Battlefield 2 in the flesh, I'm willing to lower my guard and try these new gameplay approaches. The radio beacon tactic sounds interesting, thanks for the advice.  (P.S. you're still a crazy bastard)
 

Your argument is pure conjecture, zero fact. I imagine the current TTK will be just fine on large maps, since TTK does increase more drastically at range due to more damage drop-off and spread and bullet drop than it was the case for BF:BC 2.

Yes, the range combat is gonna be OK, I'm more concerned about the conflict over flags. The combat in BF2 was great because just two opposing squads could have a fucking five minute shootout over a single flag, it was beautiful working together, spawning on the squad leader and reviving each other, and not being afraid of running free once in a while. Then a helicopter or a jet or a tank came in and tipped the odds, it was always a magnificent struggle whose end was unknown. And then the end comes and one of the two teams victoriously takes over that control point.
With the instant kill combat of BF3, the action over the flags is gonna be really slim and boring compared to what it should be. I tried it in Caspian, and it was just a bummer to take over flags (or lose them) so instantly. The combat felt hollow.
#17 Posted by easthill (351 posts) -

Also;

* Fixed a bug where shooting at a moving enemy could cause more than the intended amount of damage.

Source.

Hopefully this will remove the instagib going on sometimes.

#18 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6789 posts) -

@easthill said:

Also;

* Fixed a bug where shooting at a moving enemy could cause more than the intended amount of damage.

Source.

Hopefully this will remove the instagib going on sometimes.

Huh. That is good, hopefully that will help. The one problem I have is (seemingly, at least) that up close, headshots are always one shot kills, so if Jimmy-McBob comes around a corner hip firing like crazy out of his M4A1 and randomly hits you in the head with his first shot due to luck he will win simply because he got lucky.

Read the rest of the changes, sounds good.

#19 Posted by easthill (351 posts) -

@xobballox: Luck is a tough bug to fix.

#20 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@easthill said:

@xobballox: Luck is a tough bug to fix.

And knowing when to roll the dice is one of the many 'Battlefield Ace' skills.

#21 Posted by MrKlorox (11209 posts) -

TTK? Is that a real acronym?

#22 Posted by SomeJerk (3320 posts) -

I was told that pistols were wimpy and sad in alpha and got buffed for this. But shotguns are an exercise in getting a horrible score per minute, dying too much and not having fun.

To use a shotgun successfully in BF3 you need

1) Luck

2) Luck with enemy player latency

3) Player prediction like a madman

4) Great map knowledge

5) More luck with latency

6) Cocaine to help cope with the pain

7) The ability to aim

8) The right kind of maps and areas for it

9) More cocaine

#23 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6789 posts) -

@easthill said:

@xobballox: Luck is a tough bug to fix.

Sure, I'm just saying if it took two headshots to kill up close, luck wouldn't be as much of a factor in that situation.

#24 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@MrKlorox said:

TTK? Is that a real acronym?

That's actual gamedesign lingo. Read it first on Blizzard blue posts.

#25 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@SomeJerk said:

I was told that pistols were wimpy and sad in alpha and got buffed for this. But shotguns are an exercise in getting a horrible score per minute, dying too much and not having fun.

To use a shotgun successfully in BF3 you need

1) Luck

2) Luck with enemy player latency

3) Player prediction like a madman

4) Great map knowledge

5) More luck with latency

6) Cocaine to help cope with the pain

7) The ability to aim

8) The right kind of maps and areas for it

9) More cocaine

You are just doing it wrong. I got most of my kills with shotguns and they are insanely powerful. Using mostly regular buckshot or slugs. Flechettes and Frag ammo didn't do it for me.

#26 Posted by Jack268 (3387 posts) -

BF3 works perfectly in this department. The only problem is spawn raping is much more potent, but that's more of a problem with the map.

#27 Posted by Pie (7110 posts) -

It sounds like you like it because you're able to go all one man army on people. Personally I think they should increase TTK or whatever to more bad company 2 levels. At the moment it seems like being a medic dishing out health packs is kinda useless because no one lives long enough to use them. Also there is barely anytime to react to being shot at. In bad company 2 unless you're out in the open you normally have time to hunker down behind a piece of cover and find where the guy is. I don't know if the idea is that as soon as you get shot you should go prone and that's why changed TTK (urgh) but that's not really how I like to play. I like getting a overall feeling of where everyone is and then manoeuvring my way around so I can get them from the sides, whilst manoeuvring I might take a few shots but a useful medic will just patch me up. In this it seems to be a lot more running forward until you hear shots being fired in your direction and then proning and attempting to pick guys off but oh wait some guy just shoots me anyway. It all feels a bit slow and frustrating. I like my gunfights to last and not just be "wha ya dead"

#28 Edited by SomeJerk (3320 posts) -

@Seppli said:

@SomeJerk said:

I was told that pistols were wimpy and sad in alpha and got buffed for this. But shotguns are an exercise in getting a horrible score per minute, dying too much and not having fun.

To use a shotgun successfully in BF3 you need

1) Luck

2) Luck with enemy player latency

3) Player prediction like a madman

4) Great map knowledge

5) More luck with latency

6) Cocaine to help cope with the pain

7) The ability to aim

8) The right kind of maps and areas for it

9) More cocaine

You are just doing it wrong. I got most of my kills with shotguns and they are insanely powerful. Using mostly regular buckshot or slugs. Flechettes and Frag ammo didn't do it for me.

Yeah, that's what I'm doing, trying to get the M1014 up to slugs was the worst..

..until I joined a server on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean and became an unkillable god, charging in and getting 3-6 kills before going down :]

870 remains preferable even with slugs and IR on that little fellow, sadly. Hopefully slugs can pierce cockpit glass.

#29 Posted by amomjc (977 posts) -

@Seppli said:

@Spoonman671 said:

I wish players could take just the slightest bit more damage, but I'm not terribly offended with the status quo. I'm an easy man to please. Just let me set up my bipod and mow dudes down.

I'm quite the opposite. Unless I win and dominate and my team works together like cogs in a Swiss watch, I'm going increasingly MAD. Then I turn off the game and do some push-ups like a boss.

You know, that is a serious sign of anger problems lol.

Kidding aside, as long as I feel like I am contributing and my team is being completely stupid, I enjoy myself and it doesn't matter to me.

#30 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

I like the damage and hope it remains the same. I will be playing Conquest 90% of the time too.

#31 Posted by Discorsi (1390 posts) -

I liked the higher TTK from Bad Company 2. It allowed me to kill people who I was way better at aiming then.

#32 Posted by mr_ace (54 posts) -

i think the TTK is pretty perfect, i hated the BC2 TTK, it took forever, which made a lot of tactical stuff useless. For example, if i do a big flanking maneuvour and get in behind enemy lines, and i see a group of 3 people, all looking the wrong direction, i end up killing nonew of them, because in the ridiculous time it takes to kill one of them, the others have turned round and mowed me down. This isn't quake, people should die in a few shots

#33 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@csoup said:

@Seppli said:

@Spoonman671 said:

I wish players could take just the slightest bit more damage, but I'm not terribly offended with the status quo. I'm an easy man to please. Just let me set up my bipod and mow dudes down.

I'm quite the opposite. Unless I win and dominate and my team works together like cogs in a Swiss watch, I'm going increasingly MAD. Then I turn off the game and do some push-ups like a boss.

You know, that is a serious sign of anger problems lol.

Kidding aside, as long as I feel like I am contributing and my team is being completely stupid, I enjoy myself and it doesn't matter to me.

Emperor Palpatine gets it. Anger is energy. He just forgets to do his push-ups or he wouldn't look so pale and squishy.

This is how angry people are supposed to look. Bulging muscles fueled by ANGER ENERGY!
#34 Posted by Extreme_Popcorn (842 posts) -

I don't think you can judge the TTK in the beta as the final product because the hit detection is pretty fucked. It varies between taking a couple of hits to kill someone to people taking entire magazines to the face and not dying.

My biggest fucking issue with the beta is that I constantly get hit markers when shooting at someone when all I can see is their head and top of their shoulders, how the hell do I get hit markers and not get a headshot in that situation? It happens so often it's infuriating and it's a bigger problem than the TTK.

#35 Posted by Sjupp (1910 posts) -

I'm totally cool with with it as it is. *humblebrag* I could definitely go with it being raised a bit though. In such a (originally) teamplay-focused game, you have little time to react and counter whatever is being thrown at you. Metro is so hectic I feel like I'm doing less good when trying to focus on reviving people because it's so risky.

#36 Posted by Quipido (644 posts) -

In BC2 I only played hardcore, so high damage is allright for me. Question is: is there gonna be hardcore mode in BF3?

#37 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -

@Pie said:

It sounds like you like it because you're able to go all one man army on people. Personally I think they should increase TTK or whatever to more bad company 2 levels. At the moment it seems like being a medic dishing out health packs is kinda useless because no one lives long enough to use them. Also there is barely anytime to react to being shot at. In bad company 2 unless you're out in the open you normally have time to hunker down behind a piece of cover and find where the guy is. I don't know if the idea is that as soon as you get shot you should go prone and that's why changed TTK (urgh) but that's not really how I like to play. I like getting a overall feeling of where everyone is and then manoeuvring my way around so I can get them from the sides, whilst manoeuvring I might take a few shots but a useful medic will just patch me up. In this it seems to be a lot more running forward until you hear shots being fired in your direction and then proning and attempting to pick guys off but oh wait some guy just shoots me anyway. It all feels a bit slow and frustrating. I like my gunfights to last and not just be "wha ya dead"

The health packs heal super-fast. Just like BF:BC 2, they're meant to 'fortify' a position. If you've got a health pack deployed and can pop in and out of cover, that makes all the difference in the world.

I hate BF:BC 2 32 player Rush on PC, because there's just too many players on the map. With the high TTK of BF:BC 2, often enough Rush and some of the linear narrow Conquest maps devolve into a static stand-off. There's just no progressing. Any try-hard who keeps on trying will just die over and over again. That won't happen easily in BF3, if TTK remains so low. Playing a superior angle, a single player and even more so a good squad can take apart a team opening up the frontlines for some dynamic action.

I seldomly go prone and am not overly careful. I just go and am ready to shot as quickly and deadly as I can when I foresee opposition. If I've chosen the right gun for the job, chances are I'll cut through the frontline like a hot knife through butter. That just didn't work with high TTK. Somewhere around 3 average players is about as many as you can beat coming at them from a ninja angle in BF:BC 2. In BF3, you can take out 3 guys coming straight at them and wipe out a team coming from a ninja angle. Of course that's not the rule, but I love it as a possibility.

Yeah - people will camp. But only those with superior aim will camp for long, cause death comes easily even to the most advantageously chosen camping spot.

#38 Posted by Capum15 (4939 posts) -

The biggest problem I have is the amazing people who position themselves perfectly to tag me just as I respawn.

Just talking about regular spawning here, as spawning on a teammate in or near combat is obviously dangerous and doesn't bother me much.

I've found the beta incredibly fun, and really fucking annoying at times. Granted, 90% of it is due to how badly I suck at multiplayer anyway.

Also, what exactly does the radio do? I've been playing mostly Support. It's fun tossing an ammo pack to a good defensive location and racking up the points while I move on. I should try medic here soon, as I really liked that in BC2.

#39 Posted by mikeeegeee (1574 posts) -

EMCYTZT796

@Capum15 said:

Also, what exactly does the radio do?

I assume you're speaking of the recon's radio beacon? If you drop one, it serves as a mobile spawn point for you, your squad, and the rest of your team(?). Very, very tactical. After achieving tremendous success with one once, I've now made it a point to try to get one near an MCOM station every chance I get.

Can the opposing side see the beacons and destroy them? I imagine so, but I haven't seen it happen.

#40 Posted by Capum15 (4939 posts) -
@mikeeegeee: That's awesome. I'm playing right now and that radio is incredibly helpful for Offense.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.