TTK: Like it faster, or Slower?

[Aaron]

Personally, I like the fast TTK. For me, it gives weapons a feel of lethality that is satisfactory. However, that's my opinion. What's yours? I'd like to see what TTK speeds the community favors.

[EVILPIG]

I prefer faster TTK's. We'll just ahve to play Beta and see.

[Coreldan]

Generally speaking I prefer much faster, but with PS2's scale in mind, I think it seemed quite spot on in the video.

[MrBloodworth]

Personally, I prefer a slower one. Makes shoot outs matter, and happen.

Endless respawn loop with seconds apart is not fun. IMO. If you die, it should sting.

Shooting game should be about sustained accuracy, not who saw who first. Takeing and advancing should be about pushing, not who can spawn faster.

Logistics need to matter, Planetside is a war game, not a session based shooter. At least, It didn't used to be.

[Coreldan]

Shooting game should be about sustained accuracy, not who saw who first.

You make it sound like it's the truth instead of an opinion :D

I'm not sure how you would back up that argument though. I don't really have much to back up the other way either, except perhaps the realism argument. Real life shootouts arnt about sustained accuracy. While games are games, not reality, reality definitely is where the games "originate" from :D

[EVILPIG]

Shooting game should be about sustained accuracy, not who saw who first.



Realism says otherwise. It should be not about soaking up damage, but using tactics which put you in position to shoot them first.

[MrBloodworth]

Ill remember the realism as I put on my regenerative shield.

Its a silly argument. This is planetside, not ARMA.

[ringring]

Don't know, I'll decide in beta.

[ThGlump]

Slower ttk promote cooperation better. Supporting fire, flanking, retreating. No point with any of that when you kill somebody before they can even react.

[Coreldan]

Ill remember the realism as I put on my regenerative shield.

Its a silly argument. This is planetside, not ARMA.

It's better than having no real argument, though.

Remember that these things revolve around some degree of realism too. Why don't we fight with unicorns and instead of weapons have lasers coming out of our eyes on a planet made out of cheese?

Cos players want some level of realism even in a game of this kind.

The cooperative argument works both ways. Why bother giving suppressing fire when the person won't even die to it? Quite the contrary, if I need to move across an open area, I need my teammates to drop the threat before they drop me, cos I most certainly wont make it alive if I start getting shot at.

Or I can argue that slower TTK encourages 1v1 duel shootouts which isnt the point in a game like this. I know I'm using exaggerated examples, but this is just one fo those topics where the arguments are just about endless and in the end it comes down to nothing but which the person happens to prefer.

[MrBloodworth]

Slower ttk promote cooperation better. Supporting fire, flanking, retreating. No point with any of that when you kill somebody before they can even react.

This.

[Aaron]

Realism says otherwise. It should be not about soaking up damage, but using tactics which put you in position to shoot them first.

That's kinda gameplay I like. In that type of environment, attack direction and planning play more critical roles. Being a surprise attacker would be advantageous only if TTK goes moderately fast.

[XPquant]

I was incredibly happy with what I saw in the GDC footage. It looked fast and furious like combat should. Lights dropped like flies while heavies required some focus fire. Looked super fun, this waiting is killing me.

[SUBARU]

Slower ttk promote cooperation better. Supporting fire, flanking, retreating. No point with any of that when you kill somebody before they can even react.

This

[Aaron]

Slower ttk promote cooperation better. Supporting fire, flanking, retreating. No point with any of that when you kill somebody before they can even react.

But wouldn't faster TTK also promote cooperation? If you didn't know what you were doing, and weren't working with your team, you'd get killed pretty fast.

[Figment]

Much faster and you may as well just create a game where you have to click faster after respawn than your enemy to get to your next respawn.


Downtime and TTK length have appeal. Combat that goes so fast you can't even observe or study an enemy's behaviour to qualify what your next move should be, is just mindless and does not allow yourself to built up a relation with an enemy.

They're just fodder to you and you're just fodder to them. I've never felt like I got to know any CoD players I played against online. The same goes for World of Tanks opponents.

Completely untrue for PlanetSide, where each enemy player had their own quirks and preferences. You got to learn them and their playstyle and you got to learn and device ways to counter them that did not always dumb down to JUMPJET FASTER AIM WIN!!! It involved planning, observation, timing. Not just spamming bullets and throwing more bodies at the enemy than they could handle, which incidentally seems to be what PS2 is all about. :(

Zergfest 2. Now with more zerg.

[Eighm]

While I generally prefer fast TTKs, I don't really have enough info to go on from the GDC video. If spawn times will be as short as they were in the video than the TTK is fine. If they're going to be more like PS1 then I think the TTK should be increased simply because people will be doing more waiting to spawn than playing the game.

[Saintlycow]

TTK in the vid looked almost perfect

[ArmedZealot]

I think it was just right. The faster TTK compared to Planetside 1 is offset by the base redesigns to allow for more cover. A more "run and gun to cover" feel is more fitting to the war shooter that Planetside 2 aims to be.

[MrBloodworth]

TTK in the vid looked almost perfect


Almost, but it could be slower, and still be quite a Visceral experience.

[BlazingSun]

TTK seemed a bit to fast in my opinion. For fights of this dimension, it doesn't seem appropiate. It might have looked ok in the video for some people, but that's only because of the inaccuracy of the gun, or because of higby's playing (tap the fire button higby! :D).

[Canaris]

the TTK seemed good from the gameplay footage but truthfully only beta will tell, One thing I do know I certainly wouldn't want it any faster than it is.

[BorisBlade]

The weapon accuracy is what really speeds up ttk in PS2, not lower armor or higher bullet damage. People just dont get it. If you put these more accurate weapons into PS1, the ttk time would be cut in half.

PS1 had a CoF that would bloom like crazy when you got hit or under sustained fire. The initial blooms were great and worked well, but the exaggeration when hit or when under prolonged fire was excessive and people often didnt notice it got so bad and wondered why people took so long to die when it was just that the bullets were goin all over the place. A JH will kill you in two hits even in rexo up close, go to VR training and you'll see that even a cycler or other MA weap will kill someone very fast when you land all your shots, just as fast as PS2. But in real combat your bloom goes nuts and you miss way too much.

[TekDragon]

All you have to do is compare a game of Tribes Ascend, and then a game of CoD, and you'll understand why a longer TTK is so great and leads to a much higher skilled level of gameplay and teamwork.

People who haven't played those 2 games - you just won't understand.

[EVILPIG]

Much faster and you may as well just create a game where you have to click faster after respawn than your enemy to get to your next respawn.


Downtime and TTK length have appeal. Combat that goes so fast you can't even observe or study an enemy's behaviour to qualify what your next move should be, is just mindless and does not allow yourself to built up a relation with an enemy.

They're just fodder to you and you're just fodder to them. I've never felt like I got to know any CoD players I played against online. The same goes for World of Tanks opponents.

Completely untrue for PlanetSide, where each enemy player had their own quirks and preferences. You got to learn them and their playstyle and you got to learn and device ways to counter them that did not always dumb down to JUMPJET FASTER AIM WIN!!! It involved planning, observation, timing. Not just spamming bullets and throwing more bodies at the enemy than they could handle, which incidentally seems to be what PS2 is all about. :(

Zergfest 2. Now with more zerg.

WOW You describe combat as if it should be about the speed of turtles courting. Even in Planetside1, you'd be outflanked and overrun in said "observation and planning".

Honestly, this really blew me away. I had a harsher response, but decided to take a higher (though not much) road.

[TekDragon]

WOW You describe combat as if it should be about the speed of turtles courting. Even in Planetside1, you'd be outflanked and overrun in said "observation and planning".

Honestly, this really blew me away. I had a harsher response, but decided to take a higher (though not much) road.

The problem isn't him. The problem is that some of us process information at a much faster pace than others.

He and I (and everyone else except you, apparently) can recognize and process combat techniques very quickly in a battle. Some players prefer to stand and fight, some like to strafe in one direction, others go back and forth, others immediately retreat to cover, others charge forward.

For people like him and I, we can process that information within a quarter to a half second and adjust our firing strategy to match.

I'm sorry that your brain hasn't developed to that level. I imagine you're one of those players that just stands in place and sprays.

[ArmedZealot]

The problem isn't him. The problem is that some of us process information at a much faster pace than others.

He and I, and many others, for example, can recognize and process combat techniques very quickly in a battle. Some players prefer to stand and fight, some like to strafe in one direction, others go back and forth, others immediately retreat to cover, others charge forward.

For people like him and I, we can process that information within a quarter to a half second and adjust our firing strategy to match.

I'm sorry that your brain hasn't developed to that level. I imagine you're one of those players that just stands in place and sprays.

I guess your just one of the internet master race ain't ya?

[MrBloodworth]

I don't think anyone is arguing to go back to PS1 TTK.

I think what people are requesting is a bit slower that what was shown.

[TekDragon]

I guess your just one of the internet master race ain't ya?

I was being sarcastic, since the troglodyte I trolled was being pretty uppity without putting even the barest hint of effort into a rational argument.

[IronMole]

The TTK looks fine from the videos. I for one welcome the faster TTK.

Although, a lot of people seem to forget - if it wasn't for the crappy net code and warping on PS then the TTK would have been quick also...

[ArmedZealot]

I was being sarcastic, since the troglodyte I trolled was being pretty uppity without putting even the barest hint of effort into a rational argument. I realized that after the fact lol.

He does make a decent point though. Slower TTK's become more and more irrelevant the larger the game gets.

[TekDragon]

I'd just like people to play a game of Tribes before they comment on TTK.

Tribes, including the new game Tribes: Ascend, requires more skill than any other 2 FPS games you care to name, combined. It also promotes teamwork in a way no other FPS outside of PS1 has managed.

Yet despite that, TTK is fairly "slow" in Tribes. Each battle isn't a single quick jerk of the mouse and a click, it's a dance that focuses on positioning and behavioral analysis. And yes, a quick jerk of the mouse and a click when the time is right.

[IronMole]

I'd just like people to play a game of Tribes before they comment on TTK.

Tribes, including the new game Tribes: Ascend, requires more skill than any other 2 FPS games you care to name, combined. It also promotes teamwork in a way no other FPS outside of PS1 has managed.

Yet despite that, TTK is fairly "slow" in Tribes. Each battle isn't a single quick jerk of the mouse and a click, it's a dance that focuses on positioning and behavioral analysis. And yes, a quick jerk of the mouse and a click when the time is right.

Lol, wut?

[Boogster]

I'd be disappointed if it were any slower than what we've just seen. In fact I think they've just about got it bang on, although we've not had a chance to see HA weaponry in action. I'm not even sure we've seen Heavy Assault units yet, and their TTK could turn out to be slightly slower than Higby in his snazzy Light Assault.

[EVILPIG]

The problem isn't him. The problem is that some of us process information at a much faster pace than others.

He and I (and everyone else except you, apparently) can recognize and process combat techniques very quickly in a battle. Some players prefer to stand and fight, some like to strafe in one direction, others go back and forth, others immediately retreat to cover, others charge forward.

For people like him and I, we can process that information within a quarter to a half second and adjust our firing strategy to match.

I'm sorry that your brain hasn't developed to that level. I imagine you're one of those players that just stands in place and sprays.

It's fascinating that you think that you can process information so much faster, yet need so much more time to do something with it.

[ArmedZealot]

I'd just like people to play a game of Tribes before they comment on TTK.

Tribes, including the new game Tribes: Ascend, requires more skill than any other 2 FPS games you care to name, combined. It also promotes teamwork in a way no other FPS outside of PS1 has managed.

Yet despite that, TTK is fairly "slow" in Tribes. Each battle isn't a single quick jerk of the mouse and a click, it's a dance that focuses on positioning and behavioral analysis. And yes, a quick jerk of the mouse and a click when the time is right.

I think this is an unfair comparison to make. TTK is slow, as you say, because of positioning and "behavioral analysis". This is only because of skiing, jetpacks, and the high speed players move in that game. These things wont ever appear in Planetside 2.

Without these Tribes: Ascend would have an incredibly fast TTK. That's evident in the indoor and gen fights that happen in that game.

[SgtMAD]

The problem isn't him. The problem is that some of us process information at a much faster pace than others.

He and I (and everyone else except you, apparently) can recognize and process combat techniques very quickly in a battle. Some players prefer to stand and fight, some like to strafe in one direction, others go back and forth, others immediately retreat to cover, others charge forward.

For people like him and I, we can process that information within a quarter to a half second and adjust our firing strategy to match.

I'm sorry that your brain hasn't developed to that level. I imagine you're one of those players that just stands in place and sprays.

what a joke, I love all these clueless fools

a quarter of a second,I am still laughing at that one.

[BlazingSun]

The weapon accuracy is what really speeds up ttk in PS2, not lower armor or higher bullet damage. People just dont get it. If you put these more accurate weapons into PS1, the ttk time would be cut in half.

PS1 had a CoF that would bloom like crazy when you got hit or under sustained fire. The initial blooms were great and worked well, but the exaggeration when hit or when under prolonged fire was excessive and people often didnt notice it got so bad and wondered why people took so long to die when it was just that the bullets were goin all over the place. A JH will kill you in two hits even in rexo up close, go to VR training and you'll see that even a cycler or other MA weap will kill someone very fast when you land all your shots, just as fast as PS2. But in real combat your bloom goes nuts and you miss way too much.

You know you are dealing with a "strong" argument here, when you also read the claim that a Jh is/was a 2 shot kill weapon against rexxo armor in the same paragraph. You clearly know what you are talking about ...

You are basically saying, that the TTK in PS1 and PS2 is almost equal, or? I'm sorry to say, but you are clueless my friend. I think it took up to 10 bullets of a gaussrifle in PS1 to kill a rexxo (close up) and 5 to kill an unarmored cloaker. What we have seen in the video looked more like 7 bullets to kill a Heavy armor trooper and 5-6 to kill someone in medium armor. But ontop of that, the rate of fire seems to be faster as well. So ....

[Hmr85]

I thought the time ttk for the light assault class was about right. I would expect it to take a tad longer for HA and MAXS. I saw nothing wrong considering we only saw 1 class with light armor.

[ArmedZealot]

what a joke, I love all these clueless fools

a quarter of a second,I am still laughing at that one.

You fell for a troll. You should read more.

[Death2All]

I was really concerned about the TTKs, especially since they stated they wanted to "speed up" the general pace of the game.

After seeing some infantry action I thought the TTKs were very nice. Not too speedy so you get instapwned. Not too slow so that it's a joke and takes forever to kill anyone.

I do think that the TTKs could be a TINY be slower, if only by .5-1 second. There were a few instances where I saw Higby walk around the corner and get instant killed, zoom to the kill cam and then wind up at the respawn screen, reminded me A LOT of Battlefield.


Also another point that people have touched, that I agree with is that a longer TTK promotes generally more skillful gameplay. A short 1 second TTK just dumbs the game down to whoever gets the first shot, basis the game around find a good area to set up (putting it lightly, I think "camping" is the correct term) and owning people before they know what happened.

I really enjoyed the TTKs in PS1. If someone jumped out at you and got the first few shots you could still have a chance to win it if you properly evaded their shots and managed your CoF. That was awesome and one of the most compelling things about the combat for me in PS1, no other game has seemed to capture that.

Albeit a little unrealistic, I get shot in the face 10 times but I can still turn around and finish the guy off if I can aim effectively (bow chika bow wow?) But it doesn't have to be realistic to be fun, this is a Sci-Fi game after all.

[TheSHiFT]

Realism says otherwise. It should be not about soaking up damage, but using tactics which put you in position to shoot them first.

Problem w/ a game like this is, the tactics used heavily weigh on where one spawns.

[ArmedZealot]

Problem w/ a game like this is, the tactics used heavily weigh on where one spawns.

Which is a good thing because we are no longer restricted to spawning in spawn tubes.

[MrBloodworth]

Which is a good thing because we are no longer restricted to spawning in spawn tubes.

Because they have all but removed this element of a war game.

This is session based thinking, corrupting a war game. Logistics no longer matter. Denial, no longer matters. Reinforcements come from everywhere.

Spawn, fully equipped as a max on your squad leader.

[ArmedZealot]

Because they have all but removed this element of a war game.

This is session based thinking, corrupting a war game. Logistics no longer matter. Denial, no longer matters. Reinforcements come from everywhere.

Spawn, fully equipped as a max on your squad leader.

The enemy's gate is down.

[UnknownDT]

Personally I think it needs to be a TINY bit slower. I suppose I wouldn't be up-to-arms if they DIDN'T change it, but I would like it to be slower because afterall... this is an MMO. Not COD/BF3.

[VioletZero]

I like it where it is.

I don't like it slower because then it becomes less of a tact battle and more of a skill battle. And I have no qualms against skill, but heavy skill emphasis isn't right for Planetside.

But not too fast. ;3

[DayOne]

I think it's actually perfect from what we saw in the demo. But obviously we need beta to see how it really is!

[Vancha]

I think the biggest issue is with medics. If people die too quickly, being healed isn't of much concern...Life and death becomes almost binary...An on/off switch.

For medics to be significant, the health bar "buffer" needs to be significant.

The same sort of applies to revival. The harder people are to kill, the greater the impact of bringing them back to life and thus greater reason to make revival take a while. If death is quick then revival needs to be quick, which turns resurrection into wack-a-mole and removes a lot of the risk vs reward of reviving someone.

[Espion]

Slower TTK requires more skill to dominate. When you have a short TTK like in CoD or BF the gameplay degrades into a "who sees who first" metagame, and that's just not attractive at all to players who prefer a game with a higher skill ceiling.

In the GDC videos the TTK seemed ridiculously short, as short or possibly even shorter than BF3 unless a lot of the people he was shooting were already damaged. The longer a battle takes the more skill that is required and atm it just doesn't seem like there is a high skill required to be above average in this game. I'll have to wait to try it before I can really comment, but as impressive as these videos were I can't help but be left feeling a little disappointed. I realize this game isn't even in the running to be considered "esport," and that's fine with me, but I still want to feel like I'm being rewarded for showing a higher level of skill, otherwise it just gets boring too quickly.

But wouldn't faster TTK also promote cooperation? If you didn't know what you were doing, and weren't working with your team, you'd get killed pretty fast.

No, it's actually the opposite. Slower TTK requires A LOT more coordination between teammates in order to meet goals since it's harder for a single player to dominate. It might sound weird at first to a lot of people, but faster TTK = slower gameplay, and slower TTK = faster gameplay due to the increased need for teamwork.

People always reference oldschool games like Quake, UT3, Tribes1/2, etc to get this point across, and they're right, but here's a more recent example of a game going against the CoD-trend, although I guess it still technically falls under Tribes...

http://blip.tv/tribescast/team-zfz-vs-egocentric-on-katabatic-m2-6002163

This is only 8v8, and I don't expect the TTK in planetside to be quite as long as TA, but it does get the point across. When you play 8v8 in this game the pace is so fast you get the same feeling as playing 10v40 in a planetside base. Despite the larger map size and lower player count it always feels like there's someone in every corner, and the high speed combined with high TTK rewards skill in almost every aspect. The games are very different but the point is still the same.

The TTKs in planetside1 should be roughly carried over to PS2 and with the reduction in lag it would still feel faster, and keep gameplay at a good pace imo.

[Top Sgt]

I think it's fine how it is now... Super long ttk just gives players a chance to jet pack away once being hit etc.

not we don't need instant deaths but 4 to 5 hits as it looks now is plenty.. Don't want to feel like I am shooting rubber bullets in game.. Add in the natural latency and lag.. it's fine where it is now.

[ArmedZealot]

I think the biggest issue is with medics. If people die too quickly, being healed isn't of much concern...Life and death becomes almost binary...An on/off switch.

For medics to be significant, the health bar "buffer" needs to be significant.

The same sort of applies to revival. The harder people are to kill, the greater the impact of bringing them back to life and thus greater reason to make revival take a while. If death is quick then revival needs to be quick, which turns resurrection into wack-a-mole and removes a lot of the risk vs reward of reviving someone.

To be honest the role of a medic is before or after the fight to patch things up. TTK doesn't really change that. It doesn't matter if I have 100 total health or 50 total as long as its back up to 100% before the next fight.

[Espion]

I think it's fine how it is now... Super long ttk just gives players a chance to jet pack away once being hit etc.

That's sort of the point in a team based game. Killing is not always the best option, nor is staying alive always the best option. With longer TTKs you have the option to choose which route benefits your team/squad/etc the most, and that adds to both the depth and skill ceiling of the game.

[Sifer2]

I think it needs to be slower. There was barely any guys by Planetside standards in the vids. And yet he was still dropping lightning fast the second someone actually shot at him. It makes me very concerned with how combat will play out when it comes time to push forward an try to take over bases. You wont really be able to move at all when you can die so fast the second you poke your head out.

Granted I don't think he was playing Heavy Assault. But it looked like the actual HA guys were dying fast as hell too. How are we going to actually push through chokepoints? Is medic going to be able to Ubercharge a MAX?

[Vancha]

To be honest the role of a medic is before or after the fight to patch things up. TTK doesn't really change that. It doesn't matter if I have 100 total health or 50 total as long as its back up to 100% before the next fight.
If the TTK is so short that life/death is practically binary, it doesn't matter whether you're at 50% or 100%.

I'm saying the longer the TTK is, the more it matters how much health you have and the more medics matter.

[ArmedZealot]

If the TTK is so short that life/death is practically binary, it doesn't matter whether you're at 50% or 100%.

I'm saying the longer the TTK is, the more it matters how much health you have and the more medics matter.

I suppose you are right. But the argument can be reversed, a longer TTK makes MAX's more insignificant.

[Figment]

WOW You describe combat as if it should be about the speed of turtles courting. Even in Planetside1, you'd be outflanked and overrun in said "observation and planning".

Hyperbole strawmans aren't your thing, are they? (sarcasm).

Honestly, this really blew me away. I had a harsher response, but decided to take a higher (though not much) road.

I'll just retort with saying you apparently don't understand the difference 0.4 seconds can make for a fight scenario.

But let me explain, I don't like fights being over as soon as they started like in CoD (where I often utterly annihilate my buddies when radar is off, even more so when it's on). Especially if you catch them even semi by surprise. In CoD you kill people so fast, you don't even know WHO you just killed, nor who killed you (especially with the stupid PS3 naming system, but I digress). That's very annoying to me and it's not very interactive, nor challenging.

Like in CoD, with no infantry third person will happen a lot. Everyone has a reaction time and this feels to short for most to get back into cover and have a fire fight last long enough to not feel you shot some AI fodder, but an actual player.

That means things like some cat & mouse gameplay need to exist. Giving chase and being chased in PS1 was a lot of fun and a highly interactive dynamic between two or more players.


Comparing the speed I'd like to see (by slowing it down slightly) to the speed of a turtle does my opinion no justice and only serves to make you look like a troll Evilpig. That disappoints me in you.

[Vancha]

I suppose you are right. But the argument can be reversed, a longer TTK makes MAX's more insignificant.
How so? MAXs would still be carrying increased firepower and would still be used to tank through chokepoints and such. For MAXs increased durability to become insignificant, the TTK would need to be wayyyy higher than in the original Planetside, which certainly isn't what I'm suggesting.

[ArmedZealot]

How so? MAXs would still be carrying increased firepower and would still be used to tank through chokepoints and such. For MAXs increased durability to become insignificant, the TTK would need to be wayyyy higher than in the original Planetside, which certainly isn't what I'm suggesting.

Because TTK become insignificant the more people are in the fight. Using 1 max for a choke becomes less significant because 5 people would be shooting him. Increasing his TTK by a second for a 1v1 still only gives him .1 second in a 1v5.

A shorter TTK would mean that max would have a greater chance of getting a kill in that time.

[Vancha]

Because TTK become insignificant the more people are in the fight. Using 1 max for a choke becomes less significant because 5 people would be shooting him. Increasing his TTK by a second for a 1v1 still only gives him .1 second in a 1v5.

A shorter TTK would mean that max would have a greater chance of getting a kill in that time.
I have no idea what you just said.

Why does TTK become insignificant with more people in a fight? Why would more people be shooting a MAX? Why does he only get .1 second? Why is it a 1v5?

If it takes a person 25 seconds to kill a MAX and a MAX takes 4 seconds to kill a person, then he'll only be able to kill one person in a 1v5. If you raise that to 50 seconds and 8 seconds, you've increased the TTK but the MAX will still only kill one person before it dies.

Keep in mind also, that a MAX will be resistant to AI and require AV to be taken down quickly...That's all the more applicable with higher TTKs.

[ArmedZealot]

I have no idea what you just said.

Why does TTK become insignificant with more people in a fight? Why would more people be shooting a MAX? Why does he only get .1 second? Why is it a 1v5?

Assuming the choke scenario- He's a larger target, he does more damage, he keeps you from killing the people behind him.


If it takes a person 25 seconds to kill a MAX and a MAX takes 4 seconds to kill a person, then he'll only be able to kill one person in a 1v5. If you raise that to 50 seconds and 8 seconds, you've increased the TTK but the MAX will still only kill one person before it dies.

For this scenario the MAX has 200 hp and does 50 dps. Hes is facing 5 targets with 100 hp each and each do 20 dps. So it takes 2 seconds for him to die and kill 1 person.

Increasing the TTK (across the board so 1 second more for a MAX and 1 more for 1 target, via hp not dps) by one second we get 300 hp for the max and 150 hp for each infantry. The max will still only get one kill, but the infantry now have 600 hp remaining, instead of only 400, making those infantry(and medics) 50% more effective while not changing anything for the max.

But I'm bad at maths.

[Top Sgt]

That's sort of the point in a team based game. Killing is not always the best option, nor is staying alive always the best option. With longer TTKs you have the option to choose which route benefits your team/squad/etc the most, and that adds to both the depth and skill ceiling of the game.

negative it should not take an entire mag to drop someone even in a team based game (which I have been playing since the early 2000's by the way.

I am far from a kill whore in games.. I'd rather be the guy who keep his squad moving and objective objective objective

But come on in the video it already took half to 3/4 the mag to drop a guy.. and you want even longer than that? All your gonna end up getting is players all chosing max's and heavy assault with chainguns due to how many bullets it takes to actually kill someone etc. Do you want a game where everyone is clamoring to that?

In the video it seemed just right.. it took more than a quick burst and plenty of times people being hit e-gressed to cover after being hit etc.

Alot of skill involved in these games is just getting yourself into a great position to fire on your opfor before they have the ability to find cover or react.. not alot of skill in mouse aiming now a days.

I do not want a halo where people are jet packing into line of fire knowing it takes so much to kill them etc.. I also do not want hardcore TTK either where 1 to 2 bullets kill.

In these videos it looks like5-7 bullets are needed to hit. which is fine

[waldizzo]

I liked how fast the combat was in the GDC video, but think that the TTK should be raised just a bit. I think players should be able to at least try to make an aggressive move without being killed instantly. Will see in beta for sure though.

[Vancha]

Assuming the choke scenario- He's a larger target, he does more damage, he keeps you from killing the people behind him.
This would seem to apply regardless of the TTK...?



For this scenario the MAX has 200 hp and does 50 dps. Hes is facing 5 targets with 100 hp each and each do 20 dps. So it takes 2 seconds for him to die and kill 1 person.

Increasing the TTK (across the board so 1 second more for a MAX and 1 more for 1 target, via hp not dps) by one second we get 300 hp for the max and 150 hp for each infantry. The max will still only get one kill, but the infantry now have 600 hp remaining, instead of only 400, making those infantry(and medics) 50% more effective while not changing anything for the max.
What do you mean 50% more effective? By increasing the TTK by 1 second you gave both the troops and the MAX 50% more health. They were both "50% more effective", that's why the results were the same. The MAXs have made no less significant an impact...

[Espion]

negative it should not take an entire mag to drop someone even in a team based game (which I have been playing since the early 2000's by the way.

I am far from a kill whore in games.. I'd rather be the guy who keep his squad moving and objective objective objective

But come on in the video it already took half to 3/4 the mag to drop a guy.. and you want even longer than that? All your gonna end up getting is players all chosing max's and heavy assault with chainguns due to how many bullets it takes to actually kill someone etc. Do you want a game where everyone is clamoring to that?

In the video it seemed just right.. it took more than a quick burst and plenty of times people being hit e-gressed to cover after being hit etc.

Alot of skill involved in these games is just getting yourself into a great position to fire on your opfor before they have the ability to find cover or react.. not alot of skill in mouse aiming now a days.

I do not want a halo where people are jet packing into line of fire knowing it takes so much to kill them etc.. I also do not want hardcore TTK either where 1 to 2 bullets kill.

In these videos it looks like5-7 bullets are needed to hit. which is fine

"hardcore" is not 1-2 bullets. The hardcore modes in games like CoD are about as casual and carebear as you can get. There is absolutely no skill requirement to kill someone in that short of time, you just spray and win, camp and win, see the guy first and win, etc. No real fighting at all.

If it takes near an entire clip there is an actual requirement for aim, leading, and tracking. If you have a clip size of 30 and it takes 25 shots to kill someone, the higher skill player will win every time because they will try to get the kill without having to reload, where as the bad player will spray and put themselves at a huge disadvantage with reload time.

Lower TTK favours bad players, and anything that favours bad players helps good players even more. If an average player can walk into a room and down 4 players in one clip, what do you think an above average player will be able to do? The proper way is to raise the skill ceiling so that all players always feel like they have something to work on and improve, rather than having a low cap that average players can easily reach and get bored at.

[Coreldan]

But not all of us want to utilize the aiming skills only. I prefer using the skills that that make the difference in a low TTK situation.

Both low and high TTK games require plenty of skill, it's just a different set of skills. Just that once you fuck up in a low TTK game, you leet aiming skills wont save you anymore. The skill is in not getting to the situation where you get shot first/shot without cover. People who don't play this games regularly or just play them "wrong", that equals to camping, but I never camp in those games either.

Apart from any skill discussion, IMO high TTK is just mind numbingly boring and makes the games feel extremely arcade and pointless. The reason I mainly did support roles in Planetside was the horrible gunplay (TTK wasnt the only reason, but also horrible netcode + ADAD as well as playing from Europe to Gemini).

I don't want this "higher skill cealing" when it makes the gunplay boring and horrible for me.

Opinions are like assholes, etc, etc.

That said, I think CS will fall into the category of low TTK game. I believe thats one of the.. ehm.. more popular e-sports platforms. Have you tried going against those players cos after all they are most likely just bad players who win by spraying and camping? (That said, CS isnt anywhere near the tactical shooter I like to play, but an example of a low TTK game where there sure as fuck is plenty of skill involved)

[Espion]

But not all of us want to utilize the aiming skills only. I prefer using the skills that that make the difference in a low TTK situation.

Those skills not only apply to both, but apply more to a higher TTK situation. Unless you're somehow counting camping as a skill...?

(That said, CS isnt anywhere near the tactical shooter I like to play, but an example of a low TTK game where there sure as fuck is plenty of skill involved)

It's not really right to compare them since there's no respawn in CS. That makes such a massive difference.


I hate to direct this argument directly at you, but it sounds like you only hated the gunplay because you weren't good at it. I'm all for having dedicated support roles and think that adds a lot to a game, but if you thought the actual fighting in PS was boring then you probably just weren't willing to push yourself to improve, which I suspect is the case for a lot of people advocating low TTKs and 3-4shot kills. The TTKs weren't even that long in PS, heavy weapon had theoretical TTKs between 0.5-1s on agiles, and players from top outfits could easily down 3 or more in one clip. It really doesn't need to be any shorter than that...

The great thing about PS was that is catered to a wide range of players. If you wanted to push yourself to be a top dueler that option was there, or if you wanted nothing to do with that you could just fly a gal. That's what happens when you cater towards the top end of gameplay. If you cater towards the lower end, you're left with severely limited options due to the low skill ceiling.

[Figment]

I liked how fast the combat was in the GDC video, but think that the TTK should be raised just a bit. I think players should be able to at least try to make an aggressive move without being killed instantly. Will see in beta for sure though.

Indeed, initiative should not be punished.


In World of Tanks, a very fast - often even instant - TTK happens whenever you get detected. Since you can't respawn there, this can lead to complete stop of any movement on either team whatsoever and people just sit in bushes waiting for the other to make the first move.

It paralyzes gameplay, creates camping and can be very frustrating.


Of course, in PS2, you will be able to respawn so it's not as big an influence and hiding probably won't be as effective either (won't disappear from sight). Still, it will influence the willingness of people (as mentioned in the K/D thread) to perform risky actions.

In PS1 risk was high enough to expose yourself when encountering a large group of people.

In the footage we saw sofar, only a fraction of total players was playing who'd be present in such a situation. If it takes so short to take someone out, how will a 10 vs 20 fight work out? It's only a 1:2 ratio, but the faster the TTK, the bigger the leverage of the bigger group and the smaller the impact of individual skill (IMO), and the greater the need to split this large enemy group up.

Sure, you could argue you will diminish enemy ranks faster in theory, as long as they don't hit you as you kill them faster as well. However, you can't absorb any damage in the PS2 situation and you will get flanked and overwhelmed much sooner due to the jetpack infantry exposing your weak sides more easily.

[DayOne]

If it takes near an entire clip there is an actual requirement for aim, leading, and tracking. If you have a clip size of 30 and it takes 25 shots to kill someone, the higher skill player will win every time because they will try to get the kill without having to reload, where as the bad player will spray and put themselves at a huge disadvantage with reload time.

What's so great about being able to put in soo much time into a game that you are only good because you've trained yourself to being incredibly accurate.

If anything this style of game play is even more mindless than CoD. Games like Arma are good because they force you to think about what you are doing and how not to get killed.

High TTKs WILL turn away new and casual players. A very, very bad thing in an MMO

[TekDragon]

After finally watching Part 3 I can say that my enthusiasm for this game has diminished greatly. People dying in .5 second weapon bursts from medium range? Really?

Higby had no time to do anything before dying, and the people he was shooting didn't have any time to react before going down.

Zero strategy, zero skill, zero effort.

I don't care how much strategy they put into the game from a macro RTS perspective, if the combat on the ground means you either:

A) Camp and kill people in .5 seconds
B) Advance and die in .5 seconds to someone you don't even see before you're dead

I'll take my money elsewhere, to a game that doesn't try to desperately emulate CoD "hardcore newb" mode.

[Coreldan]

Those skills not only apply to both, but apply more to a higher TTK situation. Unless you're somehow counting camping as a skill...?

It's not really right to compare them since there's no respawn in CS. That makes such a massive difference.

I hate to direct this argument directly at you, but it sounds like you only hated the gunplay because you weren't good at it. I'm all for having dedicated support roles and think that adds a lot to a game, but if you thought the actual fighting in PS was boring then you probably just weren't willing to push yourself to improve, which I suspect is the case for a lot of people advocating low TTKs and 3-4shot kills.

Well, in PS's case I suppose one of the bigger problems was the latency. A decent player with one third of my ping should just about never lose a gunfight to me. In addition, the netcode was horrible. I mean, I guess it's OK if you like doing those ADAD shootouts, to me it's not fun. It has nothing to do with not being good at it, it just isnt the type of gameplay I prefer. I like tactical shooters more, and as I said, I don't camp, I never do. Thats a huge generalization people who advocate high TTKs (see what I did there, quoted you almost!) often do.

The boring part is the long gunfights with the ADAD spamming. I compete in practical shooting in real life and am a generally speaking a milsim-like game fan and like realism. Long ADAD gunfights have nothing to do with any of that.

As said, just personal preference.

You use some highly stereotyping examples there. Like the camping. It's like I would say about a high TTK game that it's just no skill arcade where you can run in the open all you want with no risk as long as you can keep the crosshair on the enemy or something along that lines. I respect high TTK games though, I just realize they arnt my cup of tea :D

That said, the current TTK of PS2 is nowhere near realistic or even very low, but I dont even want it lower seeing the nature of the game. It's far higher than the usual games I play, but seeing the scale I think it seems fairly good.

And no, camping isn't a skill, but to think low TTK games at high levels are only about camping and spraying is fucking ignorant too.

I'm off to sleep now, these posts are probably buried under a dozen pages by the time and wake up and most likely wont even remember the existance of this discussion, so don't wonder if I dont further come back. That said I dont think theres anything left to say, these things are up to personal preference, utilize different sets of skills and I'm pretty sure theres a reason why high TTK games are a dying breed after the early 2000s. Most people just don't overly care even if the skill cap might or might not be a tad higher, I guess I'm not the only one who isnt overly fond of the long ADAD fights. Good night.

[TekDragon]

And I seriously doubt all the "But dying in .5 seconds is REALISTIC!" are actually going to ever be infantry.

I'd put money that these are air-whore and tank-whore players that plan on sitting in their armor and air (with massive TTK on them, ironically enough) and hoping they can laugh their asses to the XP bank getting 1-shot kills everywhere from long range.

[Figment]

High TTKs WILL turn away new and casual players. A very, very bad thing in an MMO

Let's see if we can't turn that around a bit.

The shorter the TTK, the more they'll think "Okay... I was completely unable to do anything at all... Fun..." as well.

In that sense, the more time they get to adapt, the more time they have to learn what is killing them, why and what they can do to avoid it. :)


Look at world of tanks, people get one shot continuously in lower tiers. They have absolutely no chance to learn how to avoid fire, how to position etc.

I can guarantee you that any PS1 player with some vehicle practice gets much higher winrates than those of regular players. In fact, all PS players I've played with in WoT (around 20) have average winrates between 52-60%, where 48% is the mean average (2-3% draws, 48% loss) in random matches where you are team dependent more than individual skill dependent.

Platoon with other PS players and your winrate goes to 60-75% even if they use fragile units that can be easiyl shot. Why? Experience. Positioning. Timing. Insight. Coordination.



And... Patience.


Patience to wait for the appropriate opportunity to take out someone with a higher TTK than you is a very valuable trait. If TTK is low and respawn is fast, patience is not taught.

[TekDragon]

Let's see if we can't turn that around a bit.

The shorter the TTK, the more they'll think "Okay... I was completely unable to do anything at all... Fun..." as well.

This.

Low TTK means that the only players who stick around are the ones who just want mindless run & gun. People who to play tactically, strategically, or as a team are left frustrated as their options in combat go down to whatever they can accomplish in .5 seconds.

[DayOne]

@Figment, you can't go to either extreme. Both are bad, it's getting the right balance that will make this game good.

[Espion]

What's so great about being able to put in soo much time into a game that you are only good because you've trained yourself to being incredibly accurate.

Because not only are you forced to think before and after the fight, which is the argument you're trying to make, but you're forced to think during the fight as well. The longer a fight takes the more environment factors that come into play. Suddenly you have to be aware of your movement, the movement of others around you, locations of cover, how exposed you are to vehicles fire, are you backing into a corner where you'll be vulnerable to nades, how much ammo do you have left, what tools do you have that could help you, the list goes on...

The planning/thinking you do before and after fights helps lower the potential TTK, while the thinking you do during the fight is equivalent to putting your plan in action and seeing it through.


Not to mention it seems like you're arguing that practice/training should not be required to be good...? Serious? Yes if I'm a new player I want to be on par with veteran players from a gameplay standpoint, but I'd never expect to be on par with them skillwise unless I work towards it...

[Coreldan]

And I seriously doubt all the "But dying in .5 seconds is REALISTIC!" are actually going to ever be infantry.

I'd put money that these are air-whore and tank-whore players that plan on sitting in their armor and air (with massive TTK on them, ironically enough) and hoping they can laugh their asses to the XP bank getting 1-shot kills everywhere from long range.

Hey, I'm a grunt to the bone! :D

I only play BF3 on hardcore and I think I can count the times I've entered a vehicle other than the jeep with one hand finger in some 70h.

[sylphaen]

Considering we mainly saw action from the LIGHT armor class, and assuming HEAVY assault would have greater life expectancy in a HEAVY firefight, I'd guess the TTK looks ok as it is.

I do like the fast movement and fast action from the LIGHT class.

It will be interesting how higher armor & firepower/slower movement will balance out in beta.

EDIT: just to make sure people read this write. TTK >> NOT ANY FASTER than what we saw. Slower is fine, IMO

[Coreldan]

Actually the movement from Higlos perspective seemed very slow, even when sprinting. However when he was watching others run around, they looked very fast.

It was weird. I was actually sort of feeling uncomfortable watching the guy move relatively slowly looking. But I guess that was just me :D

[XPquant]

I love how you guys argue that being slower is more skill oriented. All your whining for is time, time to shoot, time to hide, time to aim time to run. If you were better you wouldn't need that time.

[Espion]

It's like I would say about a high TTK game that it's just no skill arcade where you can run in the open all you want with no risk as long as you can keep the crosshair on the enemy or something along that lines.

Not quite sure where you're coming from here since arcade style games are generally considered to have the highest skill requirements among FPS's. Also... PS was an arcade style game :/

[Ragotag]

Slower ttk promote cooperation better. Supporting fire, flanking, retreating. No point with any of that when you kill somebody before they can even react.

This I do not agree with; I think the opposite is true. If you can soak up tons of damage, you don't need as much cooperation and tactics. IMO, it would also render medics/engineers somewhat pointless. Don't get me wrong, too fast a TTK can be so unforgiving that cooperation and tactics become a near impossibility. I would prefer something right in the middle.

[fod]

As an aussie I'm hoping that the TTK will lower or I'm not gonna have a chance because of 400 ping (I get 400 ping on PS1 currently from aus)
people will be able to kill me before it even registers them on my pc

[Figment]

@Figment, you can't go to either extreme. Both are bad, it's getting the right balance that will make this game good.

That's the thing though, when we ask for slightly slower TTK, we're not asking for a full minute. :/

I don't quite get where that hyperbole sentiment is coming from.

If BF is what, 0.4 seconds, this is what, 0.6 and planetside is 1.0-1.9 (in some cases an engagement can take much longer because of that), I would opt for somewhere around 0.9-1.5 seconds.

Response time of adults is slightly slower than that of children. Do you want to remove adults from the game because they're too slow to respond or their eye-sight or hand coordination is a bit worse and they can't aim as fast?


Or, in the words of Battlefield Heroes:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3326/3480742148_5fa1dd0f11.jpg

[Coreldan]

Not quite sure where you're coming from here since arcade style games are generally considered to have the highest skill requirements among FPS's. Also... PS was an arcade style game :/

And I dont disagree, it was just an example of biased, bad, uneducated and stereotyping argument, similar to what you made about low TTK games :D Planetside wasnt overly arcade cos it had no arcadey fast movement. Time to kill/gunplay wise it was. However PS was a game like no other, which is why I play it. I would never play a "run of the mill" shooter with high TTK though. Now seriously, off to sleep lol, bai

[EVILPIG]

I love how you guys argue that being slower is more skill oriented. All your whining for is time, time to shoot, time to hide, time to aim time to run. If you were better you wouldn't need that time.

And what they don't realize is that slower TTK, actually favors the more skilled (whether "skill" be twitch or tactics). If a "noob" gets the drop on a "vet" and the vet is dead before they can react, great. Even with TTK's as slow as PS1, a noob could get the drop on a vet and the vet could jump, move, spin etc. and then own the noob.

If you're better, whatever "better" is, you're still better. You could look at air combat as an example (since TTK is slower than infantry). Noob comes up behind said vet and begins to fire on them destroying 25% of their armor, vet manuevers and turns the tables and kills noob. If noob had a weapon that would have destroyed the vet's aircraft faster, noob probably would have owned the vet. Shame on the vet for letting a noob get the drop on them. Good job noob.

And again, you watched a video. You have no idea what the game feels like. Play Beta first.

[Malorn]

It seemed a bit on the 'too fast' side to me.

[Checowsky]

So you have more open maps and lower TTK times and also jumpjets and no longer do you have just straight corridors with 3 entrances to the inside of a base, I imagine as we didn't see one.

Enjoy trying to rap your head around who shot you this time as you fall to floor dead yet again. This is an MMO shooter and the point is fun, you could die in PS in 0.3 seconds very easily, don't single out one on one fights and assume everything is jelly. PS was a corridor shooter most of the time where numbers meant little and you could easily coax people into fighting, this is a lot more open. That means theres a lot more angles to be shot from. Its like an MA fight in PS except those had huge ranges about them as trees were large and spread out, not as close knit as that outpost base was in the GDC vid.

Longer TTK times would just work out more fun for more people imo.

Also Pig, the vet shouldn't get getting dropped on that easy if he is a 'vet'. Your example also makes no sense due to the fact that vet or not most people will die a lot all the dam time from angles they didn't think of. Slower TTKs give everyone a chance, vets will own but hey, they should.

[Espion]

If a "noob" gets the drop on a "vet" and the vet is dead before they can react, great. Even with TTK's as slow as PS1, a noob could get the drop on a vet and the vet could jump, move, spin etc. and then own the noob.

Rewarding the time and effort someone puts into a hobby? That sounds terrible!

[Figment]

And what they don't realize is that slower TTK, actually favors the more skilled (whether "skill" be twitch or tactics). If a "noob" gets the drop on a "vet" and the vet is dead before they can react, great. Even with TTK's as slow as PS1, a noob could get the drop on a vet and the vet could jump, move, spin etc. and then own the noob.

If you're better, whatever "better" is, you're still better. You could look at air combat as an example (since TTK is slower than infantry). Noob comes up behind said vet and begins to fire on them destroying 25% of their armor, vet manuevers and turns the tables and kills noob. If noob had a weapon that would have destroyed the vet's aircraft faster, noob probably would have owned the vet. Shame on the vet for letting a noob get the drop on them. Good job noob.

And again, you watched a video. You have no idea what the game feels like. Play Beta first.

So dogfights should not occur. Fights should not occur.

Only executions?


How is that fun again?

[Whalenator]

As I always say, if you get killed you should really feel like you've fucked up. TTK should be a little faster than the snail pace presented in Planetside 1, but not by much. If you're pulling out the realism excuse, keep in mind we're all wearing futuristic armor made out of energy shields and rare earth metals.

The TTK in the demo was acceptable, but not preferable. I would really hope to see a longer TTK as the beta goes on; keep in mind the reason Planetside stood out is because it stood out.

Just like Planetside, the pace of the game should be slow. Gives you time to think. Planetside and consequently Planetside 2 are about more than just massive battles; they're about strategy on both the large and smaller scale. I love short spawn times, but these sorts of things could be a gamebreaker.

tl;dr: Dying should matter.

[DayOne]

Rewarding the time and effort someone puts into a hobby? That sounds terrible!

Veterans will be rewarded, they will be rewarded with the knowledge of how not to be shot in the back or flanked.

The idea that a vet can outdo a noob because they just have played so much that it has become muscle memory is ludicrous. How would you feel that someone was able to kill you, despite you getting the first shot on, because they have just scrapped their social life to play the game.

Stupidly high TTK is bad.

[Vancha]

Rewarding the time and effort someone puts into a hobby? That sounds terrible!
Heh, I didn't even realize he was criticizing it until I read your post. I thought the "great" was sarcasm.

I guess that's where our opinions are divided. I want my ability to play a role in deciding whether I do well or not. I don't want to own people simply because I saw them first.

[Checowsky]

Low TTKs are for people who can't aim well and think tactics should win...also known as I camped longer so I won.


Let the fun begin.

[EVILPIG]

Rewarding the time and effort someone puts into a hobby? That sounds terrible!

Noob and vet are generic terms for a "less skilled" vs. a "more skilled" player. Being a "vet" actually means having been around and that certainly does not garuntee more skill, but these are terms we all understand.

[Figment]

Stupidly high TTK is bad.

I like how you feel ANY TTK other than yours is defined by "stupidly high".

Please, enlighten us, what is a "smartily low" TTK?

[EVILPIG]

So dogfights should not occur. Fights should not occur.

Only executions?


How is that fun again?

You think that real aricraft from any era of history put massive amounts of lead into each other as they dogfought? They manuevered unitl one got a killshot then it was usually over. You snuck up high on the flank and opened up, you watched a ball of fire go down.

[Espion]

The idea that a vet can outdo a noob because they just have played so much that it has become muscle memory is ludicrous. How would you feel that someone was able to kill you, despite you getting the first shot on, because they have just scrapped their social life to play the game.

If I can walk into a game as noob and destroy vet players, it's probably a terrible game that will get boring incredibly fast because I have nothing to work towards and challenge myself with.

If I can get the first shot on someone and still lose legitimately, that shows me that the game has depth beyond point and click. That's challenging. That's fun. I don't want to immediately be the master of everything I touch because that means everyone else probably is too, then there's nothing to set you apart from the generic masses.

[DayOne]

I like how you feel ANY TTK other than yours is defined by "stupidly high".

Please, enlighten us, what is a "smartily low" TTK?

CoD TTK. Black Ops anyway.

It would certainly not work for planetside but I hope this clears things up.

I think that the TTK seen in the demo was spot on for Planetside 2. :D

[Checowsky]

trololololololol (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yunSRfnsVck)

I love you now.

[Vancha]

Actually that's a good point about people turtling. The more fragile people are, the less inclined they are to expose themselves. It was hard enough getting people to push forward in Planetside as it was.

[Figment]

CoD TTK. Black Ops anyway.

It would certainly not work for planetside but I hope this clears things up.

I think that the TTK seen in the demo was spot on for Planetside 2. :D

CoD: BO is horrid for noobs. In our friends group, my brother and I get 15 kills to every 1 to 3 kills for our noob friends. At one point I decided to just use the knife. I got 20 kills, they got 4, killing each other... We started playing BO at the same time and played equal matches since we only play at parties of my brother's, I'm at level 23 now, my brother at level 32, one is at level 7, the other at level 12 and another friend is at level 20. (also play MW2/3 and a lot of Fifa, etc, so don't actually play it more than thrice a month for an hour or 4 in a row)

The only kills the worst of the two got was when he had time to actually aim in my direction or kill the second worst. He camps continuously and is easily discovered and killed before he realises he has been spotted.

The other only got 12 levels because he discovered the grenade launcher attachment. It took ages for me to teach them how to quickstab (they gotten more proficient at that thanks to me, not my brother who gives them no chance to practice).


I ran matches where I would be a free kill all match for them to practice targeting. But their situational awareness would be so horrid, that I would come lie prone next to them and they wouldn't notice for a minute or two.

And by the time they noticed, I would already be LONG gone before they aimed at where I was... Quick TTK does not help them, it just gives them less time to learn. Consider that these people were MUCH more proficient when we played GoldenEye 64 and gave them significant health bonuses. And we'd still win.


Hence I would personally like the TTK seen in vid to increase by a half if not to PS standards, while the shield recharge is quite a bit slower.

[Ragotag]

IMO, proper Infantry damage effects would also go a long way to help balance TTK. Not many FPS games do this (L4D/L4D2/Rainbow Six series/Ghost Recon series). I would be in support of slower TTK if character models reacted and behaved as if they were getting shot and had suffered damage. Things like getting knocked down or slowed from ballistic/energy impacts and damage effects like slower movement rates, limited or inability to jump, narrowed/monochrome vision, or even the ability to wield/fire two-handed weapons accurately. To me these effects would justify a slower TTK; you can soak up more damage over time but it should have a noticeable effect on your performance.

[DayOne]

I could go for a higher TTK if there was locational damage. You could disable, but not kill, someone by shooting them in the leg.

I dunno, I think I'm gonna opt out this debate by playing the "wait for beta" card.

[Figment]

I could go for a higher TTK if there was locational damage. You could disable, but not kill, someone by shooting them in the leg.

I dunno, I think I'm gonna opt out this debate by playing the "wait for beta" card.

From what I read and heard, they do have different multiplyers for hitting someone in a different part of the body aside from the head, but no actual disabling (or things like in Perfect Dark where you could punch someone and grab their gun - which would be extremely funny if someone would allow that to happen to them).

[EVILPIG]

CoD: BO is horrid for noobs. In our friends group, my brother and I get 15 kills to every 1 to 3 kills for our noob friends. At one point I decided to just use the knife. I got 20 kills, they got 4, killing each other... We started playing BO at the same time and played equal matches since we only play at parties of my brother's, I'm at level 23 now, my brother at level 32, one is at level 7, the other at level 12 and another friend is at level 20. (also play MW2/3 and a lot of Fifa, etc, so don't actually play it more than thrice a month for an hour or 4 in a row)

The only kills the worst of the two got was when he had time to actually aim in my direction or kill the second worst. He camps continuously and is easily discovered and killed before he realises he has been spotted.

The other only got 12 levels because he discovered the grenade launcher attachment. It took ages for me to teach them how to quickstab (they gotten more proficient at that thanks to me, not my brother who gives them no chance to practice).


I ran matches where I would be a free kill all match for them to practice targeting. But their situational awareness would be so horrid, that I would come lie prone next to them and they wouldn't notice for a minute or two.

And by the time they noticed, I would already be LONG gone before they aimed at where I was... Quick TTK does not help them, it just gives them less time to learn. Consider that these people were MUCH more proficient when we played GoldenEye 64 and gave them significant health bonuses. And we'd still win.


Hence I would personally like the TTK seen in vid to increase by a half if not to PS standards, while the shield recharge is quite a bit slower.

You do realize that what you described doesn't support the point you want to make. You even ran around and did not fire on them and would run up and sit next to them? I'm sorry, but your friends just suck. Harsh reality, but true.

[Whalenator]

You do realize that what you described doesn't support the point you want to make. You even ran around and did not fire on them and would run up and sit next to them? I'm sorry, but your friends just suck. Harsh reality, but true.

I'm just wondering at this point who Figment was replying to so fervently that it caused him to bring up Call of Duty on this forum. How is the skill of his friends related to the topic at hand?

[Figment]

You do realize that what you described doesn't support the point you want to make. You even ran around and did not fire on them and would run up and sit next to them? I'm sorry, but your friends just suck. Harsh reality, but true.

Yes they do suck, that's the point. They're noobs. And it does support the point, because I also noted that their stabbing skills have improved because I allowed them to practice.

On me. By giving them the time to do so, after which they would get faster at it, as anyone practicing.

NOT HAVING A CHANCE TO DO SO, like when fighting my brother, or as noob being thrown into the PS2 version as I see it now, would mean you would not have the chance to improve naturally, in comparison to if you had some time to at least fight back - even if it would not stop you from getting killed.

It would provide you with a chance for situational awareness. It doesn't mean you'd instantly get better, BUT, it would allow you to return some fire and get better at determining where fire is coming from, returning it and learning how to reach cover.

A fast TTK does not even allow for reaching cover because you have no time to determine where a shot is coming from and thus can't derive where cover is.

[Figment]

I'm just wondering at this point who Figment was replying to so fervently that it caused him to bring up Call of Duty on this forum. How is the skill of his friends related to the topic at hand?

...Try the person I quoted? I did not bring it up, I responded to the definition of a "smartily low" TTK, posted by DayOne. :P

[sylphaen]

I agree with Espion's points and a few others for slower TTK.

One question: do you also feel like the rate of fire from rifles is higher in PS2 ?

From what I remember, emptying a full clip in PS1 would have taken a lot longer. It could be a reason why the TTK is lower in PS2 even if it takes the same amount of shots (ratio of: shots / total size of magazine) in PS1 to frag someone.

If they slow down the TTK with a "it takes more shots to kill someone" solution, at the speed those guns fire, we will spend a lot of time reloading.

We'd really need beta to evaluate the current mechanics in a large scale fight...
:rolleyes:

[ArmedZealot]

This would seem to apply regardless of the TTK...?




What do you mean 50% more effective? By increasing the TTK by 1 second you gave both the troops and the MAX 50% more health. They were both "50% more effective", that's why the results were the same. The MAXs have made no less significant an impact...

True, looks like I'm wrong. I suppose some testing in beta will settle how medics feel.

[Sirisian]

There are two things I look at with TTK for Planetside 2. Does the player have time to make a choice? If so what choices can they make in different scenarios? The second thing I look at is if focused fire is being used. Is it just a single person quickly killing people seemingly separate from their squad or faction.

The TTK dictates what choices a player can make. As a generalization a low TTK in the worst case results in what others have described as "shoot first". Meaning the only legitimate choice to seeing an enemy is to shoot first. A grenade would take too long to travel to the enemy before you died and retreating to cover would be an assured death. No one is suggesting that, so it's pointless to fixate on. The slower the TTK the more choices a player has. If they are behind barrels it could mean making it to another stack of boxes in the courtyard while being fired at or it could mean dying halfway there. Rewording it would be the difference of stepping out of a door and jumping behind a box taking down half your shield to maybe getting to another piece of cover with almost no health. The extreme is you step out and are killed destroying that as a viable choice, making pushing forward too risky.

In the previous example I left out focused fire. Basically if the TTK is low then you are most often killed by a single player in a battle of hundreds of players. In Planetside 1 there was a nice feeling where you'd target a person and you'd see your bullets hitting the enemy along with another person's and the enemy drops because of focused fire. That's something that happens after a certain TTK threshold. Maxes might be the exception to this with the current design, but for most players it was a solo-kill with no real teamwork from his squad.

I discussed some other choices and gameplay elements that open up with a slower TTK in this thread (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showpost.php?p=648679&postcount=21). Basically just describing what's possible if you give people time to make more risky choices in combat.

Also to stress these concepts refer to Vancha's post:
I think the biggest issue is with medics. If people die too quickly, being healed isn't of much concern...Life and death becomes almost binary...An on/off switch.

For medics to be significant, the health bar "buffer" needs to be significant.

The same sort of applies to revival. The harder people are to kill, the greater the impact of bringing them back to life and thus greater reason to make revival take a while. If death is quick then revival needs to be quick, which turns resurrection into wack-a-mole and removes a lot of the risk vs reward of reviving someone.
This summarizes the choices a player can make. As a battle medic they should be useful. I didn't see anyone in the video healing Higby. As soon as his shield was off he died. He was revived nearly instantly it looked like making revival more important than healing. Basically a player low on health should be able to make the choice of finding their squad medic and healing. It shouldn't be game over at that point. Which brings me to the point that health should be generally 4 times larger than shields. Shields should be blocking the stray lame bullets and fall damage that players are expected to encounter in such a large game with so many bullets flying around. Health should be the important part.

I don't feel a player should have binary choices in combat.

Interestingly the next post supports this concept:
I think it's fine how it is now... Super long ttk just gives players a chance to jet pack away once being hit etc.
The longer the TTK is the more choices. So what if a person jet packed away or runs back for cover; you pushed the enemy back as you pushed forward which is all about territory control. Killing them so they respawn back at the same place they ran to does the same basic thing.

If it isn't obvious I prefer a slow TTK. One that is slower than the current one demonstrated, since I prefer focused fire and more choices available during combat.

[Graywolves]

Everyone should read this post.

I think Sirisian put it pretty well.

Choices

Medics being useful

etc.

[Malorn]

I think in general ever since Counter-Strike games have had a fairly high TTK, where who-sees-who-first is typically what decides encounters. At some level you have to reward people who flank and get the jump on others, but you also need to give people some chance to react in most cases or it just loses its fun.

PS1 was a game that gave you a good balance. I'd like it a little faster than PS1, but not much.

The "pacing" speed increase that I want to see is just helping people get to the fight faster, respawn closer, etc so the battle keeps rolling, but I dont' want to see a significant reduction in TTK along with that.

PS1 had it about right.

[SKYeXile]

I like Planetsides TTK, game pace needs to be alittle faster, maybe lower the TTK slightly, but i thought it was good....its and MMO afterall, I dont really want to be killed before i can see somebody...I'm sure you Americans don't want want me to kill you before I even render for you either.

[TekDragon]

I feel like there's several people in here who will only be happy if they took the "quick knife" mechanics and moved it to guns. Move your gun over a player, click, and watch an instant kill.

So skilled.

[Whalenator]

Well the Planetside team is trying to cater to the traditional FPS audience, whose TTKs have been increasing steadily from Unreal Tournament to Counter Strike to Call of Duty and now Battlefield. I like how you didn't get killed instantly but making a mistake out of cover would still end up with you dead. Maybe the TTK could be raised a smidgen...

...But guys, please keep in mind
1. That was Alpha
2. Most of them were Light Assault
3. Beta will, and I quote "change everything"

[Yutty]

Part 2

Light Assault starts hitting Heavy Assault @ 3:29; +100 kill exp pops up @ 3:30

He was pretty close but too fast? Doesn't make it look like heavy assault would be even worth it when you could go light have jump jet and ammo drop?

[deltase]

I voted for slower cause Slower TTK will promote teamwork and not CoD style gameplay!
I'm sick and tired of super fast TTK, in which camping is the way to go. And don't start on how the gunz FeELzzzzzz cause that's bullshit! A game is a game, in which things should be fun for all and not just some 2 or 4 guys who are camping, getting kills like its Christmas! Dueling should be fun and full with skill and not the first guy who shoots gets a kill! That is just wrong in video games cause people will get smart and you know what they'll do... Exactly! Camping!
Lower the TTK and let the Skill fest begin!

[Tehroth]

Realistic damage where it will take about 3 shots with a sniper rifle and high times to get back into the fire. I don't want to take a base only to have those same people reappear 1 minute later. I understand deploy centers, but those can be destroyed.

[Tom Peters]

I was ecstatic to see how fast infantry were dropping, while still encouraging huge, open firefights involving several squads at once.

[Dreamcast]

Guys this is exactly like Killzone 2 TTK.....The whole way the game is played, the tactics,etc yell out killzone 2

[dai shan]

TTK has such a profound impact on so many different areas of the game.

I voted for slower -- I hope that by the time beta ends, it's significantly slower than bad company 2.

With a lower TTK and more lethal weapons, almost every aspect of the game has to increase in speed to keep up. You have to respawn faster, and closer to the firefight (so like squad insta-spawning), medkits and ammo supplies become significantly less important (since you are going to probably respawn with full ammo / health anyway), and the firefights are almost always very rapid and short, with not very many long drawn out fights (which is the way I like it).

The recent trend towards faster and faster ttk is pretty disheartening.

[Vancha]

With a lower TTK and more lethal weapons, almost every aspect of the game has to increase in speed to keep up. You have to respawn faster, and closer to the firefight (so like squad insta-spawning), medkits and ammo supplies become significantly less important (since you are going to probably respawn with full ammo / health anyway), and the firefights are almost always very rapid and short, with not very many long drawn out fights (which is the way I like it).
This. This is what sways it imo.

Other FPS' can get away with low TTKs because the front line is all there is, but Planetside is unique in that there's a lot going on behind the front lines, whether it be support or logistics, both of which are devalued by low TTKs.

[VioletZero]

Guys this is exactly like Killzone 2 TTK.....The whole way the game is played, the tactics,etc yell out killzone 2

Umm, no.

>_>

I'll give you a hint: Killzone 2 didn't have vehicles.