Head shots, body shots, TTK

[asdar]

I hope this doesn't turn into a thread about which is more tactical, short or long TTK. I'm just curious about how the TTK is weighted right now, and maybe what you think it should be.

If you go with the heaviest attack, either the Max unit or HA vs the Lightest armor LA, eng or medic how many head shots does it take? and how many body shots?

I think I'd be ok with 2-3 headshots in this situation, and 6-9 body shots.

If you went the Lightest attack vs the heaviest infantry armor I'd be ok with 5-7 head shots and maybe 15-20 body shots, Max Units I'd think 10-12 head shots, 20-30 body shots.

I figure head shot should be roughly 3X a body shot in damage.

[Vanu Techpriest]

From the livestream footage I watched, it seems that you can kill some of the lightly armored classes very quickly provided that you can aim properly and control recoil.

I saw some instances where people were wasting whole clips spraying and others where the enemy died within 1-2 seconds.

[wasdie]

They are making the gunplay more along the lines of modern shooters so expect much shorter TTKs than in Planetside.

[OutlawDr]

I want shorter TTKs tbh. PS1 ttk were just too long for my tastes even back then, and new players today won't put up with it now.

I watched some clips to figure out how many shots it takes to kill players.

A Vanu max with a quasar, took 4 shots to kill a light infantry
It takes roughly about 6 shots to kill a LA with standard infantry weapons.
I'm assuming these were all body shots.

In modern FPS games it averages about 3 shots up close and 5 shots from a distance to kill players. Headshots are usually only a 1.4-1.5 damage multiplier. Some sniper weapons sometimes have 1.7 multiplier, or have an automatic headshot kill ability.

[SpcFarlen]

I dont really feel fast TTK is bad. For vehicles it is fairly fast too. Though things do look fairly balanced, which is what i am looking for. It may not be everyone's cup of tea for fast TTK, but balancing it is more key.

[Bags]

At the moment 2 headshot to take out a HA with a medic carbine rifle.

So given hundreds of people instead of 100 at E3, expect to die instantly every time you poke your head out.

Have "fun"!

[asdar]

I watched most every bit of footage from E3 and I didn't see any HA get taken down by a medic with only 2 headshots.

Can anyone confirm this, 2 headshots is way to low in my opinion if this is true.

I saw a Light armor kill an HA, but it took 6-8 shots and I'd have sworn every shot was a head shot.

[Mechzz]

I saw an uncloaked infil kill a max from prbly full health with a sniper rifle from about 5 yards. Don't think it means I'll see that every day?

[fod]

going by TB's videos imo TTK is waaaay to low

how many "bullets" it will take will all be dependant on the faction so the tr with their low damage/high ROF will need more bullets than the NC with their high damage/low ROF so talking about how many bullets it should take is irrelivant imo its all about the "time" it takes to kill

sure ps1's was a little high in the ttk but i think the battlefield 3/COD model is also way to low for ps2 - a little higher than the TB videos would be perfect

[OutlawDr]

shot to kill gives you a good approximation of ttk.
Accurate TTK values are impossible to get unless you know damage and rof values. In the videos some guys took forever to go down, some went down in seconds. It all depends on the players movement and aim. Going off by shots gives us now something solid to compare to other games.

In the E3's videos, ttk in PS2 looks to be somewhere in between modern FPS games and PS1.
2 shot head kill is probably the only thing that mirrors exactly a modern FPS game, as even an SMG can kill in 2 hits at close range in mw3.

[Ratstomper]

going by TB's videos imo TTK is waaaay to low

how many "bullets" it will take will all be dependant on the faction so the tr with their low damage/high ROF will need more bullets than the NC with their high damage/low ROF so talking about how many bullets it should take is irrelivant imo its all about the "time" it takes to kill

sure ps1's was a little high in the ttk but i think the battlefield 3/COD model is also way to low for ps2 - a little higher than the TB videos would be perfect

We also have to take into account that we had ALOT of action going on in one spot between three different empires; something that probably won't happen THAT much in the game proper. I'm willing to bet this caused alot of variables (target health being low, for instance), just because there was such a flurry of activity and people just running around deathmatch style.

My hope is that the TTK is a bit longer than the videos showed; especially for some air vehicles.

[asdar]

The way I understood the comments from E3 each player had a shield and health and the shield regenerated after action. The health I've heard people that were at E3 say that it didn't regenerate at all, but some regeneration was seen on the video. I think maybe the medic regen was involved, but I didn't see it.

Saying that TTK was too long or too short to me is just gut reaction. It should be based on shots vs armor in some manner.

Vehicles is a totally different affair. I'm not sure how to weight them yet, so I'll keep my mouth shut on that topic. The vast majority of vehicles I saw destroyed were killed because the pilot ran into something. I'd keep that as it is, if you're not good enough to avoid the mountain then stay out of the sky.

Well, I won't totally shut my mouth on the topic. I'd hate to spend a lot of credits to get a ship that's taken out by one Lock-on type missile that takes no aiming. I'll give the devs some leeway to find the right balance for air.

[OutlawDr]

Health does regen. Players at E3 were probably to involved in figuring out what to do to notice. It takes about 25-30 seconds to start the regen, and about 10 secs for the regen to full hp from low health. Shield starts regen after 10 seconds and takes about 5 seconds to refill from zero.

[maradine]

I am 100% in favor of body shots.

[Sifer2]

Well in terms of standard body shot TTK I think its way too low currently. They seem to be trying to copy Battlefield 3 here in terms of pacing an kill times. The problem I see with this is that Planetside 2's scale is entirely different. Battlefield is 64 player max. That TTK maybe fits there. But what about when its 500 players in a small area? I think its just going to be way too fast an people will ***** an moan that they die almost right after they spawn, and that it's all random bullets killing you instantly from everywhere with no idea what's going on. That's my prediction of how first few weeks of Beta is going to go, and they will need to up the TTK.


As for Headshot's oh man you could wright a whole article on that. When they are just thrown into a shooter with no thought they can easily ruin it. GTA4 multiplayer for example had really bad headshots. Since they were instant kill compared to the beefy health bars you had if someone was trying to body shot you. You kind of have to have played it to know how god awful it was. It felt so random with you both just spamming bullets at each other, and who ever got the lucky headshot first always won.

IMO the game that did Headshot's the best of any I ever played was actually Halo. In fact I would argue that was the primary reason that game series ever became so popular. It was the famous three headshot Pistol kill. The way they did it was only certain weapons could get headshots. Pistol, Battle Rifle, and Sniper Rifle. All the more spammy weapons like SMG's or Assault Rifle could not. This allowed more skilled players who were good with the slow firing weapons able to aim, and consistently score multiple headshots in a row would rise to the top.

Unfortunately now we live in world where people would rather play Call of Duty. Where you just spam a couple bullets in the general direction of your opponent, and they drop dead. In Planetside 2 footage is appears to be pretty similar here where you just spam full auto at head level, and you easily kill your opponent. IMO they should aspire to be more like Halo. And restrict headshots to weapons like Pistol's and Snipers only. Maybe even add a Battle Rifle class of weapon which has small clip size and low firing rate but better accuracy over long distance, and headshot capable.

TLDR:

TTK needs to be higher.
Only certain none spammy weapons should be able to headshot.
Headshot should almost never be instant kill unless maybe its a Sniper on light armor class.

[Bags]

I watched most every bit of footage from E3 and I didn't see any HA get taken down by a medic with only 2 headshots.

Can anyone confirm this, 2 headshots is way to low in my opinion if this is true.

Planetside 2 E3 Stream - Day 1 - Part 1 (feat. Totalbiscuit and Margaret Krohn) - YouTube

37:50 - 38:00.

[Sifer2]

37:50 - 38:00.


Yep that's similar to how it was in GTA4. It looks like the Headshot damage bonus is so massive currently it's basically instant kill with any weapon. Which means spray an pray at head level an hope for the best gameplay.

[OutlawDr]

...or you can aim for the head and kill the guy thats just spraying. Players do it all the time in modern FPS games. The skill ceiling is quite high in those game, I can assure you. Never played GTA4 online, but it doesn't sound like a good game to make comparisons.

Honestly though, slow TTK, fast TTK...its a preference. They both promote different styles of gameplay, and require different set of skills to be proficient at it. Trying to argue which one is better is really fruitless, plus the OP asked not to.

[Sledgecrushr]

Yeah the cod insta death game mechanic is no fun to me.

[Bags]

modern FPS games. The skill ceiling is quite high in those game, I can assure you.


No they aren't. I've played maybe 50 hours of BF3 and I can easily top or nearly top the scoreboard if I really try to. I was able to do so after I learned the maps, so about 10 hours.

I played Quake for longer and still can't get above 30 pts before someone wins at 50.

[Gandhi]

Headshot damage multiplier should be fairly low, around 1.25x for most weapons. That's the easiest way to separate actual aim from spray and pray, consistently getting headshots will give you a marked advantage while consistently missing them will result in a big net loss in damage output. If I can make up for 3 misses with a 3x headshot multiplier then what possible incentive would I have to not spray the target's head and hope for those few lucky hits?

And lets not ignore the vertical gameplay here. It's much easier to headshot someone from above, combine that with light assault jetpacks, high walls and vertical elevation inside bases and you've got the makings of some pretty frustrating gameplay if the multiplier is too high.

Can't say anything about the TTK until I play the beta, but considering the scale we're looking at I'd err on the side of caution and keep it fairly high.

[OutlawDr]

No they aren't. I've played maybe 50 hours of BF3 and I can easily top or nearly top the scoreboard if I really try to.

heh, ok nevermind, your limited anecdotal evidence proves modern FPS games require no skill. Spread the word.

[Bags]

heh, ok nevermind, your limited anecdotal evidence proves modern FPS games require no skill. Spread the word.

At least I have anecdotal evidence, whereas you have nothing.

[lolroflroflcake]

Something I don't get. Modern FPSes have really low TTKs, they also have extremely limited match sizes. Their TTKs are based on the fact that there are usually not that many people shooting. So why is it a good idea to shorten TTKs when there is a whole crap-load who will be shooting, seems to me like that is just a recepie for everyone hiding behind cover afraid to emerge or spending quite abit more time dead then alive.

[Mechzz]

Something I don't get. Modern FPSes have really low TTKs, they also have extremely limited match sizes. Their TTKs are based on the fact that there are usually not that many people shooting. So why is it a good idea to shorten TTKs when there is a whole crap-load who will be shooting, seems to me like that is just a recepie for everyone hiding behind cover afraid to emerge or spending quite abit more time dead then alive.

Good point. Is it a plan to get us all to spend our Smedbux on body armour for ourselves and anti-mine plating for our tanks?

[OutlawDr]

At least I have anecdotal evidence, whereas you have nothing.

Excellent. I could post about how I can top the charts on almost every FPS and TPS game I play (which I do MW series, BF3 and series, NS2, L4D, Tribes, Mechwarrior 4, MWLL, Global Agenda)...but what does it prove?
Mostly that I am good at shooters. Usually good gamers are good in almost any game they play in (or a certain genre anyway..I blow at RTS or any strategy type game).

[captainkapautz]

At least I have anecdotal evidence, whereas you have nothing.

Well, your anecdotal evidence was kinda crappy, since you didn't say anything about what kind of server you played on, which gamemode, etc.

Sure, modern fps aren't as hard to learn as older ones like Quake or UT, but in my opinion that's a good thing.

I rather have "Easy to learn, hard to master.", than "Hard to learn, almost fucking impossible to master.".

[lolroflroflcake]

Excellent. I could post about how I can top the charts almost every FPS and TPS game I play (which I do MW series, BF3 and series, NS2, L4D, Tribes, Mechwarrior 4, MWLL, Global Agenda)...but what does it prove?
Mostly that I am good at shooters. Usually good gamers are good in almost any game they play in (or a certain genre anyway..I blow at RTS or and Strategy game for that matter..

I think the point is that modern shooters are easier to be good at then other games as they are designed to appeal to more casual crowds. They generally don't like being rocked repeatedly by those who have been playing shooters for much longer, I guess they're just poor sports.

So yes Modern shooters are easier, its not a good thing but that is just the way they are.

[OutlawDr]

Also don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for COD ttk speeds for PS2.
A slower TTK I think would be better suited for planetside, but I rather NOT see a return of PS1 values. Somewhere is in middle would be best imo. That what we saw in the E3 videso for the most part.. Something I could agree on is that 2 hit headshot skill from a cycler on a HA is too fast. I wouldn't mind that increased to around 4. Also a 3x multiplier for head shots is insane. Most games are only around 1.4-1.5.

[Bags]

Also don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for COD ttk speeds for PS2.
A slower TTK I think would be better suited for planetside, but I rather NOT see a return of PS1 values. Somewhere is in middle would be best imo. And so far thats what we are seeing. Something I could agree is that 2 hit headshot skill from a cycler on a HA is too fast. I wouldn't mind that increased to around 4. A Also 3x multipler for head shots is insane. Most games are only around 1.4-1.5.

PS1's main problem was the damage falloff was ridiculous. If they got rid of it and kept the # of bullets to kill it'd be fine.

[Whalenator]

I don't know about Infantry,
but the vehicle TTK atm is waaaay too short. Two hits to kill a heavy tank? BS.

[captainkapautz]

Something I don't get. Modern FPSes have really low TTKs, they also have extremely limited match sizes. Their TTKs are based on the fact that there are usually not that many people shooting. So why is it a good idea to shorten TTKs when there is a whole crap-load who will be shooting, seems to me like that is just a recepie for everyone hiding behind cover afraid to emerge or spending quite abit more time dead then alive.

This is something I don't understand about you guys.

The thought a low TTK somehow removes strategy and tactics and turns the game into "IMA HID IN DA FOOTHOLD"-side.

In case you all forget, those tactics and strategies you all like so much in your Planetside more often then not have their roots in RL, and AFAIK the TTK in RL is pretty damn low.

Imo high TTK actually removes tactics and strategies, because I DON'T have to worry about dieing really fuckin fast, but when I actually have to think about how to approach a situation while keeping myself alive, that is the time when real tactics actually come into play.

And to be quite honest, we aren't talking BF-Hardcore, much less CoD-Hardcore, here, so if the TTK is on BFBC2s level it's still rather high by todays standards.

[Bags]

And to be quite honest, we aren't talking BF-Hardcore, much less CoD-Hardcore, here, so if the TTK is on BFBC2s level it's still rather high by todays standards.

Based on what we saw at E3, we are. I don't see how 2 hs is harder than 1 hs with a 75 clip LMG.

And what are you talking about, if you die in 10 shots you still die fast when multiple people shoot at you... how does that remove tactics?

[captainkapautz]

Based on what we saw at E3, we are. I don't see how 2 hs is harder than 1 hs with a 75 clip LMG.

And what are you talking about, if you die in 10 shots you still die fast when multiple people shoot at you... how does that remove tactics?

Simple, the longer it takes to take someone out, the more time there is for 1 or more of his friends to notice and join in.

Now that I think about it some more it takes away more from "small unit tactics", that benefit from higher individual skill, than it does from large scale tactics, because when a small group, say a squad, drops on or infiltrates a base that is held by a platoon then a high TTK will be a disadvantage to them, simply because if it takes 10 seconds to kill someone in a 1v1 situation then that means that no matter how good you are, if you go up against more than one opponent you will be at a significant disadvantage.

In the end I hope for a TTK that is more BFBC2/2142, than it is PS1.

Edit: I mean PS1 TTK over range, I know that point blank you still die rather fast, but as you mention the damage falloff was beyond retarded.

[Sabot]

As they do have headshots now, and everybody exept the infil are wearing armor that must weigh a ton or two, I tihnk the TTK could be a little higher on center mass hits. 12-13 hits perhaps.

[captainkapautz]

As they do have headshots now, and everybody exept the infil are wearing armor that must weigh a ton or two, I tihnk the TTK could be a little higher on center mass hits. 12-13 hits perhaps.

I don't think "It has future armors." is a good enough reason behind a high TTK.

[Sabot]

I don't think "It has future armors." is a good enough reason behind a high TTK.

Well spotted... now try to spot the sarcasm, it's worth over 9000 points! :P

But serisouly... obviously I meant that beacuse of the possibility of headshots now present, a higher TTK on body hits makes sense.. especially as there quite possibly will be more than 10 people shooting at you at the same time. And if that squad that dropped to take something guarded by a lot more players want to be able to do something useful there, they better know how to aim and shot them in head for staters.

[NEWSKIS]

This is what beta is for, to hopefully fine tune it so its not too short or too long. Personally as long as its not horribly short I'll be fine with whatever they decide.

As for vehicles, for the main battle tanks, I'd say the lowest it should be is 2 shells on rear armor, 3-4 for the sides and 5-6 on the front. Some people might say this is high, but think of how many tanks you'd be fighting, even with those numbers you'd get instagibbed.

[captainkapautz]

Well spotted... now try to spot the sarcasm, it's worth over 9000 points! :P

But serisouly... obviously I meant that beacuse of the possibility of headshots now present, a higher TTK on body hits makes sense.. especially as there quite possibly will be more than 10 people shooting at you at the same time. And if that squad that dropped to take something guarded by a lot more players want to be able to do something useful there, they better know how to aim and shot them in head for staters.

Yeah the whole sarcasm in writing thing doesn't really work that well. ;)

And I think your suggestion with the headshot puts to much emphasis on personal skill, it should be a sweet spot between where you can negate numbers to a slight degree by being better and just roflstomping superior numbers everytime because you have godlike skills.

P.S.: I dunno, it's kinda hard for me finding the proper words atm, I blame being at work and being tired.

[Sabot]

Yeah the whole sarcasm in writing thing doesn't really work that well. ;)

And I think your suggestion with the headshot puts to much emphasis on personal skill, it should be a sweet spot between where you can negate numbers to a slight degree by being better and just roflstomping superior numbers everytime because you have godlike skills.

P.S.: I dunno, it's kinda hard for me finding the proper words atm, I blame being at work and being tired.

Hehe well I thought that one was pretty obvious. :)

Well, maybe it's just me, but I think personal skill should be rewarded like that. Some people are good making good tactical decisions on a squad level, some are good at the meta-game, and some are good at shooting things. All styles are needed imo, and I think that all play styles should be rewarded for doing it well... even if that means just a "participant trophy" in the grand scheeme of things and a slightly nicer K/D ratio.

Besides, if you have 10 people shooting at you, it doesn't matter if the TTK is 10 or 13 hits... unless you find cover fast as hell, you're going to die even faster. Unless they're really bad...

[Dairian]

I have talked about this topic before. After playing about ALMOST every FPS ever made from DOOM to now. And an original planetside vet. The more players you have on a map the higher your TTK needs to be. Now I do not think it needs to be as high as PS1 but if it is as low as BF3 with 2k players on a map and in some fights i would say at least 500+ at a base. I know I would get pissed if I spawned and as I ran out of a doorway and were killed in 1/16th of a sec from 4 people spamming fire. Without a way to fight back other than sit back and do the same waiting on them to come in. But as we all keep saying WAIT FOR BETA!! Coming very soon!

[Stew]

I hope this doesn't turn into a thread about which is more tactical, short or long TTK. I'm just curious about how the TTK is weighted right now, and maybe what you think it should be.

If you go with the heaviest attack, either the Max unit or HA vs the Lightest armor LA, eng or medic how many head shots does it take? and how many body shots?

I think I'd be ok with 2-3 headshots in this situation, and 6-9 body shots.

If you went the Lightest attack vs the heaviest infantry armor I'd be ok with 5-7 head shots and maybe 15-20 body shots, Max Units I'd think 10-12 head shots, 20-30 body shots.

I figure head shot should be roughly 3X a body shot in damage.

You cant say 1 hot 2 hot 6 shot like this

Every weapons have their own dps Rate of fire vs stopping power vs accuracy !

U cant say it must take thats much shot since every weapons are balanced with Stopping power vs accuracy vs rate of fire vs damage degrade over time vs distance etc..

its not that easy lol

[Stew]

I have talked about this topic before. After playing about ALMOST every FPS ever made from DOOM to now. And an original planetside vet. The more players you have on a map the higher your TTK needs to be. Now I do not think it needs to be as high as PS1 but if it is as low as BF3 with 2k players on a map and in some fights i would say at least 500+ at a base. I know I would get pissed if I spawned and as I ran out of a doorway and were killed in 1/16th of a sec from 4 people spamming fire. Without a way to fight back other than sit back and do the same waiting on them to come in. But as we all keep saying WAIT FOR BETA!! Coming very soon!

I think i do not agree 31 years old FPS vets here and i deeply agree whith this ... more player must be better ttk since you can run more often in a huge group of people so you personally need to have a chance if your skills are higher otherwise it will always be Numbers wins , high TTK in a massive online game is just stupid ! It must be well balanced thats mean huge headshot bonus and also very low legshot and decent body shot !

Dust have a high ttk and it sucks

[goneglockin]

Imo high TTK actually removes tactics and strategies, because I DON'T have to worry about dieing really fuckin fast, but when I actually have to think about how to approach a situation while keeping myself alive, that is the time when real tactics actually come into play.


You'd think so, but you'd be wrong. The longer a fight lasts, the more likely the better player will win. I'm talking about tactics and strategy in regards to playing a video game, an FPS game. You're talking about tactics and strategy like an arm chair general with a war fantasy, that's what I don't get. I don't think that's what makes games fun.

Anyway, the game that had the best average TTKs was FEAR, the first one. It had thee most under-rated MP experience of the past decade, and was the last great corridor shooter of its day. I'm all for somewhere in the middle, but fights between decent players should rarely last more than 2-3 seconds up close.

[captainkapautz]

You'd think so, but you'd be wrong. The longer a fight lasts, the more likely the better player will win.

No, I don't think I'm wrong.

Simple reason is that you think in a 1vs1 scenario, while I think in a scenario where a 1vs1 can quickly turn into a Xvs1 if it takes to long to kill someone.

I'm talking about tactics and strategy in regards to playing a video game, an FPS game. You're talking about tactics and strategy like an arm chair general with a war fantasy, that's what I don't get. I don't think that's what makes games fun.

You aren't talking about tactics or strategy at all, only think you did was throw a veiled insult at me.

[goneglockin]

No, I don't think I'm wrong.

Simple reason is that you think in a 1vs1 scenario, while I think in a scenario where a 1vs1 can quickly turn into a Xvs1 if it takes to long to kill someone.


Ganking happens in every game regardless of TTK. I know what you're trying to say but you're still wrong. It takes a predetermined minimum amount of time to kill someone for any given weapon, and whether it's 1 second or 1 minute TTKs, a player fighting multiple people will have the same odds.

Unless you aren't fighting them at all. Unless... You're talking about "tactics." i.e. Sneaking up on a group that is fighting others, so you can spray several people in the back before any of them have a chance to notice. Those are the only time the odds are different depending on the TTK, because the longer it takes, the better the odds are they will turn around and shoot you in the face.

So why is shooting people in the back a good reason for low TTK? If you were concerned about a single player being ganked, you'd be more in favor of health drops from killed players than fractional second TTKs for spraying groups.

Fighting two players at a time, and getting a health drop from the first one you kill is the right way to put skill back into it. It's all in the compounding effects of the different game mechanics, not so much one number of one mechanic, that determines how an FPS game plays.

[captainkapautz]

Ganking happens in every game regardless of TTK. I know what you're trying to say but you're still wrong. It takes a predetermined minimum amount of time to kill someone for any given weapon, and whether it's 1 second or 1 minute TTKs, a player fighting multiple people will have the same odds.

I said when a 1vs1 turns into an Xvs1, clearly stating that the fight started with just me and him, but his friend/s joining in when it takes to long.

Unless you aren't fighting them at all. Unless... You're talking about "tactics." i.e. Sneaking up on a group that is fighting others, so you can spray several people in the back before any of them have a chance to notice. Those are the only time the odds are different depending on the TTK, because the longer it takes, the better the odds are they will turn around and shoot you in the face.

Those "tactics" are called ambushes or surprise attacks.

So why is shooting people in the back a good reason for low TTK? If you were concerned about a single player being ganked, you'd be more in favor of health drops from killed players than fractional second TTKs for spraying groups.

Fighting two players at a time, and getting a health drop from the first one you kill is the right way to put skill back into it. It's all in the compounding effects of the different game mechanics, not so much one number of one mechanic, that determines how an FPS game plays.

I don't care about a single player being ganked, if he goes up against X amount of players with them fully aware if him.

[Forsaken One]

I like long TTKs only when a game does not have headshots.


I HATE when games have headshots and it takes 1-3 headshots to kill someone but like 6+ body shots to kill someone.

IF there is headshots I like short 3- body hits to kill someone.

[ParisTeta]

What if Headshot work this way, they have a slight multiplicator like 1.1 or 1.2, and part of the damage goes right through the shield/armor. If there is no shield/armor, it does full HP Damage of course.

Some sprayed shots wont ruin the day, but continuely hits would bring you down very fast.

The DEVs seems mostly smart (except Magrider *sight*) and thoughtful what they do, i guess they have something in mind, if not implented it already, not to die instantly to often.

Something like this would explain why Burster Flak can make good kills with headshot, as far as i remember, most not AI weapons sucks manly on the armor, but was little more effective on pure health.

[Timealude]

i think it should only take 1- 2 head shots for lighter armor targets anymore then that and your punishing the player for playing a sniper and playing that way. Even though it may seem like a cheap shot you should reward a player for being able to take the head off someone while moving or from really far away as well as comping for bullet drop/bullet degradation. I can see why it would require more shots to take down a MAX or a HA. Also its not like this rifle is a semi auto, its bolt action style there for they have to reload after each shot so should that shot count for something? Also for the Normal infantry weapons, they should require a little bit more damage seeing as they arent as high caliber bullet.

[OutlawDr]

They could implement halo like shield/headshot mechanics like someone suggested earlier. Shields provide headshot immunity except to high power low ROF weapons, such as sniper rifles, battle rifles and magnum-like handguns. Any initial panic spray and pray would confer no advantage. Once shields are down, headshots are open to all weapons.

[DarkChiron]

I think having TTK on the level of CoD would be a huge problem in combat zones with many combatants. But like others have said, I think a return to the old PS1 values would be too much. It just depends, I suppose.

When you factor in things like medics, engineers, and refilling health/shields (which from E3 footage you can CERT into to make them regen better/differently), TTK becomes a more complicated topic.

The only thing I'm worried about is too much of a disparity between classes, namely light armor classes being TOO easy to kill. Of course heavy armors need to be better at taking damage, but it'll suck if the light armor units can't survive enough for their maneuverability to even be a factor.

[brinkdadrink]

I personally am not a fan of low TTK times. It promotes more of a solo play than team play.

That said the TTK should not be as high as PS1 mainly because it was too easy to survive. I would like to see it in the middle like most others have said.

Another reason to add to this argument is the TIME TO RETURN TO BATTLE. In modern shooters with such small maps you are back in the action within 10 seconds. In Planetside 2 that will be closer to 30sec to as high as a 1 min or maybe even more. Because of this I would not want to die in 1 second by random fire.

This fact along with as been said of larger numbers I personally dont want to see the TTK as low as BF3/COD3

[Madlaps]

Take a base defense from PS1, could you see any chance of getting through a choke point (In PS2... bio lab?) through a door of a facility with the Planetside 2 TTK?

You guys are talking 1v1 TTK, so what happens when it's 10 people point their guns at a door and 1 person walks in - it's going to be interesting once beta is up at least what happens to the TTK.

E3 showed Planetside 2 as a deathmatch, there was no organisation, no one ran around together.. there was no attack/defend scenario as the game will be when opened up. I think the TTK will get raised once we see what happens to attackers when theres 100-200 people defending a base.. all shooting the same direction - whether it be down a corridor or out in the open.

[captainkapautz]

Take a base defense from PS1, could you see any chance of getting through a choke point (In PS2... bio lab?) through a door of a facility with the Planetside 2 TTK?

A better chance then in PS1.

Because unlike the guys outside, the guys inside don't really have anywhere to go to dodge AoE.

[Tarconus]

You know what would help vehicles take out damage from the environment. There's no reason to have it in at all.

[Elim]

TTK also affects the pace of the fight, and for the game to have a modern feel(pace) as well as a TTK time that everyone don't die in a fraction of a second in a chaotic battle is hard to tell.

I am confident that once the game is in open beta where huge battles occur constantly, there will easily be enough data to fine tune TTK.

As for HA, people at E3 hardly use the pshield, which I imagine to be OP since it can be use to survive some tank shots.

[Sabot]

The HA shield does seem a little OP, yeah... TTK goes up with like 20 hits. I don't know if it's on a timer as well as dmg absorption, i.e, the shield only last a set amount time, even though no dmg is taken... also what CD is it on, if any?

[TerminatorUK]

I'm hoping they'll tweak it to the point where it the TTK is akin to a medic with the body armour perk in BF:BC2 against non-magnum ammo.

That was roughly somewhere smack bang in the middle of the TTK in BF3 and that of Planetside 1 I'd say.

[Stew]

I personally am not a fan of low TTK times. It promotes more of a solo play than team play.

That said the TTK should not be as high as PS1 mainly because it was too easy to survive. I would like to see it in the middle like most others have said.

Another reason to add to this argument is the TIME TO RETURN TO BATTLE. In modern shooters with such small maps you are back in the action within 10 seconds. In Planetside 2 that will be closer to 30sec to as high as a 1 min or maybe even more. Because of this I would not want to die in 1 second by random fire.

This fact along with as been said of larger numbers I personally dont want to see the TTK as low as BF3/COD3

This statment is wrong to me having a low or medium low ttk do not encourage or discourage solo play !

The low or medium ttk simply allow people to not be compleatly pawn by outnumbers zerg when they are actually better players

In a low TTk senario 5 guys can win a 5 vs 12 is a high ttk the 5 vs 12 guys will ends up in a 0 vs 11 or 0 vs 10 thats mean they will be maybe able to kill one or 2 guys but they have no chance

also the high ttk allow bad player to have the time to flee or simply get reinforcement before they died and you personally in a 1 vs 1 figth end up with no kill 1 dead and also

whith a high ttk the people will run around like chikens since they know they will be hard as MAX to kill with a infantry it simply do not make sens !

High ttk did not encourage team play it simply make ZERG invisible

[Stew]

The HA shield does seem a little OP, yeah... TTK goes up with like 20 hits. I don't know if it's on a timer as well as dmg absorption, i.e, the shield only last a set amount time, even though no dmg is taken... also what CD is it on, if any?

the High ttk fans will say its not enough buff this shield so it will take at least 60 hit so we will call thats skills lollll

cant beleive what i seen sometime

and your rigth the HA shiled as to be turn down Not up and the overal healt seams ok from whats ive seen form the alpha !

[Stew]

A better chance then in PS1.

Because unlike the guys outside, the guys inside don't really have anywhere to go to dodge AoE.

LOL rigth i find sometimes funny how ps1 actual players seams to be advers to (( camping , low ttk , etc.. )) but at the same time i remeber myself in planetside always figthing in tigth corridor with everybody corner camping door camping near generator room etc... with tons of max repair and healing tool etc.. so i really dont get it

Planetside 2 is a way more balanced and enjoyable on all level ttk , map layouts , scales , vehicules , graphics

in everything planetside 2 is better than planetside 1 and ive play over 3 years in the golden age not in 2008 2009 2010 etc..

[MacXXcaM]

That said the TTK should not be as high as PS1 mainly because it was too easy to survive.

Well, I think surviving is a good thing. I don't want to die all of a sudden the whole time.
I need the time to identify the person attacking me and have the opportunity to either shoot back or run.

That's what makes PS1 so nice to me. It's not like in Battlefield 3 where I barely live 2 minutes before spawning back in action.
I can choose to get back behind our lines, re-equip, heal myself and the start a new coordinated attack with my mates.

[Stew]

Well, I think surviving is a good thing. I don't want to die all of a sudden the whole time.
I need the time to identify the person attacking me and have the opportunity to either shoot back or run.

That's what makes PS1 so nice to me. It's not like in Battlefield 3 where I barely live 2 minutes before spawning back in action.
I can choose to get back behind our lines, re-equip, heal myself and the start a new coordinated attack with my mates.

the thing is planetside 2 isnt planetside 1 from the ground up it as been designed to be a way more like battlefield in term of gameplay and ttk and its to late to change the entire game mechanics

and with the kind of setting map layout etc.. ps2 cant and will never be anywhere planetside 1 gameplay wise because people who actually play ps1 are the people who as never turn to other games and like the gameplay as it is but most of the ps1 community goes to others games and never has come back until ps2 annoncement !

and we were like 500 000 back in the day and now whats is the ps1 actual player comunity i dont think its nowere near that lol

but like i said its to late and dev team already have make some choice around how the game should be and iam glad they avoid all the flaws from ps1

Ps1 was amasing in term of team work , scales , persistance etc.. and all thats will come back in ps2 but all the gameplay emchanics were pretty bad for the most part and restricted by the technologie of the time

[MacXXcaM]

Ya, I hope it'll turn out to be more like PS1 than BF3, though. They adopted many mechanics from other shooters which might be a good decision and I'm overall happy with what I see...

Somehow I have a feeling that they lowered TTK from GDC to E3.
At GDC I saw some pretty nice gun fights that reminded me of PS1. E3 kills were oftentimes more like "see, shoot, kill".

This might be a thing I'll leave for beta to decide if I'll like it or not.

and we were like 500 000 back in the day

Wut?

Sounds way too much in my ears.
I read once PS1 had a total peak of 5k within the US.

[FuzzyandBlue]

The TTK against infantry seemed pretty good from what I saw, at least at close ranges(5-25 meters), with skilled players being able to down players within 2 or so seconds. At range on the other hand it seemed like damage was way to low. I don't think I saw a single kill with an infantry weapon from over 50 meters away. Maybe everyone playing were just terrible shots, but it seemed like damage fall off was a little bit much, and weapon accuracy was a little erratic.

[OutlawDr]

double post

[OutlawDr]

You guys are talking 1v1 TTK, so what happens when it's 10 people point their guns at a door and 1 person walks in - it's going to be interesting once beta is up at least what happens to the TTK.


If 10+ people are shooting at you, it doesn't matter if it takes 3 shots or 10 shots. Your ass is going to get greased before you even know what happens. In fact, all these examples I keep reading of the poor lone player stepping outside and getting instantly killed by 500+ players doesn't make a case for high TTK. It makes a case to not cluelessly step out into a 500+ base battle without a clear plan. In light of such a cluster f*ck though, Im sure a players efforts could probably be spent better elsewhere. Maybe with a squad taking on a more manageable and profitable objective.

I think the pros of high TTK is that it promotes strafing gunnery skills and long circle strafing duels. Not exactly my cup of tea, but I can understand why people like it. It also gives people more time to react to a situation, and gives them time to react if someone jumps them suddenly. But if you are getting shot at by more then one person, this becomes marginal. However, the main con imo, is that it can give players too much time to react if set too high. They are punished less for bad positioning and getting flanked.
Pros for low TTK are that it promotes positioning and flanking. It rewards players more for getting the jump on someone. This is a pro or con depending on your preference, or latency too. You can less haphazardly walk into the unknown and still expect to to react properly to someone that pops out from a good position. Like some here have said, it allows for smaller groups to take on larger groups with use of smarter positioning and flanking. A large, unorganized blob of players needs more time to react, and giving them that time gives their numbers too much of the advantage.

[lawnmower]

IMO the game that did Headshot's the best of any I ever played was actually Halo. In fact I would argue that was the primary reason that game series ever became so popular. It was the famous three headshot Pistol kill. The way they did it was only certain weapons could get headshots. Pistol, Battle Rifle, and Sniper Rifle. All the more spammy weapons like SMG's or Assault Rifle could not. This allowed more skilled players who were good with the slow firing weapons able to aim, and consistently score multiple headshots in a row would rise to the top.

that sounds pretty stellar

...or you can aim for the head and kill the guy thats just spraying. Players do it all the time in modern FPS games. The skill ceiling is quite high in those game, I can assure you.

its not. you cant assure us of that because youve never played a skillful game at a high level
one thing is that you have to zoom in to be able to hit ANYTHING and then you pretty much cant move which makes it not very skillful, quite randomish and not very satisfying

Excellent. I could post about how I can top the charts on almost every FPS and TPS game I play (which I do MW series, BF3 and series, NS2, L4D, Tribes, Mechwarrior 4, MWLL, Global Agenda) but what would that prove
any real game?
and that wouldnt show anything as youre discussing the skilldifferences where he said he gets way better score at bf3 than in quake with less total playing time...


Sure, modern fps aren't as hard to learn as older ones like Quake or UT, but in my opinion that's a good thing.

I rather have "Easy to learn, hard to master.", than "Hard to learn, almost fucking impossible to master.".
how are they ha rd to learn?

PS1's main problem was the damage falloff was ridiculous.
whats that?


Imo high TTK actually removes tactics and strategies, because I DON'T have to worry about dieing really fuckin fast, but when I actually have to think about how to approach a situation while keeping myself alive, that is the time when real tactics actually come into play.

except that high ttk have all the factors that low ttk has at a different amount of importance

[Furber]

Im interested to see where this goes in Beta. IMO, regular TTK is fine, but headshots just seem a little bit over the top TTK, especially on MAXes.

[Sabot]

Im interested to see where this goes in Beta. IMO, regular TTK is fine, but headshots just seem a little bit over the top TTK, especially on MAXes.

Over the top, how? Too low or too high? From what I could see you still had to hit like... 3-4 headshots on a max to bring them down. That is very high for being headshots, as it should be... MAX units shouldn't go down easy from small arms fire.

[Stew]

Over the top, how? Too low or too high? From what I could see you still had to hit like... 3-4 headshots on a max to bring them down. That is very high for being headshots, as it should be... MAX units shouldn't go down easy from small arms fire.

http://www.gamebreaker.tv/video-game-shows/this-week-in-mmo-show/

Someones who as play dust 514 with a high ttk 40:20 talk about it about how it feel and how bad it is

this guy also have play ps2 and he said everything feels rigth and from the video i also see thats it feel rigth the High ttk could ruins this game PUT that in you MIND !

[Gandhi]

Over the top, how? Too low or too high? From what I could see you still had to hit like... 3-4 headshots on a max to bring them down. That is very high for being headshots, as it should be... MAX units shouldn't go down easy from small arms fire.
That's high for a pistol with a 10 round mag, not very high at all for an assault rifle with 60 rounds and a high ROF.

[Stew]

Over the top, how? Too low or too high? From what I could see you still had to hit like... 3-4 headshots on a max to bring them down. That is very high for being headshots, as it should be... MAX units shouldn't go down easy from small arms fire.

MAX as to not be OP and MAx has to take huge punishement while aiming in the head its the way it whould be but assuming from your sign its not like your not preaching for your own ;)

[captainkapautz]

how are they ha rd to learn?

"Old School"-shooter, like UT, Quake or CS aren't really newcomer friendly, you join a game and most "veteran players" will just roflstomp you all day, while newer shooters like MW1-3 and BF3 are pretty lenient with new players, so you don't feel as curbstomped as if you would in older FPSes.

whats that?

Means your gun does X damage at point blank range, the further the projectile goes, the more damage it loses, until it fades out completely.

Damage falloff in PS1 was retarded enough to make any kind of mid to long range engagement with anything but a sniper pretty much a lesson in futility.

except that high ttk have all the factors that low ttk has at a different amount of importance

That's what I said.

I want more TACTICOOL and less TWITCHADADADADAD.

[Sifer2]

That's high for a pistol with a 10 round mag, not very high at all for an assault rifle with 60 rounds and a high ROF.


QFT. That's the biggest problem I have with the current headshots. They don't look hard at all to achieve when you can get them with the highly accurate spammy rifles we have. If it were limited to Pistols an Snipers only that can get headshots there would be no issue. That's how Halo did it, and it worked perfectly. But just spamming 60 rounds at head level is not hard for even the worst player in the world to do, and it going to really throw off the TTK balancing. Maybe i'm just an older FPS player living in the past that remembers the days when a headshot was something cool when you got one. Not expected every time you shoot someone.

[PsychoXR-20]

Head shots are reason enough to keep the TTK similar to PS1, just the fact that some shots are going to be doing extra damage will naturally lower the TTK to a level that the devs want (some place between PS1 and Battlefield). Having and already lower TTK plus head shots is going to be frustrating at times when you get the equivalent of 1 shot.

Head shots are fine for snipers. A head shot on a Light Assault or lower should be a 1 shot (perhaps do an inverse damage degradation, so they can only achieve 1 shot kills at a distance).

A Head shot on a Heavy Assault should bring them damn close to dead (so much so that if they have suffered any damage it will result in a 1 shot.

MAX's well have to see how it plays in beta, and possibly should require some sort of AP ammo (I do believe the devs said that there were still ammo types)

Pistols are acceptable for having head shots, since they typically have lower damage, less range, acuracy, RoF etc.

Everything else shouldn't, or at the very least should have a very low modifier, like 10%-20% more damage on a head shot. An MCG should not get a head shot bonus, no should a fully automatic Gauss Rifle, or even a wide spread shotgun. At that point you are rewarding spray and pray playstyle, aiming for only their head area and hoping that a few of your shots land.

[dyslecix]

Head shots are reason enough to keep the TTK similar to PS1, just the fact that some shots are going to be doing extra damage will naturally lower the TTK to a level that the devs want (some place between PS1 and Battlefield). Having and already lower TTK plus head shots is going to be frustrating at times when you get the equivalent of 1 shot.

Head shots are fine for snipers. A head shot on a Light Assault or lower should be a 1 shot (perhaps do an inverse damage degradation, so they can only achieve 1 shot kills at a distance).

A Head shot on a Heavy Assault should bring them damn close to dead (so much so that if they have suffered any damage it will result in a 1 shot.

MAX's well have to see how it plays in beta, and possibly should require some sort of AP ammo (I do believe the devs said that there were still ammo types)

Pistols are acceptable for having head shots, since they typically have lower damage, less range, acuracy, RoF etc.

Everything else shouldn't, or at the very least should have a very low modifier, like 10%-20% more damage on a head shot. An MCG should not get a head shot bonus, no should a fully automatic Gauss Rifle, or even a wide spread shotgun. At that point you are rewarding spray and pray playstyle, aiming for only their head area and hoping that a few of your shots land.

I agree with this guy, very well said.

[Trafalgar]

In the GDC footage, you can see whoever was demonstrating (I didn't hear him say his name in what was on youtube) is accurate enough with the NC assault rifle that he is using to be able to aim at people's heads while firing and take them down rapidly as a result of headshots.

I too liked how Halo in general, and Halo 3, ODST, and Reach in particular balanced headshots and shielding such that only certain more precise weapons did headshots, and how certain weapons were more effective against shields and others against non-shielded enemies. I'm not saying it's perfect for my tastes: All the Halos had OHK weapons (In 3, for instance, the rocket launcher, and at close or point blank range, the shotgun or dual-wielded maulers, as well as certain melee weapons and backstabs (I liked the backstabs, though)), but as a multiplayer small-scale console FPS it's practically a given that there will always be a few overpowered weapons to fight over.

I'm assuming OHK rockets and the like are right out (AV weapons currently appear to do very little to infantry, IIRC), but I don't think we've seen shotguns yet, have we?

If we end up with a OHK weapon, it would not surprise me if we end up with most of the player base choosing it if they can (unless they pick other things to show they're better players than everyone else) - until the devs nerf it, anyways.