Does the shallow TTK shortchange the Depth this game could have?

[VGCS]

This topic was a bit too highbrow for the official forums so I figured it belonged here instead....

http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode...vs.-complexity

Pay particular attention to the point about "Modern Shooters" while considering PS2's ingredients: Situational Awareness, tactical decision making, reaction time, Map & Terrain awareness, your opponent's class, your opponents weapon, where the nearest corners/cover is in multiple directions, ally locations, objective & spawn flow, recoil control, compensating aim for the impacts of flinching, ...and everything else I'm missing here that comes from hybridizing an FPS together with the macro-elements of RTS size armies & strategies .... and then compress it all into 0.80 seconds which is effectively your entire lifespan when being shot at.


Is it "Depth", or "Complexity" that best describes 90% of the ways you find yourself dying in this game? And do First-Order-Optimal strategies tend to work just as well if not better/faster when facing these deep and highly time compressed situations? Is this also part of the reason we have no Tutorial yet, or worse still, mean the game is also guilty of "Irreducible" Complexity for the average player?

[Zulthus]

I personally hate the TTK in the game, it's nothing more than who sees who first. Of course, SOE didn't really have a choice. If what you're shooting doesn't die in 1 second, the ADHD crowd quits the game and whines about kills taking FOREVER.

I liked longer TTKs and the armor bar; it made fights interesting and required skill. Maybe I'm the only one, but strafe fights were fun.

So, yes; I believe the game could have a lot more depth when it comes to TTK.

[Figment]

Long answer: oh yes.

Short answer: yes.

[Methonius]

It's too late for them to change this now, even though I did like the TTK in the old planetside they would have to redo almost every aspect of the game to coincide with a higher TTK for infantry. So I see them never changing this plus all the COD kiddies would scream out with a million voices as if the universe was hit by a supernova.

[Ghoest9]

I like the short time to kill it places more emphasis on tactics and less dancing tricks like circle straff and bunny hopping.

I think one of the silliest aspects of most shooters is that when someone shoots you in the back you have a fair chance of killing them by dancing around.

Its much better that game actually reward you for sneaking up behind someone.

[Rbstr]

Originally Posted by Ghoest9

I like the short time to kill it places more emphasis on tactics and less dancing tricks like circle straff and bunny hopping.

I think one of the silliest aspects of most shooters is that when someone shoots you in the back you have a fair chance of killing them by dancing around.

Its much better that game actually reward you for sneaking up behind someone.

I agree. It rewards pre-conflict thought and planning more. You have to pick battles more carefully. It means you need to think quickly and pay much more attention to getting blindsided.

[Palerion]

The time to kill is actually a bit longer than most modern FPS games I believe, and if they bumped it up, they would probably have to make weapons easier to use, also.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

Originally Posted by Ghoest9

I like the short time to kill it places more emphasis on tactics and less dancing tricks like circle straff and bunny hopping.

I think one of the silliest aspects of most shooters is that when someone shoots you in the back you have a fair chance of killing them by dancing around.

Its much better that game actually reward you for sneaking up behind someone.

I agree completely. If I outflank, outwit and outmanoeuvre the enemy, I deserve teabagging rights. Edit: I've had a think about it over the last 15 minutes and I think that I might actually prefer a 75% chance of winning instead of an "execution" like my post originally reads. A higher TTK would be good but it's a fine balance to maintain between rewarding those who are tactically better and the twitchers who can 360 no-scope me.

If they get to turn and headshot me with their [insert faction specific OP weapon] after I've spent 5 minutes getting into position, I feel that it's unfair.

If the enemy is going to blindly walk forward and take no precautions, I deserve to farm them from my entrenched position.

(This is not the same as spawn camping though. I hate spawncamping from both sides of the equation.)


Back to OP, I think PS2 is unique in that the potential depth *is* there, but it's not utilised because low TTK and zerg tactics (low complexity) are more effective. Low complexity => lowER depth. But if you hunt for it, you can have it.

[Sturmhardt]

I more feel like the game rewards the guy who sees the other first... I can only kill noobs who see me first, if I'm against an experienced player the advantage of the first sight is too big. So yes, higher ttk plz. Would also give the weapons a chance to be different in damage.

.sent via phone.

[maradine]

I felt PS1's TTK was atrocious. That said, I think they could globally add another 50% health to what we have now. The pendulum has swung a hair too far.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

Originally Posted by maradine

I felt PS1's TTK was atrocious. That said, I think they could globally add another 50% health to what we have now. The pendulum has swung a hair too far.

I should copy this post and paste-edit it into mine so it looks like I had the idea first.

[JesNC]

PS1's TTK was indeed atrocious, to the point where some guns were mainly cosmetical in use.


PS2 rewards thinking before you engage. Complexity during a firefight is actually minimal if you considered positioning, angle of attack and equipment before engaging your target. All the complexity in firefights is hitting the other guy while not being hit yourself.

The 'depth' comes from figuring out how to approach that firefight, and while there are numerous ways to do so, the thought process isn't overly complex either.


That said, the ability to make tactical/strategical decisions naturally decreases while being in a firefight.

[psijaka]

Originally Posted by Ghoest9

I like the short time to kill it places more emphasis on tactics and less dancing tricks like circle straff and bunny hopping.

I think one of the silliest aspects of most shooters is that when someone shoots you in the back you have a fair chance of killing them by dancing around.

Its much better that game actually reward you for sneaking up behind someone.

Totally agree with this.

I've played a fair bit of Firefall PvP, where the TTK is pretty high, and it generally boils down to a jet pack twitch spamfest, not my cup of tea at all.

I prefer a game like Planetside 2 where you have to think about cover, flanking, risking a run across open ground, where your enemy might be - situational awareness, in other words. These things matter a lot less with a high TTK when you can just twitch react your way out of trouble. High TTK takes a lot of the thinking out of a game.

[psijaka]

In answer to the OP - No. Quite the opposite, in fact; short TTK adds to the depth of the game as players must be more situationally aware to survive.

[Mietz]

Answer: Yes. Been saying that since beta.

If you pay attention in the game, PS2 isn't -actually- designed for tactics and positioning play, just like COD doesn't induce that.

Why? Because death is meaningless, respawn timers too short and gameplay too fast.
If you want a tactically deep game with this whole positioning and "hurhur outplayed you by shotgun in the back" you need to be closer to a sim than you are to an action game.

PS2 took the sim-y elements of recoil and extremely short TTK (~600ms on most guns) and paired them with the COD run-and-gun element.
Its a hodgepodge of mechanics that doesn't really make the game fun on any level:

RPG Elements:
Certs
Bullet DMG
COF (random)
Bloom

Sim Elements:
Recoil
Flinch
Projectile Drop
Damage Falloff

Action Elements:
Regenerating Health (shields)
Short respawn
Infinite Sprint
Viable Hip-Fire

By the developer words themselves, they wanted to make "BF3 on crack", and they succeeded, except that this playstyle "on crack" isn't really conductive of tactical and positioning play.

Rather, it translates into lucking out to find enemies not looking in your direction.

There is no element of picking the right tool for the job for example, infantry guns are mostly same-y, even with the varied "stats" they have.

If PS2 wants to be tactical, you would need to go the route of Arma or BF2 Reality Mod.
Otherwise tactics can not be executed, because "outplaying" an enemy or a group of enemies means dropping C4 with an LA jet-hopping on houses.