TTK?

[Ivam Akorahil]

i so wish ps2 would be more of a future milsim like arma 2 but in the futur

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Originally Posted by greenberetdelta

I probably should i said that i got the answer, so no need to keep this thread alive thanks though guys

Too late, they're already arguing )))

[Timithos]

I hope the TTK is the same as PS1, because hit box/head shots make the TTK shorter anyway. Actually, that might mean they had to raise the TTK in all other aspects.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by TAA

• Two guys guarding a room.
• One enemy attempts to walk in through the door.
• In a low TTK game: the enemy gets killed by either defendant. You say this means there is no skill involved.
• In a high TTK game: the enemy gets shot, doesnt die, and has time to retreat back out of the room. The only ways for a defendant to kill that enemy are: (a) get a headshot, or (b) focus fire him with his buddy.
• Given these two possibilities you suggest that it is obvious that games are better with a high TTK. It promotes both skill and teamwork.

You're overgeneralizing the results for a low TTK. This is very common when thinking about low TTK. You got the high TTK basically spot on. So the more general way to view it is:

• Two guys guarding a room.
• One enemy attempts to walk in through the door.
• In a low TTK game:
  • The enemy is killed by either of the defendants
  • The enemy kills one of the defendants then is killed (The fallen defendant is revived possibly).
  • The enemy kills both defendants
• In a high TTK game:
  • The enemy gets shot by one or both players, doesnt die, and has time to retreat back out of the room
    • Many options open to the attacker, but the defendants have suppressed the attacker. He could try to throw a grenade or set down a turret as he runs in. The defendants if they want could throw a grenade out the door at him as he retreats.
  • The defendants focus fire and kill the player with or without headshots
  • One defendant gets a few headshots killing the attacker before he has time to retreat
  • The enemy gets multiple headshots and one defendant and is killed. (The fallen defendant is revived possibly).

Originally Posted by TAA

Given these two possibilities you suggest that it is obvious that games are better with a high TTK. It promotes both skill and teamwork.

As you can see a high TTK allows more options for teamwork while still allowing individual skill when playing. Sustained fire is rewarded for headshots and by teammates meaning both attackers and defenders feel they made a kill or lost fairly. There's no sense of "oh that was luck with that 1 headshot or those 3 body shots as he came through the door".

By the way skill in this case is not simply aiming. I hate when people equate skill to simply putting your cursor on the enemy's head. That's a very small part of it. Moving into place and using utility items is a much bigger part of it. Knowing which weapon to use for instance is important. (Like not charging a Jackhammer user hiding behind a wall and using grenades to fish him out).

Originally Posted by TAA

Focus firing is by far the most basic method of teamwork.

100% Agree. That's actually the second sentence on my site. A high TTK rewards focused fire. If two players are fighting at range and target a single player they can both put bullets into the enemy while still allowing him the choice of finding cover. (Just like in Planetside 1, you had multiple people shooting at a single target). A low TTK removes these teamwork decisions for focused fire by allow individual aiming to be the only variable outside of weapon choice.

Originally Posted by TAA

Take the video below: If low TTK removes the need for teamwork, then why are these guys here even bothering? Shouldnt they just be charging at the enemy?

The low TTK is not the reason for teamwork. That game has very long ranged combat. It has always promoted gameplay akin to America's Army where players are forced to move slowly and be on the lookout for campers. This creates some of the slowest gameplay ever as indicated in that video. He didn't do "anything" for essentially 12 minutes.

Also notice how many choices he could make in that game. He could change movement by crouching or prone and zoom or shoot. That's it. The game doesn't allow complex gameplay thus a allowing a high TTK would not benefit it in the slightest except to allow players to retreat. In PS2 (and Planetside 1) players have complex loadouts with utilities and abilities that they can use for situations. Without the time to use them in combat they are useless.

A low TTK always values individual players that are actually making kills. It has no effect on teamwork since players that don't see the enemy are not inputting anything into the attack since it happens so rapidly. This is also seen on the enemy's side who often does not see the attacker before they died and has no possible reaction once the two players view each other. Their only option is to shoot or die. They can't even get help from a teammate if they are walking in first.

A high TTK allows a team on either side to make tactical choices and assist each other without the worry that they will be trivially killed before making any meaningful choice once combat begins. Big difference between "I just got shot by a guy up on the wall" versus "I just got killed when I walked around the corner. I don't know where he is."

Originally Posted by TAA

I think that both high and low TTK are matters of preference

I wish it was that easy. The TTK totally changes the gameplay and how players play a game and how teams function with one another. As I said on my site it's the difference between a medic reviving a player over and over versus a medic healing a player as two groups attack one another. Especially for a team moving between cover. Taking a bullet or two should be expected in the game. It should always require sustained fire to earn a kill. If a player is running and can't find cover then someone can just single shot from a range and pick off the players.

This is mostly coming from Planetside 1. For those unfamiliar you could easily sit on a wall and tap people with a bullet or two while they run between cover. It wasn't game over, nor when you were putting a bullet or two into the players did it feel like you would earn that kill if they had died. When you do line up and actually kill someone you knew you had that kill. It wasn't because of some random shots.

[TAA]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

[*]In a low TTK game:

• The enemy is killed by either of the defendants
• The enemy kills one of the defendants then is killed (The fallen defendant is revived possibly).
• The enemy kills both defendants

You see, I dont think that there are less options at all. Its just that in your example of the room, that the options occur before entering the room. For example, the attacker could:

• Throw a grenade before entering the room. Knowing that it is a low TTK game the grenade could be used to either clear the entire room, or to clear one sector of the room. In a high TTK game chances are you would just damage but not kill the defenders.
• Use smoke or flashbangs to tilt the odds in favor of the attacker.
• Fire through the walls (if the game engine allows it). In a high TTK game doing this is a waste of bullets, but in a low TTK game doing this can be effective. If the TTK is very low then a room can almost be cleared by doing this.
• Choose a high damage close combat weapon (eg. a shotgun) and very carefully probe defences around the room. Eg. quickly look into a window for a fraction of a second then duck back.

Ideally the attacker should wait for backup and clear the room with a team mate (teamwork). What he cant do is just run into the doorway like a maniac, and rely on the high TTK to ensure he doesnt die from the careless approach.



It doesnt matter though, because I reject your position that the number of options available to a player is what determines ability for teamwork and skill. Why? Because if you consider the extremes of both low and high TTK in your example then you will see that all teamwork in a very high TTK game boils down to focus fire.

• Example 1: Assume there is only weapon in the game and that the weapons kill with one shot. No drop off in damage over range, no variation in recoil/sustained fire ability, no variation in scopes or bullet drop. Just simple guns that kill in one bullet. Many of the options I listed above in your example are still valid. Waiting for backup and working as a team is still the best strategy.
• Example 2: Same weapons as example 1 above, but TTK is so high that it takes 5 minutes of sustained fire to kill another player. Assume no headshots are possible and that damage is the same everywhere you hit (my understanding is that this is how it works in PS1). The only teamwork required is for the two defenders to focus fire the attacker. They dont even have to stay in the room. They just have to stick together and walk around the map until they find the one guy. The attacker has two options: die sooner or die later. There is nothing the attacker can do, because if the two guys stick together he will never be able to defeat them.
• Example 3: Exactly the same as example 2 above (5 minutes of sustained fire to kill), but now headshots kill immediately. Who would win? The player with the highest ability to hit headshots. Yes the two players sticking together have a better chance because there are two of them, but at the end of the day the ability to hit that headshot is the number 1 factor that is going to decide the outcome of this match.

I maintain that there is no magical cut off point at which the game loses all ability to sustain teamwork. I think that there is a gradient (non-linear) from one extreme to the other, and that there is a happy medium between the two.

[The noob]

When it comes to TTK and teamwork, I believe that there's much less correlation between TTK and teamwork, and more about the mechanics at large in the game encouraging (or forcing) teamwork, and rewarding it. For example, regardless of TTK, a heavy assault with a medic healing him is more likely to survive an encounter against several enemies, If he works with and protects the medic, he's far more likely to kill several enemies in the room, or clear it out. If he protects the medic, he'll be rewarded with more survivability. If he fails to protect the medic, he'll very likely fail in his assault as he can no longer sustain himself in a fire fight.

It's all about the game mechanics at large encouraging and rewarding team work. Low TTK games can have staggering amounts of team work if their mechanics force, encourage, and/or reward teamplay, vice versa rings true as well. A game with high TTK may have little teamwork if the game simply doesn't encourage it.

[Accuser]

Two players in a room aiming at the same target is not teamwork. It's just two people on the same team in close proximity. In the "two players guarding a door" example, they don't even have to know that their team mate exists to be effective, they just shoot at what comes in the door.

Lets say their room has a front door and a back door. With long TTK, both players could (obliviously) aim at the front door without coordinating. One enemy comes in the back door and opens fire on person A. They both turn around and return fire, person A dies but person B finishes the enemy and rezes A. In this situation long TTK doesn't reward teamwork, only superior numbers. With a short TTK, that lack of coordination would be punished with both of them dying to the single enemy in the backdoor.

Now if they coordinated fields of fire, with A covering front door and B covering back door, the enemy might kill B on his way in, but A should be able to swing around and finish the enemy off if he's paying attention. Hence, short TTK rewards teamwork... instead of rewarding superior numbers as long TTK does.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by TAA

Ideally the attacker should wait for backup and clear the room with a team mate (teamwork).

In a low TTK system if one person is sitting crouched and shooting people as they run in then it would be in that defender's favor even against two targets. A high TTK system doesn't favor campers since it requires a sustained fire to make a kill so the second person would aim and shoot the defender. Possibly the first attacker might retreat or turn on his HA shield if he had it or throw grenade at the camper. It favors players that move around and make multiple choices in combat. For a person defending even they would want to move around and use utilities like turrets since crouching makes sustained shots easier. The skill required is much higher in that respect as players make more choices. (Which is expected with a higher TTK). For instance, a medic laying down healing AOE when pushing into a room so players can move on quickly. In a low TTK system health is not as important and thus medics are used primarily for revival.

Originally Posted by TAA

What he cant do is just run into the doorway like a maniac, and rely on the high TTK to ensure he doesnt die from the careless approach.

With a low TTK you suggested players should waste grenades and throw them into rooms before they enter. I find that kind of gameplay to be pointless. If I see someone on the minimap sure, but I'm not going to play a game where throwing grenades into doors like "maniacs" for easy kills is preferred. You covered it well for a good system. Throwing a grenade in would damage the enemies inside making them easier to finish off.

Originally Posted by TAA

It doesnt matter though, because I reject your position that the number of options available to a player is what determines ability for teamwork and skill. Why? Because if you consider the extremes of both low and high TTK in your example then you will see that all teamwork in a very high TTK game boils down to focus fire.

... and? All very low TTK games boil down to... spray and pray with absolutely no teamwork since players can just camp and run around by themselves and kill everyone. So high TTK boils down to teamwork where players are using abilities and surviving and low TTK boils down to solo gameplay.

Originally Posted by TAA

Assume there is only weapon in the game and that the weapons kill with one shot. No drop off in damage over range, no variation in recoil/sustained fire ability, no variation in scopes or bullet drop. Just simple guns that kill in one bullet. Many of the options I listed above in your example are still valid. Waiting for backup and working as a team is still the best strategy.

Waiting for backup is pointless. You're assuming it only takes one bullet to kill. You can spray kill people as they run through a door. None of the options you listed are valid and you know it.

Originally Posted by TAA

Same weapons as example 1 above, but TTK is so high that it takes 5 minutes of sustained fire to kill another player. Assume no headshots are possible and that damage is the same everywhere you hit (my understanding is that this is how it works in PS1). The only teamwork required is for the two defenders to focus fire the attacker.

A high TTK increases teamwork? You don't say. You'll notice if you go anywhere near the low end it removes the need for teamwork entirely. In PS1 it was high enough so you could kill players relatively quickly at close range and with damage degradation it was harder at far ranges. The game was not specifically designed for 1v1 combat since they assumed players would be fighting in squads against other squads. They were right; however, 1v1 combat worked with the system since scaling the TTK still allowed players to fight and win with skill other than simply aiming. Controlling CoF and moving into tactical positions to not take damage was the skill. It just gave them slightly longer to make choices. Which was why some people had surge so they could tactically retreat. All base battles involve tons of players in an area. You don't have 1v1 or 1v2 or 2v2 all that much. It's more like "oh I'm fighting one person, now I'm also fighting two so I'll jump behind this rock and dodge that guy's sniper shot from 500 meters away". A high TTK takes into account this complexity. (Remember during E3 you saw a battle with 120ish people? Planetside 1 was 133v133 at one base a lot of the times during the peak. The amount of times you'd get shot while walking around or running to cover with your squad was insane. Getting to the backdoor you'd take a little bit of damage and heal when you got inside (teamwork in the early days). In a low TTK system that would be moot because you'd never make it there.

Originally Posted by TAA

I maintain that there is no magical cut off point at which the game loses all ability to sustain teamwork. I think that there is a gradient (non-linear) from one extreme to the other, and that there is a happy medium between the two.

Agreed. I'm arguing that it's going to be higher than lower for the cutoff point. Even if it isn't your intent, it sounds like you really like solo play and are trying to argue for a system that would allow it while playing it off as "teamwork" oriented knowing full well that's not even possible in a game this large. And by not possible I mean not enjoyable for both attackers and defenders.

Watch the E3 videos and see how many bullets they take in situations. Play the game out with your envisioned TTK. Do you think the players would enjoy dying earlier in those situations?

Take this case at 19m 30s:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=017I9ghLsYA#t=19m30s
Did the TTK change the outcome? Or did Higby have more time to think? Notice how he threw a grenade at the wrong place. A skilled player might do something differently. However, with a low TTK he'd be dead at 19m 32s and nothing else would happen. Totally changes the gameplay. Especially if you know he bought that grenade with resources and would have waste them at that point never having a chance to use it.

[TAA]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Watch the E3 videos and see how many bullets they take in situations. Play the game out with your envisioned TTK. Do you think the players would enjoy dying earlier in those situations?

I never argued that the TTK should be exceptionally low. From what I have seen of the upclose base combat it seems to me like the TTK was fairly decent. I will have to try it out for myself. I am however worried about the effect on the damage drop off. Even though the TTK is IMO fine up close, it might not be to my liking in medium/long ranges.

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Take this case at 19m 30s:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=017I9ghLsYA#t=19m30s
Did the TTK change the outcome? Or did Higby have more time to think? Notice how he threw a grenade at the wrong place. A skilled player might do something differently. However, with a low TTK he'd be dead at 19m 32s and nothing else would happen. Totally changes the gameplay.

What I saw was a player who was in a battlefield by himself, who was not situationally aware enough to realize an enemy could get the drop on him, who even when getting shot didnt turn immediately towards his enemy but rather turned the opposite way and got stuck on a rock all while under fire, and then finally after realizing what was going on managed to empty several bursts into his enemy before choosing an inappropriate weapon (grenade) as a countermeasure. Do you think that if he had hit one of those bursts in the head of his enemy that the enemy should have deserved to die?

A lower TTK would indeed totally change the gameplay. It would have forced him to you know, look around and stuff, or maybe perhaps that alien concept of clearing the surroundings with his buddies before assuming it was safe.


Again, having an exceptionally low TTK is not my envisioned way to play. I have done nothing but argued for balance. The only bias towards a particular style here is coming from you. From what I have seen the game seems fine, but I dont know how the game will play because I havent played it myself.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by TAA

Do you think that if he had hit one of those bursts in the head of his enemy that the enemy should have deserved to die?

I'm for high TTK. I advocated in a few headshot threads for very low damage modifiers for headshots especially at range. (I feel ranged headshots are spray and pray and shouldn't be rewarded much). Personal preference. Some people really enjoy them.

Originally Posted by TAA

From what I have seen the game seems fine, but I dont know how the game will play because I havent played it myself.

Yeah I'm mostly fine with the TTK at the moment, but it could be higher from what I've seen without even playing it. Thought maybe you were arguing to have it lower. I'd like to test it with a higher TTK during beta honestly. (The balance here though is subjective. I think it will be balanced at a higher TTK). Might just be a PS1 mentality having seen the difference it makes for teamwork compared to every other FPS out there.

[Salad Snake]

Personally I prefer high TTK games. For the most part that's because low TTK has taken the FPS spotlight for the past couple years, with Halo and perhaps Battlefield being the two major exceptions. Ever since the advent of CS, your lowest common denomonator-type players tend to have an attitude of low TTK=skill so of course the genre has drifted in that direction. So while I like high TTK, compared to most old-school arena shooters it's more mid-TTK. So far this game looks high TTK enough for me to enjoy tactically, and it doesn't seem like camping has too much of an advantage over rushers such as myself.

[Littleman]

A .5 to .8 second TTK is fine by me. Mind you, that's successful connected shots. Factor in inaccuracy or burst fire - the former wasting bullets and the latter consuming time to NOT waste bullets - and TTK coincidentally rises, without the developers actually making the weapon any weaker on a per-shot basis.

For the record, the MA of PS1 required over a second of sustained fire to kill a rexo, and that's with every shot connecting within 75m (50m for the Pulsar) and no other factors, like extra health, medkits, personal shield, or second wind. TTK's became pretty outrageous as they easily rose into the 2 second plus range with all of those survival tools I mentioned, some of which a newb just doesn't have access to for a while.

[Raxxus]

After Playing games like Project Reality mod for BF2 and ARMA series I am a big fan of low TTK games.

Low TTK games tend to make players use tactics and squadwork to achieve goals,while lone wolfing tends to get you killed very quickly.

I understand a lot of people prefer higher TTK however most games with a higher TTK tend to be shoebox shooters with confined deathmatch style maps and rapid player movement which usually turns into pointblank firefights where luck is generally more important then actual player skill.

Dont get me wrong I enjoy playing those sorts of games aswell Blacklight Retribution has me hooked atm, but for an Epic sandbox game such as PS2 I think a lower TTK would be better.

[Kezz]

In some ways a bald "TTK" is a distraction. It's going to vary so very much on any given 1v1 matchup and that variation is going to balloon when you're talking about xvn matchups: will 2 HA have to geek the Medic before they can hope focus down the Medic's HA mate?

Things that affect TTK that need considering are things like "random" damage from opportunist snapshots. Should getting from spawnpoint to coal face require that you wait for a couple of squadmates to spawn so you can fire and maneuver your way back to the rest of the squad, or should you be able to stand a bit of a shredding crossing a corridor junction and get some healin' lurve the other side? There are going to be headshots, so crossing a whole courtyard under a sniper's sights is going to have its risks, as it should.

With the amount of lead flying round, I think most classes should be able to stand a reasonable bit of arbitrary damage and get patched up, which will mean a TTK that's on the higher end.

[Firearms]

Originally Posted by Raxxus

I understand a lot of people prefer higher TTK however most games with a higher TTK tend to be shoebox shooters with confined deathmatch style maps and rapid player movement which usually turns into pointblank firefights where luck is generally more important then actual player skill.

Like you I came from Desert Combat so used to think in the same way - TTK in BF2 vanilla was stupidly long for instance.
The difference here (IMO) is that it is closer to the arena/shoebox than you might imagine. The map may be big, but you still have potentially 1300 players shooting at you at any one time as opposed to 32 - I know the math doesn't stack up quite like that but you could start at a TTK 40x longer than P.R to have the same impact....

You can look round 32 corners to kill a team and take a base in PR etc....1300 corners where 2 bullets might kill you would soon piss you off....

IMO