Melee is to Brawl as Short TTK is to Long TTK

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Jaedrik, May 29, 2014.

  1. Jaedrik

    Think about it. ;)

    Being honest, I'm incredibly surprised that so few answered 'Too Long' on Higby's Strawpoll: http://strawpoll.me/1775970

    What all do people have against dropping people 'fast'? We've already laid the common arguments 'less tactical' and 'less skill' to rest, in fact, we've shown exactly the opposite; it creates dynamic which favors consistently good aim and amplifies the risk-reward of tactical maneuvers.

    Going with the Smash Bros. Analogy, fast-paced is considered more competitive, by community standards, and it just straight FEELS better to many.
    I mean, you guys remember MW2 and their 2-3 BTK? It felt glorious!
    Why do so many object to it is what I want to know. Thoughts, please.
    • Up x 2
  2. DurandaI

    Well, with clientside hit-detection and a .3 or so second lagtime between your shots registering on your screen and them taking damage on their screens. A 2-3 BTK as you call it would equate to everyone getting instantly killed by every weapon in the game without them being able to have any reaction time....that does not = a competitive game.
    • Up x 15
  3. Tommyp2006

    Because there are already too many games out there with faster TTKs, which work fine for those smaller games, but in a game with as many players as this one, a TTK any shorter would make the game feel much more chaotic, much less of a chance of fighting back. A shorter TTK also lessens the difference between individual weapons.
    • Up x 4
  4. Epic High Five

    Where would the noble kerfluffle, scrum, dustup, and fracas rate on this list?

    I like a long TTK. MAXes are very popular due in large part to the 2x+ TTK of any other classes that they enjoy, despite having relatively underwhelming weaponry and horrible mobility.
    • Up x 3
  5. MrNature72

    Because not every game has to have 2-3BTK. Look at Team Fortress 2. Hailed as the granddaddy of class-based games, some characters can eat 10-20 bullets, if not more. The TTK is amazingly long, but it is still amazingly balanced.

    And what's with this 2-3 TTK = realistic nonsense? Realism would be a bullet to the head kills with any weapon, your chest armor would be able to absorb 5-6 bullets alone, and legs and arms take higher damage, cause problems, but don't outright kill you immediately, instead allowing you to bleed out.

    You do not need to die super fast to have a "fun" game. What you need is for it to feel fun. I would be fine with dumping 1-2 more bullets into someone to kill them. Or maybe 2-3 more rockets for a tank. With over a hundred soldiers able to participate in a fight, increasing the TTK by single digits isn't going to cause much of an issue. If anything, I'd say leave it as is, or increase it very, very slightly. But don't decrease it. That will just encourage camping and stupid twitch-reliant gameplay.

    And not everything has to be super boosted. Why not add 200 health to every soldier, but take off 25% of the Heavies shield, and only add 100 health to the MAX?
    • Up x 1
  6. Jaedrik

    Hah, MW2 didn't have the best servers, in fact I would say that the super-fast BTK COVERED for the netcode. Think about it, if you get hit a few times and can visibly react to it and go "WTF THAT GUY SHOT ME AROUND THE CORNER" whereas in MW2 it didn't matter because one small peek, and you were like 'nah that makes sense' because the TTK is so fast.
    Speed, also, does not necessitate no reaction time. Though I admit the analogy is flawed from a fighting game, where speed is necessarily more competitive, and 'reaction' time is not an issue, because there are ALWAYS proper reactions...
    No, I still think that argument doesn't work, if there's no reaction time in an FPS, there's no reaction time in a fighting game.
    By the FGC standards, I know you're wrong. There's plenty one can do to 'react'.

    I would beg to differ, though most games are faster, it is only marginally so by around one or two BTK, rare is the shooter that has 2-4 BTK average.
    I don't understand why a chaotic, fast-paced feeling is bad, it certainly doesn't mean 'no time to fight back', and even if it does, does that matter? It rewards better positioning all the more, and punishes bad behavior more often. You're playing into exactly what I said with my analogy. Melee punishes bad options WAY harder than Brawl, and Brawl is commonly understood as more 'casual', therefore I conclude that a faster TTK will be more hardcore, and better.

    I will give you that last one, though, it does make weapon balance... different, BUT again I point to MW2, where nearly every weapon was viable in some way or another (besides the F2000 :/), and there were tons of niches, and no single dominant gun, whereas later in the series we see the dominant weapons very clearly (FAMAS BO1, ACR 6.8 MW3, so on).
    I think that might be due to the perk system, how Stopping Power could actually be viably let go of in some cases (it didn't benefit the WA-2000, for example, or the glock.)

    I said nothing about realism.
    I admire TF2, it's probably one of my favorite shooters.
    I am telling you that it FEELS better with a shorter TTK.
    Where you say 'campy', I look at as enhancing and defining the role of positioning, zoning, as well as flanking, knowledge of the battlefield, awareness, squad loadouts. Besides, the way the netcode is set up, whoever comes around the corner FIRST is the one that's going to win! Think about it, you come around the corner, and nobody on the other screen sees you until about 500ms later, far enough time to send many hits confirmed to the server.
    That's why there was so little camping in BO2, but also so many complaints about "Lag Comp".
    I could look at it multiple angles, and in every one there's a counterargument to be made.

    I guess it's no surprise that I dislike MAX units :p
    Nintendo hasn't made Smash Kerfuffle yet, but it has community votes for best name ;)
  7. Jaedrik

  8. Epic High Five


    Haha, well I can't say I agree with your viewpoints but I admire your consistency and ability to explain it.

    Smash Kerfluffle 2014:

    Bowser: *bites thumb at Mario*
    Luigi: "Turn thee, Bowser, and look upon thy death"
    Mario: "HAVE AT THEE, KNAVE!"
    • Up x 4
  9. Garrum

    I dislike longer TTK, or BTK, because it makes anything beyond short range almost pointless. It just takes too much time and too many shots to make mid-long range fighting anything other than frustrating.
    • Up x 2
  10. Altimor

    The less bullets to kill the less headshots matter. PS2 doesn't need to be a center mass spray ****fest.
  11. Drippyskippy


    Its a bad analogy in regards to a FPS. Yes, melee takes more skill and is more fast paced than brawl, but its a fighting game, not a FPS.

    When it comes to FPS the lower the TTK the less skill it takes (in a broad sense, many other factors though). If you get the drop on me and can drop me in 2-3 bullets (non headshot), then I don't have a chance to shoot back. It makes the game all about positioning and not about aiming, thereby reducing the skill cap. An FPS should reward players for both position and aiming IMO. With longer TTK's you have to work harder for your kills and it forces players to be great at aiming and leads to better 1 v 1 infantry combat (not saying this game is designed for it, just making a point). Also, I think lower TTK makes for a more campy less tactically aggressive game. Honestly, I think the TTK in PS2 is ok, could possible be increased slightly. However, I think if you want to make the game more skill based player movement should slightly be increased. Faster movement = more hand/eye coordination skill in order to land shots on target thereby increasing the skill cap.

    In a game with a slow tick rate, sloppy hit detection (clientside/doesn't register hits on occasion) faster player moment probably wouldn't be good for the game until they can fix these issues though.

    Edit: I played MW2 when I was a console peasant. It was an ok game, but it was no where near a competitive shooting game should be. It was only at tournaments because tournament organizers knew they could make money by having the game due to its popularity.
  12. Jaedrik

    Naw! That's not true!
    I defeated this criticism in response to ViXeN's thread about headshots passing through nanoweave lowering the skill the game required.
    Those who set up their schema to have superior positioning and superior aiming mechanics will be duly rewarded by less BTK. In a game where aiming is so incredibly inconsistent anyways, headshots have marginal effect on realistic TTK, no matter how much headshots are rewarded, if they can't be gotten consistently, they have no consideration in competitive play anyways. I very much feel like the CoF mechanics and recoil are far too much and too random to have headshots matter in the slightest anyways. What I propound is the view that the game, in its current state, is center-of-mass central for all automatic weapons.
    • Up x 1
  13. DurandaI


    No, not with the lag compensation and client-side hit detection that Planetside uses, which is likely different than what MW2 used for their servers. Watch this, it is an interesting one. With a 2-3 BTK you would be dead before you had the time to react. Period.
    • Up x 2
  14. z1967

    I am more disappointed in the 178 who said "who cares about infantry peasants." Though a joke, it does kinda point at the mentality of some vehicle users. Making this game more combined farms than combined arms.
    • Up x 4
  15. Altimor

    I have no idea what the hell you're talking about. But I always aim for the head if I'm close enough to reliably hit it and it gives me a huge advantage.
  16. Axehilt


    I don't think we've laid those things to rest, if you think fast vs. slow involves the same depth of skill.

    Fast TTKs reward a narrow range of skill. Mostly just aiming. Perhaps worst of all, fast TTKs mean that most fights are actually won due to the abnormally large delay to lag compensation in PS2 compared with other games (see Wrel video for details). The faster TTKs are, the more combat is won by being the guy who peaks the most. Which is just not a particularly deep core combat mechanic.

    Slow TTKs reward a broader range of skill types. Evasion skill becomes significant factor in addition to all the skills that mattered in a Fast TTK system; it's just that no longer will those skills win the first completely on their own -- now you have to keep playing skillfully to finish off the opponent who you've scored several advantages on.

    That should be enough on its own, but slow TTKs are also better-suited to a game with long reinforce times. In COD where you can spawn less than 10 seconds away from someone, near-instant TTKs are a little better. In PS2 where you often spawn over 30 secs from someone, fast TTKs are less suited. The underlying reason is you want a relatively high amount of time in a shooter to be spent shooting (ie spent in combat), as a portion of your overall playtime.
    • Up x 4
  17. Jaedrik

    I agree, the analogy isn't that good, but it gets my sentiment across nicely.
    BUT I feel it's PERFECT for the next portion.
    The fact of not being able to fight back does not detract from the skill something takes at ALL.
    In Melee, you know that combos are far more prevalent than Brawl, there is NO way to escape these save through sound DI. DI is something entirely predictive, the time from getting hit to being sent flying away in hitstun, wherein directional influence is possible, is comparable to the time when someone rounds a corner in an FPS, it is 'twitch', and relies ENTIRELY on the schemas set up beforehand to deal with the situation appropriately.
    DI being an impulse reaction that must be trained to acquire, and often requires no small measure of guesswork and mindgames, is the perfect analogy for positioning and twitch aiming in an FPS game. That's what is enhanced with a faster/shorter TTK.

    Protracting the engagement would ease the skill curve by a large margin, and lower the skill ceiling, and enhance the influence of luck, for after a certain point, both players will get on target and be more or less consistently hitting, then the horrible aiming mechanics in this game will hold unparalleled influence where the shots will land, what with the horrible random CoF.
    And, as I said before (you should totally look up the huge posts in ViXeN's thread against her silly idea that headshots being more important lowers the skill cap in response to the then-recent nanoweave nerf) headshots wouldn't matter that much more with a longer TTK.

    I do agree with faster movement, though, I do feel camping would become a 'problem', but with the problems in netcode as you point out the game becomes 'whoever comes around the corner last wins the gunfight', which is hardly in favor of camping. If they improved those things, I feel it would be necessary to increase something to counteract camping potential.
  18. Ribero

    I felt that the TTK in this game was Baby Bear's porridge- Just right.
    • Up x 4
  19. DrPapaPenguin

    I think TTK/BTK is perfect the way it is right now.
  20. Jaedrik

    No! That would be the VERY video I'd recommend, and I have watched it. Actually, I talked with Drift0r a lot when he was making that video (the one that Wrel references), us at the Den Kirson Proboards had a long discussion about the popular conception of 'lag comp', if those say anything about my credibility.
    Probaddie, Marvel4, Mousey, I, and others, have said, the netcode of CoD has been relatively unchanged, the only thing inserted later on is a much larger buffer. The buffer was something crazy like 500ms.
    What I'm saying is that MW2 was the best of all worlds, for one had time to react if faced on directly (and I often did, we often did), but none if they were caught in an inferior position. I like that dynamic, and think that's important. I'm asking you to trust me on this. <3