TTK: Higher? Lower? No change?

TTK is an integral part of any FPS, and as such how high or low it is, both in a general sense and in specific match-ups (like bursters versus air targets), greatly affects the gaming experience.

There are a lot of aspects that factor into how long or short TTK is (health, armor bonuses and weaknesses, weapon damage, fire rates, accuracy, etc). However, this thread is not addressing any one of these aspects, just how they feel about TTK (in general and for specific cases), and if they would like to change them or keep them the same.

Before I state my personal thoughts and request yours, I'd like to state the two extremes on the sliding scale of TTK.

Low TTK (i.e. things take less shots to die)
Pros:
- Rewards players with fast reaction times
- Allows a player to engage more targets within a given time frame
-----+ Less time spent per person -> Can engage more people
-----+ Gameplay is "faster-paced" (a buzzword, but sprees are indeed exhilerating and feel rewarding)
- Generally speaking, better for players on the attacking end
Cons:
- Targets have less time to react in an engagement
-----+ Reduced ability to reposition or flee if caught off guard
- May be adversely affected by connection issues
-----+ Dying behind cover, that sort of thing
- Generally speaking, worse for people trying not to die

High TTK (i.e. things take more shots to die)
Pros:
- Easier for players with slower reaction times (whether personal or caused by lower-end setups)
- Targets have more time to react in an engagement
------+ Increased ability to reposition or retreat from a losing battle
- Generally speaking, better for players on the receiving end of an attack
Cons:
- Players must spend more time on single targets
-----+ Engaging multiple targets is harder
-----+ Gameplay is "slower-placed" (not necessarily bad, but a lot of people see this as a con, especially for FPSes)
- May be adversely affected by connection issues
-----+ Being denied kills because you think they're not in cover but the game thinks they are, etc.
- Generally speaking, worse for players trying to kill things


Now personally, I believe TTKs in general are fine. Coming from someone who used to participate in the near-instagibfest that is the Call of Duty series, I appreciate the fact that I have much more time to react to getting shot at. I understand that the original Planetside had even longer TTKs, but I haven't tried it, so I can't say much about how balanced or unbalanced it was.


TL;DR
Do you think things die too quickly or too slowly (in particular instances or in general)? Do you want this to change?
List examples and situations of what you want changed or what you think is balanced.

I think the TTK on infantry right now is fine, if someone attacks me from behind he usually gets me, which is fair since i got flanked. But at the same time the TTK is long enough for me to react to a flank and kill the flanker (if he is not skilled enough of course). There is room for flanking and there is room for skilled aiming rather than only raction time.

For vehicles, increase thier costs and boost thier health. The buff of HP to the MBT was great, but other vehicles need some love too!

No change, thanks! Only annoying thing is ohk shotguns

Increasing the TTK slows down the game, making it less skill based.

Lowering the TTK puts the already bad players at an even worse disadvatge because half the time they won't even know what hit them (not aware of their surroundings).

So do you want to make a game that takes little skill but due to that more people can be good at it, or a game that is high skill but due to that there will be a large difference between a good and bad player making the bad feel even worse.

I personally prefer high skill games.

The lesser of two evils, you have to find a middle ground. All I can say is there are times when my LMG does sub-par damage at medium ranges, and there are times when Carbines drop me in 2 seconds without a headshot.

Think the only issue with the TTK at the moment is how irrelevant long range infantry combat is.

Honestly, I think the TTK is fine, but the net code and client-side detection is not. Those are the root of many of the problems with the "TTK" of this game, and much more.

It's just getting way too fast now... especially with all the Packet-Compressors running lose, and also the rash of "Speedhacked ROF" guys who seem like they 1-shot people with Automatics (& even some semi-auto firing mode weapons).

IF SOE refuses to ban the obvious Packet Manipulators, then they HAVE to raise TTK in general b/c it's just getting ridiculous now. (especially for those of us getting 10fps in fights we used to get 25 in)

Lucky you...
I'm constantly getting dropped by them at long range in 0.75 secs. And a lot of ppl would **** bricks if they found out the BR 80+'s doing it are actually using Exploits to do it... (No I'm not going to reveal those exploits so don't even ask)

The time for this discussion was a year ago. Beta is over. Changing fundamental aspects of the game at this juncture is just going to anger people.

I'm getting rather bored of being one hitted in a 1 on 1 fight.


I also ragequitted about 10 minutes ago after being killed by a guy before he'd even open fired on me. I'm guessing that's more lag though, but it was quite a small battle. :/

The TTK damage models are not as simple as you are making it out to be (which is great, because damage models in games are really fascinating).

Alright, so first off, decreasing TTK doesn't always mean you are speeding up the game, and increasing TTK doesn't always mean you are slowing down the game.

For example: say you take Planetside 2, and you decrease the general TTK from ~700ms down to ~500 ms. What happens? You would speed up the game to Bad Company 2 levels. What if you decrease the TTK from ~500 ms down to ~200 ms? You increase the game speed to Battlefield 3 levels, however some aspects of the game would slow down (like how you play around choke points).

Say you decrease the TTK even further, from 200ms down to around 130ms? Well, you speed up the game to Call of Duty levels, OR you could end up slowing down the game, depending on how accurate the guns are, how fast players can move, the map layouts, etc.

Consider this: In Battlefield 3, the TTK is between 130 to 300ms. Battlefield 3 hardcore mode has a TTK of between 70 and 140 ms. Both in Call of Duty and Battlefield, hardcore modes are typically slower than normal modes. In other words, there comes a point where you start to slow down the game from decreasing the TTK.

Basically my point is that you can't simply choose a TTK range because it seems nice. You have to consider what synergy a particular TTK range has with the movement, accuracy, and map layouts of the game.

Furthermore, just like how a low TTK allows good players to go from target to target to target, and is more twitchy, a higher TTK like in Planetside 2 allows really good players to get out of bad situations.

For example, I can't look at 5 enemies in this game and kill all of them at once like I can in Battlefield 3. However if I kill a person and get flanked, I can absolutely start dodging bullets, flip around, and headshot the person who flanked me--provided there is a large skill gap of course. This isn't possible in other games, and it definitely adds to the skill ceiling of Planetside 2.

Personally, I like where the TTK is in Planetside 2--it's actually in a bit of a sweet spot. That said, be careful about forming your opinion about how it might be changed. The implications are often hard to predict.

For a massive multiplayer game the TTK should be longer. But right now it is not too off the mark.

Low TTK on a massive online game may not work at well, due to network lag, and much lower FPS in large battles. Also, with large maps, it takes longer time to reach a hotspot and do only very short fights (that's not fun)...

Smaller fights on COD or BF can afford a low TTK due to lower people count, thus less overall lag on an average computer.

For instagib games, FPS or network lag probably does not matter as much. If you get hit, there is really nothing to respond other than accept death.

Currently i think the low TTK on PS2 is rewarding fast computer a bit too much. Random network lag is also annoying, sometimes you hear like 6 shots hitting you all at almost same time.

Now back to the skills side, lower TTK adds more randomness to the fights and reward people with quick reflex (i.e. teenagers / young people). Which can be good or bad, it is a fine balance. I would say for SOE2 a broader audience base might be a more profitable business proposition, and for good players, you got more people to shoot at...

Just a quick note:

For males, reaction time peaks at around age 16, and then stays relatively constant until age 35ish--assuming you constantly keep in practice.

This isn't quite the case for females however.

disclaimer: this is from an academic paper I read a long time ago. If someone has more reliable information, definitely correct me!

the problem I have discussing TTK with people is they always want to use the theoretical TTKs they calculated from DPS on a spreadsheet... that gives a false picture as those rarely ever happen in game... looking at player stats you can see most people barely have 30 percent accuracy on most weapons meaning the TTK they are actually seeing in game could be around 3 times the theoretical "perfect every round hits" one people keep calculating and throwing around...

Mostly agree. I think TTK, as it stands, is fine. I would like to see it a little higher, if only to allow bullet speed to be raised and to give the designers more room for unique weaponry. In fact, my main argument for a higher TTK is to allow for more varied weaponry.

That being said, if the devs can create a bunch of unique weaponry with the current ttk, good on them. The current system works, for infantry at least.

I would prefer a shorter TTK overall. Lowering the TTK rewards flanking and surprise attacks a lot more, and makes ranged combat a lot more viable. To accommodate this, they would also need to add a lot more cover so that you can more safely move around. If you can get killed in 3-4 hits at range, you can no longer charge 70m across the flat, barren fields to approach a base.

Another benefit of a short TTK is that weapons feel more powerful, while a longer TTK would make it feel like we are using nerf guns. Well, it already feels like we are using nerf guns.

A longer TTK would just make ranged combat a wast of time and the only way to kill people would be to run right up to them and put your gun against them. Players are already bullet spongy enough.

I honestly think they should double infantry health, while keeping infantry damage / heal rates constant. One-on-one fights are painfully brief, especially between non-heavies. I don't feel like I can really take advantage of superior dodging / aim as much as I can in other FPS games, such as Quake. Pump actions would be more of a player preference instead of a flat-out, dominating upgrade vs semi-autos when they are no longer able to one-shot people at relevant ranges.

Vehicle damage vs infantry could be balanced by using damage proportional to the current amounts, (perhaps a bit lower)

Sniper weapons would need a faster projectile speed, more damage, and a larger ammo reserve.

This is also extremely important, moreso than my suggestion, but I don't know how, when, or if they'll consider it.

No change
Such a large scale game can not possibly have a higher TTK
Lower ttk will make PS2 very slow and painfull

TTK is way to long on combat >100m. A bullet going out to 100m should not lose damage.. drop yes, damage fall off, no.
TTK is just fine for CQC if you are using a full autoshotgun, .25secs.

Having to shoot someone 8 times to down them with a carbine is a sick joke.... They should be dead in half that many rounds.

3 to center mass, 1-2 to the head should kill anyone....

Personally, I like it right where it is. The game is extremely fun while forcing me to watch my butt and run with my squad.