Jump to content
Anxter

Is the new TTK here to stay ?

Recommended Posts

A pretty simple question, would love to know if the developers plan reverting it if the community doesn't react well to the change.

Cheers

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont understand how it was even allowed.

I'm not for mob rules because people usually dont have a clue but this style of TTK has always had issues and problem and it should of been dismissed as too low to be viable for play.

You can look at the TDM trailer for senate and see how everyone is spraying and prespraying around corners. It looks like a disaster compared to old gameplay.

There a cut off for viable TTK for it being too low and I think .3 was on the edge of it. You get issue when TTK is too long depending of factors such as movement and map design which would mean in this game you cant have too high of a TTK but .3 was no where near high it was at the edge of medium or the high end of low.

 

I see no reason to go to a very low TTK. I feel like they are trying to make the game easier and not require as much aiming skill. Also I see that they want to push burst fire as a reason for the new TTK which doesnt make sense because you can do that with out touching the damage.

 

The old TTK needed smaller targets that gave higher rewards to push better aiming. You also add a small amount of deviation for full auto over a certain amount to push for bursting.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I hope they change it atleast a bit, all you need to do now is pick the highest rate of fire gun and you can dominate, especially with the MG's

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope if we get it reverted uts not like when the tme limit was reverted but not back to original.

Why change balance when .3s hit reg was broken so you didnt have a proper base line to adjust off of

When it says to make the ttk more consistant  but it wasnt consisant because of hit reg first.

How would it be a good idea to try and change balancing when you had nothing to go off of for that balancing.

The math behind low ttk shows its a bad idea along with the seen outcome of the practical test of many other games that done this in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it's still gonna be balanced, we also have other factors like BTK, TTD, which will be adjusted during later tests. Personally, I'm little pissed off when I get killed pretty quick, even if I started shooting first towards the enemy, and definitely hit him enough times to kill him first, but as I said there, also other factors.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TCPPolak said:

TTK feels good anyway, it should stay IMO. I don't see the problem.

You and the others say FEELs or in your OPINION which amounts to nothing. You dont say 1+1 feels like its 2 because that logic could as well be used to say 1+1 feels like 4.

Not understanding why its bad when there is clear error in the logic of having it based on mathematical reality.

The current TTK has turned this game in to CoD which TTK is pretty near the current one. It is great for casual players who dont want to have to put effort into aiming or other forms of skilled play but its shitty for people at higher tier play who actually care to see the issues.

But any one who actually understand higher tier play sees the issues that affect good players such as latency,  and, reaction time issues that causes low TTK games like CoD to have a very narrow, shallow, low skill floor, and low skill ceiling gameplay.

Its boring when I go seal clubbing against all these people with out effort in a very one sided shallow manner making uses of better reaction time and latency to just run in and land 10+ killstreaks by cheesing corner prespray, not needing to aim, reload, use cover or positioning. A good player can out put constant pressure that can not be counter except by doing the same cheese tactics which ends up in a game of chance instead of skill.

 

There is a reason CoD is dead on PC.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MFG,  TZoningHard, u r just everywhere!!! In every f..ng theme there is u, and ur usual "hurr-durr, TTK, brainless and skillless run'n'gun, yada-yada!".

I'm f...ng tired of reading forum full of ur whining! I'm really not wanting to open the forum because I know that there will be u non-stop spamming how devs are wrong and only u know what's better for all of us.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, tynblpb said:

MFG,  TZoningHard, u r just everywhere!!! In every f..ng theme there is u, and ur usual "hurr-durr, TTK, brainless and skillless run'n'gun, yada-yada!".

I'm f...ng tired of reading forum full of ur whining! I'm really not wanting to open the forum because I know that there will be u non-stop spamming how devs are wrong and only u know what's better for all of us.

Prove me wrong. The TTK is cancer I want it fixed so I can enjoy the game.

If there wasn't a issue I would be playing the game and have no time to be here to complain.

All I see are opinion and no one can back up why the change is good. Mean while others are giving situations and scenarios that occur and why there are issues and why there needs to be a revert.

Edited by TZoningHard
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah we finally get to the point, So that you can enjoy it. See: There are players who enjoy the game as it is now. Then there are players who enjoy something totally different and it is all fine. You wouldn't believe it but if just seen players complain about the armor being too strong so that you need to many bullets to kill someone. I do not follow that argumentation and I would say that this is a small minority but still these players exist. And they all play for fun! Fun that is what games are about. Maybe you are so hardcore that you have forgotten that I don't know. But if there are enough players enjoying a certain kind of gameplay or to be more specific TTK as in this case and have fun playing it that is all the argument you need for justifying this TTK.

Your language is quite rude and while you claim everybody else is just having an opinion and you are the only one knowing better you blatantly fail to see that you view is just as subjective. Yes your arguments and numbers are correct. But you are all the time using the same argumentation which applies to a very specific situation. Close quarter engagements without any cover.

Seriously just try to get familiar with the thought that you do not know the one glorious and golden answer to anything and there are players that are considering themselves also hardcore players (ffs I still do not know what you mean by that besides putting hundreds of hours into a game) and prefer something different from you. Might be as hard for you as controlling a modest recoil but just try it. Sometimes pracitce is all you need ;)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TZoningHard said:

I want it fixed so I can enjoy the game

I think this is enough I need to quote you on.

This stuff is opinionated, no need to go elitist on a subject you're self righteous on. That is, after all, your opinion. And if mine doesn't amount to anything, I don't think yours does either. Accept that this is opinionated stuff.

Also, "Your opinion doesn't matter because I'm right anyway" isn't a good way to put things. The devs are making this to the LIKING of the MAJORITY. Not the "Facts" of a few individuals, do note.

YOU aren't these forums, I don't see why you're unable to accept or even acknowledge the fact some stuff are simply opinionated. Like game development, for example. You can like something without being able to describe why or how, you don't need to go into this "higher tier play" stuff, because there is no point. A game is to be enjoyable.

EDIT: I would also like to quote @HeiligeRobbe on this.  "But you are all the time using the same argumentation which applies to a very specific situation. Close quarter engagements without any cover." A fair point I couldn't put my finger on before.

 

Edited by TCPPolak
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I warned you about this Tzoning.

From the day you and I disagreed about the game needing server browser.

Your response to me was that my opinion didn't matter because there's a logical way to do things (btw, everyone seems to enjoy the server browser tyvm) and I thought you were just in a mood. But here I see it again.

You actually believe that your opinion is better and that mostly everything else that is not your opinion is inferior.

I told you that it would help if you learned that you've just got to agree to disagree on some things.

 

 

In case its not clear - this game was brought into early access so that it could be built around what the community wants.

Not what you want.

WW3 is not a game that will ever be catered to what you alone want.

WW3 is not Tzonings side project.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you cant argue against a point so you argue the person. How toxic.

All I want is a good game, I bring points to the the discussion but instead of discussion its mob rules, slander, and trying to talk behind peoples back.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Borreh said:

That was the intention - Previously high TTK made the game feel a little bit too arcade.  We do realize low TTK works in milsims differently than in more arcade games so we're eager for more feedback.

Overall I feel that a 3 BTK is a good middle-ground between one-shot-kills games like ArmA, Insurgency and Rising Storm and more arcade titles like Battlefield and I think it fits WW3's in-between nature best. However there is no point in forcing it if you guys aren't enjoying it but so far the reception feels divisive as some people heavily criticize it while others love it. So we'll need more feedback on the issue and we'll adjust accordingly.

 

There were 3 main points when designing the new damage model:

1) Consistency of TTK (previously was all over the place with some players tanking damage while others died very quickly)

2) Role of armors in the game and bullet versus armor interaction (was very muddled previously) with a window for possible implementation of additional armor types in the future

3) Better balance of weapons (SMGs and pistols were severely underpowered while ARs dominated 80% of encounters with little room for heavier weaponry)

 

So far we feel points 1 and 3 were pretty much achieved. 2 is still in need to analysing and tweaking as a lot of you find armors underpowered - I still want to be sure that really is the case and not just everyone wishing they worked like they did before. The damage model unified the BTK for most weapons and the role of armor is to *buy* you one (or more depending on bullet/armor used) BTK more for the weapons the armor is effective against - Thus light armors don't defend against most bullets at all. So I feel a lot of the "armors are useless" comments can come from players who equip HDPEs and wonder why did they get killed easily with ARs and the like (against which that armor offers no protection at all).

 

Of course I may be wrong here so I want to be sure this is not the case. Once that is done I think there is a number of possible solutions:

1) Lower the weight of armors by 1 level down, making HDPE effectively "weightless" as the default armor already counted into your soldier's base protection. Thus the selection would become more noticable and more players would equipt heaviest armors (which are a rarity now due to how limiting their weight is).

2) Increase effectiveness of all armors by 1 level up, making HDPE able to stop AR rounds (just 1 hit but still something) and so forth. I'm not sure how this would affect the role of heaviest armours yet but we'd figure something out.

3) Increase the weight limit.

4) Take a closer look at the gutshot situation.

 

If the consensus will be that the TTK is too short after all of those options are exhaused then we'll consider rising it by 1 bullet. I'd prefer to test the other options first because armors are designed to be a major part of the game's balance and we'd rather have a lower TTK heavily affected by the armors rather than a higher one. A 4 bullet BTK would mean armors would have to raise it by 1 at default (for them to make any gameplay sense) and with 5+ (possibly 7-8) we're getting into very tanky (and arcade) territory.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Posted a question to the developers on what they would like to do with the TTK in the future.

>Got everyone's personal opinion on it even though there are other topics asking for that specific opinion.

>Got the battle arena for "I love the TTK" vs " I really dislike the TTK".

>Last comment I got was the actual answer.

>Thank you @weedtime

LMAO

/Too big image, double-click, you can resize :)
weedtime

/I liked the original weedtime, pls no bully

 

ops.meme_.nba_-1024x768.jpg

Edited by Anxter
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TZoningHard said:

When you cant argue against a point so you argue the person. How toxic

You literally said our opinions don't matter... It is hard not to mention how you act. You refuse to answer us, as shown. There is no slander, you've shown yourself, and to quote you a bit, "Your opinion amounts to nothing" "I want a game that can enjoy".  In my opinion, your attitude itself is toxic. 

Also, your points are still opinion. You're acting as if everyone should have a problem with this, when in fact, this is an opinionated matter, and "points" don't prove anyone right. Just saying that "High tier play should have higher ttk" doesn't make anything right. This is opinion.

Some points we picked up.

1.) This is subjective, not objective.

2.) You always talk about CQC scenarios with no cover involved.

3.) The devs are making the game to the liking of the majority.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No ttk new ttk needs some tweaking, it favors high fire rate weapons, armor is almost useless, you might aswell remove it from the game in the current state, snipers 1 hit body 

Has issues 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Copied from my Netcode/Hitreg, TTD issues topic:

After playing 5h on the new 0.4 update it get worse than before. Now it's totally Hardcore Mode that you die from 1-3 bullets and can't react, makes more easy for camper. Instead of that the devs improved the netcode/hitreg, TTD and armor system, no they increased the damage of the weapons. Also the MG5 is broken - feels most time dying from one shots. With the inconsistent ping of the servers (Joined on 24-32ms Servers, but we can't see still the ping of the players) and the delay between players makes gameplay bad, it feels every match different, 1 match runs great the other match complete unplayable.

Set for all automatic weapons the bullets-to-kill on close range to 4-5 (based on weapon, e.g. SCAR-H 4 bullets), 3 is too low. On longer distance 6-8 (based on weapon, armor and which body hit like head, legs etc.

Ask players why most of them don't play hardcore mode on other shooter (Arcade Shooter) because of the delay, who shoot first or spray and pray wins.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is actually fun, TZoning that you say others are toxic given the list of things you offended without any reason (e.g.: modern Bf and CoD titles and their playerbase [stupid casuals], Squad and Insurgency and their playerbase [stupid larpers], TDM [cancer], a low TTK [cancer], predictable recoil [annoying and unenjoyable], battle royale games and their playerbase [cancer]). On top you are elitist by claim and deny the opinions of others the right of existence. Little surprise some take that with a grain of salt.

Besides, there have been multiple occasions others tried to list arguments the contrasted your opinion.  At best you ignored them - which is probably why you tink there are none in the first place - or at worst you insulted whoever argued against you. Maybe people felt the need to take a step back to explain to you that different opinions about the same topic exist and are a matter of taste before they get to the subject of discussion again simply because arguing with someone who is entirely unwilling and unable to see another opinion than his own is outright pointless.

Now, before turning to the content of your arguments and responding to them I little note on the side about the structure of your argumentation: In most of the cases you claim a generality for your arguments which is proven wrong by a single counter example (e.g. the recoil right now is unenjoyable). Not only do you fail to see that but also you once more ignore counter examples brought up by others. Quite funny to be honest.

Let's finally turn to your main argument against a low TTK - it leads to effortless kills and out of sudden everything just comes down to who rounds the corner and sprays down the enemy first and well whatelse. This is true! I said that multiple times already - only this argument has only a limited relevance as it is only applicable for short range engagements. And by the way your argumentation goes there seems to be no cover included as well. In these engagements a low TTK inevitably leads to a noticeable advantage for peekers and lag/ping/latency become very important so the goal is to extend the average duration of engagements. You argue with a calculated TTK based on the ROF and from what I can tell you assume that every bullet hits. Your way to extend the average time of a firefight is to increase the number of bullets needed to kill. Clearly that is a possibility.

Is it the only one? No. Another way would be to increase the average engagement distance. While this is of course a stylized way to speak and not as easily realised as a lowering the damage it will lead to a similar result: You say aim doesn't matter anymore? I would say it does on distances closer to 100m than 25m with the enemy being behind cover, showing only parts of his body. Of course being the one who starts the firefight is still important but not as much as on the engagement distance you are implicitly speaking about. Admittedly increasing the main engagement distance is not straight forward and is hard to balance as well but already now it feels to me that compared to 0.3 the engagements in WZ take place on higher ranges.

Another way to increase the time of a firefight is making it harder to land the required amount of hits. You may find it annoying to compensate for recoil - others do not, they actually enjoy it more. The recoil is still very modest and given how precisely LMGs can be fired with sufficient accuracy while side strafing it's maybe still too low in my opinion. Someone said in some thread that recoil comensation is something you get used to by pulling your mouse downwards and thus it is not really a skill in it's own right. I disagree with that. If players can be better than others simply because they are better in controlling the recoil it is a skill. Besides, aiming is also a certain way to move the mouse on the mouse pad to which you get used to at some point. To sum this paragraph up: Making it more difficult to land multiple shots in a short period of time is a valid way to make firefights more challenging although you may not like it.

If your central complaint about the new TTK is that firefights end too quickly putting less emphasis on aiming and more on reacting and spotting the enemy first the two measures I just explained can lead to the same average duration of a firefight as a higher TTK would. That is not to say it's easy to achieve or it is outright better than a higher TTK but it is something some players prefer which finally brings me to the point why people like a low TTK despite the issues it can bring.

I would say that the vast majority of players plays videogames for fun with an important minority doing it for living either by being in a professional team or a full time streamer or youtuber. From now on I can only speak for myself but maybe this is true for others as well: For me a large proportion of the fun I have with a game comes from its "atmosphere" and indeed "feel". I put both terms in quotes because I find it hard to pin point how to define wither of them with respect to a game. If I play a modern military shooter whith real life weapons equipment and so on I just prefer it if a low number of bullets is required to kill because that is what I would expect from real life. I admit to have no military experience on my own let alone from a battle (thankfully) and comparisons to real life are always a risky thing but speaking about how deadly weapons feel in a FPS is a crucial part I think and I find firefights to be much more intensive if a small number of bullets may kill me and also I can kill my enemies with a couple of bullets only. This is highly subjective I know. but it's just what I prefer and others might as well. That's why I advocate the lower TTK but I can live with a slightly higher one as well. But if a battle rifle would require 4 body shots up close as Scroopi proposes it would take me out of the immersion and kill much of the atmosphere lending to the fun I have with the game.

On top there are also less subjective arguments going for a low TTK. Given it is done it the right way you can have the following things for example:

- LMGs and DMRs/Battle Rifles can be used for true suppressive fire that does not require any special mechanic as exposing myself will indeed put me at great risk. A necessary requirement in my opinion would be to make them a little less effective if fired on the move strafing left and right and  maybe also a slight decrease in accuracy and increase in recoil over the time of the burst.

- Semi-Auto and Full-Auto will be more equal in terms of effectiveness. Right now full-auto is almost in any case the way to go with an AR. With the Scar-H it makes sense to switch to semi-auto quite often but using an AR I will often be better going full-auto regardless of the range. With a realtively low TTK and high recoil going full-auto is still an option but someone who simply prefers to use semi-auto fire quick tapping is not put at such a massive disadvantages which allows for more gameplay variety in my opinion. WIth a high(er) TTK and low(er) recoil semi-auto is at a massive disadvantage because of the extra time required to shoot the necessary number of bullets.

All that being said I this is my opinion and I can happily live with others and I am also aware of the issues a low TTK brings. So if the majority of the community wants a slightly higher TTK I am fine with that. And if the TTK becomes so high that I can't enjoy the game as much anymore that is also fine. I just doubt that it is necessary to be so rude and aggressive to everybody who likes a low TTK.

Because I expect an angry respond by TZoning a last word on your argumentation: Because of your denial of the subjectiveness of you arguments you are somewhat inconsistent to be honest. On the one hand you complain about effortless kills but on the other hand you don't want spraying to become harder. On the one hand you complain about TDM and mindless run & gun gameplay but on the other hand it seems as if your argumentation is mainly based on experience gained in TDM. You want a game for hardcore gamers but apparently you have almost exclusively one skill (aiming) in mind when it comes to how players can be better than others. On the one hand you argue for more immersion and less "taking-the-player-by-the-hand" mechanics, (e.g. hit markers, spotting) but at the same time you rage about things like magazines not refilling automatically to 30 (50, 60) bullets. What this tells me is that you have a very specific gameplay experience in mind with little to no willingness to deviate from that in an argumentation. Don't pretend as if that is the only gameplay experience the world is allowed to like.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HeiligeRobbe said:

But if a battle rifle would require 4 body shots up close as Scroopi proposes it would take me out of the immersion and kill much of the atmosphere lending to the fun I have with the game.

For the SCAR-H I meant it for 4 hits to kill for body shots on close range, 2 Headshots to kill because of body part damage multipliers or 1 Headshot and 2 Body shots to kill on close range. The SCAR-H is also a AR the devs named it Battle Rifle because you can use it for longer distance, too. 😃

Edited by Scroopi
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×