Could a higher Time To Kill (TTK) be a thing ?

(sageCarrot) #101

that’s only a negative biproduct of doing so; the main reason that i was going in depth about is that raising the ttk lowers the individual skill when it comes to gunplay

(Szakalot) #102

well, yes and no:

it will make it less likely you achieve anything in 2v1 situations, but in a 1on1 duel the longer the duel lasts the more expressed the skill level of the better player. Just like having 10 duels will let you gauge 2 players differences better than 2 duels

(INF3RN0) #103

I think the TTK is in a very good place atm. TTK is a very preferential thing between different games, which I believe DB makes compromise of well.

(immenseWalnut) #104

I agree, for some games. In a DM match in UT for example, your ability to move and aim, as well as knowing the map and keeping track of pickup timings does make the game and your skill at it feel rewarding. And because the only objective is killing the other players, it works very well.

Compare that to a teamwork/objective based game, and it can drag the game down if too many players are more focused on individual glory rather than winning the match. I’m not saying a higher TTK will magically fix DB (it wont) but it would be a good starting point. The devs wouldn’t have hidden everyone’s KDR during a match if solo fraggers that ignore the objectives weren’t a problem. And over the last weekend, we also had the added problem of players rage-quitting frequently. Players that are having fun don’t do that, so clearly there is something wrong with the game on a fundamental level.

I would rather see a lower number of mercs, each of them having a more defined/diverse role and more abilities each, with a greater emphasis on using those abilities (and teamwork) to dictate the match, but also to have an equal emphasis on aim/gunplay.

Given what I have experienced playing DB, there is no chance I would be willing to watch competitive matches (although playing them could be fun) as there is nothing to watch. Once you have seen one high skill aimer, you have seen them all, and with so few abilities, there is little that pro players could do to make DB exciting to watch.

(Szakalot) #105

Devs only started to hide KDR recently, and I think it was one measure that, while welcome, is unnecessary. They want people to play ‘for the team’, but that simply won’t happen among a small group of betatesters, who play 5 maps over and over again for 1+ year.
So this close beta builds have experienced a disproportionate amount of games where people play it as TDM.

Nothing wrong with that, matchmaking will address this issue upon release; when you are genuinely motivated to win the map, rather than get some frags.

Similarly, I don’t think you have experienced ragequits as much as "i don’t wish to play anymore’ quits, partially due to imbalanced teams, but also because matchmaking was forced on everyone, including those who did not consider themselves in a competitive match-maked game.

With 20+ mercs you have 20+ abilities! I’d say that is pretty high for FPS, higher than either ET, or QW (if you exclude vehicles).

I think we are going to be talking past each other from now on, so I’d just encourage you to try out the new build, and if hopefuly all mercs are available, you will see the teamplay and ‘outsmarting’ your opponent you are looking for: with balanced matchmaking, and party system.

(B_Montiel) #106

[quote=“Szakalot;7381”]I honestly think ETQW had more depth and more intricacy than W:ET ever could. The main problem was lack of polish: frustrating netcode, 30fps lock for characters, lack of pro-mod in the first crucial half-year from release.

Even with the gameplay limiting (but necessary) ETpromod, the amount of strats you had to prepare to effectively combat good defenses was staggering. Icarus drop to disable a tank - take out the tank - lock down the APC - clear out mines - kill defense - plant - defend plant was just the simplest one[/quote]

Sorry I explained it badly. I never meant to say that those two lacked of depth. My point was that they simply did not achieve to create a game as good as W:ET was. For various reasons, but not lack of intricacy, definitely not :wink: .

(immenseWalnut) #107

Oh, have no fear on that score mate, if I was done with DB, I wouldn’t even be on the forum posting daily. I am more than willing to give the game a fair chance.

But at the same time, once the game is finalised, it is too late to offer any feedback that might make an actual difference. Hence my current participation. Saying that…

I know not many people feel the same way, and that is fine. Same goes if the devs don’t feel the same way, it is their game after all. I will offer my own opinion, even if it isn’t popular (and it rarely is to be honest, I tend to only give negative feedback).

But I would also like to think I offer a different perspective. There are a lot of people on this forum that have mentioned previous SD games, and given that they speak highly of those games (Brink maybe notwithstanding) it is clear that those players enjoy this type of game.

But from another perspective, there are incoming players that haven’t played those earlier games and might not agree (I have only played Brink, none of the previous games), so our opinions on many factors wont align. The same exists with UT4, I have offered opinions that annoy the ‘old faithful’ crowd, but actually might make the game more successful with newer players that have never played a UT game.

For example, I came to DB expecting a game that could supplant TF2. Mostly because it is a team based/objective shooter. But actually playing the game, it feels more like Assault in UT2K4, without the vehicles. Which isn’t a bad thing, if it had a singlular class with the full range of weapons etc.

(Amerika) #108

This game will never be finalised. At least not until it’s shut down. So any opinion you voice can make it into future changes if the devs believe they are needed and the rest of the community would back it.

I also hope this game doesn’t turn into TF2. That is the most spammy game I’ve ever put hours into. It also has such a low TTK that people constantly take damage and run away to the nearest HP locker or HP drop on the map. Due to this the spammy weapons have to be way more powerful than, what I feel, they should be.

(immenseWalnut) #109

Really? Did Splash Damage not make Brink?

Sadly, I was one of those mugs that bought the game months later. After it had already been abandoned, by both the devs and the player base.

Should I put ‘months later’ in bold just to emphasise my point?

Look I get it, you like the game, that is cool, I’m happy for you (and sorry if that sounds patronising, because I’m not trying to be). But there is a reason TF2 is still popular 8 years later, and so many other games have fallen by the wayside.

I honestly can’t see DB lasting more than 2 months before the bulk of the player base is gone. But I am more than happy to be pleasantly surprised, assuming I am still playing it.

(I would normally use more smilies to try and show good nature and that I’m not being mean, but for some reason the smilies on this site are very different to what I am used to).

(Szakalot) #110

can’t share your pessimism. I’ve started playing in August, and I’d say I’m only ever more excited for the game.

Even all those alpha players who keep coming back to whine about maps or whatever, well… they keep coming back.

Gunplay is very satisfying, and that alone will keep the game alive for at least a year. Brink’s gunplay was far from satisfying, from what I heard.

(denimDirector) #111

[left]I never had an issue with the TTK in the CBT and I’ve played very little Brink, ET, etc. It was a bit of a change over what I’m accustomed to, but I found that shooting people in the face nullifies this. :wink:

That said, my biggest issue from the beta testing was the absurd amount of bullets I had to drop into someone to finish them off. I can’t even begin to count the number of times I’d down someone mid-range, start finishing them off, only for a medic to run through my bullets, insta-revive them and make it a 2v1. I love the 1v1 battles I had on DB where it’s just gun on gun, skill on skill, but then having to dump another half clip into them, just to finish them seems absurd.[/left]

(Eox) #112

Downed targets can be instantly finished with a melee weapon though. I guess for the gun part that it was necessary in order to make medics a bit more valuable during gunfights.

(denimDirector) #113

and that’s fine if it’s a CQC battle. I can even understand making medics more valuable, but at the very least, limit player revives to once per “life”. So if I drop someone 1v1 and the medic spams the insta-revive and I drop them again, the medic can’t keep continually reviving the same guy until I’m dead.

For instance, I remember taking out a Fragger with Skyhammer. Medic ran out from behind a container and hit him with the insta-revive as I was trying to finish him. Downed him a second time (headshots FTW) with a small amount of health left, only for the medic to insta-revive him again as I was reloading. Felt like such a cheap death.

(Eox) #114

Yeah, that’s another issue I tried to debate about here : http://forums.dirtybomb.nexon.net/discussion/1365/cooldown-for-defibrillators#latest

(immenseWalnut) #115

[quote=“Szakalot;8225”]Even all those alpha players who keep coming back to whine about maps or whatever, well… they keep coming back.
[/quote]

Yeah, but they are only doing that because they have not YET lost hope. Sooner or later though, the penny will drop, and they will realise things wont change. And then they will move on without a backward glance.

For me, I have been down that road. This game opened up today for the next beta phase, it is highly unlikely the game will change from here on in. Many of those players complaining will realise that in the next few days, and they will walk away, disappointed. But they will still walk away.

(Nail) #116

obviously this isn’t the game for you
hopefully you’ll find one simple enough for your ability

(Amerika) #117

Really? Did Splash Damage not make Brink?

Sadly, I was one of those mugs that bought the game months later. After it had already been abandoned, by both the devs and the player base.

Should I put ‘months later’ in bold just to emphasise my point?

Look I get it, you like the game, that is cool, I’m happy for you (and sorry if that sounds patronising, because I’m not trying to be). But there is a reason TF2 is still popular 8 years later, and so many other games have fallen by the wayside.

I honestly can’t see DB lasting more than 2 months before the bulk of the player base is gone. But I am more than happy to be pleasantly surprised, assuming I am still playing it.

(I would normally use more smilies to try and show good nature and that I’m not being mean, but for some reason the smilies on this site are very different to what I am used to).

[/quote]

Yes, Splash Damage made Brink and they shutdown support for it quickly. What is your point? Why do you have to bold anything? Until that happens it means that you’re voice can be heard.

I pre-ordered it and stayed up until 2am on a work night with a bunch of friends and none of us played past the first week. I very rarely pre-order games these days because of Brink.

TF2 is not popular 8 years later because of TTK and other mechanics that DB doesn’t have. It is still popular because Valve has been very good with the community, didn’t shut down support for the game, kept churning out updates and TF2 didn’t really get that big, and neither did CS:GO, until Valve created the market which made players invested in the game they played. Yes, people do enjoy the mechanics but TTK has nothing to do with why all those people still play.

Look I get it, you like TF2, that is cool, I’m happy for you. But trying to turn Dirty Bomb into TF2 when TF2 exists isn’t going to help Dirty Bomb. No other current game (not counting the older games) plays like Dirty Bomb and that’s a good thing.

Instead of proclaiming doom and gloom because you believe you can design a better game why don’t you just go play TF2? I’m cool with you stating an opinion but the way you are doing it sounds incredibly immature and doesn’t fit the tone of these forums at all. It’s not constructive.