Speed vs TTK

(OwNLY) #1

Hey,
so after playing a few matches in Xt over the past week i asked myself why the game feels so slow.
Then i had an idea: what if the current speed doesn´t match the TTK?

In CS:
The spread while moving and the overall movement speed slows down the game extremely.
But one shot to the head does the job.

In CoD/BF:
Higher movement speed/lower spread than CS, but still pretty slow.
2-3 Headshots for the kill.

In ET:
Good movement speed, small spread-penalty for movement.
TTK not too fast and not too slow.

In Quake:
Extremely high movement speed, no spread at all.
TTK is extremely high, too.

All of these Games were pretty successful, and they had one thing in common:
Their speed matched their TTK.
Quake with 2-3 Hits for a kill wouldn´t work, and CS with ET-like TTK neither.

So i would say that in Xt for the current movement speed and the spread penalties for moving and jumping,
the Bullets to Kill are too much. In every game mentioned above, with some good aim and movement you were able to win a 2-3 vs 1. But in Xt, you eat too much bullets before you have downed one guy and can start shooting at the 2nd. 2 vs 1 might be possible with alot of luck, but 3vs1 ? Nope.

I would either increase the current bullet damage, or increase the overall speed of the game.

What do you think?

(Smooth) #2

This is something we’re aware of, we even have a damage/lethality vs speed/agility chart of many different games.

Can’t really say much more than that.

(acQu) #3

Thinking the same. My solution:

a) slower ROF, increase bullet damage, add strafe-sprint, no spread penalty for player movement

or subset and a good start

b) add strafe-sprint, no spread penalty for player movement

Exactly what you said above are also my thoughts. The TTK closely resembles ET. The movement closely resembles MMS games. That is, for me, a prime reason why infight movements are not fun and you can hardly land killstreaks; because these two simply do not fit. You imo have to open up the movement and make it much more fluid, faster in the infights, if you want ET TTK. You make slower movement and match it more closely to MMS, but add faster TTK, so it is more satisfying to run around shooting.

http://forums.warchest.com/showthread.php/37549-First-impression?p=467290#post467290
http://forums.warchest.com/showthread.php/37549-First-impression?p=467295#post467295

(Mustang) #4

Ooooh smexheh, care to share?

(Smooth) #5

Honestly, no :frowning:

It’s such a subjective chart that sharing it will just cause more arguments :tongue:

(Seanza) #6

Surely you got this data from public sources anyway? Or have you hacked into other devs’ space? :wink:

(trickykungfu) #7

[QUOTE=OwNLY;467873]Hey,
so after playing a few matches in Xt over the past week i asked myself why the game feels so slow.
Then i had an idea: what if the current speed doesn´t match the TTK?

In CS:
The spread while moving and the overall movement speed slows down the game extremely.
But one shot to the head does the job.

In CoD/BF:
Higher movement speed/lower spread than CS, but still pretty slow.
2-3 Headshots for the kill.

In ET:
Good movement speed, small spread-penalty for movement.
TTK not too fast and not too slow.

In Quake:
Extremely high movement speed, no spread at all.
TTK is extremely high, too.

All of these Games were pretty successful, and they had one thing in common:
Their speed matched their TTK.
Quake with 2-3 Hits for a kill wouldn´t work, and CS with ET-like TTK neither.

So i would say that in Xt for the current movement speed and the spread penalties for moving and jumping,
the Bullets to Kill are too much. In every game mentioned above, with some good aim and movement you were able to win a 2-3 vs 1. But in Xt, you eat too much bullets before you have downed one guy and can start shooting at the 2nd. 2 vs 1 might be possible with alot of luck, but 3vs1 ? Nope.

I would either increase the current bullet damage, or increase the overall speed of the game.

What do you think?[/QUOTE]

Like how you are thinking.

Smooth: The reason why you don’t wonna do this is because lower skilled player will get frustrated because of not killing enough people?

(tacocat) #8

heh, thats a good one.
to this day i still loathe turn spread and thank god that there is none in extraction.

(INF3RN0) #9

[QUOTE=Smooth;467882]This is something we’re aware of, we even have a damage/lethality vs speed/agility chart of many different games.

Can’t really say much more than that.[/QUOTE]

Just curious why high RoF + low damage is found more favorable over low RoF + high damage as a standard? I think most people would rather like the feeling that their shots have a significant impact rather than being a spray-able “pea shooter”. A lower RoF would negate the consistent overkill / delayed kill response issues- resulting in people complaining about weapon spread and ammo, as well as making movement during fire fights feel more important as well. Both systems aren’t exactly newbie friendly or more difficult than the other, however lower RoF allows for more fluid and responsive game play imo, and you immediately feel informed about how your weapon works when you have a strong sense of when each bullet leaves the chamber. The most that the current RoF allows for is an extent of forgiveness to moments of poor aim because you can spray with more success in comparison and recover from mistakes more quickly, though you still need to land a lot of shots to get kills. I think it would be fine to have some weapons that have a higher RoF and low damage, however I don’t think they should set the bar. Overall the current weapon scheme as the standard really will make it difficult to have more diverse weaponry that won’t feel lame since they will likely have to kill people in very few shots to be balanced.

I’d like to see a good mix between weapons that have a low RoF and higher damage (still around 3 headshots) possibly with lower clip sizes, and then your higher clip sized higher RoF and lower damage weapons. Then you could easily also have weapons that increase in spread and involve burst firing somewhere towards the top of the damage charts as well. I just think trying to mix everything into one system atm might not be the best way to make everyone happy or create a real synergy with the actual game. Just my 2 cents.

(trickykungfu) #10

[QUOTE=INF3RN0;467929]Just curious why high RoF + low damage is found more favorable over low RoF + high damage as a standard? I think most people would rather like the feeling that their shots have a significant impact rather than being a spray-able “pea shooter”. A lower RoF would negate the consistent overkill / delayed kill response issues- resulting in people complaining about weapon spread and ammo, as well as making movement during fire fights feel more important as well. Both systems aren’t exactly newbie friendly or more difficult than the other, however lower RoF allows for more fluid and responsive game play imo, and you immediately feel informed about how your weapon works when you have a strong sense of when each bullet leaves the chamber. The most that the current RoF allows for is an extent of forgiveness to moments of poor aim because you can spray with more success in comparison and recover from mistakes more quickly, though you still need to land a lot of shots to get kills. I think it would be fine to have some weapons that have a higher RoF and low damage, however I don’t think they should set the bar. Overall the current weapon scheme as the standard really will make it difficult to have more diverse weaponry that won’t feel lame since they will likely have to kill people in very few shots to be balanced.

I’d like to see a good mix between weapons that have a low RoF and higher damage (still around 3 headshots) possibly with lower clip sizes, and then your higher clip sized higher RoF and lower damage weapons. Then you could easily also have weapons that increase in spread and involve burst firing somewhere towards the top of the damage charts as well. I just think trying to mix everything into one system atm might not be the best way to make everyone happy or create a real synergy with the actual game. Just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE]

i can not believe it but inferno is right XD

(acutepuppy) #11

A lower ROF would be great. I was just watching Quake Wars, the Lacerator and AR had distinct power vs speed ratios. Even in RTCW (not W:ET) had slight differences between the MP40 and Thompson. It’s a gradient with Extraction, but all on the faster end of the spectrum in my opinion.

Long range battles are really frustrating for me, to be honest. I can’t even start dodging before my screen is lighting up and I get shot in the head three times :[

(Smooth) #12

Most of our weapons actually fire signifcantly (30-40%) slower than the audio for them, so our guns are lower RoF than they sound. This will be eventually resolved but probably not any time soon. For example, Skyhammers AR has audio playing at 860rpm but actually fires at 500rpm (the same as ETQW AR). Audio has a massive impact on perceived weapon behaviour (as we all know) and there’s very few weapons that currently match up :frowning:

That said, these are modern guns we’re using and modern weapons fire a lot faster than back in the WWII days. Simply put; if it looks like an AK47 it should sound like an AK47 which means the RoF needs to be similar to an AK47. While we are trying to stick to the lower end of the scale (500-600rpm) for a lot of our weapons, we can’t quite go as low as 400rpm (MP40) without our guns sounding slower than Conker/Thunder’s Machine Gun, which fires (with matching audio!) at 470rpm.

I eventually see our automatic weapon fire-rates ranging from around 400rpm for a couple of really slow firing weapons, typically clustering at 500-600rpm and then peaking at like 1,200rpm for some of the really fill-the-air-with-bees weapons.

All THAT said, we will be gradually introducing more unique weapons as we progress. Not just semi-auto and burst-fire but also slightly more… exotic weapons beyond the typical AR/SMG’s :wink:

(chippy) #13

Hand 'em over this instant, mister!

(k1ruaa) #14

I personnally have no problem with the RoF of weapons. I am complaining about recoil and spread being a bit too high but this is really not an issue for me.

(INF3RN0) #15

[QUOTE=Smooth;468036]
All THAT said, we will be gradually introducing more unique weapons as we progress. Not just semi-auto and burst-fire but also slightly more… exotic weapons beyond the typical AR/SMG’s :wink:[/QUOTE]

I actually play 90% with no sound or simply have music flooding it out (unless it’s a draft) and I’ve never really found audio to be that important in this type of game personally. Skyhammers AR definitely feels right as the mid point standard for weapons, but in the greater scheme it feels like the SMG is overtaking the rifle. Then you have a weapon like the Fragger MG which just doesn’t make sense to me, especially if you consider how it handles. The MG’s should be about the clip size and if you decide to make them as accurate as they are in hip fire, then the superior damage output is very unnecessary unless they are going to have a low RoF. In terms of weapon stats though, I’d love to see the statistics per weapon disclosed more often rather than having to calculate it myself heh. I know you guys want to see what people say before knowing the stats first, but I consider stats a means of avoiding a build up of inaccurate feedback that you constantly see, ex. “I can’t get kills with X weapon and I think my aims great, so must be the weapon’s fault” type of stuff.

I’m banking on the multi-weapon loadouts per character atm. I do however think you guys should ignore the “lower recoil, lower spread” because most of the weapons that are the reason for that aren’t actually rifles. Weapons should definitely follow the goals of the characters, and of course not everyone is going to like everything if it doesn’t appeal to their play style. So instead of meeting demands for making SMGs more like rifles I think introducing some new weapons would be the better solution. I’m looking forward to seeing what kinds of new weapons you come up with, and if there are more rifle types introduced I might even go as far as suggesting some more drastic traits per weapon type really. I don’t really like it when all the weapons feel nearly identical, and I welcome all of the diversity I can get. And the same goes for the exotic types that function completely differently all together.

(acutepuppy) #16

The audio mismatch totally makes sense. The AR in ET:QW fired at a constant rate, but the audio was syncopated.

That means hit sounds aren’t in rhythm with the audio ROF either! That is huge on the perceived effectiveness.

(Mustang) #17

Could we have some placeholder sounds for now.

//youtu.be/RQ40jowqiHA

(ImageOmega) #18

Smooth, I love how active you’ve been on the forums. I also like the detailed thoughts and discussions you bring to the table.

Just wanted to say thanks for that and it is appreciated. Now about that sprint and reload…

(Kendle) #19

[QUOTE=ImageOmega;468112]Smooth, I love how active you’ve been on the forums. I also like the detailed thoughts and discussions you bring to the table.

Just wanted to say thanks for that and it is appreciated.[/QUOTE]

+1, we don’t give you guys enough credit sometimes. :smiley:

(1-800-NOTHING) #20

this game handles so differently from one map to the next.
usually it gets sludgey*/unplayable when the server fills up.
but sometimes it’s perfectly crisp and smooth even on a full server (at -seemingly- the same low framerate/same ping), and not only can i hit what i aim at really easily, but it’s obvious my enemies (who i’m not deluded enough to think are complete noobs) can’t hit me even if they break their wrists trying.
makes it kind of hard to provide accurate feedback one way or the other.

[*left hand gets tired from trying to get some movement juice out of the wasd keys, right hand gets tired of trying to manage recoil/kick with the crosshair kind of freezing up during fights, and weapons seem to occasionally have a slight delay before they actually fire.]

looking at the sometimes ridiculous differences in K/D ratios and the sometimes noobishly low K/D ratios for players that, unlike myself, i really don’t consider to be noobs, i can’t help thinking i’m not the only one experiencing this. would be interesting to see some echo data on this.

OT: makes sense, conker’s MG feels just as powerful as it sounds. (still prefer fragger’s MG, though.)