5.2 TTK change [Megathread]

Comments

  • MusicienElegant
    232 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    FF_smart27 wrote: »
    Honestly, I don't know if all this is worth discussing at this point since we have no idea how it is going to play out.
    All we know is that there will be changes in the BTK but how will it affect TTK?

    This man tried to tell you but y'all aren't listening(Quote)
    Maybe some one should change the thread title to " 5.2 BTK Change "

    I know, but the motivation for changes that weren't really an issue to begin with is concerning. I hope the RoF changes and recoil patterns help increase the gap to the TTK. But then the logical change would be higher RoF and lower recoil, neither of which seem like good compromises. At least in my honest opinion.
  • dayglowfroggy
    623 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Ea game changers have started back pedalling and trying to put positive spin on it but seem to be guessing the ttk will stay the same by increasing rpm (so why change it if the ttk stays the same)
    I think the guns are balanced well at the moment most of the maps are big and it helps to use 3x.
    So these new changes might work well on operation underground but what about panzer storm? Will it just be snipers and tanks?
  • e-Sparta_Rambo
    476 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    lKetx wrote: »
    Please, don't mess around with what makes this game better than the other battlefields, no one is asking for that, its literally great in this current state, i don't want bullet sponges and i don't want to mess around my muscle memory, please don't ruin the game. I don't even want to test that change, it was hated the last time you guys tried, stop forcing it.

    And what exactly makes this abomination better than previous titles ? Its terrible on console and PC
  • DrunkOnRedWine
    1691 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2019
    viper63x said:
    i feel like these ttk changes are a waste of resources, when you could be focusing on other things.
    Indeed, DICE should be concentrating on team balancing first and foremost then anti-cheat. The TTK, BTK at distance, changes to weapon dynamics with recoil and ROF are game changing and not in a positive way.

    It is hardly our fault the game has a player retention issue but the TTK is not the defining factor in all this. The game was in bad shape on release and content was so slow come out and many left. Players are also sick of bugs, performance of the game / servers, hackers and unbalanced games. If DICE had fixed the core issues quicker the game would have done much better at attracting players and keeping them.

    Making the game noob friendly after all this time is and act of pure desperation and it won't work. If anything the player retention will go down further as those that supported the game will no longer support it.

    The warning signs are there for DICE to see. DICE must have seen the backlash across Twitter, forums, Youtube and Reddit - if they continue to pursue these changes then you can only surmise that they do not care about loyal supporters anymore. 
  • Kompura
    296 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Red dot over enemy head, what next, auto aim to PC? There were absolutely no need to those changes.
  • Caramac_D
    190 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    The solution to please everyone is obviously thus: Servers running an Xmas casual mode, an as it is now mode and hardcore mode. Solved.
  • grrlpurple
    843 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    9/10 of my games fall on a server where I'm shooting paper bullets and dying from one hit deaths from everything. If I can already empty a clip for hit markers how is 'more bullets to kill' going to help?
  • The_BERG_366
    2781 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Kompura wrote: »
    Red dot over enemy head, what next, auto aim to PC? There were absolutely no need to those changes.

    this mechanic is already in the game... it just gets buffed basically. don't know why people all of a sudden start to complain now but it was never an issue before....
  • DrunkOnRedWine
    1691 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2019
    Caramac_D wrote: »
    The solution to please everyone is obviously thus: Servers running an Xmas casual mode, an as it is now mode and hardcore mode. Solved.

    Will never happen as this segregates the playlists even further and the player numbers are very low already
  • Conker
    38 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Kompura wrote: »
    Red dot over enemy head, what next, auto aim to PC? There were absolutely no need to those changes.

    this mechanic is already in the game... it just gets buffed basically. don't know why people all of a sudden start to complain now but it was never an issue before....


    because we didn't see this shiet before. No one is running close to a potentual enemy.... to get this ugly flag pop up.
  • NLBartmaN
    4484 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    9/10 of my games fall on a server where I'm shooting paper bullets and dying from one hit deaths from everything. If I can already empty a clip for hit markers how is 'more bullets to kill' going to help?
    More bullets will take the server longer to process and calculate/simulate the hit claim confirmation -> different load on server, takes more time for the server

    From previous experiences with longer TTK in BF, things will get better on the paper bullets and 1 frame dying (in cover).
  • WetFishDB
    2343 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    NLBartmaN said:
    9/10 of my games fall on a server where I'm shooting paper bullets and dying from one hit deaths from everything. If I can already empty a clip for hit markers how is 'more bullets to kill' going to help?
    More bullets will take the server longer to process and calculate/simulate the hit claim confirmation -> different load on server, takes more time for the server

    From previous experiences with longer TTK in BF, things will get better on the paper bullets and 1 frame dying (in cover).
    My experience is the opposite.  The bottleneck doesn’t necessarily occur at the server, they could be at the users internet connection, or the clients ability to receive an process packets.  That’s why, IIRC,  on some of the previous  titles there were 60Hz servers for Conquest on PC, but not on Console.  

    Whilst it is true that more bullet hits means more simulations on the server, it also means more opportunity to receive a packet containing damage prior to the death occurring, meaning players with quicker reactions can respond to the gunfire.
  • ackers75
    2652 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Ea game changers have started back pedalling and trying to put positive spin on it but seem to be guessing the ttk will stay the same by increasing rpm (so why change it if the ttk stays the same)
    I think the guns are balanced well at the moment most of the maps are big and it helps to use 3x.
    So these new changes might work well on operation underground but what about panzer storm? Will it just be snipers and tanks?

    Game changers will tell you what they are told to say and nothing more
  • THECOMMANDER66
    127 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
  • VincentNZ
    3885 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Honestly, I don't know if all this is worth discussing at this point since we have no idea how it is going to play out. All we know is that there will be changes in the BTK but how will it affect TTK? This man tried to tell you but y'all aren't listening
    PartWelsh said:
    moose004 said:
    The graph at 4:56...are they seriously saying that an MG42 will take THIRTEEN ROUNDS to kill somebody at 100 meters with these changes?
    Please consider that we're making ROF and Recoil adjustments to the weapons too. It's going to be best to view these changes in the context of gameplay when you get hands on next month.
    Maybe some one should change the thread title to " 5.2 BTK Change "
    That is not the issue though. With the info at hand we can deduce some things already. Like the MG42 having no niche and the same bullet damage as the Tommy. Further that the Tommy will be useless at very relevant engagement ranges.
    Now they can say that they will make ROF and recoil adjustments, but does one expect that the Sten will be now 720 RPM with Type 100 recoil (which it already has). And people say that they will receive individual damage numbers. So it will be 5-9 like the Type 100 now, which is an underwhelming yet fun to shoot weapon? You can very much doubt it. We might see some guns moved up one step n ROF, meaning the Sten gets 568, and will kill at 5-12 bullets instead of 14, making it precisely just as useless as a Tommy.
    And for what? On Reddit a dev complained that the Tommy and Suomi is all people use and just a look at the stat bars are enough to see that all SMGs are relevant. He continued saying that, why should one use the Tommy (Suomi) that is a one-trick pony instead of the well-rounded MP40. Versatility is fun, overspecialization is not. I totally agree the Tommy already is unusable at range, and symthic shows that all SMGs (bar the MP34) have a role and work well, BUT the stat bars certainly are of no help in telling that. Further, while the Dev (Random Recoil gameplay designer) is right in his arguments, and essentially said everything is fine, DICE just announced a change that will kill the versatility of the SMGs.
  • NLBartmaN
    4484 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    WetFishDB said:
    My experience is the opposite.  The bottleneck doesn’t necessarily occur at the server, they could be at the users internet connection, or the clients ability to receive an process packets.  That’s why, IIRC,  on some of the previous  titles there were 60Hz servers for Conquest on PC, but not on Console.  

    Whilst it is true that more bullet hits means more simulations on the server, it also means more opportunity to receive a packet containing damage prior to the death occurring, meaning players with quicker reactions can respond to the gunfire.
    The server "compensates" for the poor connections (more than 2ms latency variation, above 60ms ping, packet loss, etc) in the hit claim simulation and with a longer TTK (or BTK in this case) for me it feels that "advantage" is eliminated, because more of the good packets of the players with a stable and fast connection get confirmed.

    BF1 after TTK 2.0 has the same issues as BF V for me.

    The first TTK change in BF V and BF1 before TTK 2.0 worked a lot better for me and close to none issues.

    Lets just hope 5.2 has the same effect.
  • CStarfish9
    105 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TTK change will be good.
  • WetFishDB
    2343 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    NLBartmaN said:
    WetFishDB said:
    My experience is the opposite.  The bottleneck doesn’t necessarily occur at the server, they could be at the users internet connection, or the clients ability to receive an process packets.  That’s why, IIRC,  on some of the previous  titles there were 60Hz servers for Conquest on PC, but not on Console.  

    Whilst it is true that more bullet hits means more simulations on the server, it also means more opportunity to receive a packet containing damage prior to the death occurring, meaning players with quicker reactions can respond to the gunfire.
    The server "compensates" for the poor connections (more than 2ms latency variation, above 60ms ping, packet loss, etc) in the hit claim simulation and with a longer TTK (or BTK in this case) for me it feels that "advantage" is eliminated, because more of the good packets of the players with a stable and fast connection get confirmed.

    BF1 after TTK 2.0 has the same issues as BF V for me.

    The first TTK change in BF V and BF1 before TTK 2.0 worked a lot better for me and close to none issues.

    Lets just hope 5.2 has the same effect.
    Technically there is no ‘advantage’ really, but I know broadly what you mean.  It sounds like you are saying a slower TTK will potentially improve the TTD/sponging experience for players with decent connections.  They have a greater chance of receiving damage packets before the death occurs allowing them to react.  If that’s the case I’m inclined to agree with you.  It won’t make it perfect, but I have hope that it might improve it a little.

    Personally I don’t have an issue with TTK2 in BF1.  I did prefer it with TTK1 at the time, but having gotten used to TTK2 I don’t really mind the difference all that much anymore.  I still think it’s way too punishing on new players though.  I tried to get a friend into BF1 and the poor guy would just get destroyed over and over and over with almost no time to react.  In BFV it would have been even worse, so I told him not to bother buying the game.
  • SFSeventh
    271 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hey i came here to get some answers because Reddit isn't being very helpful regarding this. I'd like to know a couple of things because i am very worried about how this update could negatively impact my experience with BFV's gameplay. Maybe i am just a little paranoid because last year's TTK 2.0 was so horrible but this seems like it's going to do the exact same thing after i saw the graphs provided by DICE in their post.

    So why is this change needed ? Most players seem okay with the current balance, sure some weapons need tweaks but a full rework of all weapons is pretty over the top.

    Why are they shoving this down our throat when last year we clearly decided that we do not want this change ? If i remember correctly BFV was supposed to promote very lethal gunplay by design so it's not like it was done by mistake.

    And if this change does indeed come with 5.2 and people don't like it, will they revert the changes or will we be forced to play like this forever ?

    -------------------
    At this time i am strongly against these changes.

    I know that the current system is far from perfect, and some weapons  are waaaaaay overused and there is not much variation. I'd love to see some weapon diversity and fresh gameplay, but this looks like it's going to stray very far away from what we are currently playing.

    Thanks is advance.
This discussion has been closed.