Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

Decreasing TTK for all infantry weapons except BAs and shotguns

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Posts: 226

Date of registration
: Sep 20th 2016

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 7:31pm

Quoted from "JSLICE20"

From what I understand, reducing the TTK up close by reducing the BTK by 1 isn't a feasible option because of how frames work. With this we run the risk of 1 frame kills and nobody likes those. However, it's possible to reduce the TTK at min damage range through reducing BTK by 1.

@Labby

Let us not forget that the real reason BTK was increased in BF4, was to mask the netcode issues creating 1 frame deaths....

Holy War? No Thanks.

Posts: 2,699

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 9:24pm

Quoted from "JSLICE20"

From what I understand, reducing the TTK up close by reducing the BTK by 1 isn't a feasible option because of how frames work. With this we run the risk of 1 frame kills and nobody likes those. However, it's possible to reduce the TTK at min damage range through reducing BTK by 1.

@Labby

Let us not forget that the real reason BTK was increased in BF4, was to mask the netcode issues creating 1 frame deaths....

Pff...Honestly I think this was all rather placebo, we, as in my mates, never had any problems whatsoever. Nothing at least that could not be boiled down to user error, the placement of the killcam, ragdoll physics and the delay between death and killcam. Also all that hertz upping and netcode adjustments only have minimal consequences in an engagement.

BF4 was rather bugged at release, but a lot of stuff was just overexaggerated and stuff like the double headshot damage had nothing to do with netcode. It just added fuel to the flame.

Posts: 293

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 9:40pm

Quoted from "Ritobasu"

I also think keeping LMGs in the 5-BTK at CQC is entirely unnecessary. The vast LMGs already have a ROF disadvantage to SMGs, and the way you can make that CQC disadvantage even more obvious is giving them horrible hipfire spread.

Remember, we want player agency to matter here by reducing the BTK of ALL non-shotguns/bolt actions. You won't accomplish this for Supports if they are still stuck on the same BTK model up close, it'll only feel arbitrarily harsh to players who are on the receiving end of this balancing. I don't know how to articulate this concept well, so I'll just put in an example; you want them to think "I lost to a SMG up close because I can't hipfire as accurately as he does/I take too long to ADS in time" instead of "I lost to a SMG up close because my damage is awful".

Agreed. I would rather have the LMG 4BTK up close and giving them huge hip spread values, like 5 for the MG18 (Type 8, 4.5 for the Lewis (LSAT), and the rest 3.5 (base BF4 LMG). This of course has to come with rebalancing adjustments to other weapons in the game, like the BAs. They used to be 4-5, now its 2.5-4. I really have 0 idea why they would buff hip fire like this.

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 10:51pm

Quoted from "VincentNZ"

Pff...Honestly I think this was all rather placebo, we, as in my mates, never had any problems whatsoever.

Vincent, not this again. "If it doesn't happen in my gaming experience it must not have been true." This is a silly way to perceive anything, really. There was bountiful documentation for the existence of one frame kills/ deaths; you can't simply toss that evidence aside and cry "placebo!"
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.75
AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 1.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.34
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.2
SnapZoomPostTime 0.2
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 1.2
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.0
AttractUserInputMultiplier 1.0
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom -1.0
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.0
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 0.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.0
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

 AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.75
AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 1.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.34
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

the Sebstalder is quiet good since it can 3hit kill at any distanc ,but In my opinion i actually thikn the sweeper is better, its got a really really fast firerate that can beat alll those Noobmaticos, Helregall adn shitguns in close quarters , and its also really accurate out to like l;ong range,. overall great allround gun, jsut my 2\$ tho

Holy War? No Thanks.

Posts: 2,699

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 11:31pm

Quoted from "VincentNZ"

Pff...Honestly I think this was all rather placebo, we, as in my mates, never had any problems whatsoever.

Vincent, not this again. "If it doesn't happen in my gaming experience it must not have been true." This is a silly way to perceive anything, really. There was bountiful documentation for the existence of one frame kills/ deaths; you can't simply toss that evidence aside and cry "placebo!"

Ah I meant no disrespect, but it was exaggerated. Here is where I would agree that players should have been educated better. You know, sometimes you die and you think you were behind the corner already and then you blame it on the netcode. Or you run into a guy and he kills you almost instantly, or it just seemed that he must have seen you earlier. But in fact, the killcam shows up a second after your death and your enemy moved, so of course the angle is flawed. Or maybe you joined the server and have a higher ping, which gives your enemy just that split second more. Or maybe it was just bad luck or lack of skill.

And then somebody comes along and says there are issues with the netcode and that there is a bug where headshots do double damage and suddenly it all makes sense. Then all deaths suddenly are caused by these issues, and anything suspicious is suddenly filed under "netcode" even if its just a mechanical bug, or something totally unrelated to the game at all. Were there problems with this? Yes and very likely more than in previous iterations, but it was totally bloated.
When you got killed behind cover it was very likely perceived fishy because of the killcam, the angle and the delay. So your perception was deceived. Personally I find the tank spawn swap of BF1 much more annoying and gamebreaking as these netcode issues or even the BF3 M26 Dart bug.

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

Friday, April 28th 2017, 12:08am

Quoted from "VincentNZ"

Pff...Honestly I think this was all rather placebo, we, as in my mates, never had any problems whatsoever.

Vincent, not this again. "If it doesn't happen in my gaming experience it must not have been true." This is a silly way to perceive anything, really. There was bountiful documentation for the existence of one frame kills/ deaths; you can't simply toss that evidence aside and cry "placebo!"

Ah I meant no disrespect, but it was exaggerated. Here is where I would agree that players should have been educated better. You know, sometimes you die and you think you were behind the corner already and then you blame it on the netcode. Or you run into a guy and he kills you almost instantly, or it just seemed that he must have seen you earlier. But in fact, the killcam shows up a second after your death and your enemy moved, so of course the angle is flawed. Or maybe you joined the server and have a higher ping, which gives your enemy just that split second more. Or maybe it was just bad luck or lack of skill.

And then somebody comes along and says there are issues with the netcode and that there is a bug where headshots do double damage and suddenly it all makes sense. Then all deaths suddenly are caused by these issues, and anything suspicious is suddenly filed under "netcode" even if its just a mechanical bug, or something totally unrelated to the game at all. Were there problems with this? Yes and very likely more than in previous iterations, but it was totally bloated.
When you got killed behind cover it was very likely perceived fishy because of the killcam, the angle and the delay. So your perception was deceived. Personally I find the tank spawn swap of BF1 much more annoying and gamebreaking as these netcode issues or even the BF3 M26 Dart bug.

I mean he is right here in one sense:

"Netcode" was to BF4 what "Casual" is to BF1.

There was always a litany of whining about "netcode" whenever players weren't having engagements go their way.

Salt Miner

Posts: 3,636

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

Friday, April 28th 2017, 12:36am

The real question is, will the next game have casual netcode?
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

Friday, April 28th 2017, 12:59am

Quoted from "BleedingUranium"

The real question is, will the next game have casual netcode?

Nothing beats the BF2 netcode where you had to lag at the trailing edge of the player model to get hit detection.

Posts: 293

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

Friday, April 28th 2017, 4:51am

Regardless of what happened in BF4, I think the BF1 "netcode" has been improved and 1 frame death is not reported as often. Moreover, if we base our TTK changes on post patch BF4, it will not be any worse than BF4 right now.

I have read on CTE reddit that the DICE has started a roots initiative for the community to provide feedback on core mechanics, gunplay mechanics etc. I think it would be a good idea to discuss more detailed balance numbers here for DICE to look at. We need to let DICE know that the active Symthic community has found a core gunplay flaw that has undesirable consequences.

Let me start by making some proposed changes, and we can go from there.

MP18, Hellriegel:
4BTK up to 15m, 5BTK up to 28m, 6BTK up to 40m, 7BTK anywhere in the body onwards

Automatico:
5BTK up to 15m, 6BTK up to 28m, 7BTK up to 40m, 8BTK anywhere in the body onwards
Notes: Automatico with 5BTK still has a faster TTK than Hellriegel with 4BTK within 15m

Ribeye:
4BTK up to 15m, 5BTK up to 34m, 6BTK anywhere in the body onwards

4BTK up to 15m, 5BTK up to 45m, 6BTK anywhere in the body onwards
Notes: BAR and Madsen damage model downgraded to reflect their CQ/mid range orientation

4BTK up to 15m, 5BTK anywhere in the body onwards

Cei Rigotti:
3BTK to the body all range, 4BTK with limb shots 40+m. ROF to 326.

M1907:
3BTK up to 30m, 4BTK anywhere in the body 30+m. ROF to 326.

Mondragon:
No change to damage model, ROF to 276.

M1916:
No change to damage model, ROF to 256.

1906:
2BTK up to 15m, 3BTK anywhere onwards.

ROF to 398. 3BTK anywhere.

3BTK up to 20m, 4BTK up to 30m, 5BTK anywhere in the body onwards. ROF to 398.

RSC:
ROF to 179.

I understand that spread values need adjustment as well, but let's focus on raw DPS right now. Discuss.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "sid_tai" (Apr 28th 2017, 11:46am) with the following reason: Mistakes pointed out by BleedingUranium

Posts: 100

Date of registration
: Jul 28th 2014

Platform: PC

Reputation modifier: 5

Friday, April 28th 2017, 5:55am

Quoted from "VincentNZ"

TTK needs to drop across the board to allow for more tactical and strategic depth.
I shall raise you Rainbow six siege, With every single gun can one-shot anyone at any range. IMO TTK wasn't the define factor how a tactical and strategic a FPS is. This can sway a game to be very arcade(TitanFall 2?) or very realistc(R6S and etc).

Titanfall 2 has a super low TTK, I guess to make up for the maneuverability, since if it was high TTK, it'd take forever to kill anyone, what with them jumping, grappling, and wallrunning all over the place. But at the same time, I can't get into that game because you can get killed from any angle almost instantly.

If you're looking for games with very high TTK, I think Halo is a good one (3 especially). Overwatch is even more extreme.

As for BF1, I can't say I'm a fan of the incredibly high TTK, or rather, the BTK, either. I didn't like when they raised it in BF4, I really don't like how it's even lower in BF1. It's especially weird because weapons in BF1 fire slower than in BF4. I don't want the game to be hardcore mode, I just don't want my bullets to feel like they're paintballs.

However, I also think that what they did to shotguns is pretty criminal. They're incredibly underpowered compared to BF4, and the map design is more open, so as a whole they're just less useful. The only truly efficient one is the Model-10 Slug, but that's not a shotgun as much as it is the missing link of bolt-action rifles behind the SMLE and Martini Henry.