Single fire vs Full auto

@slazenger A yeah, TTK means time to kill and there is no "minimum required" to be called TTK. If TTK is 0.000001 sec, it's still a TTK of 0.000001 sec. Benz is misleading you.

@best-waifu Let's just call it "high lethality 1 shot 1 kill" from now on rather than time to kill
Time to kill in my mind is the time it takes from the first bullet making contact - the subsequent bullets making contact - to the target dying.
This is not how we want it.
We want it 1 shot 1 kill.

@slazenger I'm sorry, TTK and high lethality are two different concept. Time to kill means one simple thing, how long it takes to kill something.
high lethality means very lethal, it's too vague. Technically a game where 200 lives are lost can be considered highly lethal, even if the players died a slow and agonizing death.
Stick to TTK, it means what you're trying to say. Just ask for a very short TTK since it's what you want. You can even specify what amount of time should be the maximum to kill a player! It's a well established concept, keep to it otherwise you'll probably confuse other people.

last edited by Best Waifu

Doesnt really matter how you name it, insurgency and insmod had the useful Semifire gameplay, plz bring it back. 🙂

I feel like kindergarten with fullauto and optics only...

I guess what I was saying was that I'd be totally cool with a lightning fast TTK if there were killcams to go along with it...because there's something cathartic about SEEING yourself die. More often than not it shows you what you did wrong. The added benefit of occasionally being able to SEE someone's aimbot, wallhacks, or map exploits at work is just a bonus.

This thread is still going, hm?

@tuliottr said in Single fire vs Full auto:

@biass said in Single fire vs Full auto:

  • The average Insurgency Source player is a very terrible shooter player

how is that supposed to be an argument to change the way Insurgency plays? If we Insurgency players are supposedly bad at other shooters, then there is your reason why the game shouldn't change directions: we are happy the way the original plays and changing it will antagonize a huge portion of the playerbase

You missed the context here, it's about trying to say that "because i played insurgency source" that one has an opinion of higher value. I'm saying you don't.

Poor Benz lmao, video game forums are always a comedy.

What the fuck is happening here even.

@slazenger said in Single fire vs Full auto:

@best-waifu Let's just call it "high lethality 1 shot 1 kill" from now on rather than time to kill
Time to kill in my mind is the time it takes from the first bullet making contact - the subsequent bullets making contact - to the target dying.
This is not how we want it.
We want it 1 shot 1 kill.

As an Ins2014 veteran I don't want one shot, one kill because it leads to an annoying meta where there's zero reason to use anything higher than 5.56 in caliber (even virtually zero reason to use a primary weapon; I often did better with an M9 than an M4A1).

Also, armor doesn't make you a tank. You're actually kind of resilient to bullets without armor from what I've tested. With no armor you can survive:

-> One shot of a .45 ACP round from a M45 / M1911
-> One shot of 7.62x39 or 5.56x45
-> One shot of 9x19mm from any pistol or SMG
-> Two shots of 9x18mm (Makarov)
-> One shot of 7.62x51 NATO (from a SCAR-H; everything else one-shots)
-> Two shots of 4.6x30mm (MP7)

Light Armor would probably tank an extra shot from low-caliber and possibly intermediate-caliber cartridges, and Heavy Armor allows you to tank an extra shot of a battle rifle cartridge (although any caliber .308 AP and higher is a one-shot, I believe).

For everyone proposing 1 shot kills as a solution for full auto consider Rainbow 6 siege as a case study. In the competitive scene there are nearly 100% headshot kills. The competitive players' choice of weapons? FAMAS, SMG-11, AK-74, HK416, et al. — with the one-shot kill meta rate of fire is king. Put short, RoF = headshots.

With the low TTK people are proposing you'll essentially make the whole body one massive headshot. Rate of fire will be more dominant than ever.

@doghead said in Single fire vs Full auto:

For everyone proposing 1 shot kills as a solution for full auto consider Rainbow 6 siege as a case study. In the competitive scene there are nearly 100% headshot kills. The competitive players' choice of weapons? FAMAS, SMG-11, AK-74, HK416, et al. — with the one-shot kill meta rate of fire is king. Put short, RoF = headshots.

With the low TTK people are proposing you'll essentially make the whole body one massive headshot. Rate of fire will be more dominant than ever.

You are putting this a bit out of proportion and you are missing some rather important things.

The competitive scene does not have a 100% or close to it ratio of Headshot Kills. You are talking about people who are professional players or have the skills to become professional players. This does not apply to all players who play competitive or even the majority of it. We are probably looking at the top 10-15% of the competitive players.

The reason that there is a focus on Headshots in Siege that it has a relatively high time to kill when it is not a Headshot. This works for Siege, especially since there a lot of things that influence Gameplay in other ways. There are tons of gadgets that can slow down players, blind them, reduce their health significally and so on. You are also dead if you get killed during one round. In Insurgency you will not be out for a entire round after dying once. The only exception would a very terrible round of firefight. So Siege has very different "rules" that makes it okay that headshots are very rewarding and something you should try to get efficient with in this game.

Insurgency Sandstorm is a very different game and it's DNA (so to speak) has so far rewarded very different things.

@mefirst Your gripes with the comparison are far too abstract and irrelevant. In terms of gunplay they are extremely similar games, both with a heavy emphasis on positioning and ADS accuracy.

Competitive play pushes the game design to its limits. Its natural to use it as a gauge for how the game design works or doesn't work.

@doghead said in Single fire vs Full auto:

Rate of fire will be more dominant than ever.

Not true

Source: Insurgency2014

Sandstorm right now is just keep spraying at everything. Not very interesting gunplay.

@slazenger said in Single fire vs Full auto:

@doghead said in Single fire vs Full auto:

Rate of fire will be more dominant than ever.

Not true

Source: Insurgency2014

Yes, and no one used automatic fire in Ins2.

I don't know what the hell game you played Slazenger but it sounds like you'll never be satisfied with Sandstorm.

@benz all. Making single fire viable by increasing dmg via f.e. AP rounds makes full auto even more viable.

which is why they should increase recoil, in INS2 you could kill with 1 or 2 bullets but recoil was pretty high making full auto really powerful but also hard to use. you had to be pretty good at recoil control to spray at anyone at a distance

and guess what that's kind of how it works IRL. soldiers have full auto on most of their weapons but they shoot single fire if the target is at long range.

with a high TTK like they currently have it's not realistic at all though IMO, a lot of gunfights at range are these long drawn out battles where you chip away at each other's health. it's not uncommon for me (or my enemy) to take a hit and go back into cover, than they pop out and take another hit and go back into cover. feels more like a paintball match than deadly combat if you ask me.....

@zwenkwiel said in Single fire vs Full auto:

with a high TTK like they currently have...

Currently the TTK is 2 hits with M4 and AK74. Do you consider that a high TTK?

yes because that's without armor and most people are wearing heavy armor making it require a lot more most of the time.
I want my AP AMMOOO!!!! XD

No AP as an 'attachment' supply option. There are other ways to solve the issue. Always taking AP ammo in the OG Insurgency was annoying, It just limits load-out options.

single fire is very viable atm anyways. dunno what people talk about. i mostly play semi auto and only go full auto in close quarter fights...like..how it should be.

https://clips.twitch.tv/CoyPiercingShallotJKanStyle

didnt even reload between all those kills. semi is viable.

@benz said in Single fire vs Full auto:

single fire is very viable atm anyways. dunno what people talk about. i mostly play semi auto and only go full auto in close quarter fights...like..how it should be.

https://clips.twitch.tv/CoyPiercingShallotJKanStyle

didnt even reload between all those kills. semi is viable.

That does not show a lot because the majority of kills looked like headshots. You could have done the same with going full auto, only exception is that you may would have had to reload once. The argument is not that single fire is unplayable, but that full auto is too effective in comparison.

The Damage difference should be =
Full-Auto ≤ Semi-Auto < Bolt-Action


Reason =

Bolt-Action = There is one second delay between each shot.

You fire a shot - - > Wait for the animation - - > You fire another shot

It takes about 2 seconds to kill a person.

Currently , Bolt-Action has a huge disadvantage.

Bolt-Action needs to be one shot kill.


On the other hand , Full-Auto needs more recoil.

You just press down left mouse button - - > You fire 3 bullets continuously - - > All 3 bullets hit the target accurately

It takes less than 0.5 seconds to kill a person.

Full-Auto is too powerful because the accuracy is too high and recoil is too low.

Currently , Full-Auto has a huge advantage.

Full-Auto needs more kickbacks and more horizontal recoil.

Recently, I have seen so many people who just want to spray bullets like water from a garden hose.

Many people are doing this because Full-Auto does not have enough kickbacks.


For weapons that can switch between Semi-Auto / Full-Auto =

When using Semi-Auto mode = The recoil should be lower

When using Full-Auto mode = The bullet spread should be much wider

last edited by Nick Kim