Let's wait for the thursday patch with the hitreg fix :).
1 hit kills are stupid except for bolts and headshots.
@jensiii i will throw out another fact that will blow people's mind:
1-shot-kills literally reduce the importance of positioning. The sole reason why you try to put yourself into a better position than your enemy is to maximize your chances of doing as much DPS as possible.
Assume you have incredible aim/aimbot/whatever. What difference does it make if you hide behind cover or stand in the open? 0. You will 1 shot your enemy no matter what, he has 0 time to react.
What if you need...let's say 4 shots. Even with your incredible aim/aimbot/whatever your enemy has X time to react. Where do you wanna position yourself to maximize your chances of surviving? Correct. At the better position.
I'm already curious how people wanna spin this fact .
@snuffeldjuret So.... you expect a small indie studio like NWI to work through a shit-ton of reports, most of them will be troll-reports anyways, and then actually keep all the evidence, just for that 0.005% chance that someone might actually plot a terrorist attack through voice communication in an online game? In a match that lasts....20 minutes? You want them to work through tons of 20+ minutes of demos, just because some idiot troll-reported? Just to find nothing? Are you gonna pay them to do that ridiculous work? Or who?
That's some next level fantasy story right here.
Be realistic and rational.
This is a joke. Hitting someone and he continues to run with full speed and jumping around is a fucking joke for a "hardcore" game. This might be okay for CoD or Battlefield or any other random ass shooter but for Insurgency it is not.
I somewhat agree. I don't think you should be able to jump when getting hit. Sprinting acceleration is also way too high.
No. Just no.
The devs pretty much confirmed yesterday on stream they are "happy" with the current TTK.
There's nothing "fun" or "satisfying" about low effort kills aka 1-shot-kills (besides bolt snipers). Deal with it.
Good aim pays off. Aim for the head. A lower TTK rewards bad aim. Because you need to HIT LESS to kill.
1 shots for headshots+bolts vs. everything
2 shots chest vs. no armor, 3-4 for pistols
3 shots high caliber vs light/heavy
4-5 shots medium caliber vs. light/heavy
balance armors by speed+cost.
@amurka apparently having to hit 2 or more shots is hard. Takes real effort.
competitive matchmaking suffers from multiple issues that create a very bad user experience at the moment.
What's the conversion rate for the competitive button? Why do people stop searching? After what amount of time etc. etc. All this information is important in order to create measures to help to raise the conversion rate. Here are some of the issues why players don't search/stop searching. This is based on personal experience and feedback from other players.
As a general rule of thumb: What's the purpose of the information? Does the represented information do a good job in regards to its purpose? That's the question you have to ask yourself and more importantly: you have to verify and test it.
Frustration is all over the place right now.
1. Players online indicator
The current implementation of the player-counter is bad. It doesn't exactly serve a purpose for Coop and Versus, but is damaging Competitive. The "chicken-or-egg" problem is very dominant right now. People don't search, because people don't search. There's a very well known psychological phenomenon called "social validation" which comes into effect here (and in other places) as well.
Frustration caused by:
- "13 people searching! Why don't i find a match!"
- "Only 5 people searching! I won't even bother..."
- "Why are only so few people playing competitive... maybe i shouldn't play either" (social validation)
Example question: what's the goal of showing "players-online"? If the answer is "to show how many people play a mode", then you are doing it wrong. That's information and not the purpose of showing that information.
Currently after getting put into the server you can't do anything, besides more waiting. The thing you've already done to get there in the first place. Some players do need quite some time to connect. Multiple times I've witnessed people leaving the server again, because of the infamous "x/10" situation. Some people don't have patience, in fact: most people don't. Easing the process of "waiting" is important. Not-doing-something while waiting is bad. Being occupied while waiting is good. CSGO is doing just fine with a 5 minute pre-match waiting period.
3. No public place to show-off
While it's nice and cool to get a rank, you have no public space to actually show-off. People like to brag and show-off. F.e. showing your competitive rank on the scoreboard will already be good. It allows people to:
- get a feeling of "companionship" ... "belonging" somewhere within the community
Those are both important aspects of online gaming communities.
4. More incentives
This is a tricky one. If you want to push competitive matchmaking -> you have to give competitive matchmaking more incentives. Special skins, more XP, more currency etc. etc. pp. Your choice. On the other side this might lead to a weird situation where some people think they are forced to play competitive matchmaking in order to get those incentives, despite the fact they don't like the mode, which is a legit opinion of course.
I think a reasonable approach would be to have certain "challenges" you have to complete in order to get certain things. You have to get people to at least try out the competitive matchmaking, in case they don't even know if they like it or not. Possible "challenges":
- Complete your placement matches -> get Item X/get X amount of currency
- Win X competitive matches -> get X (could be a daily achievement)
- competitive-only cosmetics, that can also be used in normal matchmaking
- more ideas here
Yes, bugs. Mainly:
- everything that prevents people from connecting
- spawn-bugs: sometimes you don't spawn initially/after capping on hideout/crossing insurgent side
Alright, I think doing this will be a huge step in the right direction. Some of the stuff can easily be implemented within a small patch, some will need way more work obviously.
@xiddy that's for gameplay reasons. Characters need the same hitbox.
don't feed the troll guys.
@dafez Thanks for your opinion. If you'd provide actual gameplay arguments it'd actually help the devs.
No. Realism is not a gameplay argument.
Forces people to be tactical
Also no.... it makes people either rambo alone or camp alone, as already stated and proved in multiple threads. It's literally what low-TTK people argue with: "So i can flank 10 people and kill them". That's not teamplay nor tactical.
and play with a focused intention, instead of running around like they're playing CoD.
Yeah, 3rd no. That's how i literally play Sandstorm right now. Because of the currently already low TTK. Just run around and kill stuff. Don't even need armor.
I'm bored of FPS games where everything comes down to aim.
You don't want AIM to be difficult in a first-person-shooter. I respect your opinion, i dont share it though.
I'm bored by the fact there is no good, competitive alternative to CSGO.
@oldkingcole225 gj generalizing those games. real deep. /s
By following your awesome generalizing you'd also say:
INS:S is still a tactical team-based FPS with a lot of realistic elements.
Nice way of making your point. /s
So let me explain why "one shot kills" or a lower TTK does not mean that the game is requiring less skill. It is simply requesting and rewarding different skills. So let's take a example that currently happens quite a lot (from my point of view). You see a enemy playing moving or just being static. The enemy player has not seen you yet, or he can not see you (because he could be facing the other direction). You start shooting at the player and you actually hit the player. The other player is reacting to the fire, faces you, shoots at you in full auto and actually kills you.
You 1-tapped yourself in the face with this example.
If a player has worse position than you and less time to react... and you don't kill him but he kills you, that means 1 thing: he had better aim than you. You play the same game. He has the same TTK you have. If you couldn't kill him despite being at an advantage -> your fault for having bad aim.
Here's the thing: if you failed in this situation, because you lacked skill in this area, it literally means you had less skill. Now if you would have WON this area because of different gameplay (lower TTK), that means this situation required LESS skill. Therefore the skill ceiling in this situation would be LOWER.