# Is Battlefield 5 not fun enough?: TTK and Health honest discussion \[TheBrokenMachine Video\] **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [February 26, 2019, 10:19am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665 "2019-02-26T10:19:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ael1as](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/439d5e/32.png) [@ael1as](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/ael1as)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2019, 10:19am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/1 "2019-02-26T10:19:00Z")
Is Battlefield 5 not fun enough? [![Video: Is Battlefield 5 not fun enough?](https://battlefieldforum.co/uploads/default/original/3X/f/d/fd9a55affdf67e3bc94c43baaedba393504d1c92.jpeg "Is Battlefield 5 not fun enough?") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Dgbk5zp6Tg) > [@](#): > > “There is just too much risk in moving around in this game, it becomes incredibly unbalanced” Quoting TheBrokenMachine in his video is the best way to synthesize the problem we still have in BFV. > [@](#): > > "when they changed it i didnt like it, looking back…personally I think a slightly higher TTK…could actually improve the game " He is honestly admitting that he is changing his mind with regard the TTK question. Ok Ok I know what are you thinking about now: “oh my god the TTK issue again!”. We all know the mess it come out when DICE changed the TTK but i think the problem is still open: in this game playing aggressive is not rewarding and too risky. I’m a veteran BF player, I play it since BF2 in 2005 and I totally agree with TheBrokenMachine. **This situation creates frustration in players and promote the use of lame weapons and bad passive-defensive behaviours enhancing stalemates.** We have to be honest and rational: looking back, something big happened in DICE team when first they decided to slightly higher the TTK and to create a dedicated hardcore mode (the correct solution) and then suddenly the decision was drawn back (the wrong solution). **Some youtubers in that moment overreacted** (Westie and others) and I saw some sort of “blackmailing” that sounded like “hey give us back the old TTK or we don’t support this anymore”. This added more pressure and emotionality in a crucial moment and the decision makers were not helped. **I’m also sure that the loudest voice is not the majority voice** : many players have the same opinion as TheBrokenMachine or others veterans like me. And many of them simply quitted the game silently. Yes, we all know that bugs, new contents, visibility and so on are really important points, but I firmly believe that the first plan (a part of) DICE team tried to do was the correct first step (slightly higher TTK and pull back an hardcore mode). That’s just my two cents. Just watch the video because TheBrokenMachine argues in details his claims. Good luck to DICE team, I alwayes believe in your job. ---
**Author:** ![princemiah](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/a8b319/32.png) [@princemiah](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/princemiah)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 6:17pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/2 "2019-02-28T18:17:00Z")
DICE didn’t need to have these crazy gameplay changes. BF3 was the blue print. BF4 is the best battlefield of this Generation console. Should kept traditional game modes like squad deathmatch. And the biggest for me: Hardcore Mode. I hate the arcade like game play. ---
**Author:** ![TEKNOCODE](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/teknocode/32/103723_2.png) [@TEKNOCODE](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/TEKNOCODE)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 6:27pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/3 "2019-02-28T18:27:00Z")
> [@princemiah](#): > > DICE didn’t need to have these crazy gameplay changes. BF3 was the blue print. BF4 is the best battlefield of this Generation console. > > Should kept traditional game modes like squad deathmatch. > > And the biggest for me: Hardcore Mode. > > I hate the arcade like game play. Battlefield 4 is 🗑 ---
**Author:** ![jimbutt9](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@jimbutt9](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/jimbutt9)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 7:28pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/4 "2019-02-28T19:28:00Z")
in BF4 wasn’t there a patch that scaled back the damage model on the guns in the game with low ttk? I dont remember why they did that but I dont remember any outrage for it. Why did people not like the higher ttk in BFV? ---
**Author:** ![Pyr0Plazma](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/pyr0plazma/32/106472_2.png) [@Pyr0Plazma](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Pyr0Plazma)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 7:32pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/5 "2019-02-28T19:32:00Z")
> [@jimbutt9](#): > > in BF4 wasn’t there a patch that scaled back the damage model on the guns in the game with low ttk? I dont remember why they did that but I dont remember any outrage for it. Why did people not like the higher ttk in BFV? They had to scale down damage because the netcode was so bad that it was artificially increasing the overall TTK. Once DICE finally got a handle of the netcode issues they discovered that people were dying faster than intended therefore they raised the TTK to compensate. ---
**Author:** ![Pyr0Plazma](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/pyr0plazma/32/106472_2.png) [@Pyr0Plazma](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Pyr0Plazma)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 7:33pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/6 "2019-02-28T19:33:00Z")
I don’t support any changes in regards to raising the TTK unless player movement is looked at first. ---
**Author:** ![jimbutt9](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@jimbutt9](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/jimbutt9)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 7:50pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/7 "2019-02-28T19:50:00Z")
> [@AssaultPlazma](#): > > > [@jimbutt9](#): > > > > in BF4 wasn’t there a patch that scaled back the damage model on the guns in the game with low ttk? I dont remember why they did that but I dont remember any outrage for it. Why did people not like the higher ttk in BFV? > > They had to scale down damage because the netcode was so bad that it was artificially increasing the over TTK. Once DICE finally got a handle of the netcode issues they discovered that people were dying faster than intended therefore they raised the TTK to compensate. Okay but with BFV’s TTK change what was the issue? I never experienced the change but to me they both seem a little similar. ---
**Author:** ![Pyr0Plazma](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/pyr0plazma/32/106472_2.png) [@Pyr0Plazma](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Pyr0Plazma)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 8:05pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/8 "2019-02-28T20:05:00Z")
> [@jimbutt9](#): > > > [@AssaultPlazma](#): > > > > > [@jimbutt9](#): > > > > > > in BF4 wasn’t there a patch that scaled back the damage model on the guns in the game with low ttk? I dont remember why they did that but I dont remember any outrage for it. Why did people not like the higher ttk in BFV? > > > > They had to scale down damage because the netcode was so bad that it was artificially increasing the over TTK. Once DICE finally got a handle of the netcode issues they discovered that people were dying faster than intended therefore they raised the TTK to compensate. > > Okay but with BFV’s TTK change what was the issue? I never experienced the change but to me they both seem a little similar. In BF1 many complained that on release the TTK was too high. Granted on release this was a combination of bullet deviation and lower bullet damage. eventually the TTK on just about every weapon was increased. I’m not a stats expert but I don’t believe the bullet damage was literally increased as much as bullet deviation was taken out. ---
**Author:** ![mf\_shro0m](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/mf_shro0m/32/106941_2.png) [@mf\_shro0m](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/mf_shro0m)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 8:48pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/9 "2019-02-28T20:48:00Z")
I barely played BFI because the TTK was way too high and it killed the gameplay ---
**Author:** ![One\_Called\_Kane](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/one_called_kane/32/107031_2.png) [@One\_Called\_Kane](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/One_Called_Kane)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 9:18pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/10 "2019-02-28T21:18:00Z")
> [@jimbutt9](#): > > Okay but with BFV’s TTK change what was the issue? I never experienced the change but to me they both seem a little similar. Because in BF4 the difference between a 4-shot kill and a 5-shot kill with ARs shooting 700-900 RPM with 30-round magazines and little recoil was tolerable. In BFV the majority of the rifles have less ammo, shoot more slowly, and have more recoil, so the actual effect on gameplay was more significant. Also the TTK changes in BF4 were done carefully with some regard for balance, and after it was done pretty much all weapons remained viable, or at least as viable as before. On the flip side the changes in BFV were done with all the care and attention of a monkey with a hammer, managing to somehow make SMGs even worse than they already were while also rendering a good 30% of the remaining weapons obsolete. In Short: The BF4 changes were measured, calculated fixes to a problem. The BFV changes were a ham-handed panic move to try to salvage sales numbers. One was a fix for the game, the other was a fix for someone’s wallet. ---
**Author:** ![jimbutt9](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/87869e/32.png) [@jimbutt9](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/jimbutt9)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 10:22pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/11 "2019-02-28T22:22:00Z")
> [@One\_Called\_Kane](#): > > Because in BF4 the difference between a 4-shot kill and a 5-shot kill with ARs shooting 700-900 RPM with 30-round magazines and little recoil was tolerable. In BFV the majority of the rifles have less ammo, shoot more slowly, and have more recoil, so the actual effect on gameplay was more significant. > > Also the TTK changes in BF4 were done carefully with some regard for balance, and after it was done pretty much all weapons remained viable, or at least as viable as before. On the flip side the changes in BFV were done with all the care and attention of a monkey with a hammer, managing to somehow make SMGs even worse than they already were while also rendering a good 30% of the remaining weapons obsolete. > > In Short: > The BF4 changes were measured, calculated fixes to a problem. The BFV changes were a ham-handed panic move to try to salvage sales numbers. One was a fix for the game, the other was a fix for someone’s wallet. That makes sense. I can see DICE/EA doing that nowadays. Makes me wonder if they really had the right idea but it was just executed that poorly. Guess the quality of the patches have really gone downhill since BF4. ---
**Author:** ![bran1986](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/bran1986/32/101405_2.png) [@bran1986](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/bran1986)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2019, 11:40pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/12 "2019-02-28T23:40:00Z")
> [@AssaultPlazma](#): > > > [@jimbutt9](#): > > > > > [@AssaultPlazma](#): > > > > > > > [@jimbutt9](#): > > > > > > > > in BF4 wasn’t there a patch that scaled back the damage model on the guns in the game with low ttk? I dont remember why they did that but I dont remember any outrage for it. Why did people not like the higher ttk in BFV? > > > > > > They had to scale down damage because the netcode was so bad that it was artificially increasing the over TTK. Once DICE finally got a handle of the netcode issues they discovered that people were dying faster than intended therefore they raised the TTK to compensate. > > > > Okay but with BFV’s TTK change what was the issue? I never experienced the change but to me they both seem a little similar. > > In BF1 many complained that on release the TTK was too high. Granted on release this was a combination of bullet deviation and lower bullet damage. eventually the TTK on just about every weapon was increased. I’m not a stats expert but I don’t believe the bullet damage was literally increased as much as bullet deviation was taken out. Bullet damage was higher in BF1 than BFV on most guns. The lack of recoil and spread, especially on DMRs is indeed the reason why ttk is much faster. ---
**Author:** ![CHAMMOND1992](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/82dd89/32.png) [@CHAMMOND1992](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/CHAMMOND1992)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 12:27am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/13 "2019-03-01T00:27:00Z")
TTK is the least prominent factor for what makes this game not as addictive. The game is not complete. Point. Blank. Period. Don’t understand why an in depth analysis is really necessary when the answer is obvious. The game wasn’t balanced before release. People who got the game day 1 were basically playing a late beta game. There’s attrition, which for some odd reason the public opinion on it has done a 180, when even in the beta some people like myself knew it sucked. There’s the bugs, the CC issue, the lack of things to get with CC, the max rank being held at 50 , no service stars, horrible dog tags, crap UI, weapon specializations which I knew from the beginning dice would not be able to balance properly(SLR’s specifically). The Tides of War was a nice touch at first, but it literally took me 2 weeks to just stop doing the assignments all together because it’s just meaningless. After every update I get curious on what the next one will have and when it will come. This game honestly feels like it’s starving. ---
**Author:** ![Pelliy](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/da6949/32.png) [@Pelliy](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Pelliy)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2019, 12:35am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/is-battlefield-5-not-fun-enough-ttk-and-health-honest-discussion-thebrokenmachine-video/106665/14 "2019-03-01T00:35:00Z")
I she with much of broken said but remove health attrition. Ttk2 was the right move but poorly executed. Allow it some time in a cte environment. I don’t care for the 3x scopes. I don’t fond them to be an issue. I feel you fix those things the game will be better. Also add better maps.