TTK&TTD| It’s hard to kill a soidler
Hello @EA @DICE. I am writing about this for the second time. Not only am I writing about this, but many players are — mostly veteran players have focused on this issue. Killing a person is very dif...
Forum Discussion
Thanks for your input, but this isn’t about skill issue. I know how recoil, spread, and bullet drop work I’ve been playing Battlefield since the older titles and I’m familiar with how different weapon mechanics affect performance.
What I (and many veteran players) are pointing out is that the perception of TTK is as important as the numbers on paper. On a spreadsheet 4–5 bullets might sound fine, but in practice with spread, bloom, latency, hitreg issues, and the chaos of Battlefield-scale engagements, it often feels like you’re dumping far more into an enemy before they go down. That perception matters, because Battlefield always had a more grounded, weighty gunplay feel compared to COD. Right now it feels too much like COD spongey soldiers that take longer to kill.
Also, telling players they’re only hitting 1/6 of their shots is dismissive. Nobody is suggesting 100% accuracy at all times, but the TTK/TTD experience should still feel authentic and consistent. Veterans aren’t asking for “easy kills,” we’re asking for a kill system that feels true to Battlefield’s roots and more realistic combat pacing.
So yes, technically TTK = time, not bullet count. But in actual gameplay, bullet count directly shapes how players experience TTK. That’s why this discussion matters.
I don't care about you or anyone else being a "veteran" player. You along with many others seem to think it's necessary to mention it, but it says nothing about the merit of your argument.
On a spreadsheet 4–5 bullets might sound fine, but in practice with spread, bloom, latency, hitreg issues, and the chaos of Battlefield-scale engagements, it often feels like you’re dumping far more into an enemy before they go down.
You summed up a bunch of things that together don't make a coherent argument. I'll break it down for you:
- Your ability to deal with spread and the chaos of the Battlefield is a matter of skill.
- You mentioning "bloom" confuses me, what exactly is bloom according to you?
- The game compensates for latency. Unless you have an absurdly bad ping, you don't even have to worry about latency.
- Hit registration issues? That's something that requires actual evidence. I don't believe it to be an issue at all.
That perception matters, because Battlefield always had a more grounded, weighty gunplay feel compared to COD. Right now it feels too much like COD spongey soldiers that take longer to kill.
So how come your perception is so much different from mine? I don't have any issues with killing multiple people with a single mag. If anything I have to correct myself from not obsessively reloading when I still have 23 bullets in the chamber after killing another player. Again, comparisons to COD are pointless and you should consider not making them.
Veterans aren’t asking for “easy kills,” we’re asking for a kill system that feels true to Battlefield’s roots and more realistic combat pacing.
It's a bad habit to speak for others using "we", if you're not a chosen representative. Battlefield has never been realistic. If anything, there have been multiple Battlefield titles where some of the weapons had a TTK that was by far slower than Battlefield 6. Bad Company 2 is infamous for its slow TTK.
So yes, technically TTK = time, not bullet count. But in actual gameplay, bullet count directly shapes how players experience TTK. That’s why this discussion matters.
While I do think that bullet count in theory could affect TTK, it's not for any of the reasons that you've mentioned before. Nor would it ever lead to a situation where you'd need an entire magazine to kill an enemy.
You keep saying skill issue and dismissing the discussion, but that doesn’t answer the concrete points. I’ll break it down clearly so there’s no hand waving left:
Skill vs design (short): yes, skill matters. I don’t dispute that. But design also shapes what skill looks like. You can be a very accurate player and still feel the weaponplay is wrong if the underlying mechanics (spread, bloom, recoil, headshot multipliers, hitreg, netcode) produce inconsistent outcomes. Dismissing complaints as “player problem” ignores that distinction.
- What I mean by bloom: bloom = a dynamic increase in bullet spread/dispersion while continuously firing (shots become less centered). It’s not the same as recoil (vertical/horizontal climb) or damage falloff. Bloom increases shot scatter and reduces on-target percentage even if your aim point is perfect. If you don’t understand bloom, you can’t credibly claim it isn’t affecting perceived TTK.
- Spread, bloom, recoil & TTK link: If bloom/spread is high, your effective hit probability drops — more bullets miss or hit limbs, so more bullets are needed to reach lethal damage.
If recoil is not consistently compensated by the weapon’s handling/ADS behavior, your follow-up shots will land off target.
Those two together turn a theoretical TTK (from damage values and fire-rate) into a practical TTK that feels much longer. That’s not opinion it’s how probability and weapon mechanics work. - Latency & hit registration (short): yes, servers compensate, but compensation isn’t magical. Interpolation, server tick rate, client smoothing, and desync scenarios still create moments where hits look like they should register but are resolved differently server-side. Saying the game compensates for latency isn’t an explanation it’s a gloss over complex systems that impact hit outcomes. If you want to refute that, provide the server tick and netcode diagrams or show a reproducible clip where a clear hit always registers.
- Hit registration claims: you say “requires actual evidence. Fine I and many others have posted clips and recorded situations where shots that visibly connect don’t register or deal inconsistent damage. If you think that’s anecdotal, ask the devs for hit/shot logs or watch community clips. Anecdotes become evidence when they’re reproducible and numerous.
- Why perception differs: you likely play in a way that maximizes hit percentage (steady aim, burst control, favorable engagement ranges). Veteran players are pointing out a systemic feel change versus older Battlefield entries. That’s not nostalgia it’s comparative experience across titles and modes. If you don’t see it, great but that doesn’t invalidate the many players who do.
- Balance and AR headshots: nobody is asking that ARs one shot everything. We’re asking for consistent, believable body shot lethality and for the baseline TTK to match Battlefield’s identity (weighty, lethal, but not arcade fast). That’s perfectly reasonable and doesn’t break balance if done with appropriate multipliers and range curves.
- Constructive test anyone can run: go to a controlled firing range (test map or server), pick one weapon, record: ammo count at spawn → ammo count when you kill a stationary target at 20m, then repeat at 50m and 80m. Do this for several weapons and post the raw numbers. If you consistently need >1 mag on average for body kills at close range, something isn’t matching the advertised damage model or the practical hit probability is too low.
- What we actually want from DICE/EA: transparency on netcode/tick rate, an official statement about hitreg, a server browser/test server for TTK tuning, or at minimum an official Hardcore toggle in the main menu where body shot lethality and TTK are tuned toward veteran expectations. These are measurable requests not emotional whining.
this isn’t ego posturing it’s feedback about core game identity and player experience. If you want to argue purely from numbers, show the community your raw test logs and POV clips where you consistently kill with <6 bullets at range X. Until then, saying it’s not hard isn’t a rebuttal it’s an opinion.
If you want, I’ll post the firing range test procedure as a one post template so more players can produce consistent data. That will settle this much faster than skill issue lines.
Spread, bloom, recoil & TTK link: If bloom/spread is high, your effective hit probability drops — more bullets miss or hit limbs, so more bullets are needed to reach lethal damage.
If recoil is not consistently compensated by the weapon’s handling/ADS behavior, your follow-up shots will land off target.
Those two together turn a theoretical TTK (from damage values and fire-rate) into a practical TTK that feels much longer. That’s not opinion it’s how probability and weapon mechanics work.This is quite literally definition of skill issue. If you are not able to control the mechanics in the game, so you miss more bullets, therefor the perceived TTK feels slower for you.
Latency & hit registration (short): yes, servers compensate, but compensation isn’t magical. Interpolation, server tick rate, client smoothing, and desync scenarios still create moments where hits look like they should register but are resolved differently server-side. Saying the game compensates for latency isn’t an explanation it’s a gloss over complex systems that impact hit outcomes. If you want to refute that, provide the server tick and netcode diagrams or show a reproducible clip where a clear hit always registers.
Hit registration claims: you say “requires actual evidence. Fine I and many others have posted clips and recorded situations where shots that visibly connect don’t register or deal inconsistent damage. If you think that’s anecdotal, ask the devs for hit/shot logs or watch community clips. Anecdotes become evidence when they’re reproducible and numerous.You will likely always have some degree of issues like this in a online multiplayer game. The focus should be to minimize these issues rather than changing the TTK. Lack of hit-registration would be the same issue even if the TTK was faster, but I would argue it would be even more annoying, as you would lose more of the gunfights (due to latency) where your hits fails to register.
You are using the term veteran player way too much, and I think you are confusing it with wanting a hardcore mode to be honest.this isn’t ego posturing it’s feedback about core game identity and player experience. If you want to argue purely from numbers, show the community your raw test logs and POV clips where you consistently kill with <6 bullets at range X. Until then, saying it’s not hard isn’t a rebuttal it’s an opinion.
It is not hard to find gameplay clips / videos like that. Here is an example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D96j41p4Wu0AchillezBF If every concern about weapon feel, hit registration, or TTK perception is just going to be brushed off as “skill issue,” then there’s no point in having a balance discussion at all. That phrase is a conversation ender, not an argument. You keep repeating “just a skill issue” as if veterans who’ve played across BF2, BF3, BF4, BF1, and BFV suddenly forgot how to aim. That’s not only dismissive, it’s arrogant. The entire point is that practical gameplay experience doesn’t always match theoretical spreadsheets or cherry picked YouTube clips. A highlight reel of someone melting enemies proves nothing about the consistency of the average experience across servers.
Battlefield’s identity has always been defined by its gunplay feel. If experienced players are saying it now feels spongy and COD like, that feedback matters whether you agree or not. Calling it “hardcore mode confusion” is just an attempt to sidestep the fact that many players share this concern.
So either engage with the actual point that Battlefield’s core TTK feels different from its heritage or keep repeating “skill issue” and prove you’re not here to discuss, only to dismiss.
- The reason I got confused is because you mentioned spread and bloom as if they were two different things. What you're probably referring to is essentially just a component of what I'd call spread. Depending on the game, it might be slightly different but in simple terms it just comes down to spread increase per shot and spread decrease. I don't know why you'd call it bloom.
- I agree, there's a difference between "theoretical TTK" and "practical TTK". However, when speaking of TTK, I generally assume a theoretically perfect hitrate. This is because it's not possible to reliably make comparisons based on a myriad of random external factors. Sure it can "feel" longer, but you can't reliably and accurately quantify a feeling and use that to balance the game.
- You're the one making the claim that latency is contributing significantly to the TTK, so you are the one that's responsible for providing the evidence. I'm not disputing the fact that latency could influence TTK, but at the same time I have no reason to believe that latency plays a significant role as long as your latency is low.
- Perhaps you have, but I've not seen you post them in this thread. Provide the evidence and if I'm wrong about it, I'll be happy to change my opinion.
- I don't dispute when you say that you "feel" something is off, but feelings alone aren't a good foundation for discussion. Feelings are subjective. If you can search for evidence to explain those feelings, then that could either validate, or invalidate those feelings. If my perception is completely opposite to yours, then that could suggest that it's not a deliberate balancing decision, but there is something else going on. Let's say it's a bug that's affecting the TTK, then why would you balance the TTK around that instead of fixing the bug?
- Again, you're using "we". It's a fallacious appeal to authority. Based on the statistics we've seen in the beta, Battlefield 6 is in my opinion already weighty and lethal. I'm not too sure how you could quantify weighty, but if you're able to effectively kill your opponent that already counts as lethal? It's probably a subject that requires you to be more specific.
- Indeed, that's at least one out of several different tests you could do. Feel free to share your results. If those results can be reproduced and prove your point, I'll be happy to change my mind.
- Battlefield has generally been very transparent about being able to troubleshoot your own issues. Battlefield 2042 had extensive graphs that you could enable. Last time I check the settings in Battlefield 6 beta, I saw similar options to enable them. I haven't compared them though. As far as your other requests go, I don't have anything to say about that, you're obviously free to provide feedback and ask for things.
this isn’t ego posturing it’s feedback about core game identity and player experience.
If you don't want people to think you're ego posturing, perhaps use a little less "we" and a little more "I"
it’s not hard isn’t a rebuttal it’s an opinion.
I've seen you do this multiple times already, but to me it looks like you're trying to invert the burden of proof. The burden of proof is on the person that makes the claim, not the person that denies it. However, it wouldn't be terribly difficult to link a random YouTube video showing people that don't need an entire magazine, but I'm getting the feeling that's not the kind of evidence you're looking for.
just ignore him, he disagree with every one unless it it is him
Featured Places
