Heavy barrel or suppressor in battlefield 3, which is better?

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

This question seems to pop up on whirlpool semi frequently so it is probably worth looking at. The answer is very dependent on your play style, how you want to play, what gametypes you play and how you aim.

A quick recap of heavy barrel and suppressor mechanics.

Heavy barrel
Reduces ADS spread by a lot
Increases damage drop off start and extends end
Increases vertical recoil
Increases hip fire spread by a lot

Overall this means a weapon with heavy barrel is more accurate and capable dealing damage to a longer range than a weapon with another attachment. The main trade off is vertical recoil which is easily controlled in battlefield 3. There is a reason this is probably the most popular attachment for assault and carbines – its negatives are not very impactful and its pros are excellent. Apparently the original release of bf3 had the HB adding more additional spread to each bullet that left the barrel when bursting. Thus after around 7-8 bullets there was so much spread the player had to stop firing. This was removed but not mentioned in patch notes at the time.

Suppressor
Hides fire actions on the mini map
Slightly reduces vertical recoil
Increases AD spread
Reduces muzzle velocity
Reduces maximum fall off distance
Increases hip fire spread

I whored the suppressor before the first big patch and have hardly touched it since.

Overall the suppressor modifiers are killer. Damage, accuracy reduction through spread and via not using the heavy barrel, shorter effective range. Feels like shooting spit balls. 1-2 additional bullets to kill and you have to lead significantly more due to the massively reduced muzzle velocity and drop.

The largest benefit is hiding you on the mini map.

The problem with heavy barrel

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

There is no problem, the attachment is too good and leaves little opportunity for variation because of this. DICE stated at one point that the naked weapon should be the benchmark and perform in the middle of attachments, however this is not the case. Because of vertical recoil mechanics the heavy barrels main negative is easily controllable. You can really feel the weapon downgrade when not using the heavy barrel, accuracy is out the window.

So… heavy barrel is the best?

If you had asked me a week ago I would have said yes, however the past 3-4 squad rush games along with some pubbing has made me appreciate the suppressor a little more. For reference I run AEK + foregrip. I have not always been a heavy barrel lover as I used and abused the suppressor until it was nerfed (and heavy barrel buffed) in the first patch.

The main point to note in relation to the ADS spread reduction is that it simply does not matter all that much unless the enemy player is quite a distance away. The spread patterns on symthic for various guns look terrible, however that is at a distance. Up close to around 50m I think the suppressor is most excellent. In squad rush this is compounded by the fact that most teams my clan has played run heavy barrels or flash suppressors. This means it is a little different and throws something else into the mix that they need to deal with and at my teams play level they may not be able to do this in the three sets of a game. For squad rush in a competitive environment I don’t know if it would be viable for a whole team to run suppressors, but one or two people would probably be decent.

You do need to keep a few things in mind – it suits a roaming role better than a stationary role, or if the role is stationary on defence you have a few different peek position options.

There are some situations where I would take always a heavy barrel. For instance on metro. If my job is peeking lockers while attacking I would take heavy barrel. The distance is enough and the encounters very brief – every bullet counts. Hiding your location does not benefit you because that particular encounter is extremely linear and a player is almost always there.

Final word on the suppressor

I have enjoyed it lately, even in competition games that I would usually not use it. It makes it slightly different at at my teams level (not awesome but not crap) I feel one player running it gives us an advantage, if only because the other teams are not used to it.

I would not run one on 64p crowded maps due to so many players in a small area – you are likely to get spotted anyway. I would not run one on the armored kill maps that frequently have long range encounters. I would not run suppressor if you play at a low level for fun – players at this level are not likely to use the mini map as heavily, removing the main reason for running a suppressor.

Finally if you are very accurate you may notice the decrease from the heavy barrel, even at close range.

What is spread in battlefield 3? How to counter it?

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

There are two main gun mechanics in BF3. Recoil and Spread.

Every bullet that leaves your weapon has a small amount of randomness added to it, this is referred to as spread.

Some attachments add spread, some remove it. Spread is uncontrollable randomness and the reason why I initially advised against using foregrip.

Spread appears to be the mechanic that DICE use to make hip fire inaccurate, however it still exists when aiming down sights.

The only way to counter it is using a heavy barrel.

Should I get a 50mm or 35mm for my Crop DSLR

This is a very good question and I hope to shed some light on which lens to pick when shopping, or help you decide, as I had to, which lens to sell. This is primarily your decision but there are a number of factors that are outside your personal shooting style I think everyone should take into account if making this choice.

This article is intended for users with crop sensor DLSRs. For example Nikons D90, D7000, D5100, D3200, etc. Canons lineup includes the 7D, 50D, EOS 550D and 650D. On these bodies the approimate field of view for a 50mm is 85mm and the 35mm is 50mm (80 and 56mm respectively).

The decision of which lens to keep if you have both is probably easier to answer than picking the lens to buy. Obviously you can easily go back through your photos and count how many are on one lens vs the other and this method is suggested as a way of picking quite often online. This can be done via EXIF info. Picking your most used between the 50mm and 35mm would be an easy way to do this and many sources online suggest doing it this way. The result will be your most used lens, not necessarily your favorite.

In my experience when travelling with both a 35 and 50mm I used whatever was on the camera. It did not matter which lens was mounted and for most things either would suffice. Obviously there are some cases where a 50mm is too long and you cannot get a shot because there is no more room behind you. Likewise needing more reach with a 35mm.

So how do you decide between these two lenses?

I would look at the quality of the two you have on offer – for instance I picked between the 35mm dx 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 “nifty fifty”. I took the 50mm because I did not like the bokeh/out of focus on the 35. I also like the background separation on when using a longer lens.

To top it off my plan was to go full frame in the future, and the 35 DX is not overly great there. Picking a lens that suits what you like to shoot and enjoy taking photographs with is more important than counting photos and comparing specifications.

Directions of Exit in relation to bounce rate

This is from the SEO Theory newsletter by Michael Martinez.

So far as I know no one has written about this concept using the expression “direction of exit”. It’s really something I should (and probably will) write about on the SEO Theory blog but I share it here with all of you first.

SPECIAL NOTICE: You have my permission to share this article (not the whole newsletter) on your blogs or in SEO presentations/webinars. All I ask is that you give me proper attribution if you heard it here first. If you summarize the information I’ll still appreciate a mention.

There are four ways a visitor can leave a Web page:

  1. They click deeper into your site
  2. They click away from your site (to another site)
  3. They close the browser window
  4. They click on the BACK button

These are the four “Directions of Exit”. Although intuitively most people have acknowledged these four directions of exit in various ways through the years, I have never seen anyone discuss how they impact the interpretation of “Bounce Rate” data in analytics.

Bounce Rates are complex things. If you really want to analyze bounce rates properly you have to add to the documented complexity and try to determine the directions of exit from a given page because all four directions can be interpreted as bounces.

For example, if a user clicks through to a deeper page on your site that does not contain your analytics code (such as an order form or — if they land directly on the order form and use it — a “thank you” page) that user’s visit appears to last 0 seconds and consists of 1 page view. Most analytics software (maybe all) would classify this as a “bounce”. Some analytics software might try to look at what the user clicked on (the Javascript would have to be configured to record clicks).

Also, if a user clicks away from your site (or just enters a new URL in the browser address bar) the analytics software is again left with only a 1-page visit of indeterminate length.

Unfortunately, there isn’t much you can do to detect directions of exit. You can ensure that your analytics code is on every page of your site, including order forms and thank you pages (this should be done for conversion analysis and goal tracking anyway). You can also try to record clicks but that might slow down performance. I’m not sure how Google Analytics does that. A sophisticated log file analyzer should be able to track a user’s IP address by click path (HTTP-ANALYZE and WEBALIZER cannot do this).

I do not share many SEOs’ concerns about high bounce rates. I explain many reasons why in my SEO Theory article but the four directions of exit are also an important reason in their own regard.

– Michael Martinez

I am posting this because I cannot find it indexed anywhere yet – lets see if anyone else ends up listing it too!

Teamplay in Medieval Warfare: Chivaly

If you are an archer and get rushed by enemy players when you have melee team mates nearby, please refrain from being a retard and trying to engage. Please just get the hell out of the way and let the guys in plate kill them 😀

Does C4 take skill or is it just stupid in BF3?

@36617305 Toto writes…
[“Lots of weapons get moaned about. C4 is one that people moan about being a noob weapon (yet it is amazing how often you get killed placing C4, but the moaners always forget that).”]

Yeah no. Actually maybe – people might moan about being killed by C4 and players trying to C4 others are killed frequently. Toto was trying to imply that C4 takes skill because many players die while trying to C4, this does not mean that C4ing takes “skill”, in fact the complete opposite is true. More often than not players just make horrible choices when C4ing.

Why do players die when C4ing?

  • They don’t care. This is fair enough, some people think that trading lives and having 1:1 KDR is acceptable. Trading in the case of a tank is probably ok regardless of the situation. From an overall game perspective trading like this is not good or bad as neither side really gets ahead. However because these players are more likely to die than trade we end up with negative tickets to their own team.
  • They do care but they C4 anyway. This is simply careless and leads to negative tickets more often than not because they will die. They probably realise
  • They trade for a tank + crew. This is the good play, the sensible play. Not teamplay but it benefits your team.

People die C4ing because they play without looking, without using situational awareness, without thinking. There is no brain. There is no skill. They don’t die because of the massive amount of skill required, they die because they are not very good.

The Best AEK-971 attachements in Battlefield 3. Use foregrip or not?

The AEK is one of the most popular assault weapons in BF3. It has always been among the more popular assault rifles and has suffered nerfs, attachment buffs and nerfs to other weapons that made it more appealing.

Since the release of Battlefield 3 the AEK971 has been worth using. At no point was it bad enough to relegate to the pile of average guns, provided a player learnt when to full auto + correct fire and when to burst. And also it did not really matter what setup you ran on it. Originally the suppressor or heavy barrel with foregrip was decent, then the suppressor went out of vogue and the heavy barrel was the goto for all assault weapons. Finally the flash suppressor became a useful alternative. The laser sight has always been an option but most players go for a P90 or other PDW rather than using an assault rifle in the hip firing role. This does not mean that the AEK cannot sit in this niche comfortably.

Enough prattle, what attachments should I use now with the AEK

The AEK is the only assault rifle worth putting a foregrip on. Foregrip removes horizontal recoil and adds spread on a weapon by weapon by weapon basis. On all the other ARs the extra spread it adds is not offset by the recoil reduction. However with the AEK the positives are larger than the negatives. You should use it at all times if you want to use the AEK971, which means you cannot use a bipod or underslung weapon. If either of those are important pick any other AR.

The heavy barrel is the next go to for the AEK. It really brings spread under control and makes weapons much more aimable. The HB is the most popular attachment.

The flash suppressor is an ok choice if you are aiming to fire long bursts as it cuts down recoil.

Finally the laser sight. Many people prefer the PDW weapons because they have less recoil and spread so are more controllable from the hip. I find the higher damage and higher rate of fire sutis my play style better, not to mention the weapon can be used at range whereas a PDW is quite useless.

See my older article if you want a break down on sight choices

In conclusion, the best attachments are the heavy barrel and foregrip, along with the Kobra.

So how should scavenger work in BF3?

So how should scavenger work in aftermath?

I think ideally it would be good if there were weapon tiers. This is easy, esp when you consider that you can skew weapons better with attachments.
T1 – A pump shotgun with frag rounds, G18 and a .44
T2 – One of the “best” assault rifles plus its optimal items. SKS or M417.

Utility weapons – RPG, M320 LVG.

Actually there are many options available. Ideally we want good weapons to be something a team works for, so having lots of them on a map detracts from the game overall. It would be easy to make a prefered set of weapons vs underdog weapons.

Things that need to be added or changed.

Health needs to be broken out of the medpack and turned into a periodically spawning item. On this note I would also say that health being boosted about 20% would be beneficial. Having played on servers like this I can honestly say it creates better firefights. The alternative is to have no attachments which also causes longer engagements due to slower TTK. 20% equates to around one more bullet in a fight.

Armour needs to be added. This is the largest problem since there is no mechanic currently. Armour would require extensive testing. Using quake numbers a full stack should add around 2-300% durability to a player. Different armour types would be fine here. A yellow and a red type that offer varying degrees of protection. The beauty of TDM is how levels can be setup to play very differently based on the load outs. Looking at popular TDM maps from quakeworld we see things like. DM2(2 red, 2yellow) DM3 (1 red 1 yellow) E1M2 (1 yellow 1 green). Wildy different setups there. In comparison to UT99 which is basically belt + jacket on every single map. Some variation would have made UT99 a lot more interested. Two jackets + belt? Three jackets? and so on. A robust armour system would give mappers much more variety.

An important thing to note is that simply giving more health is not the answer. Armour and health are very different because armour does not absorb all damage. Because of this grabing a red armour with 15 health does not offer you a great deal. You will still need to heal yourself somewhat before being more aggressive. Thus using health is not the answer.

Powerups – quad damage, invulnerability, etc. The class items could be used here. Defib is very powerful but I am not sure how game changing it would be as a short duration powerup. Quad damage could be fun, but at the same time would not be the same as in quakes. Maybe a powerup that doubled fire rate but halved recoil would be fun. This way if you miss you are not instagibbing the other player with one stray bullet. It would also make ammo a heavy consideration.

Another option would be a powerful weapon. Perhaps the M320 with a decent stack of ammo.

Ammo – Limit this to 3-4 ammo types – less if needed.

Scavenger TDM Maps

We want this to be 4v4. Maps need to be small enough to not have long travel distances between items, weapons and other key areas, decent interconnectivity without turning the level into swiss cheese is important. In addition being compact is good because we want spawners to be able to link up with team mates without a massive hike.

Ziba tower is the smallest close quarters map, however it is too large for the purposes of 4v4 TDM. Levels and atrium style maps are sorely missing in modern FPS and while they would not get past DICE QA in the older quake style, they could be created easily enough. A shopping center with ruined sections to add ramps.. Lifts, catwalks and so on. As already mentioned connectivity is important, ideally choke points should be negateable and locking down one area/item does not guarantee winning.

Spawn weapons

In the first post spawn weapons were discussed. As mentioned the spawn weapons consist of an empty pistol, a knife and a grenade. This leaves a player completely useless off spawn from a combat standpoint. In older FPS it may seem that spawn weapons are useless, but flooding enemies when they are weak should be a somewhat valid tactic. This allows taking down of weapons and camp zones even without weapons. This does not mean that spawning -> attacking should always be a valid tactic. A game that plays like this is quake 3 and its implementation of TDM, and while not bad it removes a lot of strategy and importance of items. Quake2 gave players a very weak starting weapon that did not allow much offensive action, or even defensive for that matter.

Players should spawn with something – but probably not a pistol as they are generally too powerful. A pump action shotgun with frag rounds, using the automatic shotgun damage, would do well here. They hit softly, shoot slowly but with 2-3 guys would be ok. Remove the suppression and we would be set!

A few more things..

Random weapon spawning has been mentioned on whirlpool as well as some other BF3 community sites. If this is entirely random it will completely detract from the gameplay. If all the weapons randomly spawn there is no rhyme or reason to how teams will play. The game will play worse than FFA. There will be no objectives, there will be no strategy.

By the same token players need to randomly spawn. If the current squad spawning system is allowed it compeltely detracts from the skill of surviving as a spawner and regrouping. This is an important aspect of TDM and while it may seem like it detracts from teamplay it in fact improves it due to increased difficulty of meeting up and playing together.

Plus spawn killing is similar to objectives and area control, if you control more of the map you have more “safe” area for your team to spawn in.

important – random spawning and lack of randomitem spawning.

Scavenger as real TDM in aftermath? A look at TDM mechanics

Lets take a look at some factors that make TDM.. TDM

The spawn weapon

Lets look at the spawn weapons from various good TDM games.

Quakeworld ( Single barrel shotgun ): – Hitscan 6 pellets, 4 damage per. Max damage 24 – 500ms. 48dps
Quake 2 ( Blaster ) : Slow moving projectile 15 damage. 400ms reload. Around 38DPS.
Quake 3 ( Machine gun ) : Hitscan, 5 damage per, ROF 10 per second. 50DPS.
Unreal Tournament (UT99) : Hitscan 25 damage around 400ms reload. 50DPS.

UT2k3/4 had a stupid rifle that gave you grenades straight up. Also the shield gun. Horrible.

These guns are quite weak, in Quake 2s case it was so weak it was not really worth using.

Scavenger will have you spawning with a knife, an empty pistol and a grenade. This is a step away from the above examples and I think even more useless. This could be good or bad. It means you have to share weapons and does not allow you to instantly engage like in Q3 (cess).

I have tossed around the idea of real TDM in battlefield for a while and wondered how it would work. Assuming that weapons were not changed substantially. Would you spawn with a pistol? Would you spawn with a single clip of ammo? Thats not really “poor” enough since the pistols are quite good in BF. Would you spawn with the silenced G17? Probably the worst gun in the game.

No, you will spawn with a knife and a grenade.

Weapon Tiers

Now we need to look at how weapons in other TDM games worked. Assuming that quakeworld followed by quake 2 (ignoring CPMA) were the best weapon setups that offer large amount of strategy.

Quakeworld: Spawn(axe/shotgun), T1 (Nailgun/double shotgun/super nailgun), T2 (Grenade Launche/ super nailgun), T3 (Lightning gun/ Rocket launcher). Respawn 30 seconds

I have included sng in both t1 and 2 because it is arguably not that useful. LG could be put in T2 depending on the map, it is not really the go to weapon quite often due to lack of ammo. DM3 is a good example. LG is useful for killing enemy weapons but using it on everyone wastes ammo and soon you won’t be able to kill anything. This is why rockets are the key.

Quake 2: Spawn (blaster), T1 (machine gun, shotgun), T2 (Super shotgun, hand grenade, grenade launcher), T3 (Chaingun, Hyperblaster, Rocket launcher, railgun). Respawn 30 seconds
Looking at quake 2 we see the movement away from one weapon(rocket launcher) dominating and it shares the space with 2-3 other weapons. However in 1997 (esp in australia with lack of broadband) when q2 was released the hitscan and hyperblaster were not really reliable. This means that rocket is once more king. On modern connections the hitscan in q2 is probably better than rockets by a large margin.

Quake3: Spawn (fist/Machinegun) then (Shotgun, plasma, grenade, rockets, rail, lightning).

There are is no tiers. Grab a gun and go kill stuff.

Unreal Tournament (ut99): spawn (Piston/pistol), T1 (Biorifle, ripper), T2 (pulse rifle, shock rifle, sniper rifle, minigun, rocket launcher, flak canon).

Again no tiers – if you happened to spawn near a bio or ripper you would be about 2 seconds away from a good gun anyway. Add to this that EU played with weaponstay on and you have very few things to control.

Beyond the spawn weapon and the brief look at rocket launchers in quakeworld, each weapon does not need an indepth look. It is good if a weapon provides interesting utility but is not a mainstay, for example the grenade launcher in the quakes, the LG in some levels in quakeworld.

Armour and items

A quick look at item systems on offer is needed.

Quakeworld: Red armour(200@80%), Yellow armour (150@60%), Green armour (100@30%). A lesser armor cannot be picked up when there is active better armor that absorbs more. eg 100red > 150 yellow. Spawns 20 seconds after pickup

Quad spawns every minute. Mega spawns 20 seconds after health is used. Pentagram (invunl) spawns every 5 minutes. A game runs for 20 minutes.

Quake 2: Body armor(100, stacks to 200@80%) Combat armor (50, stacks to 100@60%), Jacket armor(25, stacks to 50@30%). eg 100red > 150 yellow. With the cut down values it takes longer to get a reliable stacked team. Spawns 25 seconds after pickup.

Quake 3: Yellow armor (50@66%), red armor(100@66%). Armors stack to 200 total from any source. Spawns 25seconds after pickup.

Quad and mega times are map dependant, usually 1-2 minutes.

Unreal Tournament: Thigh Pads (50, stacks to 150 armor@50%), Jacket armor (100, stacks to 150@75%), Shieldbelt (150 armor@100%). Somehow these stack together, the easiest is jacket+pads. Lesser two spawn 27.5 seconds after pickup, shieldbelt spawns 55 seconds after pickup.

Quad (amp in ut) spawns every 110 seconds. Mega is not in any popular TDM maps (a shame).

A brief look at quakeworld TDM

In case you haven’t noticed I am harping on QW TDM. While I have never really played this in a competitive format it is perfect for demonstrating how good TDM can be. We can work backward from here through the quakes and unreals to see how it has been degraded each release.

In quakeworld the important items are as follow.

– Weapons. When weapons are referred to this means rocket launchers or less often shaft.
– Armor. The armor your team wants is the red one.
– Quad. Needs to be addressed every minute or so

Maps are typically split in half or into parts, with an in control team playing specific rooms/points and the out of control team playing weaker points.

DM3 is one of the most popular TDM quakeworld maps. Read my post here about TDM and a more indepth look at quakeworld TDM.

Read part 3, how scavenger should work as a real TDM gametype

BF3 Aftermath – Scavenger – A new take on team deathmatch and free for all or a failed experiment in stupid gametypes by DICE?

It has the potential to revitalise the competitive community. It is an opportunity to revitalise FPS. It is TDM.

So the upcoming DLC/expansion/whatever you want to call it has a new gametype, called scavenger. The basic premise is simple, and to the older audience will be familiar. Players spawn with minimal gear. A knife, a single M67 hand grenade and a pistol with no ammo.

From here players “scavenge” gear from the map. Since scavenger was only announced a few hours ago details are rather light, however DICE seem to have a record of doing things “the wrong way” so some speculation is required. Lets look at how it could work, how it should work and how DICE will probably botch it completely.

First up some old school TDM education for any younger players out there or those that played but did not understand what the goal in team deathmatch in quake or unreal boiled down to.

Control via Items was the goals, not killing the enemy. “Getting the most points” posted as the BF3 TDM goal quite often on whirlpool. Much the same way point control (thus bleeding tickets and forcing the other team to attack rather than defend) is the goal in Battlefield 3 Conquest, not “getting the other team to zero first”.

So how would this work? In older games, teamwork and coordination played a large part. Again on whirlpool many posters call out quakes and unreals as “twitch shooters”, yet they have more depth than cod or bf.. For instance in quakeworld TDM the goal was to try to get rocket launchers for your team mates (ie not pick up the weapon, TDM was played with weapon stay off), save/camp armour for team mates if you already had it, group together after being killed and secure parts of the map. For the majority of a game the goal would be to secure the red armour area as the “leading team” and the yellow armour area as the “down” team. Area control, much like in conquest. However simply controlling the area is not how you win. You win by using the resources your team has locked down to kill the opposing team. However this all goes out the window every few minutes when the quad spawns. When the quad is spawning your team needs to move on the spawn area and try to secure that without giving up whatever you were previously controlling. You can offset times of items in order to disallow quad being used to take your rocket launcher area for instance.. This does not exist in BF3 conquest. You have three flags to the enemies two – you can dig in and try to defend them, and most teams will do just that.

An example of a spot to secure in unreal tournament (ut99) is the portal from the bottom of deck16][ to above the lifts. Locking this down by either controlling the teleport entrance near the slime – or hanging around in the rafters near redeemer at the lift end would acheive this. Why would you do it? To cut the opponents options for attacking. Doing this does nothing to the points in the game but restricts the enemy movement and options. I think the lower port is the better play: easy to escape, good view of anyone from the other team dropping down, view of the belt and boots.

Another example is on DM2 in Quakeworld. This map is very light on weapons (one rocket launcher) and the aim is to get as many of your team rocket launchers as possible. When you get your RL you should be guarding the red armour. However on DM2 the best way to do this is not in the RA room, or anywhere near it really. It is outside at ring (invisibility). From here you can cover the RA room, the megahealth below ring which is also a corridor of travel from one side of the map to the other and you can cover the quad platform opposite. Getting a player to ring with a rocket launcher is quite important when you have RA control, or to take RA control.

But the real goal was items – the big important ones. Armours were camped and defended, but the goal was to get a stacked player on a quad and then retake shorter spawn item (armours/weapons) from the enemy team.

In quakeworld the weapon your entire team needed was rocket launchers – thus the goal was to go for these as well as armour. As time went by the “tiered” weapon balance disappeared. In Quake2 there were tiers, but to a lesser extent as there were many tier 1 items that were worth using.. In Quake 3 there were really no tiers as all weapons were quite good in specific circumstances. Unreal tournament had tiers but it was 2 crap ones (besides the spawn weapon) and about 8 decent weapons. This led to everyone having a decent gun compared to Quakeworlds rocket launcher scenario that took at minimum 2 minutes to get a full four rocket launchers. This is fine and just different. UT failed for TDM in other ways but for now that is enough.

Item driven gametypes, if done correctly, are much better. The items are the goal because they allow better killing and less dying. Simply locking down an area but not killing anything does little for your team. Items force conflict in a better way than flags and items are dynamic and give more options: Rocket launchers, Red armour, Quad… what to pick right now?

Maybe your team decides to secure armour next, or weapons, or quad is soon and you should abandon that plan and go for it? Or maybe ignore quad and try to get other items while the other team takes quad.

This is especially true for pub gaming where players generally play for kills and KDR. If the goal is to not die and kill lots of bad guys then getting armour and denying the quad is quite important, both to the overall game from a team point of view as well as the individual stats. I think TDM done well would be the best pub game possible because once everyone understands the goals, which improve KDR, everyone will be PTFO.

So yes, the overall idea was to kill the most but the goal was to secure resources and control areas that allowed this to happen. Few people really understood this (in 2000) and TDM between teams just below the best was quite often simply a free for all with two groups. I don’t think any teams I ever played against understood why we camped the bottom teleport on deck.

Lack of items is why TDM in COD and BF is so fail. Where is the reason to head out from your camp setup. There isn’t one. Competitive TDM in battlefield 3 would be a joke.

I think it is sad that TDM has gone the way of the dodo and instead we have conquest, bombs and flags as objectives. These games are pushed as having objective based gameplay but it has always been there – right from Quakeworld. Objectives have always existed and they were way more dynamic and interesting that conquest points.

Read part 2