Slow vs Fast gameplay; A discussion

[Badass_Ben]

Something ive seen split the community is regarding the pace of the game
GENERALLY speaking, there are two sides
Those who enjoy and prefer the game to play fast, and those who enjoy it for being slow

But what are the primary difference between fast and slow game play?

A fast game is typically:
- Little downtime between fights
- Frequent, high paced action
- Fights are often heavily influenced by simple reaction time and aim (who ever can simply click heads faster)

A slow game is typically the opposite:
- Significant downtime between fights
- The action itself tends to be slower and more methodical
- Fights are less influenced by your abilities IN THE MOMENT, and are more determined by who planned better (via positioning, tactics, etc)

I often make the comparison between a slower paced shooter and an RTS
In both, it comes down to how you THINK things out
Your movements, and choices are all vital and important
Get caught out of position for whatever reason, and there is typically very little you can do

Personally, I put myself in the slower category
And for me, this is the reason why:
Slow games may not have the same sense of "action" as faster games
But the tension is typically MUCH greater




I had a night round with a buddy where:
We were crossing some bodies of water when a shot rings out, and my buddy drops
I book it across into some reeds and thicket for concealment
I then turned towards where the shot came from, but I cant see anything
A streak of lightning briefly lights the night up, but still, I see nothing

Slowly, I creep through the thicket
Holding my breath, as if the slightest sound might give away my position

Finally, something catches my eye, a rifle barrel. My opponent had let his weapon stick through the bushes. I line up the shot and fire, target drops dead
I finally let out a breath

Moments like those are INCREDIBLY tense
And something unique to the slower shooter genre
Something like that would be incredibly boring for a twitch stream, sure
If someone was watching me, all they would see is me scanning bushes for a good 5 min


So, within that context, we have the debate of fast vs slow gameplay in Hunt
Which should be rewarded?
Of course, ultimately its a balance
Even the slowest shooter has moments that become fast paced

We have seen some changes in favor of slower gameplay, either by direct intent or aftereffect

Adding inertia, to slow down player movement
Nerfing QS, to encourage slower, more planned shots
etc

For future changes regarding the game, this discussion is really in the background of everyone

What do yall think?

[Badass_Ben]

引用自 Jester：

Slow gameplay is awesome of course not that nonsense where it's Night time and there's one boss in the swamp area. Then you have everyone crouching somewhere on a stupid grass waiting for a free kill then it just devolves to whoever has the biggest patience.

I get you

Personally, i view patience as a skill

And as far as those kinda fights, id also argue that perception becomes an important skill
Like in DnD, gotta make those perception roles

Thats why i love scopes
Not for long range shooting, but spotting those small colors that give a shooters position away

[Sasori Kigaru]

引用自 The Inseminator：

I have two examples here:

1) What Ben did, but done better: https://streamable.com/mpyvwp
Context: my teammates got ambushed by the team in the clip, died and left me alone. My last known position was in the corn field, which is where they assumed me to be. Bounty was at Windy, so they were likely to come to me. Notice the positioning and movement both parties make.
I consider this an average play because the first one didn't check behind my tree, which ultimately made them loose the whole fight.

2) The counter to what Ben did: https://streamable.com/wsat13
Context: we were heading for the bounties and we got ambushed by the guys in the clip (which is unfortunately slightly cut at the start because I only saved the one with both kills in it. What happened in the seconds before this is that I saw a figure moving around the ping. Wasn't sure if it was an Hunter though because they rotated so well from the fight 5 minutes before that we didn't even know it was the same team).
One of them let us pass, shot a teammate of mine and died right after. Their positioning is better than ours because one is behind solid cover while the other one has somewhat of an height and visibility advantage, and they sandwitched us.
I consider this a below average play both because of my average aim and the below average enemy aim.

Both are good examples, you won both engagements cause you outplayed the enemy team with your tactics.

Now, like I said before? I could start listing things that could have happened. Example being, in both of those instances? You could have been killed, had the enemy been a better shot. You could have been killed, had another team come in from an angle you weren't expecting. You could have been killed, in a variety of ways, but NONE of them matter because they didn't happen.

Ben's situation differs from yours, as does mine and as does a ton of others. Rarely are two situations completely the same in this game and thus they should never be looked at in that mind set.

Look at the tactic used in the moment, see it through they eyes of the person playing it as I did when I looked over Ben's situation. As again, what he did was tactical. He used cover and stealth to his advantage, and the enemy screwed themselves over which he simply took advantage of to make sure he gets out on top.

A valid tactic to win. As is yours. There is no "right way to play" either, we all play how we want to. It is simply best, to respect that.

[Z3pheeR]

引用自 (Sasori Kigaru) Refrigeraptor：

引用自 The Inseminator：

I have two examples here:

1) What Ben did, but done better: https://streamable.com/mpyvwp
Context: my teammates got ambushed by the team in the clip, died and left me alone. My last known position was in the corn field, which is where they assumed me to be. Bounty was at Windy, so they were likely to come to me. Notice the positioning and movement both parties make.
I consider this an average play because the first one didn't check behind my tree, which ultimately made them loose the whole fight.

2) The counter to what Ben did: https://streamable.com/wsat13
Context: we were heading for the bounties and we got ambushed by the guys in the clip (which is unfortunately slightly cut at the start because I only saved the one with both kills in it. What happened in the seconds before this is that I saw a figure moving around the ping. Wasn't sure if it was an Hunter though because they rotated so well from the fight 5 minutes before that we didn't even know it was the same team).
One of them let us pass, shot a teammate of mine and died right after. Their positioning is better than ours because one is behind solid cover while the other one has somewhat of an height and visibility advantage, and they sandwitched us.
I consider this a below average play both because of my average aim and the below average enemy aim.

Both are good examples, you won both engagements cause you outplayed the enemy team with your tactics.

Now, like I said before? I could start listing things that could have happened. Example being, in both of those instances? You could have been killed, had the enemy been a better shot. You could have been killed, had another team come in from an angle you weren't expecting. You could have been killed, in a variety of ways, but NONE of them matter because they didn't happen.

Ben's situation differs from yours, as does mine and as does a ton of others. Rarely are two situations completely the same in this game and thus they should never be looked at in that mind set.

Look at the tactic used in the moment, see it through they eyes of the person playing it as I did when I looked over Ben's situation. As again, what he did was tactical. He used cover and stealth to his advantage, and the enemy screwed themselves over which he simply took advantage of to make sure he gets out on top.

A valid tactic to win. As is yours. There is no "right way to play" either, we all play how we want to. It is simply best, to respect that.

Yeah but mine weren't tactics. I wasn't thinking while those two engagements happened, I was reacting to what was happening. If anything, those two clips show situations where I shouldn't have been had I played those better, yet I still managed to come up on top thanks to sheer mechanical skill (except the levering part, that one doesn't count cause levering is a joke anyway).
Also, I see no mistakes besides the situations themselves. In both clips I'm using hard cover as well as average movement. There are a couple of missed shots, but that's it. Had I misplayed those, my team wouldn't have won those (since they were all dead in one clip and being targeted in the other, forcing me to do the dirty work for them).

[Badass_Ben]

引用自 The Inseminator：

引用自 (Sasori Kigaru) Refrigeraptor：

Both are good examples, you won both engagements cause you outplayed the enemy team with your tactics.

Now, like I said before? I could start listing things that could have happened. Example being, in both of those instances? You could have been killed, had the enemy been a better shot. You could have been killed, had another team come in from an angle you weren't expecting. You could have been killed, in a variety of ways, but NONE of them matter because they didn't happen.

Ben's situation differs from yours, as does mine and as does a ton of others. Rarely are two situations completely the same in this game and thus they should never be looked at in that mind set.

Look at the tactic used in the moment, see it through they eyes of the person playing it as I did when I looked over Ben's situation. As again, what he did was tactical. He used cover and stealth to his advantage, and the enemy screwed themselves over which he simply took advantage of to make sure he gets out on top.

A valid tactic to win. As is yours. There is no "right way to play" either, we all play how we want to. It is simply best, to respect that.

Yeah but mine weren't tactics. I wasn't thinking while those two engagements happened, I was reacting to what was happening. If anything, those two clips show situations where I shouldn't have been had I played those better, yet I still managed to come up on top thanks to sheer mechanical skill (except the levering part, that one doesn't count cause levering is a joke anyway).
Also, I see no mistakes besides the situations themselves. In both clips I'm using hard cover as well as average movement. There are a couple of missed shots, but that's it. Had I misplayed those, my team wouldn't have won those (since they were all dead in one clip and being targeted in the other, forcing me to do the dirty work for them).

So, connecting what you say here with your previous argument

“I wasnt thinking”
Is it only skill when you arent thinking?

You say your clip is better

How exactly?
In yours, your opponent has a CHANCE to shoot you
Mine, they never do
From a tactical standpoint, mine was more skillful as it denied the enemy even a CHANCE to return fire

There is nothing wrong with having and using mechanical skill

But tactical skill is just as valid

The debate here is which is, or should be, MORE important in the game

Mechanical vs tactical

[Sasori Kigaru]

引用自 Badass_Ben：

引用自 The Inseminator：

Yeah but mine weren't tactics. I wasn't thinking while those two engagements happened, I was reacting to what was happening. If anything, those two clips show situations where I shouldn't have been had I played those better, yet I still managed to come up on top thanks to sheer mechanical skill (except the levering part, that one doesn't count cause levering is a joke anyway).
Also, I see no mistakes besides the situations themselves. In both clips I'm using hard cover as well as average movement. There are a couple of missed shots, but that's it. Had I misplayed those, my team wouldn't have won those (since they were all dead in one clip and being targeted in the other, forcing me to do the dirty work for them).

So, connecting what you say here with your previous argument

“I wasnt thinking”
Is it only skill when you arent thinking?

You say your clip is better

How exactly?
In yours, your opponent has a CHANCE to shoot you
Mine, they never do
From a tactical standpoint, mine was more skillful as it denied the enemy even a CHANCE to return fire

There is nothing wrong with having and using mechanical skill

But tactical skill is just as valid

The debate here is which is, or should be, MORE important in the game

Mechanical vs tactical

You pretty much said what I'd say anyway so I think you can handle it from here~ Good luck! Keep up keepin the debate civil~

[Z3pheeR]

引用自 Badass_Ben：

引用自 The Inseminator：

Yeah but mine weren't tactics. I wasn't thinking while those two engagements happened, I was reacting to what was happening. If anything, those two clips show situations where I shouldn't have been had I played those better, yet I still managed to come up on top thanks to sheer mechanical skill (except the levering part, that one doesn't count cause levering is a joke anyway).
Also, I see no mistakes besides the situations themselves. In both clips I'm using hard cover as well as average movement. There are a couple of missed shots, but that's it. Had I misplayed those, my team wouldn't have won those (since they were all dead in one clip and being targeted in the other, forcing me to do the dirty work for them).

So, connecting what you say here with your previous argument

“I wasnt thinking”
Is it only skill when you arent thinking?

You say your clip is better

How exactly?
In yours, your opponent has a CHANCE to shoot you
Mine, they never do
From a tactical standpoint, mine was more skillful as it denied the enemy even a CHANCE to return fire

There is nothing wrong with having and using mechanical skill

But tactical skill is just as valid

The debate here is which is, or should be, MORE important in the game

Mechanical vs tactical

You can't call tactic a thing you don't think about. That's why I said that wasn't a tactic of mine.
Also no, the fact they missed me in the first clip was the very reason they lost the whole engagement, just like they missed you. What I did better was positioning. That position let me play safer because the dude was hunting me in open fields (his mistake) as well as granting me a safe peek spot once I killed the first one (and the second one after that).
What your position in the clip failed to do was covering you from bullets. Mine did that.

[Badass_Ben]

引用自 The Inseminator：

引用自 Badass_Ben：

So, connecting what you say here with your previous argument

“I wasnt thinking”
Is it only skill when you arent thinking?

You say your clip is better

How exactly?
In yours, your opponent has a CHANCE to shoot you
Mine, they never do
From a tactical standpoint, mine was more skillful as it denied the enemy even a CHANCE to return fire

There is nothing wrong with having and using mechanical skill

But tactical skill is just as valid

The debate here is which is, or should be, MORE important in the game

Mechanical vs tactical

You can't call tactic a thing you don't think about. That's why I said that wasn't a tactic of mine.
Also no, the fact they missed me in the first clip was the very reason they lost the whole engagement, just like they missed you. What I did better was positioning. That position let me play safer because the dude was hunting me in open fields (his mistake) as well as granting me a safe peek spot once I killed the first one (and the second one after that).
What your position in the clip failed to do was covering you from bullets. Mine did that.

As great as it is to have protection in the form of cover

The protection of stealth is even more powerful

[RNG RNG Bananaphone]

Definitely like slower games more. My preferred mode is duo. It's often a lot about how I play myself, and how is my partner playing as well.. guess you could say synergy. Hate rage quitters who leave when they get downed, without even waiting for the possible res.

I definitely play more sneaky alone. Simply because a) most likely I'm the underdog b) there's one less to give away the position.

Last round my random partner gets burned early. Runs to extraction. I see the only boss downed north of us at Blanchett Graves. Estimate distance enough from the banishing site, pick up a nice bird tower (things I seldom use) for camp.. smart play. What do I know; of the two possible exit routes they choose my side. Kill the unsuspecting carriers wading in the water, loot and head out.

[Guardian Mehmed]

I think this game is supposed to be played slow, with planning and thinking about your actions. The guns and tools are not fast, the game is overall not a fast-paced game.
But then there are some weapons like dolch that breaks this,
i don't know :/

[Troubleshooter]

引用自 Guardian Mehmed：

I think this game is supposed to be played slow, with planning and thinking about your actions. The guns and tools are not fast, the game is overall not a fast-paced game.
But then there are some weapons like dolch that breaks this,
i don't know :/

Even if you design the game around a specific "vision"... good players will eventually up-end that by pushing the boundaries of what's possible. There's no way to stop game play from refining to its logical ends... there are no shortages of loadout guides and tips out there for every brand of game under the sun.

HS does a good job of giving average players a fair shot at better players by keeping the TTK low and emphasizing mechanics that reward patience without removing fast-play's inherent advantages.

Basically, camping a bush works, but you still have to land your shots.

[Badass_Ben]

引用自 Troubleshooter：

引用自 Guardian Mehmed：

I think this game is supposed to be played slow, with planning and thinking about your actions. The guns and tools are not fast, the game is overall not a fast-paced game.
But then there are some weapons like dolch that breaks this,
i don't know :/

Even if you design the game around a specific "vision"... good players will eventually up-end that by pushing the boundaries of what's possible. There's no way to stop game play from refining to its logical ends... there are no shortages of loadout guides and tips out there for every brand of game under the sun.

HS does a good job of giving average players a fair shot at better players by keeping the TTK low and emphasizing mechanics that reward patience without removing fast-play's inherent advantages.

Basically, camping a bush works, but you still have to land your shots.

Ill agree thats generally true

Especially the more sweaty players will always push the boundaries of the game’s limits for max effectiveness

BUT
You can always make tweaks and limitations to keep those extreme within the realm of what you feel healthy for the game

Best Example is Chiv 1
A cool sword melee game, until people learned how to absolutely break the mechanics to hit people in entirely broken ways

It honestly killed the game as a whole

While, as far as im aware, they didnt ever get around to changing it in the first game, at least in the 2nd game they are making a decided effort to prevent that

[lizheng616]

Slow play gets you the first one or two shots, what you do with those, determines whether slow play worked. Play slow, but also use an aim trainer and put in your hours.

[Orkhepaj]

引用自 lizheng616：

Slow play gets you the first one or two shots, what you do with those, determines whether slow play worked. Play slow, but also use an aim trainer and put in your hours.

aim trainer?:O

[lizheng616]

Like Aimlab, or any of the many others. Gunplay is too infrequent in Hunt to really improve your skills.

[Peter Panzy]

Though true, there isn't constant pvp shot outs. You can practice in tutorial against npcs. Even in a normal match, go silent and just pop zombie heads for practice.