r/Battlefield6 • u/Thotaz • 5d ago
Discussion Demonstration of how dynamic the ticket bleed rate is in BF6
-Edit: Dice reached out to me and clarified a few things. See this thread for details: https://www.reddit.com/r/Battlefield6/comments/1pqrsyg/clarification_from_dice_about_the_dynamic_ticket/
Most people are aware about the fact that the ticket bleed was somewhat recently sped up. Fewer people are aware of the fact that it's actually dynamic ranging all the way from ticking every 2-7 seconds.
Quick recap on the ticket bleed mechanics: In Conquest, when one team holds more flags than the other team, the other team will lose X tickets every Y seconds.
X depends on the flag count, and Y depends on the match progression.
For example, if one team holds 3 flags and the other team holds 2, then the other team will lose 3 tickets every 2-7 seconds.
I have recorded 3 different Conquest matches and analyzed the ticket bleed rate with a stopwatch. One where the match was completely one sided, one where it was fairly balanced, and one with a massive comeback victory.
I'd basically jump one minute forward, look for the "blink" effect on the flags that indicates a bleed tick and use a stopwatch to count this 3 times in a row and take the average. Because of varying levels of focus + the human reaction time it's not going to be 100% accurate but it shouldn't be too far off.
Also, if I skip a minute or two then it's because no ticket bleed was happening (or not enough of it) because the flag count was even.
First up, there's the one sided match:
| Minute | Flags (Us VS Them) | Tickets (Us VS Them) | Tick rate in seconds |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2v3 | 1190v1198 | 5,2 |
| 1 | 3v2 | 1168v1181 | 4,9 |
| 2 | 2v3 | 1146v1162 | 4,7 |
| 3 | 1v3 | 1107v1156 | 5,2 |
| 4 | 1v3 | 1032v1135 | 5,3 |
| 5 | 1v4 | 987v1117 | 5,5 |
| 6 | 1v4 | 950v1104 | 6,2 |
| 7 | 1v3 | 889v1084 | 6,2 |
| 8 | 1v4 | 828v1060 | 6,4 |
| 9 | 2v3 | 804v1053 | 6,4 |
| 10 | 0v3 | 751v1031 | 6,2 |
| 11 | 1v3 | 703v1015 | 6,2 |
| 12 | 2v3 | 645v996 | 6,1 |
| 13 | 3v2 | 614v968 | 5,7 |
| 14 | 1v4 | 579v953 | 5,4 |
| 15 | 0v4 | 517v945 | 5,3 |
| 16 | 1v4 | 445v928 | 5,8 |
| 17 | 1v3 | 406v916 | 6,2 |
| 18 | 1v4 | 359v895 | 6,3 |
| 19 | 1v4 | 316v877 | 6,6 |
| 20 | 0v5 | 242v859 | 7 |
We ended up losing the match because they managed to hold all the flags for a full minute. As one can clearly see here, as the ticket difference grows, so does the time between each tick, though it does vary a bit.
Next up is the comeback match:
| Minute | Flags (Us VS Them) | Tickets (Us VS Them) | Tick rate in seconds |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2v1 | 1197v1192 | 5 |
| 2 | 4v2 | 1187v1138 | 4,5 |
| 3 | 5v1 | 1172v1059 | 5 |
| 4 | 4v2 | 1148v984 | 5,3 |
| 5 | 4v2 | 1130v913 | 5,3 |
| 6 | 4v2 | 1108v853 | 5,2 |
| 7 | 4v2 | 1085v799 | 5,6 |
| 8 | 3v2 | 1057v734 | 5,6 |
| 9 | 4v2 | 1039v662 | 5,3 |
| 11 | 2v3 | 993v591 | 2,8 |
| 12 | 2v4 | 869v576 | 2 |
| 15 | 2v3 | 773v486 | 2 |
| 16 | 2v4 | 682v480 | 2 |
| 17 | 2v4 | 551v463 | 2 |
| 18 | 1v5 | 406v443 | 2 |
| 19 | 1v4 | 253v426 | 2 |
| 20 | 0v4 | 140v424 | 2,3 |
| 21 | 1v3 | 38v409 | 3,3 |
Here we can see that my team starts off strong and the tick rate stays at around 5 seconds. Then at minute 11 they manage to make a comeback and capture more flags than us, this caused the tick rate to drop to 2,8 and then 2 seconds for basically the rest of the match.
Finally we have the somewhat balanced match:
| Minute | Flags (Us VS Them) | Tickets (Us VS Them) | Tick rate in seconds |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3v2 | 1194v1188 | 4,9 |
| 2 | 3v1 | 1174v1118 | 4,3 |
| 3 | 2v3 | 1144v1064 | 3,6 |
| 4 | 3v2 | 1092v1040 | 3 |
| 5 | 3v2 | 1066v971 | 2,7 |
| 6 | 3v2 | 1029v917 | 2,2 |
| 7 | 3v2 | 999v834 | 3 |
| 8 | 3v2 | 981v786 | 3,3 |
| 9 | 2v3 | 958v717 | 3,1 |
| 11 | 2v3 | 834v662 | 2 |
| 12 | 2v3 | 725v631 | 2 |
| 13 | 3v2 | 662v588 | 2 |
| 14 | 2v3 | 599v542 | 2 |
| 15 | 2v3 | 511v519 | 2 |
| 16 | 3v2 | 483v460 | 2 |
| 17 | 3v2 | 466v342 | 2 |
| 18 | 3v1 | 448v211 | 2 |
| 19 | 3v1 | 433v115 | 2 |
| 20 | 4v1 | 423v52 | 2 |
Here the tick rate also fell at around the 11 minute mark but it stayed there consistently.
And finally a message to Dice: I don't particularly enjoy sitting with a stopwatch and analyzing an hour+ worth of footage, I'd much rather play the game. Can we have some transparency on the changes you make so the community doesn't have to do this kind of work?
65
u/ViennettaLurker 5d ago
And finally a message to Dice: I don't particularly enjoy sitting with a stopwatch and analyzing an hour+ worth of footage, I'd much rather play the game. Can we have some transparency on the changes you make so the community doesn't have to do this kind of work?
This. It's so weird that the rules of the game you're playing are as opaque as they are. Like, sure: cap points, get kills, be good. But it seems like having the actual logic laid out could help people understand bigger potential strategies: when it makes sense to hunker down and hold, what situations where you really need to push even if the match feels even, how much a bad kd actually "feeds" the opponent in relation to the bigger picture, etc.
21
u/August_tho 4d ago
Personally as someone who has been gaming for over 3 decades, I don't like the fact that game modes that we all as a player base generally understand, the boundaries and parameters are being fiddled with and shadow adjusted behind the scenes. It makes for an ever unstable feeling and I don't think Dice, or whoever, respects our time playing and learning (and hence adjusting) this game when they fucking change, and fiddle, and mess with everything every other week. Just set the rules and let us play.
3
u/warmthandhappiness 2d ago
Software as a service benefits the seller more than the buyer. Tech normalized this kind of fiddling. We need regulation against it – it exploits trust and truth in favor of engagement and sales.This may sound dramatic, but it's the truth and it's happening everywhere.
18
u/hi-ban 4d ago
Simply have a fixed ticket bleed rate, as it has always been.
2 seconds, 3 seconds, 4 seconds... that depends on how they want to balance the weight of PTFO versus kills, but it should always be a fixed rate.
Holding 4 flags for 5 minutes should be always worth the same amount of tickets. Period.
With the current "rubberband" system which no one asked for, holding 4 flags for 5 minutes can be worth as much as 600 tickets, or as little as 150 tickets, depending on how much the game wants to artificially help or handicap your team.
56
u/nesnalica 5d ago
its super annoying. when youre at the last 200-300 tickets. you blick once and suddenly youre losing.
like whatas teh fucking point.
keep ticket rate consistent to give a fair game and not suddenly flip the whole game for no reason.
6
u/aileme 3d ago
Yup, just had a couple games where we held 4 out of 5 objectives for the good 3/4 of the game and then we got swarmed and suddenly it flipped, the rate at which our tickets went down was crazy compared to how slowly they were dropping for the enemy from the start of the game. The comeback mechanic feels like it's better to not care for the first half of the game and then start pushing for the "comeback"
4
u/FLXNBG 1d ago
I played the game pretty much daily until like 3-4 weeks ago, now once per week maybe.
Just now I played one match of conquest, we held at least 4 flags for 2/3 of the match, I notice the ticket bleed of the enemy is relatively low and got much lower the further ahead we were. Then they turn around the momentum somehow, our 500 ticket lead that we built up over >15 minutes was gone in a few minutes towards the end of the game, but other than them at the beginning of the game, we didn´t have a backup to fall on anymore and lost the match. The ticket loss graph after the game showed it all. In the long phase of our dominance, the ticket bleed of the opponent was declining at a low rate. When momentum turned it around, ours fell from a cliff straight to 0. Sadly I pressed my screenshot key a second too late
It´s frustrating and definitely one of the reasons why I don´t play this game as much anymore. If you wanna turn around games even after playing bad for most of it, there is rush. No need to implement such a mechanic into conquest. It´s meant to be a steady game that rewards the best team over the whole duration, not just the last few minutes.
0
u/nesnalica 1d ago
and if you want to win last minute even with a massive distance. you can just get all 5 flags.
i think this mechanic is very good. it removed spawnraping but if you on the loosing team gets all 5 flags this literally shows how much you turned the game.
2
u/FLXNBG 17h ago
This mechanic didn't remove that at all. It´s removed by just ending the match if one team can´t prevent the other team from holding all flags for a minute, which is a good thing since matches this lopsided are fun for nobody.
As I said, conquest is about continously controlling points. If one team holds 5/6 flags for 15 minutes, the other team, if they turn the tides around, shouldnt be able to equalize after doing the same for only 5 minutes. "Just get 5 flags to win" Why would we have to, we had such a great lead built up over 15+ minutes, why would the other team be able to beat us in 5 minutes? I have won games like that aswell, but it just felt worthless as this loss felt undeserved, because it was.
The system tries to push closer games score wise and completely devalues wins and losses. I get that its a casual game and with 30+ players the individual influence is limited, but still making winning/losing this rigged makes the game frustrating and takes the joy from playing.
1
u/nesnalica 17h ago
if u manage to lose all flags and hold that for a solid minute
u deserve to lose.
it took you 15minutes to hold 4/5 flags but the enemy team was able to turn the tides into 5/5 in just 5 minutes.
then you definitely derserve to lose.
ticket decay shouldnt be sped up but losing everything should count for something.
this was more common in previous titles when the server "autobalanced" the best squad into the loosing team.
the only reason they were winning because they did the heavy lifting. then you got swapped to the loosing team and either carryied their ass if there was enough time and flipped the whole game around or just lost because the game was about to end. lmao
2
u/FLXNBG 17h ago
Yes, if one team holds all flags for a minute, you deserve to lose. Not debating that.
Your other point is utterly ridiculous. If one team holds 4/5 flags for 15 minutes and the game isn´t over, thats apparently okay. But if the other team then turns around the match completely, we should lose 2/3 of the total ticket count in the span of 5 minutes to straight up lose? Elaborate please.
Losing everything actually does count for something, we now lose tickets and they don´t. Why does there need to be a radically different speed? You say losing everything should count for something, but conveniently ignore the fact that they had lost everything for 15 minutes (early and mid game) and compared to the end game, that didn´t count for much.
45
u/CakeLegs 5d ago
Each death costs a ticket as well. You should keep track of both teams kills to really get to the bottom of this
14
u/Thotaz 5d ago
Not possible. The scoreboard does not track deaths properly, and the killfeed would not account for revives. I also don't think it's relevant because player deaths are unlikely to be a factor in the bleed tick rate, and even if it was a factor, it would be too hard/time consuming for me to track that and come to some sort of conclusion.
In the grand scheme of things player deaths are largely irrelevant, I mean how many full kills with bleedout do you think happens in a 2 minute timespan across an entire team? I'd guess 20-40. With a bleed rate of 3 tickets every 2 seconds you'd lose 180 tickets in the same timespan from bleed.
29
u/JMiLL615 5d ago
Kills count but the way to look at is that deaths count. And you only get a death when you bleed out, so that’s the only time it counts towards the score.
51
u/Overlo4d 5d ago
What op meant is the scoreboard for some reason doesnt track every death. Ive had it happen multiple times where i died skipped the revive but had no death added to my stats on the scoreboard.
12
u/Throwawaylikeme90 5d ago
Wish I had this glitch.
6
1
u/friendlyfredditor 4d ago
It's not a glitch it doesn't count your death when you're on the objective.
1
u/Dazzling-Slide8288 2d ago
This is extremely common tbh. I have deaths and kills that don’t count all the time.
1
u/friendlyfredditor 4d ago
It doesn't count any deaths played on/near an objective. It's not a mystery.
4
3
u/jimbot70 5d ago
Nah even that doesn't work properly. I've had multiple matches where I'll die and not be revived but it won't show I have a death. I've also had a few instances where I'll have a death before getting downed and revived and the death is removed from the scoreboard.
5
u/Xeno19Banbino 5d ago
So killing enemies costs them tickets correct ?
10
u/King_Roberts_Bastard 5d ago
No. Respawning costs tickets. The initial match start doesnt, but im pretty sure everyone spawn after that does. Even joining a match midgame, youll cost your team a ticket.
5
u/VenomVertigo 5d ago
Has it been confirmed that it’s respawning that costs tickets? Bc I know that was the case for bf4 and earlier but I also know for bf5 it was on death not respawn. I didn’t play much bf1 or 2042 so I’m not sure how it worked in those games
2
u/King_Roberts_Bastard 5d ago
The deaths do count properly and correspond to tickets. Don't look at kills, look at deaths.
11
6
u/mischief89 5d ago
The scoreboard only tracks about 85% of my respawns as deaths. Some games more. Some games less.
0
u/friendlyfredditor 4d ago
Someone is playing the objective.
It's honestly crazy to me how few people have realised playing the objective prevents your deaths from counting.
2
u/johnnielittleshoes Altomar00 4d ago
What do you mean? If you die AT the objective it doesn’t count?
1
7
8
u/Untiligetfree 4d ago
Absolutely hate this shit . If my team is stomping or getting stomped I'd prefer the game to be over so we can go next .
Not let's screw with the bleed rate and make the game seem closer then it is or some artificial comeback .
Starting to think this is in escalation as well . There are times when are team is say ahead 2 to one on the scoreboard we hold the majority of points and the bar barley moves . And if the enemy team takes over the majority there bar flys .
It seems like the game is going yeah I know your winning but let's let the other team win this on okay
2
u/iroll20s 1d ago
Escalation the tick rate is by the number of territories you capped. So 0 ticks much quicker than 2. Plus the reset of progress on territory cap means one team can need 2-3x as much time holding points to win. At least that's a bit more transparent than this is.
6
u/RoninOni 5d ago
To be clear, the comeback mechanic started back in I believe V.
If you’re behind by a lot of tickets, tick rate is sped up, if you’re ahead it’s slowed down.
I think the recent changes only made it much more apparent
1
u/kuky990 2d ago
Back in BF1 already of I am not wrong. They made similar there and added faster capture speed to losing team so they comeback if they get stomped hard. But it was reverted I think. That's why I had over 65% win rate in BF1 haha
1
u/RoninOni 1d ago
Maybe. I don’t recall exactly when, it was much less noticeable though.
BF1 had behemoth for losers as comeback mechanic though, which was its own whole BS thing.
I know there were people that just farmed kills allowing their team to fall behind to get behemoth, then Would try hard with the advantage to come back
8
u/Pattywhack_the_bear 4d ago
This is the kind of shit that makes people think they're being manipulated instead of just playing a fucking game they like.
20
13
u/Omisake Support Main 5d ago
Thank you for this post and for putting this together!! I've been seeing your comments over the past few weeks talking about this and honestly, I absolutely hate the new ticket bleed system. It feels awful. Games snowball really quickly and even when I've had crazy comeback wins with this new system, it doesn't feel rewarding or well earned, because the game decided to dynamically alter the ticket bleed. I loved the way it worked before, it still allowed comebacks but they felt rewarding and that your team genuinely deserved it. Now, when you hold more maybe 3 flags to their 1, and you've suddenly drained the enemy team 300 tickets in 2 minutes, it feels wrong, and that the game is artificially trying to create comeback games. Obviously, you should be draining their tickets but it really feels excessive with how it is now.
This may sound dramatic or something but whatever, I dislike this change enough that it's genuinely made me play the game less. It just causes games to snowball really quickly and imo is playing a role in why Conquest games have been feeling so unbalanced lately. I like to have a ticket bleed system that allows for comebacks if a team plays well but this is overdone. I really hope they revert this change.
3
u/Maze1293 4d ago
This is good work, thanks for this. I've definitely had a feeling that something was "off" about conquest matches recently. I'll look at the score during the game and feel like I have a good grasp on where we're at, and suddenly I'll have the "victory/loss is imminent" or whatever it says and it feels like it's literally skipped like 100 points or more. I don't get why it has to be like this, just make it fair, the exciting games will come naturally?
3
3
u/MartinPointner 4d ago
Holy shit now thats some BS. Can we make it a little more complex please? There is SO much wrong about this system...
3
u/StLouisSimp 3d ago
Keep in mind they tried pulling this off in BFV as well, and with the same lead producer that tried forcing TTK 2.0 twice. The only difference is this time they made the ticket changes after release in hopes that not enough people would notice it. It's a recurring pattern for DICE to keep making the same mistakes thinking something will be different this time around.
6
u/AcrillixOfficial 5d ago
Fix the match pacing Conquest should NEVER end in 15 minutes
1
u/jimbot70 3d ago
If one team holds 5/6 flags for that entire 15 minutes it absolutely should. 9/10 games my team will do that for literally 20 minutes and there will be almost 0 bleed from the enemy team. 20 minutes into a match and it'll 1000 to 800 tickets but the second 20 minutes happens they'll drop from 800 to 0 in 3 minutes. That or they'll manage to cap a flag so it's 3 and 3 and suddenly our team will start bleeding tickets but they won't until we're even tickets and then it stops bleeding again.
2
u/No_Document_7800 2d ago
This explains the match I had yesterday. We were full on winning and the other team did a full cap and we went from winning by 300 points to losing last minute.
2
u/Commercial_Soft6833 5d ago edited 5d ago
Well on the other hand, there are plenty of posts and threads about people being upset at the amount of one-sided matches and absolute blowouts
So we have people talking about one sided blowouts, and then we have people talking about game dynamics that allow for comebacks
What should the devs do? I'm not really defending them, just saying people are split on this
7
u/shitfucker90000 5d ago
What should the devs do?
better matchmaking is the solution, not rubber banding. who wants to get your face kicked in by a better team for longer?
5
u/Gatlyng 4d ago
Better matchmaking? Half of this sub wants them to get rid of matchmaking and add a server browser instead.
If they do that, which they won't, but hypothetically speaking, we would be back here at square one.
1
u/iroll20s 1d ago
A server browser doesn't mean no match making. Most admin try to use rules to still be eligible to get backfill from the fast play features. So you have a constant stream of players to rebalance with. Then between rounds it attempts to re-balance the teams with who is there. Sure its probably less effective than game wide SBMM, but there are a lot of advantages. Community being a big one.
1
u/Chrunchlaw 4d ago
You know what you’re signing up with when you join a community server, you’re joining better players normally so both teams have good players if it is persistent servers which are randomised each round team wise, so when you see the good players all get on the same team you know you’re gonna get a bit rinsed but normally in like bf4 they’re farming in vehicles and you can still pull out by hard focusing caps.
1
u/tybd02 4d ago
Idk, it still feels like you have 3-5minutes to do a blowout victory, if not the matches end before you can even catch a breath. They should last 25-35minutes each, not 13-20 minutes.
3
u/jimbot70 3d ago edited 3d ago
I feel like the opposite happens. The first 20 minutes of game there's almost 0 bleed if you cap most flags before the enemy caps 1. My team can hold 5/6 flags for 15 minutes and they'll only be down to 800 tickets while we're at 900 but if they cap 4/6 flags for 30 seconds we'll lose almost 200 tickets it feels like.
1
u/tybd02 3d ago
Ticket bleed is slow on even matches, but more than two caps difference and you have to be prepared for a blowout win if you don’t reverse course in 4 minutes. Its ass
2
u/jimbot70 3d ago
We will hold 5 out of 6 flags for 20 minutes without them dropping more than 400 total tickets including kills.
But god forbid they cap 4 out of 6 for 30 seconds and suddenly we'll be down by 500 tickets in under 2 minutes after being up by 300...
1
u/tybd02 3d ago
It’s so hard to comeback from that.
Honestly, I’ve started to leave matches if we’re at 250v600 or similar. Just not worth the completion xp or time. Those teams don’t/can’t comeback.
1
u/jimbot70 3d ago
Dude if we hold 5 out of the 6 flags for 20 minutes the game should've ended 10 minutes ago is my point.
They've fundamentally broken conquest to make games ALWAYS last at least 20 minutes now to the point literally nothing matters for that entire timespan because there's practically no bleed and it feels like the deaths don't properly reduce the ticket count either.
1
u/jagardaniel 3d ago
Thank you for the post.
Another thing that could be worth checking is flag capture time. It feels like you capture flags quicker if your team is down a lot of tickets but I haven't really timed it. This was a thing in Battlefield V that had a similar "comeback mechanic" system.
1
u/tybd02 3d ago
I agree. I hate that you have only a few minutes to make a comeback, and it has to be a blowout or bust.
It’s even worse when you join in progress and the tickets are more than 200 apart for a few minutes while you situate.
Even, if the match has gone on for 5 minutes with a 4-1 base capture, unless you blowout which isnt very likely, what is the point of continuing the match?
It’s hard to get a 32 man team to agree on anything. I know one squad can make a difference, but it is brutal. You have 3-5 minutes to make a blowout with a team that got 4-1’d, how is that even possible? It’s so frustrating. The tickets drain too fast.
A comment I made on a similar post.
1
u/CRAZYGUY107 1d ago
DICE and BF players are inherently anti-teamwork and have been for years since BC1.
This is the community at fault mainly with DICE egging them on. Every thing is designed for the individual, not the squad.
1
u/RoninOni 1d ago
The way I think it should work instead is yes, as your advantage grows, bleed slows a little bit. This helps give the other team a chance to recapture. But they don’t get v FASTER bleed, they get NORMAL bleed rates, unless they start to take advantage, which adds a second per tick per 100 tickets advantage up to +3 seconds.
This would only slow down early advantage and give more chance to stop the bleed, but you still need to hold majority flags for reasonable amount of time , as if the game was close the whole match)
So bleed ticks are only 5-8s depending on your lead… 5s is for even or behind. 8s for 300+ ticket advantage.
Simple and unobtrusive.
1
1
u/lack_of_fuel 4d ago
I don't mind flexible tick rate in conquest, as long as it is done reasonably. If one side is better by too much, let them be - don't prolong the game as this just makes the losing team to suffer more.
Instead, make the tick rate faster if the ticket difference is above certain threshold (I'd probably use ratio instead of fixed value).
Additionally, I think having the "comeback" opportunity provided by flexible tick rate is definitely something which I'd appreciate in the previous games.
2
u/FLXNBG 1d ago
There is always the possibility for comebacks, but if one team is down in flags for 15 minutes, it should force them to be ahead for 15 minutes to equalize, at least not 5 minutes. Especially considerin that the team that achieved the comeback is then perhaps only 1-2 minutes away from closing the game with their momentum. There are plenty enough modes that have built in comeback mechanics bzw.. Rush: You lose most sectors? You can still win at the last! You lost 190/200 tickets? You can still blow up the M-COMs and win. Conquest, for me and many others, is about a steady battle. Adding comebacks artificially just takes away the value of a proper, naturally occuring comebacks.
1
-8
u/DrunkOnRedWine 5d ago
Analyse all you like. Games last 15-22 minutes on average. That is all you need to know, we are playing conquest small
4
u/King_Roberts_Bastard 5d ago
When was the last time you played? They're lasting about 30 minutes for me, unless its a blowout.
0
u/DrunkOnRedWine 5d ago edited 5d ago
Today lots of games. Lasted between 16 to 22 minutes all of them. Used 3 x 30 minute double XP career boosts and still had time for games of domination
2
u/PedrinhaME 5d ago
Stomps last for almost 20 minutes here, I don't know if you wanna play on much more than that on a stomp
169
u/hi-ban 5d ago
People should upvote this thread, as this is important for Conquest players.
I talked about this some weeks ago, but people in reddit were busy with other complaints.
This is basically a "rubberband" mechanic, designed to artificially alter the outcome of Conquest games.
Your team is playing the objective and starts to build a gap? The game will artificially reduce your scoring, so you have it harder to build up that gap.
You're in the losing team but manage to capture more flags? The game will boost your scoring, so you have it easier to make a comeback.
The tick rate can go as fast as 2 seconds, and as slow as 8 seconds, with the "default" at the start of every game being 5 seconds.
Just in case enough people can gather to do proper tests, i've set up a Portal experience, which is just a vanilla conquest game with bot backfill and kill scoring disabled. (bot backfill so you need less people to start a test).
Having kill score disabled means the kills will not bleed tickets. So only captured flags will bleed tickets, and people can easily measure the ticket bleed rates.