Dude, seriously — where's the disaster? There's dozens (hundreds?) of similar games out there, which were created and then shut down because they struggles to compete, often due to developers making poor decisions. Very few games from the 2000s managed to retain at least some of their audience and survive for over a decade. Some of the titles include TF2, WoW and Minecraft, so even if you're simply comparing Tanki Online to them, it's automatically an acknowledgement of Alternativa's success. Tanki Online followed a natural curve of a successful MMO, where it peaked after a few years and then slowly dwindled in popularity until becoming stable again. You can see this on Google Trends, where I compared Tanki Online to World of Tanks — a similar game in concept. WoT did a little better than TO, but the shape of the graph is strikingly similar. There's no way to know whether the changes and additions that devs made in TO over the years would have been better or worse for audience retention, so claims like "if devs didn't do X, then there would be more players now" are baseless. The game is still intended for children. Always had been, and children have always been the biggest demographic in Tanki. And, spoiler alert, children don't go on the forum to complain about updates. They open Tanki on their phone, play a few quick battles, and click on whatever shiny things developers show them. This is why even when the whole forum thread is filled with complaints, it still doesn't reflect the actual opinion of the whole player base, because the forum is used by a tiny portion of users. A lot of the updates you hate were designed for (and are effective on) the demographic that doesn't share its feedback, so the feedback that actually reflects an update's reception is in the numerical data collected from people using the game. Can you give some examples? I'm genuinely curious which games you consider to be similar to Tanki, but more successfully managed by their developers. Not really. Advertising is just a calculation of return investment. If the return diminishes, then you either change your advertising method or you stop it completely. Starladder was a similar situation — the partnership was extremely expensive, and it was done with the goal of generating profits after the financial success of eSports in DotA. Not every game is suitable for creating an engaging eSports community, and so Tanki Online's eSports was not as popular as devs had hoped. So yeah, sorry to burst your bubble, but Tanki Online Starladder was created to generate income as the main motivation, as opposed to to strengthening the player community (which was just a side bonus). It didn't work as well as devs had hoped and was therefore cancelled. You're completely mixing up different things here. Tanki Online is an in-browser game, and that's its main selling point. Tanki X was meant to be a replacement for TO, just built on a completely different, more capable game engine. The game was more than halfway through development when most of the big web browser developers announced that they will no longer support Unity within their browsers. That immediately killed Tanki X (as it became a client-only game), but devs fell for the sunk cost fallacy and finished development anyway, hoping that the the game would succeed despite this disadvantage. It didn't, and was eventually shut down. It has absolutely nothing to do with decisions made in Tanki Online. In fact, a lot of features from Tanki X have already been implemented in Tanki Online, because they were actually good design decisions. That's how game development works for a typical indie game studio. You make a bunch of games and some/most of them will inevitably flop. Especially if they're mobile games (which have about a 0.2% success rate). Tanki Online is Alternativa's flagship project, so those other games were an attempt to diversify income and plan for the future while Tanki Online provided enough profits that could be reinvested into development of new games. I don't know how you quantify success, but if I'm running a business and its income has been able to pay all of my expenses, employees' salaries, and my own spending needs for 15 years, I'd consider it successful. Anyway, neither of us have the data of Alternativa's financial performance, so this is a pointless argument. A few more points: "The Tragic History of Tanki Online" is nothing but a view-farming meme compilation (of course, made to be just over 10 minutes for that sweet extra ad revenue). It's not an actual analysis and its target audience is children, not game developers. The vast majority of players who proudly proclaim that they're "leaving the game because of bad updates" don't actually leave. It's hilariously ironic, but true. Many illegal clones of Tanki were created to appeal to the old players and give them the "Old Tanki experience". All of them are dying or have died, despite trying to implement changes based on player feedback and not repeating the same mistakes Tanki made. people simply don't want to play old, outdated garbage. Opex is not the owner of AlternativaGames. If his leadership was harming the project, he'd be fired years ago. Is it possible that the forum experts are wrong? We'll never know... Lastly, I want to note that I do agree with you on the game's development being far from perfect. Two things I strongly dislike, which the game seems to consistently fail on: Game balance The constant addition of obviously OP items and then taking an absurdly long time to nerf them. From EMP Gauss, to Helios, to Booster, to Blunderbuss, and now Miner-Saboteur combo. It seems insane that some features get added to the game without the obvious implication that they will destroy game balance. This happens time and time again and I find it extremely frustrating. Lack of QoL updates There are some features missing that I simply don't understand why devs can't dedicate some resources to implement them. Biggest one for me — ability to buy items as gifts for other players. Why is this not a thing? It's literally PROFIT! But no, instead if I want to buy something for a friend with real money, I have to ask them for a payment link, which is a terrible idea for them to give me that link because it can be used to block their game account via payment refund (fraud). There are multiple other features which have been suggested years ago and are still missing for some unknown reason.

The videos appear to be showing a battle in parkour mode. Reports of game violations (including hacking) from parkour mode are not considered. For game violations anywhere else, please report them on the Russian forum: https://ru.tankiforum.com/forum/39/ Closed

Planned Completed The latest vlog revealed that new players will soon be able to build their own tank when creating a new account, which includes selecting turret, hull and paint.

Planned The latest vlog revealed that new players will soon be able to build their own tank when creating a new account, which includes selecting turret, hull and paint.

I think it's not that big of a deal to spend any time changing it. 99% of people opening containers care only about the items they get from containers, and not whether the opening animation is accurate or not. As long as 15 keys give you 15 items, it's fine.

Yeah I agree, it looks really sus and I haven't seen lag do that before. But I still think it's this ^

I still think it's lag, since you only just went behind cover when you got hit. But has there ever been a situation where you stayed fully behind cover without exposing yourself for a few seconds and still got hit? If there's a hack that makes shots ignore walls (i.e. map elements), then it would allow the other player to hit you regardless of the thickness and number of obstacles between you and them, and the hack would be a lot more obvious.

It definitely won't happen next week, but perhaps in the future.

That kinda checks out. Early 2020 was when the first truly P2W elements appeared, starting with the EMP augment for Gauss (which was insanely OP at the time). That addition marked the beginning of the transition from a model where every player could gradually save up crystals by playing and gradually obtain all the items they wanted, to the current model where you either buy paid bundles with OP items, or hope to get insanely lucky with containers.

"People" being the typical gamers? Because I'm fairly certain that any self-respecting game dev has been taking notes from an indie game studio that managed to create an F2P MMO which is still (presumably) profitable after 15 years since release. This makes no sense whatsoever. If the game stayed mostly the same as it was in, say, 2013, then the game would die. The "meta" for gaming is constantly changing, so the new players have different expectations depending on the year they discovered the game. A new player joining in 2024 will have drastically different things that interest them compared to a new player in 2018, and even more different from a new player in 2013. Therefore, games like Tanki Online have to adapt and change in drastic ways if they want to stay relevant and be interesting to new players. I'll remind you that the absolute worst time period for Tanki Online was in 2015, when a huge number of players left because there were no major updates (due to most resources going into Tanki X). People leave because they get bored of lack of new content, and not because "ew this new thing made the game too different". In the last few years devs made a number of changes to the early game process specifically to counter this problem. Instead of immediately being thrown into all-in Legend battles, new players are gradually introduced to mechanics like overdrives, supplies, drones, protection modules. "Why play a tank game that features alien tanks?" Because it's cool as hell. Tanki never claimed to be a realistic tank battle simulator. It's a sci-fi arcade game, so anything goes. Maybe in the first few months in 2009? With the exception of Smoky, Firebird and Thunder, most of the early turrets were already very much sci-fi. This part I agree with. Some of the new augments are overpowered to such an extent that they may as well be hacks. It's ridiculous. Lol no. That's not how it works, especially not for a game that counts its annual revenue in millions. Anyone who says "I spent [insert amount] on this game and therefore my opinion is more important" needs to get off their high horse. Listening to the player base and doing exactly what the player base demands are two very different things. Devs listen and collect feedback all the time, but the changes that are actually implemented are also driven by current industry trends, budget constraints, and actual numerical data. As someone who's been on the forum since 2011, I can tell you that the stuff people post on the forum does not reflect the actual needs of the player base, and some of the suggestions I've seen are outright ridiculous. For the most part, the players themselves don't know what they actually want. I've seen this statement once every few weeks starting from... around 2014. In fact, I even made that statement myself back in 2020, saying that the game will likely shut down by 2022, yet I was proven wrong. But hey, surely this time it will actually happen? As said above, the game still generates stable income after 15 years. In the gaming industry, that's about as far from failure as it gets.

Topic merged

Sure, though it doesn't change the fact that devs don't plan to add more modes.

All three augments already got nerfed in the past, to a point where even on large maps they are merely above-average now. My point is that the traditional thinking that long range turrets are the only way to camp is no longer applicable due to the vast number of augments turning short-medium range turrets into long range.

Sounds like my interpretation (and the idea of Tail Tag) is quite similar to your idea. The only difference is that in my version, the player simply needs to kill the flag holder to become the new flag holder, while in your version, the player needs to kill the flag holder and then actually pick up the dropped flag. Still very similar. That's cute. Let me just get my Hunter Hammer, Helios Rico and Hyperspeed Thunder. Also you forgot that Scorpion exists.

That just sounds like an alternate version of Siege. Would be more interesting if it was like Tail Tag from Fall Guys (if anyone remembers), where you have a limited number of objects on the map (less than the number of players), and you get points for every second while holding one of the objects, but if you get killed, the object goes to the player that killed you. At the end, the player with most points wins. But this works best as a solo game mode, so it might work for a special event mode. Anyway, devs don't plan to add any more core game modes besides Deliver The Payload (maybe, eventually).

Mans fell into a coma in 2021 and just woke up

How is this anti-camping in any way, if campers can use it just as easily?

There hasn't been any public info, so I don't think so. The only items that devs said they might add but haven't added yet are walker hulls (hulls with legs) and a grenade launcher turret. The grenade launcher seems to have been added as a standalone item instead (the grenades themselves), while the walker hull seems hard to implement and wouldn't be received well anyway. So no, I really doubt we'll see new turrets or hulls anytime soon.

It's possible, and I'd love to have this feature. But I'm 99% certain that's it's just not the kind of feature that gets added to games with MM.

I think the same, but with most modern game dev studios implementing matchmaking in their online games, believe me — extensive studies have been done on this subject, and the solid conclusion is that the vast majority of people would rather suffer than wait. If you want to learn more about the psychological aspect of this, Vsauce made a cool experiment to demonstrate this point. The whole series is really good, actually.

Yes, but increasing waiting times even a little bit has huge implications for player retention. Platers are much more likely to put up with being put into unbalanced battles, than having to spend more time waiting in queue.

By the way, this is why I started with "besides" in my post. The number of mines from Miner+Saboteur combo must be nerfed, but also the ability to permanently discover and mark enemy mines should be implemented.

? wat? Is it mobile only? I don't see the theme option on PC. That feature has existed ever since the forum server upgrade, but it was always available only to administrators for years.

I don't think this will be added. 1) more loading bars = more interface clutter. 2) the secondary reload is usually quick, so a reload bar wouldn't help. The only reason turrets like Twins and Smoky have a reload bar is because hiding it would require extra work.

The former, of course. But I don't see why we can't have both. I mean, I've often been in situations where I'm coming up to a ramp, see a minefield, stop, but my teammates behind me don't know about it and there's nothing I can do to inform them (let's face it - writing in battle chat is not a practical option). It would be such a nice feature if by coming close to an enemy mine, you'd permanently mark it as visible for yourself and your teammates. There's absolutely no reason why you should "forget" where a mine is after already detecting it.