Please post suggestions to improve the game in the I&S section. That being said, we do not accept ideas about refunds or selling of items. Closed.

I can sympathise with this, but the current aiming time is balanced. If anything, it could be made even longer. If you get frustrated with the long lock-on time and hate it when the target hides just before you can fire, maybe it's worth using a different turret that doesn't have the lock-on mechanic.

You're essentially spending 300 crystals a day for a rare chance to get some cool reward (paint/augment/effect/whatever). The value of such rewards is subjective, so whether it's worth it or not is up to you.

Are they claiming it for the current issues? I didn't see any recent announcement that specifically mentioned DDoS.

Yeah, but with enough skill you can actually use Wasp's extreme tilt and rotation to land shots in places you wouldn't typically reach with a different hull.

Depends a lot on your playstyle. I don't like Scorpion much, so I only occasionally use it with Tornado augment. Thunder and Shaft are actually my main turrets now, but I only use them with Vacuum Rounds and Healing Emitters respectively. Healing with Shaft is really fun, I get a lot of teammates thanking me for support and for me it's a different kind of challenge — I have to find spots in the map where I have line of sight on my teammates in key positions, but the enemies can't reach me. Vacuum Thunder is fun since it's potentially OP, but only if you know how to use it well.

Back in 2018 I spent a very long time playing with Wasp Magnum. It was really fun and surprisingly versatile once I got good at it.

"Exotic" augments are only available in that tier when they're first released, but they typically move into Legendary tier in the following weeks/months. To avoid doing repeat work, the artists design these augments with a yellow outline from the beginning, since they will eventually move down to Legendary tier anyway. The same doesn't apply to Phoenix augments, which will always remain Exotic.

There's rather simple solutions to those specific issues, but I don't want to get into it at all because there's absolutely no way this thing will be developed just for a single event mode.

I feel like it would do the opposite. Currently, winning and losing doesn't make much of a difference, and your previous losses don't matter at all. But with the W/L ratio being displayed, suddenly you're gonna have players blaming each other for "ruining my stats". Instead of working together, it will cause people to be more toxic.

Well, it requires a complete rework of how a battle ends. Right now you have a timer or some finish criteria, and when either of those are reached, all action immediately stops and all players are sent to the end screen simultaneously. But with the new system, the end screen would have to happen separately for each individual player, which has serious implications for the connection between servers and players.

I like the idea. Randomized turrets is kinda meh (not much of an improvement), but it would be nice to continue the battle even after someone completes the B0-NK tier. The way I see it is that either the game would just keep going until the timer runs out, or players would finish the battle individually, i.e. they would complete the final tier and leave the battle with their reward, but the actual battle would continue. The former option would be much easier to implement.

Topic merged Battle and chat violations are dealt with in different ways and by different groups of helpers. When a player is cheating or cross-teaming, someone has to report them with /vote, and a moderator must physically come to the battle and observe the violation. There may not always be a moderator available, or they may not be able to collect enough evidence for a ban when they observe the battle. Meanwhile, when you swear in chat, an automatic system detects potentially bad language, saves a snapshot of the whole chat conversation, and sends it to moderators for review. The moderators don't have to be present in battles, and the automatic report can be checked long after the violation actually occurred. For that reason, it's much harder to get away with a chat violation than with a gameplay one.

Oof, that sounds confusing. And why only Jammer augments? It should extend to all other status effects too. But wait, if that's the case, then does it mean that a teammate freeze will unfreeze you? And a teammate firebird will put out your fire? It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure if it's good to implement.

Valid

That's basically the same as super-missions, which we used to have a few years ago. I remember developers saying that most players don't have the patience to commit to a year-long mission, so adding such missions will have no benefit for the game besides giving players more free stuff. I think the new Trophy missions are all we're going to get as far as big commitment "super missions" go.

Well, with a database of suggestions that goes back to 2016, that's expected. It's not easy to come up with a new idea that is reasonable AND original.

It's most likely because anti-aliasing gets disabled, creating sharp edges around the letters.

Status changed to Valid I made some edits to the title and content.

Every additional setting does two things: Makes the UI more complex Adds another item that has to be maintained and tested with every new update to ensure it's not broken. So yes, in theory they could "just add" a hundred different settings to customise every little thing, but in reality the number of settings should be kept as low as possible — just the essentials. One must be especially careful when a setting affects the game in a way that's as significant as completely changing the map models. I think a more correct approach to this problem would be to scrap the old maps, but also add an even lower detail setting to the remastered maps, bringing their "weight" (the number of polygons, resolution of textures) close to the level of old (non-remastered) graphics. But then again, is it really worth going through this whole process when it benefits only a very small part of Tanki's player base?

This is fine as long as remastered maps follow the exact same geometry that standard maps use. But this would severely restrict artists in the type of maps they can create. If map geometry must remain simple like in the old maps, then why bother remastering them at all? Besides, it's better to allocate more resources towards optimising actual remastered maps, rather than creating a whole new system where two types of maps are available and must be compatible with one another.

Valid Developers are constantly working to optimise graphics and improve performance on low end devices. Unfortunately, there's only so much they can do to improve performance without significantly worsening the overall look and feel of the game. When it comes to software design, at some point you just have to accept that a few users have devices which are so weak, that it's unreasonable to optimise the project down to their level since the vast majority of users have devices that are capable of handling higher-end graphics. Some sacrifices must be made. That being said, it's possible that a new graphics option may be added to reduce the level of detail on remastered maps even further.

It's literally still in the testing phase. The items Opex was using are likely only test versions to see whether or not they physically break the game (cause crashes, errors, etc.). Don't treat these encounters as a solid demonstration of what the augment does.

Can't the same be said about every other turret?

Valid