Don't play XP. XP is an inferior combo to use outside of XP Battles and Parkour. If you want to be good at XP (or TO in general), play a different TPS/FPS for faster reaction time.

Isida should probably be re-purposed instead, removing the only support turret is a terrible idea.

Remove from garage, keep airdrops an option.

This again? Last time it was that the burn was UP, and before that nerf, it was OP.

You clearly haven't thought up of other reasons. Firebird has the worst reload time and range of any gun. Firebird M0 and M1 is unlocked early, allowing lots of MUs and early exposure to an M1.

Let's properly balance the game, remove the p2w aspect and add more depth to the game so people can enjoy it for longer!

Vulcan doesn't offer any additional depth to the game and was a waste of time.

I just want to say that you're in the right mindset, but your logic (in one part) is flawed. In TO, the "rebalances" serve no purpose, as there is no context for why any "rebalancing" update happens except for the purpose of making an update. Rebalances, in general, if done correctly will very much benefit a game's balance. Except they aren't. You're wanting actual quality updates, not the removal of rebalancing, am I right?

I wish we still had cameras with film that we had to take to the film store to have one copy of a picture that we can't tell if we took correctly. I wish we still had clothesline hangars where we had to hope that the other support wouldn't fall or other people wouldn't steal the clothes. I wish we still had to cook food with sunlight and ceramic bowls. I wish today was August 11, 1880. You're kidding me right? Unity is a great engine and it can only get better assuming the devs know what they're doing. If they aren't it's going to be old tanki except flashier. Unity would also be a great time to fix problems such as UI elements and design issues. You seriously don't want that to change? There's so many great games that have been made using Unity. The day that the control scheme changes is the day that Isida gets balanced properly, the game isn't going to become a Street Fighter if it uses Unity.

Hasn't happened yet, you've broken a Tanki World Record! Might as well see the "Tanki World Record" forum and submit it there. /s (still, great that this is up)

"Useless topic" yet nobody has ever said Isida was weak ever since the most major rebalance. Everyone and their puppies have been using railgun, and Viking is still the med hull of choice. I'm willing to bet that the amount of viking players outnumbers the amount of Hunter and Dictator players. There's not a metagame, we're still complaining for the same stuff to be balanced.

Selling drugs in garage were, are, and will still be a bad idea. Ah forget it, i'm going to hear a lot of meaningless replies.

When was that ever a thing? Perhaps with Hornet, but does that really count?

Hunter-Isida: Get two of them and you have infitely healing tanks that can't die with drugs

I wish I had said that far earlier.

I was a bit harsh against Viking's speed; it's very good. I was meaning to refer to its performance with close-range turrets, where speed is vital for those weapons.

I'm saying that the amount of depth is nulified by a paywall and "noob strategies" that negates depth. To a looser extent, i'm saying the current amount of depth is also quite low regardless.

Viking is too slow, Hornet is low-tier garbage. Hunter is a better candidate for the universal hull, but Viking is stupidly imbalanced.

This SHOULD be a simple topic. I hope. BEFORE YOU READ TAKE QUESTION #1 FIRST AND ANSWER IT HONESTLY. Please? Depth, in laymen's terms, is essentially the amount of choices that give a different experience that can be done within a game's rules. What do I think about it? There's not enough, especially for a perpetual PvP MMO. Why do I say so? Tell me the amount of choices you can have. -7 Hulls, with three categories that sadly are mildly accurate, and make all hulls in a category feel very similar. -9 Turrets, but with a non-existent metagame. Why is a non-existent metagame bad? This means that one turret can be stirctly better than another, but they stll have different enough playstyles to be "different in their own way". Another problem is certain combinations being very powerful and require a very specific strategy to get around, since THEY AREN'T BEING BALANCED PROPERLY. That's probably for another time. -A plethora of paints, many of them useless or inferior. -Effectively 8 total inputs, and you can only use, at maximum, 4. I'm excluding camera, pause, and options because those do not offer much to an experience. If you DO include camera, both of those figures increase by 1. Except here's the problem...The game's depth is limited but only by time, but by MONEY. This also means you don't experience 5% of what that depth has to offer without buying. The asking prices are also really high without sales. It takes approxmately 400 USD to get a single combination from M0 to M3. That's a low answer. If you want a single M3 conbination, it takes about 260 of that 400...Sales are not going to make players experience more depth. Why do you think people are ungrateful for under 50% sales? It's possible to be very bad at TO because there's no other way to earn crystals but win. If you're not winning, you're not going to be able to play the game properly. So how do newer, inexperienced players win? "Noob strategies" that negate any of the depth that the game has to offer. There is a reason Ricochet is so widely used among the lower ranks, and why so many of those Ricochet users are terrible. The most dissapointing part is that the game's depth isn't even negated by complexity. I don't even have a soluton for this. I highly doubt Unity will fix this, the engine doesn't change the business model. Obviously, you can answer questions #2 and #3 now. Answer them honestly, please. If you see any possible pitfalls with my logic, feel free to disagree.

If I didn't have a ghosting keyboard, I would totally 1v1 you and flip your Dictator, tracks-side up with my Hammer.

Are you serious? Its battle selection UI is horrid and the Garage navigation even more so. The tutorial lacks quite a bit. So many important things are missing such as more advanced tutorials to assist players who already understand WASD and Spacebar. In game UI is mostly good, but the health and "ability bar" (or whatever they call it, there's no name for it BECAUSE THE TUTORIAL IS HORRID) are really quite small and I could imagine people just not noticing them. If anyone with a different perspective could see a purpose to a miniscule health bar, that would be nice. Although, THERE ARE NO NUMBERS. I can't tell how many seconds or how many hit points I have because they don't show them, and i'm willing to bet that modding the game is against ToS. Not everybody will like it but it's pretty much vital information, so an option would be great. The game has little graphical fidelity to speak of. Bloom there and some touch ups there, but if that looks visually amazing you haven't seen anything more impressive. The only kinda good thing are the aesthetics, but that doesn't save a terrible UI and tutorial. Have you ever gotten anything higher than a college degree? I highly doubt you would say it was easy to get one. If you do have a decent job, however, I am impressed. Are people playing on burnt potatoes? Even consoles could run that, and that's saying something. The main business decision was because less people could play it, so they would lose revenue from the people that could not play it. Saying a game is "Losing its roots visually" or whatever they put means the artists did a terrible job preserving the aesthetics. You're telling me you don't want Tanki to be able to run in 4k HD and 100 fps?

This is why I find hornet inferior: All light hulls have a lower HP:Max Speed ratio compared to other hulls. However, Hornet does not excel particularly well in anything. So does Hunter, but Hunter does not have an inferior HP:Max Speed ratio. Hornet is fast, but Wasp is far faster, with M2 Wasp beating M3 Hornet in Max Speed, iirc. Wasp also has a better turret position and handling than Hornet. Trying to pop out your turret using a hull where the turret is in the middle of the tank and drifting leaves you vulnerable at a corner for longer. Hunter can risk these things, but Hornet cannot.

I'm honestly puzzled on how to repond to this. I'll just put all my reponses here. Yes, i'm late. BAHAHAHAHA PFFFFF wait what do you mean this wasnt a comedy show? This beats out South Park, even if only by a smidge. - I'm still using hornet. That drifting is counter-productive and really helps to dissappoint your team, friends and family in CTF. Wasp is a weak, easy-to-flip, (heh, oxford comma) and a tiny little toy that's is slighting (wut) faster than hornet and much weaker if using a pc with a processor worse than an Intel 2 Duo, and internet fuelled by a potato. Statistics show that --->80%<--- of all tankers use hornet as their main hull and are probably still less competent than me, even after I quit the game. BEAT THAT HORNET! WHY AM I STILL USING IT? B) - So what have we all learned today? Since Wasp is too weak, we should nerf all hulls. Hornet should have an even lower HP:Max Speed ratio, reduce the turning speeds of all med hulls to something even slower than the most recent "rebalance", and make all heavy hulls made out of an Xbox, so they have no movement speed and will SD if pushed to a measly "limit". Game balance from a genuis. #balence #tankoozllyfe #noscope #arcade #sterleddur #imrunningoutofideas #ithinkthejokeisdeadnow - I hate how i'm late.

shoot, i feel silly. I normally just assume when the word "pro" is used it's used in the most uneducated way possible. :S

Anything highlighted in green I agree with. Also, I liked the post not because I agree with the poster about the game being "too simple", but about the game having some gaping flaws that should be fixed. (inb4 op states that they only wanted increased graphical fidelity on the lobby, then consider half of my post silly. I consider interfaces in the "ancient times" to look inefficient and be inefficient, which is why i talk about the lobby being inefficient and instead of simply looking unappealing) The OP does a terrible job of stating most of their opinions clearly though, so i'm probably wrong about what i think the OP is trying to say about the interface. I probably should have just made my own topic instead, shouldn't I... Generalissimo is a grindfest. It's in no way "complex". There's only oh so many ways you can earn points, i'll say all the possible ways here. Destroying tanks, capturing flags, capturing points, healing tanks, and uhm... that's it? Don't confuse complexity and depth. Your post shows none of it. Joining a battle isn't easy, all the 2042 maps, and what other maps are separated. It's rare that the maps are in alphabetical order, and we can't sort between pro battles, maps and time left. I find amateur websites better at sorting than the lobby at times when I get referred and whatnot. (read to the top, i know i might be wrong) It doesn't lag as much? I highly disagree. I have some pretty high-end internet, and I lag constantly on minimal graphics without an fps drop, to the point where the game is unplayable. I have tried several MMOs and they don't nearly lag as much. "At some point the game you first loved seems to be quite boring and simple." I find this flawed and true at the same time. If you enjoy a game, chances are you want to explore the most amount of depth into it. The problem with this game is the lack of depth. You don't notice the lack of simplicity, you notice the lack of depth. Therefore, the game might seem boring and even more simple if you decide to move onto another game. Good time for a commercial break I agree with you, but the thing you're missing is the poster's intentions. They don't want more complexity, they want more depth (and a better interface). Look what they say: "Also, I know that you are working on daily missions but still, there's absolutely nothing to do in this game, just tanks shooting each other, capturing flags and points, parkour isn't even worth trying, because of the many, many lags this game has." Do you see the major problem? If you don't i'll say it. THERE IS LITTLE DEPTH. There is only oh so many things you can do with this game. Even though all games (technically) do this, the fact that all the depth in the game can be reduced to two lines on 14 font is quite appalling. Also, the fact that battles are sorted in one of the most ineffective ways possible is silly. You ONLY have game mode, and technically pro battles, because they're at the top if you have a pass. You CANNOT sort by time, map, alphabet, reverse alphabet, max amount of players (and per team), and how many flags/points left. If I loved 2042 CTF, why are they all separated when the only filter off is the CTF button? I feel like living in 2000 to have such an ineffective sorting of battles. (read to the top, i know i might be wrong)