They do. Tanki has made two strategic mistakes in development, first to brutally prioritize revenue per player over the the number of players, and then more recently the choice to subject all development to court 12 year olds on mobile (thereafter called "the imbeciles"). Pretty much everything that breaks the game today has been done to court the imbeciles. The destructive parameter change of September 2020 caters to their craving for instant gratification without any account strategy, the fatally wide rank spreads in battles have been invented because the imbeciles' attention span to wait for a battle stretches only over a few seconds, the promotion of ever more BOOM instead of battle strategy and tactics is due to the the imbeciles' lack of intellectual capacity and discomfort when feeling called upon to use the brain, the hovering tanks are created to suit their limited motoric abilities, and so on. By now, my sad guess is that developers will only realize the dead road they are on when it is to late. So I enjoy to use the grotesquely overpowered Hopper myself for as long as the game lasts. And whenever I encounter an imbecile in battle (a learned eye will spot players that do not use keyboard controls in the enemy team), I find exquisite pleasure in punishing them for being the pathetic burden on human kind which they are.

I think I do understand what Maf is saying. It is a perfectly legitimate opinion. Though it involves an element, switching teams, which I do ethically abhor. What I would find fine is to add MMS options for players as a feature. Like having a preference for (or against) being assigned to a running battle as a substitute for a deserter in a team that is lagging in score. I would actually often check this option, I like comback battles just as Maf does.

Maf, for me this is a point of principle. When I am in a PRO battle (where switching teams is possible) and our team puts up an honest good fight and overpowers the enemy team, turning it into a rout, then in my opinion only one clean path exists, namely finishing the battle so that everyone can have a fresh start. In such a situation, I find it disgusting to abandon the aim of the mode and turn to spawn killing, as some do. And I find it despicable if one or more players of my team switch to the enemy team in such a situation. Actually the best way to have me remember an account name is to do this. I do not forget people who desert my team and join the enemy team, whatever their motivation may be. In some cases I am casually chastising people for such shameful behaviour for years, in the battle chat whenever I meet them, after such a thing happened. And whenever I see an opportunity to join a battle against them, I am eager to do so.

I hope that this suggestion of a "switch teams" feature is meant as a joke. In my humble opinion, switchers are even more despisable people than simple deserters. The MMS has two, and only two, issues: First is the ridiculous wide rank spreads in battles, which serve to make many people of all but the very highest ranks leave the game in frustration or become habitual deserters. This problem apparently exists because developers think that the 12-year-old-on-mobile crowd they are courting does not have the psychological maturity to wait for some seconds more to get into a battle with smaller rank spreads. Second is the issue of uneven teams due to widespread desertion. This problem exists because of a number of development decisions, like the wide rank spreads, the promotion of the cursed "Quick Battle" button which by its nature often sends people into battles with characteristics they do not want to play, and the reluctance of developers to try gentle nudging to finish battles, like publishing a finishing quota on players' profiles.

Every time I click the ingame link to a V-log in the forum, my security software tells me it prevented an attempt to access my laptop camera. I like to imagine that my superior gameplay makes developers in Perm wish to watch me in action. Though access to my laptop camera is protected by several layers of security, the last one being duct tape.

I seriously wish they would fix it. The rewards for daily and weekly missions are not paid any more. And when you visit the garage during a battle, you frequently get kicked and find yourself with the starting screen, only to get a cynical message after a minute that the pause has ended, asking you if you wish to return to the battle, which it however won't do when you click yes. Furthermore, the no-damage-bug from the anti cheat system runs amok.

If and only if you enable video upload in the forum. Though on this video you would only see nothing happening, except the "open" Button changing from clickable to unclickable after the click.

Would you please be kind enough to solve the bug with opening Weekly Containers? In more than 90 percent of clicks to open them, nothing happens except the open button becoming unclickable and the containers disappear, only to reappear as unopened in my garage some half an hour later. This bug has been haunting players and customers for weeks now, and it sucks.

I am confident that we will get 50% discount on micro-upgrades (I do not care about speed-ups because I do not use them), it has always been like this for Christmas. However, there is one question I am actually excited about: Will there be increased crystals without increased experience in battles? This would be the one Christmas present from Tanki to its players and customers which would motivate me, and many others, to play (and invest significant money).

Most people more or less strongly prefer a particular setting, and many of them would immediately leave a battle in a setting they dislike, hoping for a setting they like better in the next assignement they click for, and the existing desertion problem would proliferate. So I think randomization is not viable (unless there were a severe punishment for desertion, which probably will not come, as developers still even shy away from gentle nudging by publishing a finishing quota on players' profiles).

Maf, weekly changes might be another way towards the variety effect, though I think for several reasons that fixed settings for fixed weekdays were the superior solution. For example, this gives more immediate experience of variety, and it does not turn off players who really hate and would not play in a particular setting for an entire week. Sabry, the problem with alternatives is that it disperses the player base too much. You would effectively have not 7 game modes but 21 of them, and waiting time for battles in each of them would become extreme. This idea might become viable one day, when game developers fundamentally change course and focus on enlarging the player base instead of squeezing as much money as possible from every existing player, but I do not think it is viable now.

As your different "experiment" MMS settings natually are each loved by some players and customers and hated by others, and the game needs variety (which for many years was an attractive selling point for Tanki, before you regrettably started to intentionally drain PRO games, a mistake you should reverse anyway) they should probably all be part of the game. However, it is not viable to offer them alternatively, as this would disperse the MMS player base too much, and it also is not viable to offer them randomly, as desertion from battles with unwanted settings would proliferate. So my suggestion is to make different settings the norm for different days of the week, like 6v6 on small maps on Monday and Thursday, 12v12 or 16v16 on large maps on Tuesday and Friday, 8v8 on medium maps on Wednesday, Saturday and Sunday, or the like.

No matter how much one has the focus on the purpose of the respective game mode, no matter how much money one spends on premium: Ever since the disingenuous parameter change of September (which was and is the wrong track for many reasons anyway), the efficiency rating and ranking for every active player and customer only goes down. The only way to improve at least the ranking is to simply not play Tanki. I want to complain about you disincentivizing me from playing and spending money for the game.

It is a very positive surprise that there will be double funds without double experience. This gives hope that Tanki might finally leave the dead road into the swamp of instant gratifications and quick achievements, which it has been following on for much too long, for the benefit of a sustainable path designed for mentally healthy players and customers instead. I am so happy about this new development that I intend to express my gratefulness by spending some 100 Euros tomorrow (mainly for hull immunities, less for lottery tickets aka containers, because I am not so much into lotteries). And if you should ever reverse or at least mitigate the parameter change of September, I might feel motivated to spend money for this game frequently again ...

Dude, when I look at the battle scoreboard you posted above, you had a K/D of 13:1 while your team suffered from deserters and was losing 3-0 in an apparent rout. There are many people who would have more issues with the attitude you displayed in that battle, than with disruptive new equipment like Gauss EMP augment or Hopper overdrive. You might want to curb the self-righteousness.

Statistically, in about 50 percent of the battles anyone plays the own team would not win. Snowflakes who desert their teammates because their team is about to lose a battle should leave Tanki altogether, the game would be a so much better experience for all of us mentally healthy and socially decent players without those snowflakes.

I have fun with Hopper these days, in particular in RGB and ASL modes.

Yes, the problem is widespread for some weeks. It only happens to me when I click another window while I am waiting for a battle assignement, then my tank is frozen at the start of the battle.

A symptom of an immature personality on the part of the deserter, yes. No, it is not. The team composition algorithm of the MMS works fine, even very fine to excellent in my humble opinion. And I have never seen, among all this complaining about it by the ever same people, any realistic idea on what exactly might be changed. You guys dislike some game features, which is legitimate, I do share some of your dislikes, but the demand that the MMS team composition algorithm of all things should have to save you from any confrontation with such parts of game reality is grotesque. Whenever in this forum alleged flaws of the MMS were discussed, every concrete claim was debunked. I am not going to elaborate for the thousandths time that pitching of players with the same gear score is impossible while changing gear during a battle is allowed with good reason as it is, that segregating the player base into "buyers" and "non-buyers" for the purposes of MMS battles is an absurd demand, et cetera. Like it is a legitimate suggestion to abolish players being able to buy much more advanced gear for real money during ranking, a suggestion I would even moderately support, but offering players to make such purchases and then punishing them for it in the MMS team composition algorithm is an absurd idea. My most used hull immunities (EMP immunity, AP immunity) do not concern you at all unless you use a Pay-To-Win weapon. The only hull immunity that is arguably "overpowered to the extreme" is Fire Immunity when used in combination with Vulcan and its Incendiary Band augment. I have not been using this for a long time, and anyway a simple Heat Resistance hull augment for crystals plus a defence module against Vulcan for crystals, and some basic skill in playing against a Vulcan, gives decent protection against it.

My cute Hopper is bought and gets upgraded with crystals from the millions of those I accumulate from gameplay. The only thing I actually spend money on, besides premium and battle passes, is hull immunity augments. I consider this a legitimate defensive measure against the diverse overpowered Pay-To-Win weapons that Alternativa sells to teenagers who would urgently need clinical help for their fundamental self-esteem issues, but rather mitigate the symptoms by annoying other people in an online game. I never bought any Pay-To-Win weapon, and I could never again look into a mirror if I would. Whenever I encounter a player with a Gauss EMP augment in a battle, I dedicate the battle exclusively to humiliating that player, in order to better them as a person. I think I am doing fine.

First of all, do not insult my cute Hopper as "flying cheat". Second, it benefits both me and my respective team. Third, in my impression, the MMS algorithm does pretty much the best possible job to compose teams for competitive battle, the fact that many battles develop one sided is beyond what a team composition algorithm can do. I am not fond of the development path of the game, with its focus on instant gratifications, quick achievements and lotteries, and the ever more disruptive changes to the game. I think that this path should be reversed, not by still more fancy disruptive changes, but by a persistent attitude of continuity instead of disruption and steady hand that rewards persistence, long-term account strategy and smarts. However, I do arrange to live well with the world as it is. https://ibb.co/M1606FR I do blame them for deserting their teammates in battle. I accuse them of perpetrating the most egregious act of sociopathy a human being can perpetrate. I despise them for this from the very depth of my heart. Dude, in yesterday I played an MMS battle, just by myself, where there was a group of three e-sports champions on the other side. It quickly evolved into a rout and a massacre. Half of our team deserted us teammates. The three of us remaining did our best to defend our base, and more than once we managed against all odds to foil an enemy attack of overwhelming force. We lost that battle standing upright as free men and women. The very idea of abandoning this dedicated, courageous, industrious Isida which so stoically respawned time and again to skillfully heal her two remaining teammates and charge at the attackers, the very idea of abandoning her in the heat of battle is utterly alien to me. In my book those deserters leave not only a battle, but also the community of human beings. My solace is that these deserters affirm a behavioral pattern for themselves, which will see them fail in real life.

What you are providing here is a more valuable service to human kind than the accomplishments of any dozen Nobel laureates taken together. The sad aspects are first that it draws attention to the fact that Tanki itself does not provide this option (they should make you a good offer to buy your code), and second that looking at those data painfully reminds the players and customers to the fact how much the unwarranted parameter change of September 2020 has violated account statistics.

Thank you for the compliment. For me, there are two reasons not to make myself busy with talk about "the real issues with TO" right now. The first reason is, I am currently playing the vastly overpowered Hopper-Firebird-Defender combination in flag/ball modes, and I feel no personal grudge. The second reason is that I do not think the two real issues with TO can and will be solved. Let me elaborate: The basic issue is the dead road development path of the past years, with its ever more accelerating implementation of quick achievements in all dimensions. While this bizarre doubling of health points experiment appears to give a hint that developers have finally realized the problem, I have no hope that a forum post of mine might result in comprehensively and in all dimensions turning the development path of the game into its opposite. The other issue, which annoys me personally significantly more, is the issue of players deserting their team in battle. I do not see any readiness on the part of developers to implement even the softest nudging techniques to address the issue. And really effective solutions, like investigating the real life identity of habitual deserters and abducting them to face court martial and a firing squad, are not practical and probably grossly illegal even in Russia. So if I post a complaint here, I make it about something that can easily be done in two hours of coding time and has apparent benefits, with no discernable argument against doing it right now. Like making the profile pages fully functional.

Whatever purpose one uses profile pages for, be it for personal gratification or for assessing other accounts or both, Alternativa should certainly take the two hours of coding time to get them shining in a fully functional state.

The K/D ratio certainly is interesting information, but isolated it is not very helpful. A high K/D can mean that this is a skilled player, or a coward camper (with a very high K/D it always is both). But there is a second interesting information, the ratio of crystals earned in battle divided by experience earned. This ratio can be estimated manually, or be found in a diluted form in the so-called efficiency ratio. A high efficiency ratio points to a skilled player, dedicated to the purpose of the respective game mode. So a high K/D earns my respect only if it is accompanied by a high efficiency ratio ...