Many on the thread have said that the "devs don't care" or bitterly say "the devs are trying to ruin the game" or "all they care about is money" The latter is probably partially true. The dev team needs to pay for their food and bills. This is a commercial enterprise for them. Gazprom does not accept FaceBook/YouTube likes as a form of payment. With regards to ruining the game - maybe it's a strategic decision to push people towards Tanki-X. Sadly, this won't work on me, although I wish it did. The game looks amazing, but with sub-30 frames per second, it's unplayable on my non-upgradeable MS Surface4 Pro. So I simply cannot take part in what looks like an visually stunning game. As for the first statement - even if the devs cared, the decisions that are being made by the management gives them the option of a ) revolt, get sacked and release the job to someone who will do as they're told b ) implement and get paid Not sure how we would get to know the truth, but the effect remains the same: unpopular changes will be pushed through. Has anyone seen a poll of "what features would you like implemented" offered to the community? Please post the link here and PM me if you know more than I do. I wish the Alternativa strategy would be to leave TO the heck alone, to generate (trickle-down) background revenue, and focus on making Tanki-X a more attractive, playable proposition. Fans of the game and genre ought to move to Tanki-X by their own volition, because it's better, not due to frustration with their current gaming experience. If operating cost of TO is a problem, why not redirect the talent of the developers to the next big thing and leave behind a core of 3-5 people for operations support and reduce the number of servers to reduce costs? Surely this must be better than rolling out update after update that, due to unpopularity, further reduces the playerbase while keeping the development cost level?

Speaking as a big fan, frequent player, and occasional purchaser of crystals.... The 'PRO Pass' update means I can no longer play on the map I want with my TO friends because I can't create battles. This sucks. Also, if one of my friends invites me to play, this usually means I can't join because I don't have a PRO pass. These two reasons have directly impacted the amount of time I play, the fun I have and the amount of $$$ I am prepared to spend. Like if you feel the same way.

follow-up to my previous post. messed around with the maths a bit more, translated to currently published MU costs, so a fair bit of assumption going on. the moral of the story is: if i want to increase my average damage, doing it via MUs costs me around 20k (i.e. 1/5th of the modification cost) In the interest of fairness, if I want to increase my min damage, doing it via MUs costs me around 200k (i.e. 2* the modification cost). However, since overall the average damage output will be, erm... the average, no matter how I spin it around, this mod sounds massively under-powered for the price. Basically, I can spend 100k to guarantee that I can one-shot an unprotected, un-MU'ed Wasp M0. Big whoop. Shame, I really wanted to boost my rail, but this doesn't look like the way to do it. Maybe I'll just spend 30k on a freeze M2 in the sales, now THAT is how you OP a turret.

Thanks - I did the maths and made some assumptions as follows A. the variation declared in the stats does not refer to absolute change in damage. B. the variation declared in the stats refers to the compression of original normal distribution as per http://en.tankiwiki.com/In_depth:_Game_Mechanics#Railgun (i.e. gap between MinHP and AveHP reduces by 50% and respectively gap between MaxHP and AveHP reduces by 25%) C. the stats declared are actually accurate and reflected in the game mechanics D. Post-stabilisation damage probability follows a normal/Bell curve (like the current one) I checked assumption c) by recording 29 consecutive shots with my (MUed) M2 railgun at a Titan M1 and Wasp M1 (no protection) - each. A total of 58 shots. I noticed a significant variance in the average. AveHP vs TitanM1 = 866 AveHP vs WasppM1 = 821 Maybe the small sample size drives this. When combining the two sets into one superset, the distribution gives a reasonably good histogram with a bucket size of 50 - with the average pretty much where it's meant to be : 860 (ish). Following the maths, where HP = Hit Points (i.e. Damage done) SMinHP = Standard Min HP SMaxHP = Standard Max HP SAveHP = Standard Average HP SSMinHP = Shell Stabilised Min HP = 570 SSMaxHP = Shell Stabilised Max HP = 1149 SSAveHP = Shell Stabilised Ave HP = 860 Calculating SSMinHP SSMinHP = SAgvHP - [sAvgHP-SMinHP]/2 = [sAvgHP + SMinHP]/2 = 715 SSMaxHP = SMaxHP - [sMaxHP - SAgvHP] * 25% = [3*SMaxHP+SAvgHP]/4 = 1077 not sure what the probability distribution is for the new model, so for simplicity I will assume a bell (like before) which puts the average in the middle, so SSAveHP = 895 (Just for the heck of it, the formulae for the new SS values will be at the end of the post. Haven't done algebra for a while, and this is a bit of fun.) Summary : Cost of upgrade = 100,000 crystals MinHP : 570 >> 715 (up 25% net) AveHP : 860 >> 896 ( up 4% net) MaxHP : 1149 >> 1077 (down 6% net) Is it worth it? hmm... hmmm... dammit, I really wish it was, but sounds kinda crappy overall. Also, no plans for sales on the modification are planned - so no way of getting a discount on it. If anyone rents it and has a noticeable performance improvement, would love to hear from you. Anyway - formulae as promised, in terms of the min and max as described in your current the gun properties in the garage: SSMinHP = [3*SMinHP + SMAxHP] / 4 SSMaxHP = [sMinHP + 7*SMaxHP] / 8 SSAveHP = [7*SMinHP + 9*SMaxHP ] / 16 I checked the results, accurate to 4 decimal places. Enjoy!

has anyone field tested shell stabilisation? any thoughts? i cant make sense of the possible damage output. [peak damage -25%] < [bottom damage +50%]. how does that exactly work?

sorry -- is the complaint "M3 is better than M2"?

Halogen.H SharpTechdragon What do you call a baby salmon?

Lots of negative feedback on the mouse controls, but please Tanki don't consider deprecating it. Using mouse controls in Tanki is like patting your head and rubbing your tummy at the same time. First few times you try, it's very uncoordinated. Secretly, I am glad people aren't using it. Gives me an edge.

Mouse controls are painful for the first few battles, but then it gets a lot easier. When I switched, I was getting killed all the time. Once I got used to it, great!