When I saw the first videos of the Striker, I did not realise, that the reload in arcade mode is so slow.. I thought too, that it can fire 4 missiles in a sequence with a reload time of 0,25sec between the missilies. Therefore I thought the turret is so much overpowered.. which it would be if you could charge 4 missilies in fast sequence without aiming laser. If your target is a sitting duck (poly CP heavy hulls; or poly CP mediums at the point) you can just fire one missile after the other and deal heaps of damage (also thanks to splash of course). But a clever opponent will start to hunt your strikers in 1-1s, where they loose, and so the rest of the team can cap the point then. It's all about teamwork and map, with such turrets that are dedicated to a special task. Firebirds rule Poly CP today, but they are cheap pray on Parma.

If you /vote, there is a chance that something happens. If you don't vote, there is no chance at all, that something happens :p

Interresting concept. Could you please explain what happens if you are on noise, on the highest level, and you drive over the edge towards the center of the map? Will you fly straight forward and keep your height; with no nose-up/nose-down control? Or will your hull stick to the ground, and so make not much of a difference to hulls with tracks? What happens if a railgun hits you? Do you flip? If you flip and are upside down, will your propulsion drive you head down into the ground?

^have you ever been on the testservers? Most players there just log in, get some M3/M4 and drug as much as they can - just for the sake of it. Almost noone is interrested in "testing" stuff, like to check how many shots does it take to kill a Mammut with Arty; how many tries do I need until I corrected my aim, .. nothing. You will just get slaugthered :p So it's in any case a very, very recomended idea of your's to start an alternate account and try the turret, spent time and try to get somehow used to it. Once you can handle it, you can think about your battle experience in high ranks and can think how it would work - and purchase later. good luck on it ;)

I see. Maybe you want to place a note giving that statement above the kits section.. could help :p

Could you be so kind to propose the request to the people in charge of defining the official format? To know what the module protects against is very sane request that would help the players a lot.

Playing among supply users does not directly increase the fundshare for the non supply users. The only thing that helps, is if some noobs less good players hook up to supply overlords and so become a part of a winning team. => BUT a game of supply free XP/BP will grant more fund, as the tanks die faster. So I completely agree to you - now. Because now (thanks to the side effect of the battle button), there are a lot more drug-free Pro Battles around for high rankers. Low rankers have not so much drug issues.. but midrankers are still in trouble. They usually bought too many M1s, realise too late that they have to save up for M2s.. and lack crystals for pro passes. completely agreed.. the +100% philosphy of DD and DA, and of protection modules (50% protection = 2x the survival time = +100% surival time) forces players into countering supplies with supplies. A 30..50% boost by DD would make it more easy to counter supply users by skill and a bit of luck.. and would not feel overwhelming chanceless. but I realised the last couple of months, that supplies are not ment to give you a "reasonable advantage that can be countered by skill" Supplies seem to have the purpouse to give excitement to their user.. and +30% gives no excitement (ok, not much). As long as this is the plan, I doubt that the +100% philosophy of supplies will be broken up. Supplies would loose a lot of their appeal. Alhtough it could be broken up for protections (making 30% the new maximum, instead of 50%). IMHO it is much more usefull: to seperate supply users from non-supply users, instead of adapting supplies themselfes too much to make sure that people with a few supplies can have "full fun" in ~5 battles/day (and revert to proBattles later on), while buyers can have fun in ~10..15 battles/day.Pay2Play? Yes, somehow, yes. But a mild form, as you still have pro batltes around (now) To give less frequent players access to pro battles too (pay share of your fund afterwards). They work in the same company, do you think the do not talk to each other, ask for each others opinion and evaluating each others ideas and discuss until they think "this could work"? It's just natural that some ideas that come up are adapted until both find it good.

Therefore I think that the impact of winning-vs-loosing should be less, while the impact of the score/minute in relation to your teammates (only your teammates) should count more. You face the same situation as your team.. so the ones that handle it better should get a better rating. downside: Of course this is then a rating based on comparisms, and less of a rating that can be directly calculated from some fixed statistics (like hours played total, xp gained total, crystals gaines total, ...).

let me try Imagine the bases of both team are hard to defend because of the map specifics. Each flag is placed in a rather open ground But then the red team has a lead by 1 flags an has an idea: they manage to get the blue flag, they take it home to their red base, right into their own red spawn area, and do not cap. Instead they defend it in some corner that is easily defenable. Because they spawn right next to it, it is easy for them to hold the enemy flag for the rest of the game, while blue can not cap (due to the absence of their own blue flag). Red simply locks blue out from any chance to cap, and if red could cap, they don't do it (it would return the blue flag and wuold open up the chance for blue to win a flag too). Instead of defending their own, hard to defend flag on open terrain, they choose to steal the enemies flag and defend it in a very defensive corner, because they can choose the defense location better (the enemy flag is mobile, the own flag not). 2000mc, did I hit your intentional point?

sadly it is true for many democracies, but here's the wrong place to discuss politics. To sty on the in-game point of view: If a buyer offers to give a gold to everyone that votes him and spends 500 USD on it.. he will have pretty good chances. Does this qualify him? I doubt so. If a famous youtuber that plays with Legends all day volunteers for the ingame election, he will get a lot of votes just because of his popularity. Does this qualify him to discuss about changes that effect mid-ranks the most? I doubt so. If a famous clans leader volunteers, his popularity, his clans mates, the clan members of all befriended clans.. all would vote for him. Would they ask what makes him qualified to discuss in game changes? I doubt so too. There are people here, like AbsoluteZero, that would be very qualified to judge stuff, just because of their analytic mindset and experience. But I bet players like oufa would get more votes then the qualified ones.

A game is no democracy. If it would be, then most players would vote for free crystals. Btw, in real life most democracies turn into "ruled by greedy people who please the selfish ones to stay in power, instead of thinking about the greater good". Still I do like the idea to have a set of players, that play low, mid and high ranks on a regular base, and dicsuss stuff like that with the dev's. Not that they should have a veto.. but they should be sound and clever people, able to give good advice.. and the dev's should take advantage of them and discuss the ideas with them. I think it would improove the game. But you can not vote them.. voting does not work, as it gives decision power to the voters, and most voters decide.. bad.

ty for your answer ;) btw I think it's awesome :ph34r: If battle_mods have to change it, I volunteer to the over their avatar :P (ye I know, only officials get an avatar, ..) @Cedrik, maybe you could manage to collect all Q&A in the second post in the thread, so that the same questions will not be asked multiple times (at least not so often :P)

How many hours per week do you have to work as battle mod? How long in average does it take to check a battle, collect evidence and punish the violators? edit: cool idea to start this thread ;)

share your concerns there: en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=348941 Those guys there think about the factors that influence your rating. Over all, the rating value is no ranking number. Check your page: http://ratings.tankionline.com/get_stat/profile/?user=Hashir_the_best it says (right now): "efficiency":{"position":56550,"value":8402208} so your rating is 84022,08 (8402208 / 100) and this rating results in a ranking poisiton of 56550 (like 1st, 2nd, 3rd, ..... 56550th....)

it's no rebellion, as long as the go into a battle afterwards ;)

I think, that the timeframe of 48h is too short, to conduct any meaningfull results. The players need more time to adapt to the new situation; and learn it's pro's and con's in battle, to learn them from each other. -> I think you should run this for 7 days btw, another proposal: Ideas section, December 2016: "Experiment: 1 weekend with reduced effects for supplies and modules"

at the moment they read specially here, so I think you best give it a shot.

see it from this angle: There are mulitple types of isida players: - some play it on drugs as unstoppable killing machine (oh they might be pleased now..) - some play tactical healer (they are f*ked up, as they can not take care for themselfes) This is actually not a good change, if a turret becomes unstoppable if two of them pair up, isn't it? If Isida players would have loved high damage output in 5sec time, then they would have purchased a firebird right from the start.

if it would be a cycle, then the next step after the cycles end would be fhe first step of the cycle. like: "charge-shoot-reload-charge-shoot"-"charge-shoot-reload-charge-shoot" ^ but this does not work. After "charge-shoot-reload-charge-shoot" you are empty and can not charge. So this can not be the cylce. It is TTK (or in other words: damage output over time until my enemy is done) what you are after.

noone says that the turkish flag is more imporatant; there are simply more turkish players here that stand up and complain. This has also nothing to do with racism If they would prirorize then it would be a marketing decision (largest markets first). As an instance I would really like to buy a special croatian skin-cream for the aftermath of beeing sunburned, because it is great. Much better then anything in the rest of central Europe. But it is not sold in my country. This is sad for me.. but for sure no racsim.

Those are different things you tank about. DPS/DPM (how much damage = score can I deal in average over a timeframe) is a value calcuated by the cycle time.. and the cylce is charge-shoot-reload-/-charge-shoot-reload-/-charge-shoot-reload.. The things you wolverine think about are more usefull for a time-to-kill (TTK) calcuation (how fast can I kill someone in a 1-vs-1 encounter on the field)

It was a vlog where they said that the changes will be more frequent, but with lower impact. I apriciate that. For a vulcan user it is much more bearable, if his damage is reduced by 5% (not noticeable) then if there are big changes by -20% (like it was done to vulcan recently, if Iam not mistaken). Small changes = good. Shaft received no small change here.. +1second is a lot. 4x 0,25seconds; spread out over 3 months would be far less impact for the players.. and would maybe be so small, that tanki could say "if we change something by less then 5% in a month, we do not announce it large. you can find it in the wiki, bit there is no big deal about it". And after each change the players would have 1 month to see if it's truely "thaaaaaattt bad" and again "broke tanki" (like 20 times before). This would work better. Slower, but better. Isisda got no small changes. Isida just becomes a new kind of turret.

I think the fewer pellets have no impact on range; If the distribution pattern inside the angle has not changed, then you will deal the same damage statistically. 2 small pellets close to tank border, one hits, one doesnt <-> 1 large pellet, it hits 2 small pellets close to tank border, one hits, one doesnt <-> 1 large pellet, it misses as the distribution patter around the edge of the tank (close by shot) does not change, it should make no difference over time IMHO the main reason for the reduced pellet number, is lag: less pellets -> less data to be calculated (hit, no hit, impact where, ..) and less data to be transmitted over the net

^it was just irony :) Isisdas aiming angle is clearly a nerve, at least for skilled players. the higher dpm is a butt (self heal was useless) but a buff that seems not in line with the isida that players loved to play (even drugless) for years.

Not beeing forced: In games that try to balance for diversity as prio 1 (and therefore sacrifice balance of power) the balance changes are ment to make players change the turret they use. Think about it. It seems hte comparsim was.. too creative. A supermarket would piss off their customers (therefore they dont do it). Tanki does do it and p*sses off their players. I hope that cleared it up. For the rest of your arguments I kindly ask you to read my post again, because from your answers I could imagine you misunderstood quite parts of it. Feel free to come back a day later, if it still did no clear up.