Actually it's nothing close to balanced without drugs(I play almost exclusively PRO Battles with drugs disabled). The problem is that a Twins M2 by itself can dictate the pace of the match in a mid sized map. Pair it with Viking and you have very little weakness. People will say long range weapons are strong against it but nobody plays long range weapons besides Magnum. (in mid sized maps that is) In the time I've used it, it's been relatively easy to maintain a 1.6+ D/L ratio and almost always the highest in the match.(No drugs since pro battles)

Just got M2. It's so overpowered, how they allow something this stupid to exist in the game is beyond me. This is ridiculous! Seriously, you cannot play normal games without drugs, it's so stupid, clearly you can't beat someone because they're more skilled at pressing 3! Wow that take so much skill, let's make money off of people who know nothing about how the game works but they can win because why ? They can press 3 harder! YEAH! Either you play Pro Battles or you drug because you cannot be competitive against these noobs with so much skill (aka pressing 1, 2 and 3 repeatedly)

No genius, I'm buying the M2 Viking on sale and will play almost nothing but Viking until I can get an M3 hull. (with the exception of XP/BP I guess) Besides what's the point of such a silly question? "Oh do you want to have more HP or less HP?" Of course I'll use the M2 Hunter over the M1 VIking, but once I get my M2 then Hunter can go in the trash can.

I think the problem is that protections protect you way too much. Cutting someone's damage in half is like an always active double armor + the fact that you can also use double armor. I'd like to see the protection cap being lowered to say like 35%.

You have High caliber ammo? Is it good? Worth it for 50K?

People say that the alteration that makes projectiles faster is actually really good. And it does look that way on paper. Personally, M2 Rico is super common at these ranks, and seems to be a solid choice. Are there better turrets for Poly CP? Definitely, but it's generally a turret you can use almost anywhere. If you're talking about the M2 rico alteration then forget it. If you want splash damage then play Thunder, It's not really worth it to lose the bounce effect.

You are just an immature person who gets defensive as hell when someone says something you don't agree with. I played Hornet until it became obvious that it's simply incompetent in most cases.

Good luck to YOU. I'm doing pretty well so far.

If something cannot get a K/D above 1 then usually it's not worth it unless you don't mind having terrible stats(except for isida only). It'd be fine if you care about "team effort" but it's mostly meaningless nobody cares about how the team does, they just care about their own benefit. Besides all you do is avoid the comparison and move the goal post because you can't actually come back with actual facts and throw around completely wrong claims like "Hunter M1 has higher acceleration than M1 Viking". You also assume the game is overrun by shafts or something. Besides, if we're talking about M2s (which matters to me, M3s don't just yet) then an M2 Shaft cannot actually one shot a stock M2 Viking. (you can check the stats) Micro upgrades will either be disabled or Viking has upgrades as well. (or even protection)

Difference in reverse acceleration is 16% at M3 between Viking and Hornet. The difference in acceleration is 22%. The difference between top speeds is 13.2%. But the difference between HP is 50%. Still it's not even worth it. Hunter doesn't really matter because they're very identical. Viking is better than a Hornet 9 times out of 10. You can barely notice the acceleration difference and frankly it's not worth the 50% lost HP. (which is about 900 difference in HP) And I have where you even got the idea that any hull is somehow better than Viking at Stability. Viking is always the most stable. Just because players use Hornet doesn't mean it's good. Have you looked at those players' stats? 90% of them will be below 1 K/D. And no, Hunter's acceleration at M1 isn't better than Viking's because you probably looked at lateral acceleration and just assumed that's the acceleration when moving forwards.Double check your facts next time.

This isn't a card game or anything of the sort. You don't balance the game around luck, you balance it around effectiveness versus skill required to use.

Yeah but that's because like you said no one is perfect. But imagine you hit the ball just right and it flies straight up. Players shouldn't be punished for good play, that's a terrible way to balance the game. Besides, why would you ever compare this to an outdoor game? It doesn't make sense, they're 2 very different things, what works for 1 thing cannot work for another.

That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. How is a more skilled player losing a fight because of stupid luck is in any way fun? And no it doesn't exist because it is somehow "boring". It exists so that worse players can get lucky and win fights they shouldn't although they suck at the game. And no 3 shot kills don't only happen when you double shoot. They can happen in a 1v1 as well. Not that rebalance. I mean THE FIRST BIG rebalance. The time when Smoky, Firebird and Twins were useless at high ranks. This was years ago.

Yes, it has terrible DPM(about 11K at M2) and can't 2 shot. What is the point of playing it on mid sized maps?! Something like Smoky might suck at range but has 18K DPM if you assume 1 of 5 shots is a crit(at M2). Thunder M2 has about 14000 DPM at M2.

The Magnum problem is present in another game (I won't name it) and it's exactly the same situation. Artillery in that game literally sits in base and clicks on people to do free damage. It makes no sense. Magnum players can sit in a safe spot and do a stupid amount of damage without putting themselves at any kind of risk. This needs to be changed.

Another one! Viking is clearly the most versatile and useful hull in the entire game. There is not a single map where you wouldn't use a Viking on. It makes no sense, it has a stupid amount of HP for something that fast. First of all, medium hulls should have their top speed slightly nerfed but more importantly their acceleration. It makes no sense whatsoever why they can get to their top speeds so fast. Hulls like Viking make Hornet and the like pretty much obsolete. Why would anyone use a Hornet for 20-25% higher speed when they can get very competitive speed and 50% more HP?

Magnum is such a stupid turret. It barely takes skill, you don't even need to hit the enemy, you just have to land the shot close to them.

Twins as it stands right now, is clearly one of the most overpowered turrets at M2. The thing about Twins is, it always used to be a no skill weapon. You just held Spacebar, but back in the day it was very weak compared to higher tier turrets like Thunder. After the rebalance, the power level of this no skill gun is out of this world. Clearly the amount of Twins and Firebird protections used at M2 ranks is evidence enough that it's beyond overpowered and should be nerfed. Why would you ever make such a no skill weapon be this powerful?

My problem is that the numbers make very little sense.

A nerf to medium hulls would work as well.

Exactly, buffing doesn't get us anywhere, we should be nerfing what's imbalanced. Medium hulls right now are idiotproof. They don't really take any particular skillset to use and they have abnormally good stats.

See you remember 2012 rebalance right? Before the changes, there were 3 hulls that were mostly used and there was a beautiful balance to it. I remember M3 values almost exactly. Hornet, Viking and Mammoth had HPs of 100, 150 and 200 respectively. And if I remember correct, hornet was a 3 shot for M3 Thunder and Viking was on average 5. Right now as it stands Thunders of the same M number, can consistently 2 shot Hornets and that's a problem. Now we can't nerf Thunder, because that breaks the game further. But here's the big deal. Back in the day, the movement values WERE WAY different. M3 Viking had like a movement speed of 7, while M3 Hornet had 10. That's about a 40% difference in Speed while you lose 50% extra HP you could have had. Now that's reasonable, right now Hornet on average is like 15%-25% faster and has 50% less HP. That logically makes no sense, buffing these Heavier hulls in terms of speed broke the balance just in terms of Maps. Because with Hornet you could take key positions that other hulls couldn't. Right now, there really isn't much of a difference.

And it makes sense right? Viking doesn't really have any significant weakness. It's nothing close to slow and it has a very solid HP pool.

Exactly, there's very little reason if any to play the Hornet over a Hunter or Viking. Back in the VERY OLD days, Viking was considerably slower and Hunter was useless.

Would the Tanki team be willing to share what the most common Hulls are? I'd be willing to bet that Viking and Hunter take a good portion of it. Also we can't claim that something is "better" without stats to back up the claim. In higher rank games where people actually know which Hulls are "good/effective", Hunter and Viking will have a higher use percentage. And a more likely reason that the nitro is only a 40% speed boost is probably because the base speed values are so high that doubling that value would make hulls basically lightning bolts zipping around and would completely break the game because maps aren't big enough. Most maps are medium sized. Also, I never suggested that Hornet should have the same HP as a medium hull, I only suggested that it should have comparable HP. A difference of 50% is by no means "comparable". The game isn't built around numbers, it's built around thresholds. How many hits from a specific turret can Hornet take? Also about the example of Double Damage, that's actually one huge factor that breaks Hornet's balance. Because some Turrets can outright one shot it and have ridiculous levels of DPM just because of Double Damage. The speed difference frankly isn't worth being 1 shot by a Thunder with double damage. Just because 1 player got good stats on just 2 matches doesn't mean that Hornet is in a balanced state. That's a very poor perspective to discuss balance from. That's almost somewhat negated by latency.