I avoid Highways because every game is the same: 5-6 shafts on each side just sniping the handful of tanks trying to cap flags or CPs.. Same for Brest. I avoid Silence too but there it is the Magnums. Matchmaking cannot come soon enough for me.

Happened to my three times in the game I was just playing. I created this thread almost eight months ago. Since then TO hjas not even mentioned they are aware of this bug. How hard can it be to fix for professional programmers? Now, how hard is it for TO programmers? Another one of those times where I asked myself "why am I even playing?" and left the game entirely. It's happening more and more lately. The reason is TO produces garbage.

Hey this is a nice concept. Why think of things yourself when you can just steal good ideas from other peeps? Consider this heisted. Wolv is correct in the ultimate analysis but on athe ractical level I do not see this as a big issue. Every so iften I see a healthy tank run over an RK. I figure he has a missions and that's about it. Most often the tank is playing the game mode other than that. I can't really think of a time in a close game I saw a teammate do nothing but camp boxes. Even if a player joined the game with an eye on box grabbing the chance to play in a fun/close game is usually appealing in itself. As for joining a 3 vs 4 game wher eone side is down 7 flags to none ... who cares? Anyway .... TO is always a mix of playing the for the game mode win as a team and individual goals by each tanker. For a large-scale example of this, consider the War event.

How exactly are box missions useful? Well here is why: after you pick up X number of boxes you get a reward. The rewards are useful in game play. Either they add to your stock of supplies, or to your Crystal fund, or perhaps by giving you three hours of Premium Account. These rewards all have utility, or IOW, are "useful". There is no reason whatsoever to assume every player on a box mission does nothing but take boxes and disrupt the game. Does it happen sometimes? Sure. Is this destroying game play? LOL

I think Striker is just one that you have an eye for it or not. Over the months I have just forced myself to take a wide variety of solo shots. Eventually you reach that "feel" situation where you aren't aiming aiming. I was thinking about the Viking part watching your gif. I use Titan mostly but also own Hornet. The stability of Titan is often a better launching platform than hornet. But hornet allows you more deflection from rocking the hull. The hull plays a huge role in striker-aiming. I almost always am micro-rocking the hull to make fine vertical aiming adjustments. I also shoot over viking a lot from titan. Hull height makes a real difference. On your gif those shots you hit the bridge edge would have scored hits from titan. For moving targets there are moving targets and targets that are moving some, if you get my drift. Some you hit, some you shoot at for the challenge. Great fun to hit those when it happens. Depends on the range and angle they are moving at. Striker's vertical reach is greater than most people realize.. With turret and hull you can traverse a considerable arc to hit those circle-strafing attempts. And yo can always shoot low at the enemy treads.. Either you hit the treads directly or close enough to do near full damage. (It probably helps that I am used ot close-range fighting from my Smoky play. ) But bottom line every turret has (or should have) a weakness. If striker's was only fast movers that's be OK.

I do not want all striker shots to be homing missiles. That gives up the ability to bombard terrain to cause splash casualties. After awhile you can reliably hit small targets at long ranges. You do not need homing to hit still targets or terrain outcrops near moving ones. "Awhile" being maybe 3 months or a year depending. :rolleyes: Giving that up to get nothing but homing missiles would make striker less versatile. I do not use mouse controls so my opinions are from the kb point of view.

I did buy it and played it to about 50k exp on a throwaway account. Yeah the first couple games you're experimenting a lot. But by my 5th game or so I was putting up the 30+ kills and the 3 or fewer deaths. Also thre are other Magnum players to watch. You see what they do and in moments you too are raking up the easy easy easy kills. Now time for to ask you: how much have you played Striker? My guess is zero, if you think Magnum is hard to learn. The learning curve should not justify more damage. That excuse gave us Magnum. Off though to hear the same person say the exact opposite thing about the learning curve when it comes to Magnum and striker. The VLog said it is OK Magnum is so strong because it has a long learning curve. But for Striker this justification does not apply. Same person, contradictory opinions. Welcome to TO-quality. Again. Well I agree with the learning curve opintion (Striker version). I do not want Striker buffed so much it becomes the next Magnum. It could use a little bump but not much. Sort of like Vulcan.

How are those missions "useless"? They aren't. They are exactly as useful as any mission. As has been explained it is good to have a range of mission fdifficulties, and, good players pick up boxes while playing missions. Bad players are going to be a drag on your team if they are doing a box mission or not.

Join game. Lousy team. Down 3-0 CTF. Quit game. Find another. Join game. Lousy team. Down 3-0 CTF. Quit game. Find another. Join game. Lousy team. Down 3-0 CTF. Quit game. Find another. Quit playing Tanki Online for the day. Mission remains unfinished. Don't care. Great way to maintain player interest TO. By the way, when will I get the containers I lost because of your errors? Anothe Golden Day in TO customer relations.

Well not everyone is a French tanker. :p

Viking has better reveser acceleration so it is better at the peek-out / peek-bacl stuff and dodging. I do not see forward acceleration listed in Wiki anymore?!

Thanks for the comments on Drought. Sometimes the sample paint looks good but it doesn't look good on the actual tank. Rhino comes to mind though of curse everyone has their own taste. It is amazing isn't it that so many people still do not know about mission containers?

No worries and whining is needed at times. 15 no-paints in a row is entirely unremarkable. It just seems especially rotten when you are hoping for that desired prize. ;) Grats on Africa. I think that is one of the best paints. Do you like Drought on an actual tank? It looks interesting in the 'swatch' you see in the shop. LW got Hohkama and Amber. Hohkama is another nice garage paint. Amber looks good too. I got that on 2 accounts now.

You are wrong. Next?

The reason you think the counter is unreliable is because it is. TO's counters failed me twice in the War event. I di dnot get 32 containers that I'd earned. I know of doaens of otehr players who were also screwed mt TO's inability to write solid code. Amd of course TO refused to make goon on its mistakes or even to look into their won coding mistakes. They just blame all their customers of being unable to count. They deserve no respect and especially no financial support. Ever. I track container openings. There's no reason to suspect the odds of each award being changed. OTOH tehg paints area is where I feel the most uncertainty. In a week or so we'll have enough data I can perhaps settle out the paint odds a little better. If you open 100 containers you will with over 99% certainty get 1 more more Garage paints and it is about 96% to get 1 or more Epic Paints. But for the legendary animated paints even 100 containers gives you maybe 50% to 60% chance of getting 1 (or more) of those.

I saved my containers becuse I had no real need to open any. I shared that info with my project contributors. I do not tell people what to do with their containers. I ask people to contribute data. We learn from the data and share that knowledge with everyone. That's a good thing for everyone. You are a strange person always accusing others on being amoral. Or in other words, bite me. Or is wordless sound. hahahahahahaha.

I did! :o Must have been the good mojo you sent thru the interwires. Yeah I need to wait for 50% to do the upper steps on modules or else it breaks the budget. So better to trade in some containers. Cash soesn't ehlp yu until it's spent. :) You have to backwards. I am, not a buyer. I rely upon the sales. Buyers can just buy ...

Wow so many 50% MU sales one after the other. Until this one I have been able to earn enough between sales to MU everything needing it. But this one arrived so soon I will have to prioritize. Well that's the kind of problem you want to have, :) OTOH I guess I'll open some of the 100+ War containers I have hoarded . . .

You can get a 3-way m3 module for 125k on sale. MU it to 40% for about 55k (IIRC) at full MU price. Then MU to 50% on salea at a cost of 100-125. So a full 50% module will cost you 300k or so. The thing is you need to buy them all early so you can upgrade them all 1 MU at a time as the sales come along. I am a General I am not a buyer and I already have 4 3-way modules at 40% to 44%. I also have a mine module at 45% When I reach Marshal I will trade in my last pair of 3-way modules for m3 and MU them both to 40% in the 1st 10 days. My other accounts in the LtCol to MajGen ranks are in even better shape than LW, having learned from his experience. I will then have 600,000 exp points to level them all up to 50%. That will be no problem. It would have been no problem before Containers were added but with hem it sill be very easy. And I will have enough for another hull and turret if I so choose. Arriving at this point is what those Crystals are for. If I can do it w/o buying then anyone can do it.

There was NO variety under the previous system There'd be 40 Poly CP battle 20 Noise 10 Monty Carlo. I'd have to server hop 10 times to find one battle worth trying to play that wasn't a mindless grinder. Please. The current system is tenfold better than the old one.

If you do not want protections that's your call. The point to my resposne was by the time a player is legend having a 50% module against any turret type is nothing remarkable. So then I guess all turrets are "worthless".

TO gave you the reason. Removing this reduced lad on teh bandwidth. That helped reduce lag / increase performance. Someone always has to cook up a conspiracy theory . . .

Every Legend should have 50% protection against all 13 turrets in the game.

Some maps seem to favor red others blue. It can produce good balanced games. But on some maps it does not seem to fit as well. No I don; have a list ... well Osa.

You absolutely miss the point, either intentionally or not. I do not give a northbound rat's south end for your opinion as to what I find worth my time. If you find being spawn-camped fun, have at it. PS: The same rat can be used to express the priority I put on GBs. You're funny but no Joe Pesci. My point is, the current system does not offer many interesting games to the player searching for one. You can pretzel logic that if you wish. To me that is an issue. No it will not solve the problem. But as I said originally I feel it will be a net benefit. There are no basic maps I do not like for themselves. There are map I do not play because 95% of them are just shooting galleries for Shafts or magnums. But in MM 5 magnums cannot seek out those maps, game after game after game. Those maps will become interesting again. I just checked my accounts that did not do missions last night. The exact same three Hiways games I did not want to play 15 hours ago were still there. In MM these games will not persist for 24 hours. Will I get dropped on a losing team? Yes I will. But not every losing team is bad. Blowouts are bad. But losing a tough battle ... well you cannot say you want close battles yet be unwilling to lose them.. Will MM produce fewer blowouts than we see now? Well now we are back to my original comment. Right now you have to skip past 10 blowouts to find a reasonable game. That's pretty low odds. In my reckoning MM can be both; flawed, and, a better situation that what we have now. Especially if TO is serious about making good changes to scoring systems. Good changes would make it worthwhile to try to turn around losing games or at least make them close. That in turn makes a satisfactory MM easier.