3) exact same thing has happened to me. Comfortable lead half-way through battle (now "invested" ) and all of a sudden half my team leaves. Que the amazing "come-back".

Economics. Consider a Bugatti and a Ferrari. Bugatti might cost 3x the Ferrari, but... is it worth it? Priced to differentiate, and make it more "exclusive".

You generalize a lot. <_< How do you know what server they were using before update?

You don't need to buy paints. They are a luxury.

Ely might be referring to in-battle team communication... "incomming on right".... "sniper on hill" kind of communication. For DM - not an issue. Who needs to "talk" then. But team games it can make a difference when you battle as a real "team". Co-ordination is quite important in team games.

OR... They were mults. Keep the game going until many of the players are "invested" - maybe half-way through. Else scam does not work. Then they start dropping out. But for some reason the other side is not losing players. Battle completely unbalanced and no chance to keep the lead. This has happened to me a number of times in Polygon with a comfortable lead. No reason half the team-mates should be dropping out at that stage - unless they were mults. One or two? maybe - but then someone would fill that spot. Half the team at once? Nasty.

2) True up to a certain rank. At my level doesn't matter - if your fighting two levels up it's legend territory. My ranking won't hurt me now. Will add more crystals upon rank-up though. 1) Not necessarily. Yes we can compete somewhat but... A) Since they removed missions from Pro-Battles we need to use up a lot more supplies than before, just to complete 1-3 missions. RKs are not distributed as freebie rewards in same proportion as they come in kits. So Supply buyers have huge advantage there. RKs get used a LOT. B) Special Events. Did not even bother trying lately - I don't have the RKs to make it worth-while competing with opponents who spam an RK every time I'm about to deep-six them. Many of the daily missions are "get 80 kills" or finish first 3 times. Getting those 80 kills requires a lot of supplies because the enemies have 40%+ protection against my turret. So it either takes 3-4 battles to complete (using up lots of supplies) or I end up completing only 1 or 2 missions for that day. I'm at the in-between stage - high enough to regularly battle enemies with full, upgraded garages (and supplies), but not high enough to have acquired the assets to really compete on an even basis.

Hate the drift Viking has now. But I don't mind the drifting on hornet. Can be used to advantage when there's a bit of room.

Twins projectile speed is relatively slow - does that make it a "skilled" turret? Do you have lots of experience with smoky - from another account maybe?

Not at all. Was a rebuttal to fact that smoky might be OP because it has unlimited ammo. It's hardly the only weapon with "unlimited ammo".

Sure you're allowed to have an opinion. And I happen to disagree with it. Doesn't need much skill? Try aiming and killing targets with it. You say shaft is balanced, even though it has unlimited ammo.

Wait - whaaaaat?? :wacko: :blink: :D

Don't you get a death recorded against you when self-destructing? Seems like a double-penalty to me.

Yup - when you encounter enemies with 40%-50% protection vs your one turret - SOL.

I would not be so sure. There was a lot of discussion after last contest like this and it seemed to be they were not rewarding kills if you left the battle before it ended.

Are you sure you read D.a.n.t.e's post carefully? Your highlights don't address this part do they? "Finish each non-PRO battle for your kills to be counted." ah... Dante beat me to it...

I think you are correct - 3 flags and 2 CP. Blue still lost ~ 70% of the time. Was way worse at start before they adjusted the scoring. More tweaks there might make it more even.

Interesting battle mode but... Sides were imbalanced - even more so than a map like Noise. Defender (Blue?) with three points to watch was at a large disadvantage - especially when tanks could lag right over the blocking defenders. Attackers (Red?) won - i'd guess - 70% (or more) of the time. Tankers on Red side would exit when battle ended just so they would not have to play blue.

That's the way it should be. If you can one-shot a medium hull from distance AND fight up close then... ... ... OP. How does a freeze defend itself from a shaft on the other side of the map? Running and hiding?

A lot of what you say is true. However, there has been battle imbalance for quite some time. The underlying reason is the economics and how battle funds are distributed. There is - and has not been for some time - any reason for a tanker to join the losing side. The switch to no pro-battle missions and the addition of crystal missions has made it worse though. They need a better formula to end battles early - not just based on # tanks each side. They need to end battles much earlier when they are obviously out of hand. And two other "rules" might help... 1) Don't let anyone join "winning" side unless they have less tanks 2) After every battle ends, all players removed from battle and must re-enter (see Tanki-X). That way battle does not begin with 8 vs 3.

People keep asking because it was a pathetic answer. The reasoning given does not at all justify the drastic change. Take for example... people cheating - mults. Get blocked for a day. A DAY. They don't really care about cheaters in-game but ruin an entire mode for many people because a few people "game" the system. Ridiculous.

If you consider luck and lots of searching... "simple" then sure. Not exactly "fun" though. I used to have fun while simultaneously completing my missions before. Not so much nowadays.

Protection vs Isida is not your issue - if it gets that close you're likely dead - just like any other short-range turret vs Thunder. It has no self-heal so your team needs to figure a way to kill it. (get a firebird down that tunnel/use magnum to drop in bombs...) Maybe it has Protection Module. Higher M-level. More MUs... that's the way Polygon works. isida excels on that map - especially with no supplies. And opposite true for many larger maps.

You realize that the more tanks you kill the faster you get to 100%. Supplies help you do this. The more RKs you use, the longer you live, and this means you likely kill more tanks. So supplies help on this end too. In effect, the more supplies you have (and use) the more often you get to 100%. See where I'm going here? ;) Maybe with your suggestion (of removing all supplies) Zero-Supply would be fine. But currently... :blink:

No thanks. Just promotes more supply usage so tanks can get to 100% boost faster. The rich get richer and the poor.... remain under-foot. As with anything supply-related, those with the most RKs remain alive longer and thus benefit from this system more.