Yes, but let's make some calculations. Let's assume that Double Damage adds 100 points to the turret's damage instead. Smoky M0 deals an average damage of 285 and has a reload time of 1.8 seconds. With DD, it would do 385 damage (on average) every 1.8 seconds. That's 214 DPS instead of the previous 158 DPS. So we've got an increase of 56 DPS. Now let's look at Railgun. It's average damage is 600 every 5.5 seconds. With DD we go to 700 damage per shot. That is 127 DPS instead of 109 DPS, an increase of 18 DPS. Therefore, DD would be about three times more powerful for a Smoky than for a Railgun. But let's see Twins. It's damage is 105 every 0.365 seconds. With DD, it would be 205 every 0.365. That means that its DPS would go from 287 to 561, almost doubled. If the damage boost was a static value that remained the same for all turrets, Twins and Ricochet would be extremely overpowered while on it, whereas Railgun, Thunder and other such turrets wouldn't really benefit from it.

I like the idea in principle, but I don't think it would work out well, not with Double Damage at least. Simply because fast firing turrets and close combat turrets would get a ridiculously high advantage compared to the others.

What about the fact that they are already getting more rewards from missions?

Well, I kinda like knowing the total amount of hours that I've spent in the game, not that it is really important, but when I see numbers I automatically start making calculations. If you add up the total hours of all your turrets, all your hulls, all your protections, and all your paints respectively, they don't always match. At the end of the day, it's just a matter of curiosity anyway. Some people would like to know other people's micro-upgrades, I would like to know the total amount of hours that I've spent on the game. I guess it's not that different.

...no different than playing a battle where everyone can press V or R and see your micro-upgrades? On the other hand, maybe some people are extremely curious, but I really don't see the use of having micro-upgrades in the profile. I'd much rather have something like 'Total hours played.'

Of course they will. They will do exactly the same thing that they are doing with Striker, keep increasing the missile speed so that you can only maybe dodge it if they fire from the other side of the map and you have no other distractions. Soon Magnum will not even have to aim, because its splash area will be so big that wherever they shoot won't matter because all the enemy tanks will die. I couldn't agree more on those points. The mission system needs to be completely reworked. Not just turned back to what it was, but majorly changed. People play to complete missions, not to have fun. Things as they are now, I think it'd be better to simply do away with missions and increase battle funds (and, while we're at it, make it so that it is worth staying in a losing team), so that people can actually play what they want to play instead of having to do their chores in order to have enough crystals and supplies to actually be able to compete in the game. I don't know your computer's specifications, but I play on linux, and flash stopped updating it years ago, I've got to run with a fossil version from 2012. I really can't understand why they didn't migrate to html5 three years ago. Last week I got to play a Sandbox CTF, and I realised that I had forgotten how much I enjoy that map. People end up playing in maps that they don't like, complete missions that they don't care about, face people 10 ranks above them, and so on and so forth. Eventually, people will get fed up and leave the game. It's a pity, Tanki is a fun game, and overall I enjoy it. It's just... If they had left things as they were after the battle button, that's fine, you just play pro-battles and you can do whatever you want. If you don't care that much about it or don't have time to play very often, then normal battles do the trick. But why "encourage" players to play normal battles that they don't enjoy with a broken mission system?

I would really appreciate it if you stuck to having a reasonable conversation instead of using a straw man. Oh, I see what you mean now. The first option would be interesting. I definitely would not buy premium if it was only +100% crystals, though some people might. I guess it comes down to that, premium wasn't appealing enough, so they decided to make it a better deal. I suppose it's still better than having a paint with 15% (20%? I can't remember how much it was) protection against everything. No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying two different things: 1: The premium update does not automatically unbalance the game. At least no more than it was before. Somebody made the argument that now low rank accounts can buy premium and be overpowered. I just noted that that tactic would take a long time and that there were easier ways to become overpowered at low ranks well before this update. 2: If they gave 2,000 crystals to everybody who got the answer right on the vlog thingie, chances are that players would be much less reluctant to share the right answer with other players and the contest would become a "google the answer, post it somewhere, get crystals," which would sort of ruin the purpose of the contest. As you can see, this has nothing to do with balance issues. Turns out that you can't log in with your account if you are logged in elsewhere. Since I check the forum from my mobile as well as my computer, I need to log in with different accounts on each device.

Then why did you use it as an argument to start with? Also, if they did that, people would be more likely to share the answers and it could quickly degenerate into scores of thousands of players getting 2,000 crystals every week who simply googled the answer. I find the underlying idea that every single person who buys anything in Tanki loves playing drug wars all the time amusing. Not an interesting one, really. Your crystal/experience ratio only went up by 33%. Also, you rank up faster, which in this game is not particularly good. At the end of the day, you were better off playing only to complete missions than buying premium. No thanks. 50% is already enough, I don't want to rank up any faster. Moreover, if you rise the experience to +100%, premium players gain nothing, they just rank up faster, without any added benefit.

Well, it isn't technically double fund, because you also get 50% more experience. So technically you crystal/experience ratio is only 33% higher. Yes, 75,000 crystals per month is a big amount of money, especially at low ranks. But you still need to wait for one month. What are you going to do? Log in for a whole month in order to get the daily reward and don't play until the month has finished? Because if you don't do that, you are going to rank up and all that, so you won't stay in low ranks a long time. And if you do it, well, then free players won't see many buyers around. Also, Smoky + Titan costs over 200,000 crystals (and a lot of time). 75,000 is a bit short for that. Moreover, nothing has really changed, before, if you wanted to be overpowered at Warrant Officer ranks you only needed to wait for a special event, buy a bundle, get 150,000 crystals and rock and roll. In fact, I doubt than anybody could become that overpowered with 75,000 crystals.

I do not think it's such a big advantage. Yes, it's a lot of money, but it is spread all over a long period of time. It's not like you buy premium and all of a sudden you find yourself buried under tons of crystals. Also, it sort of makes sense. If I buy premium, I don't want to have to go about playing non pro battles in order to get my rewards and chain rewards and all that stuff, I want to make the most of it and play pro battles. This allows me not to worry about missions at all. Why don't they ever release something to the advantage of non-buyers? How about the recent updates for micro-upgrades? When micro-upgrading your stuff became cheaper? Didn't that favour non-buyers over buyers who had already spent a lot of money on micro-upgrading their stuff? However, developers need to eat, mate. Of course they are going to release stuff that makes buying more appealing, that's how online games work.

And what happens when you have eaten and left the restaurant? Then what? You are going to look back and wonder why you spend it there.

Sorry about that, I was busy. Hey, that's amazing! You did a really cool job! I think that it looks great!

A complete fail? I happen to find it quite agreeable. I'd rather have old news than a bunch of people trying to trick others into giving their passwords away, trying to get others to go the their battles, or hitting on people.

I completely agree with that. Maybe Tanki does have a clear sense of direction and they know exactly where they are going, but from this side of the screen, it looks like they are just doing haphazard changes. Changes, by the way, that make you feel like not buying. I think that Tanki, overall, is a cool game, but I am afraid of spending any more money on it because one week after I've done it, they may do something that renders my inversion worthless. A couple of weeks before they changed the multi-upgrade thing, I upgraded my Smoky M1 to 50/50. I hadn't even started getting used to it, that everybody was able to micro-upgrade their equipment for the same price as buying the next modification. Of course, they say that in real life if you buy something in a store and the next day in becomes cheaper, they don't give you your money back. But do you know what? If that happens in real life, I can just go to the store the next day, give what I bought back and get a refund. That is not possible with Tanki. Moreover, in real life I buy stuff for a lot of different reasons, among them survival, convenience, and fun. In Tanki, the main reason why I buy turrets, hulls, and protection modules is competitiveness. If the day after I buy something you make it twice as cheap, that means that I am at a competitive disadvantage with other players, as they will need to spend less resources to get the same result. You might think that this is a very clever tactic and that it will make me buy more in order to remain competitive. But, at least in my personal experience of life, the result is the exact opposite. I just feel like not buying anything anymore. And you may say that it is life, and that I should stop crying like a baby and all that. But you would be wise to take it as a warning, rather. If things go that road, I will not buy, and eventually I will leave. And for me it is just a game, but for you it is a job. So do not come with "you bought a Smoky M1 50/50 and that's what you've got," because, yes, that's what I got, but I do not care whether Smoky M1 50/50 deals five hundred hit points per shot of five million, or about whether it costs two crystals or a five hundred million. What I care about is whether I keep the competitiveness that I used my resources for or not.

Which is why now it is appropriate to complain about it. Hope they sort that out.

If you insist. You complained that the update had not taken the desired effects. However, your complaint was before the server update and, therefore, before the update was actually part of the game. So I felt compelled to drive your attention toward the fact that the server had not yet restarted. I hope it's clearer now.

The update kicks in tomorrow, mate.

By the sentence in bold, I understand that bozo88 would rather have no option to just upgrade and upgrade during sales.

I agree, Tanki needs more plain paints. I, for one, find pink and purple missing! NB: Just in case, this is a serious post. I want pink and purple paints in Tanki.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Thursday Panic! Did you miss it last week? Today is your chance! There are no kits in the garage yet once again. So, please, feel free to come in and panic.

I have been thinking about missions and their effect on the game for a while now, but until now I haven't had time to sit down, organise my thoughts, and write something that might or might not make sense. First of all, let me explain why we need a new system for missions. The reason is very simple. Just as they are, missions encourage selfish behaviour that is detrimental for the team and often is close to sabotage if not outright sabotage. For instance, missions that ask to collect boxes, encourage players to take supply boxes before a teammate who obviously needs them more or could do a better use of them (e.g. if there is a teammate coming to the same box with full health and I've got only 5% of my health bar, she'll make a better use of it that I). Missions that ask you to finish first, encourage people to mess with their teammates, especially those who are on top of the list. I can't count the number of times that I've been first on the list and other players from my own team tried to flip me, block my way, or put me right in front of enemy fire. Missions that ask you to capture flags, again, encourage people to block the flag carrier's way, flip her and all that. Many times, I find that in CTF mode my own team makes it more difficult for me to capture the flag that the enemy team. So I have come with an idea for a different system. Basically, every player will get three missions every day, these missions are: Earn experience in battles (250) Earn experience in battles (500) Earn experience in battles (1,000) This way, you will be rewarded simply by playing the game. You can play the modes you like, the maps you like, and the roles you like. No more having to capture flags if you feel more comfortable as a defender or prefer CP. Also, it will allow casual players to complete at least one mission relatively easily, while letting more dedicated players get more rewards. These missions will be renewed every day, which means that if you earn 347xp any one day, the next one you can't simply earn 153xp more and get the reward for the second mission, you will have to start it all over again. What happens with super missions? Another good outcome of this system is that we do away with stupid missions that ask you to kill 9999 tanks in order to get a turret or hull that is not better than the normal version and costs more crystals to upgrade. If super missions should be kept, then the third mission can be replaced with a super mission that will stay until the player changes it or completes it (that is, it will not be reset on the next day).

I am complaining because being one-shot is not fun. Before, there was only one turret that could one-shoot me without double damage. But I had protection against it, so it couldn't one-shoot me off double damage. Then, Tanki changed the rules of the game, so not only is my protection against Shaft useless now, but there are two more turrets that can one-shoot me without double damage.

Honestly speaking, I really don't see how this message answers my previous posts. I shouldn't be purchasing modules? Well, they happen to come with kits. Or at least, they did last autumn. Also, Eagle D-A was rather useful while it kept me from being one-shot by Shafts. Avoiding getting locked by a Stricker is easy when there's nobody else around. When you've got a Hammer on double damage and a Firebird coming toward you, things change a bit. I'm not even sure what the point behind respawning and real battles is, sorry.

That still doesn't make being one-shot any funner. Seriously, I would be perfectly fine with those turrets dealing 90% of my tank's health, I could even do being one-shot by them if buying a 15% protection would keep me from being one-shot. But in order to avoid being one-shot by shaft and striker I need respectively 31% and 50% protection against them, which, at M1 ranks is simply impossible. With magnum, on the other hand, 15% or 16% should be enough, so magnum's case might not be that bad.

Then I would answer two things. First, your statement is simply not true. To start with, there are tons of different kinds of artillery. Some of them are heavier, some of them are lighter, some of them are intended to kill, some of them are intended to impede movement, some of them are intended to demolish buildings, some of them are intended to defend against aircrafts. Even when it comes to specific anti-tank artillery, not all of them are able to destroy a tank. Some of them, for instance, are just able to damage the tracks, thus immobilising it. Others can hinder the tank's firing power, but not really destroy it. Moreover, the most effective artillery used to destroy tanks uses a two-shot system, in which the first one serves to reveal the tank to a radar system and the second one is a guided missile. Also, let me add that, funnily enough, most of the artillery able to actually destroy a tank fires rockets, which means that Striker is closer to an actual anti-tank artillery than Magnum is. Second, I didn't know that Tanki had decided to move toward realism. That's good news, I'm looking forward to getting rid of Twins and Ricochet. However, I was unaware of that fact, so I was talking from a gaming perspective. In games, tanks are supposed to be somewhat sturdy. Generally speaking, in a game you would expect to need more than one shot to destroy a tank.