They might implement B) but A) & C) definitely never. For A), allowing us to choose the size of the map we want for game modes would lead to much longer queues, and queues are already long - that would mean a further subdivision of the players queuing for any given mode into 3 different groups. If the playerbase was larger that might be viable, but Tanki's is currently too small and is on a downward trend, so it is isn't going to happen unless that changes. For C), they will never terminate battles simply because they are imbalanced, that was never the case - in fact they have stated they deliberately make some battles imbalanced. Although what you probably mean- for too low players on the one side team - possibly - but new players will keep being put into the match until it nears the end. So you will be forced to stick out battles you don't want for a long time with 20 minute battles, or quit (and this battle length will force you to quit, wasting your time queuing - unlike currently when you can at least finish battles you don't want to be in quickly). Not all of us play mobile, you can't ignore the PC players. We get 1 free mission change a day and that is it, and you also have the weekly missions regardless. Also, aren't you the player that was complaining about the new weekly mission system being too hard to complete in one of the Ideas & Suggestions threads recently, when we were chatting there? I am astonished that you are showing support for 20 minute battles in that case - do you have any idea how much harder that would make it to complete weekly missions (and daily missions for PC players who can't change missions as you can?). It would be a total disaster, think about this more carefully. 20 minute battles do allow more chance for comebacks than 7 minute battles, for sure. But 10 minute battles also allow enough time for comebacks, while not subjecting you to vastly increased match times in battles you don't want, and also making daily and weekly missions only slightly harder. So 10 minute battles are overall the best option IMO, to give a balance of all factors. 7 minute battles are however vastly preferable to 20 minute battles, as the drawbacks of battles that long are significant - completing daily and weekly missions would be a torture. If that was implemented, it would be the worst change for me in the last 2 years unless radical changes were made to matchmaking, and the missions system at the same time - which wouldn't happen. We would just be left with a disaster, and having to play a huge amount of time to get missions done, and quit many battles wasting a huge amount of time queuing for nothing.

Uhhh what, 20 minute battles are perfect? I'm not sure you have thought this through: In Matchmaking you will often get put into battles you do not want (such as for instance for me, a CTF match on Lost Temple) - with 7 minute battles you can just about put up with bad matches and get some mission progress, then proceed to queue for a new battle which hopefully will be better. With 20 minute battles, you will end up stuck in games you don't want for a very long length of time - or in fact what will happen is that you will be forced to quit matches. Quitting after a long load time, is a waste of time, and also the next game may not be a good match either - so being forced to quit games is pretty awful. Also, we have daily and weekly missions which require us to "complete battles in a mode" or even to "finish top-3 in the winning team" in a certain number of battles. For instance, lets say you have a daily mission to complete 3 battles. Right now, that will take around 21 minutes. With 20 minute battles - it will take an hour. So how exactly is that perfect? Sounds absolutely terrible to me, and a lot of other players. Also, just imagine how long "finish in the top-3 in 10 matches" weekly quests will take with such long battles.... So no, this would not be perfect - it would be awful. Your logic is flawed. Longer battles do not help you to get missions which have a requirement to use supplies done faster. You can make an approximately equal amount of progress in three 7-minute games, as you can in one 20-minute game - the only possible advantage is that there might be a higher ratio of queue time to "in battle" time. However, longer battles could also lead to longer queues as less players will be queuing at any one time - so even this point is questionable. Any very small potential increase to queue time vs in battle time is not made up for by the huge disadvantages of 20 minute battles which I listed above. I really don't understand why people think long battles helps them get missions done faster - there is no real logic to this argument. 20 minute battles enforced in Matchmaking would lead to a lot of players quitting, far too long and awful for many reasons. 10 minutes at most.

Honestly I think this is a good idea, because Mortar for Magnum is the only augment in the game which requires two modules to protect against it - which is an inconsistency. If you have to equip 2 protections to deal with a Mortar user, that will mean that you will be less well protected against all the other turrets in the enemy team - especially for those of us with only 3 module slots. Some require an augment and a hull augment to protect against them, but no other augment requires 2 protection modules. So hence, I think it is logical that the mines from Mortar are treated differently to regular mines - and are protected against by the Griffin module and not Spider. Although it has to be said that I don't think that Mortar is a particularly large issue in the game - not really an OP augment in the current meta, especially after all the Magnum nerfs. But as a low priority, I think this change should be made for consistency.

Yes, the upgrade will continue if you rank up - it will not be stopped, and next Mk will be free - I have done it. However, yes the new system is very poor. We can at least do this anyway.

My bad, you're definitely right - I was tired last Friday and somehow heard the wording wrong lol. However, as I said offering the Engineer Drone with its current effect at Sergeant Major makes no sense - because battles at that rank are almost always crystal box battles with no "on map" supplies other than a rare repair kit - and in such matches Engineer Drone's effect is almost totally useless. I am well aware of how useless it is since I have a third lieutenant account with Engineer - and even there you often get crystal box battles. Offering it 5 ranks lower, with an effect that literally won't work in those battles seen a bizarre. It is basically a more expensive and slower to upgrade Brutus drone at such ranks. For sure, Booster doesn't require E-sports calibre skills to be used effectively - and with its current power level it is still effective even if used suboptimally. But it does require some level of skill and timing to be used well, and personally I disagree that it is not an interesting drone to use - certainly along with Defender/Crisis it is too strong right now - but making it a clone of Defender with a constant Boosted boost instead of Boosted Armor would be boring. Examples of timing with Booster - when using it with scout rail you have to activate just as the charge up period is coming to an end - and not before - to get 2 shots within the extra damage window. With constant damage turrets such as Vulcan/Twins - you have to predict when you will get 3 seconds of fire on enemies, or preferably when several enemies are in line of sight. I have seen many opponents waste their Boost period by using at bad moments, when the enemy can easily get in to cover - and did so myself sometimes when I was first using Booster. So - not rocket science, but there is more skill involved to get the most out of Booster than there is for say, using Brutus or Assault. But the power of the drone does still lead to an advantage even if it's used badly, agreed. It isn't fun to have all items - in this case drones - to be clones of each other and have no variety. And a constant damage boost takes away any requirement for timing - and any real interesting gameplay - from Booster. There are better ways to nerf Booster without making it a clone of Defender - and buffing up other weak drones is part of the solution. Balance certainly hasn't been helped when rather than enhancing weaker drones, the developers have handed out massive unwarranted nerfs to Driver, Assault and Blaster - while leaving drones which were already much stronger untouched, the opposite of what should have been done. These drones should have received slight buffs, not giant nerfs. I have some ideas for more interesting balance changes to Booster/Defender, and also for Hyperion - which wouldn't be just to make them boring clones, which require no timing to use - which I will try to get written out tomorrow.

I don't think its possible to get the "finish battles in the top-3" mission in all slots? I really don't know, but I haven't seen even 2 missions of the same type in different slots. Do you have a screenshot of this? As far as I'm aware you are only going to get this mission in one slot, and the highest you can possible get is "finish 10 battles top-3", which is lower than the 15 we used to get - the other 2 missions are guaranteed to be easier. I think you are complaining about something which actually isn't in the game - unless you have a screenshot of this? Do show if you do. I hadn't played in just over 2 weeks, but back again today. I completed all my weeklies under the new system in less than 90 minutes - I don't think that is exactly "24/7"? It would have taken probably a good 4 hours of playtime, on 5 separate days to complete all weeklies under the old system - which is quite a commitment away from your weekly schedule - and even the 2nd mission required 3 days per week of play minimum. Now you can do all in one day, and in less hours playtime than before - so how is it not better?

What ze flip? Okay, another case of very significant stealth changes then... I understand why they might want to give Dictator's overdrive an Exp value to stop Dictator/Mechanic efficiency bots, or players trying to mult with just using free score items and making no contribution to the battle in low ranks - but I think 20 EXP would be enough, no need to increase to 60. Also, no need for such changes to be made by stealth.

Dictator's overdrive gives EXP? Or do you mean score? I haven't been playing lately so haven't been around to see any such changes personally. Also and yes, what they have done to Driver is sad :(. Instead of buffing Driver after the unreasonable nerf, they have decided to comfirm it's now trash tier strength by making it a low level and cheap drone. Why they decided to wreck a good and viable drone I don't know - perhaps because they are trying to clamp down on "additional score" and some free players were doing OK with Dictator and Driver perhaps? Also maybe because Driver doesn't consume additional supplies but was a good drone, which they maybe didn't like. But none of those are good reasons to nerf it, it was far from OP and a viable and interesting drone.

I live in hope. Lol. But really, if battles are increased to 15 or 20 minutes that would be hideous for me. A lot of players would quit because every time you roll something like Lost Temple CTF, or find yourself in a bad battle it will be very painful indeed, whereas you can easily endure it for 7 minutes and get your missions done right now. I don't want to be forced to quit and then endure a 2 minute queue + load time to get a new battle, only to get into another battle I don't want to be in for 15/20 minutes. And completing daily and weekly missions with battles that long, would be awful. 10 minute battles on the other hand would be perfect - it is very hard to get the right length I will give that to the developers. But the way Tanki works with the weekly and daily missions system, along with Matchmaking in its current form - things are finely balanced - too long battles would be a disaster. I really hope they don't change to 15 or 20 minutes as that would probably cause another huge loss of players, perhaps including me.

The drone changes sound interesting, I do think that many drones could do with a re-vamp (especially the unused ones such as Supplier, Sprinter etc.). However, I must say I am disappointed to hear about the proposed changes to Booster. Booster is certainly a very strong drone, but the fact that it only offers a boost to damage for 3 seconds keeps it unique and somewhat interesting - and means that this drone requires some level of timing and skill to use. An unskilled user can easily waste the boost period with little benefit provided - whereas a good player will rarely do so. Having a constant boost to damage like Defender would be still good, but boring - a constantly bonus is not really suited to a damage type drone, it is much more suited to a defensive drone and it works well for Defender. But for damage, you want to deal a large amount of damage in a short period of time that you choose - and the current Booster's design is perfect for that as it is. A nerf to the power of the effect perhaps, but a constant bonus is boring. Booster, Defender and Trickster are currently the top drones - to balance them I would support other drones being brought up to their level, rather than for instance destroying what makes Booster an interesting drone to use. On another, much less important note - I see developers plan to make Engineering Drone a low-level drone which boosts experience. The developers surely are well aware that all players below Legend aim to earn as little as experience as possible, while gaining as many crystals as possible - unless they have absolutely no idea what they are doing. If you are low ranked, you want as good a crystal to experience ratio as possible to get a strong gearscore for your rank. Gaining extra experience, for no gain in crystals, would not only be worthless, but worse than having no drone equipped. If Engineer drone will increase experience, then any low ranked player with a brain will use Brutus or other drones every time, and not touch the Engineer drone, ever. And also - given that the developers have made most low rank battles have no map dropped supplies - the current form of Engineer Drone does not work at low ranks, since you have no on-map supplies to benefit from it. Unless that effect is to be totally removed, having Engineer as a very low rank drone will not work well. But overall, the drone re-vamp sounds interesting if they breathe new life into currently useless drones. But please don't make everything the same - just like you have given the same status effect alterations to many different turrets. which is dull. VARIETY. Don't make Booster and Defender mechanics the same - different mechanics are interesting, not just two drones which are the same except with Boosted Armor and Boosted damage swapped around. EDIT: ALSO, a drone re-vamp would be the perfect time to bring back the old Trickster drone which many of us loved (especially Support Nanobots Isida players like myself). There is currently a major lack of true support drones in the game (although I know you plan to buff Supplier, hopefully the new one will be good). The Old Trickster was the perfect support drone, as @kydapoot and others have suggested - Sprinter could be change to have the mechanics of the old Trickster (perhaps with a cap of 10 score no matter how many allies benefit from the effect). Something to consider, the new Trickster is great, but the old one was also good for many other reasons. #BringBackOldTrickster.

No offence to the developers, but I don't see any need to "test" 20 minute battles - players already made it clear following the last test that they found 15 minute battles too long for Matchmaking, why would we need to test battles that are even longer? To give my feedback: I think the perfect time for Matchmaking battles would be 10 minutes, as others have already said - any long than that would be too much. However, the current 7 minute battles are also fine. 10 minute battles are good, because they allow a better chance for comebacks and more strategy in matches, and also given the sometimes long load time into battles that many of us experience, this length of battle works better. But 10 minute battles are also just about short enough, that if you get stuck in a match which you don't like, for some reason, you will only find yourself there for a bearable amount of time. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here are some reasons why battle length longer than 10 minutes would not be a good idea for Tanki in its current form: 1. Unless players are willing to quit matches, if they found themselves in a battle which they didn't like - they would be forced to endure it for an annoyingly long time. There are many different reasons why players might not like a particular battle - some hate certain maps or modes, or alternatively your team might be heavily underpowered compared to the enemy, and be getting crushed - however for some reason, perhaps that the enemy is not focusing on the objective or the fact that your team is somehow just about holding on - the battle does not end before the match time limit. An example of this would be the painfully awful CTF matches in 14 v 14 maps which most players (including me) despise. It is very difficult to capture in such large CTF battles, and such battles often end 0-0 or 1-0 after 7 minutes. Most players totally give up on the objective and only go after kills, as they know capture is nearly impossible. Being forced to be in these games for 15 minutes would be truly awful, 7 minutes is bearable. The fact that we can quit matches is not a solution, as between queue and load times it takes quite a long time to get into each battle - so having to quit is very annoying - and also there is no guarantee that if you quit that you will like the next match either. I try not to quit battles, but if battle length is increased beyond 10 minutes I will sometimes have to start quitting, and that will make the game a lot worse for me, and many other players. 2. Certain daily and weekly missions will take FAR too long (and too much experience for low ranks) if battle duration is increased to more than 10 minutes. Given the recent change to weekly missions, the difficulty of completing both daily and weekly missions is now very much affected by battle duration. If battle duration was increased to, lets say 15 minutes, "Finish X battles" / "Finish top-3 in the winning team in X battles" missions will take more than twice as long as they do now with 7 minute battles. Many players already find that the "Finish top-3 in the winning team" missions are too difficult to complete, and if this is made even harder they will be furious, and this will make completing missions like this extremely painful. If battle duration was to be increased to more than 10 minutes, the requirements for these missions would have to be heavily reduced - but I don't see the developers being willing to do that. Therefore, best not to implement such long battles. 3. Players will be more likely to quit battles early after fulfilling the requirements for missions. If you have a daily mission for let's say, "Gain 300 score in CTF", good or well-equipped players can easily complete this in a 7 minute battle, and almost all players can manage it in a 10 minute battle. If you have finished such a mission, and the battle is close to ending, most players would probably stay to the end. However, if you complete your mission in the first 6 minutes, and 9 minutes are left to play - a lot of players with limited time to play might just quit, and queue for another battle. 4. If players don't have much time to play, 20 minute battles are just too long. Some players are short on time, and only hop on for a quick game or two. They might not have time for a full 20 minute battle, or if they have to go due to real life reasons it will be very annoying to quit a battle where you had already put in a lot of work, with no crystals to show for it at the end. 5. Greater than 10 minutes is too long. Just. Too. Long ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just like 12, 15 or 20 minute battles would be too long, this post was also too long. Short posts are good, and short battles are also good. Keep battles short!

Yes the premium day is removed, but we get 8 containers from the free tier - which is more than we used to get - and also more crystals (I think?), than the old 3000 stars challenge before they changed to 4000 stars. So who cares really about the removed premium day - it wasn't worth that much. Now the challenge is back to 3000 stars, which is most important, and it has better rewards in the free tier (slightly) than it had before the change to 4000 stars. Yes, 5 months is a long time to save for the first pass. You get the next pass faster as you only need to save 1100 tankoins for the next one, but it still takes a long time. To be honest though, you don't really need battle passes anyway considering how often we have events now - just do the events and the Ultras will give you good stuff over time. You can get a pass every 4 months or something, and rewards from the events - that is fine I think. When the battle pass gave only Garage augments 500 tankoins might have been a fair price, but I don't think we need to see more Stun Strikers/EMP Gauss/Vampire Isida etc. than we already have - with the pass still that cheap and these kind of augments now in it, it would make all the OP augments too common. So I think the price is right for the power of the augments that it now (sometimes) has. Not all the passes are good - yes this month isn't amazing (although I don't have any idea how good Jammer Hammer is - it might be good but I suspect it isn't a tier 1 augment).

New weekly mission changes look good - glad that the game will be more suitable for casual players now. I think if you play 3 (or maybe 4) days a week, and complete the crazy weekends, you can complete the challenge now - no need to play 5 or 6 days a week. The new weekly missions solve a problem Tanki had for free players - you were "forced" to play in a certain way - a little bit every day - and if you played more than that (more than your missions) you were effectively punished as you would end up running out of supplies. It is kinda bad to punish players for playing more - a bit counterintuitive. Now with the new system, you can play more on an individual day if you want, and make good progress. The missions overall look easier so this seems to be a better system, for me anyway. Glad that we are no longer forced to play 5-6 days a week. Of course, if you play 5-6 days a week you will still make better progress - but now at least we have the choice whether to do that, or play more on 3 days or so perhaps. My only complaint - why are there so few mines in the new weekly containers??? Only 30 (90 per week?)? We used to get 360 mines per week from weekly containers at Legend - we could now run out of mines. Mines are not a premium supply - costing the same as BA/BD/speed boosts, so I think we should get 100 just like the rest. We are getting more crystals, Tankoins and batteries now though which is great - and also the missions themselves are better. So a good change in my book.

Having tried Tesla, I think it is a really cool and fun turret. Really interesting gameplay dynamics - could do with a little balancing of course, but it isn't too bad if you have the protection module like I do. I am very annoyed that they have given such a huge nerf to Hornet ( 3 seconds AP???) presumably because of how OP it was with Tesla (and Freeze too I suppose). If they wanted to nerf Tesla + Hornet, they should simply have done something like cause Supercharge to only grant a 100% critical strike on the first 3 targets Tesla hits - rather than be able to crit an entire team, and kill whole teams almost instantly in Siege with AP. Hornet is too weak now, it was Tesla + Supercharge that should have been nerfed, not Hornet.

Well really, this doesn't matter because don't forget that the challenge is now 3000 stars to complete - so the rewards per tier are actually better than they used to be on the silver tier. You get more containers than we used to get before the 4000 stars change (that was now changed back to 3000 stars), so I wouldn't complain. Also, the silver tier has no "price" as you don't need to buy the battle pass to complete it. The gold tier price increase on the other hand - yes it has increased substantially. The old price was 500 tankoins, and with 400 tankoins available in the gold tier, the total cost of the pass if you manage to complete the gold tier is 1500-400 = 1100 tankoins (NOT 1000 tankoins, because the 100 from the free tier is earned regardless of whether you buy the pass or not). Personally, I think the battle pass was too strong before for what it gave once they gave out Ultra Container augments every time - for instance we had EMP Smoky and AP Immunity for Titan for 500 TKs one month along with 2 other augments. Really I think the value was a little too much, so I don't think the new price is that bad. However I think that the pass should simply cost 1000 tankoins - with no TKs given out in the gold tier - to make that first pass easier to afford. If they were giving out stuff like EMP Gauss/Stun Striker for 500 tankoins still, I think these kind of OP augments would become too common - Garage augments would become devalued, Ultra Container augments too, and battles would become more imbalanced. Now, part of the issue is that Ultra Container augments are too powerful... but anyway. Sadly they have no plans on changing that.

I agree with @iMoneyMaker (although no need to insult the CM), and @Mohamed40 (who's post was deleted) that this imagery is a little inappropriate for a game with kids, and also this mission name: If I had kids playing this game I wouldn't be too happy about this either, and would have to review if I would continue to let them play. I think Tanki should be more careful in future to avoid suggestive themes and imagery given the age group that play this game. (EDIT: Removed discussion of topics the mods did not want - hopefully this new post is acceptable)

Well OK, a light buyer then :) . Hmm, well perhaps the extra shards from mobile really increases your supply count by quite a bit, or you are playing less than me - or a bit of both - but for a free PC player like me, you will regularly be running low on repair kits and batteries if you are playing the crazy weekends + maybe a few extra games here and there. I often find myself having to resort to Brutus drone - right now my battery count stands at about 80. So for me, the drones off or supplies off settings are very useful to gain extra crystals in a cost effective manner. As for the drones off reducing damage - well actually I don't think that is really a factor because while you have less damage, opponents also have less armor so it evens out. However, the only way damage is less is the lack of Booster Drone - which substantially decreases kill time in DM. Did I like the DM mode? Well TBH yes I did, I found it much more fun than with drones on, because Drones on is just people (including me) using Booster and getting multiple kills with instant DD+DA application after spawning, die and repeat. You have to think (slightly) more with drones off to win. But however 1) I am one of the few people who bought Tesla module on the last sale, 2) I was abusing Freeze + supercharge which is currently insane - so those might some additional factors as to why I liked it. DM modes are always about killing stealing, but you won't be stealing my kills when I am doing almost 10k damage per second during supercharge ? . Freeze(Adrenaline) with Dictator took me to the top almost every game, and Hornet (which I don't have) is even better I think. The Tesla hordes didn't stand a chance.

I think the discount must have been a glitch, because it doesn't seem to have been announced on Tanki's Facebook or Instagram pages - I just checked. Hot Sales are announced there I believe (with the exception of the most recent 70% off stars, as that was advertised on the Players vs Developers stream to encourage players to watch it). The point of Hot Sales, was partly to encourage people to sign up to notifications on Tanki's Facebook/Instagram pages, to make them more popular and to get more potential players aware of the game. So they would almost always be announced there. Also, sad I missed the sale ?

Well, you probably disliked the "no drone" part because you are a buyer with infinite batteries (despite your very unfortunate chances for Legendaries or Exotics :P). Think of the free players, for us no drones is fantastic as it gives a fair chance to compete for everyone. It is much more cost effective than usual - you can get good crystals from the DM mode without running of/spending crystals on batteries - to do the same in regular MM you would have to use Brutus, which puts you at a big disadvantage against users of other, much more powerful, drones. So for free players, these kind of settings are fair and very good for us. Also, even many buyers like these settings as it can require more skill than one-shotting people with Booster, or having the advantage of being able to activate Boosted Armor/Damage together instantly.

Agreed, I am concerned about these mission changes - it could make it harder to complete weekly missions. I don't see a need to change the current system, now they have reduced the weekly mission requirements to only need 5 days played per week instead of 7 (and the requirements for daily missions are not too hard) it is better for players - and if you are a super casual player you can just complete the 15 mission weekly quest over 2 weeks. There is nothing wrong with the weekly mission system currently for casual players - if something isn't broken it doesn't need to be fixed. No-one is complaining about this system - the only complaints are about "Finish in the top-3 on the winning team" missions, which some players find to be too difficult, and they would like that changed - everything else with daily and weekly missions is fine.

Actually Freeze seems stronger than Tesla right now (as long as you have Tesla protection module, which I fortunately do!), apart from when Tesla is fighting from high ground or behind walls, and hitting you with chain lightning off the balls when you can't hit back. But if the Freeze gets close it is game over for the Tesla guy. Pretty much every DM with my 9k GS Freeze(Adrenaline)/Dictator I was #1-#3, even against better geared Tesla users. Hornet/Freeze is also amazing (but sadly I don't have Mk7 Hornet) and Viking/Freeze is also great. These were a few games I won (didn't win all but at least top 3 usually): So ye Tesla is not the top dog among melee turrets right now IMO, Freeze is. However Tesla has the advantage of facing fewer protection modules. I'm just worried with this weird range nerf to Freeze and Firebird, when the inevitable nerf for Freeze comes - it could be left with this horrendously bad range, and less damage that it has now - and be awful to play with. Freeze needs IMO a nerf to the excessive critical damage, and back to 20 yards range - Firebird also needs 20 yards. 15 yards is just far to little range, only made up for by the fact both turrets (especially Freeze) currently hit like a truck.

Are you serious :P ? That's impossible... lol, you win the competition for worst Ultra rewards then. RIP ?

I don't mind drone/overdrive off settings - that means you are able to grind out the missions without burning batteries or using Brutus in the case of drones, so it evens the field between buyers and non-buyers. Also it prevents abuse of OP drones. Overdrives are better I think for missions like this, where we need to get kills, but for gold box events overdrives off is definitely more fun. But I totally agree on the 500 kills in DM mission. That is just a bit too much to ask for a 3 day event. We have had events which are 10 days long recently which only asked for 600 kills, this is just too much for an Ultra Weekend.

The 5k DM battle point mission is equivalent to 500 kills, and yes that makes it probably the toughest and longest Ultra Weekend missions we've had in a long time. Well, you can get lucky from Ultras sometimes and sometimes unlucky - last time I got stun Railgun, this time I got probably the worst Ultras I've had ever. However since I fortunately had premium, I did get a lot of crystals and experience from doing the mission - and I was able to grind that in a mode which didn't require the use of any batteries. Wouldn't have been as easy to get that many crystals in regular MM using Brutus against buyers. I now have close to 240k crystals having starting on nothing, so I'd say it was still somewhat worthwhile. But yes, I would not like to see this kind of mission again. 500 kills in DM is very rough for missions that have to be done in 3 days - simply too much. To be honest though, I did have quite a bit of fun abusing the new Freeze (along with being one of the only players with Tesla protection, and therefore able to wreck the Tesla hordes) - but if it wasn't for that it would have been hard to get through it.

OK - I have some dataz of my own now! My best reward from this weekend's 7 Ultras .... were 10k crystals and a 125 repair kits :( . So the free ones aren't always amazing, lol.