I guess that would work. They released the heavyweight augment stats, though, so I imagine they might eventually tell is what we’re buying regarding the turret augments.

Hi! The new adrenaline augments are pretty neat, but being the kind of analytical player I am, I can’t help but be curious how they work. As of right now, the stats aren’t out on the wiki yet, but has anyone with a turret with predictable damage been able to figure out how much the damage increases? What’s the maximum percentage (the damage boost just above 0 health)? Also, based on the description, I would expect the change to be linear (the boost being twice at 1hp than it is at half HP), but I could be wrong. Any insights?

It seems I misunderstood this comment - you were likening it to this, not saying that was what's happening. Apologies, and good luck with getting your bug fixed.

Well, yeah. It's supposed to do that. When you enter scope mode while moving, your tank's hull doesn't instantly freeze in place just because the treads have stopped moving - it still has momentum, and it loses it over a second or so due to friction with the ground. Since that friction is applying a backward force on the bottom of your tank, the tank rocks forward before steadying. The same thing happens if you stop suddenly without scoping, it's just less noticeable. Hunter is a particularly rocky hull due to its height and shape. Unless really weird stuff (prolonged rocking, sideways movement, increases in rocking amount, etc.) is happening, it is in fact the hull, and not the camera, that's wildin' out when you scope that way.

Looking at youtube videos, Ultra Containers clearly have a higher chance of the "legendary" tier happening, though it's almost always 10 coinboxes. We're masking the actual results by mixing them with probabilities that simply aren't the same. Perhaps not, but isn't low data (which will be accumulated over time) better than bad data? We're losing track of what's in real containers by mixing them in with ever-changing Ultras with different sets of probabilities.

Obviously, you're alienating your buyers as well as your non-buyers. Moving things out of locked-in-the-shop ultra containers will make all of your players much happier. Am I missing something?

I tried it, and it's a little faster. Still, not close to what I'd expect given my connection. I think that it might be Tanki's servers, though. This is a fairly recent problem, and the servers appear to have crashed a couple of minutes ago. Hopefully, things will be back to normal once they come back online.

Regularly, I check that my internet is working, and it is. All other websites load just fine, and a speed test reads "fast" (at least). And yet, it takes 2+ minutes to load into a battle and I frequently have incredibly high ping once I finally get in. I doing something wrong that prevents me from properly loading a battle? I'm using a Macbook Air, Opera browser, and the web HTML5 version. Cookies/website data are allowed to be stored.

Won't that affect the results, since ultras have different possibilities?

We should only report regular containers here, right? Also, is there another form for ultras, or do their contents change too frequently?

Yeah that's great and all, but when are ultra containers going to be available through special missions as promised with their release? I appreciate the Augment eventually being available for all players, but you're adding the crisis drone to the growing list of non-cosmetic Pay-to-Play items until you make ultras obtainable without buying. Making ultra containers available in missions won't stop people who were going to buy them for real money from doing so, so why not make the significant population of non-buyers happy while maintaining your revenue?

Beautiful interface, isn't it? FR tho, this is really annoying. I was in Siege Mode, had clicked "Next" to go to another Seige mode battle, and instead it put me into the queue for Quick Battle without me ever having clicked a button that should do that. If I'm playing a mode (because I clicked on that mode button) I should stay in that mode. This sort of thing happens fairly frequently. Usually, quick battle loads too fast to cancel, but this time, I hit cancel and it stopped the queueing but turned out to be a big mistake because the above image resulted. Not only that, but the webpage then proceeded to brick so hard I had to force quit my browser.

In the wiki, the drone micro-upgrades page is out of date (the damage values don't match what's in the game), so I don't trust that. On the regular drone page, which looks to be more updated, it says that blasters radius of minimum damage increases from 12 to 15 meters, while the radius of max damage remains at 5 meters. In the garage, however, there is no indication that upgrading Blaster will increase its range; only damage is shown. What actually happens to Blaster when you upgrade it?

Or at least, please make this an option. Many players find the old look more appealing and more navigable. I know it would take some time to put together a retro interface, but it would be time better spent even than game content updates at the moment; you would win over a lot of HTML5 boycotters.

Yes, you need to say more. Go over to the "What would make the HTML5 version awesome FOR YOU?" thread and actually explain what isn't working so they can see your feedback and (someday?) act on it it.

I support the move to HTML5 from a programming and future development point of view. However, pretty much every quality-of-life feature that is missing from HTML5 (which is most of what is discussed in the thread dedicated to HTML5 feedback) needs to be addressed, or the guy above me's predictions about a lot of people leaving will come true. Sure, it's cool that you're making new hulls, drones, etc., but making HTML5 "better in all respects" than flash needs to be the top priority. That means not just game performance (which is already better than flash), but detail and intuition in the interface, look, feel, and secondary capabilities (gifts, seeing what map a pro battle is in without clicking on each one, viewing missions in battle, etc.).

Also, I have a question about the statistical valididy of collecting percentages for events with changing probabilities. Every time you get a paint, augment, shot effect, or skin, your chances of getting that a similar item in the future presumably go down (for example, now that I have all of the football paints, I have a 0% chance of getting one from the rare tier). Is there any information about the changing behavior of containers as certain rewards are all obtained? It's possible that the probability of getting a rare paint, for example, stays the same until they are all gone, and then that reward is replaced either with another rare reward, an uncommon reward, an epic reward, or another random draw altogether. It's also possible that the probability of getting a rare paint (or epic/legendary, skin, augment, effect) is dependent on the number you have yet to obtain; like you're pulling them from a pool. Which do you think is more likely) Unless we know this, do we just have to accept the results of this data as reflective of what the average tanker will get, and understand that people with a lot of (or all of) the paints, skins, effects, or augments could have moderately different results?

This is just my opinion, but I think the google form should only accept opening containers 15 at a time. People won't be as consistent reporting one or two containers at a time, and so there will be some unintentional bias that arises from the tendency to report interesting finds and blow off common ones. Bundling the openings would reduce the variation in rarity proportions. Edit: The form overall is more convenient than making a forum post, so maybe this is a moot point now. What do you think?

Agreed; moving around is one of the best ways to counter a vulcan. With the reinforced aiming transmission, though, the vulcan can function at close range and the 1000 DPS is much more consistent, and with Incendiary Band, you don't need a constant shot to deal lots of damage. The damage definitely doesn't need to be slashed, but maybe down to 900 or something? That's about what my half-upgraded Mk7 vulcan does, and it does just fine against Mk8 other turrets.

Yeah, firebird is a little OP too. It's got very limited range, though, and no impact force. Firebird is a bit harder to counter, while vulcan is harder to avoid. Both could use a nerf.

That's not quite what I asked. I understand that supply boxes don't affect it, because the supplies are always (nominally) active. They just all have somewhat different mechanisms than their normal-tank supply counterparts, it I'm understanding correctly.

I agree that those two are quite OP, although in the case of incendiary band, dodging shots is somewhat viable. I understand where you're coming from (it's true that Vulcan can be countered), but I still hold that the damage per bullet makes it somewhat inordinately powerful for a game that places emphasis on making each turret similarly competitive.

Huh, interesting. So none of the three supplies act as you would expect them to on a normal tank?

Really wish I didn't have to go to the wiki to see how much my stats will change by buying a new modification. Flash has it all in one place next to the turret's or hull's description in garage.

The Juggernaut supposedly has double damage, double armor, and speed boost active all the time. Speed boost clearly is functional because it can still outrun a speed-boosted wasp. Double damage works because the number you see when hitting someone with Terminator is twice the damage number you see in the wiki. The double armor icon, however, seems to be just decorative. Whenever you shoot at the juggernaut, the number that pops up matches the number you see for a tank with no double armor activated. Why?