The trash-making system is perfectly balanced with no changes required in the algorithm. Just reducing the no. of stars people earn from missions to encourage/force players to stay longer in the game will automatically fix all this crap, right? And guess how many poor low-level players get added to my game and leave immediately towards the 15 min play time?

No, I'm just seeing 1k GS players show up as my teammate in my rank, which I don't even record whether it ever happens before. And 3 - 4k GS simply pops up much more often now.

The only thing that's explicitly mentioned is the no. of stars earned from daily missions. As I've illustrated here, the rests are just assumptions, but it's a fair one in my opinion.

I like the way you structure the post as if nothing else has changed but only the weighting between the no. of stars earned from missions and games, which is clearly not the case. Old system The total amount of stars needed: 3000 Stars earned from Daily missions: 50 Weekly missions: 100 Ultra weekend/event missions in total: 150 (this is included in the calculation because it's the norm of how this game works now) Stars earn by completing missions per challenge = (50 * 3 * 7 + 100 * 3 + 150) * 2 = 3000 ∴ Players can complete the challenge without playing additional games on top of completing missions. Assumption: It takes 2 games per day to complete all daily missions The total play time per challenge = 2 * 15 min * 7 * 2 = 7 hr New system Assumption: the no. of stars earn from the rest of the mission types follows the same scale based on daily missions, i.e. reduced compared to the old system, given this is the direction the Devs are going. The total amount of stars needed: 300 Stars earned from Daily missions: 3 Weekly missions: 6 Ultra weekend/event missions in total: 9 (this is included in the calculation because it's the norm of how this game works now) Stars earn by completing missions per challenge = (3 * 3 * 7 + 6 * 3 + 9) * 2 = 180 Following the same assumption from the old system, assuming It takes 2 games per day to complete all daily missions. Additionally, optimistically assume that the player ends up in the top 3 in all battles. Stars earn from battle while doing missions = 3 * 2 * 7 * 2 = 84 Total no. of stars per challenge by just completing missions = 180 + 84 = 264 Additional star required = 300 - 264 = 36 Additional no. of games required to complete a challenge = 36 / 3 = 12 Additional playtime required to complete a challenge = 12 * 15 min = 3hr ∴ Players are expected to play longer than they used to in order to complete a challenge, even if they are being in the top 3 for EVERY SINGLE game. The above calculation made a (very) optimistic assumption that players are always in the top 3, which is clearly not the case for most people. The following assumes the player is always getting 2 stars per battle, i.e. the average case. Stars earn from battle while doing missions = 2 * 2 * 7 * 2 = 56 Total no. of stars per challenge by just completing missions = 180 + 56 = 236 Additional star required = 300 - 236 = 64 Additional no. of games required to complete a challenge = 64 / 2 = 32 Additional playtime required to complete a challenge = 32 * 15 min = 8 hr Now, what happens if a user has Premium and always getting 4 stars per battle (i.e. average case, but star earned x2 due to Premium)? Stars earn from battle while doing missions = 2 * 2 * 2 * 7 * 2 = 112 Total no. of stars per challenge by just completing missions = 180 + 112 = 292 Additional star required = 300 - 292 = 8 Additional no. of games required to complete a challenge = 8 / 4 = 2 Additional playtime required to complete a challenge = 2 * 15 min = 30min Conclusion Players are now expected to play longer than they used to in order to complete a challenge in most cases Premium is now way more useful than it used to be due to the fact that it doubles the no. of stars earned from games. And can even eliminate the additional play time if the users do get placed in top 3 constantly. --> encouraging people to by Premium On a personal note, thanks to the way the Devs designed Crisis, I'm actually losing crystals every time I play MM games because the drone requires too many drugs to operate. And this will only become worse when drones run on drugs as mentioned in the video. The only exception here is when I have Premium, then I will able to earn some profit. And because of that, obviously, I'm not gonna be happy with the fact that the Devs decided to use these kinds of cheeky little tricks to fill the game lobby and increase their revenue.

If they did increase the no. of stars earned for being top 3, then it will make sense. That's what "shifted focus" is supposed to mean. Yet, according to what they said, they are not going to do that. So even if we assume a player is able to be top 1 every single game, he still gets fewer stars from the new system compared to the old one. In other words, that's a net loss even for the best-case scenario. That's not "shifted from A metric to B metric". That's a net loss for everyone. And that includes you if you are not aware of it.

I really like how this forum ends up, as clearly illustrated in the discussion of this V-Log. Mods: Parkour yeah!!... Proceed to ignore all the bad things this V-Log mentioned (there are a lot!!!). Regular Players: What on earth are these cash grabbing Russians doing this time?... Proceed to ignore the rest of the good news (to be fair, a lot of us doesn't care about parkour)

I don't believe you can complete the battle pass by finishing missions only and leaving the game. It's never that simple. I tend to believe that the Devs are trying to fill the lobby up, and attempting to make their "trash-making" system looks less trash, and this is the way they decided to do it.

Wait, they seriously said that? How do they expect us to react? "Good lord. What a nice group of Devs. They decided to keep some of our benefits as is instead of reducing all of them at once"? What on earth are they thinking when they are writing that script...

Oh great. Now we have to play 4 - 5 rounds min. every single day instead of 6. Definitely an improvement. And what happens to that "we are gonna change the number of stars you earn from battle... You still gonna earn at most 3 or 6 stars depending whether we have premium". So are you gonna change the number of stars or not?

Is the game down again as the V-Log is released? Or is it just me... When people are celebrating battery is finally gone. Nah, this is the same group of Russians we all know about. It's never that simple.

Rename Tanki Online to Camping Online

For me, it's not the FPS, but the ping. It can go from 60 ms - 120 ms to something like 500 ms randomly. I know someone is gonna say "Tanki is having technical issues". Yeah, I know, but the big red banner is displayed more often than it is not displayed.

Everyone has their preference I guess. And the team managed to catch this opportunity well. That's good revenue with minimal cost (assuming they did pay some effort into porting the old models and meshes to the Unity engine). But I was mind blown by the fact that there are that many people willing to pay this much money just for a retro skin.

All those efforts for getting a 10-year-old asset, which they give it a fancy name call "legacy skin"...

They used to fix that a few days ago, but at the same time they introduced other bugs causing the game unplayable. I tend to believe they roll back the patch. They properly release another patch to PROD.

And someone actually did. This is the first challenge accepted result: And the winner has "earned" 66k stars, which is already not the highest amount of stars people have achieved after so many iterations of the same event. It will be up to you to do the calculation, how much does 60k+ star cost in the game? And BTW, the highest record so far is 100k+ if I remember correctly. And all those money for what? For a drone skin, irony also acts as a nerf since it costs more drugs to operate.

I would argue the biggest factor is the customers though. When your customer is stupid enough to spend 3k Euro on a skin that properly took them one or two weeks to make, you can't really fail.

I digressed, the original topic is to bring out the idea of all OD's damage and healing should scale with hull levels ONLY, except for Viking. As listed out by @TheCongoSpider, I believe currently there are way too many scaling in ODs alone. Some don't scale at all Some scale with hull level Some scale with damage bonuses (e.g. from drugs) Some have the combination of any of the above It is so confusing and is imbalance in some scenarios. e.g. Paladin OD offers negligible healing output when a Crisis user has defensive mode on and superb healing when damage mode is on Ares's OD is overly effective at low level since the damage and healing don't scale (down) with hull level.

Yep, true damage is more common than raw damage. But yet again, raw damage is still fairly common, although to a lesser degree. Obviously, once people have gotten used to the topology, everything will be clear, but the invention of the so-called "Chaos damage" is unnecessary. I get why it has to be in the game and why it makes sense. But it's essentially true damage with a fancy name (Guess they played fantasy RPG too much at that time?) that people have to get used to. So why not just literally call it "True damage"? Like we call a type of food known as a "burger", not "ground beef and two slices of bread with vegetables and pickles". The same goes for Overdrive --> Ultimate Hammer (as a shotgun) Magnum (as an artillery turret instead of a revolver) Juggernaut (the name resembles a big tough guy but thanks to the Devs' ongoing changes, its armor is ironically thin as paper) These Russians do love to make confusing names. Guess they thought this make their game unique in some sense.

More reasons for better alignment. See how things get unnecessarily complicated and confusing and don't make sense at all? No wonder Ares is OP at low level. Just make every OD scale with hull level (except Viking) and nothing else and problem solved. And I still hate Tanki's edgy naming convention. Raw damage is raw damage. Everyone else uses that and everyone understands that. And they HAVE to invent a new phrase for absolutely zero reason.

So as Paladin. But none of the above scales with damage bonus, e.g. boosted damage, not anymore at least Currently, Paladin and Ares's OD's healing part with BOTH the hull level and damage bonus.

And how on earth is a balancing suggestion getting merged in a patch update discussion? Sure, this patch has Paladin involved, but it's not remotely related to its healing capability.

You mean the dumpster book that literally getting ignored? Talking about it anywhere will not change anything anyway, just let us rant.

If you play Siege literally the way you mentioned, then yeah, you are screwed. That's not the way to play it. However, there is a clear difference between "I'm not on point because there are 3 enemies on it and I'm the only one on my team at this moment" vs "I'm gonna only playing Siege mode and will sit in spawn for the entire game to farm kills". And G-92 is the latter. BTW, Assault is imbalance in nature, sure. But CP and Siege (I'm pretty sure it's copied from Overwatch) are fairly common modes in many PvP games.