IDEA: STEALTH AUGMENT Available for long-range weapons (shaft, gauss, thunder etc) in which the user's tank neither shows outline in red when targetted, nor is picked-up by Hornet's overdrive

BUMP. Tanki has many issues and really boxed itself into a corner with some of its contradicting policies and directions. This is one of few ways-out of the mud. It needs to be looked-at and discussed properly and the idea reworked if necessary to make real-world application practical. But not ignored.

SYSTEM ERROR Lost Server Connection. NotFoundServersException

.

Because only isidas do it.

Tanki: "let's take the mode that was so unpopular that we dropped it completely, and offer it as a "special celebration"" People use that mode because of extra gold-drops and points to be gained, nothing more. It would be the same no matter which mode was used. Pro-tip, if you want people to use the game and spend money, provide things that they like rather than things they don't like. ANYTHING else would be better, but how about some race-tracks?

How do you know it is not already so? I don't know either way, but the algorithm could already attempt closer ranks and GS together before it looks further afield.

While I agree with the rank bracket, they don't use the current system because they want to. They CHANGED it from a similar system to your suggestion, because they don't have enough players to restrict the pool from which MM takes players, either for rank or for GS.

One of the problems since they gave isida non-healing options and instead let other turrets heal, is to know who on your team can help you. A small mark like a red "+" or something, to indicate it, would help.

Not if that counts as a loss

Thank you ?

It is a shame that people cannot be rewarded for holding the flag for ages while the rest of the team try to get YOUR flag back, so you can cap. In this situation the person holding the flag is missing-out on points, and this should be compensated. But like you say, it would definitely be abused. How about this? Part 1: If you hold a flag while your own flag is being held by the enemy, then the flag-carrier gets points added every 6 seconds or something. These points are only awarded when the flag is finally capped Part 2: Every second that you hold a flag while your own flag is at-home, you lose points from any you would gain once the flag is capped. Maybe quite fast. Maybe adjustable depending on map-size. If you get to zero, you lose the flag (like pressing "F") and cannot pick it up again until someone else has held it. Part 3: Every second that anyone is holding an enemy flag, and their own flag is free (neither held by enemy, nor in base, but just sitting somewhere) Not sure what to do about this one, Perhaps EVERYONE's share of the flag-points (see my previous post) gets smaller. So that anyone who has carried the flag will want to return friendly-team flag asap. The interface probably doesn't need to be any more cramped than it is now, but there could be a little display that shows how many points you are gaining/losing when the flag is yet to be capped. I am not sure if I am making sense or being clear, but people can ask questions. It's just a rough idea anyway.

How's this for an idea? The flag is worth a number of points. Everyone that carries it between taking it from enemy base and capturing, gets a share in the total that the flag is worth. It should be worth a lot, overwhelmingly more than killing tanks. Same for a rugby ball. In this way, people are encouraged to take it, run all the way to base and cap for 100% share, just like now. If you die and someone else gets it (and caps), then you each get 50% If you die, someone else gets it, then THEY die and a 3rd person manages to grab it and cap, then you get 33% of the total, each. etc If you lose the flag, someone else gets it and then they give it back to you, you still both get 50%. People that lose the flag will WANT someone else to cap it, so that they get their share, which would be worth the same whether they cap it, or someone else-does. But EVERYONE who was responsible for the flag at some-time, will get points for it. I am gonna post a part B reply to you....

The trouble currently is that you can enter a battle, change your garage to suit what you see and are then stuck with it for the rest of the match. Meanwhile, not ONLY might players change their turrets but players may leave and then new-ones arrive. Being unable to adapt throughout the battle: 1) Encourages people to leave instead 2) De-values the time and money/cry spent on making a full and upgraded selection of modules 3) Removes yet another element of intelligent gameplay. Using your brain should be an advantage, as should spending coins/cry on modules. Or why bother?

All are welcome ?

Thank you ?

We need a section on each map where lost, crying drones can be re-united with their tank-parents. If not, they might go zipping-around the map like demented bees, shooting each other.

I was thinking that there could be a an easy wysiwyg interface for making your own paint-schemes (the official ones are pretty formulaic) Tanki might be able to make something from it too, by running competitions for the best paints in different categories or in themes, and then making the winners available to all for a price as-usual. Winner gets a prize and of course the paint, others buy the paint if they want it.

I want black shots for my twins ?

Actually you DO get points for carrying the flag, if you were the penultimate person to handle it. Or at least it used to be so, I haven't checked in a while. I think achieving or contributing to the objective of the game should bring overwhelmingly bigger scores than killing. Capping the flag is already a better score than killing, but imo it should be a bigger difference. I completely agree with your main point. Worth noting is that Tanki have already chosen to make the objective of the match a purely theoretical goal, by creating missions that reward players for having a different priority (ie for playing tdm in all modes) However, that's a separate issue from the subject of this thread. That would be nice. I think they reduced the amount to discourage too many people from being healers and just all healing each other all the time. Back-in-the-day, a chain of 3 isidas used to be capable of dominating an entire map. Rather like 2 or 3 well coordinated paladins do now.

Thanks for your support ? Yeah I think it would by a useful tool to improve a lot of things. Thanks ? Mathematically It's simple enough: Decide how much comparative weighting you wish to assign to each reward-earning action a player might achieve and give numerical reward accordingly. For example, simply award a point for every point of damage done to an enemy hull (if it assists in an eventual kill) So then people might be gaining up-to 8000 points for damage done to a titan, but perhaps 2000 on average. If devs regard capping a flag as 10 times more important than damage done, then ta flag-cap gets assigned with 20,000 or more points. But then you have a dividing factor or multiplier which is applied afterwards and then rounded-up/down to bring that total number back into the range that is currently given to players. So maybe divide the total by 500 in this example (something in that region, it would have to be play-tested) And then crystals etc happens as normal. In terms of actual data handling and coding I have no clue though, probably it's a big job, yeah. I think a lot of similar stuff is done already though, just applied for different purposes. Noted re ideas within a suggestion. I didn't want to spam the forum and I didn't want to miss the more important overall goal when posting lots of smaller ones, so that's handy to know, thanks.

I am asking for a complete review of the points system with the intent to make it more comprehensive and fair. That is my suggestion. Everything else below, is a discussion on some of the ways that devs could potentially achieve the goal, but my suggestion is not intended to consist of those options specifically, nor limited to them. This change would make the game more logical, and benefit those who work hardest for the team. It could potentially also more greatly benefit low-ranked or low-GS players who currently feel it is unfair when placed by MM into battle with higher GS/Ranked players. Some possibilities might include points for: Killing the flag/ball carrier Killing tanks that have mines laid (based on the number of mines) Points based upon the damage done to a player (more damage, more points) who is killed (and then a small bonus to the player who delivered the killing shot) [this would make attacking larger tanks more valuable. It would also place greater emphasis upon engaging other tanks rather than simply making the kill, which is often a matter of luck based upon damage that other people did first] Points based upon the GS of the tank you damaged or killed Points based upon the rank of the tank you damaged or killed Points awarded for damage/kills to be adjusted up/down depending upon and disparity of GS between the teams (adjusted dynamically, throughout the battle) Points awarded for damage/kills to be adjusted up/down depending upon and disparity of player-numbers between the 2 teams, since teams of equal GS still have an advantage if it has more players. Extra points for damage or killing-shot done to a tank which is using its overdrive Returning flag, capturing flag/ball or being in the chain of flag/ball-carriers resulting in a capture, as it happens now. Message to Mods: Would you suggest or prefer that I make each of these as a separate suggestion? Edit: Also: More points for healing a flag/ball-carrier awarded to isida or healer-shaft, than for healing other tanks.

Currently, if a player is using keyboard controls then they do not have the benefit of strafing sideways, which is the main advantage of a floating hull. Can we please have a set of controls that is the same as keyboard+mouse currently, but instead of the mouse you simply use the turret-turning keys.

There's no way to tell if a stray or left-over ball of lightning from a tesla turret is from an ally or an enemy, so you end-up avoiding them all or getting hit by one you thought was friendly-fire. If you perceived them as red or blue according to team, this would be avoided.

Ahh yes. I see what you mean. Well anyway, I would totally use this aug.