The comparison was of a game (tanki) specifically designed to be unbalanced, fast paced, and created to make money vs a slower paced, evenly matched game that is still around. You can mentally substitute (let's say) monopoly (or whatever) if it helps your understanding of the comparison.

Sorry, one last point to add which I don't think is accurately conveyed above. And that point is: tanki is actively choosing to present their game this way--unbalanced, static, ever changing, and increased prices for less of a return--dopamine rushes. That is the business path they are going down--and you can never return from making that choice. Ever. Perhaps with classic, the other path (chess) is the direction that game will take. I doubt it. The love of money...

I counter with chess is 100% balanced and seems to be still hanging around as something people play... No need to find/link the theory. I know of it as well. But the theory is used primarily for revenue generating. Hypersomnia is correct with his post. Maybe tanki was steered (in 2015) towards a certain demographic of customer in the online community that tends to spend the most amount of money on online games such as this. I have never spent any real-world currency on this game and I never ever will, so I am obviously not their target customer. But then, I still play chess, so... Either way, tanki has actively chosen to follow this path with maximizing revenue for whatever the return on that revenue is. Maybe games like tanki have a finite lifespan and this course of action is necessary to maximize profits. Tanki is playing the short-viral money-game vs the long, slow money-game. If you are already a buyer (in the case above), you already have fallen for tanki's shtick. The rest is incidental. If you spend money once, you will spend it again because the unchanged variable is the player's (addictive) personality. Perhaps they turn their attention to a brand new account with a different turret? Or maybe a (lol) paint/skin. Or perhaps it follows the 'sunk-cost' theory/fallacy, or the drug-dependency feelings that Hyper pointed out above. Or maybe that individual person doesn't spend any more money, but is replaced by someone else who does. Or all of the above.

I wasn't referring to you with my comment--but you were witness to the silly exchange I had to endure about 'balance' in another thread with people who didn't think tanki was a business (oh to be that young and foolish again...). But to your point, nobody expects perfect. But nobody expects blatant lop-sided battles either. With the addition of bots, there is no excuse for lop-sided battles anymore. None. But--as we have discussed in exhausting detail--balance doesn't make tanki any money. And that's why there is none. None of the developers at tanki are 'stupid'. Not a single one. They know exactly what they are doing. And what they are doing is exactly what they are told to do by their owners. Rank progression and matchmaking game balance are unified under the umbrella of: Make money. You can make them separate entities if you wish, but it's really not necessary. Example: As I have perpetually exposed, there is no valid reason for a 7k to be on one team and two 2ks on the other. None. Other than: 'make money'. Replacing 7049 and 6790 with two 6090's would probably make this particular match 'balanced enough'. But would it make tanki money...? Not sure. As it stands, you know exactly who is going to win this game and who isn't. (I won't discuss augments, even though there are 5x as many on the stronger team than the weaker) ***I would be interested to know the statistics of how many players leave battles vs stay until the end.

Can I ask what makes you think they can't solve it...?

4 5 Tanki Offline.

And there was a time where players argued (continually for days and days) with me saying this game wasn't a business, saying matchmaking was 'balanced', and it was a 'skill issue' and whatever their naive little minds came up with (lol). (Not referring to anyone specifically who posted on page 232, of course.)

Then, if it was such an important position, you'd think there would be more of them. Not less. I would say a lack of battle moderation (because of less battle mods) is a far greater reason for people to stop playing the game altogether.

True. But lets just look at the list of helpers that tanki has that put in the work. First: battle mods/admin (This list hasn't been updated since 2015, so it's probably different by now. But count the number of helpers on this list). And let's compare it with the list of chat moderators/admins (also probably not updated, but count the number of chat helpers). You quickly realize where tanki would rather spend its time moderating based on where they assign the numbers of helpers. It isn't the game.

Bots with the blaster augment.

I guess that counts as 1 each...

Still putting 7ks with 2ks

If there can be two sets of GS for bots in any one battle (GS6220, GS5520): Then there never, ever, ever, ever needs to be a player with 5k GS higher than the lowest GS in any battle. Ever. Seriously? That's just a ridiculous match. Not even including the augs.

Anything for a turret I actually use.

another 4 5 7 games today. but it's ok. most of them were trashmaking games anyways.

Some people reach that endpoint faster than others. At what point did you realize that the devs didn't care one iota about all the effort you put in to knowing the '+1 or -1' of all the turrets and hulls?

ratio

I'm not sure anyone at tanki thinks it is broken.

My opinion of the state of tanki online is that it is BRUTAL

Mods can probably un-pin this too. Months/years between 'compliments'.

When you join a game late and a bot is the best player. Eyeroll.

IF your 'solution' to the ddos attacks is to randomly kick people out of games in the hopes that you stop them, that is an abysmal 'solution'. And that is my opinion.