With the current state of the game, specially with the number of grenades that have been added this is actually a great idea and should be taken into consideration. But I don't think there is a need to decrease the protection percentage.

I agree with you on that. The modes are still a problem in this concept. But the feature can also be implemented where the mode is not displayed on the voting screen and players only vote for a map and then the games decides the mode randomly. Which still gives the players a sense of control over the the next map they will play.

@Akame You have made some good point here. In my opinion the player base has grown significantly in the last two years. The average waiting time to get a match in the Quick battle is approx 15-30 seconds in the peak hours and 50-90 seconds off-peak hours. So the player base should not be an issue. I also agree that some players would naturally vote for the maps or modes they believe are most profitable. However, I don't necessarily see that as unique to a voting system. Players already leave battles or select mode specific matchmaking options based on their preferences. The voting phase simply gives the existing lobby an opportunity to reach a collective decision instead of everyone acting independently. No one likes ASL . In most maps its completely unbalanced. So there is already a need to balance and fix that mode. Regarding players wanting to change their equipment or preferred combination after a battle, since there would already be a short transition period before the next match begins a feature to go into the the garage for a specific time can be added on the voting screen. So if the players wanted to change again mid battle they would still have their one time change option available to them. Penalties would not be fair, the players do have the right and control over what maps they want to play and they will be free to leave like any other match making battle. But the majority of players who vote will be able to play their preferred maps. The empty slots left by the players who leave will be filled by players joining quick battles. Yes, I was around at that time. But in my opinion it could work if implemented now.

Merging the selections from two different battles will create a separate complexity, as it will be very uncommon for two battles to finish at the same time (Limited time for voting) . So we will stick with voting from a single battle and the rest of the players will be joined randomly when they start a quick battle for the first time. As voting will only be available once you have successfully finished the first random selected match. If two battles do finish at the same time and both had the same map available at the voting then its a possibility to merge the players into a single battle if slots are available but again it will complicate things. No , there will not be a battle for the two players as only the map with the maximum votes will be selected for the next battle. The vote count will be displayed and if the players dont want to play the most voted map they will have the option to leave the match making before the countdown for voting ends.

Yes the game mode is still the problem. But I can't think of a possible solution for that right now. We can also remove the mode displayed with each map and let the matchmaking decide the mode and leave it to the fate

The empty slots dont necessarily have to be filled by the players who finished a match at the same time and have voted the same map at the end of their match. It will mostly be filled by the players clicking the quick battle for the first time (The Players who have already left a match and are on the home screen and might be in the garage or taking a break for a while). As the players joining their first match will not have the voting option and they will be randomly put in a match already voted.

Yes the voting time will be limited and it can be adjusted according to the availability of the players and depending on the logic implemented by the devs. I believe even if the voting time is kept 30-45 seconds most of the players will be okay with that.

That's a great example. But even if 6 players vote the next map, we still have to consider the players joining from the random match making so this way the match making will fill the remaining slots available. Note that this I concept is a Post Match Map Voting. So the voting option will only be available to the players who have finished one match with the map that was selected randomly and only when that match is finished the voting screen will be displayed to those who chose to stay. So the empty slots will be filled out by the players joining the match making for the first time.

@Sabry Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. You raise some valid points, and I actually agree with most of them. The exact implementation could certainly be adjusted depending on the use case and the developers' design goals. For example, they could decide how game modes are handled, whether the vote is restricted to the current mode, whether multiple modes are included, or even whether the available options are generated using player preferences or matchmaking criteria. Likewise, the number of maps presented for voting could be revisited if the team believes a different approach would provide a better player experience. Ultimately, those balancing and technical decisions would be up to the developers if they ever decided to explore the idea further. I really appreciate you taking the time to point out these scenarios. Feedback like yours helps identify edge cases that I hadn't fully considered and makes the concept stronger. Thank you again for the thoughtful discussion.

@THRNMap Ratings is a great idea as well. But this way only the most liked maps by all the players will become popular in the match-making. Which will affect unpopular maps rendering them useless. But if a map voting system gets implemented the algorithm can provide unpopular maps in the voting system as well and cycle the maps available for voting from time to time. This way no map will become obsolete and there will be a diversity in the maps played. Keeping the element of player's choice intact.

@Sabry I totally get what you are trying to say but still getting an option of three maps gives you control over the next match. Although some of the players might not be happy with the three choices provided but majority of the players will be able to select the preferred map to make the experience even better. Moreover providing all maps will not be practical, it might be a total disaster for the Devs and specially the UI team as showing all the maps available in the game on the voting screen will not be practical. If all the maps are provided for voting there will be multiple ties. For an example if 16 players are selecting from all the available maps even if a maps gets three votes there is still a possibility that the remaining 13 players vote for a different map each. They (The 13 players) might not like the map chosen by the three votes. But if there are three maps, the choice is limited and votes will be divided among just three maps so most of the players will feel included in the decision making.

@NikmanGT Yes I wrote the proposal myself but a little bit of Gen AI was used for formatting and final touch up.

Overview One of the strengths of Tanki Online is the large variety of maps available across its different game modes. Every map offers its own style of gameplay, encouraging different strategies and play-styles. However, because the next battlefield is selected automatically, players sometimes encounter several maps in succession that they may not particularly enjoy, leading many to leave the lobby before the next match begins. To make the transition between battles more engaging while giving players a greater sense of participation, I would like to suggest the introduction of a post-match map voting system. The purpose of this document is simply to present the concept and demonstrate one possible implementation. The Core Idea Once a battle has concluded, players who remain in the lobby would briefly enter a voting phase instead of immediately loading into another match. During this period, possible maps and game mode combinations would be presented on screen. Players would have a few seconds to select the option they would most like to play. When the countdown ends, the option receiving the greatest number of votes would determine the next battle. If no clear winner exists, one of the tied options could simply be chosen at random. This approach preserves variety while allowing players to influence the direction of the next match without significantly slowing down matchmaking. Why Introduce Map Voting? Rather than replacing randomness altogether, map voting introduces a small element of player choice. Potential advantages include: Giving players a reason to stay in the current lobby instead of searching for another one. Reducing frustration caused by repeatedly receiving less popular maps. Making the time between matches more interactive. Encouraging players to participate together before the next battle begins. Increasing anticipation for the upcoming match. Because the available choices would still be selected randomly by the game, diversity across maps would remain intact. Interface Concept The attached illustration demonstrates one possible presentation of the voting screen. Each option displays: A preview image of the map. The map's name. The associated game mode. A live vote counter. A countdown timer indicating how long players have to cast their vote. Design Flexibility The exact implementation would naturally be determined by the development team. For example, the team may decide to: Adjust the duration of the voting phase. Control how maps are selected for voting. Prevent recently played maps from appearing too frequently. Decide how ties should be resolved. Limit voting to certain matchmaking queues or events. These decisions would ultimately depend on technical considerations and game-play balance. Closing Remarks This proposal is intended only as a community suggestion from a long-time player who enjoys Tanki Online and would like to contribute an idea that could enhance the multiplayer experience. Thank you for taking the time to consider this suggestion. Regardless of whether it is pursued, I appreciate the continued effort that goes into developing and improving the game. Regards, Violation