You don't know the lore of how isida met smoky?

Huge

This can work too and already implemented in overwatch and it is called Push, just like the normal Payload mode, the Push mode has few challenges to be implemented correctly. - The map has to be symmetric. Both teams share the exact same goal at the exact same time: seize the single Payload and push it toward the enemy base. If one side of the map had a better terrain or a spawn area that was 10 meters closer to the Payload, that team would have a permanent, unearned structural advantage. - Fair Sight lines and Choke points. Because the Payload constantly changes direction in Push, a single lane has to function perfectly as both an attacking lane and a defensive lane depending on who owns the Payload. Making the map symmetric ensures that if Team A has to fight through a brutal, narrow choke to push the Payload forward, Team B will face that exact same brutal choke (same terrain) when they try to push it back. The speed of the Payload is constant, so the speed of those who are pushing is irrelevant (those who are within the radius of the Payload). The Payload speed can be increased based on how many are pushing it. For example, if only 1 player is pushing it the Payload will move at a speed of 10 m/s, but if 3 players are pushing it the speed will increase to be 13 m/s.

The way the Payload mode is implemented in many games, is that the Payload will continue to move if there is one of the attackers team within the radius of the Payload but if there was one or more of the defenders team within the radius of the Payload, the Payload won't move anymore, so the defenders have to engage in a close combat within the radius of the Payload, otherwise the attackers will just keep pushing bit by bit till the Payload reach the goal. The attackers will also have to kill anyone of the defenders within the radius of the Payload, since the defenders can stall and buy time by entering the radius of the Payload. The balancing of this mode is heavily based on the map and the terrains of it just like other modes such as CTF. In Overwatch for example, some maps heavily favor the attackers team, other maps favor the defenders team and some maps are somewhat balanced for each team. Another issue is that the time in MM is constant for every game but the maps are different in terms of size, so the route length in meters is different for each map, for some large maps the time will not be balanced since the time is too short for a long route of the Payload, the attackers will be at a huge disadvantage in this case, but in a small map the time can be way plenty for the attackers so the defenders in this case will be at a huge disadvantage. So is there workaround? Yes but it is hard to implement. - Strict the Mode to a Few maps that are very similar in terms of size. First the devs need to select a group of maps that are similar in size. Secondly, the devs need to choose and measure a uniform length of the Payload route that will fit all the selected maps. Thirdly, the devs need to find an optimal Payload speed that will fit the time reasonably, so the time will be balanced for every selected map in relation to the Payload speed. Keep in mind that this Payload speed is uniform across all selected maps. The downsides of this workaround is: 1- the mode will be playable in only few maps so it will feel boring and repetitive for the players after a while. 2- Since the playable maps are all from the same size, they will have the same number of players, which means some turrets and combos won't be as effective as in smaller, less crowded maps, So the variety of combos in this mode won't necessary be good. Another workaround that is better but harder to implement: - Alter the Payload speed to fit each map. No selection of maps needed. No uniform length of the Payload route needed, since every map will have its own payload route and Payload speed to fit the time reasonably. This workaround needs a lot of testing and experimenting for every single map!! This workaround is the one that the devs of overwatch used to implement their Payload mode to make it balanced. The yap above is one of the reasons why game designers often consider Payload maps among the most difficult to build and balance out of any mode.

I respect the effort, but sadly I do think that this idea will be buried and forgotten alongside other amazing ideas as well. The Payload is the famous escort-style mode found in many games. It was first introduced in the game Wolfenstein enemy territory (2003). Valve brought it to the mainstream in 2007 with Team Fortress 2. I am wondering why did you choose Convoy as a name of the mode instead of the known familiar Payload?

Claude remove stadium from the MM map pool

A Shaft augment where you can move the tank while in sniping mode.

I respect the effort. It is hard to judge the parameters accurately without in-game testing and how each OD will perform and work in different situations, but overall I do think that ODs do need big/new changes other than tweaking and tuning the parameters, specially some ODs like dictator's. I highly doubt they will do big changes to the ODs but your ideas can be a starting point if they do, although I bet some of the visuals will be hard to implement.

After successful milking in Classic's early access. This early access is no suprise to me. It seems every new stuff from now on will be following the "early access" META.

Ok, but i don't see how that is related to my point. Nevertheless I will answer your question. Gaining profit is not a necessary condition to have fun, so some players don't take golds for profit they just do for the fun of it. Just like Parkour players, they keep wasting supplies for 0 profit but they keep doing it because thats how they have fun playing Tanki. Some players do take golds for the profit even if their garage is maxed out, maybe because they want to feel safe if they needed to spend crystals for supplies or a new turret and a new module. Even when you are rich, having more money is always nice. The motive is not simple, so it is always a mix of both for all players, they play for fun and also they play for the profit.

What do you mean by that?

"A balanced game is a state of fairness and strategic variety where no single strategy, character, or item dominates, ensuring that all options are viable and victory depends on skill rather than overpowered choices. It maintains an equilibrium between player challenge and skill, preventing frustration while allowing for diverse" What you said was definitely one of the worst things that has been said to defend the game state. Players don't "cry" because they don't take golds, they "cry" because of hoppers existinece which is two different things that you had them mixed up. April fools and golds events exist way before Hopper appered late 2020 and not every player was able to farm and take golds just like now, but suprisingly such "crying" was not there before. A bronze ranked player will lose becuase of his poor skills, therefore he won't blame the game. However, if that same bronze player lost becuase of unfair matchups, he will rightfully so blame the game for his lose. Forcing an option to take golds is the opposite of balance. Players don't mind not taking golds, I don't think we will ever see a player criticize by saying: the event is bad because I did not take x number of golds.

it is obvious that the design philosophy of turrets has been shifted towards designing simple repetitive core turrets and then adding new mechanisms through Augments. From a business standpoint this is understandable since augments generate more revenue, but from quality of design standpoint it is bad. Augments do not really add something new and unique to the turret, it just tunes the parameters. there are few exceptions such as: Thunder's nano tech, Shaft's Healing Emitters and Shock nanobot injection for isida. In general Tsunami is a bad design and a boring turret, if there is still a chance to rework it before the official launch then please do.

Well, this is just objectively wrong. Hovering mechanism is far more stable than tracked mechanism in every way. One of the ways where Hovering mechanism really shines on stability over tracked mechanism, is having the ability to control the tank while being mid-air, so despite having no ground support whatsoever you can still give inputs to your tank and adjust it mid-air, while tracked mechanism requires direct contact with the ground. You can test both mechanisms by simply falling off any tall place and trying to adjust while being mid-air. This is without mentioning the free and immediate movement of hovering mechanism in any x,y direction compared to the limited tracked mechanism.

Considering how common cheats are these days even among esport players and how suspicious your gameplay looked, I don't see this as a surprising outcome.