How games are handled in Tanki: Discussion

[eessydo 17]

I have always taken issue with how tanki manages their games in their forum. I personally believe that games should have two things to make them significantly more fun.

 

1. A fair playing field to start.

2. A clear and definitive end.

 

Currently in Tanki, games are initiated by a player. Once that games is activated the timer or game starts AND when games are over they regenerate by switching teams colors. This creates a major issues IMO.

 

1. Waiting for games to start on even ground are based upon someones ethical standard

2. It encourages lower ranks or overpowered sides to start scoring flag grabs early on.

3. In time games, it creates games where the side that flag grabbed before the sides filled out to sit on their flags and defend (boring)

4. Upon the end of a game, inevitably some players leave always created a shift in the balance of power, and #1 on this list starts all over again.

 

Overall it is a vicious cycle and can really make finding an interesting match painful.

 

My proposal on how to solve this issue. (again, feel free to make your own proposal, complain about mine, or offer added content)

 

1. Once a game is initiated have the game start only upon the filling out of both teams.

2. Don't allow for players to move their tank until the game starts. Very simple concept here, sometimes you will have each team camp on the other flag in hopes that they can get an early score.

3. Should someone leave a game, still allow for a substitute player (s) to ensure as much fairness as possible.

4. Upon completion of the game, Close the game. If someone wants a rematch, then they can open up another game.

 

Why do I think this will work?

 

1. Well for one thing it will decrease the amount of game instances in the lobby, which might actually help increase overall network performance.

2. Encourages more competitive games by eradicating early flag grabs

3. Gives players that want instant action the ability to get in a game as a substitute.

4. Gets the log jam of Silence games off the top of the available games boards in the lobby.

[king_beast88 19]

I doubt they do this but, I would say change this part only instead allow player to move around in ghost mode before the game starts, and only allow them to move half the way across the map no further.

[r_ORiley0 0]

Im agree with you, except this:

3. Should someone leave a game, still allow for a substitute player (s) to ensure as much fairness as possible.

 

The game will be paused constantly, because only few players play ALL the battle.

[king_beast88 19]

Im agree with you, except this:

3. Should someone leave a game, still allow for a substitute player (s) to ensure as much fairness as possible.

 

The game will be paused constantly, because only few players play ALL the battle.

 

I am awaiting the new search feature for battles,

 

other wise if all these othere were somewhat tested to be where the are nominal to be implemented, then why not have it like this we click say silence II and it automatically finds us a game, so if there is one starting then it puts us there and if there is one with a open spot we get put there, and if none are open we can create one or change the map we are trying to find.

 

Call it something like jump into battle button or something, alongside this we would still be able to manually look for games as well.

[r_ORiley0 0]

It can automatically find us a game, but each player like to play his own way..some poeple look for battles with certain rank limits, or with low score, or recently started. But the idea is not bad. Maybe you can use a kind of "filter" to look at the battles in the map you want to play..

[king_beast88 19]

It can automatically find us a game' date=' but each player like to play his own way..some poeple look for battles with certain rank limits, or with low score, or recently started. But the idea is not bad. Maybe you can use a kind of "filter" to look at the battles in the map you want to play..[/quote']

 

I dunno about a filter the entire point is to make sure all battles are filled regardless, but you do have a point filters could be of use.

[eessydo 17]

You probably won't need a filter. If the games drop off upon completion it won't be an overly long list for you to scroll through.

[MONKBLOB 33]

What is the game never gets full?

[Shocker_33 4]

1. Once a game is initiated have the game start only upon the filling out of both teams.

.....................People won't like to wait for longer than 10-20 seconds. They'll get bored and change to a different battle. Leaving the current battle one more person short. Pointless because this wouldn't solve the issue. I actually enjoy uneven battles.

 

2. Don't allow for players to move their tank until the game starts. Very simple concept here, sometimes you will have each team camp on the other flag in hopes that they can get an early score.

..................Good idea, this occurs in other online games.

 

3. Should someone leave a game, still allow for a substitute player (s) to ensure as much fairness as possible.

..................So someone needs to sit, waiting for someone to drop out? I think the reserve will get bored and move to a battle that they can play. Leaving the battle with no reserve, again this wouldn't solve the issue.

 

4. Upon completion of the game, Close the game. If someone wants a rematch, then they can open up another game.

................This would only work if the game downloaded the maps to your computer and stored them offline, allowing quick load rates of battles. At the current load rates of battles this wouldn't be efficient enough in terms of time and players would get bored. I feel the solution to this, would be to have a button on the results screen asking if they want to play another battle with a time limit to make a discussion.

[ZzPrincezZ 1]

Uhm Honestly I don't like your whole idea except waiting for full teams to start that's a good one but also bad because what if people get inpatient and don't want to wait the game will never start... people will leave join etc so i think once there is atleast 1 player per side the game shall start (; my opinion

[eessydo 17]

3. Should someone leave a game, still allow for a substitute player (s) to ensure as much fairness as possible.

..................So someone needs to sit, waiting for someone to drop out? I think the reserve will get bored and move to a battle that they can play. Leaving the battle with no reserve, again this wouldn't solve the issue.

 

No, there is no reserve concept in my comment. It would function exactly as it does now. Someone drops off, and a spot in the battle opens. This would allow the the impatient to be able to join a game immediately vs. waiting for a game to start.