Let's suggest a new Auto Balance to admin...

[ghostTX 33]

We've all been in battles that seem to be going one direction or another. One team is ahead and pretty much in control... then, in the span of a few minutes, the other team has players leave and they get replaced by a horde of M3 Mammoths and Titans, all with great amor and weapons and unlimited supplies.. the result, the "winning team" gets bulldozed and the late-comers take over and win (frustrating after a 2 hour battle to get overtaken and beaten in 15 minutes).

 

So, how about the auto balance also expresses a limitation on size, i.e., the battle CANNOT have more than xx% heavy tanks (the biggest ones). It would pretty simple to just divide the tanks into light/medium/heavy tanks - then make a ratio that the battle make-up can;t exceed. 

 

From what I have seen it really is pretty much a clearly divided line between the big tanks and everyone else. I do know of a few players that have stopped playing altogether because it was just too tough to battle a wall of mammoths advancing on you, no matter how good they were or how many supplies they had. 

 

Just a thought. I'd like to see if this is feasible. Rick

[TheLonelyEpic 212]

Dislike; battles should be open to all players. However, there are plans to make it so that when creating a battle, you can restrict which weapons and hulls may be used.

Edited November 10, 2013 by TheLonelyEpic

[doughnut2100 763]

I dont like this idea at all.

Thats what makes tanki a fun game. The diversity in each battle of tanks and weapons and in general players. :D

[Dark-Rim 183]

No. this will be to confusing for players. restrictions of tanks and guns will also be unfair for many players.

[Playep 355]

Yes, that will be great, even i am the one usually be the late comers.

It can ensure the fairness of a battle.

[UNDESIRABLE 147]

No please. Takeovers are fun.

[Buggati_The_Best 1,233]

No please. Takeovers are fun.

if you are in right side -_-

[Longcat970 119]

You wouldn't want to see a light or medium tank in a very small map, or a couple heavy tanks in a large map, would you?

[r_goblin7860 95]

You wouldn't want to see a light or medium tank in a very small map, or a couple heavy tanks in a large map, would you?

I would, i don't see anything wrong about it.

[Longcat970 119]

I would, i don't see anything wrong about it.

So you would rather have tanks that would be less effective in a certain map.

Unless you're naturally good on fighting tanks that have advantages over you, the auto-balancing proposed in this topic wouldn't be a good thing to have in long battles.

 

[ghostTX 33]

I'm not suggestion a limitation of hulls in general, just a balance based on size. Surely no here thinks that 10 mammoths versus 10 medium and small tanks is even remotely a good recipe for a battle? The ones here that replied that take-overs are god probably have an M3 mammoth and look for battles in the final stages that they can jump into and profit from without being there from beginning to end. 

 

If you think I'm just imagining this, look at the battle board - you bound to see battles where there are no players on one side and a horde of mammoths on the other... because the other team was so overwhelmed they just left. Is this what you think tanki is all about? Battles of XX versus none. Going to get real boring when this happens more and more.