Team funds

[Promissory 569]

I think each team should have separate funds, so if a team works very hard, they will still have a good reward. The team fund only increases by the score that it team made.

(Im on android sorry if typing errors)

[general_abrams 424]

The teams split the fund when the game is over. The winners get slightly more, and the players with higher scores get slightly more. I believe that it's pretty fairly split right now, so I don't see a reason why you would need to create separate fund for each team. :mellow:

[RustyNail 1,538]

The teams split the fund when the game is over. The winners get slightly more, and the players with higher scores get slightly more. I believe that it's pretty fairly split right now, so I don't see a reason why you would need to create separate fund for each team. :mellow:

The funds distribution is not balanced today. Winners get much more than the losers. That makes Tanki really harsh and very competitive, reducing the fun it supposed to be.

Two things are wanted

1. more funds in general (crystals)

2. More funds (than today) for losing team.

 

However, I thing this topic should merge with this

http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=266943&hl=

because they are almost identical.

[genak138 950]

The funds distribution is not balanced today. Winners get much more than the losers. That makes Tanki really harsh and very competitive, reducing the fun it supposed to be.

Didn't the losing team always get less than the winning team? How does this feature existing now take away the fun it used to be if this always existed? Unless it didn't always exist, of course.

Anyways, the losing team does get more crystals than before. Almost a year ago (I think) it became impossible for a team to get no crystals, even if they got no scores.

[Promissory 569]

Didn't the losing team always get less than the winning team? How does this feature existing now take away the fun it used to be if this always existed? Unless it didn't always exist, of course.

Anyways, the losing team does get more crystals than before. Almost a year ago (I think) it became impossible for a team to get no crystals, even if they got no score

check the date lel, I dont even play this

[BSG-62 512]

That's a good idea because cause if you're on the losing team, you get virtually nothing.

[general_abrams 424]

The funds distribution is not balanced today. Winners get much more than the losers. That makes Tanki really harsh and very competitive, reducing the fun it supposed to be.

Two things are wanted

1. more funds in general (crystals)

2. More funds (than today) for losing team.

 

However, I thing this topic should merge with this

http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=266943&hl=

because they are almost identical.

I agree that the fund size is too small for current battles. There needs to be more reward all around. However I think that the distribution is at least alright for the time being. If you balance it much more between the losing team and winning team, the motivation to win will lessen, because the difference between winning and losing is not that much.

 

Take this battle for example (note that this is a Polygon XP/BP, which usually yield higher than average funds):

 

 

 

 

The final score of the battle is very close. Look at the third place guy on each team. Their scores are relatively the same. Combined they received a total of 3,019 crystals. The difference between their rewards (range) is 673. 0mani, who is on the winning side, got approximately 60% of the total fund between them. That means that JagernautNova, who was on the losing side, got the other 40%. So we can say that the approximate difference between the winner's reward and the loser's reward, if their scores are similar and the final score of the battle is close (which good battles always are), is a ratio of 60:40. Personally I think that this is a good balance. It's enough to keep the motivation for winning, but not completely rip off the losing team.

 

I'm not implying that there's no room for improvement, but I am pointing out that the smaller the difference is between winning and losing, the less motivation there is to win.

[r_priyangshu0 270]

I agree that the fund size is too small for current battles. There needs to be more reward all around. However I think that the distribution is at least alright for the time being. If you balance it much more between the losing team and winning team, the motivation to win will lessen, because the difference between winning and losing is not that much.

 

Take this battle for example (note that this is a Polygon XP/BP, which usually yield higher than average funds):

 

 

 

 

The final score of the battle is very close. Look at the third place guy on each team. Their scores are relatively the same. Combined they received a total of 3,019 crystals. The difference between their rewards (range) is 673. 0mani, who is on the winning side, got approximately 60% of the total fund between them. That means that JagernautNova, who was on the losing side, got the other 40%. So we can say that the approximate difference between the winner's reward and the loser's reward, if their scores are similar and the final score of the battle is close (which good battles always are), is a ratio of 60:40. Personally I think that this is a good balance. It's enough to keep the motivation for winning, but not completely rip off the losing team.

 

I'm not implying that there's no room for improvement, but I am pointing out that the smaller the difference is between winning and losing, the less motivation there is to win.

I just believe it should always be 60:40 regardless of the difference in flags/points/kills. If the difference is a lot, it means the winning team is OP.

[RustyNail 1,538]

I agree that the fund size is too small for current battles. There needs to be more reward all around. However I think that the distribution is at least alright for the time being. If you balance it much more between the losing team and winning team, the motivation to win will lessen, because the difference between winning and losing is not that much.

 

Take this battle for example (note that this is a Polygon XP/BP, which usually yield higher than average funds):

 

The final score of the battle is very close. Look at the third place guy on each team. Their scores are relatively the same. Combined they received a total of 3,019 crystals. The difference between their rewards (range) is 673. 0mani, who is on the winning side, got approximately 60% of the total fund between them. That means that JagernautNova, who was on the losing side, got the other 40%. So we can say that the approximate difference between the winner's reward and the loser's reward, if their scores are similar and the final score of the battle is close (which good battles always are), is a ratio of 60:40. Personally I think that this is a good balance. It's enough to keep the motivation for winning, but not completely rip off the losing team.

 

I'm not implying that there's no room for improvement, but I am pointing out that the smaller the difference is between winning and losing, the less motivation there is to win.

 

The battle you use as an example has very close final score between the teams. That's why people with close personal score get similar funds.

Try to use a battle with final score like 10-1 (which is very often the case nowadays) and you will find out that the top scorer of the losing team with personal score similar to that of the top scorer of the winning team, gets very few crystals indeed.

 

Besides, every battle is a competition by itself. It doesn't really need a crystal motivation. Crystals reward is an extra motive for trying harder. But trying harder kills the fun. It's a game after all. Fun is essential.

 

I do understand that there is a very sensitive balance between a loose game and a tight game. Loosing the game might end to loose teams, some players that don't really care for the battle etc.

Perhaps a new mechanism is required, for rewarding the effort and not the final result. Not to replace the old mechanism but to apply next to it. A double scoring method, that is.

[creeperskelly 1,281]

The stupid thing about how reward or points are awarded is this: whether I pop a low level Wasp or a drugging M3 Mammoth the reward is the same either way despite one tank requiring more effort to kill it.

 

The amount of crystals added to the battle fund should be determined by how hard it is to kill a certain tank. Likewise you should get a higher score for killing a more difficult opponent.

 

As pointed out when you are on the losing team in a 10-1 battle you get nothing. So why stay?

[IODIUM 6]

first lets recap

 

why have devs removed crystal boxes?

 

they where too destracting

 

why do we wont crystal boxes?

 

for crystals of course

 

why do we dont wont them?

 

becuse of farmers and distraction

 

 

now the idea is to alongside daily misions witch are more selfish(you dont do them for sombody else)we could have battle misions

when we enter the battle wepick an battle mission from the offerd pool

when we finish it we get x amount of crystals(at the end of the battle)

so this will more focus people on the team play then for selfishnes

and jf you are in loosing team and you do the battle mission your ravard should be greater(you did your duty)

there will be no farmers becuse jf they farm they help out the team

 

here is some examples

 

persuer-retourn the flag x times and kill person who is holding it x number of times

 

recconosance-in a light hull kill x number of tanks with the light hull

 

line holder-take x amount of damige and kill x number of enemies

 

flanker-kill x number of enemies while not taking damige

 

and lots of others

 

-IODIUM