Periodic Map Influencing

[ThouShallNot 963]

me either then y did they remove it?

it wasnt laggy

They removed cuz they were "Unpopular" according to the devs  :rolleyes:

[dilsharox 2,395]

They removed cuz they were "Unpopular" according to the devs  :rolleyes:

but you know it wasnt unpopular they just removed it by giving us a stupid reason

 

Maybe too popular :x

Not like silence and polygon now,but you get it xD

lol

[KNELSEN4 177]

#BRINGBACKDECK-9

[Vikingsrallentando 3,058]

Here is my full text :

That would be great to go along with this suggestion! That by itself wouldn't have as drastic of an effect. Just guiding someone to play the map better is beneficial, but if there are very few battles with those maps, then there is little that can be done with the knowledge given. This suggestion would be the platform to create the influx of the map and then the guide would be MOST beneficial for the player and maps success.

 

me either then y did they remove it?

Please note, they were of the least popular maps that were to be removed. IMO, they were the ones to go. They didn't offer much gameplay wise. There is plenty still to be played, especially in that list.

 

 

Not the purpose of this suggestion.

[Vikingsrallentando 3,058]

So as of my reading and understanding you (we) want Dev's to promote/make us to play on other maps then "famous" maps around?

You make it sound like its a bad thing...when really its not. Playing the same group of maps, the famous or popular ones, is not playing the game at its full potential or variety. Your not getting the best 'bang for your buck' so to speak, regardless if you've ever paid for crystals. Your time spent doesn't go as far when you play the same group of maps everyday for years. 

 

How about the bigger the map, the bigger the fund, for small maps the fund would remain like it's always been.

That is on a different topic)

 

[Nltobh 498]

i wish there was a button that said join random battle :L 

[RustyNail 1,538]

i wish there was a button that said join random battle :L 

That seems like a really good idea. And easy to implement, I think.

[Vikingsrallentando 3,058]

i wish there was a button that said join random battle :L 

If you have reasons to back the suggestion, then roll with it.

[Sr.I3oSS 2,546]

Adding new maps, bla bla.

[boppyeric 30]

When I first started playing it wasn't about the Polygon CP or the Noise CTF

(although Polygons are slowly disappearing in the EN servers)

It was literally Stadium and Silence , Silence II spam. Well now Silence II is gone, but ilence is still a pretty decent map itself. And so is stadium! Remember when stadium was super famous? Now the only times a map gets popular youtuber and tanki person plays it. For example OUFA, if not for him playing the map all the time, Kolhoz. If not, it would be dead.

You guys remember 2042? Where did it go!??? 

[swede1 1,726]

They can't alter fund amounts on specific maps, the system is set up for all maps the same. The whole system would have to be rebuilt from the ground up

[dragonssk1 334]

As a non buyer who is struggling to purchase m3 items ( I only do on 50% sales) I can only play specific game modes and maps that suit my turret and hull the best (this case thunder m3 and hunter/mammoth m2). I perfect map for thunder domination is polygon cp which give really go funds. Also this map and game mode is very popular so this battle is the only battle I play 90% of the time. I do agree, but my garage equipment is limited and I will get a lower score in other maps due to my limited garage. I believe most of the popular maps allow all types of hulls and turrets to be use effectively and in some balance such as Noise, Silence and Polygon. 

[dragonssk1 334]

i wish there was a button that said join random battle :L 

+1

[Vikingsrallentando 3,058]

Adding new maps, bla bla.

Not quite yet. The list of maps needs to shaken up popularity wise so then the decision on what maps stay and which leave with the Unity version is a good one. Then make way for new)

 

Remember when stadium was super famous? Now the only times a map gets popular youtuber and tanki person plays it. For example OUFA, if not for him playing the map all the time, Kolhoz. If not, it would be dead.

You guys remember 2042? Where did it go!??? 

Yeah, what happened to stadium? People didn't like the changes? I never remember Kolhoz being popular, however. At least that sparked up. I guess 2042 died as well...

 

They can't alter fund amounts on specific maps, the system is set up for all maps the same. The whole system would have to be rebuilt from the ground up

Even so, increased gold will still get peoples attention. Regardless, a much more versatile system for these types of promotions would be beneficial to the development of the game.

[fast900 5]

The conception to change the game for the better through rebuilding the system is an excellent idea, and needs to be pursued by TO after they've finished the Unity version of TO. I am 110% for the idea of promoting maps that are not regularly played, although I have an opinion which may be of interest. 

 

1. TO needs to create a feature which will allow players to use a simple "drag and drop" method to build their own maps and allow their friends to play on them. These maps would be temporary and unique to the creator as, he will choose how the map will be distributed and whether or not, other players besides their friends will be allowed to play on them. I feel by allowing players to make their own maps, they will find new inspiration to play a wider variety of maps and terrains, which they are not accustomed to. 

 

2. The idea of promoting maps that aren't as popular, as they once were is a great idea. However I feel the habitual activities of players will get the best of them, and they will turn back to maps which they feel comfortable with. I will use myself as an example, I love to play XP and I've played many variants of maps from Red Alert CTF to Madness DM. However, when introduced to new maps I find the terrain difficult to comprehend, so I go back to the more popular ones. Furthermore even when attempting to create XP battles on lower-tier maps they don't attract players which is an issue in itself.  

 

3.Lastly my praise for your idea is beyond your understanding, and I hope this brings about change in the community; 

 

I would also like to congratulate you on your return to TO, I'm eager to see what other ideas you can bring, to revolutionize the battlefield.

 

I will leave my regards with this quote which I believe you possess the essence of.

 

"Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them."

William Shakespeare

 

You my friend may have just been born great  ^_^

~fast900 

 

 

[C-O-O-L-G-U-Y 131]

All Call of Duty players will know what I am talking about :D You know how in call of duty there is always that "random" bottom you can vote for. Essentially this could definitely be used in tanki as well. this idea might need a few tweaks but overall I think it would solve this problem :)

[fast900 5]

All Call of Duty players will know what I am talking about :D You know how in call of duty there is always that "random" bottom you can vote for. Essentially this could definitely be used in tanki as well. this idea might need a few tweaks but overall I think it would solve this problem :)

hey coolguyiscool99 loving the name :P

[C-O-O-L-G-U-Y 131]

hey coolguyiscool99 loving the name :P

Thanks bro :D

[boppyeric 30]

Ok... anyone remember or even know this map? I don't really think so.. dead dead dead http://prntscr.com/6so3ua

[general_abrams 424]

This topic suggests an excellent idea.

 

 

 

Also, in addition to some, or all, of the suggestions mentioned in the topic, I would like to see a system that would boost the interest in larger maps.

Currently, small to medium maps, like Sandbox and Polygon, hold out an extreme popularity advantage over larger maps, like Serpuhov and Kungur. The reason is plain: Small-medium maps have more action, thus, you get more XP and crystals from a 15 minute match at Polygon than you ever will in a 15 minute match at Serpuhov. To remedy this, I suggest this solution:

• Incorporate some system where larger maps have a slightly faster-growing battle fund, and maybe even faster XP accumulation, in order to make larger maps desirable to play on. In addition, perhaps you could increase the amount of players that can compete at once in larger maps, to boost the action even more.

[redguy150 0]

i think there should be some NEW tracks instead...

[Vikingsrallentando 3,058]

The conception to change the game for the better through rebuilding the system is an excellent idea, and needs to be pursued by TO after they've finished the Unity version of TO.

Hopefully they are restructuring the system like we suggest as we speak. But If increasing gold boxes can be done, why can't they do that now?

1. TO needs to create a feature which will allow players to use a simple "drag and drop" method to build their own maps and allow their friends to play on them.

I would love this but knowing how the developers are about this type of thing leads to me believe it will never happen. The game has a good number of player maps in it. I don't know exactly how many but I would say a quarter to a third of them are user generated. There is the capability to make maps on AlternativaEditor, which is an external program. The most recent additions to the roster that were player made was in the "Level designer contest" (which wasn't to find a designer, was to get a few maps that use their 3rd prop library); Future from Profnaz (a seasoned MapMaker), Factory from John_Makklaud and Platform (#RIP) from tank789. That was almost two years ago. They show no desire to let UGC into the game.

 

Another factor, thats not so pinning on the devs, is us players. If more of us showed more interest in the world of maps, more specifically making them, then the developers may be more willing to accept that kind of stuff. But how many of you can say you've created a complete, playable map in AE? We were able to get Aleksandrovsk, the former New year map, into the game, which seems to have fallen flat because of the playerbase's habits. Anyway, the more of us that are for map variety, the more likely map reform will happen.

 

2. The idea of promoting maps that aren't as popular, as they once were is a great idea. However I feel the habitual activities of players will get the best of them, and they will turn back to maps which they feel comfortable with.

As I was starting to mention, the playerbase rarely extends beyond what is popular, so that is expected. Its the product of nothing being done to mix up the maps. Again, could go either way, whether its the developers fault or the players fault. You decide.

 

"Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them."

William Shakespeare

I always appreciate someone who quotes the great Shakespeare. Thank you))

[MrsTankBuster2 141]

Couldn't agree more that something needs to be done about the awful lack of choice of maps as one progresses up the ranks.

 

As a CP only player, I'm in the minority already, but I'm sick to death of seeing the battle lists dominated by Polygon, Arena and Island.  I hardly use this account to play anymore, despite having spent money on it and having a nearly new M2 Rico gathering dust in the garage. It's pointless when I can't actually find any maps I like (despite trawling all the servers).  I like to play most medium to large maps.

 

I mainly play on my lower rank alts now to get a bit more choice - but I certainly won't be spending any money on them as I know that the choice of maps will disappear once I rank up a few more times.

 

There is something fundamentality wrong somewhere as to why the variety of maps slowly disappears as one ranks up.

 

I don't think I can suggest anything that hasn't already been mentioned in the 'ideas' section in general, but I can only lend my support to those who suggest ways to improve the variety of maps.  This game needs to be made more interesting past the low ranks, especially for CP, IMO.

[PuncherTank 37]

There is something fundamentality wrong somewhere as to why the variety of maps slowly disappears as one ranks up.

 

I tried to address the problem of lack of diversity and sickening popularity of only a few small/medium maps in many of my posts. There isn't a single cause or a single solution to the issue, but I can summarize it in the following 4 problems:

 

Problem 1: Many players here seem to have crappy PC's/internet connections making large maps technically troublesome; low FPS, high ping times and the dreaded Fatal Error.

 

Solution: The whole "first flash-based online 3D action game" idea was a bad one to begin with. This is just too much for flash. So, TO can only tell players to either wait for the Unity version or get better PC/broadband.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Problem 2: Most players just want to rank up quickly and/or make as many crystals as possible, and the current progression and battle fund growth systems favor certain small/medium maps in this regard. For example, Polygon CP is the most efficient map where you can easily and quickly kill many enemy tanks, gain more exp. points, raise a large fund in a relatively short period of time, and catch a gold box as it has a greater chance of falling.

 

Solution: I did suggest that the system for calculating battle fund take into consideration the map that the battle is played on. This will make all maps - small, medium and large - just as efficient for fund raising. The exp. progression system can also incorporate what I called the Complexity Coefficient (CC), in order to make large maps as efficient as small ones in terms of progression. Gold Box drop chances should also be dependent on the CC. You can read my post here for more details.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Problem 3: Large maps require more team work and communication to win, which is usually very hard to find. On smaller maps, like Polygon and Silence you can win if you have another two or three good players on your team, but on Berlin you'll need at least 10 or more strong players to win. So when one side has many strong players (often a clan/friends) and the other side are a bunch of random uncooperative players this usually leads to most players on the weak side leaving the battle which then dies. This happens very often on large maps.

 

Solution: I suggested an improved fund distribution system that gives you a larger reward for your efforts even if your team loses. This will make players less frustrated and more confident in playing on large and unfamiliar maps knowing that their efforts will be efficiently rewarded regardless of the teammates they get stuck with. You can read more about my suggestion here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Problem 4: People instinctively choose things they are familiar with and prefer to stick to a certain routine that works for them rather than taking chances and trying new things out.

 

Solution: Developers can enforce diversity by implementing an automated matchmaking system to replace the current battle creation system. However, this matchmaker system should not be implemented before resolving the other problems mentioned above. You can read about the suggested matchmaker system here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[MrsTankBuster2 141]

I tried to address the problem of lack of diversity and sickening popularity of only a few small/medium maps in many of my posts. There isn't a single cause or a single solution to the issue, but I can summarize it in the following 4 problems:

 

Problem 1: Many players here seem to have crappy PC's/internet connections making large maps technically troublesome; low FPS, high ping times and the dreaded Fatal Error.

 

Solution: The whole "first flash-based online 3D action game" idea was a bad one to begin with. This is just too much for flash. So, TO can only tell players to either wait for the Unity version or get better PC/broadband.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Problem 2: Most players just want to rank up quickly and/or make as many crystals as possible, and the current progression and battle fund growth systems favor certain small/medium maps in this regard. For example, Polygon CP is the most efficient map where you can easily and quickly kill many enemy tanks, gain more exp. points, raise a large fund in a relatively short period of time, and catch a gold box as it has a greater chance of falling.

 

Solution: I did suggest that the system for calculating battle fund take into consideration the map that the battle is played on. This will make all maps - small, medium and large - just as efficient for fund raising. The exp. progression system can also incorporate what I called the Complexity Coefficient (CC), in order to make large maps as efficient as small ones in terms of progression. Gold Box drop chances should also be dependent on the CC. You can read my post here for more details.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Problem 3: Large maps require more team work and communication to win, which is usually very hard to find. On smaller maps, like Polygon and Silence you can win if you have another two or three good players on your team, but on Berlin you'll need at least 10 or more strong players to win. So when one side has many strong players (often a clan/friends) and the other side are a bunch of random uncooperative players this usually leads to most players on the weak side leaving the battle which then dies. This happens very often on large maps.

 

Solution: I suggested an improved fund distribution system that gives you a larger reward for your efforts even if your team loses. This will make players less frustrated and more confident in playing on large and unfamiliar maps knowing that their efforts will be efficiently rewarded regardless of the teammates they get stuck with. You can read more about my suggestion here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Problem 4: People instinctively choose things they are familiar with and prefer to stick to a certain routine that works for them rather than taking chances and trying new things out.

 

Solution: Developers can enforce diversity by implementing an automated matchmaking system to replace the current battle creation system. However, this matchmaker system should not be implemented before resolving the other problems mentioned above. You can read about the suggested matchmaker system here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have already read some of your previous suggestions and comments, and you make a lot of very good points.