valid New game mode: DM-TDM crossover

[wolverine848 13,097]

If you destroy a tank alone and your partnet(s) don't help you, you get 10 exp and +1 kill. They get nothing.

If you destroy a tank with your parnter, you get 30 exp distributed between you two (e.g. 18 and 12). Each of you get +1 kill. It's not that one tank give two kills, but you both get a kill because you both killed that one tank together.

If a third member also participates in the killing, they also get +1 kill. In that case there will be 45 exp distributed between the 3 of you.

Not really a fan of this... artificial kills total more than actual kills.

Same with Xp... A tank should be worth a fixed amount of xp.. split it however you want, but total should be same no matter how many are involved in the kill.

 

Not sure how you can "split" the kills, but again, killing one tank should not result in a kill for each participant.  4 smokys pounding on a mammoth = a kill each?  Seems like that can be exploited.

[Maf 32,300]

Not really a fan of this... artificial kills total more than actual kills.

But you do agree with situations where you deal 99% of damage to someone, but some stray shot from a Twins (who wasn't even aiming) hits your enemy and finishes him off, giving him the kill instead of you. Does that seem more like "actual kills"?

[wolverine848 13,097]

But you do agree with situations where you deal 99% of damage to someone, but some stray shot from a Twins (who wasn't even aiming) hits your enemy and finishes him off, giving him the kill instead of you. Does that seem more like "actual kills"?

I agree.  it is very frustrating when that happens.  Supposedly it evens out in long run... but is frustrating.

[Gray_Knight 2]

it would ruin the fun of dm

Edited July 5, 2017 by Gray_Knight

[TeaLeaves 12]

I thought the point for a "DM" is for players to kill each other (FFA) rather than team. If you wanna team, go to TDM, it is called "TEAM Death Match" for a reason mate


Also, i find teaming in FFA to be more of a nuisance and rather unfair than a good idea 

[CODY2AWESOME4U 20]

DM isn't the most popular game mode in this game and I think that's mostly because it simply isn't interesting enough at the moment since all you have to do is shoot and not get shot.

 

Players often try to make it more interesting for themselves by agreeing to team up with others and play together. However, such a system often annoys other players and causes conflicts in the battle chat.

 

My idea is to add an option to create "Alliances" in DM. Players, who dislike teams in DM can create/participate in battles with this option disabled, as it will be a tick box that players will select when creating the battle.

 

In the battle there would be a special button for teaming up in DM (you select a player in the list and send them a request to team up). Your request to team up will show up in the top-right corner of the person you wist to team up with, similar to an invitation notification. It will be possible to disable these notifications, making it impossible for others to send you an "alliance proposal". If they accept your request, the two of you will become an official team in that battle, which will change your gameplay in such a way that:

• Your weapons will deal 10-15% less damage to enemies
• You won't be able to damage each other
• If you destroy a tank together with your partner, you will get 30 xp points divided between you two depending on the damage each of you dealt (like in team battles)
• If the two of you completely kill an enemy tank from full HP, each of you will get a kill.
• If other players also dealt damage to the tank you were destroying, only the person dealing the final hit will get the kill.

Teams can be from 2 to 4 players and each additional player in the team will reduce the team's gun damage by another 10% and increase total score distributed per kill by 10 points. If there is an existing team of 2 or 3 players, any other players wishing to join will send a teaming request to either player in the existing alliance and both (or 2/3) players need to accept it to allow the other player into their alliance.

 

---

 

 

Example:

A Firebird, 40hp/s damage teams up with a Twins (15 hp/ball damage) and a Railgun (100 hp/shot damage) in a DM battle. Together they see a Mammoth with 300 hp and destroy him. Since there are three players in the alliance, their gun damage is reduced to 80%, so the Railgun deals 80 damage (one shot), the Twins deals 60 damage (5 shots, 12 damage per shot) and the Firebird deals 160 damage (5 seconds at 32hp/sec). Since there are three of them, the total number of points distributed for the kill is 40. The Firebird gets about 21 points for dealing 53% of the damage; the Railgun gets 11 points and Twins gets the remaining 8. Each player gets a kill added to their kill-count.

 

 

I believe such a system would make DM matches a lot more interesting and tactical, encouraging more players to enter them ,especially if they like to play with friends. This would be great for times when you want to play in a big battle with your friends, but you can't get 10 of them together to play CTF or TDM with all of you in one team, while playing with one friend and 9 random people usually doesn't end well. Instead, you would just enter a DM match and play together in a team against everyone else.

 

Idea originally appeared in this topic

 

Important: It will be possible to turn alliances off in battle customisation settings and play normal DM, if you wish to play alone and don't want to deal with teams.

Uhhh no. First of all this is what team deathmatch is for, why is tdm a mode then? Secondly, you said something about if 2 of the same aliance shoots 1 person and one of them then get the kill for it then on the scoreboard both of them do, then it could be ultimatly a tie for 1st every time then. Third of all, someone said it in a reply but deathmatch is suppose to be just that death match every man for himself if you want to play with a team but dont want an objective game mode go play team deathmatch.  Also, theres a big problem everyones missing, ima give you an example. Say theres 8 tankers in a dm ( bob, billy, eric, larry, jose, jason, cody, shane) what if bob starts an aliance with billy an jose, but jose also is in a aliance with cody and a aliance with jason and shane. You guys see what im saying? jose then would then only have 1 enemy larry. But, there is a counter argument for my statment, just simply only allow 1 allince then per person. But, haha i have the counter argument to that, what if cause you said an alliance can hold up to 4 people, so what if bob starts an aliance with billy, eric, and larry, and jose starts an aliance with jason, cody, shane. You see the big problem now, they just turned a DM into a TDM. So i ask again Why is tdm a mode then? 

[Maf 32,300]

Uhhh no. First of all this is what team deathmatch is for, why is tdm a mode then? 

This is to make DM more fun. Or, alternatively, it could be a second type of TDM.

 

Secondly, you said something about if 2 of the same aliance shoots 1 person and one of them then get the kill for it then on the scoreboard both of them do, then it could be ultimatly a tie for 1st every time then. 

So what? It's already possible to tie for first, so what's the problem with it happening more often? It's not like there's special rewards for first place.

 

what if bob starts an aliance with billy an jose, but jose also is in a aliance with cody and a aliance with jason and shane. 

It would be like clans. One player can only be in one alliance at one time. If bob sends an alliance request to jose, then jose would first have to leave his current alliance and join bob's one.

[D.a.n.t.e 475]

1. So what? It's already possible to tie for first, so what's the problem with it happening more often? It's not like there's special rewards for first place.

 

2. It would be like clans. One player can only be in one alliance at one time. If bob sends an alliance request to jose, then jose would first have to leave his current alliance and join bob's one.

1. 1st place missions. In a 4vs4, all 8 will be 1st place, and you know... game economy, and stuff...

 

2. That complicates things, how is the system going to figure out the rewards when you were in one team first, then switched to the other team. And what if you and your buddy are playing 1vs1 with fire and wasp for some contest, you both have lots of kills and the battle fund is big, then another player joins, maybe even a mult, and you and your buddy team up, 2vs1, and you share the big reward, what then?

[Maf 32,300]

1. 1st place missions. In a 4vs4, all 8 will be 1st place, and you know... game economy, and stuff...

 

2. That complicates things, how is the system going to figure out the rewards when you were in one team first, then switched to the other team. And what if you and your buddy are playing 1vs1 with fire and wasp for some contest, you both have lots of kills and the battle fund is big, then another player joins, maybe even a mult, and you and your buddy team up, 2vs1, and you share the big reward, what then?

I think you haven't thought about it that much. For first place missions it's pretty simple: If multiple players have equal kills, then the player who gets actual first place will be the one who has least deaths and was the first to get that number of kills. Besides, there won't even be that many situations where many players share the same number of kills because the only time you and your allies both get +1 for kills is when you both shoot and kill the same tank. In all other cases it works just like normal DM.

 

As for complicating things then the reward is straightforward. The teams you were on (or still are in) don't matter. All that matters is your final kill count. If you are playing 1v1 and then team up against a player, you won't really get a big reward since it's still a 2 or 3-player battle. Besides, you and your teammate will get -10% to your weapon damage, meaning that the third player has a better chance at killing you two and thus also getting a fair share of the fund.

 

And if everyone gets first place (same kills), then the fund will simply be distributed evenly among the players. No damage to the economy.

[Sword-of-Damocles 83]

 why would you want to team in DM mode when there are  team battles you can join instead. DM mode  is suppose to be rely  on yourself. 

[Shadowmaster2.o 125]

They are useless. Basically all of the topics and ideas in this sub-forum are useless, since the developers already have a long list of things they want to add to the game + the whole Unity version development. It will probably take them another 2-3 years to go through the whole list before they can go and look for more features to add.

I knew your not only your but every Idea and suggestion topics are useless now you've said it yourself and proven my point.

[Maf 32,300]

I knew your not only your but every Idea and suggestion topics are useless now you've said it yourself and proven my point.

I said that back in 2015. I no longer think the topics are useless, but it's true that developers have enough of their own ideas to be busy for months, if not years. But I am convinced that many of these topics do get seen and considered, so our efforts are not in vain.

[D.a.n.t.e 475]

I think you haven't thought about it that much. 

Probably.

 

But why not a suggestion for something like "Multiple Team Death Match" (MTDM), where the system functions like TDM but for more teams? And to prevent 2 teams from teaming up against a 3rd team, it shouldn't put friends or recent friends in more than 1 team, and you'll only get substantial points if you're targeting all teams equally.

 

And for DMs, that hopefully you'll leave it alone ;), you should only make substantial points if you are targeting all the other players. There's could also be numbers above enemy tanks indicating how many times you have kill those tanks, so you target those that you haven't killed or killed few times in order to get more points.

[RIDDLER_8 5,552]

We all know that Isida is a turret of double-action. Attack and Heal! This turret can heal team mates in team battles, so why not have it to also heal particular players that you choose to be team with you in DM mode?

 

In DM mode, I would like to see players have an option to choose to heal players on their chosen team side.

 

We all know that the rules of DM mode stands for "every man for himself", meaning you battle on your own "relying on your own skills"

 

Let me explain how this will work:

 

In DM mode, if you use Isida, you can recruit a certain amount of players to be on your team. When this happens, the green bar on the tank changes to red or blue, upon the team color you choose. Then, your DM mode players become your friends, so you can heal them in DM mode using Isida.

 

The number of players which Isida can recruit in DM mode will depend on the number of players in such battles.

 

For example, if a DM mode consists of 3 - 4 players, you can recruit 2 players. (Note that this will not work with 2 players DM battles because there are not enough players). If a DM mode has 5 - 6 players you can recruit 3, and so on.

 

If you are tired of recruiting players in DM mode, you can always un-recruit them, and recruit others.

 

I have seen such an amazing feature in GTA San Andreas where you can recruit the green Homies of your gang. So let's have a similar feature that works with Isida in DM mode in Tanki Online.

 

I think that this can be possible for Isida to heal players in DM mode, as well as attack enemies. Please consider this idea as valid, because Isida is a double-action turret made for the purpose of both attacking and healing. Isida is the only turret in Tanki Online which has the healing ability, so let's have it heal players in DM mode as well.

 

Thank you audience!

[Maf 32,300]

 

Topic merged

[Nicola_M 1,563]

Great, so Riddler suggests having alliances with Isidas in a DM.

Tell me again how that's not already managed with TDM?

Can anyone else not see how that would lead to an unfair advantage?

Edited November 14, 2017 by Nicola_M

[Maf 32,300]

Great, so Riddler suggests having alliances with Isidas in a DM.

Tell me again how that's not already managed with TDM?

Can anyone else not see how that would lead to an unfair advantage?

Read the first post of this idea. The difference is that DM alliances would allow more than two teams, with different numbers of players, but still balanced in relation to one another. So instead of a simple 10 vs 10 in a TDM, there could be 1 team of 4, 2 teams of 3, 4 teams of 2 and 2 single players, all playing against one another and still having equal power.

 

I feel like it would make for a fun game mode.

 

And obviously Isidas would be able to heal teammates in such alliances.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Read the first post of this idea. The difference is that DM alliances would allow more than two teams, with different numbers of players, but still balanced in relation to one another. So instead of a simple 10 vs 10 in a TDM, there could be 1 team of 4, 2 teams of 3, 4 teams of 2 and 2 single players, all playing against one another and still having equal power.

 

I feel like it would make for a fun game mode.

 

And obviously Isidas would be able to heal teammates in such alliances.

How is there equal power?  A team of 4 is 2x as strong as a team of 2. And they could easily have 2 isidas + 2 attackers. They would be invincible in comparison to the other teams.

 

And how long you think the single players would stick around?

 

This idea, if implemented, should be a new battle-mode.  I don't think it can be fairly applied to the current DM battle-mode.

[Maf 32,300]

How is there equal power?  A team of 4 is 2x as strong as a team of 2. And they could easily have 2 isidas + 2 attackers. They would be invincible in comparison to the other teams.

 

And how long you think the single players would stick around?

 

This idea, if implemented, should be a new battle-mode.  I don't think it can be fairly applied to the current DM battle-mode.

Did you even read the post you quoted? It says "read the first post". And if you read the first post, you'll find that it says:

 

Your weapons will deal 10-15% less damage to enemies

Meaning that if you team up with other players, you get bonus EXP and ability to work together, but individually you will be weaker than other players in the same game, who are playing alone or in a smaller alliance. The 10-15% is just an example, if the feature would actually get implemented, it would be balanced properly.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Did you even read the post you quoted? It says "read the first post". And if you read the first post, you'll find that it says:

 

Meaning that if you team up with other players, you get bonus EXP and ability to work together, but individually you will be weaker than other players in the same game, who are playing alone or in a smaller alliance. The 10-15% is just an example, if the feature would actually get implemented, it would be balanced properly.

Why do you assume I did not read the original post? :huh:

 

I just don't think your concept will work in a DM match.

Have a new battle-mode that people can enter and maybe it works. Bur the original DM mode needs to be kept as is.

 

IMHO.

[Maf 32,300]

 

Yeah, that I can't disagree with. Seems like like a separate game mode, than DM. Either way, whether it's a battle setting or a separate game mode, it would never actually replace current DM mode.

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

Edit: Bad idea.

Edited November 14, 2017 by r_Issimo2

[Widow-Maker 60]

Still sounds like TDM. What's the difference between TDM and DMT? 

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

Still sounds like TDM. What's the difference between TDM and DMT? 

With TDM you have to deal with Autobalance and Autofinish, with this you and your Clan can join and team up to beat up a team of 3 and the other noobs that didn't team up.

 

Riddler is so funny.

[Widow-Maker 60]

With TDM you have to deal with Autobalance and Autofinish, with this you and your Clan can join and team up to beat up a team of 3 and the other noobs that didn't team up.

 

Riddler is so funny.

As proposed by OP, those who have teamed up cannot damage nor destroy each other. As you put it, it sounds like one team is playing TDM and the other is playing DM. Two different battle modes in the same battle. If both teams team up, then it's no longer DM but TDM.