category Ideas for Missions!

FrozenRailgun · June 23, 2019

I am aware top 3 mission did discourage tankers and makes them less motivated.

What do you mean by penalized? You cannot guarantee matchmaking will put you into winning team though.

A Penalty is something you give up or lose. Like being the #1 player in a game - but losing completion of your "Top-3" mission because the rest of the players on your team suck. The better a player is, the more likely they'll be stuck on a team with players who suck. But a great player with two crummy players isn't the same as three average players.

Your word choice "penalize" does not make sense. If the game really have penalty on losing, that would be decreasing mission progress.

Mission progress IS decreased. Despite being nearly twice as good as the best player on the other team, your top-rank finish doesn't outweigh the fact that MatchMaker stuck you on a crappy team.

"They follow Soviet model. They will tell YOU what you are going to want..." I do not understand this statement

It's simple. You have no choice - and that's your choice.

"With MM..... that's impossible." That created biases. Keep going to have winning team will put those who are losing team more disadvantaged.

What the hell is with you and "biases"? I'm talking about people having so much fun in a battle that they want to play the game again with the same team! And then THAT game was so great, they wanted to play AGAIN! AND AGAIN! AND AGAIN! It was

THE VERY BEST OF TANKI

- now made impossible by MatchMaker.

For me, without matchmaking, there would still be armies of Shafts in Highways. Now whenever I am in Highways, usually I am the only Shaft. I am grateful MM existed because... less Shaft means less Eagle modules to deal with.

So what? If you don't like Highways, don't play Highways. Except with MatchMaker, you have to wait... and wait... and wait... to find out MatchMaker has stuffed you in Highways (which you don't want to play) so you quit. Taking away the choice of map was Tanki being stupid and indifferent to players.

What you REALLY like about Highways is it gives you a bias over everyone else... which is what you've been complaining about. In other words, as long as it's good for you - it's good. But if it's bad for you, then you don't really care if it's good for everyone else. What you like about Highways is that with a shaft, everyone else is just a target for you. You like it because it's uneven. Because you have the best tool for the job - and with MatchMaker, by your own words, others do not. So why not just have a map where only YOU have ammuniition and no one else can shoot back. It's pretty much the same thing. What you really do NOT want is the challenge of someone else with the same equipment YOU have shooting BACK at you! You want MAXIMUM BIAS in your favor!

Again, only playing CTF will take 1 month or even longer time to get the mission done. I know you only like CTF, but getting the mission done is much more crucial.

I don't appreciate you lying like that. I never said I only like CTF. I just don't like games where the most important factors are armor, rate of fire, impact, damage, protection - and skill, planning, strategy don't matter at all. Unfortunately, you get a LOT of that when you pile 16 players on a map. You get even more of it when they're all shooting each other - as in Deathmatch or Juggernaut. And doing things like making navigation easier by widening the paths as in Brest and removing the craters on Massacre just took out the characteristics that made those maps interesting. I used to really like Massacre. Now? It sucks.

But getting Alternativa listening to us is difficult. I supported MM because for me, it is more fair. At the same time what MMSUX said.... makes me want to combine the current characteristic of the game with the old Tanki.

You don't support MatchMaker because it's more fair.

You support MatchMaker because you're not a very good player and it's more biased for your style of play.

“It's simple. You have no choice - and that's your choice.” Oh.....

“What the hell is with you and "biases"? I'm talking about people having so much fun in a battle that they want to play the game again with the same team! And then THAT game was so great, they wanted to play AGAIN! AND AGAIN! AND AGAIN! It was impossible by matchmaking.” But then... keep on winning will be boring. Unless you used REAL skills and cooperation to capture the flag, ending your team having 5 flags victory is the real fun.

Word choice “AGAIN! AND AGAIN!!.....” You just render that argument obsolete.

“So what? If you don't like Highways, don't play Highways. Except with MatchMaker, you have to wait... and wait... and wait... to find out MatchMaker has stuffed you in Highways (which you don't want to play) so you quit. Taking away the choice of map was Tanki being stupid and indifferent to players.” I do not mind any map that matchmaking dump me into. As long as the battle is not a blowout, I’m ok with the map.

“What you REALLY like about Highways is it gives you a bias over everyone else... which is what you've been complaining about. In other words, as long as it's good for you - it's good. But if it's bad for you, then you don't really care if it's good for everyone else. What you like about Highways is that with a shaft, everyone else is just a target for you. You like it because it's uneven. Because you have the best tool for the job - and with MatchMaker, by your own words, others do not. So why not just have a map where only YOU have ammuniition and no one else can shoot back. It's pretty much the same thing. What you really do NOT want is the challenge of someone else with the same equipment YOU have shooting BACK at you! You want MAXIMUM BIAS in your favor!” I apologize for that statement I made, I do admit I was biased within that claim I made. I use other combination than just Hornet-Shaft in Highways. I used Striker, Thunder and Isida in that map. There are time I was disappointed within that map, other time a huge success. One time I was in Highways DM, me using my signature Hull-turret combination, sitting in the top center bridge sniping tanks left and right (where everyone can see me) and ended up getting 22 kills 4 deaths. Camping? I did, in a spot everyone that they would attack me. Hull? Hornet ( before the Overdrive update). Other time.... ended up getting 9 kills 15 deaths.

“I don't appreciate you lying like that. I never said I only like CTF. I just don't like games where the most important factors are armor, rate of fire, impact, damage, protection - and skill, planning, strategy don't matter at all. Unfortunately, you get a LOT of that when you pile 16 players on a map. You get even more of it when they're all shooting each other - as in Deathmatch or Juggernaut. And doing things like making navigation easier by widening the paths as in Brest and removing the craters on Massacre just took out the characteristics that made those maps interesting. I used to really like Massacre. Now? It sucks.” But you spent no hours and earnt no exp @ Juggernaut. While you wasn’t 200k exp via DM. I did not mean to lie though, that I back then only factored the #of hr you spent on top 1 mode.

“You don't support MatchMaker because it's more fair.

You support MatchMaker because you're not a very good player and it's more biased for your style of play.” I support matchmaking b/c it allows random assignments, eliminate any possible biases. At the mean time.... when time and flap requirement significantly reduced, turning the tide is not possible anymore. And plus, I don’t get to always play Highways @ matchmaking.

N88B · June 24, 2019

“It's simple. You have no choice - and that's your choice.” Oh.....

“What the hell is with you and "biases"? I'm talking about people having so much fun in a battle that they want to play the game again with the same team! And then THAT game was so great, they wanted to play AGAIN! AND AGAIN! AND AGAIN! It was impossible by matchmaking.” But then... keep on winning will be boring. Unless you used REAL skills and cooperation to capture the flag, ending your team having 5 flags victory is the real fun.

You're really not very bright, are you? Or are you just being fundamentally dishonest? I said nothing about WINNING every game. In fact, my emphasis was on BOTH sides, ALL the players having so much fun in a VERY EVEN game, that, whether they won or lost, they wanted to play again. All the players on BOTH teams decided to play again. And again. And again. Because it was the

VERY BEST OF TANKI

Of course, some noob who spends all his time looking through the scope of a shaft probably doesn't get that. They don't move. They don't see most of the game. For them there's no strategy. They just hope no one attacks from a blind spot (which is pretty much everywhere.) It's like they live their "life" at the bottom of a well. Nothing changes for them.

Word choice “AGAIN! AND AGAIN!!.....” You just render that argument obsolete.

Sorry, but in English, that doesn't mean anything.

“So what? If you don't like Highways, don't play Highways. Except with MatchMaker, you have to wait... and wait... and wait... to find out MatchMaker has stuffed you in Highways (which you don't want to play) so you quit. Taking away the choice of map was Tanki being stupid and indifferent to players.” I do not mind any map that matchmaking dump me into. As long as the battle is not a blowout, I’m ok with the map.

Except you prefer Highways because it's the best for shaft... which means it's the best for you. And be honest - MatchMaker didn't do ANYTHING to prevent games from being blowouts. I've had opposing teams with plays EIGHT LEVELS higher than me. Nothing I could even do to them. But just because you don't care doesn't mean others don't. I sort of feel sorry for short-range weapon users who wind up on a long range map. Sure, you could go change your turret, but if you do, you miss about 20% of the game. So all that time MatchMaker made you WASTE waiting to get into the game is just the beginning. Now you get to waste time getting the right equipment set up. You have to change a turret, you change protections to match, maybe you even change the hull. And then the game is over. But you don't care because your idea of "playing" Tanki is to sit and look through a telescope.

“What you REALLY like about Highways is it gives you a bias over everyone else... which is what you've been complaining about. In other words, as long as it's good for you - it's good. But if it's bad for you, then you don't really care if it's good for everyone else. What you like about Highways is that with a shaft, everyone else is just a target for you. You like it because it's uneven. Because you have the best tool for the job - and with MatchMaker, by your own words, others do not. So why not just have a map where only YOU have ammuniition and no one else can shoot back. It's pretty much the same thing. What you really do NOT want is the challenge of someone else with the same equipment YOU have shooting BACK at you! You want MAXIMUM BIAS in your favor!” I apologize for that statement I made, I do admit I was biased within that claim I made. I use other combination than just Hornet-Shaft in Highways. I used Striker, Thunder and Isida in that map. There are time I was disappointed within that map, other time a huge success. One time I was in Highways DM, me using my signature Hull-turret combination, sitting in the top center bridge sniping tanks left and right (where everyone can see me) and ended up getting 22 kills 4 deaths. Camping? I did, in a spot everyone that they would attack me. Hull? Hornet ( before the Overdrive update). Other time.... ended up getting 9 kills 15 deaths.

No need to apologize for the TRUTH. I don't really care if you prefer to play on one map or another. That should be your choice. For most of the existence of Tanki it WAS your choice. Then Tanki implemented MatchMaker and took away your choice. And that's when a LOT of people left - because people LIKE choice. And in every case - every single one - from what map you play to what you eat for dinner - every single choice is based on some kind of bias. I don't care if your preference is shaft or firebird, or racing across the map or camping. That's all part of the game. But there was NO REASON to take away the choice of map. It was a stupid decision. And here's the proof:

Suppose you want to play Highways. The old system would let you see all the games, who was playing and what the score was. Lots of people would just join the winning team. With MatchMaker you can't see any of that and you get dumped in some pretty stupid situations, like on a map you don't want to play, with the wrong equipment, in the last minutes with your team down by 4-0 and missing 3 players. The game is OVER - but MatchMaker still wasted you time and dumped you on it. We still have mults, because Tanki keeps trying to FORCE people to stay till the end of the game - even when it's hopeless. So people log in and sit and do nothing because their mission says, "finish 3 deathmatch games" or "use 3 overdrives". So they click for Deathmatch, and they just sit there and do nothing.

What Tanki COULD have done is something like, show all the games that have openings for your rank, show the maps and remaining time, and what the score is. But if you join, you don't know which team it's going to put you on. That way if you go around looking for 14-0 CTF games, that's fine - but you could get put on the losing side. You would STILL have the choice of map, and could STILL choose to only join games that have a certain amount of time remaining, and you could STILL set up your equipment to match your choice of game type and map. You just wouldn't be able to "pile on" to a losing team. And because you can join the game at any point, the long waiting time MatchMaker creates would go away. Maybe you prefer waiting 2 and a half minutes for a game to start. I don't.

“I don't appreciate you lying like that. I never said I only like CTF. I just don't like games where the most important factors are armor, rate of fire, impact, damage, protection - and skill, planning, strategy don't matter at all. Unfortunately, you get a LOT of that when you pile 16 players on a map. You get even more of it when they're all shooting each other - as in Deathmatch or Juggernaut. And doing things like making navigation easier by widening the paths as in Brest and removing the craters on Massacre just took out the characteristics that made those maps interesting. I used to really like Massacre. Now? It sucks.” But you spent no hours and earnt no exp @ Juggernaut. While you wasn’t 200k exp via DM. I did not mean to lie though, that I back then only factored the #of hr you spent on top 1 mode.

How many hours have you spent sticking needles in your eyes? Have you done it at least 30 times? How do you know you won't like it? How do you know it's not a GOOD thing? That's how I feel about DM and Juggernaut. I've had enough experience to know I generally don't want to play them. Sometimes I do. But very seldom.

“You don't support MatchMaker because it's more fair.

You support MatchMaker because you're not a very good player and it's more biased for your style of play.” I support matchmaking b/c it allows random assignments, eliminate any possible biases. At the mean time.... when time and flap requirement significantly reduced, turning the tide is not possible anymore. And plus, I don’t get to always play Highways @ matchmaking.

Again, every part of that is nonsense. There is nothing inherently good about "random". Want proof?

Tell me how you would feel about MatchMaker RANDOMLY assigning you the hull, turret, protections, drones and paint each game. In one game you get an m4 shaft on a hornet hull, but most of the time you get an M0 Smoky on an M2 Titan hull or an M4 Magnum on an M0 Wasp. With 7 hulls and 14 turrets, only one time out of every 98 games would you even get a Hornet/Shaft combination. But it would be random. No bias. Is that what you want?

I've already addressed bias. The only reason you have an opinion on anything is BECAUSE you have bias. But as I've said before, all MatchMaker did was take away your CHOICE. It didn't eliminate any bias.

Edited June 24, 2019 by N88B

FrozenRailgun · June 24, 2019

You're really not very bright, are you? Or are you just being fundamentally dishonest? I said nothing about WINNING every game. In fact, my emphasis was on BOTH sides, ALL the players having so much fun in a VERY EVEN game, that, whether they won or lost, they wanted to play again. All the players on BOTH teams decided to play again. And again. And again. Because it was the ....

Of course, some noob who spends all his time looking through the scope of a Shaft probably doesn't get that. They don't move. They don't see most of the game. For them there's no strategy. They just hope no one attacks from a blind spot (which is pretty much everywhere.) It's like they live their "life" at the bottom of a well. Nothing changes for them.

Sorry, but in English, that doesn't mean anything.

Except you prefer Highways because it's the best for Shaft... which means it's the best for you. And be honest - MatchMaker didn't do ANYTHING to prevent games from being blowouts. I've had opposing teams with plays EIGHT LEVELS higher than me. Nothing I could even do to them. But just because you don't care doesn't mean others don't. I sort of feel sorry for short-range weapon users who wind up on a long range map. Sure, you could go change your turret, but if you do, you miss about 20% of the game. So all that time MatchMaker made you WASTE waiting to get into the game is just the beginning. Now you get to waste time getting the right equipment set up. You have to change a turret, you change protections to match, maybe you even change the hull. And then the game is over. But you don't care because your idea of "playing" Tanki is to sit and look through a telescope.

No need to apologize for the TRUTH. I don't really care if you prefer to play on one map or another. That should be your choice. For most of the existence of Tanki it WAS your choice. Then Tanki implemented MatchMaker and took away your choice. And that's when a LOT of people left - because people LIKE choice. And in every case - every single one - from what map you play to what you eat for dinner - every single choice is based on some kind of bias. I don't care if your preference is Shaft or Firebird, or racing across the map or camping. That's all part of the game. But there was NO REASON to take away the choice of map. It was a stupid decision. And here's the proof:

Suppose you want to play Highways. The old system would let you see all the games, who was playing and what the score was. Lots of people would just join the winning team. With MatchMaker you can't see any of that and you get dumped in some pretty stupid situations, like on a map you don't want to play, with the wrong equipment, in the last minutes with your team down by 4-0 and missing 3 players. The game is OVER - but MatchMaker still wasted you time and dumped you on it. We still have mults, because Tanki keeps trying to FORCE people to stay till the end of the game - even when it's hopeless. So people log in and sit and do nothing because their mission says, "finish 3 Deathmatch games" or "use 3 overdrives". So they click for Deathmatch, and they just sit there and do nothing.

What Tanki COULD have done is something like, show all the games that have openings for your rank, show the maps and remaining time, and what the score is. But if you join, you don't know which team it's going to put you on. That way if you go around looking for 14-0 CTF games, that's fine - but you could get put on the losing side. You would STILL have the choice of map, and could STILL choose to only join games that have a certain amount of time remaining, and you could STILL set up your equipment to match your choice of game type and map. You just wouldn't be able to "pile on" to a losing team. And because you can join the game at any point, the long waiting time MatchMaker creates would go away. Maybe you prefer waiting 2 and a half minutes for a game to start. I don't.

How many hours have you spent sticking needles in your eyes? Have you done it at least 30 times? How do you know you won't like it? How do you know it's not a GOOD thing? That's how I feel about DM and Juggernaut. I've had enough experience to know I generally don't want to play them. Sometimes I do. But very seldom.

Again, every part of that is nonsense. There is nothing inherently good about "random". Want proof?

Tell me how you would feel about MatchMaker RANDOMLY assigning you the hull, turret, protections, drones and paint each game. In one game you get an m4 shaft on a hornet hull, but most of the time you get an M0 Smoky on an M2 Titan hull or an M4 Magnum on an M0 Wasp. With 7 hulls and 14 turrets, only one time out of every 98 games would you even get a Hornet/Shaft combination. But it would be random. No bias. Is that what you want?

I've already addressed bias. The only reason you have an opinion on anything is BECAUSE you have bias. But as I've said before, all MatchMaker did was take away your CHOICE. It didn't eliminate any bias.

That part I agree.

That's campin' Shaft, mobile Shaft need more skills.

I did not notice, and my native language is not English though.

Alright, that was biased in my own word b/c "I only like Highways". But again, I do not mind what map matchmaking dump me too. I do understand it did not prevent blowout battles, I experienced them myself when playing team battle. I faced Commander a rank ago and he did not get to dominate the battle, but a Major General did.

So if the battle choice returns.... tankers may stay in the game longer and maybe. Those who quitted the game may come back if the choice return?

Back then, I do not wanted to play Highways. "Lot of tankers would just join the winning team." Now that's biased. Only wanted to join winning team, nope. However you are right about "your team down by 4-0 and missing 3 tankers." MM is a double-edged sword.

I do not either.

I literally said, CHOICE is absolutely biased. Period.

N88B · June 24, 2019

CHOICE is absolutely biased. Period.

Your choice to play shaft is bias! You must stop immediately! :P

Look at what MatchMaker does:

1) Takes away choice of map,

2) Wastes LOTS of time waiting for battles to start,

3) Wastes a LOT MORE time every time it FAILS (which is about 15% of the time),

4) Introduces bad software bugs,

5) After it wastes your time getting into a game, it wastes your time on battles that were almost over,

6) ... and battles that can not be won.

7 ) Eliminates "repeat" battles with the same teams - which were the absolute VERY BEST OF TANKI !!!

8) Gets lots of people to quit playing Tanki

9) Increases server load because every map has to be downloaded every game.

Three things MatchMaker did NOT do:

10) Eliminate mults,

11) Eliminate blowout battles,

12) Get people to stop quitting in the middle of a battle.

But MY suggestion was just to change "Top 3 on winning team" missions to "Top 3" missions because you can outscore everyone on both teams by more than 50% and STILL not complete the mission because your TEAM sucks and they FAILED. YOU succeeded. You did better than ANYONE in the game. But you don't get credit because MATCHMAKER put you on a team of losers.

As for MatchMaker, letting people choose their own maps and battles, and even knowing the score and time remaining is fine. Just don't let them pick which team they want to be on. That's simple - and it doesn't involve all of the stupid things that MatchMaker does now.

Personally, I think the scoring should be changed a bit too. Like if you're the top player, your scores are all tripled. If you're a 2-3 player, maybe they're doubled. And if you finish 4-6, they're increased by 50%. And that should be regardless of which team you're on.

Edited June 24, 2019 by N88B

FrozenRailgun · June 25, 2019

Your choice to play shaft is bias! You must stop immediately! :P

Look at what MatchMaker does:

1) Takes away choice of map,

2) Wastes LOTS of time waiting for battles to start,

3) Wastes a LOT MORE time every time it FAILS (which is about 15% of the time),

4) Introduces bad software bugs,

5) After it wastes your time getting into a game, it wastes your time on battles that were almost over,

6) ... and battles that can not be won.

7 ) Eliminates "repeat" battles with the same teams - which were the absolute VERY BEST OF TANKI !!!

8) Gets lots of people to quit playing Tanki

9) Increases server load because every map has to be downloaded every game.

Three things MatchMaker did NOT do:

10) Eliminate mults,

11) Eliminate blowout battles,

12) Get people to stop quitting in the middle of a battle.

But MY suggestion was just to change "Top 3 on winning team" missions to "Top 3" missions because you can outscore everyone on both teams by more than 50% and STILL not complete the mission because your TEAM sucks and they FAILED. YOU succeeded. You did better than ANYONE in the game. But you don't get credit because MATCHMAKER put you on a team of losers.

As for MatchMaker, letting people choose their own maps and battles, and even knowing the score and time remaining is fine. Just don't let them pick which team they want to be on. That's simple - and it doesn't involve all of the stupid things that MatchMaker does now.

Personally, I think the scoring should be changed a bit too. Like if you're the top player, your scores are all tripled. If you're a 2-3 player, maybe they're doubled. And if you finish 4-6, they're increased by 50%. And that should be regardless of which team you're on.

Super funny, what about your Magnum and Thunder too? :rolleyes:

WTH? The repeat battle with same team is the worst. And it has to go. Nope.

I agree that part though.

wolverine848 · June 25, 2019

Your choice to play shaft is bias! You must stop immediately! :P

Look at what MatchMaker does:

1) Takes away choice of map,

2) Wastes LOTS of time waiting for battles to start,

3) Wastes a LOT MORE time every time it FAILS (which is about 15% of the time),

4) Introduces bad software bugs,

5) After it wastes your time getting into a game, it wastes your time on battles that were almost over,

6) ... and battles that can not be won.

7 ) Eliminates "repeat" battles with the same teams - which were the absolute VERY BEST OF TANKI !!!

8) Gets lots of people to quit playing Tanki

9) Increases server load because every map has to be downloaded every game.

Three things MatchMaker did NOT do:

10) Eliminate mults,

11) Eliminate blowout battles,

12) Get people to stop quitting in the middle of a battle.

But MY suggestion was just to change "Top 3 on winning team" missions to "Top 3" missions because you can outscore everyone on both teams by more than 50% and STILL not complete the mission because your TEAM sucks and they FAILED. YOU succeeded. You did better than ANYONE in the game. But you don't get credit because MATCHMAKER put you on a team of losers.

As for MatchMaker, letting people choose their own maps and battles, and even knowing the score and time remaining is fine. Just don't let them pick which team they want to be on. That's simple - and it doesn't involve all of the stupid things that MatchMaker does now.

Personally, I think the scoring should be changed a bit too. Like if you're the top player, your scores are all tripled. If you're a 2-3 player, maybe they're doubled. And if you finish 4-6, they're increased by 50%. And that should be regardless of which team you're on.

Would not be conducive to good team play.

Players would not be willing to take an extra death while blocking to let flag-carrier get away. Things of that nature...

TheCongoSpider · June 25, 2019

Personally, I think the scoring should be changed a bit too. Like if you're the top player, your scores are all tripled. If you're a 2-3 player, maybe they're doubled. And if you finish 4-6, they're increased by 50%. And that should be regardless of which team you're on.

Ok, so how will this work at the start of the battle? The players at the top of each team at the start of the battle are the first players to be put in that battle. If they get a kill, they would get 45 score. That is a big jump and if they get another one, I would go to 90 score. So I, as a Shaft, would get the first kill and then I'd comfortably stay in 1st place because I got that first big boost ahead of my allies. If I get ten kills, I'd have 450 score (assuming that I didn't get any assists). This would just make the players that have M3 equipment while playing with M1s score even more points. They'd almost guaranteed top the scoreboard and no one can compete with them.

I'm not sure if the battle fund adds a particular number of crystals to it pertaining to the rank of the player that was killed anymore, but if it does, then you just unnecessarily inflated the scoring system when there was no need to.

ZivOfficial · June 26, 2019

Daily: Kill the juggernaut 1 time (3rd mission slot) (hard)

Weekly: Kill the Juggernaut 5/10 times

Pretty tough tbh

Edited June 26, 2019 by ZivOfficial

N88B · June 27, 2019

Super funny, what about your Magnum and Thunder too? :rolleyes:

WTH? The repeat battle with same team is the worst. And it has to go. Nope.

I agree that part though.

Like This

What? You are so full of excrement your EYES are brown!

Super funny, what about your Magnum and Thunder too? :rolleyes:

WTH? The repeat battle with same team is the worst. And it has to go. Nope.

I agree that part though.

Look, I'm talking about FULL TEAMS that stay to play a rematch.

If ANYONE on EITHER team wasn't having fun, they'd leave.

Sometimes we'd get games that were so good that for 3-4-5 times in a row NO ONE would leave. And that's when games were 15 minutes long. That's like playing 10 games in a row WITH THE SAME TEAMS today.

Eventually a couple people from each team might leave - had to use the bathroom? Had to eat (or starve to death?) Had to do homework. But they were not leaving because the game wasn't FUN. They weren't leaving because MatchMaker had thrown them into some CRAP game with hugely log-sided teams, a wildly uneven score and only seconds to play.

They were staying because they were starting to experience TEAM WORK, and the game was REALLY CLOSE.

And that's what makes you less than half-way intelligent --- because what you CLAIM you want is a competitive game - and every once in a while you really got that in the OLD Tanki. But now? Hardly ever. Now it's just "shoot and shoot and shoot". Screw planning. Screw teamwork. It's all tactical (nothing is strategic) and everything works in a 3-second window.

See, this is what MatchMaker PROMISED, but NEVER (ever EVER) delivered. GREAT battles. Hardly ever happens in MatchMaker.

MatchMaker is a con - a ruse - a cheat - a lie. It's a prostitute instead of your true love.

It pretends to bring good things - but it actually PREVENTS the best things.

Even though I know you're the kind of half-player who likes to sit behind a Shaft scope and shoot people 10000 yards away, and that's all you will ever be - even at THAT - if you ever enjoyed a game and thought, "Wow! I wish I could do that AGAIN!" Well, MatchMaker makes sure you cannot.

MatchMaker is pustulence. MatchMaker is a cesspool. And YOU are not very smart (or maybe, just a coward) if you can't figure out the difference.

Because here's the thing to remember: EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE PLAYERS COULD HAVE LEFT AND FOUND ANOTHER GAME. But they CHOSE ***NOT*** to! EVERY SINGLE ONE CHOSE TO STAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All MatchMaker does is cheat players by taking away the choice.

And if you cannot understand that, then you are not smart enough for me to waste my time on anymore.

Edited June 27, 2019 by N88B

N88B · June 27, 2019

Would not be conducive to good team play.

Players would not be willing to take an extra death while blocking to let flag-carrier get away. Things of that nature...

Ok, so how will this work at the start of the battle? The players at the top of each team at the start of the battle are the first players to be put in that battle. If they get a kill, they would get 45 score. That is a big jump and if they get another one, I would go to 90 score. So I, as a Shaft, would get the first kill and then I'd comfortably stay in 1st place because I got that first big boost ahead of my allies. If I get ten kills, I'd have 450 score (assuming that I didn't get any assists). This would just make the players that have M3 equipment while playing with M1s score even more points. They'd almost guaranteed top the scoreboard and no one can compete with them.

I'm not sure if the battle fund adds a particular number of crystals to it pertaining to the rank of the player that was killed anymore, but if it does, then you just unnecessarily inflated the scoring system when there was no need to.

All scores as they work now.

At the end of the game, top score is tripled.

2nd and 3d place scores are doubled.

4th and 5th place are 1.5x

After that - no bonus.

Is it really THAT hard to figure out? Or are you being deliberately dense?

Daily: Kill the juggernaut 1 time (3rd mission slot) (hard)

Weekly: Kill the Juggernaut 5/10 times

Pretty tough tbh

Just skip the mission. Like the stupid "play X times" and "use Y overdrives".

Dumb missions - the only purpose of which is to make you play more games.

Rewards for NO SKILLS

TheCongoSpider · June 27, 2019

All scores as they work now.

At the end of the game, top score is tripled.

2nd and 3d place scores are doubled.

4th and 5th place are 1.5x

After that - no bonus.

Is it really THAT hard to figure out? Or are you being deliberately dense?

Is it a case where I'm too meticulous, or did you not put enough thought into creating your idea and wording your post?

You said nothing about it being increased at the end of the battle. You just stated that the scoring system should be increased with those parameters you've set. That wording gives the idea that it happens throughout the battle. Now that you have explained it more clearly, my response still stands as the appropriate response.

I'm not sure if the battle fund adds a particular number of crystals to it pertaining to the rank of the player that was killed anymore, but if it does, then you just unnecessarily inflated the scoring system when there was no need to.

^ ^ ^ ^

There is no reason to implement your idea. Your idea gives unnecessary extra work for the game at the end of the battle. There is no reason to increase the scoring at the end of the battle for those positions because at the end of the day, the players would still end up in the same position. They aren't going to magically jump over each other in the leaderboard. Did you think this through thoroughly?

RIDDLER_8 · June 27, 2019

Catch up on skipped daily missions and skipped daily missions counter

Hello everyone. I did not post ideas for quite some time now. Well, I was always playing Tanki Online and completing my daily missions every day, as well as always completing weekly missions as well.

I have a good suggestion about adding missing information that Tanki Online lacks, especially in daily missions that players did not complete. For example, when players do not complete or fail to complete their daily missions as usual, there would be a daily counter where players would be able to catch up on their missed daily missions along with the current missions of the day.

A good example of this that I have in mind is if you skip completing daily missions for a number of days, weeks, months or even years, the players can catch up by completing them at the same time as they complete their daily missions of the current day they complete them.

That works by adding up all the total daily mission rewards together and also making missions a bit harder due to larger rewards. The larger rewards only consist of the daily mission rewards that players skipped to complete. Catching up on daily missions makes sense and also its a good idea to have a daily mission counter that shows up in your daily missions menu to indicate how many days you have skipped completing daily missions. The daily missions counter would only start counting when you skipped one or more of your daily missions.

Please do not merge this topic with any other because its my original idea.

Thank you.

wolverine848 · June 27, 2019

All scores as they work now.

At the end of the game, top score is tripled.

2nd and 3d place scores are doubled.

4th and 5th place are 1.5x

After that - no bonus.

Is it really THAT hard to figure out? Or are you being deliberately dense?

Just skip the mission. Like the stupid "play X times" and "use Y overdrives".

Dumb missions - the only purpose of which is to make you play more games.

Rewards for NO SKILLS

You quoted my response "Would not be conducive to good team play." but did not address it. Your idea widens the gap between 1st and 2/3 and 4th. Players then have more incentive to play for themselves, not the team.

"Dumb missions - the only purpose of which is to make you play more games."

I'm not a fan of JUG and cetainly would not do those missions but...TO wants more players in battles. Nothing wrong with having some missions that rewards players for participating = filling up the teams. More players = less waiting time.

Also, you are starting to be rude in your response. If you want people to ignore you, then you're on the right track.

Maf · June 27, 2019

Please do not merge this topic with any other because its my original idea.

It's not really original - a lot of people suggested various ways to avoid missing out on missions if you didn't have time to complete it. This topic will stay for a few days, but it will be merged into "Ideas for Daily Missions" once it becomes inactive.

RIDDLER_8 · June 27, 2019

OK. But please don't delete any text. My suggestion here will help developers get some ideas for future updates on daily missions.

By the way, when will the "Main" missions tab be available?

N88B · June 28, 2019

You quoted my response "Would not be conducive to good team play." but did not address it. Your idea widens the gap between 1st and 2/3 and 4th. Players then have more incentive to play for themselves, not the team.

"Dumb missions - the only purpose of which is to make you play more games."

I'm not a fan of JUG and cetainly would not do those missions but...TO wants more players in battles. Nothing wrong with having some missions that rewards players for participating = filling up the teams. More players = less waiting time.

Also, you are starting to be rude in your response. If you want people to ignore you, then you're on the right track.

Okay, for starters then, we will consider all other issues HAVE been addressed - and you admit I am correct.

As for "conducive to team play", the biggest motivation for THAT was back when the winning team got a huge bonus and the losing team got diddley. People really did not like that. Why? Because they could play great, and Tanki would penalize them for being on a team of suck-wind players. That's EXACTLY the same problem with the "top-3 on the winning team" mission.

In general, there's very little incentive NOW to play for the "team". MatchMaker destroyed it. You get dumped in a game where you don't know anyone, maybe on a map you don't want to play, with the wrong equipment, down by an insurmountable lead with less than 2 minutes to go. The games are too short to develop any strategy. There are too many players to coordinate anything. It's just shoot-shoot-shoot and try to stay alive. If you think about anyone else on your team at all, it's for a maximum of 3 seconds - like sharing an overdrive, or blocking an attacker. So there's almost no team work left to begin with. Anyone who tries rarely has a teammate "get" it.

The one last holdover from the days of big bonuses for being put on the winning team is the requirement that the "top 3" requirement can only be met by being randomly deposited on the winning team by MatchMaker. They might as well start out with, "Get MatchMaker to put you on the winning team... and while there, be one of the top 3 players on that team".

Seriously, what's the difference between being #1 on the winning team and #1 on the losing team? If you have the same score, there's basically no difference (score wise) so no incentive for your team to win. The only scoring incentive is for you to do well personally. Generally, aren't the activities that are good for the individual good for the team? Who does a better job for the team? The guy who kills 40 enemies? Or the one who kills 1? The guy who scores 5 flags? Or the guy who scores none? The incentive to do well is baked in. What you do NOT get, is points for hindering your own team. So if I have a choice between preventing someone on my team from scoring a flag (to keep their score down) I probably just wasted my chance to kill 2, or 3 enemies - further raising my score. Anyone who spends most of their time trying to prevent teammates from scoring isn't going to spend much time in the top three to begin with. But suppose you're right. Suppose you have the top score, and the guy who is #2 in on your team and he's racing for a goal and you trip him up and he gets destroyed. After that, he's scored no points, neither have you. So you're still #1, right?

Probably not.

When you undermine your own players, the other team scores more. You're not #1 anymore, because while you were tripping up #2, the top players on the other team outscored you AND the #3 guy on YOUR team scored 3 kills and is now ahead of you.

I agree that SOMETIMES, people impede each other. I have seen people prevent each other from scoring. Like when a guy does something stupid and the other guy retaliates. I've seen a lot of that. I've had morons who kept slamming into me while I'm trying to shoot - and sometimes pin them to a wall until they self-destruct to get them to leave me alone.

The DUMB missions are only there because TO's other poor decisions have driven so many people away. When you see 8,000 people playing where there used to be 30,000, it should be a clue. Desperate to suck people into battles, TO doesn't make the game BETTER. Instead, it creates stupid missions, the only purpose of which is to force people to stay in the game to the end. Missions used to be about skills. Some still are. "Destroy 20 enemies", "Capture a flag", etc. But "finish a game"? "Use an overdrive"? What skills are involved in those? The skills of logging in and sitting around? You can see it in any game - 2, 3, 4 players out of 16, just sitting there - waiting. Marking time till the end of the game. You think that's a GOOD thing? And the "top-3 on the WINNING team just means that if you have that mission, and it looks like your team is going to lose - you quit and go find a team that is winning. You also quit if the game is already in progress, because if you're behind by 100 points, odds are poor you're going to catch up. So that just keeps the team weaker as MatchMaker cycles you in and out. Yet another reason the "top 3" should be changed.

The bottom line is TO decided to do MatchMaker. I don't know why. Maybe they're taking some really bad drugs. There does not appear to be any sense in it. But okay. They made that decision. And thousands of players decided to stop playing. So instead of fixing the mistake (by removing MatchMaker) TO decided to make ANOTHER mistake and force people to stay in battles by making missions dependent on "attendance". This is like the dumb teacher who knows a lot less than you do about whatever subject she's teaching who insists you sit in your chair and count the seconds until the end of class rather than letting you take the final exam and get credit for knowing all the material. (Having received nearly 40 semester hours of college credit that way, I can vouch for the fact that it's better than sitting in class.) The current "top-3" is just more stupidity.

Finally, you consider my responses rude. Without meaning any insult, I consider your responses not very intelligent. I have very little patience for people who don't catch on - or who raise dull arguments. But maybe you're right. Maybe I should just ignore you because your objections have no merit. What do you think?

Edited June 28, 2019 by N88B

wolverine848 · June 28, 2019

Okay, for starters then, we will consider all other issues HAVE been addressed - and you admit I am correct.

As for "conducive to team play", the biggest motivation for THAT was back when the winning team got a huge bonus and the losing team got diddley. People really did not like that. Why? Because they could play great, and Tanki would penalize them for being on a team of suck-wind players. That's EXACTLY the same problem with the "top-3 on the winning team" mission.

In general, there's very little incentive NOW to play for the "team". MatchMaker destroyed it. You get dumped in a game where you don't know anyone, maybe on a map you don't want to play, with the wrong equipment, down by an insurmountable lead with less than 2 minutes to go. The games are too short to develop any strategy. There are too many players to coordinate anything. It's just shoot-shoot-shoot and try to stay alive. If you think about anyone else on your team at all, it's for a maximum of 3 seconds - like sharing an overdrive, or blocking an attacker. So there's almost no team work left to begin with. Anyone who tries rarely has a teammate "get" it.

The one last holdover from the days of big bonuses for being put on the winning team is the requirement that the "top 3" requirement can only be met by being randomly deposited on the winning team by MatchMaker. They might as well start out with, "Get MatchMaker to put you on the winning team... and while there, be one of the top 3 players on that team".

Seriously, what's the difference between being #1 on the winning team and #1 on the losing team? If you have the same score, there's basically no difference (score wise) so no incentive for your team to win. The only scoring incentive is for you to do well personally. Generally, aren't the activities that are good for the individual good for the team? Who does a better job for the team? The guy who kills 40 enemies? Or the one who kills 1? The guy who scores 5 flags? Or the guy who scores none? The incentive to do well is baked in. What you do NOT get, is points for hindering your own team. So if I have a choice between preventing someone on my team from scoring a flag (to keep their score down) I probably just wasted my chance to kill 2, or 3 enemies - further raising my score. Anyone who spends most of their time trying to prevent teammates from scoring isn't going to spend much time in the top three to begin with. But suppose you're right. Suppose you have the top score, and the guy who is #2 in on your team and he's racing for a goal and you trip him up and he gets destroyed. After that, he's scored no points, neither have you. So you're still #1, right?

Probably not.

When you undermine your own players, the other team scores more. You're not #1 anymore, because while you were tripping up #2, the top players on the other team outscored you AND the #3 guy on YOUR team scored 3 kills and is now ahead of you.

I agree that SOMETIMES, people impede each other. I have seen people prevent each other from scoring. Like when a guy does something stupid and the other guy retaliates. I've seen a lot of that. I've had morons who kept slamming into me while I'm trying to shoot - and sometimes pin them to a wall until they self-destruct to get them to leave me alone.

The DUMB missions are only there because TO's other poor decisions have driven so many people away. When you see 8,000 people playing where there used to be 30,000, it should be a clue. Desperate to suck people into battles, TO doesn't make the game BETTER. Instead, it creates stupid missions, the only purpose of which is to force people to stay in the game to the end. Missions used to be about skills. Some still are. "Destroy 20 enemies", "Capture a flag", etc. But "finish a game"? "Use an overdrive"? What skills are involved in those? The skills of logging in and sitting around? You can see it in any game - 2, 3, 4 players out of 16, just sitting there - waiting. Marking time till the end of the game. You think that's a GOOD thing? And the "top-3 on the WINNING team just means that if you have that mission, and it looks like your team is going to lose - you quit and go find a team that is winning. You also quit if the game is already in progress, because if you're behind by 100 points, odds are poor you're going to catch up. So that just keeps the team weaker as MatchMaker cycles you in and out. Yet another reason the "top 3" should be changed.

The bottom line is TO decided to do MatchMaker. I don't know why. Maybe they're taking some really bad drugs. There does not appear to be any sense in it. But okay. They made that decision. And thousands of players decided to stop playing. So instead of fixing the mistake (by removing MatchMaker) TO decided to make ANOTHER mistake and force people to stay in battles by making missions dependent on "attendance". This is like the dumb teacher who knows a lot less than you do about whatever subject she's teaching who insists you sit in your chair and count the seconds until the end of class rather than letting you take the final exam and get credit for knowing all the material. (Having received nearly 40 semester hours of college credit that way, I can vouch for the fact that it's better than sitting in class.) The current "top-3" is just more stupidity.

Finally, you consider my responses rude. Without meaning any insult, I consider your responses not very intelligent. I have very little patience for people who don't catch on - or who raise dull arguments. But maybe you're right. Maybe I should just ignore you because your objections have no merit. What do you think?

I'm not reading that wall of text in that font. Yeesh.

Edited June 28, 2019 by wolverine848

Hate · June 28, 2019

Topics merged.

FrozenRailgun · June 28, 2019

Eventually a couple people from each team might leave - had to use the bathroom? Had to eat (or starve to death?) Had to do homework. But they were not leaving because the game wasn't FUN. They weren't leaving because MatchMaker had thrown them into some CRAP game with hugely log-sided teams, a wildly uneven score and only seconds to play.

That I am aware, but I did not add this comment b/c it's unnecessary to this topic.

Daily: Kill the juggernaut 1 time (3rd mission slot) (hard)

Weekly: Kill the Juggernaut 5/10 times

Pretty tough tbh

Yes plz!

N88B · June 29, 2019

That I am aware, but I did not add this comment b/c it's unnecessary to this topic.

Yes plz!

If they're going to add crap missions like that (and I'm aware some people might like them - but since most don't even PLAY Juggernaut - forcing them to play it to complete a missions is indeed CRAP), then Tanki ought to increase the number of FREE mission changes.

That way the people who want to play Juggernaut for a mission CAN, and those who don't want to play Juggernaut at all, don't have to.

RIDDLER_8 · June 29, 2019

Please Maf can you list this post in the Under Review or Valid Section.

QuicKK · July 1, 2019

Alright, I've come with an idea or suggestion of making only 1 mission (out of 3) replaceable and with no cost, if the mission is replaced, they will have to wait 24 hours to replace the new mission if they don't feel like they can or... you know what I mean.. Rather than making it 1k cyrstals for each change

What do you think?

N88B · July 5, 2019

I am sick of waiting for games to load - and just having MATCHMAKER TIME OUT at 3 minutes - and having to start all over again.

Tonight, I was trying to complete a RUGBY mission, but twice in a row, I got the 3 minute time out.

Now it would be BEST if TANKI would FIX this BUG, but if they're not going to do it, then at the very least they can give us CREDIT for the missions MATCHMAKER WON'T LET US PLAY.

So if someone logs in to play "ASSAULT" and they have a "complete 3 games in assault" mission or "earn 400 crystals in assault" or "score 800 points in assault" and MATCHMAKER TIMES OUT, then ALL of those assault-specific missions are marked "completed" just as if MATCHMAKER had actually let the person play the game.

But like I said, it would be better if Tanki would FIX THE BUG (or better yet, GET RID OF MATCHMAKER!)

I suspect that part of the problem is that MATCHMAKER is waiting for 16 players - and there aren't that many people trying to play those particular games. If that's the case, then another option is to START THE GAME AFTER 30 SECONDS no matter HOW many players there are.

MATCHMAKER is the worst change in the history of Tanki. But there's no reason that it has to be so incomprehensibly HORRIBLE. FIX THE PROBLEM!

Edited July 5, 2019 by N88B

Maf · July 5, 2019

Isn't that exactly how it already works? :wacko:

Initiate · July 5, 2019

Alright, I've come with an idea or suggestion of making only 1 mission (out of 3) replaceable and with no cost, if the mission is replaced, they will have to wait 24 hours to replace the new mission if they don't feel like they can or... you know what I mean.. Rather than making it 1k cyrstals for each change

What do you think?

Completed.

What is eSports up to nowadays?

I don’t play eSports, what can I do?

When will it start?

Will there be Tanki Fund?

When will The Grand Finals take place?

Lollipops

Contracts

Special Missions

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

How to play

Islands

Checkpoints

Prizes

Checkpoint №1

Checkpoint №2

Checkpoint №3

Checkpoint №4

Checkpoint №5

Checkpoint №6

Checkpoint №7

Pumpkin Grenade

Bots

Discounts

Special event modes

Special offers

Epic Containers

Special Missions

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD

TASK

REWARD