Does anybody listen to our ideas?

[falcosenna1 8,320]

There is another way to make more profit. Focus on making Tanki desirable and more players will stick around and be happy to pay. These same happy players will talk and more players will join. Or Tanki can just continue to rise the cost of playing for those that are still here. They will leave and not recommend this game to anyone, in fact they may even try to discourage people form playing it at all.

TO isn't rising the cost of playing at the moment. I think we should all admit that the rewards for the daily missions were way too big during the first 2/3 weeks compared to the rewards of the daily gifts. Some are saying that a decrease by 50% was ridiculously high while we're still receiving bigger rewards for completing the missions than the rewards we got from the daily gifts. 

 

 

I agree 100%, Tanki needs to make money to pay the bills.  The problem is when a company becomes so focused on profit they become blind to the reasons why they are failing in the first place.  If I'm not mistaken Tanki's income is decreased and to make up the difference they have been forced to shift their focus away from making the game better and desirable, to making it more profitable.

 

Lets be honest and call it for what it is. Tanki needs money and they are using every trick they can think of to get that money out of the current players base. Maybe they should step back and look at the big picture. There are a lot of major issues that many players are complaining about and many of these have been around for way too long. The customer retention is falling because many players are reaching the point of being completely fed up with the lack of support and the total disregard of the major issues and they are leaving. 

TO indeed needs money to exist, like any other game in the world. We're honest about it and it's a known fact. No doubt about that. Though saying they're only focused at making more money is a pity. Developers are currently toiling to create the Unity version for both their and our sakes. It'll be much easier for them to program, to remove bugs and glitches,... because Unity supports it more than Flash. As a result, they can start focusing on improvements in anti-cheat software, the problem of mults and sabotage and other current issues. 

 

Nobody is suggesting it be free for all. The question is: how do you earn the most profits while encouraging the largest number of players to pay?

 

As I mentioned elsewhere the cost to "buy" a tank at low ranks is really cheap. Why does it go up astronomically at higher ranks? Does it cost Tanki more money for that virtual tank at Gismo compared to Warrant Officer?

 

Imagine how much money Tanki would make if the tanks cost the same at all levels. Millions of people would be buying tanks at each level instead of probably a few thousand. I personally don't know of anyone insane enough to spend $700 on a virtual tank, but, I could think of 20 people willing to pay $35 for that same tank.

It's quite normal that equipment with higher modifications and paints that offer a higher amount of protection, cost remarkably more as they give you a big advantage in battles. It'd be ridiculous if all tanks cost the same at all levels. 

"Does it cost Tanki more money for that virtual tank at Gismo compared to Warrant Officer?" 

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. You shouldn't look at the rank to fix a price, you should look at the abilities of a turret/hull/paint. 

The prices are indeed rather high. I agree with you on that.Though, if you buy new equipment during a sale, the amount of crystals needed to buy a new weapon/hull/paint are reachable without buying, especially with the daily missions which grant you some extra crystals. 

[creeperskelly 1,281]

Well my point being that ranks with similar equipment play together. It's not as if Gismos with M3+ are going to play against low ranks with M0.

 

It's already enough of a grind to have to earn 1.5 million XP then to have to deal with the double penalty of the high cost of upgrades on top of it.

 

As it is now M3+ Viking is 1,700x more expensive than the original M0. M3+ Firebird is 9,000x the cost of the original M0.

 

(M3+ Viking and Firebird is 2,400,000 versus 750 for M0). This isn't including paint.

 

Think about the logic. For the price of a fully upgraded M3+ it's like having 3,200 tanks at recruit level.

 

If all levels cost the same an M3+ is still 4x the cost of the original tank.

 

Also consider that a person of any rank can just buy a supply and essentially turn a low level tank into the max. for at most 150 crystals (or about 32-36 based on kit pricing). Supplies don't increase in cost based on rank. If the logic of tanks being more expensive because of rank were actually applied then a Gismo should be paying 480,000 for each repair kit and 160,000 for each and every other supply.

 

If tanks were cheaper then they could not sell as many supplies. But if tanks were cheaper more people would buy them.

 

Because supplies are cheaper it allows people to spend tiny amounts of money without really thinking about the long term cost.

 

I just don't really get the logic overall.

[Aniruddha_Rairikar 40]

^ Exactly what I was gonna say

but with bad english :ph34r:

XD

[Extant 154]

Even if this section still is checked a little, it should for sure be checked more and the ideas at least considered.

[falcosenna1 8,320]

Well my point being that ranks with similar equipment play together. It's not as if Gismos with M3+ are going to play against low ranks with M0.

 

It's already enough of a grind to have to earn 1.5 million XP then to have to deal with the double penalty of the high cost of upgrades on top of it.

 

As it is now M3+ Viking is 1,700x more expensive than the original M0. M3+ Firebird is 9,000x the cost of the original M0.

 

(M3+ Viking and Firebird is 2,400,000 versus 750 for M0). This isn't including paint.

 

Think about the logic. For the price of a fully upgraded M3+ it's like having 3,200 tanks at recruit level.

 

If all levels cost the same an M3+ is still 4x the cost of the original tank.

 

Also consider that a person of any rank can just buy a supply and essentially turn a low level tank into the max. for at most 150 crystals (or about 32-36 based on kit pricing). Supplies don't increase in cost based on rank. If the logic of tanks being more expensive because of rank were actually applied then a Gismo should be paying 480,000 for each repair kit and 160,000 for each and every other supply.

 

If tanks were cheaper then they could not sell as many supplies. But if tanks were cheaper more people would buy them.

 

Because supplies are cheaper it allows people to spend tiny amounts of money without really thinking about the long term cost.

 

I just don't really get the logic overall.

I'm sorry, but I don't completely get your logic. I've read your post 5 times and still don't understand why you're 'comparing' the cost of m0 with m3+.

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

As a result, they can start focusing on improvements in anti-cheat software........

OR they could just use this Easy Anti Cheat It's designed for online mmo games and Unity.

[falcosenna1 8,320]

OR they could just use this Easy Anti Cheat It's designed for online mmo games and Unity.

"designed for Unity"

I'm not a computer 'geek' at all, so I don't know if that "Easy Anti Cheat" works for flash. 

[Canadian_Eh 1,354]

"designed for Unity"

I'm not a computer 'geek' at all, so I don't know if that "Easy Anti Cheat" works for flash. 

Yeah, I don't know either. I sent a PM and assuming he reads it they can look into themselves. Maybe they already have but I felt it was important to point it to them.

[Sr.I3oSS 2,546]

Something highly interesting, reaching high upvotes and views is read by developers (mostly see Hazel-Rah ^_^)

[creeperskelly 1,281]

I'm sorry, but I don't completely get your logic. I've read your post 5 times and still don't understand why you're 'comparing' the cost of m0 with m3+.

Think about it. When a person is a new player if they want to buy M0/M1 it costs relatively little. It's easier to be a buyer of hardware at lower levels than when a player reaches higher levels.

 

Let's look at Viking and Firebird. I'm going to compare M1/M3+ because M0 is so cheap it takes almost no effort to get the crystals to get each one.

 

 

Viking:

M1 costs 19,300 crystals and gives you 162HP. The cost of 20,000 crystals is cheap - it's easy to get out the credit card and purchase.

M3+ costs 1,010,100 crystals (M2, M3, and M3+) and gives you 300HP. That's 52x the cost of M1 but not even double the HP.  So, for 52x the price of the original M1 hull you get only approx. double the specs.

 

Firebird:

M1 costs 7,250 crystals and gives you 40 damage/5 sec. of burning time.

M3+ costs 1,354,200 (M2, M3, and M3+) and gives you 72 damage/20 sec. of burning time. This is 187x the cost of the original while giving you about double the power.

 

True Costs:

 

Firebird M1 and Viking: M1 = 26,550 crystals = $20 USD.

Firebird M3+ and Viking M3+ =  2,364,200 crystals = $642 USD.

 

Now, you said:

 

 

 

It's quite normal that equipment with higher modifications and paints that offer a higher amount of protection, cost remarkably more as they give you a big advantage in battles. It'd be ridiculous if all tanks cost the same at all levels.

 

My assertion is that based on actual characteristics (Firebird + Viking) M3+ should cost in the neighborhood of 80,000 instead of over 2,300,000. The power/advantage/strength of that combination is barely double that of the same combination at M1, but, the cost is ridiculously high compared to the benefits you get.

 

If the power is double then the price should only be double. If the armor/HP is double then the price should be double.

 

Understand my logic now? If a tank gives you 50HP and costs 1,000 crystals then a tank that gives you 100HP should be 2,000 crystals - not 76,540.

 

Because of this high price it's why people are forced to buy supplies. Supplies are a cheap way to get power and advantage. And, because supplies are consumed it is precisely why drugs will never be taken out, and, why prices of tanks will never drop.

 

Think about the logic. Someone at M1 can buy supplies that gives him or her almost the equivalent of an M3+ for 45 seconds. And since the cooldown is reset upon death a person could essentially play an entire battle at almost M3+ power simply by buying a supply kit.

 

Anyways my thought is that if the prices of tanks were lowered people would spend more money on them and Tanki would make more profits. That's really what I'm saying.

[magnaboy2 656]

Yes they do http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=218473&hl=

[falcosenna1 8,320]

Think about it. When a person is a new player if they want to buy M0/M1 it costs relatively little. It's easier to be a buyer of hardware at lower levels than when a player reaches higher levels.

 

Let's look at Viking and Firebird. I'm going to compare M1/M3+ because M0 is so cheap it takes almost no effort to get the crystals to get each one.

 

 

Viking:

M1 costs 19,300 crystals and gives you 162HP. The cost of 20,000 crystals is cheap - it's easy to get out the credit card and purchase.

M3+ costs 1,010,100 crystals (M2, M3, and M3+) and gives you 300HP. That's 52x the cost of M1 but not even double the HP.  So, for 52x the price of the original M1 hull you get only approx. double the specs.

 

Firebird:

M1 costs 7,250 crystals and gives you 40 damage/5 sec. of burning time.

M3+ costs 1,354,200 (M2, M3, and M3+) and gives you 72 damage/20 sec. of burning time. This is 187x the cost of the original while giving you about double the power.

 

True Costs:

 

Firebird M1 and Viking: M1 = 26,550 crystals = $20 USD.

Firebird M3+ and Viking M3+ =  2,364,200 crystals = $642 USD.

 

My assertion is that based on actual characteristics (Firebird + Viking) M3+ should cost in the neighborhood of 80,000 instead of over 2,300,000. The power/advantage/strength of that combination is barely double that of the same combination at M1, but, the cost is ridiculously high compared to the benefits you get.

 

If the power is double then the price should only be double. If the armor/HP is double then the price should be double.

 

Understand my logic now? If a tank gives you 50HP and costs 1,000 crystals then a tank that gives you 100HP should be 2,000 crystals - not 76,540.

 

Because of this high price it's why people are forced to buy supplies. Supplies are a cheap way to get power and advantage. And, because supplies are consumed it is precisely why drugs will never be taken out, and, why prices of tanks will never drop.

 

Think about the logic. Someone at M1 can buy supplies that gives him or her almost the equivalent of an M3+ for 45 seconds. And since the cooldown is reset upon death a person could essentially play an entire battle at almost M3+ power simply by buying a supply kit.

 

Anyways my thought is that if the prices of tanks were lowered people would spend more money on them and Tanki would make more profits. That's really what I'm saying.

Why does everything need a linear dependence? 

 

If you visit the Wiki page about hulls/turrets, you'll see that there are a lot more parameters that improve than the ones shown in your garage. Also, the higher your rank, the faster the battle fund grows. It's not because your rank has 'doubled' that the battle fund grows twice as fast as well. There's no linear dependence here either. 

 

Because of this high price it's why people are forced to buy supplies. Supplies are a cheap way to get power and advantage. 

I can't agree on this. Supplies are 'cheap'? They cost 50 crystals each and when you use them, they only last for 45 seconds. I don't call that 'cheap'. Also, you can't compare supplies with micro-upgrades or buying higher modifications. 

[creeperskelly 1,281]

When you buy supplies in a kit the price of the supplies is  actually 17.5 each (which, compared to buying a repair kit for 150 each is a great deal). I can't imagine anyone really pays full price for supplies all the time. Spending 150 crystals on repair kits all the time is foolish.

 

So, for 45 seconds at a cost of about 52 crystals you essentially double your important specs - power, protection, and speed (of course you can't hit all three at the same time, but, with some overlap by using field drops it works out almost the same). Based on the Wiki a person with an M1 can have the same power and protection as any M3+.

 

Worst case scenario is a cost of 1,000 crystals in a 30 minute battle (which is an important point I have brought up many times in the drug related threads - it rarely makes sense to actually drug unless you know you are going to win 1,000 or more crystals in a round). This means an average kit can last a player for 1,150 hours - or 48 solid days of game play.

 

This means when you compare the consumption of supplies (bought in a kit) versus the cost of a fully upgraded Viking/Firebird the equivalent amount of supplies you need to buy to get the same power as that tank would let you fight 2,300 rounds.

 

I think we can all agree it's far easier to earn 100,000 crystals from battle than it is 2,300,000.

 

As an experiment I bought one drug supply kit to see if I could use that kit to earn back what I spent on it - and it happens to work out that you can.

 

Sure, you can buy a tank in a kit but it's not always the tank that you want. Right now none of the kits available to me achieve my goals (which was fully upgraded Hornet, Viking, Firebird, and Isida).

 

As far as battle fund growth is concerned - I see the same funds and crystals using my son's account on Rio as I can get on my own account on Rio. The battle fund is no different and I usually get the same amount of crystals either way - whether it is WO1 or General it has no impact on how much you get in XP and it makes no difference in how the battle fund increases.

 

If I kill a tank at Sergeant or General I get the same XP either way - it's linear. It makes no difference the rank I am, or, the level of the tank I killed.

 

Let's consider parameters. What is the most important thing someone considers when buying a hull? Probably protection. What about turrets? Probably the damage it produces (yes, I know there are other parameters such as acceleration, weight, rotational speed, etc). With turrets there are some trade offs considering damage versus reload time, but, overall people are going to choose something that kills faster. That's why so many people use Rail, right? The problem with comparing turrets is some have penetrating power while others can deal damage to a whole group of tanks that aren't necessarily lined up. You can't really compare the penetration power of Rail to Rico because Rico can't deal damage through tanks. So, when comparing turrets the best thing to compare is raw power. Also the use of drugs only affects certain parameters - double damage, for example, has no effect on Firebird's burning time.

 

Again, let's start at M1 and compare M3+.

 

Power (max. damage):

 

Rail: M1: 115, M3+:199. Cost: M1: 31,650, M3+ :1,189,603. Rail at M3+ does 1.75x more damage per shot than M1, but, costs 38x more.

 

Shaft: M1: 135, M3+:260. Cost: M1: 19,100, M3+: 1,032,961, Shaft at M3+ does 1.93x more damage per shot than M1, but, costs 54x more.

 

Rico M1: 21, M3+: 38. Cost: M1: 26,200, M3+: 1,276,670. Rico at M3+ does 1.81x more damage per shot than M1, but, costs 49x more.

 

Thunder: M1: 70, M3+: 110. Cost: M1: 39,100, M3+: 1,062,505. Thunder at M3+ does 1.57x more damage per shot than M1, but, costs 27x more.

 

Twins: M1: 12.5, M3+: 21. Cost: M1: 35,250, M3+: 1,303,402. Twins at M3+ does 1.68x more damage per shot than M1, but, costs 37x more.

 

Smoky: M1: 28.5, M3+: 56. Cost: M1: 11,000, M3+: 1,158,432. Smoky at M3+ does 1.96x more damage per shot than M1, but, costs 105x more than M1.

 

Isida: M1: 36, M3+: 66. Cost: M1: 20,400, M3+: 1,000,702. Isida at M3+ does 1.83x more damage per shot (tick) than M1, but, costs 49x more than M1.

 

Firebird: M1: 40, M3+: 72. Cost: M1: 7,250, M3+: 1,354,204. Firebird at M3+ does 1.80x more damage per shot (tick) than M1, but, costs 187x more than M1. This is the most expensive upgrade of all the turrets!

 

Freeze: M1: 43, M3+: 80. Cost: M1: 23,200, M3+: 1,035,294. Freeze at M3+ does 1.86x more damage per shot (tick) than M1, but, costs 46x more than M1.

 

Hammer: M1: 61.5, M3+: 115.5. Cost: M1: 38,000, M3+: 1,036,521. Hammer at M3+ does 1.88x more damage per shot than M1, but, costs 47x more than M1.

 

Vulcan: M1: 33, M3+: 60. Cost: M1: 28,950, M3+: 1,261,902. Vulcan at M3+ does 1.81x more damage per shot than M1, but, costs 44x more than M1.

 

I won't go into the details of hulls, but, they follow the same pattern: M3+ gives you about 1.75x more protection at a cost of 43x that of M1 (Mammoth and Titan are the only two that give you double the protection of M1, but, at a cost of 259x more than M1).

 

Do you see a pattern here? On average an M3+ turret or hull gives you about 1.77x times more damage or protection than M1 - and it costs you 43.5x more than the original price just to get that upgrade.

 

This is why drugging leads to such an imbalance. If a player with an M1 tank can drug and get the same power/protection as M3+ - is it fair to those who actually have M2 or M3? This just leads to them having to drug to keep the advantage - which makes those who don't drug nothing but cannon fodder.

 

If other garage items are the same cost regardless of rank (such as supplies, paints, passes, score multipliers, etc), and, other features of the game are linear (such as XP earned in battle) - then the astonishing price of upgraded tanks makes no sense at all compared to what you got at the lower tiers - unless, of course, the idea is to price them that high in order to get people to buy consumables (drugs).

 

It's far easier to get small sums of money out of people over many transactions than a large chunk of money out of someone in one transaction (this is why credit is so popular). Even if the sum total of those small transactions is double the overall cost of a single large transaction very few people see it like that. Hence, I'm sure it's quite easy for Tanki to get people to buy drugs (small transactions - a few dollars here and there) compared to the number of people willing to buy upgrades (which, as I pointed out - actually spending real money buying M1 equipment is relatively easier to justify compared to M3+).

 

(There is another monetization model that could exist - eliminate garage supplies and make tanks cheaper - then the tanks slowly get damaged as one's deaths increase - thus eventually dropping parameters down one or two levels until the player spends crystals repairing it - this would benefit skilled players as their tanks would wear out slower due to being better skilled and having fewer deaths in battle - the more times you respawn the more your tank's "wear" factor increases - then Tanki could sell hull/turret repair supplies that you activate to bring your specs back up to their original level - but I wonder if they have even thought about this....).

[E.Leclerc 1,887]

Yes they do http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=218473&hl=

And? What about anti-kick system?! 

[falcosenna1 8,320]

I'll right down my remarks/thoughts on what you said in orange.

When you buy supplies in a kit the price of the supplies is  actually 17.5 each (which, compared to buying a repair kit for 150 each is a great deal). I can't imagine anyone really pays full price for supplies all the time. Spending 150 crystals on repair kits all the time is foolish.

 

I can't imagine players pay the full price for new equipment and micro-upgrades. You can wait for a nice discount and TO also offers equipment kits besides the supply kits you're mentioning.

 

So, for 45 seconds at a cost of about 52 crystals you essentially double your important specs - power, protection, and speed (of course you can't hit all three at the same time, but, with some overlap by using field drops it works out almost the same). Based on the Wiki a person with an M1 can have the same power and protection as any M3+.

 

You'll have to buy supplies over and over again while you can just have that  protection when you go for M3 or even M3+. After some time, you'll see that buying supplies the whole time isn't worth the crystals. You're then playing to earn crystals in order to be able to buy new supplies instead of going for new and better equipment. 

 

Worst case scenario is a cost of 1,000 crystals in a 30 minute battle (which is an important point I have brought up many times in the drug related threads - it rarely makes sense to actually drug unless you know you are going to win 1,000 or more crystals in a round). This means an average kit can last a player for 1,150 hours - or 48 solid days of game play.

 

A drug kit that costs a bit less than 20 000 crystals contains 100 of each supply. The first aid only lasts for 2 seconds, drugs last till you die. So let's take a look at DA, DP and DS. They last for 45 seconds each. You've got 100 of each, which makes 300 times 45 seconds which is 13 500 seconds or 225 minutes. 

 

If you take the kit with 1500 supplies each, you get 4500 times 45 which is 202 500 seconds, which is 3375 minutes, which is 56.25 hours. 

 

This means when you compare the consumption of supplies (bought in a kit) versus the cost of a fully upgraded Viking/Firebird the equivalent amount of supplies you need to buy to get the same power as that tank would let you fight 2,300 rounds.

 

I think we can all agree it's far easier to earn 100,000 crystals from battle than it is 2,300,000.

 

Of course. 100 000 is way less than 2 300 000, so of course it's easier.

 

As an experiment I bought one drug supply kit to see if I could use that kit to earn back what I spent on it - and it happens to work out that you can.

 

Though, you earned the crystals back that you had spent on the supplies kit, but I wonder how many crystals you got more than the kit cost.

 

Sure, you can buy a tank in a kit but it's not always the tank that you want. Right now none of the kits available to me achieve my goals (which was fully upgraded Hornet, Viking, Firebird, and Isida).

 

That's sad to hear, but you can always buy these hulls and turrets in sales if you don't find a kit that pleases you.

 

As far as battle fund growth is concerned - I see the same funds and crystals using my son's account on Rio as I can get on my own account on Rio. The battle fund is no different and I usually get the same amount of crystals either way - whether it is WO1 or General it has no impact on how much you get in XP and it makes no difference in how the battle fund increases.

 

As explained in one of the V-LOGs, it does make a difference, a rather big difference. 

[creeperskelly 1,281]

Sure, there are discounts, kits, and double crystal cards from time to time.

 

Unfortunately one problem with the sales is that if you haven't reached the proper rank yet when the sale comes along then it really isn't helpful.

 

At lower ranks I used crystals that I earned for the garage, then, past M1 waited for sales.

 

Which asks the obvious question: if nobody buys them at full price why charge such a high price in the first place?

 

It sort of reminds me of something in the US called "club cards" where stores will discount certain items during a sale if you have the store's club card (which is free if you hand over your personal information....). So a product might be $10 one week and $6 the next week if you have the club card (of course, if you compare at other stores the regular price there is $6 all the time without needing the special card). So it seems silly to charge such a high price and then have a rare "discount" to make it appear you are giving a sale when in reality the normal price elsewhere is the same as the "sale" price.

 

During the last sale after the Star Series final I upgraded to Hornet M3 because it was 50% off. None of the other sale items were beneficial for my career path (Isida or Firebird). Viking was 30% off, but, I know that the Tanker's Day sale is upcoming so I put that off for now knowing there's a chance it will be cheaper in a few weeks.

 

Right now the only kit available to me is the "Raiden" kit which is ThunderM3/Viking M3 along with Emerald.  A few months ago I was using Thunder as my third turret of choice, but, then it got nerfed in a recent update so I have essentially stopped using it (this is one of the things I find frustrating - the changes all the time to turrets and hulls).

 

The kits don't help with microupgrades though - that's really where the significant cost of moving beyond M3 comes from.

 

The cost of the drug kit didn't necessarily earn more crystals than not having it because of the effect of being on losing teams - hence, the biggest advantage overall of using the kit is earning XP faster. I earned back the cost of it through careful use of supplies, but, I don't think it made much of a difference overall - if it cost me 140,000 it might have brought back a net of 5,000 or so. All it really did was ease some of the frustration of dealing with opponents who seem to have 10,000 or more of each supply.

 

If moving up in rank and competing against those with higher ranks is supposed to make a difference in fund growth I'm just not seeing that in real game play. Most of the time I am playing 15 minute rounds of either Rio or Serpukhov and I just don't see that happening. The average battle fund after 15 minutes never seems to exceed 2500~3000 or so - which means if you are in the top 3 on the winning team you can generally expect 500 or so as a reward.

 

Now, it's possible that because the weapons are a bit stronger near the top - coupled with supply use - it results in more kills per battle - which results in more crystals. More one shot kills = more tanks being destroyed = more crystals added to the battle fund. But that's not really an affect of rank more than it's a side effect of supply use.  Rarely does someone of higher rank and M3 tier weapons destroy me with one shot. The same thing happes at low ranks - in a battle with high drug use the battle fund grows faster and higher due to more kills. Low drug use = smaller funds and fewer kills.

 

The only changes I see mentioned about battle fund growth are increased  funds for lower ranks this past March, and, a 50% crystal growth bonus if several tanks converge to destroy one enemy. Is there something I missed?

 

What did you think about my last idea - the elimination of supplies and having tanks get "worn out" over time and needing to be repaired to bring them back up to full capacity?

[falcosenna1 8,320]

 

I won't go into the details of hulls, but, they follow the same pattern: M3+ gives you about 1.75x more protection at a cost of 43x that of M1 (Mammoth and Titan are the only two that give you double the protection of M1, but, at a cost of 259x more than M1).

 

Do you see a pattern here? On average an M3+ turret or hull gives you about 1.77x times more damage or protection than M1 - and it costs you 43.5x more than the original price just to get that upgrade.

 

This is why drugging leads to such an imbalance. If a player with an M1 tank can drug and get the same power/protection as M3+ - is it fair to those who actually have M2 or M3? This just leads to them having to drug to keep the advantage - which makes those who don't drug nothing but cannon fodder.

 

If other garage items are the same cost regardless of rank (such as supplies, paints, passes, score multipliers, etc), and, other features of the game are linear (such as XP earned in battle) - then the astonishing price of upgraded tanks makes no sense at all compared to what you got at the lower tiers - unless, of course, the idea is to price them that high in order to get people to buy consumables (drugs).

 

It's far easier to get small sums of money out of people over many transactions than a large chunk of money out of someone in one transaction (this is why credit is so popular). Even if the sum total of those small transactions is double the overall cost of a single large transaction very few people see it like that. Hence, I'm sure it's quite easy for Tanki to get people to buy drugs (small transactions - a few dollars here and there) compared to the number of people willing to buy upgrades (which, as I pointed out - actually spending real money buying M1 equipment is relatively easier to justify compared to M3+).

 

(There is another monetization model that could exist - eliminate garage supplies and make tanks cheaper - then the tanks slowly get damaged as one's deaths increase - thus eventually dropping parameters down one or two levels until the player spends crystals repairing it - this would benefit skilled players as their tanks would wear out slower due to being better skilled and having fewer deaths in battle - the more times you respawn the more your tank's "wear" factor increases - then Tanki could sell hull/turret repair supplies that you activate to bring your specs back up to their original level - but I wonder if they have even thought about this....).

This kinda brings me back to the point when I asked why everything has to be linear dependent. :P

 

Sure, there are discounts, kits, and double crystal cards from time to time.

 

 

Unfortunately one problem with the sales is that if you haven't reached the proper rank yet when the sale comes along then it really isn't helpful.

 

At lower ranks I used crystals that I earned for the garage, then, past M1 waited for sales.

 

Which asks the obvious question: if nobody buys them at full price why charge such a high price in the first place?

 

That's part of the game. You need to rank up in order to unlock new equipment. The kits' advantage is that you can have equipment which hasn't unlocked at your rank yet. The downside indeed is that you might not like all items a kit contains.

 

Why are most clothes so expensive? Store also give big discounts, though we don't always wait for them. :P

 

 

 

 

It sort of reminds me of something in the US called "club cards" where stores will discount certain items during a sale if you have the store's club card (which is free if you hand over your personal information....). So a product might be $10 one week and $6 the next week if you have the club card (of course, if you compare at other stores the regular price there is $6 all the time without needing the special card). So it seems silly to charge such a high price and then have a rare "discount" to make it appear you are giving a sale when in reality the normal price elsewhere is the same as the "sale" price.

 

How would you implement such a 'club card' in TO? Players will have to buy them, because all players would have one since they all buy equipment in the 'store' with the game currency. 

 

During the last sale after the Star Series final I upgraded to Hornet M3 because it was 50% off. None of the other sale items were beneficial for my career path (Isida or Firebird). Viking was 30% off, but, I know that the Tanker's Day sale is upcoming so I put that off for now knowing there's a chance it will be cheaper in a few weeks.

 

Right now the only kit available to me is the "Raiden" kit which is ThunderM3/Viking M3 along with Emerald.  A few months ago I was using Thunder as my third turret of choice, but, then it got nerfed in a recent update so I have essentially stopped using it (this is one of the things I find frustrating - the changes all the time to turrets and hulls).

 

These changes are made to create more balance in the game, though I must admit I preferred Thunder before the decrease of the reload time. 

 

The kits don't help with microupgrades though - that's really where the significant cost of moving beyond M3 comes from.

 

The cost of the last steps are indeed very pricey, though the first steps which are rather cheap are really worth it.

 

The cost of the drug kit didn't necessarily earn more crystals than not having it because of the effect of being on losing teams - hence, the biggest advantage overall of using the kit is earning XP faster. I earned back the cost of it through careful use of supplies, but, I don't think it made much of a difference overall - if it cost me 140,000 it might have brought back a net of 5,000 or so. All it really did was ease some of the frustration of dealing with opponents who seem to have 10,000 or more of each supply.

 

Sometimes using supplies is indeed great to ease some frustration and as you mentioned, I also think that those supply kits are not very profitable.

 

If moving up in rank and competing against those with higher ranks is supposed to make a difference in fund growth I'm just not seeing that in real game play. Most of the time I am playing 15 minute rounds of either Rio or Serpukhov and I just don't see that happening. The average battle fund after 15 minutes never seems to exceed 2500~3000 or so - which means if you are in the top 3 on the winning team you can generally expect 500 or so as a reward.

 

Now, it's possible that because the weapons are a bit stronger near the top - coupled with supply use - it results in more kills per battle - which results in more crystals. More one shot kills = more tanks being destroyed = more crystals added to the battle fund. But that's not really an affect of rank more than it's a side effect of supply use.  Rarely does someone of higher rank and M3 tier weapons destroy me with one shot. The same thing happes at low ranks - in a battle with high drug use the battle fund grows faster and higher due to more kills. Low drug use = smaller funds and fewer kills.

 

Each kill in a high ranked battle adds more crystals to the battle fund than each kill in a low ranked battle. At least that's what I've experienced so far.

 

The only changes I see mentioned about battle fund growth are increased  funds for lower ranks this past March, and, a 50% crystal growth bonus if several tanks converge to destroy one enemy. Is there something I missed?

 

What did you think about my last idea - the elimination of supplies and having tanks get "worn out" over time and needing to be repaired to bring them back up to full capacity?

 

So you can't use that particular tank for a limited period?  Just like in Pokemon where you have to go to a specific house to heal your pokemon? :P

[canadarules 1,938]

Reread my second sentence, especially the 'used to' part. :P

 

 

He gave an answer to the question why so many ideas are being rejected. Though I don't see this section as 'pointless' since the daily missions have been introduced. It's just my opinion on the matter.

 

lol he left us

[falcosenna1 8,320]

lol he left us

I know, unfortunately. 

[iamthebadboy2 168]

"Over this entire situation, by the way. I've been telling on this forum not so long ago that there are no suggestions can make into this game, because we are shifted our priorities to the new game. Most suggestions around here simply can not be applied to the future game due to difference in the mechanics. Which makes this entire forum section a bit pointless at the moment, from my personal point of view. And as long as my comments considered by this forum section community as 'sarcastic' and 'disrespectful' I am leaving this part of forum entirely." ~Hazel-Rah

 

I believe that this should answer you. This section should be closed.

[E.Leclerc 1,887]

@iamthebadboy2

 

Yes, this section can be closed. It is pointless. 

[creeperskelly 1,281]

 

 

So you can't use that particular tank for a limited period?  Just like in Pokemon where you have to go to a specific house to heal your pokemon?

 

Actually what I was proposing is this:

 

Eliminate drugs.

 

Replace them with something else that generates revenue - this would be garage repairs for damaged tanks.

 

For example, let's say Mammoth M3 is 300HP. As you use it more and more and get killed in battle the HP slowly decrease over time - no less than the level of M1 for example (the tanks would never become useless - they just degrade due to use or due to being killed).

 

Someone who is greatly skilled and has fewer deaths would have a tank that lasts longer without needing repairs. People who are unskilled would have their tanks degrade faster.

 

Turrets could be the same way. They would take damage over time and become less powerful or less accurate (such as shaft or rail).

 

This would eliminate the absurd imbalance created by drugs while ensuring that battles have more randomness to them as tanks get worn out in battle. It also means that Tanki could make money from selling repairs.

[Dragon-Judgement 1,529]

Actually what I was proposing is this:

 

Eliminate drugs.

 

Replace them with something else that generates revenue - this would be garage repairs for damaged tanks.

 

For example, let's say Mammoth M3 is 300HP. As you use it more and more and get killed in battle the HP slowly decrease over time - no less than the level of M1 for example (the tanks would never become useless - they just degrade due to use or due to being killed).

 

Someone who is greatly skilled and has fewer deaths would have a tank that lasts longer without needing repairs. People who are unskilled would have their tanks degrade faster.

 

Turrets could be the same way. They would take damage over time and become less powerful or less accurate (such as shaft or rail).

 

This would eliminate the absurd imbalance created by drugs while ensuring that battles have more randomness to them as tanks get worn out in battle. It also means that Tanki could make money from selling repairs.

This idea really reminds me of World of Tanks. After battles, you're tank is either damaged or have used up ammunition, so you have to repair it and restock.

 

Also WoT has repair kits to use in-battle to fix certain spots on your tank. Like for example: if your tank gets "Tracked"; you're immobilized, so you either wait for the module to repair itself(and risk getting tracked again and again), or use your repair kit for an immediate fix.

 

Another example: If you're turret is jammed; it's stuck and you have to turn your hull to engage a target(but if you get tracked or critical engine damage done, you're hopeless) but it's the same process as I mentioned above.

 

A damaged engine; your speed is reduced, and even once it's repaired your speed is still impaired.

 

And for my final example, you can get "Ammo racked"; where your reload time is slower, and your ammo durability is reduced. If I were to add WoT's realistic feel to the damaged engine and ammo rack... your tank will become a firework.

 

 

I still hold my opinion that supplies make games fun, even though people see "unbalance" being done, but still a good idea that was suggested.

[creeperskelly 1,281]

Supplies can be fun if used defensively - and suppose you are out hunting down the flag carrier it can counteract those trying to defend the flag.

 

It's when people just use them to raid battles or sit there and run up the score by spawn camping that really makes the use of them egregious.

[falcosenna1 8,320]

Actually what I was proposing is this:

 

Eliminate drugs.

 

Replace them with something else that generates revenue - this would be garage repairs for damaged tanks.

 

For example, let's say Mammoth M3 is 300HP. As you use it more and more and get killed in battle the HP slowly decrease over time - no less than the level of M1 for example (the tanks would never become useless - they just degrade due to use or due to being killed).

 

Someone who is greatly skilled and has fewer deaths would have a tank that lasts longer without needing repairs. People who are unskilled would have their tanks degrade faster.

 

Turrets could be the same way. They would take damage over time and become less powerful or less accurate (such as shaft or rail).

 

This would eliminate the absurd imbalance created by drugs while ensuring that battles have more randomness to them as tanks get worn out in battle. It also means that Tanki could make money from selling repairs.

Supplies are an important part of the game play. They can't be taken away. I understand your idea and it's not bad, but I'm afraid it'll encourage campers. Close range turrets won't be used anymore because players are scared of receiving damage.