Score cap for standard battles (Updated on August 28)

[El_Jefe_Supremo 7]

Or maybe instead of a blanket cutoff at x number of x perameter, it depends on the difference between the two teams, or the rate at which they are capturing. If one team doesn't capture a flag in 1/4 of the time while the other caps 1 or more, the timer goes down twice as fast. If at the halfway mark they still haven't captured one, the match ends. Or, if team A has x flags more than team B, the match ends. In rio, if team A has 9 flags and team B has 5, team A caps one more flag to bring their lead to 5 (Could be changed, just an example), the game ends.

[gedulis9 0]

The name off the update was interesting but its terrible for me one off small maps player

[sonofchrysalis3 3,719]

The tweaks that were implemented today work perfectly. I am SO HAPPY with this update, I simply cannot express it. The one and only thing I've always hated about this game is the tendency for lopsided battles to develop, and now they never will.

 

Ah, and to the impossible-to-please tankers who are screaming that this is the end of the universe: maybe you should quit complaining about something I know less than half of you have tried. This update will provide the competitive balance that we needed.

 

I can now officially say that Tanki has no faults.

[toy69 1]

I don't think that's something good i would like to highlight the minus points

They are :-

 

1. REDUCED CHANCES OF GOLD BOX because it will cause battles to end sooner with less funds

2. LOW FUNDS Everybody wants to get high reward that's unfair to those who have skills and performed good.

 

And many more  reasons... but personally this would affect the entire economy of crystals and drugs

 

Therefore my opinion is to either set different limits on maps depending on route length from 1 point to other, map size, and heights. Or rather remove this update to maintain fare distribution of crystals in matches.

 

For example a case where red team is losing badly in a ctf and suddenly some guy who is capable to making the team win enters he caps our 1st flag .. 15 minutes left and then.

 

BOOM! You see the score board as the blue team has capped its 10th flag meanwhile.

[Alois_Hammer 21]

Don't like it at all, and I don't even have to play to say I don't like it.

No, no!  A few months ago, they removed a five-minute game limit because everybody thought it was too short a game.  They believe that the players will like three-  and four- minute games as long as they do not know in advance that the game will be that short.  I cannot think of any other reason for this update.  Or we can play DMs, you know, the battle mode that I never play except when forced by missions.

[creeperskelly 1,281]

The big flaw for capture limits is this:

 

When a round ends with teams of 10 v 5 the next round starts with teams imbalanced again - the team with more players captures flags while the other team members pound the weaker team to pieces - so the team with more players assigns one or two to cap flags. This gives them a good battle fund while shutting the weaker team out - because the team with more players can reach the flag limit quickly it ends the round faster - thus - allowing them to rake in the crystals easily.

 

Unless the issue of imbalanced teams moving into the next round is solved this update really achieves nothing.

 

When a round ends with 10 versus 5 the next round needs to start with 5 versus 5.

[MuhammadShah 0]

This update is totally not good.All the fun has gone.I do NOT like this update.So please remove it.Thank you.

 

 

[The-Operator219 1,929]

Angry comments sure helps somebody here, they got us FIVE whole --------- minutes added, is that your professional solution? FIVE flags? Only added fifty to TDM and CP, I get that. DM I could care less.  I want to play all kinds of matches, stop catering to ONE kind! "We are trying to cater to everyone." by gaining whiplash? All you did here was anger the people who buy your solid gold hot tubs of stale wine.

REMOVE the caps.

Again, lack of understanding of your audience.

We don't want the battles longer, we want them the same as before.

I honestly thought you would learn form Your team is going to lose, do something!".

Actually I would PREFER that over this.

Just, god...

Perfection cannot be improved, stop peeing in your own soup!

Edited August 28, 2015 by The-Operator219

[sonofchrysalis3 3,719]

@The-Operator219 -->

 

May I remind you that no one is requiring you to play this game. If this update is so horrible that you are compelled to use inappropriate imagery and hateful manners, please don't hesitate to find a different game, one that you panders to your every whim.

[sonofchrysalis3 3,719]

Please respect Semyon's request and use some common courtesy when submitting feedback to this update. Angry comments, to borrow the quote, will get us nowhere.

[thunderousrailgunner 1,934]

Atleast need change in Large Maps

[ZAIDI79 63]

im not getting.... the objective of this cap is to end battle sonner of certain outcomes right...then why not simply introduce that timer mechanism which was previously introduced and remove this cap system its ruinning the game  :(

 

 

 

 TANKI HAS CREATED THIS PROBLEM BY ITSELF AS NOBODY ASK FOR THIS POOR UPDATE

[Bydo 20,121]

Probably this would be the next update :

 

Tankers!

 

Today, as an experiment, we’ve introduced an additional way of ending PRO battles. From now on, only 10 PRO battles can be created in a server. And the Pro battles automatically ends when it reaches a max of 200 kills, 200 CP and 200 CTF.

 

And as a discount we have reduced the price of PRO pass to 4999 crystals. Buy PRO and go PRO...

 

So what are you waiting for. Enter the game, try out the new update for yourselves, and don’t forget to share your feedback on the feature in this topic.

Let's start! :P

not many servers have pro battles due to players not wanting to pay for the card so i have only seen pro mainly on Russian servers ..very little in English

[The-Operator219 1,929]

Alright, I've been WAY to vulgar here, I'm sorry...

But I woke up to this, and I'm already...mad...about it, to put things positively.

Here's a more detailed reason why CTF is bad now;

1. Battles are now TWO minutes long, how short did they want it? Three-four?

2. If you have wasp, the battle will end in ONE minute, no exceptions here.

3. It was my favorite gamemode until this, now I primarily play (Gag hack ) Deathmatch (Cough Gag).

4. There was nothing wrong with TDM CP or DM, all we wanted here was CTF to be the same, with the caps implemented LIGHTLY.

5. It's no longer Tanki, I know, brave statement, but hear me out. Buying the PRO pass is the best solution to the problem here, but I want to SAVE my crystals, and earn more by battling. Which I can't due to obvious reasons.

And if I want the crystals? (GAG HACK) Deathmatch (COUGH HACK) just saying it sickens me.

Or you could BUY them, what's that? A game that's free to play but you can buy the stuff and actually have fun?

Never heard that before!

 

Anyone here played Battlefield Heroes by EA?

 

Tanki should NOT become that.

Reply with your "OMG too negative11!11!!!111"

But I could care less, I just want my opinion known.

[The-Operator219 1,929]

And son of Crysallis, you're right, that was my primal rage of running out of coffee.

I've got some now, I'm thinking more rationally.

[The-Operator219 1,929]

Too be honest, I went into the update positively, then I played CTF...

[sunhawk 93]

How many people need to point out that a grossly lopsided game is indicated by a difference in scores, not by reaching a set score limit? Not wanting to be offensive, but seriously, are they all in first grade?

 

I suppose if they can figure out what absolute score cap, for each map and mode, would be impossible to reach unless one team was slaughtering the other, that would be okay.  Not great, but okay.

 

What happened to their plan to end games if the teams were grossly uneven in size, anyway?

Edited August 28, 2015 by sunhawk

[The-Operator219 1,929]

Exactly, the "Your team is going to lose, do something!" was bearable, at least the battles were interesting and not short.

And the game recovered from that honest mistake, they had a few kinks to work out, they removed it.

Why can't they do that here? What's so important about this?

Also, who in their right mind ASKED the developers for shortened, less-one sided battles?

They were fine before.

[Technophyle 367]

My feedback after playing today:

 

This is a good update. I hated it yesterday but it is useful.

 

The aim of this update should be :-

 

1. In a good and challenging battle where both team are balanced, no team should reach the score caps. It means that the particular battle should end at the time limit, not at the score limit.

 

2. In an unbalanced battle where one of the team is dominating the other team, then the battle should meet the score limit before the time limit.

 

But this update is not working like that.

 

Some battles are ending when there is still time but the enemy team can still win. And some battles are going on but the losing team will still sure lose.

 

For example:

 

1. In Island CTF 15 mins with 10 score cap: Any team can easily capture 10 flags in the first half of the battle (mostly all tankers start capturing when the teams are not full, like 1 vs 2 or 2 vs 3 and even 1 vs 3 when someone joins and leaves).

But this does not mean that if the losing team start drugging they cant cap 11 flags in the next half.

 

2. In Arena CP 60 mins with 400 score cap: I was playing this battle today from start. Both team had one drugger. At first half we were winning with at least 60 cp point difference. We crossed 100 cp points and they were below 40. During this time some enemy tankers left and some joined. Then they started to to win and our drugger left. And one more drugger joined them.

At last after 2 tankers left from my team, 2 tankers joined with XP and BP

I wanted that battle to end when 10 mins were left and I even went to pause during last 5 mins.

Final score was 200-130 something. No way near 400 cp point.

 

Solution:

 

It is not enough to just adjusting the score cap amount.

The score caps should be adjusted differently for different maps.

 

Flag limits should depend on how much time it takes to capture.

CP limits should depend on how many points that particular map have.

[Technophyle 367]

What happened to their plan to end games if the teams were grossly uneven in size, anyway?

 

 

Exactly, the "Your team is going to lose, do something!" was bearable, at least the battles were interesting and not short.

And the game recovered from that honest mistake, they had a few kinks to work out, they removed it.

Why can't they do that here? What's so important about this?

Also, who in their right mind ASKED the developers for shortened, less-one sided battles?

They were fine before.

 

I think they cannot fix the 'Early battle termination' system. That's why they came up with an easy fix - "Put a score cap in battle" :p

[alotharian 8]

I'm not convinced a point limit is useful at all, but if you insist on implementing a point limit regardless, it must be proportional to the number of control points on each specific map. The limit must be larger than the number of points possible for the map in half the time. That is, if it is possible to get 500 points maximum built up on a CP map, assuming little or no opposition, then 250 could be the limit, since the outcome of the battle is certain as soon as more than half the possible points are attained. The other team might mount an overwhelming comeback, but the lead cannot change before the regular time expires. I've participated in such, and it is exhilarating despite the fact battle fund share is still limited.

You are almost at the right point.

I think the limit should be put a bit above the half. So, in case 500 is the theoretical max, the limit should be 260 or 270.

[ChippeRockTheMurph 90]

Then we need to double it again probably lol. Thanks for the feedback!

 

Looking forward to more opinions.

Are you really that stupid??? If you have to double it then why not remove it completely from the game???

 

P.S. Why would he remove it if he's going to double it??? It'll be exactly the same as before except now when a gold box drops the score cap will be hit and there won't be any gold.

Edited August 28, 2015 by ChippeRockTheMurph

[The.Skilled.Legend 1,459]

^ What you said made absolute no sense. If he's going to double it why would he remove it from the game?

[Fatal-Attraction 80]

I do not like this update.

 

Sometimes when I'm in a great game, the game ends when the game could tip in either direction, making for an exciting game. Then the game ends.

 

Really, really annoying!

 

It use to be that one could set his own point cap in a game or no point cap.

If some people like this point cap, they can still have it that way.

For those who don't, they can play on maps with no caps.

 

There would be a choice.

 

I don't think the player should be able to set his own point cap like before because a  long game with an unbalanced score wouldn't be a stable game. This so called '''Game" would just take up server space for an hour.

 

This is why I believe that if the player did have the option, the point cap should be set at a defined default, as it is now

 

 

 

[alotharian 8]

How many people need to point out that a grossly lopsided game is indicated by a difference in scores, not by reaching a set score limit? Not wanting to be offensive, but seriously, are they all in first grade?

 

I suppose if they can figure out what absolute score cap, for each map and mode, would be impossible to reach unless one team was slaughtering the other, that would be okay.  Not great, but okay.

 

What happened to their plan to end games if the teams were grossly uneven in size, anyway?

What happens with their plan to implement higher score rate to the team behind in CP?

 

I think they did not even thought that through before Semyon mentioned that in a V-log.

I explain why with a simple situation:

 

Team A fully rules the field and controls all the points from the beginning to the half of the game time (no limits there then).

At half time the Team B becomes stronger, and starts controlling all the points.

 

With the faster score aggregation of Team B as they are behind, they could get to tie game before the battle ends, what is more in the remaining time they would clearly win.

Would that be fair? Both team controlled the point(s) for exactly the same time.