Episode 114 of the V-LOG is here

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

Please make wasps more agile.

MakeWaspsFunAgain :)

[r_I_already_won0 2,339]

 

I wouldn't say more agile, actually. IMO hornet should be easier and better to control, quicker at turning, and more stable when firing and under fire.

However, wasp does feel too slow. I'm more in favor of increasing the top speed by .5 meters/sec.

[LittleWillie 3,199]

I'm sure Northerner will serve you well. MU Smoky to at least 15 if you can.  ^_^

15 is a certainty. I have about 50k I'm NOT spending on a Smoky alteration . . .  :)

[LittleWillie 3,199]

Please make wasps more agile.

MakeWaspsFunAgain :)

Wasp Maneuvers Matter

[Spinister 1,192]

Nice

[Flw 1,625]

It's ok but I'm still waiting for alterations on XT's equipment -_-

[Cyborg 3,189]

Yes, but like @BlackWasp777 said, it wouldn't prevent those raiders if you can:

 

• Access the battle through the lobby, as usual
• Invite friends to the battle

That's for normal battles and not for the BATTLES button. You will only press a button, then the game will put you in a random match. I don't see how you can meet your friends every time. Also if it Will put you in a battle matching your rank. So even if you invite friends they can't be low rank mults.

I don't get it. Would you mind to explain why the Battle! thing should prevent multing?

 

Due to the 2 min. pause and the removal of 30 and 60 min. battles there might be fewer mults tho. But that doesn't prevent people from playing with M0/M1 in M3+ battles or starting players that still have <15% of the average team points.

It is just the first step of the release. Atleast now those using M0 or M1 equipments purposefully would not have a reason anymore unless they are truely having a poor garage because i don't see any reason that why should I mult in a match of random people. Again 1 single update can not demolish the whole mults and saboteur thing. That's why Battle Mods still exist. Even though low in number, but they do work. Players have a huge imagination in terms of ruining gameplay its never possible to completely make a fool proof system with codes. Edited November 12, 2016 by Cyborg

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

That's for normal battles and not for the BATTLES button. You will only press a button, then the game will put you in a random match. I don't see how you can meet your friends every time. Also if it Will put you in a battle matching your rank. So even if you invite friends they can't be low rank mults.

It is just the first step of the release. Atleast now those using M0 or M1 equipments purposefully would not have a reason anymore unless they are truely having a poor garage because i don't see any reason that why should I mult in a match of random people. Again 1 single update can not demolish the whole mults and saboteur thing. That's why Battle Mods still exist. Even though low in number, but they do work. Players have a huge imagination in terms of ruining gameplay its never possible to completely make a fool proof system with codes.

well I guess everyone understands that the Battle Button places the player in a random battle that suits his rank.

The question is

- if _other_ players can see this random battle via the lobby battle list, and if they can access it -> because this opens up the doors for raiding teams with their mults)

- if players that entered the random battle via the [battle] button can invite their friends -> because if they can, they invite their mults

[Phoenix.Rising 2,519]

 

[battle !]  or   [battle @!xxx***!"]

• Will the Battle Button place us in a battles, that are accessable by all other tankers through the lobby as well?

  If yes, it will not help vs mults.

   

• Will I be able to invite my friends to the battle, that I enterend through the Battle button?

  If yes, it will not help vs mults.

   

• Will the battle button use the matchmaking system later?

  Would be very nice if it would..

 

Now that I have rewatched it again.. the answer is "YES" to all of them.. last part is unknown.

Edited November 12, 2016 by Phoenix.Rising

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

^ I see it exactly like you.. and I fear it helps not at all regarding mults at the given stage.

 

 

But to be fair it has some advantages:

• it is a first stage.. and hopefully more advanced stuff can come later and build on it.
  Unfortunately we are not told about it yet.
• I think that the "Battle" button helps starters a lot

Edited November 12, 2016 by BlackWasp777

[Phoenix.Rising 2,519]

 

^ I see it exactly like you.. and I fear it helps nothing at the given stage.

 

But to be fair:

• it is a first stage.. and hopefully more advanced stuff can come later and build on it. Unfortunately we are not told about it yet.
• I think that the "Battle" button helps starters a lot

 

Actually, I now think that the main purpose of this new addition is to help battles fill faster with random people since there are many empty battles throughout the servers. People would wait less for battles to be filled. If the players are sent to a "pre-staged" battle, then they will be at a serious disadvantage. Staging battles have never been easier with this new button, just like now but much faster. :mellow:

 

Reduction of pause time is interesting, not allowing people to take long "coffee breaks". But it doesn't stop mults from driving all over the place randomly/parking & getting killed repeatedly without caring for flags/points/etc.

Edited November 12, 2016 by Phoenix.Rising

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

The pause time is a good thing as it puts a little more pressure on the players that truely need a break (nature calls :P). It also helps vs those most basic mults that sit and do nothing. They get killed and their owner has to push a key all 2 minutes now.. the likelyhood that he misses that deadline (while fighting with his the main on the other team) are high and his mult gets dropped earlier. But of course this is the most basic way of multing; every advanced mult user will just smile about change, adjust his script that controls his mult, and be fine..

 

What would help is a system that rates the players by skill (better then the old skill system pls) and directs you _only_ into battles that match your skill level. And this was what I actually understood as matchmaking system.

But of course this would sacrifice a lot of beloved things:

 

 

- no more friend-invites in those battles

- no more free selection of battles that you are likely to win

- maybe you can not even choose your favourite map to play in, as you always depend on the other players that are currently in the [battle!] queue.

If you took a look at Wodrl-Fo-Takns you see eactly that.

All other stuff could be left for pro battles.. in a brave new world -.-

 

 

I hope that is NOT their plan. Because this would <again> cut away the funny and beloved parts of this game; in order to fix some broken parts (like mults). Just like the last balance did.. the game is way less fun now as wasp (my wasp must have been truely overpowered in mixed battle scenarios, to receive such a nerv in agility..).

Edited November 12, 2016 by BlackWasp777

[Phoenix.Rising 2,519]

^But how do you define "skill" ? K/D? No. of wins?

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

Please make wasps more agile.

MakeWaspsFunAgain :)

 

I wouldn't say more agile, actually. IMO hornet should be easier and better to control, quicker at turning, and more stable when firing and under fire.

However, wasp does feel too slow. I'm more in favor of increasing the top speed by .5 meters/sec.

The speed difference between Wasp and Hornet was small, and the speed did not help you in higher tiers.

 

I would lie if i say that I dont miss the speed.. but what I miss most is the agility = Turning acceleration.

 

 

The Wasp was always very manoverable and agile.. it turned on the click of the button, and not spongy like now. This agility allwed you to drive crazy stuff - and slip through enemy tanks. Dodging was hard with Wasps as higher grade tankers did not miss a wasp, even with Twins. The downside was that it was nimble and it was so easy to throw it's aim off.

The Hornet on the other side lived from it's acceleration and stabillity. This combined with the fast turning on spot allwed great dodging, and the stabilty allwed to place your shots well after a dodge (if you dodnge with a wasp and shot immediatly you hit the ground or the air..). Hornets downside was the drift.

 

 

If I would have banced those two, I would have made the pre-balance hornet M3 as fast as the pre-balance wasp M3; and I would have taken the M4 stats in terms of speed and agility closer to the M3 stats. Then you have the same speed, while the Hornet has acceleration, dodging and stabilty -vs-drift / the Wasp has cornering agility and precise steering -vs- beeing nimble and delicate to control

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

^But how do you define "skill" ? K/D? No. of wins?

Maybe it's better to not talk about "skill" (a lot of emotions will arise..), but about a [battle Effciency Rating].

 

 

[battle Effciency Rating]

- values your relative score in battles, compared to your teammates (only to active teammares, so dont value mults in..))

 

 

 

Imagine each tanker starts with a [battle Effciency Rating] of 1000 BER. The minimum is 0 BER, the max is 2000 BER.

 

Then all those players go into the same battle on the same team and lets assume they all stay till the end. So they score their in-battle points for kills, flags, flag-kills, ...

 

After the battle is finished, you will see the statistics board: lets say the best player scored 500 points, the worst one 100 points and one was on pause the whole time and scored 15 points. You skip the value of the mult and sort the players:

- on hand hand you sort them by their score achieved

- on the other hand you sort them by their current [battle Effciency Rating]

 

Then you check the difference:

- each player that ranked scorewise higher then rating wise, those rating is increased

- each player that ranked scorewise more/less the same as rating wise, those rating stays untouched

- each player that ranked scorewise lower then rating wise, those rating is decreased

 

The rating change could be +/- 5 points (slow, precise) or +/-10 points (fast, fluctuates a bit, but is ok).

It works even better if you don't add/deduct x points but do this aligned by the score-to-rank-difference

    New_Battle_Effciency_Rating := Old_Battle_Effciency_Rating + (score_rank% - rating_rank%) x 10

 

So over the time (from battle to battle) the players that "usually" lead the battle score will have higher [battle Effciency Rating] values. They will reach a plateu where they can not get higher, and can only break through it if they with better team colleques - then the rating adjusts again.

 

This rating has to be hosted seperate values for the gamemodes (CP, DM, CTF..) and for Drugs/non-Drugs and for Formats (XP/BP..).

This larger amount of ratings is not complicated at all, because those are just numbers in a database handled by the computer.. I mean, you do not have to calc it for yourself ;)

 

You might now say "but he has more points because he drugged while I did not drug" -> well, this is not about your """"skill"""", it is about your efficiency in a battle. As this is what counts in the end.

Noone cares if I have a 99% hit rate with my railgun if I camp in nowhere-land in a full drug war, not using DD. < in this case I would consider me almost as mult :P

 

ps: if players do not stay for the whole amount of time, you can take their [score per minute in battle] and compare it to others players [score per minute in battles]. This should only take effect on the ratings for players that have participated for more then 5..7 minutes.

 

 

Edited November 12, 2016 by BlackWasp777

[Winner_Of_Turkey 2,647]

Only thing that makes me happy is we keep the mop paint.  :rolleyes:

[zainslimshady 474]

Idk if you guys remember there was an option to kick the mults from the battle. Like it was introduced in 2014. Where majority of players vote someone out and he gets kicked. And it was a good option as it ensures the players who are playing cannot be voted. Though there were some mistakes like what if somebody is just noob playing like a mult lol. So he gets kicked out of the battle. But i would want Tanki staff to look into the old update to vote or maybe Hazel can look into it

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

Maybe it's better to not talk about "skill" (a lot of emotions will arise..), but about a [battle Effciency Rating].

 

[battle Effciency Rating]

- values your relative score in battles, compared to your teammates (only to active teammares, so dont value mults in..))

I reworked the proposal; simulated it in excel.. and it truely worked :)

The [battle Effciency Rating] aligned to the score that the players scored in relation to each other; not overshooting and not growing endlessly; nor dropping down to the bottom of the scale. It works :)

Edited November 12, 2016 by BlackWasp777

[r_I_already_won0 2,339]

...

We could also have a "skill rating" with the same formula you mentioned, the one difference being that it's solely for PRO battles with supplies off. This would encourage more people to buy a PRO pass, which would generate more PRO battles, which would motivate more people to buy the pass, and so on.  

While it is impossible to adjust the formula to account for drug usage in normal battles (ex. how many points would using a DD take off?), it is quite easy to implement this for no-supplies battles only, in addition to the "battle efficiency rating" you proposed. 

Edited November 12, 2016 by r_I_already_won0

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

We could also have a "skill rating" with the same formula you mentioned, the one difference being that it's solely for PRO battles with supplies off. This would encourage more people to buy a PRO pass, which would generate more PRO battles, which would motivate more people to buy the pass, and so on.

I think we need it for normal battles as well, as if this would be used by the [battle] button, the batltes could be filled with evenly efficient players.. so that they will be more interresting and will not result in runners due to overpower of one team over the other.

 

 

 

 

While it is impossible to adjust the formula to account for drug usage in normal battles (ex. how many points would using a DD take off?), it is quite easy to implement this for no-supplies battles only, in addition to the "battle efficiency rating" you proposed.

From my original proposal (with corrections on grammar :P):

This rating has to be hosted seperate values for the gamemodes (CP, DM, CTF..) and for Drugs/non-Drugs and for Formats (XP/BP..).

This larger amount of ratings is not complicated at all, because those are just numbers in a database handled by the computer.. I mean, you do not have to calc it for yourself ;)

Edited November 12, 2016 by BlackWasp777

[r_I_already_won0 2,339]

 

Well we will have the DM tourneys soon so the DM ratings aren't that necessary...

 

My point was to call the rating for non-drug battles "skill rating" to get the point across. ;)

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

I do not know if I get your point.. (I am not a native English speaker as you might have guessed already :P)

 

I tried to call it not [skill rating] but [battle efficiency rating] for exactly that reason, that a drugged intermediate can beat a skilled non-drugger, and this would interfere with the rating completely. Besides the word "Skill" raises the emotions in tankers when you start to talk about it :P :P :P

 

Therefore I propose to measure the battle efficiency and put in in relation to other tankers. Of course playing drug free has to has to feed into another rating couter then playing drug battles (you can be a pro in drugfree, but a noob in tactical druggin).

 

At least.. we would have some other thing to brag about at the rating pages :P

 

Would look like that:

 

Battle Efficiency Ratings for player BlackWasp777

Edited November 12, 2016 by BlackWasp777

[orbanbotond 407]

GOOD :) 

[austen_pierce 1,948]

Tell me honestly though - when you log in, are you really going to roll the dice on a random battle on a random map with random players, trusting Tanki automation to judge players your 'equal'???

 

Or are you just going to keep looking for the Polygon, Sandbox, Arena, or Rio battle with a team who look somewhat competent?

[BLASTER872 1,892]

Ro I&S BlackWasp

 

Take rank into account

 

System could be abused (I play terribly, play against mults, then play wonderful and wreck them)

But, I don't like this, casual players who jsut wanna have fun.. cant.