Implosion of Battles

[austen_pierce 1,948]

When one team finally eeks out an advantage. And everyone on the other team leaves.

 

What can be done about this?

 

.

Edited January 29, 2017 by austen_pierce

[stanzhang 3,291]

When one team finally eeks out an advantage. And everyone on the other team leaves.

 

What can be done about this?

 

.

What do you want to be done about this?

[kaisdf 3,320]

The battle auto-finishes, then people join the other team...

[austen_pierce 1,948]

I'm aware of the early battle termination system, but I am more interested in what can be done about the underlying problem. Why do players leave losing battles? Can gameplay be changed so that players no longer want to leave, even if their team is losing?

[Amagi 1,728]

The losing mentality of the TO community has always been there since the beginning of the game. It's because it's just too easy to leave without any repercussions, especially when you're getting nothing out of a losing battle anyway. Of course, there will always be exceptions, but that's my observation so far.

[Maf 32,307]

Am I the only one who always switches teams when they start getting unbalanced? :D

[austen_pierce 1,948]

Part of the problem is the vast inequity of battle funds distributed to the team's. Losing teams get so few crystals it's not worth it to stay.

 

My suggestion to that would be a flat crystals per kill/cap. The winning team gets a flat bonus. This rewards all players for their play and would further reduce if not eliminate the problem of raiding parties / takeover teams.

 

I also want to hear what other people think could be done.

[r_carlo1234 118]

That's one thing I don't like about the game.

 

For Tanki 8 against 5 is a balanced game that doesn't need an early termination and at the beginning even if there is an 8 to 1 imbalance it'll also not trigger early termination soon enough. I think that should change

 

I also have an idea in IAS for compensating inactivity in a team that could also help a team that started playing with fewer players. Check it out.

 

Another solution could be to even the number of players at the beginning of a battle automatically. For example, if there is 8 players in one team and 4 in the other from the last battle, Tanki should only keep the top three players of each team in their new places and shuffle the others to even the numbers. Those that finished 4th will automatically switch teams when there is imbalance, and so on.

 

Moreover, there is not an incentive to stay in the losing team until the end. If you're the brave one to stay until the end there is no reward for you. That should change too, you should be able to get the crystals of those that abandoned your team.

 

Thanks.

[r_carlo1234 118]

Am I the only one who always switches teams when they start getting unbalanced? :D

Very few do that. Many only join the winning team with higher ranks and more Premium Account players (possible buyer with better equipment and possible drugger)

[Katydid 97]

If the opposing team has taken over your base and hovering over the respawn areas, why stay? You're just making more points for them and none for you or your team. Almost sounds like multing.

[BNICE1 70]

Am I the only one who always switches teams when they start getting unbalanced? :D

yeah i do that alot

[Spit_Fyre 334]

My suggestion to that would be a flat crystals per kill/cap. The winning team gets a flat bonus. This rewards all players for their play and would further reduce if not eliminate the problem of raiding parties / takeover teams.

 

I also want to hear what other people think could be done.

I like your suggestion too. There's something in the pipeline (but it's been there for a loooong time) -

http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=237215&page=8&hl=%2Bsimulated+battle+commencement&do=findComment&comment=5398039

[Benefactor 6,888]

Am I the only one who always switches teams when they start getting unbalanced? :D

I guess it feels better to jump on a winning team. OK, I'll try it your way.....  :P

[Maf 32,307]

I guess it feels better to jump on a winning team. OK, I'll try it your way.....  :P

Well, with it the case is usually that I destroy the other team, they run and then I switch teams to destroy the other team that I was on. Yeah, that 20% module is OP as heck  <_>

[Benefactor 6,888]

Well, with it the case is usually that I destroy the other team, they run and then I switch teams to destroy the other team that I was on. Yeah, that 20% module is OP as heck  <_<

Ah, so you play Team-Pong.

That Best Helper paint looks nice, like it came fresh out of the car wash. +

Gratz on that.

 

P.S.

Does 20% against any turret make a difference?

Edited January 30, 2017 by Benefactor

[Maf 32,307]

Does 20% against any turret make a difference?

Against 1 - no. Against all enemies in any battle - massive difference. On larger maps (where I most often play) there usually isn't a single T-module that would give better protection than a 20% M-module.

[CooperO 7,956]

I'm aware of the early battle termination system, but I am more interested in what can be done about the underlying problem. Why do players leave losing battles? Can gameplay be changed so that players no longer want to leave, even if their team is losing?

If I'm in the winning team, I ask my team to go a little more easy on the enemy team to prevent them from running. Basically give them the idea they still have a chance to win. To me there's no fun in battles where your opponents leave the battle. Just as there is no fun when all your teammates run when things get tough.

[austen_pierce 1,948]

I like your suggestion too. There's something in the pipeline (but it's been there for a loooong time) -

http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=237215&page=8&hl=%2Bsimulated+battle+commencement&do=findComment&comment=5398039

I'm surprised that survived. I didn't post this in I&S because I know anything having to do with battle fund, gold box, or crystals in general are rejected outright.

 

I also agree that early termination doesn't kick in fast enough after the battle turns over. I don't see why there would be any delay. The 30 second countdown after the timer turns red is sufficient. If the battle doesn't balance, just end it already.

 

Or just not let battles continue, period. :D. Nah, too drastic.

 

Also too drastic is to simply remove the option to leave battle. Wouldn't work anyway. Players would just close the window or client.

 

I'm at a loss. How to fix this when changing the fund mechanism won't be considered???

[Skills.n.Girls 767]

Depends if I am with working-losing-team or if I am with multing-losing-team.

I hate those, I can't wait till I may get "Legend" kit since in XP battles you can find good teams.

[DeathByBoss 104]

Part of the problem is the vast inequity of battle funds distributed to the team's. Losing teams get so few crystals it's not worth it to stay.

 

My suggestion to that would be a flat crystals per kill/cap. The winning team gets a flat bonus. This rewards all players for their play and would further reduce if not eliminate the problem of raiding parties / takeover teams.

 

I also want to hear what other people think could be done.

Nah i have a better idea which is similar. Keep a solid flat crystal amount per kill cap, but winning team gets 50% more. This means no losers, just some extra-winning-winners.

[Katydid 97]

Part of the problem is the vast inequity of battle funds distributed to the team's. Losing teams get so few crystals it's not worth it to stay.

 

My suggestion to that would be a flat crystals per kill/cap. The winning team gets a flat bonus. This rewards all players for their play and would further reduce if not eliminate the problem of raiding parties / takeover teams.

 

I also want to hear what other people think could be done.

For the most part, you would be right. But eliminate the problem? The jury is still out on that one. It depends on the types of weapons and tanks with upgrades/modules on the other team.

 

Consider this situation (which I've seen a few times on other maps):

 

Map is Barda, TDM, 8 man teams. 15 minute battle.

 

I was on red, losing team. I started out with Isida/Hornet, but later changed to Titan. The rest of our team had one Shaft/Mammoth, and the rest were Hornets, Wasps and one Viking. Turrets: 2 Firebirds, 2 Railguns, 1 Freeze, 1 Hammer, 1 Thunder. No Strikers.

 

Blue had: 3 Striker/Mammoth, 2 Hammer/Hornet (working together), 1 Freeze and 1 Firebird (working together...If you didn't freeze to death, you were burned alive), 1 Isida M3/Viking. No Wasps.

 

Some of red were using supplies, some weren't. All of blue were using supplies and went in the battle field for more.

 

Red advanced on blue and were quickly slaughtered. Blue easily over took our base. It was like shooting fish in a rain barrel, with us being the fish. They had all the respawn areas well covered. I'll have to give our team credit, they stuck it out until the bitter end, though I don't know why most didn't leave.

 

We tried to get our kills in, but all the hulls were like impregnable steel walls. I firmly believe that all of blue had both M3's and M2's MU'd to or nearly to M3's in hulls and turrets. Top man on our team got 84 crystals. He got his kills at the beginning of the battle when we tried to raid blue team. I was too busy healing and dying (mostly dying) to notice the battle fund. 

 

In a situation like this, your suggestion wouldn't necessarily work. The raid/overtake would still have happened. I think, had there been other players on our team, they still would have left regardless of the crystal distribution. After we were overtaken, I don't think we got any more kills, though shots were delivered. Their Isida did more killing than healing. 

 

Blue team worked together so perfectly, it's hard to believe they were random players. (Or maybe they weren't). :ph34r:

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

Well the old saying goes like this "if you can't beat them, join them"

[wolverine848 13,097]

For Tanki 8 against 5 is a balanced game that doesn't need an early termination

Wait - what? 8 vs 5 is... balanced?  How so? 

 

Assume each tank is relatively even... 5 vs 5 cancels out. That leaves 3 tanks to grab supply drops or cap flags.

 

It's not balanced  but - timer won't kick in either. has to be 8 vs 4 in that case, no?

Edited January 31, 2017 by wolverine848

[Pink_Legacy 269]

Wait - what? 8 vs 5 is... balanced? How so?

 

Assume each tank is relatively even... 5 vs 5 cancels out. That leaves 3 tanks to grab supply drops or cap flags.

 

It's not balanced but - timer won't kick in either. has to be 8 vs 4 in that case, no?

Oh, I think you missed a sarcasm flag, dear sir/lady.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Oh, I think you missed a sarcasm flag, dear sir/lady.

If that's the case then.... ooops.