Declined Remove Damaging teams option in pro battles

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

Then which one?

One battle with this option on means one less battle available for those looking for more normal battles.

 

Apart from that, cheaters like to create these battles for their benefit because many will join these battles without realizing this option is on, then when they notice this they leave leaving more rewards for the cheaters.

[railguniz4noobz 2,394]

One battle with this option on means one less battle available for those looking for more normal battles.

 

Apart from that, cheaters like to create these battles for their benefit because many will join these battles without realizing this option is on, then when they notice this they leave leaving more rewards for the cheaters.

On top of this, it promotes sabotage as there is no real penalty for killing your teammates. A captured flag is worth much more than a kill.

[lukey0 27,543]

One battle with this option on means one less battle available for those looking for more normal battles.

 

Apart from that, cheaters like to create these battles for their benefit because many will join these battles without realizing this option is on, then when they notice this they leave leaving more rewards for the cheaters.

Well out of the 93 Pro Battles available to join on my Generalissimo account guess how many have friendly fire enabled? 20? 10? Well try 1. Yep 1 battle... I don't think it has much effect.

 

How are they cheaters? It's your fault you didn't check the settings before joining. 

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

Well out of the 93 Pro Battles available to join on my Generalissimo account guess how many have friendly fire enabled? 20? 10? Well try 1. Yep 1 battle... I don't think it has much effect.

 

How are they cheaters? It's your fault you didn't check the settings before joining. 

It's probably less than 3 percent, but I still think it's better if removed.

 

It's player's fault for not being careful or not reading very carefully the many battle options before joining a battles and cheaters count on this. So overall the option is not good. Don't think of the noobs, think of the cheaters.

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

Well out of the 93 Pro Battles available to join on my Generalissimo account guess how many have friendly fire enabled? 20? 10? Well try 1. Yep 1 battle... I don't think it has much effect.

 

How are they cheaters? It's your fault you didn't check the settings before joining. 

as he said, if no one even uses it then might as well remove it

[RevengeAttacker 217]

Use that space for a much better setting.

[lukey0 27,543]

as he said, if no one even uses it then might as well remove it

Why remove something for the sake of removing something? It's not like it's hurting anything by being an option. 

 

 

Use that space for a much better setting.

Possible, but there could also just be another tick button added for the new option. 

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

its not removing for the sake of removing. it's removing cause there's no purpose of it being there. 


not one of us said we want to remove it for the sake of removing, that's just your own made up nonsence. 

we gave our reasons for removing, you said that our reasons don't matter cause such battles are so rare anyway... and only in regard to your comment we say that if they are so rare then removing them won't affect anythinng too. 

thank you for showing us your room temperature IQ

[ThirdOnion 4,898]

It's a circular debate. 

 

We say those battles are rare.

You say if they are so rare removing them has no effect.

We say by that logic, keeping them in the game also has little effect.

You say that in that case removing them also has no effect.

 

And so on and so forth. Hence it comes down to whether the devs feel like using their time in this way.

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

It's a circular debate. 

 

We say those battles are rare.

You say if they are so rare removing them has no effect.

We say by that logic, keeping them in the game also has little effect.

You say that in that case removing them also has no effect.

 

And so on and so forth. Hence it comes down to whether the devs feel like using their time in this way.

excatly. 

 

so being rare has nothing to do with our reasons. That fool started it so i was just showing him how stupid it was... but he didn't get the point and actually thought that was my reason. 

[RevengeAttacker 217]

I didnt want this to be a fight...

 

Wait nvm its me being stupid

 

Yay I'm a fool

[lukey0 27,543]

its not removing for the sake of removing. it's removing cause there's no purpose of it being there. 

 

 

not one of us said we want to remove it for the sake of removing, that's just your own made up nonsence. 

 

we gave our reasons for removing, you said that our reasons don't matter cause such battles are so rare anyway... and only in regard to your comment we say that if they are so rare then removing them won't affect anythinng too. 

 

thank you for showing us your room temperature IQ

It has a purpose, to inflict damage on your teammates if you want that option enabled, duh. If it had no purpose it would be a tick box you could click but nothing would happen. 

 

How? Fact is people will complain if the option is there and people will complain if the Deves remove it. See the situation they are in? You don't have to say 'we want it removed for the sake of removing it' because your reasons of 'they are so rare' 'players just make those battles so leave leave and receive a bigger fund' which are true, but basically scream the reason above.  

 

I'm with ThirdOnion here, there is no point continuing this. The discussion will just continue to go round and round. 

[RevengeAttacker 217]

I'm sorry for everything I did here. I just made a suggestion because I thought it was good.

Admin please close this topic

[lukey0 27,543]

I'm sorry for everything I did here. I just made a suggestion because I thought it was good.

Admin please close this topic

You don't have to be sorry about anything. You had an idea, and made a topic about it, nothing wrong with that. :)

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

I'm sorry for everything I did here. I just made a suggestion because I thought it was good.

Admin please close this topic

What did you do wrong? Nothing. It's a good idea. Just because someone started to argue for the sake of arguing doesn't mean it's a bag idea.

[Viking4s 10,791]

Never used, even if it is used; useless.

Remove it and make a better feature.

It is not useless, E-sport players uses this function in many battle formats. As e-sport play a sizeable part of Tanki Online this option is very unlikely to be removed.

What better feature are you proposing?

 

Yes it does. Games with this option are unplayable since teammates are constantly killing eachother. Heavy hulls sit on the flag so they can kill the flag runners for easy experience.

Every game with this option enabled takes away from other, actual games.

Pro Game are there to give options to player to customise their battles. If you decide to join that battle you then agree to play according to the set up. If you can't bother to check the set up, then play normal battle so you don't have to think about it.

 

Another declined idea with no good reason.

Untrue see above. And it's better to add something than remove it, because once it is removed it's unlikely to be added later.

 So becareful for what you wish for.

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

Lol, untrue see above. And it's better to add something than remove it, because once it is removed it's unlikely to be added later.

 So becareful for what you wish for.

Laugh all you want you punk, the fact is that we gave valid arguments against it and you just decided to ignore them in your reply. And since there are valid arguments on both sides the idea shouldn't be capriciously declined, let devs decide... if they even care to check ideas.

 

I see more abuses than uses, but how can we have a discussion with people that want to have arguments that go in circles. It's like dogs chasing coyotes.

[Viking4s 10,791]

Laugh all you want you punk, the fact is that we gave valid arguments against it and you just decided to ignore them in your reply. And since there are valid arguments on both sides the idea shouldn't be capriciously declined, let devs decide... if they even care to check ideas.

 

I see more abuses than uses, but how can we have a discussion with people that want to have arguments that go in circles. It's like dogs chasing coyotes.

"lol" was over the top sorry about that.

The cons do overcome the pros.  

Removing it, will harm the e-sport. As know you can still choose not to participate and avoid the abuse. 

So many ideas and little time, so part of the responsibility is delegated to the owner of this section and this not us who decided it like this - it's sponsored by the dev. So if they are not happy with our work they will let us know.

 

Anyway, all ideas (declined, under review...) are summarised into a weekly report, so it is not lost and you can still discuss it. We have seen in the past that declined idea were then amended to under review, there is still hope. 

[Lankbouv 6,347]

Never used, even if it is used; useless.

Remove it and make a better feature.

"never used"< ok Mr.Ignorant, it's used in nearly all eSports matches because it ensures people don't shoot indiscriminately, and makes it a more realistic combat scenario.

 

And also, why is removing it a good use of time?  If you dont like it, dont use it.

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

We also talked about keeping the option for Clan and Private battles, and like it can stay for eSports.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

The friendly fire option is disabled by default, but it's there for when we want to play with it on.

 

Not to mention it's good practice for e-sports players

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

The big deal with Decline is that these declined ideas will soon be archived. So please don't decline ideas that have good reasons.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

The big deal with Decline is that these declined ideas will soon be archived. So please don't decline ideas that have good reasons.

And what good reasons are there to remove the friendly fire option?

[lukey0 27,543]

And what good reasons are there to remove the friendly fire option?

Oh you shouldn't have asked that question. Prepare for a paragraph on the only reason. It's not used.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

Oh you shouldn't have asked that question. Prepare for a paragraph on the only reason. It's not used.

Just because it's not frequently used doesn't mean that no one plays in it.

 

Like I said a couple posts back, it may not be used all the time, but the option is there when we want to try a new difficulty in battles. Plus it's good practice for e-sports players.

 

And don't give me that balcony crap of an excuse of sabotage. Hell, I'll answer with the fact that the players that do the sabotage are the problems themselves, not the option.