Declined Matchmaking

[l-lence 17]

You guys should make matchmaking In which buyers are placed with buyers and non buyers with non buyers

 

i think the game would be more fair then.

[Maf 32,317]

Declined

 

This doesn't work, because "buyer" and "non buyer" does not define how powerful that player is in battle. There are free players, who saved up crystals and have a full garage with thousands of supplies, and then there are buyers, who spend thousands on gold box supplies and paints, but don't have powerful equipment and/or aren't as skilled. Matchmaking should separate players by their ranks and skill, rather than whether or not they purchased items.

[Nine 693]

You guys should make matchmaking In which buyers are placed with buyers and non buyers with non buyers

 

i think the game would be more fair then.

I think it’s sort of doing that already, because im a HAEDCORE drugger and it’s putting me with other hardcore druggers

[BlackEliteEnemy2 250]

Declined

 

This doesn't work, because "buyer" and "non buyer" does not define how powerful that player is in battle. There are free players, who saved up crystals and have a full garage with thousands of supplies, and then there are buyers, who spend thousands on gold box supplies and paints, but don't have powerful equipment and/or aren't as skilled. Matchmaking should separate players by their ranks and skill, rather than whether or not they purchased items.

Please, if you don't think that M2 Smoky & Viking on is powerful, then tell me what on this Earth is powerful?

BUYers. They BUY crystals, they MU stuff. They got drugs. And you tell that they are weak?

 

It's nice to hear: with M1 stuff is powerful enough to fight against alted M4 stuff :)

[Maf 32,317]

Please, if you don't think that M2 Smoky & Viking on is powerful, then tell me what on this Earth is powerful?

Then players should be separated by equipment level and other factors (like how many supplies they have/use), but not exclusively by how much money they spent.

[BlackEliteEnemy2 250]

Then players should be separated by equipment level and other factors (like how many supplies they have/use), but not exclusively by how much money they spent.

But, I want to say that buyers can get this kind of tank. You can't say they have weak equip. But if you separate by eq. level, what's the point of upgrading tanks?

[r_Kirby4 358]

Then players should be separated by equipment level and other factors (like how many supplies they have/use), but not exclusively by how much money they spent.

Prioritize?

1. Equipment
2. Efficiency
3. Supplies usage rate
4. Rank

In my opinion.

 

- -

 

But if you separate by eq. level, what's the point of upgrading tanks?

Climbing up. Well, for example, in World of Tanks there is no experience system; players can grind for any amount of time playing with their low-Tier ranked tanks. It's just in a nature of a player to want to advance to the best, said so this efficiently could apply to the highest ranks. I personally prefer being destroyed continuously by a player having similar attributes than by some clearly overpowered drugfest tankpartyier.

 

- -

 

But then, would the game still profit as well? Again for example using WoT - game seems more fair and more profiting. Game includes premium tanks, barely more powered (but not overpowered) over other tanks of it's tier. In Tanki, in my opinion, this would earn less in some amount of time but keep the audience longer. A another buff in pricing micro-upgrades (especially speed-ups) would be something of a solution as in compare to WoT's slow, a lot pricing and/or impossible buff to an already more powered tank.