Would you pay real money to play a retro version of Tanki?

[ByeByeBye 1,747]

I'd be happy to send in $100 a year or $10 a month to play a version of Tanki right around the Paint Separation time...let the paint separation update stand, but roll back all the other toxic updates.

 

I wonder if Tanki has thought about starting another game like this...the code should still be somewhere and it might only take one or two servers.  It would be really cool to have Tanki be fun again.

 

What do you think?  Would you pay to play a good version of Tanki?  How much?

[Pyre 3,485]

I woudnt. I dont have money, and I prefer the current version.

[splitterpoint 10,986]

No, might be nice having nostalgic servers but in terms of gameplay and balance; I prefer the current version.

[Musa 5,352]

Current Tanki is better

[Benefactor 6,888]

I woudnt. I dont have money, and I prefer the current version.

 

 

No, might be nice having nostalgic servers but in terms of gameplay and balance; I prefer the current version.

 

 

Current Tanki is better

 

I heard rumor that Tanki was dying. Hmmmm....  :blink:

[Maf 32,307]

So we're calling 2016 Tanki "retro" now?  :lol:

 

On a serious note - this would be a terrible financial decision for Tanki. Making an older playable version of the game has multiple huge disadvantages:

• It would take many months and man hours to create.
• It would drive some of the current audience away from the main game, which means less effective Matchmaking.
• It would create some hype on release date, but the vast majority of players would play it for 5 minutes and go back to the current version (because in most aspects it's undeniably better).
• Only a handful of players would actually stay and play regularly. The amount of revenue it would generate would cover only a small part of the development cost.
• My guess is it would stay active for a couple months or so, but then everyone would go back to the main game because it's better and has more active players.

So yeah, there's a reason why we don't accept ideas for "bringing back old tanki".

[Benefactor 6,888]

So yeah, there's a reason why we don't accept ideas for "bringing back old tanki".

Except maybe on an anniversary for a 24-hour celebration.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

If they revert the hull update of October 2016, the game would be even better than it is now.

 

Also buff hammer.

[Benefactor 6,888]

If they revert the hull update of October 2016, the game would be even better than it is now.

 

You mean switch back Hunter and Viking to their original parameters? I would be for it.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

You mean switch back Hunter and Viking to their original parameters? I would be for it.

And make all the hulls of the same class have different hp values. And return the light hulls original speed values.

[loginci 877]

So we're calling 2016 Tanki "retro" now?  :lol:

 

On a serious note - this would be a terrible financial decision for Tanki. Making an older playable version of the game has multiple huge disadvantages:

• It would take many months and man hours to create.
• It would drive some of the current audience away from the main game, which means less effective Matchmaking.
• It would create some hype on release date, but the vast majority of players would play it for 5 minutes and go back to the current version (because in most aspects it's undeniably better).
• Only a handful of players would actually stay and play regularly. The amount of revenue it would generate would cover only a small part of the development cost.
• My guess is it would stay active for a couple months or so, but then everyone would go back to the main game because it's better and has more active players.

So yeah, there's a reason why we don't accept ideas for "bringing back old tanki".

Yeah, true. I was also thinking that old Tanki is always better, but no, it isn't better in most aspects. The new game has one problem, it's pay-to-win and devs can solve it easy. they can add lots of skins and some upgraded features that won't affect the gameplay like PRO-Premium.

[fordmustang12345 3,910]

If they revert the hull update of October 2016, the game would be even better than it is now.

 

Also buff hammer.

just revert that entire update and we'd all be happier

[ThirdOnion 4,898]

Not really. Some things of old Tanki were better, but many were also worse. One tends to see the past in rose-tinted glasses anyway.

[CabbageRoll 3,018]

huge disadvantages:

• It would take many months and man hours to create.

 forgot to add real proof where developers added map missions accidentally, textures dont really tell anything

Edited September 30, 2018 by CabbageRoll

[BlackWasp777 4,498]

For a retro version.. no.

 

 

 

 

So we're calling 2016 Tanki "retro" now?  :lol:

Well if we wait 2 more years some players will ask to bring Tanki 2018 back.

Beeing serious -> ppl like not the game, but the fun they had.

And when you live through a game like Tanki, you always have more fun in the start, then in the end.

 

In the "end" of a players Tanki life cycle the most of them enjoy some special stuff.. like playing only polygon, others only hardcore drug wars, some enjoy xp/bp. But they did not start like that.. still they sticked to the game long enough to become like that.

 

So there was something in the past that kept them going.. and most likely it was not perfect balance of stuff like that (we never had that as far as I know).

People like to play "something new", they enjoy their first times when they hit a tank in midair (which comes common later on), they are so glad if they made it to the tankpole (which they become used to...).

 

I think this is the main reason why palyers like old times back.

[fordmustang12345 3,910]

Not really. Some things of old Tanki were better, but many were also worse. One tends to see the past in rose-tinted glasses anyway.

only thing I can see worse about old Tanki is that prot was stuck to paints, otherwise it was way better that now

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

I'd honestly be willing to pay real money for the mods to just ban those people who spam abut how "tanki is dying" every farting time there's an update

[ThirdOnion 4,898]

We even have crystal box as one of default cache contents of tanki and it was obviously removed 

 

Devs obviously dont destroy old code

A texture is not code. Code is rewritten, overwritten. Textures are just no longer referenced by the game.

Edited September 29, 2018 by ThirdOnion

[u812ic 1,629]

An MMO game I played a few years back, did just that, but the player didn't have to pay for it. Players were "screaming" to have the retro game back. The Devs had saved the code for the game as it was when it came out of Beta, including all the bugs and glitches. I joined the game about 4 years post-beta and had been playing the game for about 3 years when the old game was released. I made up a retro account to see what it was like back then. Boy! What a difference. 

 

The players had forgotten about the bugs and glitches, the fact that there were only 3 maps, 3 kinds of armor and 3 types of weapons. Bad graphics, including everything being slightly off color. In the forums, players were posting comments like and similar to: "I don't remember the game being like that." "Where did all those bugs come from? Why didn't the Devs doctor it up before releasing it?" The pat answer the Mods gave was, "You asked for the old game back and that's what you got." 

 

The newness lasted about a month or so, some players stayed on it a bit longer. After about 3 or 4 months, there were times I'd log into the retro server, clicked on the player tab and found I was the only one there. When I left the game, a few years later, the retro server was still there. Occasionally, it would peak out at 100 players, globally. 

[Guest]

I thought retro tanki meant pre-rebalance or pre-graphics update time.. nvm  :unsure:

[CabbageRoll 3,018]

A texture is not code. Code is rewritten, overwritten. Textures are just no longer referenced by the game.

yes i wrote a message like 2 minutes before that

[Heles 9,220]

Lol, no thnx 

[babyofRosemarysbaby 256]

You mean switch back Hunter and Viking to their original parameters? I would be for it.

Hunter was inferior garbage. Less health, less stable, less power, but more speed right? 

 

 

 

 

The thing needed half a stadium lenght to even make up for its hideous acceleration, not to mention it couldn't take a hit without doing ballerina spins, the original parameters were disgusting.

Now yes, the switch could've just been a hunter buff, but I guess devs figured that people who bought viking obviously wanted less control of their tanks.

Making all mediums same health was a good decision I'll give them that. Much easier to balance things when you have less variables.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

Hunter was inferior garbage. Less health, less stable, less power, but more speed right? 

 

 

 

 

The thing needed half a stadium lenght to even make up for its hideous acceleration, not to mention it couldn't take a hit without doing ballerina spins, the original parameters were disgusting.

Now yes, the switch could've just been a hunter buff, but I guess devs figured that people who bought viking obviously wanted less control of their tanks.

Making all mediums same health was a good decision I'll give them that. Much easier to balance things when you have less variables.

 

Well now hunter is the best hull to use in the game and the most versatile.

 

I can take the enemy head on and not have my aim knocked off once unless if it was from a railgun.

 

I can camp on high ledges and use the rocking ability to hit shots onto lower enemies.

 

I can tackle enemies that are on high ledge from down below.

 

I can shoot over Viking, hornet, and wasp teammates.

 

I can catch up to a Viking of the same modification.

 

 

Honestly, if Viking has the ability to shoot over half of the hulls in the game and to rock, but hunter doesn't. Then I wouldnt mind if hunter got the stability buff.

 

But that's not how it was.

[babyofRosemarysbaby 256]

Well now hunter is the best hull to use in the game and the most versatile.

I too agree that it's the best atm. However not nearly as decisively as the old viking was.

I did this profile data gathering thing a few weeks back on 4500 profiles. Basically, at m2 ranks usage of dictator, hunter and viking are pretty much equal. This was not the case before the update. So yes, I too think hunter sits on top, but people seem to like them pretty equally.

(and no viking m2 being exceptionally strong modification doesn't factor in. People still use m1 viking over m1 hunter even though hunter is clearly better. Earlier unlock ranks and MU:ing make tier-based power differences irrelevant)

 

You also make valid points in hunter being tactically more viable, but I really have to question this part: "I can catch up to a viking of the same modification".... you can't. Viking is simply faster, and not in the sense old hunter was "faster" viking actually has decent acceleration. 

Additionlly I don't know about the shooting over people thing, very turret specific, for example; my hammer tends to spray pellets over enemies when they get closer. And I often don't have time/space to rock forward for every shot. Shooting over people because you get hit also happens more with hunter. Besides, how often are your teammates blocking your view so badly, that instead of moving a little for a clear shot, you shoot over them? I can't recall the last time i had to do that.

 

You conclude by saying the switch wasn't equal, which i do agree with. My point was that it's still way more equal than the previous meta. And bringing back the old extremely unbalanced parameters would be regressive.