Valid Fix Matchmaking battles by choosing players through GS

[Destrod 2,634]

This was suggested before as I remember but I couldn't find it. So, if the topic is still active, feel free to merge this with it.

 

So, it would be really good and maybe remove most pay2win features from the game if we were matching according to our GSs.

 

4000-6000/7000 GS in one group

 

7000+ in one group

 

Wouldn't it be good?

 

And also changing during the game should not be allowed, and if you say that we should use our equipments according to the map, there's also a solution to this, which is seeing the map we will play.

 

Or another solution is that you won't be able to increase your GS higher than 7000 if you joined a 4000-7000 GS battle.

 

I don't know how much is that possible but still a nice idea IMO.

Topic Merged.

 

Quite odd, the keyword GS wouldn't show up in the search option. In case you find an issue in finding duplicates you already know about, you can use the search by tag option(basically click on the related tag underneath any existing topic), it's not as accurate but it should narrow down the list enough for you to find it relatively quickly.

[u812ic 1,629]

With my present setup and basic green paint applied, my GS is 6075, but if I apply animated paint my GS jumps to 6124. Not much, I know, but since paint isn't supposed to have any protection value, then why should it affect the GS?

[crap_creep 6]

Time to use m0 hulls and turret while entering and then once dead change to

M5 :)

[u812ic 1,629]

Time to use m0 hulls and turret while entering and then once dead change to

M5 :)

M5? Which game do you have tanki mixed up with? 

[wolverine848 13,097]

Perhaps you could match them by average GS, meaning the average GS between their entire garage.

This account has...

4 m3 turrets, 2 m1 turrets and 5 m0 turrets.

3 m3 hulls and 1 m0 hull.

All my protections are at m3.     

 

I wonder how that "averages" out.  The modules will bring up my average.  Those with fewer modules?

[F.O.R.K.Y 33]

Then theres literally no point for legends with m4's to play anymore, Lol

[Jay 1,431]

As we all know, matchmaking can be frustrating at times. Especially if the teams are unbalanced. I think matchmaking should put players in teams according to gs, to create a more fair game.

 

Some people might use low GS things when entering a battle, to get into a lower GS game, and then change once they have loaded in.. to prevent this, i think you should see the average GS of all combined and active turrets/hulls for a more rounded pick.

 

For example, blue team has players with the GS range of 8000-8500, as does the red team. this might help balance out MM...

[Destrod 2,634]

As we all know, matchmaking can be frustrating at times. Especially if the teams are unbalanced. I think matchmaking should put players in teams according to gs, to create a more fair game.

 

Some people might use low GS things when entering a battle, to get into a lower GS game, and then change once they have loaded in.. to prevent this, i think you should see the average GS of all combined and active turrets/hulls for a more rounded pick.

 

For example, blue team has players with the GS range of 8000-8500, as does the red team. this might help balance out MM...

Topic Merged.

[wolverine848 13,097]

As we all know, matchmaking can be frustrating at times. Especially if the teams are unbalanced. I think matchmaking should put players in teams according to gs, to create a more fair game.

 

Some people might use low GS things when entering a battle, to get into a lower GS game, and then change once they have loaded in.. to prevent this, i think you should see the average GS of all combined and active turrets/hulls for a more rounded pick.

 

For example, blue team has players with the GS range of 8000-8500, as does the red team. this might help balance out MM...

Average GS of what combined?      The person's garage?     The players in the battle?

 

Not sure how either of those prevents a player from artificially lowering their GS to get easier competition.

Especially DM - where there are no teams.

[Tani_S 736]

Average GS of what combined?      The person's garage?     The players in the battle?

 

Not sure how either of those prevents a player from artificially lowering their GS to get easier competition.

Especially DM - where there are no teams.

hmm true.

We need a GS 2.0, a Garage Score  :P

[SmellThis 117]

great idea love it i go get my m0's on vs rookies and get 100 d/l thanks implement it now

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

Tanki doesn't care about balance or one sided battles, all they want is to extract money from players in any way they can, if that means players buying out of frustration or giving buyers the incentive of OP alterations, so be it.

 

Oh, and this idea is flawed because one can join with weak equipment then switch to stronger equipment.

 

A better way could be to have a rating which starts with the strongest hull and turret in your garage, then the other equipments and other turrets and hills giving less points to that rating, then use that rating to try to balance teams. But they want to favor buyers and groups, and Drones and Alterations... there's no balance there.

[loginci 877]

I really like this idea and should be handled in my opinion, a good solution for the game balance and perhaps matchmaking. Perhaps we wouldn't be able to find matches easily, like not before than 30 secs for one battle but I'd prefer playing a balanced game to an unbalanced one.

 

3 people already suggested this, and maybe there will be more, who knows. Eh tanki, don't you ever think about releasing an update like this? 4000-7000 and 7000-10000 would be a good idea. 

Tanki doesn't care about balance or one sided battles, all they want is to extract money from players in any way they can, if that means players buying out of frustration or giving buyers the incentive of OP alterations, so be it.

Oh, and this idea is flawed because one can join with weak equipment then switch to stronger equipment.

A better way could be to have a rating which starts with the strongest hull and turret in your garage, then the other equipments and other turrets and hills giving less points to that rating, then use that rating to try to balance teams. But they want to favor buyers and groups, and Drones and Alterations... there's no balance there.

I want Alternativa to earn money as much as they can but they shouldn't reflect this to the game balance. There should be a difference between buyers and non-buyers but a huge difference like this is clearly unacceptable.

[Aigaion 636]

*legends use lowest equipment, m0s&m1s, get put into battles against lower ranked players, switches to M4s*

[Astute_T.O 63]

I sometimes am put against a full m2 in 2nd lieutenant. I support this.

Edited December 31, 2018 by Astute_T.O

[Astute_T.O 63]

The teams in MM battles shouldn't be decided on GS but on Hull and Turret modification. It is possible for a buyer to get some 5000+ GS at Staff Sargeant.

[GorgoBlesk 831]

The teams in MM battles shouldn't be decided on GS but on Hull and Turret modification. It is possible for a buyer to get some 5000+ GS at Staff Sargeant.

Devs should make 'rating' with this formula: Level of hull + MU of hull + Level of turret + MU of turret.

 

M0 and M3 micro-upgrades would have value of 0,5 points (they are 20, not 10).

 

Highest possible 'rating' would be 80.

 

I have M2 2/10 Titan and M2 1/10 Smoky (my strongest equipment) so I should get 'rating' of 20+2+20+1 = 43.

 

This 'rating' would be always based on strongest equipment, not on equipment used in battle.

 

I would have 'rating' of 43 so I should face only players with 'rating' of 38-48.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Devs should make 'rating' with this formula: Level of hull + MU of hull + Level of turret + MU of turret.

 

M0 and M3 micro-upgrades would have value of 0,5 points (they are 20, not 10).

 

Highest possible 'rating' would be 80.

 

I have M2 2/10 Titan and M2 1/10 Smoky (my strongest equipment) so I should get 'rating' of 20+2+20+1 = 43.

 

This 'rating' would be always based on strongest equipment, not on equipment used in battle.

 

I would have 'rating' of 43 so I should face only players with 'rating' of 38-48.

Don't forget to incorporate protection modules... their m-level and MUs...

[GorgoBlesk 831]

Don't forget to incorporate protection modules... their m-level and MUs...

There is no need to make it complicated.

 

Players with good hull and turret have usually also good modules and good drones (if they use them).

 

Players with weak hull and turret have usually weak modules and weak drones (if they use them). Some of them would like to use drones but their rank is too low.

 

My 'rating' would put buyer Sergeants and WOs with M1 10/10 kits against M2 1/10 and 2/10 Captains, Majors and Colonels. When they have the same garage, why not?

[wolverine848 13,097]

There is no need to make it complicated.

 

Players with good hull and turret have usually also good modules and good drones (if they use them).

 

Players with weak hull and turret have usually weak modules and weak drones (if they use them). Some of them would like to use drones but their rank is too low.

 

My 'rating' would put buyer Sergeants and WOs with M1 10/10 kits against M2 1/10 and 2/10 Captains, Majors and Colonels. When they have the same garage, why not?

Have to disagree with you on this.

 

Sometimes - especially at mid to low-high ranks - players have to make tough choices.

You can fully MU your turret+hull all the way to next m-level, or buy some discounted modules that immediately give you 25+% protection - more than offsetting a players fully-MU-ed turret.

 

I can go into battle with an m2.5 and a bunch of modules at 25% or so.  I'm willing to bet I do better than the player with m2.9 - if I even meet that player.  My GS score might be low enough to give me easier opponents, even though I might have spent same amount of crystals as the player with m2.9.

 

Not including protection modules would be a grave error.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

I wish we can just worry about the turret, hull, module, and alteration (if any) the opponent has equipped as well as the micro upgrades. Instead of also have to worry about how many supplies, what paint, skin, and shot effect they have.

[GorgoBlesk 831]

Have to disagree with you on this.

 

Sometimes - especially at mid to low-high ranks - players have to make tough choices.

You can fully MU your turret+hull all the way to next m-level, or buy some discounted modules that immediately give you 25+% protection - more than offsetting a players fully-MU-ed turret.

 

I can go into battle with an m2.5 and a bunch of modules at 25% or so. I'm willing to bet I do better than the player with m2.9 - if I even meet that player. My GS score might be low enough to give me easier opponents, even though I might have spent same amount of crystals as the player with m2.9.

 

Not including protection modules would be a grave error.

Only the biggest buyers can afford all 14 M2 or M3 modules. You can not be protected against every turret.

 

You can put Thunder, Smoky and Hammer module but Shaft and Rail snipe you, Fire and Vulcan kill you via afterburn, Freeze circles you, Striker fires salvo, lucky Magnum shot and then mine.

 

You simply can not be protected against majority of enemies. Players like different turrets.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Only the biggest buyers can afford all 14 M2 or M3 modules. You can not be protected against every turret.

 

You can put Thunder, Smoky and Hammer module but Shaft and Rail snipe you, Fire and Vulcan kill you via afterburn, Freeze circles you, Striker fires salvo, lucky Magnum shot and then mine.

 

You simply can not be protected against majority of enemies. Players like different turrets.

Not sure how this would explain exclusion of modules in rating - since they are potent.

 

My Colonel account now has 10 of 12 modules at ~ 29% each.  Along with hornet+hunter+freeze+vulcan at m2.9

My legend account (L3) has all modules (except mines) at ~ 46%.

 

Depends on where you want to spend your crystals.

[Guest]

Easily be abused. Equip all M0s before entering battle and then switching once you are playing against lower ranked players.

[GorgoBlesk 831]

Easily be abused. Equip all M0s before entering battle and then switching once you are playing against lower ranked players.

The level and MU of strongest hull and turret of each player would count.

 

My strongest combo is M2 2/10 Titan and M2 1/10 Smoky. That means that if I took my M0 Viking and M0 Hammer, it would not help me at all because MM would count my strongest equipment.