Episode 198 of the V-LOG is live!

[Ninja 10,468]

need explanation(breakthrough) in English 

Search for Shibe's vids on YT. They're pretty good. 

[RIDDLER_8 5,553]

I have linked my YouTube channel to the YouTuber TO site. My YouTube channel is a music channel. Will I get rewards by having Tanki Online players watch my music videos.

[Mikaelson 664]

I have linked my YouTube channel to the YouTuber TO site. My YouTube channel is a music channel. Will I get rewards by having Tanki Online players watch my music videos.

Hey,

 

The YouTuber TO program is specifically made for players who create Tanki Online related content. You are, however, more than welcome to also create other kinds of videos. You will only get rewarded for the content created about and/or surrounding Tanki Online; this is a very clever way to get more and more players to create TO content on YouTube — almost like 'free' advertising for the game if you will. 

 

One thing you could do would be to have the music playing on the background of a TO-related video; that way, you get to both keep the niche of your channel and be able to win some prizes from the program. 

[Zak 2,532]

I have linked my YouTube channel to the YouTuber TO site. My YouTube channel is a music channel. Will I get rewards by having Tanki Online players watch my music videos.

I'm afraid, no.

The main reason for having YoutuberTO program is to promote TO youtubers, those who make special videos about the game.

[RIDDLER_8 5,553]

Well, at least players will like music on my YouTube channel when they want to listen to music on their spare time.

[Showbot 819]

Can you developers plz never add the overdrives? the game is still playable right now, don't ruin it.

[Merovingian 656]

Please add the Overdrive, it is boring right now.  :P

[GeekSHizzle 522]

Please add the Overdrive, it is boring right now.  :P

Soon,they are trying hard,i can understand their stress.

[lssimo 1,559]

Don't say anything critical about MM, OP alterations, one sided battles, hackers, anything... Your post will be broomed under the carpe... I mean, moved to an appropriate carp... no, appropriate topic.

 

Holy Cow! I'm not good at this.

[Merovingian 656]

Don't say anything critical about MM, OP alterations, one sided battles, hackers, anything... Your post will be broomed under the carpe... I mean, moved to an appropriate carp... no, appropriate topic.

Holy Cow! I'm not good at this.

MM, you can discuss it here: Let's discuss Matchmaking 

However if you need more voices or followers to support you cause, you could write a compelling article where you explain the default and other aspect of it. And at the end you should expose your solution & improvement in details. 

...

One sided battles are due to many parameters and MM do not look at it the way you think. The system wait for many players to form a queue, then select 20 players based on ranks then create a random battles and send them there. The faster your ping the sooner you get there, if you use browser then your are more likely to get there 10-30 seconds after the guys with clients and mobile (they already have all the maps props).

So who ever fish was in that list would be assigned to a team. As TO wants all age and old capability of player to be able to play in the same battle, you will find quite a mix and wide range of ranks. Consequently you can have one time all the druggers in your team, and another time equally split, it is the roulette. I don't think TO will ever provide a truly match battle even if they try hard, because it is not possible (too many factor and player will always find a way to workaround it), and they would be silly to try. Look at professional football and rugby tourney even good team can loose because they choose the wrong tactic, the ball bounced a different way, one player was injured, and one action can make the game gone one way despite all the effort. It is worse here because player can still leave the mid-game with the consequence we know. Of course there are options to minimise it and TO is working on it to a certain point. TO wants a mix of player in every team.

....

Hackers are like the plague, and not only for TO, everybody game is fighting against them, it is a never ending story. To improve on your side you can be part of it and help by reporting.

...

Haha Holy cow exist, but carpets on the forum don't.

 

[lssimo 1,559]

MM, you can discuss it here: Let's discuss Matchmaking

However if you need more voices or followers to support you cause, you could write a compelling article where you explain the default and other aspect of it. And at the end you should expose your solution & improvement in details.

...

One sided battles are due to many parameters and MM do not look at it the way you think. The system wait for many players to form a queue, then select 20 players based on ranks then create a random battles and send them there. The faster your ping the sooner you get there, if you use browser then your are more likely to get there 10-30 seconds after the guys with clients and mobile (they already have all the maps props).

So who ever fish was in that list would be assigned to a team. As TO wants all age and old capability of player to be able to play in the same battle, you will find quite a mix and wide range of ranks. Consequently you can have one time all the druggers in your team, and another time equally split, it is the roulette. I don't think TO will ever provide a truly match battle even if they try hard, because it is not possible (too many factor and player will always find a way to workaround it), and they would be silly to try. Look at professional football and rugby tourney even good team can loose because they choose the wrong tactic, the ball bounced a different way, one player was injured, and one action can make the game gone one way despite all the effort. It is worse here because player can still leave the mid-game with the consequence we know. Of course there are options to minimise it and TO is working on it to a certain point. TO wants a mix of player in every team.

....

Hackers are like the plague, and not only for TO, everybody game is fighting against them, it is a never ending story. To improve on your side you can be part of it and help by reporting.

...

Haha Holy cow exist, but carpets on the forum don't.

 

With matchmaking we can only guess how it's matching players. Is b the system not waiting for 2 groups to put 1 on each team? Is the system not doing any sorting and it's just allocating players as they join? or something more sunnier like favoring buyers by putting them with other buyers most of the time.

 

You ask about solutions, I posted some before, and if i do it again they'll likely tell me to post them in IAS.

 

But since you're insisting, I think one solution could be to reduce the number of friends to 100. That would reduce the number of OP friends you can have to create OP groups.

Edited January 16, 2019 by lssimo

[wolverine848 13,097]

One sided battles are due to many parameters and MM do not look at it the way you think. The system wait for many players to form a queue, then select 20 players based on ranks then create a random battles and send them there. The faster your ping the sooner you get there, if you use browser then your are more likely to get there 10-30 seconds after the guys with clients and mobile (they already have all the maps props).

So who ever fish was in that list would be assigned to a team. As TO wants all age and old capability of player to be able to play in the same battle, you will find quite a mix and wide range of ranks. Consequently you can have one time all the druggers in your team, and another time equally split, it is the roulette. I don't think TO will ever provide a truly match battle even if they try hard, because it is not possible (too many factor and player will always find a way to workaround it), and they would be silly to try. Look at professional football and rugby tourney even good team can loose because they choose the wrong tactic, the ball bounced a different way, one player was injured, and one action can make the game gone one way despite all the effort. It is worse here because player can still leave the mid-game with the consequence we know. Of course there are options to minimise it and TO is working on it to a certain point. TO wants a mix of player in every team.

This is one of the major reasons for battle imbalance.  The rank spreads are too wide.

Better to have 7 vs 7 in a battle than to add two more players to mix ... one being Colonel and one being Gismo.

It is not fair for the Colonel and large potential for Gismo to exploit weaker opponents.

 

Match-Maker seems to put more weight on "filling" a battle than it does for balancing.

This is demonstrated by the frequency of blow-outs.

 

Many suggestions have been made in many threads for improving match-Maker.  feedback on that is minimal.

[Merovingian 656]

This is one of the major reasons for battle imbalance.  The rank spreads are too wide.

Better to have 7 vs 7 in a battle than to add two more players to mix ... one being Colonel and one being Gismo.

It is not fair for the Colonel and large potential for Gismo to exploit weaker opponents.

 

Match-Maker seems to put more weight on "filling" a battle than it does for balancing.

This is demonstrated by the frequency of blow-outs.

 

Many suggestions have been made in many threads for improving match-Maker.  feedback on that is minimal.

Before MM, the battle range was this wide already and MM till operate with the same rules. The fairness of strength cannot be achieved even with rank because at the same rank you can have player with strong equipment and other with bad equipment (or ill-equip for the map).

 

The direction, choice taken by TO on MM is currently very clear, everybody should play - otherwise they would have reduced the rank range a long time ago. Being a weak or low rank is weakness for an individual, however it is a team game so you are not alone. 

Yes you are right MM is for filling, mostly the rank mix average is respected, their is always the odd out and people leaving.

Yes there is a lot of suggestion for MM, but there is also patent made by other game company in that are that could prevent TO to actually implement some of those.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Before MM, the battle range was this wide already and MM till operate with the same rules. The fairness of strength cannot be achieved even with rank because at the same rank you can have player with strong equipment and other with bad equipment (or ill-equip for the map).

 

The direction, choice taken by TO on MM is currently very clear, everybody should play - otherwise they would have reduced the rank range a long time ago. Being a weak or low rank is weakness for an individual, however it is a team game so you are not alone. 

Yes you are right MM is for filling, mostly the rank mix average is respected, their is always the odd out and people leaving.

Yes there is a lot of suggestion for MM, but there is also patent made by other game company in that are that could prevent TO to actually implement some of those.

Before MM there was a battle-list.  It displayed the ranks for players in the battle.  One could join or not join based on that.

All that was needed was a player selecting create battle that was relatively close to your rank.  Then you never had to fight Gismos as a Colonel.

 

The "direction they chose" (if actually true - you are not a MOD - where's your inside info?) is poor.

Players have daily and weekly missions, and there are events like the Challenge (42 days!) wherein individual performances are focused on - not team play.  The lower-rank players have great difficulty completing these missions (finish top-3 x15) and gaining stars when they are so far below some of the other players in same battle.

 

You bring up team-play.  Ironic.  They merged servers of different communities and destroyed communication which basically has killed team-play.

 

Wait wut? Patents preventing improvements? :rolleyes:

What patent prevents TO from implementing early-battle termination - which they already had before?

What patent prevents TO from tightening rank-brackets so players don't get 0 stars for staying in and finishing one-sided battles?

What patent prevents TO from closing player slots with 3 or less minutes remaining?

[Merovingian 656]

Before MM there was a battle-list.  It displayed the ranks for players in the battle.  One could join or not join based on that.

All that was needed was a player selecting create battle that was relatively close to your rank.  Then you never had to fight Gismos as a Colonel.

 

The "direction they chose" (if actually true - you are not a MOD - where's your inside info?) is poor.

Players have daily and weekly missions, and there are events like the Challenge (42 days!) wherein individual performances are focused on - not team play.  The lower-rank players have great difficulty completing these missions (finish top-3 x15) and gaining stars when they are so far below some of the other players in same battle.

 

You bring up team-play.  Ironic.  They merged servers of different communities and destroyed communication which basically has killed team-play.

 

Wait wut? Patents preventing improvements? :rolleyes:

What patent prevents TO from implementing early-battle termination - which they already had before?

What patent prevents TO from tightening rank-brackets so players don't get 0 stars for staying in and finishing one-sided battles?

What patent prevents TO from closing player slots with 3 or less minutes remaining?

You could choose your battle yes, so did the mult, the raiders and the player setting map like trap to farm xp and crystal from your death.

If you wish you can still do it in pro-battle mode, it is your choice to play MM or pro or both, not TO, they might try to give you candy to play in MM thought, but I'm pretty sure you are strong enought to resist.

I don't need to be a MOD to make my own analysis and reach my own judgement, furthermore MOD have no insight on the dev works, they only repeat what is currently available (v-log, Wiki, news, patch...), explain what is not understood by players and also run some testing in battle to check some theory. I can do all of this and you know what...? You can do it too.

 

A year that MM is operating, uncountable number of battles played with MM, has the battle rank changed since? Take a hint.

In team mode you are in a team, do you not play as a team in a team? 

 

For the patent, you are too young to understand how it works, so i'm not gonna explain but they can make impossible one, more or all the possible improvement your listed. Just the fact that Hazel-rah mentioned it shows that they looked at patents in this area, at least they are aware of them. Patent is one of the many hurdles for improvement.

 

Regarding the point of improvement, put yourself feet in TO's shoes and weight the Pros and Cons and ask yourself why they are doing it the way it is currently. It is like the Kick system why they are not implementing it. To me there is obvious reason not to add kick system.

Edited January 16, 2019 by Merovingian

[wolverine848 13,097]

You could choose your battle yes, so did the mult, the raiders and the player setting map like trap to farm xp and crystal from your death.

If you wish you can still do it in pro-battle mode, it is your choice to play MM or pro or both, not TO, they might try to give you candy to play in MM thought, but I'm pretty sure you are strong enought to resist.

I don't need to be a MOD to make my own analysis and reach my own judgement, furthermore MOD have no insight on the dev works, they only repeat what is currently available (v-log, Wiki, news, patch...), explain what is not understood by players and also run some testing in battle to check some theory. I can do all of this and you know what...? You can do it too.

 

A year that MM is operating, uncountable number of battles played with MM, has the battle rank changed since? Take a hint.

In team mode you are in a team, do you not play as a team in a team? 

 

For the patent, you are too young to understand how it works, so i'm not gonna explain. Patent is one of the many hurdles for improvement.

Regarding the point of improvement, put yourself feet in TO's shoes and weight the Pros and Cons and ask yourself why they are doing it the way it is currently. It is like the Kick system why they are not implementing it. To me there is obvious reason not to add kick system.

I figured you'd skirt around the Challenge and mission-completion issues.

 

Anyone can guess - but not everyone posts like they actually understand what is really going on behind the scenes.

 

Try to help all of us infants understand and give a shot to answering my 3 questions on improving match-Maker.

Or are you just blowing more hot air?

[Retaliate 503]

:ph34r: 

 

[Hancho 3,902]

 

Interesting... 

[Merovingian 656]

I figured you'd skirt around the Challenge and mission-completion issues.

Anyone can guess - but not everyone posts like they actually understand what is really going on behind the scenes.

Try to help all of us infants understand and give a shot to answering my 3 questions on improving match-Maker.

Or are you just blowing more hot air?

Hot hair makes hot hair balloon fly, go figure.

 

You are not listening. Patents can stop TO from doing one or all of your request for MM. The game company who patented MM, and spend lots of money to do so, wants to prevent other company to use it, and they might no even use all the patented stuff, but it is enough to stop other company. I'm in product development and there is stuff that my client want to develop, but there are sometime technical reason, regulatory compliance and patent that make it impossible for me to do. 

 

It is a possibility, anyway, you forgot that they could be other reason for TO to not implement your requested changes, they might like it as it is for reason that you don't like and don't understand. 

 

Till now it looks like TO do not want to implement:

- early termination battle: there is obvious reason for that, especially with the current stars system rewards a lot more people would loose stars (both winners and loser).

- smaller rank bracket: TO said that everybody should be able to play and they want mixed level rank in battle - those are the same since I started to play 3 years ago.

- 3 minutes left: you can refuse to play that battle and leave, as far as I know there is no rules against that.

 

This said, you have all the rights to not be happy and request these changes. This TO choices however could evolves if the pool of player increase significantly.  

 

So far I'm happier with matchmaking, it is better than the previous system, I guess you like mults, raiders and traps, as you did not denied it.

 

Challenges is not problem for team play at all. So sorry to disagree with you on that one. Any effect bad or good would actually happens in both team. If it happens only in your team, maybe the problem is not your teammate (#just saying). 

 

Finish first 15 times is the toughest mission that is no surprise, but hey, no pain - no gain. You can still post against it as I have a feeling that this one will be changed, but most likely not as far as you want.

[lssimo 1,559]

What if Overdrives are separated into 3 categories, each category corresponding to each hull category, and you could choose any Overdrive from a category to go with your hull of that category?

 

This way Overdrives could be used to balance hull categories and give less pain to players as one hull one overdrive would.

 

But I don't like the idea of Overdrives at all, it's one of the causes of one sided battles.

 

Remember how Overdrives came to be? They said it was to give non buyers an oportunity to compete against druggers. That's no longer an issue because Containers give a lot of supplies. You'd have to be very noob to not have 100s of supply saved or not use them, but with Overdrives, the same noobs now get spawn killed over and over.

[wolverine848 13,097]

 

 

Hot hair makes hot hair balloon fly, go figure.

 

You are not listening. Patents can stop TO from doing one or all of your request for MM. The game company who patented MM, and spend lots of money to do so, wants to prevent other company to use it, and they might no even use all the patented stuff, but it is enough to stop other company. I'm in product development and there is stuff that my client want to develop, but there are sometime technical reason, regulatory compliance and patent that make it impossible for me to do. 

 

It is a possibility, anyway, you forgot that they could be other reason for TO to not implement your requested changes, they might like it as it is for reason that you don't like and don't understand. 

 

Till now it looks like TO do not want to implement:

- early termination battle: there is obvious reason for that, especially with the current stars system rewards a lot more people would loose stars (both winners and loser).

- smaller rank bracket: TO said that everybody should be able to play and they want mixed level rank in battle - those are the same since I started to play 3 years ago.

- 3 minutes left: you can refuse to play that battle and leave, as far as I know there is no rules against that.

 

This said, you have all the rights to not be happy and request these changes. This TO choices however could evolves if the pool of player increase significantly.  

 

So far I'm happier with matchmaking, it is better than the previous system, I guess you like mults, raiders and traps, as you did not denied it.

 

Challenges is not problem for team play at all. So sorry to disagree with you on that one. Any effect bad or good would actually happens in both team. If it happens only in your team, maybe the problem is not your teammate (#just saying). 

 

Finish first 15 times is the toughest mission that is no surprise, but hey, no pain - no gain. You can still post against it as I have a feeling that this one will be changed, but most likely not as far as you want.

 

 

 

"smaller rank bracket: TO said that everybody should be able to play and they want mixed level rank in battle - those are the same since I started to play 3 years ago"

What does this even mean?  How does tightening up rank brackets (to make playable battles) prevent people from playing?

Maybe they have to wait a little longer, but they will still be able to play.  Or 7 vs 7.. or 14 players in DM instead of 16.  Get outside of the box once in a while...

 

 "I guess you like mults, raiders and traps, as you did not denied it"

Why would I need to?  It's a rhetorical question - or at least - it should be.

And if you don't think there are mults in battles today you are delusional.

 

---------------------------

 

MM does not work unless players have incentive to play, and incentive to STAY and FINISH battles.

 

Having a "threshold" to get stars is counter to that.  Many players see their team is losing and bail early so they don't waste their time getting 1 or 0 stars and no chance for the top3-winners-team mission.  As soon as players bail that team is doomed and remaining players lose out even more.

 

Get rid of that threshold, allow players who stick it out in a crappy battle to get at least 1 star.  And players dropped into half-finished game as well. Otherwise - they see the current status and bail.

 

Players will play more and stay longer - and as a result, battles will improve.  It's a positive feedback-loop.

Edited January 17, 2019 by wolverine848

[lssimo 1,559]

"smaller rank bracket: TO said that everybody should be able to play and they want mixed level rank in battle - those are the same since I started to play 3 years ago"

What does this even mean?  How does tightening up rank brackets (to make playable battles) prevent people from playing?

Maybe they have to wait a little longer, but they will still be able to play.  Or 7 vs 7.. or 14 players in DM instead of 16.  Get outside of the box once in a while...

 

 "I guess you like mults, raiders and traps, as you did not denied it"

Why would I need to?  It's a rhetorical question - or at least - it should be.

And if you don't think there are mults in battles today you are delusional.

 

It's amazing how much you can type without actually saying anything.  :wacko:

The rank bracket was like 8 ranks wide a little while ago, now is either 9 or 10. Personally I'm doing good because I know when to leave a battle, like when I'm one of the lower ranks, but one sided battles is not enjoyable even if you're on the winning team, unless you're a son of a gun I guess.

[Merovingian 656]

"smaller rank bracket: TO said that everybody should be able to play and they want mixed level rank in battle - those are the same since I started to play 3 years ago"

What does this even mean?  How does tightening up rank brackets (to make playable battles) prevent people from playing?

Maybe they have to wait a little longer, but they will still be able to play.  Or 7 vs 7.. or 14 players in DM instead of 16.  Get outside of the box once in a while...

 

 "I guess you like mults, raiders and traps, as you did not denied it"

Why would I need to?  It's a rhetorical question - or at least - it should be.

And if you don't think there are mults in battles today you are delusional.

 

---------------------------

 

MM does not work unless players have incentive to play, and incentive to STAY and FINISH battles.

 

Having a "threshold" to get stars is counter to that.  Many players see their team is losing and bail early so they don't waste their time getting 1 or 0 stars and no chance for the top3-winners-team mission.  As soon as players bail that team is doomed and remaining players lose out even more.

 

Get rid of that threshold, allow players who stick it out in a crappy battle to get at least 1 star.  And players dropped into half-finished game as well. Otherwise - they see the current status and bail.

 

Players will play more and stay longer - and as a result, battles will improve.  It's a positive feedback-loop.

If you have a selective memory about rank range from before the MM have a look here https://en.tankiwiki.com/Rank_limits

 

Mult in MM? Yea right. Sounds like a 101 sore loser excuse to me.

 

The threshold is for stars only, without it you would have inactive player just standing there and waiting for the end of the battle. Sounds like perfect plan for abuse, don't you agree?

Plus plus with your termination battle system they will get the star in no time for nothing.  :ph34r:

90 is high but possible. Stay in battle and earn those 90 score, if you think you can't get them, then leave. 

[wolverine848 13,097]

If you have a selective memory about rank range from before the MM have a look here https://en.tankiwiki.com/Rank_limits

 

Mult in MM? Yea right. Sounds like a 101 sore loser excuse to me.

 

The threshold is for stars only, without it you would have inactive player just standing there and waiting for the end of the battle. Sounds like perfect plan for abuse, don't you agree?

Plus plus with your termination battle system they will get the star in no time for nothing.  :ph34r:

90 is high but possible. Stay in battle and earn those 90 score, if you think you can't get them, then leave. 

You can't even read what is in your own links.  DEFAULT  RANK  LIMIT.  Try to figure that one out will ya?

 

Ah forget it.

You really have no clue.  None.  At. All.

[Merovingian 656]

You can't even read what is in your own links.  DEFAULT  RANK  LIMIT.  Try to figure that one out will ya?

Ah forget it. You really have no clue.  None.  At. All.

ok, so you stop here? So disappointing, but not surprising.