Game and Team Balance

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

Smoky crits are powerful at low ranks yes - but - the % is low.  Wouldn't be end of world if m0 and m1 damage was dropped a bit.

Fixed at 10%-12.5%?  Too low at upper ranks.  Much too random and player has to rely more on luck.  That just won't fly.

 

Missiles... buff "Min projectile speed" but lower "Shell acceleration time"?

Your suggestion might end up nerfing both "Shell acceleration time" and "Max projectile speed"

Maybe a better solution is to raise "Min projectile speed" and lower "Max projectile speed" slightly.

 

But really...

If a player can't currently avoid a missile at long range that player needs to work on awareness and/or driving skills.

Especially if the striker has uranium alteration equipped.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Especially if the striker has uranium alteration equipped.

The slow-motion one... like they are torpedoes fighting through breakers?

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

The slow-motion one... like they are torpedoes fighting through breakers?

Yes.

[Maf 32,307]

I don't think we should strive for perfect balance (team balance that is) in the first place. 

This is an important point. How good can balance really be without removing the human factor and without completely rigging the results? Think about professional football - when you have the best of the best teams competing in the World Cup Final, surely their skill level would be pretty much the same, so the results of matches shouldn't be that drastic. Yet due to human factor we had a result of 7-1 in one of the semi-final games. Does that mean that the balance was bad and a weak team got matched against a strong one? No, it just means that some additional factors resulted in one team winning.

 

Same in Tanki - even if you get two teams with identical equipment and identical "skill" (based on K/D, effectiveness of whatever), the result of the battle might still be a "blowout" due to human factor.

[wolverine848 13,097]

This is an important point. How good can balance really be without removing the human factor and without completely rigging the results? Think about professional football - when you have the best of the best teams competing in the World Cup Final, surely their skill level would be pretty much the same, so the results of matches shouldn't be that drastic. Yet due to human factor we had a result of 7-1 in one of the semi-final games. Does that mean that the balance was bad and a weak team got matched against a strong one? No, it just means that some additional factors resulted in one team winning.

 

Same in Tanki - even if you get two teams with identical equipment and identical "skill" (based on K/D, effectiveness of whatever), the result of the battle might still be a "blowout" due to human factor.

Problem is - we are NOT getting "balance" in terms of equipment when the rank-range is 8+.

The Devs have decided to sacrifice quality of battles in the name of speedy battles.  This is a mistake IMO.

 

And I don't think anyone is expecting "perfect balance".  We just want most battles close enough that each team has a decent chance.

This does not happen often enough.

[u812ic 1,629]

Problem is - we are NOT getting "balance" in terms of equipment when the rank-range is 8+.

The Devs have decided to sacrifice quality of battles in the name of speedy battles.  This is a mistake IMO.

 

And I don't think anyone is expecting "perfect balance".  We just want most battles close enough that each team has a decent chance.

This does not happen often enough.

Then the question comes back to http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=380003&p=6689938. Would you be willing to wait longer for a more balanced battle?

[wolverine848 13,097]

Then the question comes back to http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=380003&p=6689938. Would you be willing to wait longer for a more balanced battle?

Of course.  I thought the post you quoted there indicated that.

[CooperO 7,956]

This is an important point. How good can balance really be without removing the human factor and without completely rigging the results? Think about professional football - when you have the best of the best teams competing in the World Cup Final, surely their skill level would be pretty much the same, so the results of matches shouldn't be that drastic. Yet due to human factor we had a result of 7-1 in one of the semi-final games. Does that mean that the balance was bad and a weak team got matched against a strong one? No, it just means that some additional factors resulted in one team winning.

 

Same in Tanki - even if you get two teams with identical equipment and identical "skill" (based on K/D, effectiveness of whatever), the result of the battle might still be a "blowout" due to human factor.

Exactly, and with that in mind, the winning team shouldn't be penalized for it. Imagine those football games, where the winning team would lose a point for every goal that the losing team would make.

 

Problem is - we are NOT getting "balance" in terms of equipment when the rank-range is 8+.

It is still possible to get perfect balance in terms of equipment with a rank range of 8 or more, but only if rank isn't the only factor taken into account. Even with wide rank ranges, each team can have an equal amount of m3s, m2s etc. The thing is that rank alone doesn't determine which equipment is used. On top of that, ranks among teams might be somewhat balanced, but one team might have more players that are ranked above a certain unlock rank than the other team.

[Maf 32,307]

It is still possible to get perfect balance in terms of equipment with a rank range of 8 or more, but only if rank isn't the only factor taken into account. Even with wide rank ranges, each team can have an equal amount of m3s, m2s etc.

The only problem with this is that you end up with 2-3 high rank players on each team playing the game, while the rest are lower ranks serving as cannon fodder. Developers say that the advantage for the low ranks is that they get more crystals from fighting high ranks (due to fund being higher), but I'm not sure if it would really be worth the struggle for them.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Exactly, and with that in mind, the winning team shouldn't be penalized for it. Imagine those football games, where the winning team would lose a point for every goal that the losing team would make.

 

It is still possible to get perfect balance in terms of equipment with a rank range of 8 or more, but only if rank isn't the only factor taken into account. Even with wide rank ranges, each team can have an equal amount of m3s, m2s etc. The thing is that rank alone doesn't determine which equipment is used. On top of that, ranks among teams might be somewhat balanced, but one team might have more players that are ranked above a certain unlock rank than the other team.

I'm not just talking about Team balance.

 

The poor shlep playing against players 8+ ranks higher and with team-mates 8+ ranks higher is at a huge disadvantage.

Good luck getting missions completed, collecting stars or (dare I say it) snagging that top-3 winning team.

Those players just end up as cannon fodder and fillers for 8 vs 8 battles.

[ghost-guns 1,486]

Balance... LOL. It is all about luck. The matchmaking system is abysmal at making fair and balanced games.

[u812ic 1,629]

Balance... LOL. It is all about luck. The matchmaking system is abysmal at making fair and balanced games.

@Maf explains it here:

 

http://en.tankiforum.com/index.php?showtopic=380003&do=findComment&comment=6689938