How bad updates came. What do you think is their point?

[Picassoo 134]

It started in 2016. I remember when I logged on in November of this year to find that I couldn't create battles. Lots of people in the chat kept asking why, while those who already knew started cursing at the devs.

 

A few months later missions were removed from PRO battles. That was what started the revolution of how battles would be created and played. Server-created battles remained similair to PRO for some time, but the for freedom of map choice you had to sacrifice crystals, which in turn started the imbalance between casual PRO battle players and peoplw who kept clicking the 'quick battle' button.

 

Later on the battles have been continously shortened, drug mechanics were modified, and Magnum was introduced. MM system made map choice completely impossible.

 

While the increase in Mission Chain rewards made people happy for a while, it made it impossible for casual PRO battle players to compete.

 

Challenges and containers made weekend players completely incompetent and devaluated cosmetic items. By the way, it was stated in a V-LOG that XT skins would only be available in the shop and containers. Now any no-lifer can get them for $5.

 

How do the devs argue why they update the game like that? Here are some examples:

 

1. RK nerf. One player suggested it, so nerfing the RK is considered listening to players (even though the idea was by far not popular).

 

2. Shortening battles. In one V-LOG they simply said: "shorter battles mean more fun". Nothing else. No real reason.

 

3. MM system. Mods kept saying that all the negative comments regarding it were a result of predudice. When the update was released it turned out that the players were right. Yet the update was not removed.

 

4. Making PRO battles available from WO1. No reason at all, simply part of the anti-PRO canpaign.

 

5. Introducing new turrets. It was always just a few players who wanted new guns. The concept of Magnum is incompatible with this game.

 

6. Overdrives. They just said it would be "cool".

 

7. Challenges and containers. Just ripping off other games.

 

There were some more bad updates, but these are the major ones.

Why do you think the developers keep pushing such updates?

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

The updates that I hated the most came from the global update of 2016. That was when Viking and hunter switched stats (making hunter completely OP, while Viking becomes useless for mid and long ranged shot and projectile turrets to where you literally have to camp to be successful), separate m3s unlock at the rank of Marshall, and hulls of the same weight class had the same amount of HP at M0, m3, and m4.

 

1) hey, at least it now has a strategic setback instead of rushing head first into the enemy base, taking the brunt of the damage and then activating repair and getting the full health.

 

2) I also hated the shorter battle time, it means less time to be able to complete your missions per battle, and the devs reason was "to get stars faster". <_<

 

3) MM was a nice concept, though how it was implemented into the game was unfavorable.

 

4) Yeah I don't know why, but whatever.

 

5) introducing new features makes the game more interesting.

 

6) at least these over drives are hundreds of times better than the old ones.

 

7) sometimes devs gotta do what they gotta do to keep their games afloat.

[TheCongoSpider 8,942]

The updates that I hated the most came from the global update of 2016. That was when Viking and hunter switched stats (making hunter completely OP, while Viking becomes useless for mid and long ranged shot and projectile turrets to where you literally have to camp to be successful), separate m3s unlock at the rank of Marshall, and hulls of the same weight class had the same amount of HP at M0, m3, and m4.

[XxStriker 519]

That's me on both of my 4 star accounts. I got used to it for isida, but for thunder it's inferior unless I get a great deal of support.

Edited July 26, 2019 by XxStriker

[TheCongoSpider 8,942]

The updates that I hated the most came from the global update of 2016. That was when Viking and hunter switched stats (making hunter completely OP, while Viking becomes useless for mid and long ranged shot and projectile turrets to where you literally have to camp to be successful), separate m3s unlock at the rank of Marshall, and hulls of the same weight class had the same amount of HP at M0, m3, and m4.

That's me on both of my 4 star accounts. I got used to it for isida, but for thunder it's inferior unless I get a great deal of support.

But then we have this:

 

 

 

So Viking just seems to work for some people better than the other 2. That could explain why there are so many, players are just accustomed to it and it may be easier to control than it is for many others. I still get ragdolled when I play it so I'm not playing Viking. 

[The-Operator219 1,929]

 

 

That's me on both of my 4 star accounts. I got used to it for isida, but for thunder it's inferior unless I get a great deal of support.

That was you? The person pictured is my main alt.

[Maf 32,300]

So Viking just seems to work for some people better than the other 2. That could explain why there are so many, players are just accustomed to it and it may be easier to control than it is for many others. I still get ragdolled when I play it so I'm not playing Viking. 

I have the same situation here. not too long ago the hull physics were changed so that Viking, Dictator (I think) and Hornet became different from Wasp and Hunter. Heavy hulls don't really matter because they're slow enough that the physics difference isn't felt that much. I'm so used to Wasp and Hunter now, that switching to Hornet or Viking is an absolute pain because I keep losing control and crashing into things. Also, for some reason Viking feels a LOT lighter than Hunter and gets knocked around insanely hard when under fire, which makes it extremely annoying to play with.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

But then we have this:

 

 

 

So Viking just seems to work for some people better than the other 2. That could explain why there are so many, players are just accustomed to it and it may be easier to control than it is for many others. I still get ragdolled when I play it so I'm not playing Viking.

 

I do pretty good with Viking only if I'm camping or attacking the routes with the least resistance.

 

I obviously do better with more stability, but dictator is just weird, mammoth and titan are too slow for me, and hunter IMO has too many benefits (I only use it if I really need to be efficient for my missions), so viking is my only choice.

[XxStriker 519]

That was you? The person pictured is my main alt.

No. That's how I felt with both of my high rank accounts as they bought viking m2 and m3 when it was still heavy.

[Maf 32,300]

1. RK nerf. One player suggested it, so nerfing the RK is considered listening to players (even though the idea was by far not popular).

 

2. Shortening battles. In one V-LOG they simply said: "shorter battles mean more fun". Nothing else. No real reason.

 

3. MM system. Mods kept saying that all the negative comments regarding it were a result of predudice. When the update was released it turned out that the players were right. Yet the update was not removed.

 

4. Making PRO battles available from WO1. No reason at all, simply part of the anti-PRO canpaign.

 

5. Introducing new turrets. It was always just a few players who wanted new guns. The concept of Magnum is incompatible with this game.

 

6. Overdrives. They just said it would be "cool".

 

7. Challenges and containers. Just ripping off other games.

 

There were some more bad updates, but these are the major ones.

Why do you think the developers keep pushing such updates?

I won't explain it all in detail, because developers' logic and arguments for these updates has been told many times in the past. You're very late with that discussion. But here's a brief summary:

1. RK nerf - repair kit was too OP, so it was nerfed to help reduce the P2W aspect of supplies. I don't fully agree with the new mechanic, but I can see the reasoning behind it.
2. Shortening battles - this is to make the game more suitable for mobile phones, which are often used in situations where you don't have 10-15 minutes to sit in one place and concentrate on the game. It's also beneficial for players, since you finish battles faster and therefore get stars more often.
3. MM is unfavourable? You didn't expand on this at all. As far as I can see, MM does its job well and the only thing really inconvenient with it is the inability to pick the map.
4. PRO battles available from WO1 - I don't see why you think it's such a big issue. I completely forgot about that change. Either way, I doubt that any genuine low rank players even know about PRO battles, let alone want to regularly participate in them.
5. New turrets are fun, and always give the game a significant boost that helps retain current players. Magnum may not be the most balanced turret, but at least it has interesting mechanics. Balance can always be adjusted depending on the current situation.
6. I don't know about you, but I think overdrives ARE fun! They added a whole new layer of strategy to the game, making it more interesting and allowing you to make some incredible plays. That's the one update I thought was truly refreshing and game Tanki's gameplay a new life after it was getting stale.

Now, you really triggered me with the last one. How is "ripping off other games" in any way a valid point for criticism? If a feature works well in another game and players enjoy it, what's so bad about having it here too? Should we apply this logic to other things too?

"What a cool weapon. But Tanki better not add it unless they want to rip it off!"

"Oh, this other game has amazing anti-cheat. Tanki shouldn't improve theirs because that would be copying!"

"Wow this game mode is so fun. I sure hope it doesn't get added in Tanki because that would be a rip off!"

That's just absurd. If a particular feature/mechanic is successful in other games, then by all means it should be added to Tanki to improve the game.

[u812ic 1,629]

These are some of the thoughts I've had and have:

 

Devs have a ring in our nose, they lead and we follow.

 

Psychological warfare. Before the update actually occurs, they tell us how much it will benefit the players, how different it is, how much more fun Tanki will be, Tanki marches on with the new and improved. They try to set us up with all the positive aspects without telling us the downfalls. We get all pumped up, try it out and get POed when we find out all the negative aspects that were hidden from us. (It's called....Transparency)

 

The Devs have to come up with something to account for their time. Someone comes up with an idea, everyone (or most everyone) agrees. The code is written and the idea is implemented without proper testing or to see how the codes affects other aspects of the game. Some may say, "They do test on the test servers." Yes, for somethings they do, but how many changes have you seen that was not tested on the test servers?

 

(My Opinion Only) The CEO looks like Slave Driving Dictator. But as they say, "You can't judge a book by its cover." He may be the Cool Cat at work and a Party Hound after hours.

 

I wonder how much of the Russian culture and idealism is reflected in the game. I'm a German Polak with a drop of Russian. All of it is reflected in my family. Very confusing, growing up.

 

Instead of fixing a piece of code, they put a bandaid on it. Recently, we have been told that Tanki is outdated and not worth fixing because they are working on HTML5. Understandable, but how about before HTML5. Yes, may bugs and glitches seemingly have been fixed. If that be the case, then how come some of the old bugs and glitches come back to haunt us occasionally? The pat answer is all of our potato computers and no one knows how to dump a cache. Ok, ok, some don't. But every time I have a problem with Tanki, but not with any other multiplayer game from Europe, I get the links on how to dump my cache.

 

I'm about to embark on a Stephen King novel, so I should stop here before I get into too much trouble. Some thoughts are better kept to oneself.

[The-Operator219 1,929]

I mean, if they're going to try and copy other games they could do it better. Like actual matchmaking, which typically involves creating a queue of players and a new battle in a random map and game mode.

 

Or if they're going to make all the hulls in a weight class have similar health, why not give them unique attributes so one isn't objectively superior?

 

Or if they (god forbid!) decide to make one hull able to drop a devastating bomb every ten seconds, why not globally increase the health of the hulls so that said bomb isn't instantly fatal to anyone said hull just doesn't like?

 

It's not that they can't program or don't know how, it's that they barely put any real elbow grease into it. There's no soul to be found. And I know why, it's a flash game, but even that is going away any time now. Honestly if they want to keep playing the "we try to make things simple" card they shouldn't try to copy games that aren't simple like TF2, Paladins, Fortnite, etc. Games with better development teams who actually put some care and attention into what they make. They should make a simple flash game about small, medium, and big tanks that shoot one another with various turrets.

 

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but imitation itself doesn't make you as good as the original creator of what you're imitating. So yes, they have every right to name drop the BFG from Doom or say they've done their homework, but I personally find it a little bit insulting when they lobotomize what was already a pretty well-done game they had made so they can shove in some new system that imitates something much better. Tanki was original, now it's just trying to become something it's not and taking away from what it had.

 

That's not to say I don't want new content and such, I do, but not when that new content replaces an already good system and in some cases isn't even optional. Matchmaking is thankfully avoided in exchange for a monthly fee, Rugby and ASL are optional and have their fanbases, missions don't have to be completed if you have money to buy supplies and such. Viking now being completely different and not refunded because the developers drank lead poisoned vodka? No thanks! Now my account built around Viking is completely trashed. Wasps can now get pentakills for existing a short period of time and there's nothing you can do but accept the fact some Iranian tween is having a power rush over a cheap kill targeting you? No thanks, now Wasps are everywhere and heavy hulls are more or less helpless. Don't even try to say people spontaneously decided Wasp was more fun because of it's mechanics, we all know why they're so common now.

[Picassoo 134]

I won't explain it all in detail, because developers' logic and arguments for these updates has been told many times in the past. You're very late with that discussion. But here's a brief summary:

• RK nerf - repair kit was too OP, so it was nerfed to help reduce the P2W aspect of supplies. I don't fully agree with the new mechanic, but I can see the reasoning behind it.
• Shortening battles - this is to make the game more suitable for mobile phones, which are often used in situations where you don't have 10-15 minutes to sit in one place and concentrate on the game. It's also beneficial for players, since you finish battles faster and therefore get stars more often.
• MM is unfavourable? You didn't expand on this at all. As far as I can see, MM does its job well and the only thing really inconvenient with it is the inability to pick the map.
• PRO battles available from WO1 - I don't see why you think it's such a big issue. I completely forgot about that change. Either way, I doubt that any genuine low rank players even know about PRO battles, let alone want to regularly participate in them.

• I don't know about you, but I think overdrives ARE fun! They added a whole new layer of strategy to the game, making it more interesting and allowing you to make some incredible plays. That's the one update I thought was truly refreshing and game Tanki's gameplay a new life after it was getting stale.

PRO battles are of little interest on low ranks because they are not the 'default' gamemode. Players who participate in them earn less crystals, and they are kinda hidden from new players.

 

As for Magnum, the concept is simply game changing. It hinders defense and you can't be sure that you'll survive even with no enemies in sight.

 

OD's apparently do not work as intended. In practice you just get to wreck enemies from time to time, but you also can't perfectly plan an attack because one Mammoth can spoil it. 7 mins does not give much time to repeat that.

[Picassoo 134]

[*]New turrets are fun, and always give the game a significant boost that helps retain current players. Magnum may not be the most balanced turret, but at least it has interesting mechanics. Balance can always be adjusted depending on the current situation.

 

New features keep people interested, that's sure true. But wait 1-2 weeks, and the hype is gone, while the features permanently change the players experience. Think JGR, RGB, ASL, OD's or Gauss.

In my opinion the problem is not just balance -- a perfectly balanced game may still be boring.

 

Now, you really triggered me with the last one. How is "ripping off other games" in any way a valid point for criticism? If a feature works well in another game and players enjoy it, what's so bad about having it here too? Should we apply this logic to other things too?

"What a cool weapon. But Tanki better not add it unless they want to rip it off!"

"Oh, this other game has amazing anti-cheat. Tanki shouldn't improve theirs because that would be copying!"

"Wow this game mode is so fun. I sure hope it doesn't get added in Tanki because that would be a rip off!"

That's just absurd. If a particular feature/mechanic is successful in other games, then by all means it should be added to Tanki to improve the game.

Sorry for triggering you! Hope the effect was brief.

Interestingly, our views differ on that matter. I think Tanki was an original game, with no other like it. Making it similair to other games spoils the point of playing TO. All the new gameplay features made the game sort of dull.

Of course, being ripped off is not exactly criteria for removing a feature. But successful features do not have to work in different games, unless they are very similair.

Hopefully that sounds reasonable now.

[Picassoo 134]

These are some of the thoughts I've had and have:

 

Devs have a ring in our nose, they lead and we follow.

 

Psychological warfare. Before the update actually occurs, they tell us how much it will benefit the players, how different it is, how much more fun Tanki will be, Tanki marches on with the new and improved. They try to set us up with all the positive aspects without telling us the downfalls. We get all pumped up, try it out and get POed when we find out all the negative aspects that were hidden from us. (It's called....Transparency)

 

The Devs have to come up with something to account for their time. Someone comes up with an idea, everyone (or most everyone) agrees. The code is written and the idea is implemented without proper testing or to see how the codes affects other aspects of the game. Some may say, "They do test on the test servers." Yes, for somethings they do, but how many changes have you seen that was not tested on the test servers?

 

I totally agree. They have to report to their manager who in turn reports to the game owner(s)(or directly to the owner).

 

If players are happy without new features being added some devs might lose their job. So they created three new turrets, three new game modes, OD's, MM, Challenges, Alterations...

 

All these features needed their work, and still require balancing and fixes/adjustments.

[wolverine848 13,097]

 

 

I won't explain it all in detail, because developers' logic and arguments for these updates has been told many times in the past. You're very late with that discussion. But here's a brief summary:

1. RK nerf - repair kit was too OP, so it was nerfed to help reduce the P2W aspect of supplies. I don't fully agree with the new mechanic, but I can see the reasoning behind it.
2. Shortening battles - this is to make the game more suitable for mobile phones, which are often used in situations where you don't have 10-15 minutes to sit in one place and concentrate on the game. It's also beneficial for players, since you finish battles faster and therefore get stars more often.
3. MM is unfavourable? You didn't expand on this at all. As far as I can see, MM does its job well and the only thing really inconvenient with it is the inability to pick the map.
4. PRO battles available from WO1 - I don't see why you think it's such a big issue. I completely forgot about that change. Either way, I doubt that any genuine low rank players even know about PRO battles, let alone want to regularly participate in them.
5. New turrets are fun, and always give the game a significant boost that helps retain current players. Magnum may not be the most balanced turret, but at least it has interesting mechanics. Balance can always be adjusted depending on the current situation.
6. I don't know about you, but I think overdrives ARE fun! They added a whole new layer of strategy to the game, making it more interesting and allowing you to make some incredible plays. That's the one update I thought was truly refreshing and game Tanki's gameplay a new life after it was getting stale.

Now, you really triggered me with the last one. How is "ripping off other games" in any way a valid point for criticism? If a feature works well in another game and players enjoy it, what's so bad about having it here too? Should we apply this logic to other things too?

"What a cool weapon. But Tanki better not add it unless they want to rip it off!"

"Oh, this other game has amazing anti-cheat. Tanki shouldn't improve theirs because that would be copying!"

"Wow this game mode is so fun. I sure hope it doesn't get added in Tanki because that would be a rip off!"

That's just absurd. If a particular feature/mechanic is successful in other games, then by all means it should be added to Tanki to improve the game.

 

 

You "triggered" ME on #3.

MM does almost nothing well.  The list of problems is endless.  Was poorly implemented in TO.

 

One of main things it was supposed to do was get ppl into battles faster.  Nope. I was able to pick my battles faster from original battle list.

 

And... Challenges are not bad because they rip off other games.  They are bad because they ruin battles.  Make players even more selfish.

I know the Team concept/co-operation has slowly been dwindling - but - Challenges are putting the final nails in the coffin.

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

 

MM is unfavourable? You didn't expand on this at all. As far as I can see, MM does its job well and the only thing really inconvenient with it is the inability to pick the map.

 

PRO battles available from WO1 - I don't see why you think it's such a big issue. I completely forgot about that change. Either way, I doubt that any genuine low rank players even know about PRO battles, let alone want to regularly participate in them.

 

New turrets are fun, and always give the game a significant boost that helps retain current players. Magnum may not be the most balanced turret, but at least it has interesting mechanics. Balance can always be adjusted depending on the current situation.

 

I don't know about you, but I think Overdrives ARE fun! They added a whole new layer of strategy to the game, making it more interesting and allowing you to make some incredible plays. That's the one update I thought was truly refreshing and game Tanki's gameplay a new life after it was getting stale.

1: I like MM b/c it's less biased. In the old days.... in certain maps, one type of turret are everywhere (i.e. Highways that houses armies of Shafts in team fight). Now they are less common but still may be annoying. And playing the same map repetitively can be boring too.

 

2: Um.... it's b/c the low rank tankers may not have sufficient crystals for Pro-Battle Pass.

 

3: I like Magnum, even it may be annoying.

 

4: Oh yes, my favorite. Tankers wants "Strategy! Strategy! Strategy!" and this may meet the demand. 

 

Tankers kept crying "Alternativa, Mammoths are stealing all golds! Plz remove the current OD and bring back the old one!", but um.... 5 seconds is not that OP. Not to mention Wasp's Ivy Mike can shut it down. 

[Dliver 436]

I won't explain it all in detail, because developers' logic and arguments for these updates has been told many times in the past. You're very late with that discussion. But here's a brief summary:

1. RK nerf - repair kit was too OP, so it was nerfed to help reduce the P2W aspect of supplies. I don't fully agree with the new mechanic, but I can see the reasoning behind it.
2. Shortening battles - this is to make the game more suitable for mobile phones, which are often used in situations where you don't have 10-15 minutes to sit in one place and concentrate on the game. It's also beneficial for players, since you finish battles faster and therefore get stars more often.
3. MM is unfavourable? You didn't expand on this at all. As far as I can see, MM does its job well and the only thing really inconvenient with it is the inability to pick the map.
4. PRO battles available from WO1 - I don't see why you think it's such a big issue. I completely forgot about that change. Either way, I doubt that any genuine low rank players even know about PRO battles, let alone want to regularly participate in them.
5. New turrets are fun, and always give the game a significant boost that helps retain current players. Magnum may not be the most balanced turret, but at least it has interesting mechanics. Balance can always be adjusted depending on the current situation.
6. I don't know about you, but I think overdrives ARE fun! They added a whole new layer of strategy to the game, making it more interesting and allowing you to make some incredible plays. That's the one update I thought was truly refreshing and game Tanki's gameplay a new life after it was getting stale.

Maf, ever the apologist. I do agree on a couple of points however. Mostly it's Eh or disagree.

 

Yes repair kit needed a nerf. Nothing was more irritating than nearly taking a guy out then he fired up the old repair kit and was back to full health almost immediately. And I agree that I'm not overly thrilled with the implementation too.

 

Shortened battles are good? Now you do have a half way good point that it may help the mobile version, but that's about it. We all know the truth of the matter has to do with falling numbers of players and higher an higher wait times. Unfortunately It hasn't helped those problems at all. I really love it when it says you have a 15 sec. wait time and it times out. On average wait times are 4 to 5 times longer than the posted wait time. Yes, it sometimes works out, but that is not the norm in my experience.

 

I won't get to much into MM. My opinion of it is well known.  If you truly want to be honest, a majority would probably be overjoyed if that monstrosity went away. You saw a huge drop in players when it was implemented.

 

New turrets, hit and miss there. Worst one though was magnum.

 

Overdrives - I think they over-complicate the game. They're just a new type of drug with very long cool down times that you don't have to pay for. Though I wouldn't be surprised if Pony Tail Boy and the Dev's figure out a way for you to have to pay for them soon, as the money dries up due to lack of players. Maybe having a system similar to the batteries for drones?

 

The main point is this - No matter how you view the updates brought about by Pony Tail Boy and the Devs, the proof is the game itself. The numbers keep falling. Can't even break 20,000 during peak times now. This is summer break MAN! Numbers used to skyrocket this time of year, but instead they're going down. Once again - However you view the updates, it is obvious that they're not attracting new players and the existing ones are leaving. That's the real proof of whether they were good updates or not.

Edited July 31, 2019 by Dliver

[Maf 32,300]

Maf, ever the apologist. I do agree on a couple of points however.

 

The main point is this - No matter how you view the updates brought about by Pony Tail Boy and the Devs, the proof is the game itself. The numbers keep falling. Can't even break 20,000 during peak times now. 

I'm not saying I agree with all of these changes or like them, but I understand why they had to be done and I'm doing my best to inform players about developers' reasoning behind these changes. In other words, I'm just a messenger  :P

 

As for the numbers falling thing - that's old news. To quote Hazel directly - the numbers are decreasing "at an expected rate". Hexed and I are working on a newspaper article now where this is one of the points that we'll cover, so make sure to check that out.

[u812ic 1,629]

I'm not saying I agree with all of these changes or like them, but I understand why they had to be done and I'm doing my best to inform players about developers' reasoning behind these changes. In other words, I'm just a messenger  :P

 

As for the numbers falling thing - that's old news. To quote Hazel directly - the numbers are decreasing "at an expected rate". Hexed and I are working on a newspaper article now where this is one of the points that we'll cover, so make sure to check that out.

Don't shoot the messenger.

[Dliver 436]

As for the numbers falling thing - that's old news. To quote Hazel directly - the numbers are decreasing "at an expected rate". Hexed and I are working on a newspaper article now where this is one of the points that we'll cover, so make sure to check that out.

And that is the mentality that has killed this game.... Expected failure.

 

I can just see it now when Pony Tail Boy meets with the Dev's: 

Dev minion - Hey Boss, the number of players dropped again after the last greatest update.

Pony Tail Boy - That's OK, I expected that....

 

A real attitude for success. I know over time a game will peak out, but I also know that you can reach an equilibrium where a game can continue on successfully if done properly. Unfortunately it seems the attitude of Pony Tail Boy and the Devs is that failure is to be expected. 

 

Lastly : Don't get me wrong I do respect you Maf. Even though you are an apologist for what they do, at least you try to provide the most accurate information possible. Thank you for that. :D

 

Also I look forward to your article.

Edited July 31, 2019 by Dliver

[Maf 32,300]

but I also know that you can reach an equilibrium where a game can continue on successfully if done properly.

Not when the game is outdated and runs on an old game engine that keeps crashing for 80% of players.

[mendark27 77]

Not when the game is outdated and runs on an old game engine that keeps crashing for 80% of players.

Exactly! Instead of burning their resources in the continuous stream of updates that nobody wanted, they could have utilized them to really "develop" the game. Some good games have done this and they're still prevalent in this era. It's all about priority, instead of developing the game Tanki decided to suck whatever there is left.

Edited July 31, 2019 by mendark27

[Dliver 436]

Not when the game is outdated and runs on an old game engine that keeps crashing for 80% of players.

 

 

Exactly! Instead of burning their resources in the continuous stream of updates that nobody wanted, they could have utilized them to really "develop" the game. Some good games have done this and they're still prevalent in this era. It's all about priority, instead of developing the game Tanki decided to suck whatever there is left.

Now Maf, while mendark27 may have voiced it a bit more forcefully than I would, I have to agree with him. How many years have we been waiting for HTML5? How many updates have they released that they've acknowledged had bugs? How long have we had a client program that is buggy as a dog that hasn't been given a bath in a year? How long have Pony Tail Boy and the Dev's put a low priority on dealing with hackers?  Looks to me like Pony Tail Boy and the Dev crew  really don't care.

 

Tanki was a timeless game that was simple, fast paced and fun to play. Add in to that PVP game play and you have an endless variation of game play that people enjoyed playing. The question as to whether a game is successful or not is whether or not people find it fun to play. Pony Tail Boy and the Dev's failed to keep Tanki fun, adding one non fun update after another. Why do you see such an upsurge in the return of games from the 80's and 90's? Because they are simple and fun. Tanki is no longer the simple, fast paced, and fun game that it was when you had 120,000 players playing during peak times and you had trouble finding a server to get on. Now you are lucky to get 18,000. Back then you waited because there were too many players. Now you wait because there aren't enough. The reason for this is a No Care, grab all the money you can, and when the ride ends move on attitude. They are not building a game they're riding it down.

Edited July 31, 2019 by Dliver

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

Because they are simple and fun. Tanki is no longer the simple, fast paced, and fun game that it was when you had 120,000 players playing during peak times and you had trouble finding a server to get on. Now you are lucky to get 18,000. Back then you waited because there were too many players. Now you wait because there aren't enough. The reason for this is a No Care, grab all the money you can, and when the ride ends move on attitude. They are not building a game they're riding it down.

120,000 players or 120,000 accounts? ;)