HTML5 limited public release

[Maf 32,300]

It's annoying how I have to go to the Flash client or TO mobile to buy product kits with crystals. If this is declined or invalid, then Tanki did an oopsie (if you know what I mean). Please don't merge this topic with any other topic. 

Topic merged

 

Any feature that exists in Flash but not HTML5 just hasn't been added yet. Developers will gradually implement all the additional functionality of HTML5 before actually forcing players to migrate to it. For now you can continue using the Flash version, while HTML5 has the essential features needed for proper open testing.

[Zekrom 316]

 

Ok, thanks.

 

I'll use new HTML5 version for PRO battles though, because my pro pass just ran out :(

[BouDy 110]

I know , you've added this new loading screen last year .. But  idk why do i feel that it is more suitable for html5 interface.

And , if you just implement that loading screen into New HTML5... http://prnt.sc/p7rjwd

It will be easy for developers to implement Hexed idea ( Loading Screens in containers and challenges ) and also you need to implement it because it's in mobile version and as developers mentioned before mobile version is made in HTML5......

i wish you just understood what i meant to say........

Tell me what do u think guys!

[Maf 32,300]

 

Topic merged

 

That loading screen is very low resolution, designed for small screens. It's pretty cool, but it can't be used in HTML5 directly - it looks unprofessional.

[Picassoo 134]

I like some features of the new HTML5, but others need fixing.

 

1. It is impossible to use the garage or browse battles while having the chat open. This seriously harms the social aspect of the game and makes playing with friends harder.

 

2. Please implement a sliding bar like in the Flash so that choosing the maximum and minimum rank for battles you create becomes more comfortable.

 

3. 'Advanced' battle settings are seperately placed and reset completely when you change the battle format. I assume the latter is a glitch. All of this makes creating battles less comfortable.

 

4. The main chat often glitches.

 

Hope my observations will help deal with these important game issues. Thank you.

[Maf 32,300]

 

Topic merged

[The_Pakistani 16,768]

I like some features of the new HTML5, but others need fixing.

 

1. It is impossible to use the garage or browse battles while having the chat open. This seriously harms the social aspect of the game and makes playing with friends harder.

 

2. Please implement a sliding bar like in the Flash so that choosing the maximum and minimum rank for battles you create becomes more comfortable.

 

3. 'Advanced' battle settings are seperately placed and reset completely when you change the battle format. I assume the latter is a glitch. All of this makes creating battles less comfortable.

 

4. The main chat often glitches.

 

Hope my observations will help deal with these important game issues. Thank you.

But why you're asking for this? Go outside and chill :)

[lssimo 1,559]

I like some features of the new HTML5, but others need fixing.

 

1. It is impossible to use the garage or browse battles while having the chat open. This seriously harms the social aspect of the game and makes playing with friends harder.

 

2. Please implement a sliding bar like in the Flash so that choosing the maximum and minimum rank for battles you create becomes more comfortable.

 

3. 'Advanced' battle settings are seperately placed and reset completely when you change the battle format. I assume the latter is a glitch. All of this makes creating battles less comfortable.

 

4. The main chat often glitches.

 

Hope my observations will help deal with these important game issues. Thank you.

 

In my opinion the PRO Battles section should have a chat next to it. But the MM section no.

 

Why?

 

Because I think Groups should be removed and Friends shouldn't be put in the same battles in the MM system, so no need for chat there. But for PRO Battles obviously yes.

Edited September 18, 2019 by lssimo

[Ninja 10,468]

Because I think Groups should be removed and Friends shouldn't be put in the same battles in the MM system

That would utterly destroy the fun, 50% of the reason I play is to play with friends. Otherwise it just turns into a repeatable grind. 

 

Is this you main account? If so I think you'll probably change you mind after a 1000+ hrs. To me there is only so many ways to capture a flag and kill an enemy, it gets repetitive. Friends keep it fun. If not then I suppose we have different perspectives.

[Guest]

Oh - so fps is not the tanks jumping around part?

FPS indicates how fast everything on your screen is drawn - the tanks, the map, the visual effects, the UI, etc. Having 60 FPS means that everything on your screen is updated and redrawn 60 times a second. Since rendering is handled client-side (that is, your PC does not need to communicate with the server in order to be able to draw everything on the screen), your FPS is independent of your internet connection and instead depends on how good your hardware is.

 

Now, even though the client (your PC) does not need information from the server to draw things, it does need to be told by the server what to draw. This is where packets come in. Packets are collections of data that are sent by the server to the client, and in the context of a game like Tanki Online, a packet may contain data such as the positions of all the tanks in the battlefield, their velocities, the positions of flags and rugby balls, whether a tank is firing or not, the status of CP points, etc. When the client receives a packet, it updates the information it already has, then draws everything based on that information. After that, it will "guess" what will happen next based on the information it has received and continue to draw frames accordingly, until it receives the next packet. The rate at which packets are sent out by the server is called the tickrate.

 

Now let's look at an example. Suppose your FPS is 60, and the tickrate happens to be 60 as well. Every 60th of a second, the client receives a packet and draws a single frame right after. Everything is good and looks correct.

 

Now suppose we experience something called packet loss: due to a poor internet connection, instead of the 60 packets that the client receives every second, it receives only 15. That means that in between packets, your client draws not one but four frames. Once it has received a packet and draws a single frame, it needs to draw three more frames, but where is it going to get the information to draw them? This is where the client has to do guesswork. Let's say we received a packet and in the packet, it was said that a tank at point A was going 5m/s in a certain direction. The client then assumes that the tank will go 5m/s in that direction without changing it's path until it receives the next packet, and thus draws the tank moving in that direction for the next three frames. Once it receives the next packet, it can now be sure of where the tank is and update its position accordingly. Now, because the client has had to guess where the tank is for only 3/60ths of a second, there isn't much of an issue since the tank couldn't have possibly changed its velocity drastically during that time.

 

Tanks start jumping around when the client starts receiving packets very rarely. Suppose that instead of receiving 15 packets a second, the client now receives a single packet every five seconds. This is a problem. The client now has to draw 300 frames (60 frames per second * 5 seconds) in between receiving each packet, and to do that it needs to guess what is going on for five seconds! If we go back to our previous example, the client is going to continue to assume that a tank is travelling at 5m/s in a certain direction for those five seconds. But in reality, that tank may have changed direction, or slowed down, or even been destroyed. So the client has been showing its position incorrectly for five seconds, and then when the next packet comes in and indicates that the tank is in a completely different location, the client snaps it to the correct location, and you get jumping tanks, even though your FPS has been 60 this entire time.

Edited September 18, 2019 by ThirdOnion

[wolverine848 13,097]

That would utterly destroy the fun, 50% of the reason I play is to play with friends. Otherwise it just turns into a repeatable grind. 

 

Is this you main account? If so I think you'll probably change you mind after a 1000+ hrs. To me there is only so many ways to capture a flag and kill an enemy, it gets repetitive. Friends keep it fun. If not then I suppose we have different perspectives.

I have well over 1000 hrs in this game - not a fan of Groups.

 

I really don't believe they only play other groups.  For example... a non-peak time period... 1 group hits play.  What happens if no other group comes along shortly for same battle-mode?   They wait... and wait... and wait...?   Or MM just slots them in next battle with spots open?

I'm thinking the latter.

 

But TO could appease players by making it more transparent - by tagging Groups similarly to the way Clans are tagged.  Then we'd know for sure.

[XxStriker 519]

I have well over 1000 hrs in this game - not a fan of Groups.

 

I really don't believe they only play other groups.  For example... a non-peak time period... 1 group hits play.  What happens if no other group comes along shortly for same battle-mode?   They wait... and wait... and wait...?   Or MM just slots them in next battle with spots open?

I'm thinking the latter.

 

But TO could appease players by making it more transparent - by tagging Groups similarly to the way Clans are tagged.  Then we'd know for sure.

I've waited over 10 minutes without a battle once when I tried to group with some random person :( Had to go alone...

[wolverine848 13,097]

I've waited over 10 minutes without a battle once when I tried to group with some random person :( Had to go alone...

I've had some long waits - maybe not 10 min - but not in a group.

 

But I'd still like to see the tags...

[Initiate 1,306]

 

He's been on the forum for years :P

 

His post count had a glitch I think - it used to be over 10K if I'm not mistaken. Regardless, he has at least one account at .

 

*Edit: but then I again I was positive he had a Legend account so perhaps I have the wrong person and he's the noob you make him out to be |-|D

Edited September 19, 2019 by Initiate

[lssimo 1,559]

That would utterly destroy the fun, 50% of the reason I play is to play with friends. Otherwise it just turns into a repeatable grind.

 

Is this you main account? If so I think you'll probably change you mind after a 1000+ hrs. To me there is only so many ways to capture a flag and kill an enemy, it gets repetitive. Friends keep it fun. If not then I suppose we have different perspectives.

Friends can play PRO Battles. Or Groups and Friends and play against other Groups and Friends in MM Battles that are only for Groups and Friends. There could also be a Chat for Groups and Friends to chat with your Group or your Friends or to find rival Groups.

Edited September 19, 2019 by lssimo

[Ninja 10,468]

I have well over 1000 hrs in this game - not a fan of Groups.

 

I really don't believe they only play other groups. For example... a non-peak time period... 1 group hits play. What happens if no other group comes along shortly for same battle-mode? They wait... and wait... and wait...? Or MM just slots them in next battle with spots open?

I'm thinking the latter.

 

But TO could appease players by making it more transparent - by tagging Groups similarly to the way Clans are tagged. Then we'd know for sure.

I think during off peak times its reasonable to put groups with solo players, otherwise groups would be waiting far too long to get into a match.

 

Even during peak times it take slightly longer to get into a battle with a group, I suspect thats because it must place you against at least one other group, though as you say with little transparency its hard to do much more than guess here.

 

Friends can play PRO Battles. Or Groups and Friends and play against other Groups and Friends in MM Battles that are only for Groups and Friends. There could also be a Chat for Groups and Friends to chat with your Group or your Friends or to find rival Groups.

All this take away convenience from playing with friends, its impossible to fill a PRO battle consistently and with MM it would likely take far too long to get into a match if such rules were implemented. Convenience and removing barriers to entry are some of the most important things to keep players playing.

[wolverine848 13,097]

I think during off peak times its reasonable to put groups with solo players, otherwise groups would be waiting far too long to get into a match.

 

Even during peak times it take slightly longer to get into a battle with a group, I suspect thats because it must place you against at least one other group, though as you say with little transparency its hard to do much more than guess here.

This would lead to even less players during off-peak times...   

[Viking4s 10,791]

For off-peak time, when number of player drop bellow a certain number, MM should adapt and create smaller team 6 vs 6.

Additionally have only 2 choices for battle mode:

1- Random team mode (even drop ASL)

2- DM

 

Increase fund by 5%-10% to compensate.

Probably do something with the map menu: Reduce to the top preferred one or add a special one. Which ever option is more appealing.

Edited September 19, 2019 by Viking4s

[Ninja 10,468]

This would lead to even less players during off-peak times...

 

As would forcing groups to wait for long times by making them play against other groups, its a vicious circle unless you stike a balance between the options.

[BuddyIV 4]

My keyboard is lame, and I cannot use the normal arrow keys to move my tank around, so in normal tanki I have to customize my control keys to "O" for forward, "K" for left, "L" for backwards, and ";" for right. The HTML5 version does not currently have the option to customize, and as such I cannot effectively test it out.

[lssimo 1,559]

As would forcing groups to wait for long times by making them play against other groups, its a vicious circle unless you stike a balance between the options.

 

How about this idea: Groups and Friends play 2 ranks lower than Solo players.

 

For example, Groups and Friends can occupy ranks from WO1 to Captain, while Solo players can occupy ranks from WO3 to Lieutenant Colonel.

 

And for transparency we add Wolv's idea.

[registration999 11]

My browser support fully GPL2 when I test it, my PC has powerful hardware but when I played the HTML5 version my FPS is 18?

I disable all the enhancement, no sky, drop box, chat, fog and shadow...etc and my FPS still 12-18.

Test it with flash version and my FPS is 60.  please fix it

[Tidebreaker 1,669]

My browser support fully GPL2 when I test it, my PC has powerful hardware but when I played the HTML5 version my FPS is 18?

I disable all the enhancement, no sky, drop box, chat, fog and shadow...etc and my FPS still 12-18.

Test it with flash version and my FPS is 60.  please fix it

Finally someone shares my pain.

[Ninja 10,468]

How about this idea: Groups and Friends play 2 ranks lower than Solo players.

 

For example, Groups and Friends can occupy ranks from WO1 to Captain, while Solo players can occupy ranks from WO3 to Lieutenant Colonel.

 

And for transparency we add Wolv's idea.

Not sure I get what the objective is here, placing groups with lower ranks is just going to make them more powerful... I thought the opposite was what you wanted. Not to mention it'll throw off any balance there was in the game.

[lssimo 1,559]

Not sure I get what the objective is here, placing groups with lower ranks is just going to make them more powerful... I thought the opposite was what you wanted. Not to mention it'll throw off any balance there was in the game.

It's the opposite of what you understood. Not against lower ranks but against higher ranks.

 

Today with one account I had 4 battles against the same group of at least 2 players, both with Premium. All 4 battles they were the highest and second highest rank, I was too, but the first 3 battles I was placed in the weak team and they got the strong team.

 

Then I decided to wait a few minutes and when I joined a battle I saw them again, but this time the battle was even, probably a group in my team or random strong players, at the end we won.

 

If I hadn't waited maybe the battle would have formed differently and the end result would have been different also.

 

Group are strong because most people that form groups are strong players, if not buyers as well. Most random players are weak. I don't think you Group with weak players, and the same goes for others.

 

I play good, up to the mid ranks at least, and I get many Friend requests, If I wanted and had the patience I would be playing with Friends and creating strong Groups too.

 

I believe Groups is one of the reasons we get one sided battles.