declined Oceania servers and penalty for leaving matches

[fire199 273]

can the mods here please look into possibly adding a Oceania server i know there are many players who play from NZ and Australia. the ping i get is 147 after deleting all my downloaded torrent files, only keeping 1 tab open and closing all other process via task manger, clearing cache, disabling antivirus, i have fiber internet  5GHz with download and upload speed at  200mbps

it is is much better now but it still would be nice to have my own server so my ping can go below 100. 

 

and my second suggestion is to have penalty for leaving MM matches . it is just unfair when 4-5 ppl leave cus they are either a clan or a 3 person group. and they don't want their dumb effective rating to go down so they leave. it takes 1-2 mins to a team to be filled fully again and in that time the other team takes full advantage often capping 1-2 flags or killing jugg you get the idea 

another example is when they die after being jugg they have the fastest net and i notice they always start off with jugg. because of this they take advantage and start being cocky and and if they somehow die they just leave incurring 0-1 and then the enemy team jugg can just camp rest of the game. 

 

my last example is ovb there no way to win a match when it 4-5 players vs 8 in any mode thus players should get a penalty for leaving a match i mean they can choose their mode so they cant complain about that and also its only a 6min match they can ovb commit to 6mins 

 

this should also solve players filling up spots later on in the match. theres no point joining a match when Theres only 2 mins left. its quite hard to even get the 70 battle score required to get the 1 star.  and this just waste's the players time.

 

the devs can decide the penalty but it shouldn't be too harsh. i think it should be a -1 star penalty for their next MM match or -2 for premium users or it can be a 50% decrease in crystal for their next match. 

 

i get that they might not like the map their in like stadium  for ex for ctf its really good and fast paced but for jgr its just a lot of camping. some people would also not want not want to be in the attacking team for assault as their team usually losses depending on the map.  some people leave due to the unfair gs like a couple of 9999 players and they know they wont win. or if their own team as a couple of mults with 3-5k gs at legend rank. 

 

thus the devs can look into just adding penalty for specific modes like jgr,  the most popular mode. as i said before this is where jugg hunters with the fast net hide and these are the cocky players who leave after they die. sometimes leaving straight away after becoming the jugg if the dont like the map for ex.

[Maf 32,334]

Declined

There are not enough players in Tanki to create a whole new server for Oceania. So, unfortunately, you will have to bear the lag and play on European servers.

As for penalties for leaving — this is not planned for the default Matchmaking due to the fact that it's meant for casual gameplay with no risk or responsibilities. You correctly listed the multiple reasons why people may want to leave a game, while adding this feature for just one game mode is pointless.

We had a detailed discussion about this recently in a similar topic, so please check it out here: Public quota of finished battles

 

P.S.
You're quite wrong about TJR being the most popular game mode. It's more likely to be CTF 

[wolverine848 13,097]

On 5/25/2020 at 11:18 AM, fire199 said:

and my second suggestion is to have penalty for leaving MM matches . it is just unfair when 4-5 ppl leave cus they are either a clan or a 3 person group. and they don't want their dumb effective rating to go down so they leave.

Hmmm.... did you create an alt account to complain about this?  Cuz there's been a few people singing this same old song lately.

You want to know what else is "unfair"?  When a team caps a flag before enemy team has finished loading.

Or when a player on my team contributes absolutely nothing to my team - we are down a player entire battle.

Or when a player does not play the battle-mode... camps (in a corner) for the entirety of a CP battle.

Or when the highest ranked player on my team enters the battle with the lowest GS score by a factor of 2.

Or when MM places me in a battle already 3-0 with 4 minutes left.

Not a chance I stay in the battle under the above conditions.  Fix MM and players won't leave.  "Punishing" players DOES NOT WORK.

[Maf 32,334]

3 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

Not a chance I stay in the battle under the above conditions.  Fix MM and players won't leave.  "Punishing" players DOES NOT WORK.

Yeah, this is true for many problems in real life too. Instead of adding fixes and restrictions to deal with the aftermath, prevent the issue from happening in the first place by fixing the underlying cause. In this case — improve MM so that players won't have reasons to leave in the first place (except for circumstances beyond the game's control, like a lunch break unexpectedly ending early).

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

57 minutes ago, Maf said:

Yeah, this is true for many problems in real life too. Instead of adding fixes and restrictions to deal with the aftermath, prevent the issue from happening in the first place by fixing the underlying cause. In this case — improve MM so that players won't have reasons to leave in the first place (except for circumstances beyond the game's control, like a lunch break unexpectedly ending early).

And there are ways of improving MM.

First big step would be to remove siege mode and it's missions from the game, make TDM exclusive to pro battles and remove its missions, and then make ASL and rugby become event modes and their missions available only during the event.

 

Next step would be to allow the player to choose what size group of maps they want to play in.

 

And last but not least is a pre battle lobby like what TX had.

[fire199 273]

9 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

Hmmm.... did you create an alt account to complain about this?  Cuz there's been a few people singing this same old song lately.

You want to know what else is "unfair"?  When a team caps a flag before enemy team has finished loading.

Or when a player on my team contributes absolutely nothing to my team - we are down a player entire battle.

Or when a player does not play the battle-mode... camps (in a corner) for the entirety of a CP battle.

Or when the highest ranked player on my team enters the battle with the lowest GS score by a factor of 2.

Or when MM places me in a battle already 3-0 with 4 minutes left.

Not a chance I stay in the battle under the above conditions.  Fix MM and players won't leave.  "Punishing" players DOES NOT WORK.

no i didn't create a alt account lol, i didn't notice other people made similar topics, but im not surprised as it looks like its a problem for everyone. 

i agree but i dont let that affect me as it just makes it easier for me to get the top 3 and get stars, i just make the best of the situation and leaving the battle dosnt make sense to me as i might encounter something similar again so i just go on playing without worrying about my team.

thats why i mainly play jgr because of all the stuff you have stated i can play solo easily.

in all other modes i do pay i just for kills and damage and i still end up doing well with close amount of crystals to the winning  team even if i loose as thats how MM is not like pro. 

 

i actually dont care about my team as its only a 6min match, i dont worry about gs or if they are multing , thats one of the perks of playing MM and im happy its short as i can earn quick cry and not end up playing 30min matches non stop and worry about how well my team is playing as in 30 mins a lot more in on the line if i lose. 

 

 

 

 

[fire199 273]

10 hours ago, Maf said:

Declined

There are not enough players in Tanki to create a whole new server for Oceania. So, unfortunately, you will have to bear the lag and play on European servers.

As for penalties for leaving — this is not planned for the default Matchmaking due to the fact that it's meant for casual gameplay with no risk or responsibilities. You correctly listed the multiple reasons why people may want to leave a game, while adding this feature for just one game mode is pointless.

We had a detailed discussion about this recently in a similar topic, so please check it out here: Public quota of finished battles

 

P.S.
You're quite wrong about TJR being the most popular game mode. It's more likely to be CTF 

dam didn't know ctf was that popular i guess it is as the biggest druggers can finish a match in 4-5mins instead of 6 mins and can earn stars a lot faster. thats why i avoid ctf. 

 

i guess thats true adding it for only 1 mode wont make too much difference and wont solve the problem. and yea your right again i want MM to stay as it is "casual gameplay with no risk or responsibilities." 6mins is prefect too. i hope they dont change MM its good as it is .

 

Makes me wonder why i made the topic in the first place guess i have too much time on my hands as im not too bothered by all the stuff i stated expect i do get a little ticked off time to time.

 

as for the servers thats unfortunate but hopefully in the future they may add it as i mean they added one for china and it only has 1300 players. 

[von_Cronberg 258]

16 hours ago, Maf said:

improve MM so that players won't have reasons to leave

I do not think that any of the motivations user Wolverine lists here for quitting a battle, and which mirror the persistent complaints of some forum users, is valid.

 

16 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

You want to know what else is "unfair"?  When a team caps a flag before enemy team has finished loading.

This is the most absurd one of all of them. First, the crystal rewards for MMS battles are almost the same if your team wins or loses (and stars are mostly even easier to earn with the losing team), so I do not understand even the basics of this complaint. Besides, everyone should be able to psychologically perceive playing a battle in the mood of "fighting back" as no less entertaining. I myself do actually prefer to start a battle with perceiving the enemy as having taken an "unfair" advantage.

 

16 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

Or when a player on my team contributes absolutely nothing to my team - we are down a player entire battle.

In pretty much every team I ever played with in my more than ten thousand Tanki battles, there was a huge difference between teammates in their effective contribution to the battle (and this is true even for the most communist playing style of them all, XP/BP). There are a zillion good reasons for that difference, even more so in 7 minutes battles with few time for adaption, and the idea that someone demands to play only in teams without low performers is both grotesque and brazen.

 

16 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

Or when a player does not play the battle-mode... camps (in a corner) for the entirety of a CP battle.

In my experience of seven years, about a third of Tanki players prefer "camping" sniper style gameplay for themselves, and this fact is reflected in all teams across MMS as well as PRO games. I might argue with some teammate in a long PRO battle about switching to a more dynamic gameplay, but it is utter ridiculous and grotesque to publicly cry about this individual preference fact of life with respect to short and random MMS battles, or even use it as a pretence to leave a battle. Maybe half of my own time of enjoying Tanki has been various forms of sniping. And whenever a sniping shot of mine hits a target, I like the idea that it was one of the crybabies who love spending their time complaining about snipers in this forum.

 

16 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

Or when the highest ranked player on my team enters the battle with the lowest GS score by a factor of 2.

I have never seen such a thing in my life, and if I would, I couldn't see any reason why this would bother me.

 

16 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

Or when MM places me in a battle already 3-0 with 4 minutes left.

This is the only reason which deserves some consideration (in particular for players who are much interested in earning stars and get assigned to a team where their teammates have already built up a considerable score). It has been suggested before, by me and others, to give some compensation to players who are assigned late, like entering with an already charged overdrive. However, we should first of all bear in mind that such situation only exists because of quitters. And I myself do find some solace in perceiving me riding in as the knight with the mission to save the day from the mess that quitters created. My personal rule is that only if I get destroyed three times in a row during spawn protection by Hornets on overdrive, I allow myself to consider the cause lost.

 

16 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

Not a chance I stay in the battle under the above conditions. 

You told this forum many times before that you are a quitter, so there is nothing new here. Should Tanki ever introduce a court martial for deserters, I will volunteer.

 

[Viking4s 10,791]

29 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

17 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

You want to know what else is "unfair"?  When a team caps a flag before enemy team has finished loading.

This is the most absurd one of all of them. First, the crystal rewards for MMS battles are almost the same if your team wins or loses (and stars are mostly even easier to earn with the losing team), so I do not understand even the basics of this complaint. Besides, everyone should be able to psychologically perceive playing a battle in the mood of "fighting back" as no less entertaining. I myself do actually prefer to start a battle with perceiving the enemy as having taken an "unfair" advantage.

While the fund is better split between loser and winners it is not 50/50, more of 38/62. The problem is more about the spirit of it, why do I have to start with an handicap because of a hole in the game design? I can't see a rugby match where one team start playing without the other teams being ready. All players starting at the same time would be really appreciated. If the other team cap, then it is your team's fault. I totally dig the "fighting back spirit" but not all players would be fine with that and see it as an injustice, and the atmosphere would be tense. If there is something to improve about MM that would be this. It seems relatively easy to implement.

Other than this, the other complains are indeed weak.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

45 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

I do not think that any of the motivations user Wolverine lists here for quitting a battle, and which mirror the persistent complaints of some forum users, is valid.

Just because you don't like @wolverine848's reasons for leaving doesn't mean that MM is fine as it is.

[von_Cronberg 258]

14 minutes ago, DieselPlatinum said:

doesn't mean that MM is fine as it is.

There is always room for optimization, but I would not have any concrete significant point I could suggest to change about the MMS. The only suggestion I might support is that every player should be able to exclude a small number of maps, like three or so, before asking by click for a battle assignement. I was more sympathetic to choosing features before I realized how boring ever increasing specialization of players would make MMS battles for everyone. With respect to the most vocal complaints by some, like the way the MMS measures strength in composing teams, every concrete suggestion I have seen would make the system not better but worse.

[wolverine848 13,097]

5 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

but I would not have any concrete significant point I could suggest to change about the MMS

Then you don't have a clue - about games, or sports, or any type of competition between two or more people.

[wolverine848 13,097]

40 minutes ago, Viking4s said:

The problem is more about the spirit of it, why do I have to start with an handicap because of a hole in the game design?

Well, since most of my points in the post involve starting with some some of handicap I really don't understand why you thik they are "weak".

- spotting other team a score

- playing with less players off the bat

- playing with mults

- Playing with less time

You must have a different definition of handicap.

[von_Cronberg 258]

16 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

Then you don't have a clue - about games, or sports, or any type of competition between two or more people.

Or maybe more so than you. Your persistent complaining of the MMS comes with few concrete suggestions, though two points are discernible: You want the MMS to allow for exclusive specialisation of players (on maps, situations, whatever), which would increase battle waiting time and work to make MMS battles less exciting for everyone. You want the MMS to segregate players, so that you shall not be confronted with gear or attitudes or playing styles you do not like, which is not only brazen but practically impossible.

The one thing I will never understand is why you do not simply play PRO battles, where the cherry picking you argue for is at your service.

 

20 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

- playing with mults

There are no "mults" in the MMS, the strategic placement of alternative accounts of a player in the opposing team to weaken it, that is virtually impossible in the MMS. There are players who perform poorer than their teammates in every team in every battle, just like in real life, and you will have to cope with it on Tanki, just like you have to cope with it in real life. In the rare cases where actual sabotage takes place, make a video and write a complaint, I have witnessed myself that such accounts are banned in an effective process.

 

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

1 hour ago, von_Cronberg said:

There is always room for optimization, but I would not have any concrete significant point I could suggest to change about the MMS. The only suggestion I might support is that every player should be able to exclude a small number of maps, like three or so, before asking by click for a battle assignement. I was more sympathetic to choosing features before I realized how boring ever increasing specialization of players would make MMS battles for everyone. With respect to the most vocal complaints by some, like the way the MMS measures strength in composing teams, every concrete suggestion I have seen would make the system not better but worse.

Well I already made a few suggestions in how MM can improve in the quote below:

18 hours ago, DieselPlatinum said:

And there are ways of improving MM.

First big step would be to remove siege mode and it's missions from the game, make TDM exclusive to pro battles and remove its missions, and then make ASL and rugby become event modes and their missions available only during the event.

 

Next step would be to allow the player to choose what size group of maps they want to play in.

 

And last but not least is a pre battle lobby like what TX had.

 

[wolverine848 13,097]

38 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

Or maybe more so than you. Your persistent complaining of the MMS comes with few concrete suggestions, though two points are discernible: You want the MMS to allow for exclusive specialisation of players (on maps, situations, whatever), which would increase battle waiting time and work to make MMS battles less exciting for everyone. You want the MMS to segregate players, so that you shall not be confronted with gear or attitudes or playing styles you do not like, which is not only brazen but practically impossible.

The one thing I will never understand is why you do not simply play PRO battles, where the cherry picking you argue for is at your service.

 

There are no "mults" in the MMS, the strategic placement of alternative accounts of a player in the opposing team to weaken it, that is virtually impossible in the MMS. There are players who perform poorer than their teammates in every team in every battle, just like in real life, and you will have to cope with it on Tanki, just like you have to cope with it in real life. In the rare cases where actual sabotage takes place, make a video and write a complaint, I have witnessed myself that such accounts are banned in an effective process.

 

1) Incorrect. Start reading some of the many other threads instead of making unsubstantiated claims. I'm certainly not the only one unhappy with MM.

2) Cherry picking?  You obviously don't read well.  I want balanced battles at the start.  That's it.  I don't need to win.  I want an even chance to win.

How can you not understand why I "don't just play Pro-battles"?  Where d you think the income will come from to improve garage?  MM is where income is generated.

3) You are just using the narrow definition.  There's a difference between "performing poorly" and entering the battle with clearly sub-standard equipment,  or even not actively participating in a battle.  MM tries to balance team based on Ranks.  When a high-rank player on your team enters battle with GS of 4000 when average is ~ 7500 then that player is actively handi-capping your team.  That was THE player that was supposed to "even up" the balance - and compleetly failed.

[von_Cronberg 258]

20 minutes ago, DieselPlatinum said:

First big step would be to remove siege mode and it's missions from the game, make TDM exclusive to pro battles and remove its missions, and then make ASL and rugby become event modes and their missions available only during the event.

How exactly would removing four of the seven game modes improve the MMS? It might somewhat shorten waiting time for battles in the remaining modes (which is no big issue anyway and hardly mentioned in MMS discissions in this forum), at the cost of depriving players who like to play those modes of the opportunity to do so. And none of the persistent complaints here, which center around team composition and maps, would be addressed.

By the way, I like to play the four modes you mentioned and prefer every one of them to TJR. Still, I would not get the idea that TJR must be removed, because I know that there are other people who like to play it, and that is fine with me.

 

11 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

I want balanced battles at the start.  That's it.  I don't need to win.  I want an even chance to win.

The ideal of "balanced battles" you demand from the MMS is impossible. An artificial intelligence that should achieve such a thing would have to have an incredibly complex model of every player's effectiveness in the context of a particular map and two to-be-composed teams of eight particular players, while some of the most relevant information (e.g. the current mood of a player) is even unobtainable. And then comes the issue of quitters quitting and needing to be replaced by whoever clicks for an assignement.

On the last point, I am relly impressed how well the MMS works in somehow often throwing a bunch of strong players at a battle where one team was decimated by quitters and is getting massacred, turning the tables. Being one of the holdouts in the comeback team is good fun, and being one of the knights coming to the resue is divine.

 

12 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

How can you not understand why I "don't just play Pro-battles"?  Where d you think the income will come from to improve garage?  MM is where income is generated.

First, PRO battles in CP mode (though not in CTF mode) generate ingame currency income about the same per time played as MMS battles (noting that in PRO battles it is important, income wise, to be on the winning side more often than not), while not even using supplies if you choose battles set without. Second, if you find yourself playing Tanki less to enjoy your time playing and more to generate ingame currency as efficiently as possible, you might wish to reflect on your priorities.

 

[wolverine848 13,097]

3 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

First, PRO battles in CP mode

LOL. 

[wolverine848 13,097]

4 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

The ideal of "balanced battles" you demand from the MMS is impossible.

Oh my... so you just give up?

- same number of players each team and an even split of ranks/efficiency.  Is that so difficult?

Been many suggestions over many threads - but your "effort" is to not even try.

You are fine with MM the way it is.  Many are not.  You need to accept that, instead of projecting your ideals onto others.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

8 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

How exactly would removing four of the seven game modes improve the MMS? It might somewhat shorten waiting time for battles in the remaining modes (which is no big issue anyway and hardly mentioned in MMS discissions in this forum), at the cost of depriving players who like to play those modes of the opportunity to do so. And none of the persistent complaints here, which center around team composition and maps, would be addressed.

By the way, I like to play the four modes you mentioned and prefer every one of them to TJR. Still, I would not get the idea that TJR must be removed, because I know that there are other people who like to play it, and that is fine with me.

Brings more players to the remaining game modes. Meaning more battles will have more players of the same rank range as you, which means more players with similar equipment power levels as you, which in turn means more balanced battles.

 

TDM is just bland and boring compared to TJR which has a few extra mechanics which are interesting. While siege, ASL, and rugby are straight up forced moshpit montages. 

[von_Cronberg 258]

6 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

- same number of players each team and an even split of ranks/efficiency.  Is that so difficult?

This is what the MMS is doing. However, ranks/efficiency are a general measure, and the effectiveness of a player on a certain map in a certain team situation varies widely, on the top comes that their mood might be very different at different times. And then comes the issue of quitters, who do not like the map, do not like the appearence of the first teammate they see, or a weapon they see on the opposing team, and quit, leaving the fine plan in shambles and the MMS struggling to fill up the ranks.

In a sense, this always reminds me of a famous paraphrased quote of Helmuth von Moltke the Elder: "No plan survives contact with the enemy".

[Maf 32,334]

16 minutes ago, At_Shin said:

Will there be a different version of match making system in the future? Like Ranked battles? So would there be 2 MM systems-

, the current default that's meant for casual gameplay. And another mm system which involves leagues and reputation points which depend upon your effectiveness and other stats like battles won and these may decrease if you desert your battles a lot. Just like tanki x?

Yes, just like that. It's definitely planned, but no details have been released on actual progress regarding this feature.

[wolverine848 13,097]

53 minutes ago, von_Cronberg said:

This is what the MMS is doing.

No it is not.

One team is caping a flag before defenders are loaded

One team has 6-8 active players while another has 1-4

And then there's being placed in a battle with 3 min left and it's 3-0 for other team...

You can blame the players all you want - but that won't fix the core issue of MM not working properly.

[yasgfgfffgf 282]

On 5/28/2020 at 10:41 PM, wolverine848 said:

No it is not.

1 One team is caping a flag before defenders are loaded

2 One team has 6-8 active players while another has 1-4

3 And then there's being placed in a battle with 3 min left and it's 3-0 for other team...

4 You can blame the players all you want - but that won't fix the core issue of MM not working properly.

1 some players pc are faster and they are a bit earlier on the field wich is sometimes anoying

2 some players leave instantly when they are in battle so MM must look for new players wich is a bit hard (if there are not much players around)

3 MM wants to give the remaining players at least a bit of a decent match. also sometimes it takes a while between being selected and being on the field

4 in the MM system that W.O.T is using you sometimes need to wait up to 4 min while there are much more players so in this scenenario MM in tanki is better ( in time but maybe not in balanced games)