Jump to content
EN
Play

Forum

Complaint Book


theFiringHand
 Share

Recommended Posts

gg = good game

 

Do you think it was a respectful comment after spawn killing enemy players in an 8 vs 4 battle? I don't, the gg was for his/her team at the best.

Good game is inherently a nice word. I've never, in my 9 years of gaming, seen someone use it sarcastically.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good game is inherently a nice word. I've never, in my 9 years of gaming, seen someone use it sarcastically.

Um... what about those on winning team that use it when score was 7-0 and they spawn-killed for last 2 minutes?

 

I've seen that plenty.  And there's no way they meant that as a compliment to the punching bag losing team. It is an insult.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um... what about those on winning team that use it when score was 7-0 and they spawn-killed for last 2 minutes?

 

I've seen that plenty.  And there's no way they meant that as a compliment to the punching bag losing team. It is an insult.

I also never particularly liked it when players on the other team said GG in chat after a completely unbalanced battle. I don't consider easy wins good battles, nor do I consider getting spawn killed for half a battle a good game. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that feels that way. Though, yes if a battle is fair, perhaps challenging, then saying GG is basically thanking your opponents for the fun game you had. I'd consider it a sign of respect, like @loginci mentioned.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny thing is - First time winning people say "GG" in unbalanced/spawn killing battle yet Matchmaking drops the same people in a completely different battle and the people who said GG previously ended up quitting the new battle because of new good players who have joined in - I believe it is called Karma? 

 

People however - Who said GG end of the unbalanced battle obviously were laughing directly at your face, there is no doubt about that. It is a clear direct short message saying "Thanks for the easy win, losers".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, people use ''gg'' because they want to show their respect for playing against themselves although an unbalanced battle. And the second thing, when someone who loses uses ''gg'', it means he took the loss, what a nice thing! We see many people who insult after losing, so I mean, ''gg'' prohibits this. And the last thing, not many people use ''gg'' in the meaning ''good game'', they most probably use it to show their respect.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also never particularly liked it when players on the other team said GG in chat after a completely unbalanced battle. I don't consider easy wins good battles, nor do I consider getting spawn killed for half a battle a good game. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that feels that way. Though, yes if a battle is fair, perhaps challenging, then saying GG is basically thanking your opponents for the fun game you had. I'd consider it a sign of respect, like @loginci mentioned.

Most of what was said upstream on this topic is valid. It is hard to guess what "GG" meant at the close of a game, even in a blowout. I suspect the main problem is how quickly most players leave. The close-out screen shows, and players start listing as exited. Typing something meaningful after battle end is pointless because by the time you've entered it, nobody is left to read it.

 

Most people understand GG to be "good game," and for a lopsided match, some will feel it is better than nothing. I know I always feel as bad on the winning team of a 7 to 0 blowout as on the losing team (but less frustrated).

 

I try to hope for and expect the best of intentions. That proves out more than half the time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

General observations about a lopsided CTF, comments, not much complaint (other than MM is broken).

 

I, as OKDad70, led Blue team on a 7 to 0 CTF in IRAN, finished in less than 6 minutes. I ended with 405 battle score; Blue total score 2058. Red high score was 130, and their total combined battle score was 388. As well as I can tell, five of Red team were in for the entire battle.

 

This battle was two teams of mostly high-level Legends. OKDad70 is Legend 1, and two of our team were Gismos. Still, our team had 6% more total experience. On the other hand, Red had 19% more kills (total combined, according to the profiles), Blue had about 8% higher average Gear Score, but the player efficiency ratings averaged out equal. Just guessing, but I think MM looks only at rank for selection, and I think it looks at efficiency rating for sorting the players to teams. But, that is a guess. Who knows?

 

What made these two teams so lopsided?

 

Blue totally dominated, and as well as I could tell, Red was playing right, and their players were playing well, effectively. Why did Blue keep the advantage all the way through?

 

Though Blue had a mathematical edge on GS, our two Generalissimos were the only players limited on their equipment potential. Buyers versus nonbuyers was not an issue here. We all have played too much to be restricted in that regard.

 

Totally lopsided battle. Blue dominated from the beginning. I consider myself above average, but there was no particular reason I lead the team. I captured three flags, as I recall. Catching flags is mostly dependent on luck, but supportive teammates sure help. Determination is essential, but determination doesn't equal success if you get no support or just get unlucky.

 

This account is just one data point, but my experience indicates it is the norm. Though of limited value, it is evidence that MM cannot balance battles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't do it in blow-outs.  It feels really condescending.

In that case you should write "EZ" that would be more effective or "GG ;)" if you prefer a sarcastic touch.

"GG" could mean anything as you can't assess the player mindset. Only if the player hinted in the chat some aspect of his personality, then you would be able to interpret the true meaning.

 

But what is the point really, take GG in the positive way and use it in a positive way too in return.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You drive a Viking-Freeze most of the time. Protection against the Freeze is hardly useful if you know how to stay away from your opponents field of fire. Though they did recently have the Freeze protection slow down the freeze rate, it still works. You can still slow down the opponent and stay behind him. Even with 50%, you will kill a frozen tank soon enough. 

 

No, protections are not OP. Protections are too limited, too few. 

 

Hulls are too limited, especially in speed.

Have you ever tried using Freeze? You cannot slow down anyone with above 30%+ Modules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CLAN NOTIFACATION WONT GO AWAY AND ITS SO ANNOYING

 

I can't get the clan notification to go away. it says that 8 members requested to join even after I checked, plus it always says there is a new member. please fix this glitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever tried using Freeze? You cannot slow down anyone with above 30%+ Modules. 

I have a low-level account, Captain Riconot. Riconot is NOT-Ricochet and uses only short range, specifically, Firebird, Freeze, and Hammer. The Freeze is M2, so I've used it most for a while now. I suppose at Captain, I'm not seeing any M3-level protections (except once in a while with older accounts who converted from old school protection paints).

 

So, maybe I can't answer the question authoritatively, but I think it is moot. Using freeze, I find I gain advantage very quickly if I can maneuver effectively and keep turret on target (and I usually can). Also, in my experience, protection against Freeze is rare in battle. I don't notice it when I'm playing my regular accounts. In my experience, Thunder, Rail, Ricochet, and Shaft protections are common in battles. Firebird is somewhat common, but Freeze is one of the uncommon ones. Besides, OKDad70 has 42% protection against Freeze. I find it useful when facing two or more Freeze on the opposing team, but worthless in DM. It just doesn't help that much. If a Freeze gets the jump on me, even with 42% protection, I die unless someone else kills the Freeze before my demise. And I'm still a sitting duck for a few seconds, so someone else might initiate my respawn.

 

Freeze is OP. Protections are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever tried using Freeze? You cannot slow down anyone with above 30%+ Modules. 

You can - it just does not turn them into a block of ice.  Module doesn't nullify the freezing - it reduces it.

You have to keep moving as the target slowly rotates.

 

But that's no different from Isida having hard time killing a heavy hull with 50% module.  2500 damage vs 4000 health at m4?

 

Or a Rail that was hoping to one-shot a light hull - except it had the module on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[…]

If I understand, sensei_tanker is simply arguing that protections at 50% are too much. He seems to think they are too much at 30%. At M3 levels and up, I do not think protections are anywhere near powerful enough. 30% makes a difference. 40% usually gives you the edge. And I'll admit 50% makes you fairly dominant over that turret, but we only get three. (And most players less then a few levels of Legend don't have many high protections.) I never think three protections is enough. Which is why I suggested we have additional module slots (in the Suggestion section). I suggested that more protections be balanced by applying a faction to the fraction.

 

As a for-instance, assume they give us six slots: Equipping three would be normal, base protection of the module installed. Putting in a fourth would multiply slot 3 and slot 4 by 0.8 (dropping a 50% module to 40%), adding a fifth might change slot 3 to 0.75, slot 4 to 0.67, and slot 5 at 0.5.

 

I'm not sure what might work best, but you get the point. Something like that could work. Some players expressed strong opposition to any increases. Some think total protection should not be allowed to exceed 150% (total effective protection of all modules). I think our tanks die too often. A good protection against my turret can increase difficulty substantially, but I can often avoid those with protection against me. Shafts, Rails, and Thunders complain (historically) about too many players having protection against them. Ricochet is another. Ricosck sometimes sees six players on the opposing team with 30% to 50% protection against Rico. Usually, it is not that many. When it is, I deal with it, and I count on help from teammates. 

 

My assertion is the tanks (hulls and protections) are too weak compared to 13 turrets, 4 of which are designed to inflict a one-shot, four can typically destroy you before you can respond, in under two seconds, and the remaining 5 can all take you out if you don't have that protection.

 

My point, it is common to fight one tank, maybe two, and live to fight once more. OKDad70 used to be able to dive into a cluster of three enemy and drive away more often than not. That was before The Great Leveling, back when Twins turret spin rate was fast, with very fast acceleration. That was when Viking forward and reverse acceleration were the highest. And don't forget Repair Kits actually worked back then. If you have been around more than two years, and played regularly, you remember when skill payed off. Now, when you get caught in the open, you just die and respawn. Hulls are too similar, too weak, and too slow (except Mammoth is too fast). Three protections against up to 13 different turrets (at once in DM) isn't flexible enough.

 

BTW, to those who read this, I appreciate it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think drugs should be removed from tanki all together because they take out the need for skill required to succeed in the game. I think the game would be a lot more fun if drugs were removed. In my honest opinion drugs just ruin tanki and I'm surprised they have never been removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think drugs should be removed from tanki all together because they take out the need for skill required to succeed in the game. I think the game would be a lot more fun if drugs were removed. In my honest opinion drugs just ruin tanki and I'm surprised they have never been removed.

Devs would never do such a thing because the game would die without any profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With new shot colors I don't know which is Fire and which is Freeze. Noobs.

The only problem you have is this while buyers are killing us with their OP guns lol.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only problem you have is this while buyers are killing us with their OP guns lol.

I know the colors are not a big issue, except when you want to know if there are more fires or freezes to change modules or not. But I can't complaint about the horrible game balance and the absurdity of MM battles in every post.

 

If you're having a hard time with the game you can open a new account and try to kill those buyers while helping the few newbies that are at lower ranks.

 

Park your high rank account until Tanki removes Drones, Overdrives and fixes MM, and have some fun at low ranks.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...