declined bring isisda old ability back

[wolverine848 13,097]

4 minutes ago, Son_Goku said:

You have no clue, then. It wasn't OP at all and made Isida quite unique. Since it was able to heal itself, it dealt less damage to enemies and made its primary role be healing teammates. Nowadays Isida deals damage just like the other short range turrets, which removed its uniqueness; it can be used either as a fighting role or supporting role. I have never understood why they changed Isida like that and made it boring

Which version are you talking about?

1) Had 50% vampirism and when combined with DD it was OP.

2) They nerfed it down to 10% vampirism and no one used Isida because it was basically useless.

3) They got rid of vampirism entirely and gave it more damage to make up for that.

[E_polypterus 2,374]

23 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

MatchMaker needs more players to function properly

As if,

1) 4x exp boost,

2) events (almost every week),

3) availability to earn stars only in MM,

4) conts dropping in MM only, 

5) boosted crystal funds,

6) 

Isn’t enough to attract players...

devs have done enough forcing into things unliked by the players. It’s their responsibility to introduce good updates.

29 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

players I'd support no crystals (and even no experience) awarded to ANY pro-battles in the name of fairness.

In no way is that fair or is it likely to happen. If it does, PRO players’d leave. I think that’s why devs removed funds only from format and pvt battles.

24 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

There are a significant group of xp/bp players that do not spend much/any time in Ma

Lol a majority of PRO battle players don’t play MM at all. 

26 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

 earn crystals in Pro-Battles they might be "encouraged" to spend some time in MatchMak

Those players play it coz they like it. Remove things players like from the game they won’t just go over to something they dislike or are forced to - they’d leave.

[Son_Goku 523]

On 11/24/2020 at 11:20 PM, Maf said:

In the specific case of Isida's self-healing, the feature was removed because it was impossible to balance.

How is it impossible to balance? You just have to change its damage and self healing characteristics, which are only two variables, how is that difficult..? The problem with its balance is how our dear devs approach balancing in general. They know that a turret has a problem, but they wait for like 6 months until they even look at it, only to declare it "impossible to balance" (without even trying to), in order to completely overhaul it, instead of trying to fix it...

13 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

Which version are you talking about?

1) Had 50% vampirism and when combined with DD it was OP.

2) They nerfed it down to 10% vampirism and no one used Isida because it was basically useless.

3) They got rid of vampirism entirely and gave it more damage to make up for that.

Honestly, back then all turrets which were only available at a higher rank were OP with DD, it's just how the game worked. Meant the first one

[Son_Goku 523]

5 minutes ago, E_polypterus said:

Lol a majority of PRO battle players don’t play MM at all. 

That's true, I've only earned like 80 stars in MM so far

[E_polypterus 2,374]

Just now, Son_Goku said:

That's true, I've only earned like 80 stars in MM so far

Me 0

;-;

[Maf 32,326]

4 minutes ago, Son_Goku said:

How is it impossible to balance? You just have to change its damage and self healing characteristics, which are only two variables, how is that difficult..?

I'm not a game designer, so I can't explain it well enough. But I'm sure @Opex-Rah could go on for hours about why Isida with a combination of damage, healing and self-healing was a nightmare to balance. Point is, removing it solved a lot of problems and was worth the hate that was received from Isida players.

My personal opinion is that Isida could get a self-healing augment (with appropriate disadvantages) that gives it some HP back after it kills an enemy. I already suggested it to devs, so it's up to them to decide whether such a feature should be added.

[Son_Goku 523]

10 minutes ago, Maf said:

I'm not a game designer, so I can't explain it well enough. But I'm sure @Opex-Rah could go on for hours about why Isida with a combination of damage, healing and self-healing was a nightmare to balance. Point is, removing it solved a lot of problems and was worth the hate that was received from Isida players.

My personal opinion is that Isida could get a self-healing augment (with appropriate disadvantages) that gives it some HP back after it kills an enemy. I already suggested it to devs, so it's up to them to decide whether such a feature should be added.

Of course removing it solved lots of problems, since it was considered OP. Thing is, if Tanki tried to balance turrets and hulls slightly update per update until they're not considered OP anymore, instead of with brute force every couple of months or even years, like -40% self healing in Isida's case, it would surely be possible to balance everything out just fine. But that's not how Tanki approaches it, sadly

[wolverine848 13,097]

42 minutes ago, E_polypterus said:

Lol a majority of PRO battle players don’t play MM at all. 

Which is the point I made.

If MatchMaker can't attract enough players, the game will fold.  Debating that is futile.

So... they are "encouraging" those players to participate in the mode that keeps the game going.

You can agree or disagree this is proper, but that is MY guess as to why they are doing what they are doing.

[wolverine848 13,097]

44 minutes ago, Son_Goku said:

Honestly, back then all turrets which were only available at a higher rank were OP with DD, it's just how the game worked. Meant the first one

Isida + 50% vampirism + DD was basically unkillable so long as it had energy. And even when it's energy ran out it probably had full health with 1-3 'corpses' around it.  Was deemed more potent than every other turret at the time.

What Devs should have tried was 30% or 25%, not going down a giant step to 10%.  We all know how that turned out.

As I said to MAF - they didn't really try to fix it.  And you know what?  Based on many of their other "fixes" I really don't think they know how to implement fixes.

[E_polypterus 2,374]

15 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

So... they are "encouraging" those players to participate in the mode that keeps the game going

Yes but players wouldn’t like it the way you said devs might do it (removing battle funds). Devs should consider players opinions too.

 

17 minutes ago, wolverine848 said:

If MatchMaker can't attract enough players, the game will fold.  Debating that is fut

Well the game existed before MM... but Idk if it would do well without it cuz no way it’s getting removed by devs willingly. So, as you said the might fold.

[FrozenRailgun 1,771]

7 hours ago, Son_Goku said:

You have no clue, then. It wasn't OP at all and made Isida quite unique. Since it was able to heal itself, it dealt less damage to enemies and made its primary role be healing teammates. Nowadays Isida deals damage just like the other short range turrets, which removed its uniqueness; it can be used either as a fighting role or supporting role. I have never understood why they changed Isida like that and made it boring

At least it made Ocelot module rare-to-sight. If we still have the vampirism, here comes armies of Ocelots.

[Picassoo 191]

16 hours ago, Maf said:

Why specifically old players?

Because a new player has no comparison of old vs new tanki. How are you to ask them which they prefer?

[Maf 32,326]

13 minutes ago, Picassoo said:

Because a new player has no comparison of old vs new tanki. How are you to ask them which they prefer?

If you were to give them a taste of older versions of the game, I guarantee they will prefer the new version. Older players like older versions only because that's what they're used to. For any new player things like the outdated interface and battle selection system is an instant turn-off.

And as far as turret balance goes, I feel like these days it's actually the best it ever was, and there isn't anything inherently OP besides a few specific augment combinations and maybe Hopper (only in some game modes).

I believe the correct way to approach player feedback is not to ask them which they prefer (old vs new), but find out what they actually want to see changed/added.

[Picassoo 191]

1 minute ago, Maf said:

If you were to give them a taste of older versions of the game, I guarantee they will prefer the new version. For any new player things like the outdated interface and battle selection system is an instant turn-off.

That outdated interface gave you access to anything in 1 – 3 clicks and looked good. I can't see how it could discourage new players. The new one on the other hand takes longer to navigate and seems as though it were made for mobile devices, not PCs. Another thing is that active players are already used to the new TO .

Quote

Older players like older versions only because that's what they're used to.

All active players including old ones have surely got used to the new TO.

Gameplay-wise the old version was more fun for me and for most people. Every game changing update makes more people leave the game and few new players come to fill their place.

Quote

I believe the correct way to approach player feedback is not to ask them which they prefer (old vs new), but find out what they actually want to see changed/added.

Players don't know how the game would be if something new was added/changed. Some people even give ideas for new turrets/hulls/drones/laser guns/UFOs (etc.) because they think it would be cool to have it. It quickly becomes obvious that they haven't even theoretically analyzed how such things would affect gameplay.

But we know how the game used to be and therefore can be sure we prefer new/old Tanki.

Quote

And as far as turret balance goes, I feel like these days it's actually the best it ever was, and there isn't anything inherently OP besides a few specific augment combinations and maybe Hopper (only in some game modes).

The balance of turrets has never been perfect and it seems better now. But with Augments, drones, ODs and of course Hopper the game is very unbalanced.

[alkyng 3,081]

tbh, no need now of bringing self-healing on isida again...  now with Mammoth + Isida + Lifeguard drones, is better than self-healing

[Maf 32,326]

1 hour ago, Picassoo said:

access to anything in 1-3 clicks and looked good

No it didn't
It only looked good to us because that's what we're used to. The 1-3 clicks thing is still very much applicable. In fact, the new interface is actually faster to navigate once you get used to keyboard shortcuts. I can agree that the UI became less user-friendly when it comes to PRO battles, but those battles are only relevant to a very small (and ever-decreasing) percentage of players.

3 hours ago, Picassoo said:

But we know how the game used to be and therefore can be sure we prefer new/old Tanki.

This is just very typical human behaviour associated with disliking change. There have been countless psychological studies into why we act like that, but overall it's a well-known fact that people will almost always be against making changes and trying something new, mostly due to fear of disliking it and reluctance to having to abandon their old habits and adapting something new.

The game can't progress if it stays in the past, so "old tanki" won't be back.
This is going quite far from the topic of bringing back old Isida healing though, but my initial point still stands — it's pointless to suggest bringing back removed features because it's not like developers forgot those things existed. If they deem it reasonable to bring back self-healing, then it will be done. But only at their own discretion.

[Picassoo 191]

2 hours ago, Maf said:

This is just very typical human behaviour associated with disliking change. There have been countless psychological studies into why we act like that, but overall it's a well-known fact that people will almost always be against making changes and trying something new, mostly due to fear of disliking it and reluctance to having to abandon their old habits and adapting something new.

This is about prejudice against change. Disliking things after they have changed, in this case long after, is a different thing.

Regardless this doesn't apply to me or in fact anyone who actively plays the game. I have long got used to the new Tanki and would likely find playing the old version slightly awkward at first. But I have memories of playing it and I know I enjoyed it more. Not only that — I could go on why I enjoyed it more coming down to gameplay details.

Quote

It only looked good to us because that's what we're used to.

I am not saying it was beautiful or mind-blowing. An interface shouldn't even draw too much attention. What I mean is it looked good enough to not hurt ones eyes so to speak.

The new one on the other hand is harder to navigate and looks bland.

You are right about the HTML5 hotkeys.

Quote

I can agree that the UI became less user-friendly when it comes to PRO battles, but those battles are only relevant to a very small (and ever-decreasing) percentage of players.

Actually I find it easier to find PRO battles thanks to the search option. The PRO battle playerbase is decreasing because the developers aim for PRO battles to die. They discourage new players from playing them in every way. Despite this anti-PRO campaign the MM playerbase just a few times as large as the PRO battle playerbase.

My estimates: about 600 players playing PRO right now, about 1700 playing MM.