update Continuing experiments

[Positive 1,136]

2 minutes ago, ReptilianTroll said:

In 2015 they removed crystal boxes falling from the sky from all ranks because players like me got rich by spending hours collecting them while not ranking up. It is why my legend account ThouShallNot is like it is.

No they removed it because players were distracted by them and didn't play the battle how it was supposed to be played. 
But seeing the crystal boxes back is really amazing. Like old memories. If they don't drop as often, I think people won't be distracted too much and it's a really nice addition.

[Joeguy 941]

So far this experiment is TERRIBLE.  The lag is fierce.  It takes much much longer to get into a battle....much longer waiting times.  It's taking twice as long to load the battle once MM assigns you to a particular battle and then it takes a very long time to actually spawn into the battle you've been waiting to get into.  Once you're in, it lags like crazy even on the lowest graphics setting. I'm also getting way more total crashes where you have to log back in again...you always lose your OD charge when this happens and frequently you even lose the entire battle.  You end up just returning to the lobby with no battle fund, or mission advancement...all you get is the unwanted XP and lots of wasted time.

I played for a few hours today and an inordinate amount of time was sitting around "loading" or other fussing about trying to get into battles instead of playing the game...very frustrating.  I didn't actually time it but it seems like more than half of my time was spent trying to get into laggy battles.

The 16vs16 thing is awful...it's so damn crowded on all abut the really huge maps.  It's just not even close to fun in the low ranks and the problems in higher ranks are amplified by the ridiculously overcrowded battles.  As soon as you spawn, you're dead unless you are on a team that somehow got the upper hand then you are doing nothing but spawn killing....there is no battle...it just slaughter.  Why even bother with a battle?  Just click an "outcome" button to tell you if you win or lose and your reward.  This would be the same result, just as much fun, but with much time saved.

The previous experiment wasn't disliked because of the 6vs6 as you imply.  It was hated because battle times were reduced to almost nothing (5 minutes, but you usually only saw 3 minutes of battle by the time you loaded).  The increased armor and increased damage for some turrets was also dislike by many players.  Removal of the larger maps was also disliked.  I would venture to say that most players liked the 6vs6.

I think most players are going to dislike the 12vs12...I know I already hate it and it's just the first day.  I predict a significant drop in player numbers in the next couple of weeks.  I know I'm not going to be playing nearly as much...a mission or two on a couple of different accounts and I'm done.  Too much waiting for overcrowded laggy battles just to get spawn killed...nah, not for me thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

It's even worse!...16vs16.  I misread and didn't count within battles.  Thanks for the heads up Wolverine!  16vs16....what a ludicrous idea...geez.

 

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by Joeguy

[The_Pakistani 16,768]

Who want 100 crystal box 

[Positive 1,136]

1 minute ago, The_Pakistani said:

Who want 100 crystal box 

Nah people would be obsessed with catching them instead of focussing on the game

[RIDDLER_8 5,552]

This is the very first time I have won a 16 vs 16 players battle.

I finished 1st place but I lost on my team. Who cares. At least I finished 1st place on a team.

[DieselPlatinum 5,121]

20 minutes ago, Joeguy said:

So far this experiment is TERRIBLE.  The lag is fierce.  It takes much much longer to get into a battle....much longer waiting times.  It's taking twice as long to load the battle once MM assigns you to a particular battle and then it takes a very long time to actually spawn into the battle you've been waiting to get into.  Once you're in, it lags like crazy even on the lowest graphics setting. I'm also getting way more total crashes where you have to log back in again...you always lose your OD charge when this happens and frequently you even lose the entire battle.  You end up just returning to the lobby with no battle fund, or mission advancement...all you get is the unwanted XP and lots of wasted time.

I played for a few hours today and an inordinate amount of time was sitting around "loading" or other fussing about trying to get into battles instead of playing the game...very frustrating.  I didn't actually time it but it seems like more than half of my time was spent trying to get into laggy battles.

The 16vs16 thing is awful...it's so damn crowded on all abut the really huge maps.  It's just not even close to fun in the low ranks and the problems in higher ranks are amplified by the ridiculously overcrowded battles.  As soon as you spawn, you're dead unless you are on a team that somehow got the upper hand then you are doing nothing but spawn killing....there is no battle...it just slaughter.  Why even bother with a battle?  Just click an "outcome" button to tell you if you win or lose and your reward.  This would be the same result, just as much fun, but with much time saved.

The previous experiment wasn't disliked because of the 6vs6 as you imply.  It was hated because battle times were reduced to almost nothing (5 minutes, but you usually only saw 3 minutes of battle by the time you loaded).  The increased armor and increased damage for some turrets was also dislike by many players.  Removal of the larger maps was also disliked.  I would venture to say that most players liked the 6vs6.

I think most players are going to dislike the 12vs12...I know I already hate it and it's just the first day.  I predict a significant drop in player numbers in the next couple of weeks.  I know I'm not going to be playing nearly as much...a mission or two on a couple of different accounts and I'm done.  Too much waiting for overcrowded laggy battles just to get spawn killed...nah, not for me thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Next experiment:

 

20v20 in small maps like duel, ping pong, island, arena, duality, hill, combe, etc.

[ReptilianTroll 236]

2 minutes ago, DieselPlatinum said:

Next experiment:

 

20v20 in small maps like duel, ping pong, island, arena, duality, hill, combe, etc.

Imagine 20vs20 on island. 

[SONIC-BOOM 326]

36 minutes ago, ReptilianTroll said:

In 2015 they removed crystal boxes falling from the sky from all ranks because players like me got rich by spending hours collecting them while not ranking up. It is why my legend account ThouShallNot is like it is.

You mean you were a selfish mult, about right.

[ReptilianTroll 236]

8 minutes ago, SONIC-BOOM said:

You mean you were a selfish mult, about right.

Yep, that's how I got rich without buying crystals with real money. I mostly played DM so I wouldn't get reported. When I played in team battles, I did mult quite often.

Edited December 2, 2020 by ReptilianTroll

[SONIC-BOOM 326]

16 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

Not even close to being better.

Play 16 vs 16 on Year 2042 and see how fun that is...

You really think it would bother him

[wolverine848 13,097]

57 minutes ago, Joeguy said:

I think most players are going to dislike the 12vs12...I know I already hate it and it's just the first day.

12 vs 12?       There's SIXTEEN  ...  on EACH SIDE.   

 

It's just dumb on all maps except for Berlin, Dusseldorf and maybe Deathtrack (which is actually rated for 24 - 12 vs 12 here seems reasonable).  Have yet to see Skylark but too is rated for 24.

 

 

[Coriolano 78]

Ages to enter a battle.... I have a lot of better things to do than to wait every time at least 5 minutes for entering a battle.....

[Masterpro08 8]

The return of some maps is awesome, because they are cool to play, but 16 as a group size is a little bit too much. I think 10 or maybe 12 is a better option for the bigger maps, but 8 persons is the best on the smaller maps.

[SONIC-BOOM 326]

4 hours ago, Maf said:

The main problem with these boxes is that they distract players from gameplay and cause conflicts between those wanting to run around and collect boxes and those trying to play the objective. I know you don't agree with this and I know you will want to argue in favour of crystal boxes, but it just cannot happen at higher ranks, where gameplay is more intense and focused on victory.

AGREE

[The_Pakistani 16,768]

1 hour ago, Positive said:

Nah people would be obsessed with catching them instead of focussing on the game

You mean your team mates do objectives? Wow. Lucky lol

[RIDDLER_8 5,552]

For players who lag, turn your graphics settings to minimum. That should solve the problem.

[Eithern 412]

I like big maps with more players (but 16 vs 16 is ok only in the biggest ones), but I think the best thing is to have both, small and big! And where are the supplie boxes??

[iplayatankonline 102]

In my view...

 

The new mode slightly, (SLIGHTLY) balances hopper where I'm not noticing the ownage as much.

 

Let's be clear, I haven't set one foot in a rugby game so I don't know about those... maybe it still is a problem there.

But in some ctf, assault, tdm, cp modes. I see a bunch of hoppers dying and I rejoice with glee. Discourage these guys from even entering my battles so I don't have to see them zooming around.

 

1) Maps are much larger, so you cant just stroll in grab the flag hop out and be 1/3 the way back to your flag like specfically on flatter horizontal maps with little distance between flags. The hopper jump in or out to flag, and WHAM you re on Berlin... so you still had 9/10 of the length of map to go, 4/10 stil in enemy territory and you my dear hopper were punished with 7 different turrets tearing your hull to shreds. And good riddance. Now, I do think I did some teamwork that allowed hopper to score. And this I could tolerate. In a game I played where we won, we had 3 invaders on left of berlin, and 7 go in on right. I was not a part of the 7 man group that scored the flag *or helped our hopper retrieve it, but I flanked and killed enemy tanks that would have inevitably gone against them. This stopped any abuse of a one man hopper hero winning a game for us. We definitely shredded them as a group. Our hopper died after getting the flag back to the mid field, a titan picked it up and started the path back. So in part, its more maybe the balance of the match, than that hopper is Over powered here. So the scale of maps works against hopper a bit better.

2) As mentioned above, 16 v  16. So a hopper instead of eluding 8 enemies, needs to escape from16. From what I see, as it is light hull, it can get away at times. Or sneak around in tdm getting kills. But it dies a lot. I've seen hoppers hop around and get shot like 4 times on the landing, look at the name, look at the score in the tally bar, and they are not at the top, they are dying massively. So hurray! Get a real tank hoppers!

3) ok a lot stems from the above points. But lets say as example, more tanks right? So more turrets. More isidas to heal the teammates getting burned by hoppers. More long range turrets to be sniping. More short range to be brawling. Its not just the number of people, but the types of turrets and hulls being en mass deployed. We had more big hulls to survive the burn damage, more with fire or stun immunity to quickly counter the hopper, more mid rangers and quick light hulls to chase and return flag. Or in cases of cp tdm etc, a hopper suffers a fate it cant escape.

 

If you are a hopper and finding it hard. :D :D :D

 

I remain on the fence with the experiment. Lots of good points being made. I would love for kolhoz and berlin to be kept in the game. I do not like temple. Just me though. Don;t like it. Deathtrak and dusseldorf can stay, but maybe 12 v 12 is better. 16 v 16... it just seems. Crowded. It's like tanki as raised this mighty sword and tried to swing it and show how skilled they are. Samurai. Only to find that the sword weighs more than what they are able to swing, so you have games that just seem to spiral out of control. Experiments can start like this fine. But I realy hope they take good lessons and are able to weild these into sharp wielded scalpels of excellent gaming. Show the reason you did this experiment x and y and A B C, and how you combined them to end result of , YBC, with good points.

 

It seems we might be on the way. LOOKS LIKE bottom two on losing side get 3 stars? And top 5 on winning get 3 stars? Seems so anyway. As said, defenders needing only 70 kills on asl... come on. 16 player teams. absolutely. This is easy. Now either this, or instead of keeping each map to 3 flags or 2 flags sometimes for attackers. Give them 10 flags. Make every attacker an attacker who could have a scoring flag. Or.Keep the flag as having 2-3 spots. But when one person goes to pick it up, There is another instantly there. up 5 flags can be taken from a single spot in asl before it goes away. I dunno. I've only played on 1-2 winning games of asl. The rest were shut outs for defenders pretty much. I think it was industrial and osa I won on asl. OSA surprisingly, because I had another as attacker where we got stomped.

[vecky 93]

11 hours ago, cool12345 said:

Why is my tank always Burning???  

I am on a low resolution and my screen lag and jump in a frame rate on 3-4 seconds I loose 1-2 seconds.

And My shield is almost always is broken Buahahaha!

This game is just a joke now!

Bye Tankionline!

For me until next update exist only missions!

Bye.

[vecky 93]

4 hours ago, brainhoo said:

BIGGEST PROBLEM i've faced is the GARAGE! Setting the Protection Modules is a nightmare. Need to do twice. Or it goes haywire; i take out the PM and it says i can't change yet but removed one of my PM. I've set low resolution to improve the performance but its marginally better.

Changing the protection is not only the nightmare but it is not good for health.

In some cases when you don't succeed to do a double click in a first time, you do one

click (delete protection) and when in a speed do a second double click you do protection and

delete again. And when in a speed return to the battle You notice that you have been so fast killed

and only you can see that you don't have a three protection but only two. What to say but try not to cry.

[swoody2000 20]

I definitely agree with the consensus, that size of the map should determine the player count. 16v16 is reasonable for the large maps, but a lot of smaller maps are still in the pool, and 16v16 on maps like 2042 and desert are just overcrowded and not enjoyable. It makes more sense to have the player count for the map dependent on the size of the map.

 

My major problem with this update is that with overdrives, it is impossible to capture anything unless it is done in the first minute. With 16 opponents, at least 2 or 3 of them have overdrives ready at all times, and with that it is impossible to capture flags and/or goals. The only chance that this happens is if the teams are overbalanced (which happens an enormous amount of the time). Assault is unplayable - with so many defenders the match only lasts 4-5 minutes because they kill 70 too quickly, and there are too many defenders (overdrives) to be able to capture flags. The same goes for CTF and Rugby, where there is too much space and too many defenders to get close to the base. 

 

Truthfully I enjoy this update even less than the last one (which was also horrible), just because there are too many people in battles. It's impossible to finish top 3 without having a top GS tank and drone. It's impossible to use close range turrets because with 16 enemies, you get noticed long before you get to the enemy base. I understand that Tanki needs to artificially increase the player count, but this makes half the game modes obsolete.

 

It has been nice having new maps in the pool because the old ones were getting stale. I would love to have more maps included in matchmaking, since Tanki basically forces players to do matchmaking. The bigger maps are nice, but there are still so many maps that are not used that could be viable options.

[Supper 15]

On 12/1/2020 at 7:08 AM, CyborgPenguin said:

I feel like it will take too long to load into a battle though, since we need twice the number of players now...

It does, and with the special missions to get flags in CTF you can't even get to the flag unless everyone rushes then maybe 2 people make it out alive. Then by the time you get back the other team has already taken the flag. This is one of the worst updates yet. I have been staying through the game with all the past updates and trying to be optimistic that there are some good things, but with this last update I seriously thought about quitting. The devs were saying that they had great feedback for this new experiment, but from what I have heard from EVERY SINGLE MM BATTLE I joined NO ONE likes it. It kills FPS as well as not allowing people to play properly, and with spawn protection lasting so long if you kill someone at the flag and try to run they will be right back with immunity to any damage.

[vecky 93]

30 minutes ago, iplayatankonline said:

In my view...

 

The new mode slightly, (SLIGHTLY) balances hopper where I'm not noticing the ownage as much.

 

Let's be clear, I haven't set one foot in a rugby game so I don't know about those... maybe it still is a problem there.

But in some ctf, assault, tdm, cp modes. I see a bunch of hoppers dying and I rejoice with glee. Discourage these guys from even entering my battles so I don't have to see them zooming around.

 

1) Maps are much larger, so you cant just stroll in grab the flag hop out and be 1/3 the way back to your flag like specfically on flatter horizontal maps with little distance between flags. The hopper jump in or out to flag, and WHAM you re on Berlin... so you still had 9/10 of the length of map to go, 4/10 stil in enemy territory and you my dear hopper were punished with 7 different turrets tearing your hull to shreds. And good riddance. Now, I do think I did some teamwork that allowed hopper to score. And this I could tolerate. In a game I played where we won, we had 3 invaders on left of berlin, and 7 go in on right. I was not a part of the 7 man group that scored the flag *or helped our hopper retrieve it, but I flanked and killed enemy tanks that would have inevitably gone against them. This stopped any abuse of a one man hopper hero winning a game for us. We definitely shredded them as a group. Our hopper died after getting the flag back to the mid field, a titan picked it up and started the path back. So in part, its more maybe the balance of the match, than that hopper is Over powered here. So the scale of maps works against hopper a bit better.

2) As mentioned above, 16 v  16. So a hopper instead of eluding 8 enemies, needs to escape from16. From what I see, as it is light hull, it can get away at times. Or sneak around in tdm getting kills. But it dies a lot. I've seen hoppers hop around and get shot like 4 times on the landing, look at the name, look at the score in the tally bar, and they are not at the top, they are dying massively. So hurray! Get a real tank hoppers!

3) ok a lot stems from the above points. But lets say as example, more tanks right? So more turrets. More isidas to heal the teammates getting burned by hoppers. More long range turrets to be sniping. More short range to be brawling. Its not just the number of people, but the types of turrets and hulls being en mass deployed. We had more big hulls to survive the burn damage, more with fire or stun immunity to quickly counter the hopper, more mid rangers and quick light hulls to chase and return flag. Or in cases of cp tdm etc, a hopper suffers a fate it cant escape.

 

If you are a hopper and finding it hard. :D :D :D

 

I remain on the fence with the experiment. Lots of good points being made. I would love for kolhoz and berlin to be kept in the game. I do not like temple. Just me though. Don;t like it. Deathtrak and dusseldorf can stay, but maybe 12 v 12 is better. 16 v 16... it just seems. Crowded. It's like tanki as raised this mighty sword and tried to swing it and show how skilled they are. Samurai. Only to find that the sword weighs more than what they are able to swing, so you have games that just seem to spiral out of control. Experiments can start like this fine. But I realy hope they take good lessons and are able to weild these into sharp wielded scalpels of excellent gaming. Show the reason you did this experiment x and y and A B C, and how you combined them to end result of , YBC, with good points.

 

It seems we might be on the way. LOOKS LIKE bottom two on losing side get 3 stars? And top 5 on winning get 3 stars? Seems so anyway. As said, defenders needing only 70 kills on asl... come on. 16 player teams. absolutely. This is easy. Now either this, or instead of keeping each map to 3 flags or 2 flags sometimes for attackers. Give them 10 flags. Make every attacker an attacker who could have a scoring flag. Or.Keep the flag as having 2-3 spots. But when one person goes to pick it up, There is another instantly there. up 5 flags can be taken from a single spot in asl before it goes away. I dunno. I've only played on 1-2 winning games of asl. The rest were shut outs for defenders pretty much. I think it was industrial and osa I won on asl. OSA surprisingly, because I had another as attacker where we got stomped.

I only can notice that You and management and programmers was and are very bad mathematicians in a school,

because you finish a work job to the end and then think that two errors in a row always make a good result on the end,

but the right way going to the result is still counting.

Analyzing the final result with errors on a start have no sense at all.

Because the tankionline management with so many update, entered so many errors and miss understanding the real

and normal relations in a game that it can not be analyzed any more, only to say that tankionline is now bunch of a mess and lags.

With their so many balancing with unbalance and debalance and update on an upgrade (is that possible) that no one can analyze it any more.

Neither do I. 

[vecky 93]

52 minutes ago, swoody2000 said:

I definitely agree with the consensus, that size of the map should determine the player count. 16v16 is reasonable for the large maps, but a lot of smaller maps are still in the pool, and 16v16 on maps like 2042 and desert are just overcrowded and not enjoyable. It makes more sense to have the player count for the map dependent on the size of the map.

 

My major problem with this update is that with overdrives, it is impossible to capture anything unless it is done in the first minute. With 16 opponents, at least 2 or 3 of them have overdrives ready at all times, and with that it is impossible to capture flags and/or goals. The only chance that this happens is if the teams are overbalanced (which happens an enormous amount of the time). Assault is unplayable - with so many defenders the match only lasts 4-5 minutes because they kill 70 too quickly, and there are too many defenders (overdrives) to be able to capture flags. The same goes for CTF and Rugby, where there is too much space and too many defenders to get close to the base. 

 

Truthfully I enjoy this update even less than the last one (which was also horrible), just because there are too many people in battles. It's impossible to finish top 3 without having a top GS tank and drone. It's impossible to use close range turrets because with 16 enemies, you get noticed long before you get to the enemy base. I understand that Tanki needs to artificially increase the player count, but this makes half the game modes obsolete.

 

It has been nice having new maps in the pool because the old ones were getting stale. I would love to have more maps included in matchmaking, since Tanki basically forces players to do matchmaking. The bigger maps are nice, but there are still so many maps that are not used that could be viable options.

On all of what you said which I absolutely agree, count that like you said the result of wining is set in a first minute.

Why?  Because I say for my case, but I think it is the same with almost every team which loose,

They (tankionline entering mechanism) put me in the game with 20-30 seconds late in a game and for that time

enemy players get the ball, activated supplies, get closed enough to our base and start to kill, massacrate and goal the score,

then Our team start to go out and count that with new players who enter the game after that, their overdrive start to clock

from beginning and the game is loosed.

VOILA

[vecky 93]

5 hours ago, Joeguy said:

So far this experiment is TERRIBLE.  The lag is fierce.  It takes much much longer to get into a battle....much longer waiting times.  It's taking twice as long to load the battle once MM assigns you to a particular battle and then it takes a very long time to actually spawn into the battle you've been waiting to get into.  Once you're in, it lags like crazy even on the lowest graphics setting. I'm also getting way more total crashes where you have to log back in again...you always lose your OD charge when this happens and frequently you even lose the entire battle.  You end up just returning to the lobby with no battle fund, or mission advancement...all you get is the unwanted XP and lots of wasted time.

I played for a few hours today and an inordinate amount of time was sitting around "loading" or other fussing about trying to get into battles instead of playing the game...very frustrating.  I didn't actually time it but it seems like more than half of my time was spent trying to get into laggy battles.

The 16vs16 thing is awful...it's so damn crowded on all abut the really huge maps.  It's just not even close to fun in the low ranks and the problems in higher ranks are amplified by the ridiculously overcrowded battles.  As soon as you spawn, you're dead unless you are on a team that somehow got the upper hand then you are doing nothing but spawn killing....there is no battle...it just slaughter.  Why even bother with a battle?  Just click an "outcome" button to tell you if you win or lose and your reward.  This would be the same result, just as much fun, but with much time saved.

The previous experiment wasn't disliked because of the 6vs6 as you imply.  It was hated because battle times were reduced to almost nothing (5 minutes, but you usually only saw 3 minutes of battle by the time you loaded).  The increased armor and increased damage for some turrets was also dislike by many players.  Removal of the larger maps was also disliked.  I would venture to say that most players liked the 6vs6.

I think most players are going to dislike the 12vs12...I know I already hate it and it's just the first day.  I predict a significant drop in player numbers in the next couple of weeks.  I know I'm not going to be playing nearly as much...a mission or two on a couple of different accounts and I'm done.  Too much waiting for overcrowded laggy battles just to get spawn killed...nah, not for me thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree for everything you said, but one notice I will add, And every time the crystal box is ready to fall and

you are ready to get BOOM, you are killed and someone else getting your crystal box.

I just notice one more thing every time I was killed somewhere else fall the crystal box. Normally till I spawn someone get that box.

BLAHH!