event Tanker's Day

[Let 1,398]

I love this event. 

But 20 minutes battle was soo perfect at everything. why they dont do again? 

Edited September 5, 2021 by Perish

[Debt-Collector 1,617]

1 minute ago, Perish said:

I love this event. 

But 20 minutes battle was soo perfext at everything. why they dont do again? 

No please no.....20 min battles caused more harm to the game more than good. People would often leave in mid matches and wasted more supplies in the process. 

[Let 1,398]

Just now, MysticBlood said:

No please no.....20 min battles caused more harm to the game more than good. People would often leave in mid matches and wasted more supplies in the process. 

Look:

New missions needed/need 300 supplies and 20 minutes battle is perfect about it. also many scores you know many crystals.

[lssimo 1,559]

49 minutes ago, PirateSpider said:

Start a new account. You won't have to use the drone on it. Besides, gameplay on lower ranks is always more fun than on legend ranks.

Careful with your suggestions... too late.

[The_Pakistani 16,768]

Was expecting crap and got crap. Moral: Exceptions in tanki don't hurt.

Spoiler

 

[DestrotankAI9 1,513]

5 hours ago, Perish said:

I love this event. 

But 20 minutes battle was soo perfect at everything. why they dont do again? 

Uhhh what, 20 minute battles are perfect?

I'm not sure you have thought this through: In Matchmaking you will often get put into battles you do not want (such as for instance for me, a CTF match on Lost Temple) - with 7 minute battles you can just about put up with bad matches and get some mission progress, then proceed to queue for a new battle which hopefully will be better. With 20 minute battles, you will end up stuck in games you don't want for a very long length of time - or in fact what will happen is that you will be forced to quit matches. Quitting after a long load time, is a waste of time, and also the next game may not be a good match either - so being forced to quit games is pretty awful.

Also, we have daily and weekly missions which require us to "complete battles in a mode" or even to "finish top-3 in the winning team" in a certain number of battles. For instance, lets say you have a daily mission to complete 3 battles. Right now, that will take around 21 minutes. With 20 minute battles - it will take an hour. So how exactly is that perfect? Sounds absolutely terrible to me, and a lot of other players. Also, just imagine how long "finish in the top-3 in 10 matches" weekly quests will take with such long battles....

So no, this would not be perfect - it would be awful.

 

5 hours ago, Perish said:

Look:

New missions needed/need 300 supplies and 20 minutes battle is perfect about it. also many scores you know many crystals.

Your logic is flawed. Longer battles do not help you to get missions which have a requirement to use supplies done faster. You can make an approximately equal amount of progress in three 7-minute games, as you can in one 20-minute game - the only possible advantage is that there might be a higher ratio of queue time to "in battle" time. However, longer battles could also lead to longer queues as less players will be queuing at any one time - so even this point is questionable.

Any very small potential increase to queue time vs in battle time is not made up for by the huge disadvantages of 20 minute battles which I listed above. I really don't understand why people think long battles helps them get missions done faster - there is no real logic to this argument.

20 minute battles enforced in Matchmaking would lead to a lot of players quitting, far too long and awful for many reasons. 10 minutes at most.

Edited September 5, 2021 by DestrotankAI9

[l3eblueto 122]

I really took advantage of this 50% promotion, I left my protections all improving, some were to the maximum others in half and there goes more what matters and that I could enjoy and a lot.

Edited September 5, 2021 by l3eblueto

[PirateSpider 1,491]

46 minutes ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

I'm not sure you have thought this through: In Matchmaking you will often get put into battles you do not want (such as for instance for me, a CTF match on Lost Temple) - with 7 minute battles you can just about put up with bad matches and get some mission progress, then proceed to queue for a new battle which hopefully will be better. With 20 minute battles, you will end up stuck in games you don't want for a very long length of time - or in fact what will happen is that you will be forced to quit matches. Quitting after a long load time, is a waste of time, and also the next game may not be a good match either - so being forced to quit games is pretty awful.

That wouldn't really be a problem if:

A) we were allowed to choose the size of the map we want to play on (small, medium, large, mega).

B) we were allowed to choose 2 game modes and 5 maps that we don't want to be put in.

AND

C) early battle terminations came back for when teams are imbalanced.

50 minutes ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

Also, we have daily and weekly missions which require us to "complete battles in a mode" or even to "finish top-3 in the winning team" in a certain number of battles. For instance, lets say you have a daily mission to complete 3 battles. Right now, that will take around 21 minutes. With 20 minute battles - it will take an hour. So how exactly is that perfect? Sounds absolutely terrible to me, and a lot of other players. Also, just imagine how long "finish in the top-3 in 10 matches" weekly quests will take with such long battles....

Lol, I change the game mode specific missions. Mobile lets you do it for free. Wish we can change weekly missions as well though.

52 minutes ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

20 minute battles enforced in Matchmaking would lead to a lot of players quitting, far too long and awful for many reasons. 10 minutes at most.

Then how come many of the 20 minute battles I've been in were better balanced than many of the 7 minute battles I've been in?

[Incorp 2,084]

7 hours ago, TheCongoSpider said:

On a brighter note, I was able to obtain a maxed Brutus at Staff Sergeant. 

 

You how get so many crystals?! I could stop earning crystals until mk5 levels!!!

[TheCongoSpider 8,957]

44 minutes ago, Incorp said:

You how get so many crystals?! I could stop earning crystals until mk5 levels!!!

I got this on Friday, which allowed me to speed through the last 3 upgrades. The other 17 were from crystals gained from Shard containers since the drone update. 

 

 

[brainhoo 735]

On 9/2/2021 at 9:25 PM, Spy said:

Nothing is mentioned in the announcement about it so I don't think gold boxes are increased in that mode.

so i guess the change was made for the better afterall. Cos it would be extremely boring to play Skyscraper and Hopper with no increased gold box drop rate. Loved this Skyscraper event.

[brainhoo 735]

6 hours ago, The_Pakistani said:

Was expecting crap and got crap. Moral: Exceptions in tanki don't hurt.

  Hide contents

 

You got 2 legendaries and 4 exotic with 1 of them being an adrenaline hammer augment. Hardly crap.

[RIDDLER_8 5,553]

We should have a Freeze/Dictator mode. That would be unique and fun to play with.

[DestrotankAI9 1,513]

2 hours ago, PirateSpider said:

That wouldn't really be a problem if:

A) we were allowed to choose the size of the map we want to play on (small, medium, large, mega).

B) we were allowed to choose 2 game modes and 5 maps that we don't want to be put in.

AND

C) early battle terminations came back for when teams are imbalanced.

Lol, I change the game mode specific missions. Mobile lets you do it for free. Wish we can change weekly missions as well though.

Then how come many of the 20 minute battles I've been in were better balanced than many of the 7 minute battles I've been in?

They might implement B) but A) & C) definitely never.

For A), allowing us to choose the size of the map we want for game modes would lead to much longer queues, and queues are already long - that would mean a further subdivision of the players queuing for any given mode into 3 different groups. If the playerbase was larger that might be viable, but Tanki's is currently too small and is on a downward trend, so it is isn't going to happen unless that changes.

For C), they will never terminate battles simply because they are imbalanced, that was never the case - in fact they have stated they deliberately make some battles imbalanced. Although what you probably mean- for too low players on the one side team - possibly - but new players will keep being put into the match until it nears the end. So you will be forced to stick out battles you don't want for a long time with 20 minute battles, or quit (and this battle length will force you to quit, wasting your time queuing - unlike currently when you can at least finish battles you don't want to be in quickly).

 

2 hours ago, PirateSpider said:

Lol, I change the game mode specific missions. Mobile lets you do it for free. Wish we can change weekly missions as well though.

Not all of us play mobile, you can't ignore the PC players. We get 1 free mission change a day and that is it, and you also have the weekly missions regardless.

Also, aren't you the player that was complaining about the new weekly mission system being too hard to complete in one of the Ideas & Suggestions threads recently, when we were chatting there? I am astonished that you are showing support for 20 minute battles in that case - do you have any idea how much harder that would make it to complete weekly missions (and daily missions for PC players who can't change missions as you can?). It would be a total disaster, think about this more carefully.

 

2 hours ago, PirateSpider said:

Then how come many of the 20 minute battles I've been in were better balanced than many of the 7 minute battles I've been in?

20 minute battles do allow more chance for comebacks than 7 minute battles, for sure. But 10 minute battles also allow enough time for comebacks, while not subjecting you to vastly increased match times in battles you don't want, and also making daily and weekly missions only slightly harder. So 10 minute battles are overall the best option IMO, to give a balance of all factors.

7 minute battles are however vastly preferable to 20 minute battles, as the drawbacks of battles that long are significant - completing daily and weekly missions would be a torture. If that was implemented, it would be the worst change for me in the last 2 years unless radical changes were made to matchmaking, and the missions system at the same time - which wouldn't happen. We would just be left with a disaster, and having to play a huge amount of time to get missions done, and quit many battles wasting a huge amount of time queuing for nothing.

Edited September 6, 2021 by DestrotankAI9

[PirateSpider 1,491]

49 minutes ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

For A), allowing us to choose the size of the map we want for game modes would lead to much longer queues, and queues are already long - that would mean a further subdivision of the players queuing for any given mode into 3 different groups. If the playerbase was larger that might be viable, but Tanki's is currently too small and is on a downward trend, so it is isn't going to happen unless that changes.

That's why we just just remove Seige, ASL, rugby, and TDM from MM. Makes no sense to keep them there.

51 minutes ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

Not all of us play mobile, you can't ignore the PC players. We get 1 free mission change a day and that is it, and you also have the weekly missions regardless.

Also, aren't you the player that was complaining about the new weekly mission system being too hard to complete in one of the Ideas & Suggestions threads recently, when we were chatting there? I am astonished that you are showing support for 20 minute battles in that case - do you have any idea how much harder that would make it to complete weekly missions (and daily missions for PC players who can't change missions as you can?). It would be a total disaster, think about this more carefully.

I never complained about them being too hard. I complained about there not being any incentive to continue playing for the week after they complete their weeklies. That top 3 in winners team mission is the only thing that's too hard.

Also, you should download TO mobile then, to change your missions there.

55 minutes ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

20 minute battles do allow more chance for comebacks than 7 minute battles, for sure. But 10 minute battles also allow enough time for comebacks, while not subjecting you to vastly increased match times in battles you don't want, and also making daily and weekly missions only slightly harder. So 10 minute battles are overall the best option IMO, to give a balance of all factors.

7 minute battles are however vastly preferable to 20 minute battles, as the drawbacks of battles that long are significant - completing daily and weekly missions would be a torture. If that was implemented, it would be the worst change for me in the last 2 years unless radical changes were made to matchmaking, and the missions system at the same time - which wouldn't happen. We would just be left with a disaster, and having to play a huge amount of time to get missions done, and quit many battles wasting a huge amount of time queuing for nothing.

The only missions that'll take a long time to complete with 20 minute battles are finish battles and top 3 in winners team. The rest are pretty much the same time as 7 minute battles, maybe even less.

[DestrotankAI9 1,513]

1 hour ago, PirateSpider said:

I never complained about them being too hard. I complained about there not being any incentive to continue playing for the week after they complete their weeklies. That top 3 in winners team mission is the only thing that's too hard.

Are you quite sure about that? Here quotes from you in that thread:
 

On 9/1/2021 at 6:55 PM, PirateSpider said:

Yeah, this change just caters to players that have no life. The old system was thousands of miles better, casual players could could get the 8 daily missions weekly in just 3 days and the 15 daily missions weekly in 5 days. We were fine with that.

Only problem with the old system was that the other weekly still offers that toxic and cancerous top 3 in winners team mission. If they just addressed that, then it would've been perfect.

But nope, they decided to do this crap.

 

On 9/1/2021 at 9:30 PM, PirateSpider said:

 

So was the old system but so much easier, didn't have to play 24/7 to complete them either. Also did I forget to mention that it was way better?

The new missions system "caters to players that have no life", and also "didn't have to play 24/7 to complete them either". Sounds a lot like you are saying the new weekly missions are too hard to complete. I don't see anything from your posts there that indicate you were complaining about having nothing to do after finishing them.

However, if battles are increased to 20 minutes, a complaint that the new mission system makes weeklies to hard to complete will be valid - because it would be vastly harder. Also the "finish in top-3" mission will be literally 3 times harder to complete than it is now.

 

1 hour ago, PirateSpider said:

The only missions that'll take a long time to complete with 20 minute battles are finish battles and top 3 in winners team. The rest are pretty much the same time as 7 minute battles, maybe even less.

For various reasons, unfortunately I can't play mobile games. And no one should be forced to use TO mobile just because of a new update in the game.

 

1 hour ago, PirateSpider said:

The only missions that'll take a long time to complete with 20 minute battles are finish battles and top 3 in winners team. The rest are pretty much the same time as 7 minute battles, maybe even less.

This is not correct - think about it: If you have a "Earn 300 score in CP" mission or something along those lines, you can easily complete that in a 7 minute battle. However, if battle time is increased to 20 minutes you will have to wait through a full 20 minutes, even if you managed to complete that mission long before the finish time. Unless of course, you want to leave the battle early and earn no crystals for your EXP gained.

As for the "Finish battles" or "Finish in the top-3" missions, with 3 slots for daily and weekly missions they occur frequently, so the problems with those missions would be unavoidable.

20 minute battles would make the current mission system hideous, in addition to many other problems.

Edited September 6, 2021 by DestrotankAI9

[PirateSpider 1,491]

1 hour ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

Are you quite sure about that? Here quotes from you in that thread:

 

1 hour ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

The new missions system "caters to players that have no life", and also "didn't have to play 24/7 to complete them either". Sounds a lot like you are saying the new weekly missions are too hard to complete. I don't see anything from your posts there that indicate you were complaining about having nothing to do after finishing them.

However, if battles are increased to 20 minutes, a complaint that the new mission system makes weeklies to hard to complete will be valid - because it would be vastly harder. Also the "finish in top-3" mission will be literally 3 times harder to complete than it is now.

And your point is? You have never made an argument against the fact that there's no incentive to play for the rest of the week.

1 hour ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

For various reasons, unfortunately I can't play mobile games. And no one should be forced to use TO mobile just because of a new update in the game.

For your information, TO mobile has been a thing since 2017, maybe even earlier. So its definitely not a "new update".

1 hour ago, DestrotankAI9 said:

This is not correct - think about it: If you have a "Earn 300 score in CP" mission or something along those lines, you can easily complete that in a 7 minute battle. However, if battle time is increased to 20 minutes you will have to wait through a full 20 minutes, even if you managed to complete that mission long before the finish time. Unless of course, you want to leave the battle early and earn no crystals for your EXP gained.

As for the "Finish battles" or "Finish in the top-3" missions, with 3 slots for daily and weekly missions they occur frequently, so the problems with those missions would be unavoidable.

20 minute battles would make the current mission system hideous, in addition to many other problems.

I think you're just criticizing just to criticize. During 7 minute matches, you basically have to be a tryhard to complete 300 score missions let alone in a specific game mode. 

You score 250 points in your first 7 minute cp battle but you need 300 points to complete the mission. Cp wait times are often around 5 minutes before you get put into another one. You get the last 50 points in just around a minute. The total time you spent trying to complete the mission is 13 minutes.

At the same rate, it would've taken you only 8 minutes to complete the mission in a 20 minute match, what you choose to do for the remainder of the battle is up to you.

[numericable 2,375]

8 minutes ago, PirateSpider said:

 

And your point is? You have never made an argument against the fact that there's no incentive to play for the rest of the week.

For your information, TO mobile has been a thing since 2017, maybe even earlier. So its definitely not a "new update".

I think you're just criticizing just to criticize. During 7 minute matches, you basically have to be a tryhard to complete 300 score missions let alone in a specific game mode. 

You score 250 points in your first 7 minute cp battle but you need 300 points to complete the mission. Cp wait times are often around 5 minutes before you get put into another one. You get the last 50 points in just around a minute. The total time you spent trying to complete the mission is 13 minutes.

At the same rate, it would've taken you only 8 minutes to complete the mission in a 20 minute match, what you choose to do for the remainder of the battle is up to you.

250 scores per match is very low, 600 is more accurate, then players that just chill or just dont care about the mode itself get less than 300 scores, i usually complete all my daily missions in 2 matches, once i have completed all of them in one match only so they are definitely not harder than previous ones.

[PirateSpider 1,491]

14 minutes ago, numericable said:

250 scores per match is very low, 600 is more accurate, then players that just chill or just dont care about the mode itself get less than 300 scores, i usually complete all my daily missions in 2 matches, once i have completed all of them in one match only so they are definitely not harder than previous ones.

600 is just too high for a 7 minute match, especially since you'll likely be put in a battle that's like 4 minutes in.

Only way that's possible is if you're using OP equipment against an unprepared enemy team.

250 is pretty much average for a 7 minute match.

[Let 1,398]

12 minutes ago, PirateSpider said:

600 is just too high for a 7 minute match, especially since you'll likely be put in a battle that's like 4 minutes in.

Only way that's possible is if you're using OP equipment against an unprepared enemy team.

250 is pretty much average for a 7 minute match.

Thats why 20 minute's battle is good. 

You can earn so many crystals, experiences, scores in map and also do easily missions, also weekle missions. In 20 minute's battle evry single player can make more scores amd u don't will mad at buyer's and you know =) on pmayers who have excellent garage and items. Think about it please

[Okami 3,041]

33 minutes ago, Perish said:

Thats why 20 minute's battle is good. 

You can earn so many crystals, experiences, scores in map and also do easily missions, also weekle missions. In 20 minute's battle evry single player can make more scores amd u don't will mad at buyer's and you know =) on pmayers who have excellent garage and items. Think about it please

Are you trying to artificially inflate your reputation score? Or maybe you're trying to create a favorable view of your opinions so people like Marcus see it and think that's what people want?
All of your posts have several alt accounts giving it positive ratings. All of these accounts have no posts and a large amount joined a mere 12 hours ago. Some more posts where this happens

Edited September 6, 2021 by GrayWolf8733

[Let 1,398]

4 minutes ago, GrayWolf8733 said:

Are you trying to artificially inflate your reputation score? Or maybe you're trying to create a favorable view of your opinions so people like Marcus see it and think that's what people want?
All of your posts have several alt accounts giving it positive ratings. All of these accounts have no posts and a large amount joined a mere 12 hours ago. Some more posts where this happens

nope ofc not. that guys are my friends who sharing my opinion. take my apologies if it is problem you know

[Let 1,398]

6 minutes ago, GrayWolf8733 said:

Are you trying to artificially inflate your reputation score? Or maybe you're trying to create a favorable view of your opinions so people like Marcus see it and think that's what people want?
All of your posts have several alt accounts giving it positive ratings. All of these accounts have no posts and a large amount joined a mere 12 hours ago. Some more posts where this happens

Also i'm not trying anything.

[PirateSpider 1,491]

1 hour ago, GrayWolf8733 said:

Are you trying to artificially inflate your reputation score? Or maybe you're trying to create a favorable view of your opinions so people like Marcus see it and think that's what people want?
All of your posts have several alt accounts giving it positive ratings. All of these accounts have no posts and a large amount joined a mere 12 hours ago. Some more posts where this happens

Well, I just reacted to his reply to my post. And I'm A different person, so I don't think I'm A part of that scheme, if it is a scheme.

[Debt-Collector 1,617]

1 hour ago, GrayWolf8733 said:

Are you trying to artificially inflate your reputation score? Or maybe you're trying to create a favorable view of your opinions so people like Marcus see it and think that's what people want?
All of your posts have several alt accounts giving it positive ratings. All of these accounts have no posts and a large amount joined a mere 12 hours ago. Some more posts where this happens

Just wanted to add the sound track to be more funny. XD well I read this.