declined I&S rule removal

[Incorp 2,084]

Tanki X have been gone for a long time. Tho it is a thing to weep over, why shouldn't we be able to use the stuff in tanki X to push tanki forward? Please remove that rule! :)

[Spy 14,959]

Under review
Declined

We are still discussing about it, we will keep you updated in this topic.

[Incorp 2,084]

OK thanks 

[Tanker-Arthur 2,971]

Tanki X's Module system would've been way more fun than adding a bunch of Drones, Overdrives, and status effects to be honest....
 

[PirateSpider 1,491]

IMO, kinda pointless. Only good thing about TX were the skins.

[yellowghetto 3,206]

18 hours ago, Tanker-Arthur said:

Tanki X's Module system would've been way more fun that adding a bunch of Drones, Overdrives, and status effects to be honest....
 

I repeatedly tried to suggest that years ago. Wolverine and a bunch of others did not like the idea so I stopped trying.

[SulfuricAcid 504]

NO !

I don't think it gives us benefit but also this idea will kill Tankionline as how TX died because of its content and gameplay. So, overall, the game ((TANKIONLINE))  is in its BEST state  as it is right now. No changes needed to TO status or contents or importing content from other diversions such as TankiX since it definetly ruins this game as well as how it ruined TankiX. Thank you. I don't like the entire content and gameplay of TankiX; The same as many other players don't either. The only cosmetics & Skins form TankX is appreciable to import to TO. Thnx a lot DEVS for understanding this crucial change.

[wolverine848 13,097]

On 9/3/2021 at 6:29 AM, Tanker-Arthur said:

Tanki X's Module system would've been way more fun than adding a bunch of Drones, Overdrives, and status effects to be honest....
 

I disagree.

The modules (blueprints for the modules) were handed out randomly in ... ... containers.   

Maybe if there was a different way to obtain them it wouldn't be so bad.  But that was one of the reasons I quit TX.

 

by-the-by - what happened to Forum last night after server re-set?  It tried to get me to create a new account with no access to existing accounts...

[wolverine848 13,097]

33 minutes ago, SulfuricAcid said:

NO !

I don't think it gives us benefit but also this idea will kill Tankionline as how TX died because of its content and gameplay. So, overall, the game ((TANKIONLINE))  is in its BEST state  as it is right now. No changes needed to TO status or contents or importing content from other diversions such as TankiX since it definetly ruins this game as well as how it ruined TankiX. Thank you. I don't like the entire content and gameplay of TankiX; The same as many other players don't either. The only cosmetics & Skins form TankX is appreciable to import to TO. Thnx a lot DEVS for understanding this crucial change.

Was gonna give thumbs up because of this.

But then you ruined it with the rest of your post... 

[SulfuricAcid 504]

2 hours ago, wolverine848 said:

I disagree.

The modules (blueprints for the modules) were handed out randomly in ... ... containers.   

Maybe if there was a different way to obtain them it wouldn't be so bad.  But that was one of the reasons I quit TX.

I gave thumbs up because of this.

But then you ruined it with the rest of your post... 

[wolverine848 13,097]

28 minutes ago, SulfuricAcid said:

I gave thumbs up because of this.

But then you ruined it with the rest of your post... 

I'm too petty to return the favour.   

[Maf 32,338]

On 9/3/2021 at 2:54 AM, Incorp said:

Tanki X have been gone for a long time. Tho it is a thing to weep over, why shouldn't we be able to use the stuff in tanki X to push tanki forward? Please remove that rule! :)

The original reason for that rule was to avoid having crossover of features between Tanki X (TX) and Tanki Online (TO), because the two games were supposed to take different paths of development and end up as separate entities with very little resemblance. As you know, this didn't happen and TX shut down. However, developers didn't just delete it all and erase it from their memories, so they're keeping all that lost content safe on the top shelf, so to speak.

This means that with development of TO still in full progress, there is definitely plenty of potential to see TX features being readapted for TO, which is what we've already seen happen with multiple updates — overdrives, modules, drones, HD skins (especially Steampunk), etc.

Meanwhile the I&S section rule remains in power, and the reason is that by suggesting to implement something from TX, you're not really bringing anything new to the table, since, like I said before, developers already keep all those features in mind for a potential future update. So I think the rule should stay.

[Incorp 2,084]

55 minutes ago, Maf said:

The original reason for that rule was to avoid having crossover of features between Tanki X (TX) and Tanki Online (TO), because the two games were supposed to take different paths of development and end up as separate entities with very little resemblance. As you know, this didn't happen and TX shut down. However, developers didn't just delete it all and erase it from their memories, so they're keeping all that lost content safe on the top shelf, so to speak.

This means that with development of TO still in full progress, there is definitely plenty of potential to see TX features being readapted for TO, which is what we've already seen happen with multiple updates — overdrives, modules, drones, HD skins (especially Steampunk), etc.

Meanwhile the I&S section rule remains in power, and the reason is that by suggesting to implement something from TX, you're not really bringing anything new to the table, since, like I said before, developers already keep all those features in mind for a potential future update. So I think the rule should stay.

I know why it was there, because devs want tanki X to overshadow tanki, and to finally delete tanki, but still players should be able to all East suggest it, if you get what I mean. It wouldn't be fair for devs to implement tanki X features while players get their tanki X ideas declined.

[Maf 32,338]

Just now, Incorp said:

It wouldn't be fair for devs to implement tanki X features while players get their tanki X ideas declined.

But why? If you want to see something from TX get implemented, and it does get implemented, then why does it matter if someone suggested it or not?

[Incorp 2,084]

4 minutes ago, Maf said:

But why? If you want to see something from TX get implemented, and it does get implemented, then why does it matter if someone suggested it or not?

Because the players might get ideas from tanki X, but they can't even suggest it! It's like getting ice cream but can't choose the flavor. Besides, would it hurt to do this?

[Maf 32,338]

42 minutes ago, Incorp said:

Besides, would it hurt to do this?

Since the I&S section is for forwarding potentially useful new ideas to developers, then yes — ideas about TX features are pointless and they would take up space in the section. We're still debating it, but I'm reluctant to remove the rule.

[Incorp 2,084]

1 minute ago, Maf said:

Since the I&S section is for forwarding potentially useful new ideas to developers, then yes — ideas about TX features are pointless and they would take up space in the section. We're still debating it, but I'm reluctant to remove the rule.

I mean there are some features tanki devs might not think of using in a particular situation. Like archipelago map for example. One tanker may suggest to make a jump board like in tanki X to let players travel from island to island. But it wouldn't even be valid cause tanki X had the feature. Someone did propose this, but I'm using it as an example only.

[Maf 32,338]

18 minutes ago, Incorp said:

I mean there are some features tanki devs might not think of using in a particular situation. Like archipelago map for example. One tanker may suggest to make a jump board like in tanki X to let players travel from island to island. But it wouldn't even be valid cause tanki X had the feature. Someone did propose this, but I'm using it as an example only.

That could be a valid idea, but it's also a very obvious one tbh.

[Incorp 2,084]

Ah whatever. What the admin thinks counts then. Lol. Still this idea got some potential you gotta admit. 

[Incorp 2,084]

@Maf have you arrived on a conclusion yet?

[Maf 32,338]

11 minutes ago, Incorp said:

@Maf have you arrived on a conclusion yet?

Yeah, we're keeping that rule, but with the possibility for exceptions in case a suggestion takes a TX feature and twists it in a unique way for TO, rather than just being a case of "add this TX thing to TO".

So status changed to declined.

[Iron_Man 2,376]

I totally like the rule. Not really suggesting anything new by saying "There was a thing in TX so I suggest to add it in TO". So keeping the rule

[Incorp 2,084]

So we can suggest stuff in tanki from tanki X if it does something suffering for tanki? @Maf @Iron_Man

[Iron_Man 2,376]

47 minutes ago, Incorp said:

So we can suggest stuff in tanki from tanki X if it does something suffering for tanki? @Maf @Iron_Man

I don't understand what you are kinda trying to ask but lemme make Great Le Don Mafioso's statement clear.

You can propose stuff from TX and we'll consider it only if it has something of your creativity or originality, a unique twist or something like that. It shouldn't be a copy-paste from TX. But again this does not mean that you add something random to the idea and then you argue that it is not the same as the way it was in TX("you" is used in a general sense but not pointing you my friend).

I believe you understand it now.