Matchmaking is broken - balance doesn’t exist anymore

[Mr.Blitz 57]

On 10/6/2025 at 1:16 PM, Positive said:

I mean I never denied any imbalance in some of the matches you enter. But just comparing GS between teams doesn’t really tell you a whole lot, plus it’s also often biased by pessimistic recall.
Mm balance is a multi-factor problem that’s not easy to fix. You’d have to consider more than just raw numbers.
That said, I’m curious what ideas you have for improving MM balance.

 

@Positive I appreciate your response, but the issue is that most player suggestions are either ignored or brushed off with a generic “noted.” So it’s hard to talk about solutions when feedback never translates into actual testing or changes.

Still, since you asked.. here’s what could realistically improve MM balance:

1. Don’t mix flying hulls with ground hulls in the same matches.  Separate flying hulls into their own matchmaking pool. They completely disrupt balance and don’t belong in the same environment as traditional tanks.

2. Force matchmaking to prioritize symmetry of GS ranges between teams, not perfect mirroring, but at least parity.
   (Two players can have identical GS, yet one with a flying hull and optimized setup is light-years ahead in actual power.)

3. Introduce a hidden balancing weight per player based on GS, hull type, and kill/death performance over the last few battles.

In any case, there should be a balance, and the game cannot be divided into a stronger and weaker team that the system just randomly distributes. But to solve the problem, we must first accept the fact that flying hulls are the core of the problem. So, to solve the problem with this imbalance, we must first separate ground hulls from flying ones, because that has no logic with any principle of warfare.

I would also like to add.. ideas don’t matter if every player suggestion ends up labeled as “not aligned with dev vision”.

Players keep repeating the same issues for months, and nothing changes. You can’t call it “player feedback” if all the feedback goes straight into a bin.

I genuinely love this game, but pretending this chaos is “intentional balance” is like saying a broken leg is a new running technique.

[Positive 1,136]

Thx for the suggestions. They're definitely not ignored and there're many past instances of player suggestions being on the roadmap, so definitely keep sending them.

On 10/6/2025 at 10:20 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

 

@Positive

1. Don’t mix flying hulls with ground hulls in the same matches.  Separate flying hulls into their own matchmaking pool. They completely disrupt balance and don’t belong in the same environment as traditional tanks.

I guess balancing floating hulls even to tracked hulls will do the job, right. I don't believe people have problems with the semantics of the word "tank", but rather just the strength of the floating tanks. If they're both equally strong, you'll have no problems with them I believe, am I right?

On 10/6/2025 at 10:20 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

2. Force matchmaking to prioritize symmetry of GS ranges between teams, not perfect mirroring, but at least parity.
(Two players can have identical GS, yet one with a flying hull and optimized setup is light-years ahead in actual power.)

Yeah so you already contradict your own statement here. Prioritizing gs, but at the same time acknowledging that gs is far from enough to balancing a battle. That's why it's difficult to create balancing games consistently. 

On 10/6/2025 at 10:20 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

3. Introduce a hidden balancing weight per player based on GS, hull type, and kill/death performance over the last few battles.

Do you mind explaining? Because I always thought that k/d is pretty meaningless and definitely shouldn't be taken into account when balancing. A camping player with 5 kills 0 deaths has a higher kd ratio than a flag-pulling player that probably contributed more to the game but has a kd of 0.5 for example. 

[Akame 4,577]

On 10/4/2025 at 11:53 AM, POWER-OF-ONE said:

 

1-Players from back in the day reactivating old accounts at lower ranks that have multiple protections. There are no prots until General rank, so those players already have a big advantage, and there are quite a few.

2-The buyers.

3-Did I mention the useless, pathetic, waste of space bots.

4-luck. The nerfed containers that once in a blue moon give out something that enhances your garage.

5-The biggest factor imo are the players themselves. Skill factor. Knowing what to do for the good of the team goes a long way in determining the outcome of a lot of battles.

 

  

Also the ones that leave games because it's not easy for them to play, not that I blame them, but that is also a reason as to why game balance can instantly swing out

 

  

On 10/6/2025 at 2:20 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

 

 

Still, since you asked.. here’s what could realistically improve MM balance:

1. Don’t mix flying hulls with ground hulls in the same matches.  Separate flying hulls into their own matchmaking pool. They completely disrupt balance and don’t belong in the same environment as traditional tanks.

2. Force matchmaking to prioritize symmetry of GS ranges between teams, not perfect mirroring, but at least parity.
   (Two players can have identical GS, yet one with a flying hull and optimized setup is light-years ahead in actual power.)

3. Introduce a hidden balancing weight per player based on GS, hull type, and kill/death performance over the last few battles.

 

I guess, since bots are in the game, 1 could actually be doable, just need the flying juggernaut released lowkey for TJR.

But then again, I don't think anyone wants to continuously face bots in games due to lower score return etc.

 

Also, matchmaking has been like this, for a long time, it isn't generally anything new to most players.

The game has a far too wide set of combinations ranging from weak to hideously strong, to add to this, clueless players who just wasd space and a lack of a large enough playerbase that can help devise a neat formula to help balance games without making it boring.

 

We went through the addition of bots and reduction in group sizes over time. Even that isn't enough to help make games balanced and fun. People ultimately play, to just play. Addiction at it's finest.

[POWER-OF-ONE 163]

On 10/6/2025 at 12:16 PM, Positive said:

Mm balance is a multi-factor problem that’s not easy to fix.

What a load of tripe.

My solution would 100% fix the problem, and hazel knows it will.

Also my solution would not unbalance the imbalance hazel so desperately want's to keep.

Let me explain that last sentence.

My solution would put players with very similar ranks (2 either way) in battles against each other. This in itself does not rectify the "BALANCE" problem insofar as P2w and non buyers experience, with the "balance" going in favour of the buyers.

What my solution does is make sure that "very similar" ranks play against each other all the time and not against ranks 4/5/6 times above them, sometimes even higher.

I've explained my solution at least a dozen times in various topics so I will not be going into any detail here.

Bottom line-MY idea would work FACT.

On 10/6/2025 at 1:58 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

Flying hulls have absolutely broken the core logic of this game.

Along with augments they have ruined TO. 

 

On 10/6/2025 at 2:20 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

we must first accept the fact that flying hulls are the core of the problem

I seriously get were your coming from BUT the core problem is "G R E E D".

But yeah, and nobody HATES these skips more than me.

On 10/6/2025 at 2:57 PM, Positive said:

. A camping player with 5 kills 0 deaths has a higher kd ratio than a flag-pulling player that probably contributed more to the game but has a kd of 0.5 for example. 

Not often I agree with anything you lot post but your correct.

 

On 10/6/2025 at 5:15 PM, Akame said:

People ultimately play, to just play. Addiction at it's finest.

And there you have it.

This is why the devs will always win when it comes to taking the P out of the players.  

Edited October 6 by POWER-OF-ONE

[Positive 1,136]

On 10/7/2025 at 2:08 AM, POWER-OF-ONE said:

I've explained my solution at least a dozen times in various topics so I will not be going into any detail here.

Bottom line-MY idea would work FACT.

Hi, you got a link for that? I'm curious.

[POWER-OF-ONE 163]

On 10/7/2025 at 3:02 AM, Positive said:

Hi, you got a link for that? I'm curious.

LOL not really.

My solution has been posted in multiple topics, even when it had no bearing related to that particular topic, much to the distain of certain mods who usually removed my reply or put it somewhere else.

I will explain my simple, but very easily implemented solution one last time, which would rectify not only MM, but the rank difference that occurs in battles on a regular basis.

My idea does not primarily include those ranks above Marshal as they are already either in good shape or struggling because of the current set up.

My idea concerns the very low ranks leading up to Marshal.  

Currently players rank at an alarming pace which causes them to become weaker every time they rank up, this is a fact unless you "BUY" your way through the ranks.

My solution:-

1- Increase the XP needed to rank by a factor of x2 from recruit all the way to Marshal.

A- This would ensure that players stay at their rank for much longer, giving them the ability/chance to earn enough cry to improve their garage at the next rank.

B- It would also help drastically to improve the woeful MM system which has never worked, either by design, or just very badly applied by keeping similar ranks together for much longer, so negating to a large extent the parity between ranks.

2-Make it so that after every battle your crystal to XP ratio is at least double without premium.

A- This explains itself really.

3-Reputation points is a big factor why players also rank far to quickly, because they are the hardest to accumulate, which means you need to play longer, which means you gain more XP, which means you rank to fast, which means your weaker at the next rank. Vicious circle springs to mind.

4-Passive XP is a relatively new addition to the game, but it has a massive, negative impact on lower ranks for the reasons mentioned above.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

This is a new point I am making. It's one I have been aware of for a long time but never thought to include it into my "SOLUTION."

5-When you start a new account they (the devs) give you incentives to spend cash on seemingly amazing deals.

Here is the problem with that little earner they tempt you with.

What is the point of spending cash on these one off good deals when in reality it does absolutely nothing to improve your account/garage because of the massive and intended flaws in the game (EVERYTHING I HAVE MENTIONED ABOVE) which are deliberately employed to get your cash, or make you just another wannabe if you refuse to spend on their very expensive game.

TO is a business, I get that. I agree that they (the company) have to make a profit in order to keep the game running, anything other than making a profit would render the game from a business perspective, null and void, not worth doing. I GET THAT.

If the devs would actually act on reasonable, well thought out feedback I maintain that "THE BUSINESS" would thrive even more.

A happy and content player base would be far more willing to spend cash on a game that actually gave a s--t about It's players.

There are so many things wrong with TO, so many bad updates, far to many complaints, and it all stems from their innate disdain for the players and their inability to temper their greed with anything resembling fairness.

TCSOTO-@Positive what do you think it is.  

[POWER-OF-ONE 163]

Ah well never mind.

[Positive 1,136]

On 10/7/2025 at 7:14 PM, POWER-OF-ONE said:

 

Ah, I see what you mean. Your ideas mostly focus on progression, which you see as the underlying cause of mm imbalance as well.
Personally, I mainly play at Legend rank, so I’m not too familiar with how things are at the lower ranks.

That said, are you aware of the April update in which the speed of experience points gained is reduced from x3 to x2, while the battle funds increase remained at x2. Back in 2020 it was reduced from x4 to x3.  So this already covers majority of your suggestion. You could argue whether the adjustment is sufficient, but the direction is correct, right?
But slowing the progression even further comes with a risk of boredom and quit early if it feels too grindy.

On 10/7/2025 at 7:14 PM, POWER-OF-ONE said:

My solution has been posted in multiple topics, even when it had no bearing related to that particular topic, much to the distain of certain mods who usually removed my reply or put it somewhere else.

I mean we try keep the forum organized right, it's nothing personal if your post gets moved to a more related topic.

[Mr.Blitz 57]

On 10/6/2025 at 3:57 PM, Positive said:

Thx for the suggestions. They're definitely not ignored and there're many past instances of player suggestions being on the roadmap, so definitely keep sending them.

I guess balancing floating hulls even to tracked hulls will do the job, right. I don't believe people have problems with the semantics of the word "tank", but rather just the strength of the floating tanks. If they're both equally strong, you'll have no problems with them I believe, am I right?

Yeah so you already contradict your own statement here. Prioritizing gs, but at the same time acknowledging that gs is far from enough to balancing a battle. That's why it's difficult to create balancing games consistently. 

Do you mind explaining? Because I always thought that k/d is pretty meaningless and definitely shouldn't be taken into account when balancing. A camping player with 5 kills 0 deaths has a higher kd ratio than a flag-pulling player that probably contributed more to the game but has a kd of 0.5 for example. 

@Positive I see your point, but the issue isn’t just about raw strength - it’s about the fundamental mechanics of how these hulls behave.

Floating hulls don’t use tracks, have drastically different handling physics, higher acceleration and completely different hitbox behavior. Even if you technically balanced their damage or HP, their mobility advantage breaks the ground combat dynamic that defines the game... So no, it’s not about semantics.. it’s about realism and core gameplay integrity. They simply don’t belong in the same environment because their mechanics bypass the limitations that make tank battles tactical in the first place. 
Do we need to mention that those flying hulls end up on the roofs of some houses and buildings and from there they shoot ground tanks unhindered?

Where are normal tracked hulls allowed to cross that line and end up on some roof?

That they fly around and you feel like someone has activated a flying cheat.

An no.. Not really a contradiction, it’s actually the point.

GS is one component that needs to be part of a more advanced balancing formula, not the sole factor. What I proposed is symmetry of GS ranges combined with hull-type weighting, so that identical GS setups don’t result in huge real-world performance gaps. The problem with the current system is that GS alone dictates balance, while ignoring what kind of hull or equipment generates that GS... That’s why a 9999 GS flying hull can outperform a 9999 GS ground tank by an absurd margin - the numbers say “equal,” but the match result says otherwise.

 

On 10/6/2025 at 3:57 PM, Positive said:

Do you mind explaining?

Fair question - As for K/D - sure, if we treat it as a standalone stat, it’s meaningless. But what I meant was a weighted performance index, not a raw K/D ratio. It would evaluate multiple recent indicators like average damage dealt, objectives completed, assists, and sustained activity.. to reflect actual impact.
For example, I once had a match right before reaching Legend rank with 69 kills, 0 deaths, and a D/L of 69.00, and yet we still lost the battle by three points. That alone proves that “K/D” can’t describe what truly happened - I was in the middle of the fight the entire time, carrying the team, not camping behind a wall.
This is exactly why I said it should be hidden  not to punish or reward players publicly, but to help the system identify who is truly contributing versus who is just stat-padding.

 

In the end of the road.. I think the biggest misunderstanding here is assuming that all “balance” can be achieved by tweaking stats.

The issue is systemic.. mixing fundamentally different vehicle types, relying on GS symmetry that doesn’t reflect actual power, and ignoring gameplay-based performance patterns.

I’m not asking for perfection, just logic, a tank game should primarily reward tank mechanics, not hovercraft agility. Once that line gets blurred, balance becomes mathematically impossible to achieve no matter how many numbers you tweak.

[Positive 1,136]

On 10/8/2025 at 3:05 AM, Mr.Blitz said:

@Positive I see your point, but the issue isn’t just about raw strength - it’s about the fundamental mechanics of how these hulls behave.

Floating hulls don’t use tracks, have drastically different handling physics, higher acceleration and completely different hitbox behavior. Even if you technically balanced their damage or HP, their mobility advantage breaks the ground combat dynamic that defines the game... So no, it’s not about semantics.. it’s about realism and core gameplay integrity. They simply don’t belong in the same environment because their mechanics bypass the limitations that make tank battles tactical in the first place. 

Yeah so what I'm saying is, what if we balance floating hulls taking in account their mechanics. For example, their mobility might stay more advantageous than tracked hulls, but we nerf the speed and overdrive to a point where each sort (tracked or hovering) has it's own even tradeoffs and advantages. 

Would this fix the issue for you?

If this doesn't fix your concerns, you're in fact arguing about semantics of the word tank and not about balance.

[POWER-OF-ONE 163]

On 10/7/2025 at 1:29 PM, Positive said:

You could argue whether the adjustment is sufficient,

It's not.

 

On 10/7/2025 at 1:29 PM, Positive said:

but the direction is correct, right?

The direction would be right "IF" they get rid of passive XP and adopt my solution, then it would be right.  Why reduce something only to add it onto another part of the game, makes no sense, right? 

They are adding passive XP so as to mitigate their seemingly appeared perception of "doing the right thing" Typical devs.

On 10/7/2025 at 1:29 PM, Positive said:

But slowing the progression even further comes with a risk of boredom and quit early if it feels too grindy.

Slowing progression down like I have suggested improves TO by an astronomical amount and it will in no way "feel grindy". 

What is a grind is the current system.

On 10/7/2025 at 7:05 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

That they fly around and you feel like someone has activated a flying cheat.

That's because they are.

 

On 10/7/2025 at 7:05 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

The problem with the current system is that GS alone dictates balance,

Disagree.

 

On 10/7/2025 at 7:05 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

while ignoring what kind of hull or equipment generates that GS

Agree.

 

On 10/7/2025 at 11:14 AM, POWER-OF-ONE said:

TCSOTO-@Positive what do you think it is.  

You never did give an answer that question!

[POWER-OF-ONE 163]

On 10/8/2025 at 4:53 PM, POWER-OF-ONE said:

On 10/7/2025 at 11:14 AM, POWER-OF-ONE said:

TCSOTO-@Positive what do you think it is.  

You never did give an answer that question!

Still waiting for that answer.

[Mr.Blitz 57]

On 10/8/2025 at 2:41 PM, Positive said:

Yeah so what I'm saying is, what if we balance floating hulls taking in account their mechanics. For example, their mobility might stay more advantageous than tracked hulls, but we nerf the speed and overdrive to a point where each sort (tracked or hovering) has it's own even tradeoffs and advantages. 

Would this fix the issue for you?

If this doesn't fix your concerns, you're in fact arguing about semantics of the word tank and not about balance.

Honestly my friend @Positive, what your message is saying is: If you don't accept our definition of what a tank is, then your problem is not gameplay but terminology.

I’m not arguing semantics, I’m pointing out that hover tanks, by both mobility and combat outcome, don’t follow the same risk-reward logic as tracked hulls.
If you call them tanks, fine.. but then balance them as tanks, not as gliders that can outmaneuver everything while still out-DPSing tracked builds. The issue isn’t the word, it’s the fact that hovering hulls ignore terrain disadvantage, rotate faster, take better defensive positions and yet suffer no significant drawback.
That’s not semantics. That’s imbalance.

Here are a few examples that I can publish every day, and what I'm talking about and what I'm showing, the developers know very well what I'm talking about and keep that form of injustice in circulation

Spoiler

This is a classic case that keeps repeating itself, day after day when on the opposite side we always have these (stronger) flying objects.. the people who use it are aware that they don't need any tactics anymore, they don't need skill, they just rush around the battlefield, do some stunts and destroy everything in turn..
 

Spoiler

Or let's say this case that I'm talking about, which usually happens the most, that the players with the best GS, especially if they are flying objects, they are always on the opposite side. Should we talk about what the outcome of the game is?
It's literally not playing, it's bullying and humiliating all of us who were in the blue team, because many are aware that they can make fun of us because there is no balance.

 

Then cases that happen very rarely.. at least to me..

Spoiler

Here we have an example when by some mere chance, once in 100 years, I ran into a team like this.. and that must have been a system error, I guess.

This was also not about playing, it was about humiliating the opposing team that they had to leave the match because the battle was pointless. Do you think that I, as an individual, had any effort in this fight? Not at all, it was like on a field trip, I was literally fighting to destroy a tank because these guys from my team were mowing down everything in front of them..
Is this a fair game? Of course NOT.

 

NEXT...

Spoiler

Here you can see that we didn't even try to win, the match ended in a draw, but what was the point.. Destroying enemy tanks to the point that it was more rape than a fight.. the players from the opposing team were literally unable to cross half of the battlefield.. because the strongest flyers took the front line and beat them, if they accidentally destroy one, they hold the line again until one or two flyers reach the front line and then beat them together again as if the cheaters had stepped into the front line.. So there is no action, no tactics, they are aware that they are too strong. I have not experienced anyone hitting me at least once.
Is this a fair game? It is NOT and never will be.
That is what I have been saying all along, and we can talk about it for days, the fact is known, the developers know, and what the developers have allowed makes no sense or justice at all.

@POWER-OF-ONE

Edited Monday at 02:01 AM by Positive
Please use spoilers when posting multiple images

[Jeers4U 665]

On 10/12/2025 at 6:33 PM, Mr.Blitz said:

Is this a fair game? It is NOT and never will be.

They know. 

I don't think tanki has ever said--ever--in any of it's published literature, that they provide a 'fair' game.

 

They designed it to specifically BE unfair because it makes tanki money that way.

Edited Monday at 01:04 AM by Jeers4U
they. know.

[Positive 1,136]

On 10/7/2025 at 7:14 PM, POWER-OF-ONE said:

TCSOTO-@Positive what do you think it is.  

I'm sorry, what do I think what is?

[POWER-OF-ONE 163]

On 10/13/2025 at 2:56 AM, Positive said:

I'm sorry, what do I think what is?

Never mind.

[paul16135 120]

You can't balance this game.

You can now be a legend and have no skill.  All the paints, all the skins, none of the effort.  They can bump into you though, because they have no self control as they die and spend a few minutes in the garage making some calculated changes only to return to a game 3-0 down.  This is Tanki now.  

Picture me floating away with the ability to heal you, but not bothering....