Battle Tanks game length.

[psycho_dmr]

hi community,

during the hb-dicussion we pointed out, that some ppl playing hb because normal games are too long. so i would you please to have an eye on your (long) games and try to get why they are so long.

and, on the other side, please vote how long your NORMAL(! not HB!) games are and how long they should be in your opinion.

i've put 2 votes in one here, you have 2 choices, please vote one on "should be: " and one on "they are: ". thx!

Update: Battle Tanks.... not Ballte Tanks ;D thx @ DerSatan

[sam_ach]

it depends, privat game often last about 2 hours, pub about 30-45 mins, which i think is fine
(so i dunno what to vote)

[psycho_dmr]

vote priv game length, becuase these games are "more balanced" i think

[RupinderSinghPellia]

Here we go:

• - Normal Public Games: Arround 30 - 40 mins
  - Normal Private Games: Over 1 hour

At least it depends how the players play as team.

[IlPalazzo]

Like I said in the other post, most private-normals games last 1:30, while I'd prefer it to be under an hour.

its getting imba in most poblic games, because the attackers just die too often and feeding the defenders.

Since we both notice this problem, I'll start with some of the causes.

1. NO constant-fire weapon can shoot onto enemy factories from the 1st base wall (fence)...
Picture => http://i36.tinypic.com/2m31t7l.jpg
1050 ranged weapons fall just a tad bit short to hit the factories, while 1,300 don't attack buildings.

2. Ranged weapons favors the defender.
http://tinypic.com/r/2qspehd/4
With 1300 attack range, they effectively have a 250 yard range advantage over the person trying to attack their base factories.

3. The factories are placed very close to the towers.
http://tinypic.com/r/2d2geg9/4
This allows players to heal while defending their own towers.

4. Attackers have to run ~3000-4000 to heal.
Obviously, if you have to run back and forth from battle your at a disadvantage compared to the player that can sit there.

At the time, attackers have to either kill their opponent's tank so their base is open to attack or they have to widdle down their factories/towers so they cannot heal anymore and are required to retreat further into their base. In the early stages of the siege, that may be too overwhelming. If an attacker's aiming to destroy their buildings, he has to pass the first wall in order to close in on the first factory. This in-of-itself is a death trap for the less cautious player. Now, if he's aiming to snipe out his enemies before he attacks, he has to catch his opponent off guard because the enemy tank can move further into his own base, away from the long ranged fire. He also has to keep in mind his opponent is constantly healing, and that creeps spawn every 20 seconds. So it's a challenge in both cases, trying to hop the lines to kill off their buildings or trying to snipe out the enemies within their base.

In contrast, defenders can sit in their base firing away with mid/long ranged weapons. To their advantage, they have a tower that acts primarily as a HP block so they don't die too quickly, and if that isn't enough, a factory to keep them constantly healed.

Now I'm not asking the devteam to change to any of these, as I'm sure some of these things were intentionally put into the game. I'm merely pointing out the reasons why sieging the enemy and wrapping up the game is so much more challenging for the attacker than the early-game. If you want to change the siege gameplay, these are just a few things I noticed in-game you might want to tinker with.

1. The fact that building weapons don't have the needed reach to hit factories form afar, maybe you can increase the distance for some end-game weapons?
2. The factory and towers are placed close together, maybe you can move them apart?
3. Long-Ranged weapons are highly favorable when you're playing defense, but lose effectiveness when attackers are required to destroy buildings. If both sides go long-range heavily, sieging will naturally turn in favor to the defender.
4. The attacking CPs are far from the enemy base (minor if not almost negligible contributor). You could move the CP closer to the base they start with, but I'm sure this will likely change other things in the game - so it's probably not a good idea... But I'll put this here anyway.

[psycho_dmr]

very good post IlPallazo, thats what we need

so yes, all these things were put into the map with the goal that you can not kill the enemies base from outside. but that was in a time where all these game-length things werent a problem. maybe we could change a few things of it (maybe giving bulding only weapons 1300 range)
you point out another thing which can be called imba imho, with an airtank you dont have these problems, because you can just fly over the outer fence and destroy the facs.. so in siege-sitauations normally you have to get air, a factory in front of the enemies base and then try to get the fac alive and dont die yourself.. thats really hard in public games.

[IlPalazzo]

very good post IlPallazo, thats what we need

so yes, all these things were put into the map with the goal that you can not kill the enemies base from outside. but that was in a time where all these game-length things werent a problem. maybe we could change a few things of it (maybe giving bulding only weapons 1300 range)
you point out another thing which can be called imba imho, with an airtank you dont have these problems, because you can just fly over the outer fence and destroy the facs.. so in siege-sitauations normally you have to get air, a factory in front of the enemies base and then try to get the fac alive and dont die yourself.. thats really hard in public games.

Yes, air tanks don't have this problem because they can fly over fences, but as we discussed in an earlier post - an air tank lacks commands less "fear" from players because it usually more weapon-dependant, has crappy burst damage, and has very little choices for stun. Air tanks are excellent at putting out a consistent flow of damage, but if you can run a Demon Tank/Goblin through the enemy base, you can easily wrack up almost thousands of damage in seconds if you position your tank correctly for your Ultimate/Basic Skill.

Air tanks have better mobility, ground tanks have better HP/Damage/Stun Skills... Though I agree air tanks are at an advantage for sieging, I think in the grand scheme of things it's pretty balanced... But I'm talking out of my ass here, maybe players need to look into this balancing more?

[horselance]

Since we both notice this problem, I'll start with some of the causes.

1. NO constant-fire weapon can shoot onto enemy factories from the 1st base wall (fence)...
Picture => http://i36.tinypic.com/2m31t7l.jpg
1050 ranged weapons fall just a tad bit short to hit the factories, while 1,300 don't attack buildings.

2. Ranged weapons favors the defender.
http://tinypic.com/r/2qspehd/4
With 1300 attack range, they effectively have a 250 yard range advantage over the person trying to attack their base factories.

3. The factories are placed very close to the towers.
http://tinypic.com/r/2d2geg9/4
This allows players to heal while defending their own towers.

4. Attackers have to run ~3000-4000 to heal.
Obviously, if you have to run back and forth from battle your at a disadvantage compared to the player that can sit there.

At the time, attackers have to either kill their opponent's tank so their base is open to attack or they have to widdle down their factories/towers so they cannot heal anymore and are required to retreat further into their base. In the early stages of the siege, that may be too overwhelming. If an attacker's aiming to destroy their buildings, he has to pass the first wall in order to close in on the first factory. This in-of-itself is a death trap for the less cautious player. Now, if he's aiming to snipe out his enemies before he attacks, he has to catch his opponent off guard because the enemy tank can move further into his own base, away from the long ranged fire. He also has to keep in mind his opponent is constantly healing, and that creeps spawn every 20 seconds. So it's a challenge in both cases, trying to hop the lines to kill off their buildings or trying to snipe out the enemies within their base.

In contrast, defenders can sit in their base firing away with mid/long ranged weapons. To their advantage, they have a tower that acts primarily as a HP block so they don't die too quickly, and if that isn't enough, a factory to keep them constantly healed.

Now I'm not asking the devteam to change to any of these, as I'm sure some of these things were intentionally put into the game. I'm merely pointing out the reasons why sieging the enemy and wrapping up the game is so much more challenging for the attacker than the early-game. If you want to change the siege gameplay, these are just a few things I noticed in-game you might want to tinker with.

1. The fact that building weapons don't have the needed reach to hit factories form afar, maybe you can increase the distance for some end-game weapons?
2. The factory and towers are placed close together, maybe you can move them apart?
3. Long-Ranged weapons are highly favorable when you're playing defense, but lose effectiveness when attackers are required to destroy buildings. If both sides go long-range heavily, sieging will naturally turn in favor to the defender.
4. The attacking CPs are far from the enemy base (minor if not almost negligible contributor). You could move the CP closer to the base they start with, but I'm sure this will likely change other things in the game - so it's probably not a good idea... But I'll put this here anyway.

Attacker dont mean "winner". The game also proceed while you attack and they defend. If you want to win game by capturing CPs, simply write -cv.
And there are lots of ways to attack a base and destroy factories while your enemy will be optionless (of course if you are stronger in that phase).
-Buy a factory or two and place them near enemy base.
-Buy Siege Pack or ATC. And let your mortars destroy towers.
-Spam abilities that can hit buildings and preffer tanks that can chop buildings down.
-Buy Troop Center and send waves of creeps to cover you or simply send mortars while you make your enemy busy.
-Buy an Infernal and make suicide jumps.
But if you continue your normal game play and do not get into siege mode , it will be a combat in front of enemy base and that wont give you any advantage (unless you sweep all the enemy and attack defensless base, which will be rare).

I dont think attacking the base makes game long but taking CPs is harder thing. And if you are not stronger but got the cp, then this makes game long too because enemy is stronger, kill you but cannot take the cp advantage easily... So the battle goes harder.
If enemy is stronger and takes the CPs, then you are down in a few minutes.
If both teams are equal than it takes a lot time. And it is supposed to take a lot time because of game dynamics. Just killing a guy for 5 times and getting a 2x better tank is called "-hb"..

[IlPalazzo]

Attacker dont mean "winner". The game also proceed while you attack and they defend. If you want to win game by capturing CPs, simply write -cv.
And there are lots of ways to attack a base and destroy factories while your enemy will be optionless (of course if you are stronger in that phase).
-Buy a factory or two and place them near enemy base.
-Buy Siege Pack or ATC. And let your mortars destroy towers.
-Spam abilities that can hit buildings and preffer tanks that can chop buildings down.
-Buy Troop Center and send waves of creeps to cover you or simply send mortars while you make your enemy busy.
-Buy an Infernal and make suicide jumps.
But if you continue your normal game play and do not get into siege mode , it will be a combat in front of enemy base and that wont give you any advantage (unless you sweep all the enemy and attack defensless base, which will be rare).

I agree, sieging is one of the most interesting part of the game. Again, I was merely responding to the notion that seiging might make the game too long. I don't expect the DevTeam to completely neuter the siege attacker/defender dynamics, but if they feel that it is TOO favorable to one side or the other, they could start by considering the placement of their buildings/terrain/weapon ranges.

You do bring up good suggestions on how to siege, but you have to remember that buying a factory/troop command/mortar team/infernal costs gold, which places the attacking team behind if they are required to buy an item for a specific purpose. If balance is an issue here, we have to ask "Is it reasonably possible for the attackers to invest 2,000-5,000 gold into this 'stuff' and still be on-par (or even more advanced) in terms of tanks/weapons/hulls/etc. to the defending team?"

Currently there are 7 Towers in the middle lane and 5 Towers in each side lanes. Since I don't know how Tower bounty works, I don't know how much gold that gives to the attacking team. Is 17 towers enough to initiate an effective siege? Should it be? If not, how long should the attacking team be waiting before they start attacking?

And it is supposed to take a lot time because of game dynamics. Just killing a guy for 5 times and getting a 2x better tank is called "-hb"..

...So ... I have to kill a guy 10 times to get a 2x better tank?

[GooglyBoogly]

which places the attacking team behind if they are required to buy an item for a specific purpose

This is a problem I see often.
People seem to forget that it doesn't matter how much your tank is worth, or what items you carry - if you have won the game.
There is nothing wrong with selling some standard dps to get those siege packs up, and end the game - who cares if they get an extra three kills? Money is of no use to them if they are dead.

I have had numerous games, where I have had to sell some items for sieging equipment and factories, and - as long as your allies are paying attention, it is totally worth it.

It should also be noted that usually the attacker has taken down a few towers belonging to the defender, this effectively reduces the 'cost' of the siege items, since you get some fast, extra gold from the additional buildings destroyed.

Re: poll. 15 mins is too short a variance, at least in the games I have played. The times seem to vary by 30 mins, or +/- 15min.
Games should take from 30-60mins, however the odd 90mins+ games are much more common than the very short 20min or less games

[IlPalazzo]

which places the attacking team behind if they are required to buy an item for a specific purpose

This is a problem I see often.
People seem to forget that it doesn't matter how much your tank is worth, or what items you carry - if you have won the game.
There is nothing wrong with selling some standard dps to get those siege packs up, and end the game - who cares if they get an extra three kills? Money is of no use to them if they are dead.

I have had numerous games, where I have had to sell some items for sieging equipment and factories, and - as long as your allies are paying attention, it is totally worth it.

Maybe I should try using those items more often, but I don't use it mostly because I see it as a risk... If the opposing team breaks the siege then the Mortar Team and such becomes essentially useless, which places you even further behind than if you bought a weapon/hull.

It should also be noted that usually the attacker has taken down a few towers belonging to the defender, this effectively reduces the 'cost' of the siege items, since you get some fast, extra gold from the additional buildings destroyed.

I know, but is this cost 'reduction' enough, too much, or too little?

As I stated above:
"Currently there are 7 Towers in the middle lane and 5 Towers in each side lanes. Since I don't know how Tower bounty works, I don't know how much gold that gives to the attacking team. Is 17 towers enough to initiate an effective siege? Should it be? If not, how long should the attacking team be waiting before they start attacking?"

[GooglyBoogly]

I don't know how to say this without seeming rude, but instead of repeating what you don't know, why not just took it up?

http://forum.btanks.net/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=1961

[Lezowski]

I don't know how to say this without seeming rude, but instead of repeating what you don't know, why not just took it up?

http://forum.btanks.net/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=1961

Googly, you try too hard.

[IlPalazzo]

I don't know how to say this without seeming rude, but instead of repeating what you don't know, why not just took it up?

http://forum.btanks.net/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=1961

Way to make a jackass outa me... Bleh, serves me right for being too lazy to figure out the base cost of the tower and trying making a copy/paste reply instead of trying to make myself more clear.

Anyway the point I was trying to ask was if the 3,825-4,500 gold (Assuming the tower is about 225 gold at the beginning) was enough to push an effective siege. I've noticed that a handful early game sieges result in a comeback from the defending them. I can't really decide if this is because attackers aren't given enough to carry out the siege at the time from just these towers or are just carrying their attack out in the wrong way (In my opinion I think it maybe a bit of both)... I understand you can throw down a Factory or buy a Siege pack with that gold to level the playing field a bit, but these items don't necessarily negate all the advantages the defending team has at this phase in the game. For this reason, I usually try to set up a siege later in the game, when the gold/level/tank advantage is bit more distinct. Is that just me, or does everyone else try to push into the enemy base once they've taken the 6th control point and destroyed the last tower?

[horselance]

Its just you
Normally you can siege enemy base after taking any side CP.
Better the one with HT+Teleporter/ATC+flying one atack from that lane.
Everytime you get enemy base you will deal a good damage to enemy base. And dying a few times will not be a problem while you destroy towers or factories. And while they try to kill you, their other lanes will be in more danger.

[EssiXr3i]

As it was mentioned before there is a big difference between private and public games. The duration of public games are about 30 min and in private games it`s like 1:30h up to 2:30h.

For public games i like it when it`s finished fast. But the more fun is in the private games where you can play a long period and have great fun. I think the game length is not a problem.

my2pence...

[griffin1987]

Essi 4 President!

I can only totally agree on what he says - only that my normal public game now takes 15-20 mins because I normally take team 2 and team 1 is made up of noobs who think they're so pro most of the time

[psycho_dmr]

maybe you can say something to the siege-problem in internal games?

or better: do you think that nerfing the base would be a major problem in internal games?

[Lezowski]

I don't know how to say this without seeming rude, but instead of repeating what you don't know, why not just took it up?

http://forum.btanks.net/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=1961

Way to make a jackass outa me... Bleh, serves me right for being too lazy to figure out the base cost of the tower and trying making a copy/paste reply instead of trying to make myself more clear.

If you visited the link you would've noticed that it had nothing to do with tower bounty at all.

[IlPalazzo]

For public games i like it when it`s finished fast. But the more fun is in the private games where you can play a long period and have great fun. I think the game length is not a problem.

I agree that private games should be longer than public games, but even then there's a point when each side has titans and infernals decked with Swarms and lasers - and the only thing you want is for the damn game to end.

Another thing to point out...

Conveniently, both the Infernal's and the Titan's AoE stun are large enough to cover the ramps into their base (http://tinypic.com/r/r10hle/4 and http://tinypic.com/r/1695dw0/4). With the way the base is set up, the ramps create a choke point, where the attacker is forced to clutter together and make their way up a ramp to attack the defending HQ. This allows the defending team with end-game tanks with good timing to throw out AoE stuns onto the attackers to great effect, while being able to spread out within their base to minimize the affect of the attackers' AoE fire.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but currently the only options attackers have to bypass this aren't too great: buying a Sky Fortress that can go over walls, have the infernal use his teleport skill to join the battle, or attack from different ramps... In groups battles, I see the Sky Fortresses as inferior to their Infernal/Titan counterparts. Forcing the infernal to use his cooldown to move into the enemy base limits the utility of the skill. The decision to separate into different ramps makes it easier for the enemy to focus fire on one or two tanks.

It's not impossible to win the game during the end-game, but the way I see it, end-game-base battles favor the defending team merely from the terrain of the map. Maybe the AoE skills can be tweaked or perhaps the ramps can widened over the course of the game to fix this?

If you visited the link you would've noticed that it had nothing to do with tower bounty at all.

2. Creep Bounty
The bounty you get for killing creeps and buildings increases over time, it's not influenced by upgrades. The bounty increases by 100% in one hour, so you get 200% gold after one houer, 300% after two, and so on.

"The bounty you get for killing ... buildings... increases by 100% in one hour," says a lot about how it works... All I needed to do was play a 1 minute game and kill a few towers over different times to figure out the base cost of the tower and estimate from that. You're right that it didn't say it explicitly, but it does make it easy to figure out.

Its just you

fml...