Jump to content


Thoughts on Matchmaking and Win Rate

Win Rate Matchmaking random universe

  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

_Crusader6_ #61 Posted 30 July 2015 - 12:30 PM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65668 battles
  • 13,619
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

Thx for the link to that - I shamelessly bumped it to bring it back up.

 

I logged another 12 games - there was also a 16 game segment I did not log, as I wanted to throw my phone - as everything went wrong, and I thought logging was distracting me, it turns out I just needed to put the phone down.

 

I managed to drop my recent 100 game history win rate to 50% from 59% that it was before I started logging at (which was 43 wins in 72 games, to 50 wins in 100 games -- so yes in 28 games I had 7 wins, (or one 1 win I did not log, and a lot of losses - FML)

 

 

Green over 50 Red over 50 Win or Loss Ratio  Tier and Tanks Ratio Result
4 3 w 1.333333 X Even 7 to 4
2 6 l 0.333333 X Down 1 X and up 1 IX 3 to 7
2 4 w 0.5 IX Even 7 to 2
5 5 w 1 X Even 7 to 2
4 5 w 0.8 X Down 1 IX 7 to 5
4 3 w 1.333333 X Even 7 - 1
2 3 l 0.666667 X Down 1 X, and 1 IX 4 - 7
3 4 l 0.75 X Down 1X 5 - 7
3 4 l 0.75 X Down 1 IX 4 - 7 
3 4 l 0.75 X Down 1 X and up 1 IX 2 - 7 
7 2 w 3.5 X Down 1 IX 7 - 1
4 4 l 1 IX Down 1 IX, and 1 VIII 2 - 7
 

Last night was exceedingly painful -- it seemed that the majority of the X and IX players where in the low 40% - and several where 30% in IX and X tanks...

   I struggled in my JgPZ E100, and dropped it below 50% WR (never go full retard, and I lost 13 games in a row in it) - was mostly pulling good individual stats for damage and some kills - but people where running away in contact, and then I'd get swarmed and die (thanks team).  Even had a tough time in my mainstay tanks like my E-100 where I dropped below 55% WR

 

Saw some great players to -- the 5th battle had two green Unicums and 3 on Red - including Concep and Pandarole at Castilla, Concep spotted me early in his OBJ-140 and I got clobbered by the Mill in my IS-8, but our E-100 and T-54 players prevailed with great work.

 

 

I started logging the Tier discrepancies as well -- as one where I almost punched my phone we where down 2 X tanks (wth) and had 4 VIII's, when your team has 2 X, 1 IX, and 4 VIII against a 4 X, 1 IX and 2 VIII tanks - you in a world of hurt unless your team is unicum platoons, and the other team is either AFK or Potato's.

 

 

However 1 think I noticed is that when you look at the results of what I did log over 21 games from earlier yesterday to today

 

3.714286 3.285714 0.571429

First number was the average number (inc me) of over 50% WR players, the second was Red and the WR of my logged games (you will notice that the missing data was mostly losses - so I should have logged that data - as I think it would have clearly shown that I was on the raw end of the MM RNG.

 

   Short answer is that you as an individual player affect where your team is on the + or - of the 50% WR average -- however looking at the layout I think that MM while over a lot of games does balance out - that the Tank Tiers, Types of Tanks, and Player Skills are not well aligned in the short term for a balanced game -- either on purpose or accidentally.

 

 

I guess the question is - should they be better balanced - or is the randomness add enjoyment/excitement to the game?

 

 



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  413/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


af24snipes #62 Posted 30 July 2015 - 12:37 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 10893 battles
  • 3,256
  • Member since:
    06-28-2014
Please explain these MM complaint threads. The system isn't rigged, and it will create a perfect match if it jas the chance to. The only reason why one team might have two tier tens is if there is a platoon of tier tens that has been waiting for a very long time, same with other MM ranks. If MM was rigged, then why won't WG fix it? Because it's in a state that is balanced and get you into the battle as fast as possible.

Mere_Anarchy #63 Posted 30 July 2015 - 12:49 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 36101 battles
  • 1,118
  • Member since:
    07-07-2014

View Postaf24snipes, on 30 July 2015 - 06:37 AM, said:

Please explain these MM complaint threads. The system isn't rigged, and it will create a perfect match if it jas the chance to. The only reason why one team might have two tier tens is if there is a platoon of tier tens that has been waiting for a very long time, same with other MM ranks. If MM was rigged, then why won't WG fix it? Because it's in a state that is balanced and get you into the battle as fast as possible.

 

You should actually read the OP.  This is not a MM complaint thread, quite the opposite.


 

 


_Crusader6_ #64 Posted 30 July 2015 - 01:16 PM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65668 battles
  • 13,619
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

af24 - not sure if that was aimed at me.  As VP mentioned all this is, is data and discussion -- the MM actually over larger time does a very good job at balancing.   I only started tracking stuff recently more out of interest, and taking notes on the game and how things unfolded, as well as my personal performance and how to better it.

 

 I also was finding the MM discussions very interesting - and wanted some data points on it to show that it is not as broken as a lot of folks think - or at least rant about.

 

  The offshoot to this was my recent musing - that do we as a user community want a more "equal" system in the short term, or is the long term equality better for game play, and accepting that the swings are good for the game.

 

Which can then branch into several options if there was to be a change.

  Would WG then filter by WR? and if so how:

  Would WG filter better for Tank Tier

  Would WG MM tank types?

 

You could ome up with an infinite number of changes that could be done - but the end result is would it enhance people gaming experience?

 

IF you filtered by WR - then how would you improve yours, or would eventually everyone be a 50%WR in different player tiers - and how would you separate tiers of players, and would it be tank specific?  

   Or would you filter WR so that all teams had a very similar aggregate WR?

  and then when that balanced everyone to 50% ish - how would you ensure that better players where recognized? 

 

I think that WG could not do anything with WR and still have and effective game - unless a Player Tiering was used. And  had "qualifiers" - and that to ensure folks did not sandbag at the qualifiers that if they exceeded the WR in their Tier that they would be bumped into the next.  Even then - I am not sure all the Unicums want to play in Unicum tier all the time, and at the same time, how would the rest of us get better without exposure to them.

 

So I think we've discounted any desire for a WR based MM 

 

That leaves the Tank Tier and Tank Type to be a better method for MM - which Tank Tier is sort of done - and in the longer stretches the game balances out anyway.

  Tank Type -- clearly some maps are better for some types of tanks, unless we are allowed to queue for a specific map - it's random, and the tank types can be a blessing or a curse.

    I've won on Copperfield with a Medium stacked (6) team with one lower tier Heavy (IX match with a Tiger I) - so again the randomness balances.

 

 

 

At the end of the day - I have come to the conclusion that while imbalanced on the short term, over the long haul the current MM is probably superior than anything else and retain the fun to the game.

 

 

 

 

 

 



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  413/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


RedBarchetta3 #65 Posted 30 July 2015 - 02:30 PM

    Verified √

  • Players
  • 25575 battles
  • 2,119
  • [DFNT]
  • Member since:
    06-28-2014

+1 vanpeenen - these posts are great. I've been a marketing guy most of my career, and finding the story behind the numbers is always fascinating to me. Your conclusion is spot-on with what I have always believed - MM is fair because In the long-run MM evens out. 

 

 

I keep track of my stats in an Excel spreadsheet at 1000 game intervals. I see essentially the same flat-line that you show, even though my WR is significantly below yours (currently 52.37%). But my recent history stats on WOTBstars is all over the place.

 

Another reason I think WG keeps the MM fair is outside the data. All you need to do is look at the effort they put into nerfing and buffing tanks. We may disagree that some of these changes make things worse, or skew in favor of certain tanks/countries, but WG has stated they make these changes based on server data with the intent to level out tanks. I have no reason to doubt them. To go through all that effort, while having a nefarious MM, doesn't make any sense. 

 

 


I strip away the old debris that hides a shining car, a brilliant red barchetta from a better vanished time

My not so helpful WOTB videos are on YouTube

The problem will solve itself with time.

 


ahredstealth #66 Posted 30 July 2015 - 02:51 PM

    King Tater

  • Players
  • 19022 battles
  • 8,705
  • [SPUD]
  • Member since:
    01-25-2015

Match maker being rigged seems silly to me for one simple reason.

 

If I had a company that "rigged" match making so that pay to play tankers got an easier match making path, why in the fuzzy elephant jubblies wouldn't I ADVERTISE that fact?

 

Why would I deny it, and claim indifference?

 

The fact is there are people that will pay to win.  As a company, if there are customers willing to pay for a product, why wouldn't you sell it to them?

 

I think if they said, "oh yeah, buy premium time and you'll get 10% better matches"  and then added, "And if you're in a premium tank, you can tack on another 5% better matches" wargaming would then have the problem of driving off the free to play people before they even have a chance to dangle the "2.99 one time offers" and other free to play people that grind up to tier X only to finally spend some gold on crew training.

 

Not to mention you would then have people complaining, "Hey I bought premium time, and I only got 8% better matches!  I want my money back!"

 

No, that just seems like a poor business plan, especially when you have people lined up around the block to buy an IS-6 and a T34 clown car.

 

I'll retract my statement if someone can come up with an intelligent reason for Wargaming to want to keep "premium MM'ing" a secret though.


Edited by ahredstealth, 30 July 2015 - 02:51 PM.

Today I went to the bathroom and forgot my phone.

 

There are 256 tiles in the bathroom...


NosTermite #67 Posted 30 July 2015 - 04:11 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3353 battles
  • 133
  • Member since:
    05-13-2011
Great Wall of txt, is this a post or a blog!?

CptCheez #68 Posted 30 July 2015 - 04:18 PM

    This Space Intentionally Left Blank

  • Players
  • 15398 battles
  • 6,798
  • Member since:
    07-08-2014

View PostNosTermite, on 30 July 2015 - 12:11 PM, said:

Great Wall of txt, is this a post or a blog!?

 

A "wall of text", by its very definition, does not use spacing.  Van's post is very well spaced into paragraphs and bulleted lists.  If you didn't want to read it, just say "TL;DR" :)

"When the going gets tough and the stomach acids flow, 
The cold wind of conformity is nipping at your nose.
When some trendy new atrocity has brought you to your knees
Come with us we'll sail the Seas of Cheese."


ahredstealth #69 Posted 30 July 2015 - 05:11 PM

    King Tater

  • Players
  • 19022 battles
  • 8,705
  • [SPUD]
  • Member since:
    01-25-2015

View Postvanpeenen, on 27 July 2015 - 12:17 PM, said:

TL;DR - matchmaking hates you, just take solace in the fact that it hates everyone equally and as capriciously as it does you. You are the single biggest contributor to your own success or failure in this game.

 

View PostNosTermite, on 30 July 2015 - 10:11 AM, said:

Great Wall of txt, is this a post or a blog!?

 

He even started with a TL;DR.

 

Let me guess, you're the guy that does the book report by watching the movie because reading is hard, and then gets bent out of shape when the teacher calls him out on it?

 

This is why humanity is doomed.  Doomed I say.


Today I went to the bathroom and forgot my phone.

 

There are 256 tiles in the bathroom...


Mere_Anarchy #70 Posted 31 July 2015 - 01:19 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 36101 battles
  • 1,118
  • Member since:
    07-07-2014

View Post__Crusader6__, on 30 July 2015 - 06:30 AM, said:

Thx for the link to that - I shamelessly bumped it to bring it back up.

 

I guess the question is - should they be better balanced - or is the randomness add enjoyment/excitement to the game?

 

Thanks for the bump - nothing like resurrecting the dead.

 

Honestly, as much as I curse it, I do like the randomness.  Granted there are some strong patterns, I have seen some games where relatively low WR players can make a huge difference.  I think the issue is that they can't do it consistently.   At the same time, we all know that even higher WR players have their potato moments (some of the super unicums excepted of course).

View PostRedBarchetta3, on 30 July 2015 - 08:30 AM, said:

+1 vanpeenen - these posts are great. I've been a marketing guy most of my career, and finding the story behind the numbers is always fascinating to me. Your conclusion is spot-on with what I have always believed - MM is fair because In the long-run MM evens out. 

 

I keep track of my stats in an Excel spreadsheet at 1000 game intervals. I see essentially the same flat-line that you show, even though my WR is significantly below yours (currently 52.37%). But my recent history stats on WOTBstars is all over the place.

 

Another reason I think WG keeps the MM fair is outside the data. All you need to do is look at the effort they put into nerfing and buffing tanks. We may disagree that some of these changes make things worse, or skew in favor of certain tanks/countries, but WG has stated they make these changes based on server data with the intent to level out tanks. I have no reason to doubt them. To go through all that effort, while having a nefarious MM, doesn't make any sense. 

 

 

Thanks for the compliments - much appreciated!  Glad to hear that your own data match my own.  I'd love to see how many others also keep spreadsheets of their stats.  Cleary something about this game appeals to those of us who like numbers, eh?  Couldn't agree more with all of your thoughts.

 

View PostNosTermite, on 30 July 2015 - 10:11 AM, said:

Great Wall of txt, is this a post or a blog!?

 

Lol.  Man, this is nothing for me.  You should see me when I really get rolling.  I can fill up reams of paper.  Writing something short like this requires some serious self-control on my part.  You should see the original unedited draft - I had to cut at least a whole page out of it to get it to this length.  I'll try harder next time.


Edited by vanpeenen, 31 July 2015 - 01:19 AM.

 

 


_Crusader6_ #71 Posted 25 September 2015 - 08:19 PM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65668 battles
  • 13,619
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

Shameless bump.

 

But my last 2k games or so I have kept tracking about 10% of them.

 

I ended up having a 30 game losing streak in my JgPz E100 (and I parked it for a while now) - but the biggest variable has been me as far as WR and Tank tier's/types.

 

Most interesting of all -- my Platoon Rate has had zero affect on my WR - as my WR platooned or not platooned is 100% identical (weird huh - take that STAR1 ;) )

 

 

 

 



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  413/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


Kikoscttkr #72 Posted 04 January 2016 - 07:46 AM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6112 battles
  • 752
  • [75TH]
  • Member since:
    11-30-2015

I call [edited]....they match winners together so they spend more money to stay on top.

Who cares about losers...no one...especially when you don't spend...everything is about making you spend more money..

 



BootlegTampico #73 Posted 04 January 2016 - 08:44 AM

    "LGoW" --Random Pub

  • Players
  • 22606 battles
  • 4,749
  • [-OHM-]
  • Member since:
    12-26-2014

View PostKikoscttkr, on 04 January 2016 - 12:46 AM, said:

I call [edited]....they match winners together so they spend more money to stay on top.

Who cares about losers...no one...especially when you don't spend...everything is about making you spend more money..

 

Please, for my first 6000 battles, I was a F2P user. I still had 55%+ WR. 

if you have proof, show us, otherwise, stop throwing out ignorant, baseless accusations that do nothing. 

Life you look up the wiki article, there is a page on Matchmaker that I wrote up. Perhaps it would do you good to read it.


Clan War Discord Server youtube Join the Legion

I would love for Wargaming to succeed, and I will push for success until I'm gone or Blitz is. 

 


Psychopathy #74 Posted 04 January 2016 - 09:48 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 20362 battles
  • 4,585
  • Member since:
    07-05-2014
I want training room. or maybe stupid based MM where is 1 player play with bots or platoon (no records and rewards be given) for the day that you have nothing to do.

_Crusader6_ #75 Posted 04 January 2016 - 12:05 PM

    The Society’s NA President

  • Players
  • 65668 battles
  • 13,619
  • [SURG3]
  • Member since:
    12-08-2014

MM balance's

 

Record Date Battles Period Avg Tier Win Rate Platoon Survival Dmg Ratio Kills/Btl Kills/Death Hit Rate Avg Dmg Avg Spot
2016-01-04 16510 13 9
53.85
0
30.77
1.89
1.23
1.78
93.33
2554 1.08
2015-12-31 16395 115 8.67
66.96
0
46.96
1.72
1.13
2.13
85.09
2091 1.28
2015-12-30 16293 102 8.76
65.69
0
49.02
1.70
1.17
2.29
83.93
2144 1.32
2015-12-27 16191 102 6.17
62.75
0
46.08
1.74
1.41
2.62
85.99
1709 1.16
2015-12-23 16062 129 8.19
62.02
0
44.96
1.76
1.36
2.48
82.18
1958 1.62
2015-12-20 15920 142 8.59
59.15
0
45.07
1.76
1.20
2.18
90.14
2109 1.59
2015-12-17 15800 120 8.71
69.17
0
56.67
1.88
1.30
3.00
88.28
2070 1.39
2015-12-15 15680 120 8.29
64.17
0
40.83
1.53
1.16
1.96
84.96
1883 1.33
2015-12-14 15569 111 7.14
63.96
0
49.55
1.59
1.21
2.39
86.83
1522 1.52
2015-12-11 15458 111 7.98
65.77
0
45.05
1.63
1.23
2.23
88.54
1832 1.50
2015-12-10 15321 137 6.98
64.23
0
44.53
1.45
1.11
2.00
88.55
1390 1.50
2015-12-08 15211 110 7.07
60.91
-2520.9
41.82
1.46
1.15
1.97
87.65
1530 1.11
2015-12-06 15101 110 8.85
68.18
74.67
49.09
1.78
1.25
2.46
86.35
2183 1.34
2015-12-05 15001 100 7.13
65.00
64.62
52.00
1.76
1.34
2.79
85.46
1728 1.12
2015-12-04 14901 100 7.23
62.00
77.42
48.00
1.60
1.47
2.83
82.62
1644 1.43
2015-12-02 14786 115 9.07
61.74
61.97
44.35
1.51
1.03
1.84
89.19
2205 1.20
2015-11-27 14678 108 8.06
74.07
72.5
60.19
1.80
1.36
3.42
87.78
1848 1.16

 

 

I know folks love to rage about it --- I get annoyed by it sometimes as well.

 

 But at the end of the day if you look at the red and green make ups, the vast majority of the times your skill is the biggest variable.

The problem is not a WR based MM - the issue is more and more tankers are higher tiers are retarded.

 

As much as I'd love to post picks and name and shame, I will not due to EULA and WG policy.  But when you see 35% players in Tier X battles, the biggest issues are the players themselves, and the general stupidity of the tanking masses.

I personally am not good enough of a player to make up for 2x35% Tier X's - there are a lot of folks in this forum that are.

  To me the MM works out overall however, as due to that the majority of the time you (or you and your toon) are the only players above 50% on either team.

    The times you run into purple toons on red, take as a challenge and do your best - even unicums potato too - so hope they do and try to make it hard for them.

 

Some of the tier imbalances are unpleasant - and if anything I would rather see that solved before anything else, I fail to understand why MM cannot add.

There was a SS posted by a clan mate of one of my battles where Red had 5 Tier X, and 2 Tier 9 -- Green had 3 X, 2 9 and 2 VIII

    Really MM?

 

 



 
Tank Hoarder: 401 tanks in Garage:  413/413 Played Tanks Aced
 
NON LINE OF SIGHT MISSILES ARE AN AWFUL MECHANIC 
 
    Wallet Warrior: Loyal Original M60 owner
 
 

 


Kikoscttkr #76 Posted 04 February 2016 - 01:59 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6112 battles
  • 752
  • [75TH]
  • Member since:
    11-30-2015
If MM was a person....I like it so much I'd feed it through the woodchipper...repeatedly....love you MM.

1991Syclone #77 Posted 04 February 2016 - 02:09 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 41216 battles
  • 930
  • [TITAN]
  • Member since:
    07-29-2014
This has to be the best post that has graced the pages of this forum.  It should be stickied and required reading for anyone posting on the forum about MM.

Mere_Anarchy #78 Posted 04 February 2016 - 02:17 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 36101 battles
  • 1,118
  • Member since:
    07-07-2014

View Post1991Syclone, on 04 February 2016 - 08:09 AM, said:

This has to be the best post that has graced the pages of this forum.  It should be stickied and required reading for anyone posting on the forum about MM.

 

I'm flattered - thanks much.  

 

 


neoexodus #79 Posted 04 February 2016 - 09:41 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 6430 battles
  • 21
  • Member since:
    11-27-2015

VP, thanks for this topic and posts, and I like the idea of the skill plateau that you saw in the initial data set, as that should happen in reality, and lends reliability to your data.  As a new player, I don't have access to this kind of data for my gameplay, but I hope to have it one day, and would bet that it will look pretty similar over the long term.

 

I'd also like to thank Kiko for adding absolutely nothing to the discussion. Twice.


Standard fare player, as evidenced by the numbers.


Lephturn #80 Posted 04 February 2016 - 10:11 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Club Wargaming
  • 22174 battles
  • 3,647
  • [III-S]
  • Member since:
    07-28-2014

View Post__Crusader6__, on 04 January 2016 - 07:05 AM, said:

 

Some of the tier imbalances are unpleasant - and if anything I would rather see that solved before anything else, I fail to understand why MM cannot add.

There was a SS posted by a clan mate of one of my battles where Red had 5 Tier X, and 2 Tier 9 -- Green had 3 X, 2 9 and 2 VIII

    Really MM?

 

The other change they made fixed that - now if there is over 10k people online the tier difference is 0%. Since 2.5 I have not seen a SINGLE game where the total tier differences were not perfectly balanced. They can still improve MM, but this change has been a good one.

 

Next up balance tank classes within that... but we'll get there. I think they could do that after the current MM runs ... don't show us the teams yet, just the map splash screen, and the MM engine would have 20 seconds or so to sort the total 14 teams by both tier and try to balance tank type.  I think the next step would be to use weighting based on relative performance, so that one team doesn't get the best tier VII tanks while the other team gets the worst. If green has 2 Tiger 1s, 2 Panther Is, a Panther/M10, and 2 Jg Panzer IV while red has 2 T29s, , an IS, a KV-3, 2 Comets, and an SU-122-44 we know that is not balanced. Some tanks are just objectively better and it would be nice to see that reflected.

 

I think we could also do team balancing for win rate in a loose way but we'd have to give up tank class balancing. Don't use WR to choose the 14 people to put into a game, just chuck them in the way it works now. Then run a second process while the devices are loading the maps as I suggested above. In that process you can sort between the two teams for tier balance - you just need even numbers of the different tiers. Then sort red and green based on WR within the tiers. Class each player by WR at that tier (or just overall WR if it's all you have). <45, 45-55, 55+. So if you have 8 tier VII vehicles you sort it so that the total WR group on each side at that tier is as close as you can make it. Maybe that's too complex, maybe you just try to balance WRs within the tier to get as close to even as you can.  Then for the next 6 tier VI tanks do the same thing. Boom, you have your teams. When we load into the game only THEN show us the teams.

 

The question is, would this be better? This would mean that within your tier, if you are a unicum you are an above average player you will get teamed in your tier with the worst players. If you are in a unicum platoon you will get the worst players of the same tier . If we go to +1/-1 again maybe you skip the tier thing and after making sure the tiers are even just sort for even WRs.  I'm not sure we would really like this - the better your WR the worse your team mates would be. The lower WR players get carried more and the unicums get saddled with the worst players in the game. Every. Time.

 

I don't see how you do tank class balancing AND skill based MM. I think you have to pick one, because doing both doesn't seem reasonable.

 


Edited by Lephturn, 04 February 2016 - 10:22 PM.

Lephturn Triarii Signature Media Producer

Host of the World of Tanks Blitz podcast TANK BOOM!

 

Search for "tank boom" on iTunes, Stitcher, SoundCloud or your podcast player of choice!

Android user? Get the Tank Boom! App: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tank.boom





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users