[GP] Undo, Redo, Mulligan, Take Back Options

[chapcrap]

MERGED and REJECTED (again) multiple threads about the same topic. Also, UPDATED the OP with an explanation.

[ZeekLTK]

I think this should be an option, especially on maps with difficult territory names where players sometimes click the wrong territory name on the list.

For example, New World - say you meant to fortify at Aztec 6, but instead you accidentally clicked Aztec 4. Why can't you hit "undo" and select Aztec 6 to make it right?

[spiesr]

I think this should be an option, especially on maps with difficult territory names where players sometimes click the wrong territory name on the list.

For example, New World - say you meant to fortify at Aztec 6, but instead you accidentally clicked Aztec 4. Why can't you hit "undo" and select Aztec 6 to make it right?

Such a system could potentially be abused by people intentionally "undoing" attacks where they get bad dice. Sure, restrictions on the function could limit this, but the abuse potential could never fully be eliminated.
Also, a system like you describe would not be compatible with freestyle games.

[chapcrap]

MERGED a couple more topics.

[jjleblanc25]

Is there any chance we can add a button so go back to assaults if you mistakenly click End Assaults too early? Granted it is a mistake on my part, but I don't see why I shouldn't be able to return to assaults assuming I have not begun to make reinforcements. Particularly when I use my phone to take turns and I press one button but my phone thinks I clicked a nearby button.

Apologies of this topic has already been posted elsewhere.

[patrickaa317]

This has been suggested before but I'm all in favor of it. Though in unlimited reinforcements, this would need to be disabled once one reinforcement is made.

[jjleblanc25]

Oh absolutely, disable it once the first reinforcement is made, but prior to that, I should be able to go back. Adding a button like this would not diminish from the game in any way, and would not provide someone with an unfair advantage.

[Just_essence]

I have had this problem way too many times, and I completely agree.
While we're at it, can we also have a screen of "Are you sure you want to do [reinforce, end assault]" after you click "end assaults" or "reinforce"? I've had plenty of opportunities missed in games by reinforcing too many, too little, or to the wrong territory. Same thing should go for after a successful assault.

[greenoaks]

I have had this problem way too many times, and I completely agree.
While we're at it, can we also have a screen of "Are you sure you want to do [reinforce, end assault]" after you click "end assaults" or "reinforce"? I've had plenty of opportunities missed in games by reinforcing too many, too little, or to the wrong territory. Same thing should go for after a successful assault.

And then after you click "end assaults" or "reinforce" we should have a screen that says "Are you really sure you meant to push that button?"

Then we can have another screen that says "Are you really, really sure?"

And a third one that says "Pinky swear that's what you want?" with an image you can swipe your pinky against.

[jjleblanc25]

Or we could just add a button, skip the "confirmation pop-ups," and not listen to you be a smart a$$.

[greenoaks]

Or we could just add a button, skip the "confirmation pop-ups," and not listen to you be a smart a$$.

or you could be more careful so we members don't have to pay a coder to design & implement a feature because of your clumsiness.

[nicestash]

I have had this problem way too many times, and I completely agree.
While we're at it, can we also have a screen of "Are you sure you want to do [reinforce, end assault]" after you click "end assaults" or "reinforce"? I've had plenty of opportunities missed in games by reinforcing too many, too little, or to the wrong territory. Same thing should go for after a successful assault.

While I'm all for your initial suggestion, I would hate this. I make that mistake maybe 1 in a 1000 times, and I don't want to have to spend an extra 5 seconds confirming my choice for the other 999 times.

[patrickaa317]

I have had this problem way too many times, and I completely agree.
While we're at it, can we also have a screen of "Are you sure you want to do [reinforce, end assault]" after you click "end assaults" or "reinforce"? I've had plenty of opportunities missed in games by reinforcing too many, too little, or to the wrong territory. Same thing should go for after a successful assault.

While I'm all for your initial suggestion, I would hate this. I make that mistake maybe 1 in a 1000 times, and I don't want to have to spend an extra 5 seconds confirming my choice for the other 999 times.

Agreed. Just a simple 'back to assaults' button that is disappears upon a reinforcement.

[jjleblanc25]

To be clear, that's all I am asking for: a button, not a "confirmation" page. I would find an "Are you sure??" page/pop-up annoying, too.

[jjleblanc25]

Or we could just add a button, skip the "confirmation pop-ups," and not listen to you be a smart a$$.

or you could be more careful so we members don't have to pay a coder to design & implement a feature because of your clumsiness.

If only there were other members, like yourself, that think this is a good idea... oh wait, there are. And paying a coder for an hour's worth of work shouldn't be too hard to cover.

Again, I've enjoyed listening to you not be helpful, but indeed be a smart a$$.

[greenoaks]

Or we could just add a button, skip the "confirmation pop-ups," and not listen to you be a smart a$$.

or you could be more careful so we members don't have to pay a coder to design & implement a feature because of your clumsiness.

If only there were other members, like yourself, that think this is a good idea... oh wait, there are. And paying a coder for an hour's worth of work shouldn't be too hard to cover.

Again, I've enjoyed listening to you not be helpful, but indeed be a smart a$$.

you still haven't given a decent reason for why we members should pay to help you overcome your problem.

[Just_essence]

Or we could just add a button, skip the "confirmation pop-ups," and not listen to you be a smart a$$.

or you could be more careful so we members don't have to pay a coder to design & implement a feature because of your clumsiness.

If only there were other members, like yourself, that think this is a good idea... oh wait, there are. And paying a coder for an hour's worth of work shouldn't be too hard to cover.

Again, I've enjoyed listening to you not be helpful, but indeed be a smart a$$.

you still haven't given a decent reason for why we members should pay to help you overcome your problem.

My suggestion was a little overzealous. I admit, it impedes more than helps, especially in speed games. However, the initial proposition put forth is a suggestion for the website, so why is your language a bit harsh? Asking people to be "more careful" should probably be in the form of PMs to whoever you address; I do not see any problem with a simple button, which, in my experience, should not be a Herculean effort (even when combined with the extra coding besides the HTML for properly handling the command it sends to the server). There are so many other suggestions that could be shot down with similar counter-arguments to the one you used.
Also, is covering for accidents that bad? Is it not like saying, "We shouldn't use life vests at all. Everyone on a ship or near the ocean should learn to swim and to avoid dangerous situations, instead of us paying for life vests to save those clumsy people." Isn't this type of argument ignoring the extensive list of circumstances that could lead to a dangerous situation requiring a life vest other than a person's "clumsiness"?
In conclusion, no matter what you think your argument is read as, others are reading it as a subjective argument to a specific person, instead of an objective argument to that person's proposition. Keep in mind that there are more than just one person that has had this problem.

[greenoaks]

undo buttons have been suggested numerous times and rejected. this is a wargame, not a nanny state.

be more careful and if you make a mistake, suck it up cupcake.

[patrickaa317]

undo buttons have been suggested numerous times and rejected. this is a wargame, not a nanny state.

be more careful and if you make a mistake, suck it up cupcake.

So are you against this suggestion all together or are you against it because you feel there are more important things to get done first? If this was implemented would you experience a less enjoyable time on the site? Or do you feel as though this would give you a disadvantage in a game?

"suck it up cupcake" & "it'd cost money to develop" are both fairly poor reasons to be against it. If the admin or developer came back and said the whole site had to be overhauled to make this happen, then yes, I'd agree with you but both of us know this is most likely not a huge coding effort. So please elaborate why you are so adamant against this suggestion to further the conversation.

[greenoaks]

undo buttons have been suggested numerous times and rejected. this is a wargame, not a nanny state.

be more careful and if you make a mistake, suck it up cupcake.

So are you against this suggestion all together or are you against it because you feel there are more important things to get done first? If this was implemented would you experience a less enjoyable time on the site? Or do you feel as though this would give you a disadvantage in a game?

"suck it up cupcake" & "it'd cost money to develop" are both fairly poor reasons to be against it. If the admin or developer came back and said the whole site had to be overhauled to make this happen, then yes, I'd agree with you but both of us know this is most likely not a huge coding effort. So please elaborate why you are so adamant against this suggestion to further the conversation.

are you sure you do/don't want to cash spoils this round?
are you certain you want to deploy x troops there?
are you sure you want to attack that territory?
is x really the number of troops you want to advance?
is that really where you want to fort from?
fort to?
are you sure that x is the amount of troops you want to fort?

there are 7 more buttons to implement covering other aspects of the game. why stop there. if someone is too stupid or clumsy to hit the right button that we need to code a 'Are you sure' button, how do we know they'll click that one right? we better have another set asking if they meant to select what they did with the last one. and another set to make sure this one is selected correctly. and another one after that, and after that, and after that.

mistakes happen, people change their mind. i don't want a site that makes us check and recheck every fucking move.

[jjleblanc25]

are you sure you do/don't want to cash spoils this round?
are you certain you want to deploy x troops there?
are you sure you want to attack that territory?
is x really the number of troops you want to advance?
is that really where you want to fort from?
fort to?
are you sure that x is the amount of troops you want to fort?

there are 7 more buttons to implement covering other aspects of the game. why stop there. if someone is too stupid or clumsy to hit the right button that we need to code a 'Are you sure' button, how do we know they'll click that one right? we better have another set asking if they meant to select what they did with the last one. and another set to make sure this one is selected correctly. and another one after that, and after that, and after that.

mistakes happen, people change their mind. i don't want a site that makes us check and recheck every fucking move.

Dude, what part of "This is just a button. It doesn't pop up, and it doesn't require you to do any additional work during your turn," do you not understand?

Once you cash cards, that changes the game.
Once you deploy troops, that changes the game.
Once you attack a territory, that changes the game.
Once you advance troops, that changes the game.
Once you fort troops, that changes the game.
Having an option to go back and continue assaults (prior to a reinforcement) does not change the game.

To summarize: Just a button. No pop-ups. No time added to your turn.

And since it'll make you feel better, I just became a member. So you can shut the f*ck up about how you're a member and I'm not.

[Just_essence]

Easy solution for people who don't want to be annoyed. Make it an option.
But that's for the plethora greenoaks just proposed. The "Return to Assault" button does not slow anything down.

[patrickaa317]

undo buttons have been suggested numerous times and rejected. this is a wargame, not a nanny state.

be more careful and if you make a mistake, suck it up cupcake.

So are you against this suggestion all together or are you against it because you feel there are more important things to get done first? If this was implemented would you experience a less enjoyable time on the site? Or do you feel as though this would give you a disadvantage in a game?

"suck it up cupcake" & "it'd cost money to develop" are both fairly poor reasons to be against it. If the admin or developer came back and said the whole site had to be overhauled to make this happen, then yes, I'd agree with you but both of us know this is most likely not a huge coding effort. So please elaborate why you are so adamant against this suggestion to further the conversation.

are you sure you do/don't want to cash spoils this round?
are you certain you want to deploy x troops there?
are you sure you want to attack that territory?
is x really the number of troops you want to advance?
is that really where you want to fort from?
fort to?
are you sure that x is the amount of troops you want to fort?

there are 7 more buttons to implement covering other aspects of the game. why stop there. if someone is too stupid or clumsy to hit the right button that we need to code a 'Are you sure' button, how do we know they'll click that one right? we better have another set asking if they meant to select what they did with the last one. and another set to make sure this one is selected correctly. and another one after that, and after that, and after that.

mistakes happen, people change their mind. i don't want a site that makes us check and recheck every fucking move.

This isn't currently being discussed for anything other than assaults which is for the most part, the primary part of the game. And this isn't a confirmation pop up but a button next to reinforcements that says "back to assaults" (and is only enabled if a reinforcement has not been done). Even if there was a "back to spoils" button I don't foresee that as a huge deal. Misclicks in drops and reinforcements would not be undone. This is not an undo feature. This is a different suggestion than undo's that have been requested.

So now that you have a better understanding of what the suggestion is, maybe you are still against it but to repeat myself again this is not a pop up message that you have to click through. This is not an undo feature. This is not for every aspect of the game.

[greenoaks]

the op wants this because it is difficult to always click the correct button on his little screen. if extra buttons are to be added then there are many other people who may want one to cover their misclicks.

so lets fill those tiny screens with buttons. or you could just suck it up.

[Just_essence]

You must understand that there are several possibilities why an accident could occur. It is not just because of a person's clumsiness.
Plus, if you really are worried, then (as I have suggested) we should make it optional.
And the fact that you are using subjective arguments (criticizing the person instead of the suggestion) does not help your case.