Is it just me, or does the auto attack not worth it?

[ttocs]

Hi everyone, Im just wondering, is it just me, or does the auto attack not like attackers, and makes you lose a lot of armies?

(example)=In game #74718 I had 14 armies on East Africa early in the game, and I thought it would be a safe time to use auto attack for the first time when I was attacking three armies on Congo. After i did it, i went down by eleven armies!!! Am I just unlucky, or does the auto attack unreliable?

I have also heard of a few other people who have lost a lot of armies, I know this can be extremely critical in freestyle games, but that isn't that a little crazy??

Please feel free to respond, i truly don't care if no one agrees with me.

[maritovw]

i think it is as reliable as the attack button. you just had bad luck.

[Evil Semp]

I use it alot. Most of the time it is very fair for the attacker. But I have attacked 15 on 3 and lost 12.

[gavin_sidhu]

Using the button I have lost 9 men killing 3 and seen someone lose 19 men killing only 3, in both cases the attack was repelled, this was also in the same game. I think maybe the auto attack when the chance of winning switches out of your favour.

[zip_disk]

This type of thread is the same thing as the unfair dice threads. Just that its concentrated into one go.

If you didn't want to risk all but 2-3 of your troops then you shouldn't have pressed the button.

[MeDeFe]

So far it's been slightly better than the "normal" attack button for me. It saves time and I lose less armies.

[Pedronicus]

Auto Attack?

I Love It!

i had 11 on venezula, ZawBanjito had 19 on Brazil. I was about to kill a guy for his cards - but thought I'd thin down Zaw before taking this other guy out.

Hit auto attack - i was left with 3 in venezula - brazil had 1 left on it!

after that ZawBanjito became my next target

[Scorba]

29 lost, 10 killed. Damn my lack of patience.

[nyg5680]

i thoguht the auto attack button was very unfavorable for the attacker at one moment but it was just a streak of bad luck for me now its actually quite favorable for me so i think its just u and your bad luck

[gavin_sidhu]

Europe map: I owned africa, another person owned Middle East, I deploy my men there, attack and lose 8 men straight and the opponent loses nothing. From then onwards i dont use auto-attack unless it really is do or die (killing an opponent is about the only situation) or there really is a huge attack, like 51 on 29.

[PaperPlunger]

i lost 19 against 5 on the auto attack, but it would have been no different for regular

[Marvaddin]

Im having some bad experiences, but the good ones have increased much more (since they almost didnt exist to me). Anyway, no perfect rolls are possible, since the whole dice of this site are cursed

[General Mayhem]

i dont like it unless i really have to and have armies to spare.

I like to surf the wave of randomness and catch my own streaks of winning rolls. Oh yeah dude. Oh yeahhh

[what,me worry?]

auto attack sucks. I cant tell you how many times I have wasted my nights crying myself to sleep because i lost 15 in an attack.... but usually im high and too lazy to not use it so i guess im for it.[/i]

[grav]

i like the button, you have to have some luck when playing them, and it does save some time/reloadied pages when playing your move

[mightyal]

It should take a little longer before giving the result and play scarey music in the interim.

[Hugh.G.Rection]

the poll asks if it"s reliable no it's not reliable just because you have the numbers advantage dosen't mean your going to prevail.I use it cause i'm lazy

[sfhbballnut]

it makes things SOOO much faster, so you don't have to push attack 6 times to take one troop

[qeee1]

*have never used it*

and don't intend to either.

[Herakilla]

every time i accidently hit it i win

and one time i purposefully hit it in a suicidal attack i went 5v13 and didnt lose anything!

[ttocs]

So apparently, in Auto attack, you either get really lucky, or really unlucky, am I right?

[sully800]

Mine have all been fairly normal rolls

[super steve]

for me, it really depends...i almost always have extremely good or extremely bad luck. once i had like 13 attack a 2 and i lost all of em [down to three, which i ended up lsing the remaingin two, also] and a few similar situations, but a few times when i feel like being risky, like once i had 3 and i attacked a 9, and won, etc.

so i guess thats pretty much whateveryone else has said. personally, i hardly ever use autoattack because often i dont want to risk going down to two or three armies. thats the bottom line. if you don't like it, don't use it. although theoretically it should have normal odds, and it doesnt for you, then just dont risk it, and attack maually.

[wilsonb224]

I like mightyal's scary music suggestion, that would be awesome and fitting because you never know what you are going to get from it.

I don't use it, I guess I feel I still have some control over the outcome by deciding to continue the attack. I have seen many players get raped by it. It does seem more often than not that when it is used in games I've played, the attacker, even with a great numerical advantage loses.

[Ishiro]

If its reliable isn't something we can really know, because it all depends on how the function that rolls the dice works and if that method is subject to rolls being done very quickly in sequence makes a difference. For example, if it uses a random function based off the system clock, will having all your rolls done in a matter of a few seconds affect the outcome when compared to taking a few seconds per single roll?

Most of the time, I feel it does because in an Auto-Attack I tend either lose alot or win alot. I have never had both sides lose equally.

As for function, I tend to avoid Auto-Attack unless I have no options. I once accidently clicked it and lost far more armies than I would have if I'd been doing single attacks because after losing 4 or 5 I would have stopped. Instead, I lost 13.