[UI] Semi-Auto Assault

[redhedge47]

Maybe you can set how many troops you want to lose
ex. I have 10 my oppenet has 5 I put in somewhere that I wantto lose a max of 4 troops so if the dice decide to troll me I can say jokes on you I still have six troops instead of the usual 3

[Lalloq]

Thanks for reading.
I saw your different propositions and I like them too.
Just be careful not to complicate the game with conditionnal attack.

chapcrap, you said it was proposed before. What was the problem ?

[greenoaks]

Concise description:
Help to attack a big stack in a region without conquer it

Specifics/Details:
I often play games where players get big stacks of troops (crusades, napoleonic, rome). I like, maybe I'm not alone, to attack this big stacks but not conquer it, in order not to be attacked by an adjacent stack. But it is very long to attack 300 vs 250 without conquer. I suggest to have a new option :
- Assault
- Auto assault
- Moderate Assault (or other better term).
This moderate assault would be an auto-assault which stops automatically when the defender region has only three troops.


How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
Click 150 times on "Assault" is not good, especially when the computer or servor is overcharged.


Thanks for reading and sorry for the english of a funny french

See you in another game.

i already have this

when i have a big stack i click auto-assault and it stops when the defender has 3 troops left, although often they have more.

[chapcrap]

Thanks for reading.
I saw your different propositions and I like them too.
Just be careful not to complicate the game with conditionnal attack.

chapcrap, you said it was proposed before. What was the problem ?

There was no problem I think. It just hasn't been implemented.

[MoB Deadly]

Thanks for reading.
I saw your different propositions and I like them too.
Just be careful not to complicate the game with conditionnal attack.

chapcrap, you said it was proposed before. What was the problem ?

The only reason I proposed the Conditional Assault, is because your suggestion does not scale well with large numbers. Suppose you have 1000 vs 1000.

I do not know if I want to chip his territory all the way down to 3 defenders, I may not want to risk it if he gets a couple hundred troop lead on me. I dont want to auto and be left with nothing, and again him having a couple hundred troop lead on me. I dont want to click attack manually over 100 times, with lag in between each roll.

Example:
With conditional I can say auto assault until I lose 100 troops. Okay I am winning 877 vs 900 good. Auto another 100
Oh no I had bad dice now its 830 vs 800. Auto again
Even worse dice now its 801 vs 700. Okay I feel like my luck sucks now, I think I should stop. With your suggested Auto-Assault, it is impossible to check on your troops "mid assault".

[Chives1337]

I can foresee a problem with this (the user-input one).
As we know, dice are bitches/godly at times.

Say you have 10 and opponent has 10. Then I put I want to lose 0 and him to lose 10. If coded improperly, I'd absolutely annihilate.
One solution is to roll first then check, but again there are still problems.

Just a thought.

[darth emperor]

I can foresee a problem with this (the user-input one).
As we know, dice are bitches/godly at times.

Say you have 10 and opponent has 10. Then I put I want to lose 0 and him to lose 10. If coded improperly, I'd absolutely annihilate.
One solution is to roll first then check, but again there are still problems.

Just a thought.

Well, that won't work, when you say "I want to have 10 troops left" means, that it will stop when you have 10 or less troops (aka 9, if you loose 2 troops with 11 armies). So having 10 troops from the start it won't do anything, only 1 assault. Just try now auto-assault when you have 3 armies, even if you win, you only roll once, making no difference between assault button and autoassault button

[deathcomesrippin]

Been suggested before in a slightly different fashion. I would support either way.

The other way said that if you have a stack of, say 200, then you could say that you want to auto attack to a certain troop count, like down to 100 troops.

This is what I vote for, autoing until YOUR stack is down to a certain number.

[squishyg]

Yes.

[Lalloq]

Yes,

After reading, it's a better idea to say how many troops you want play or, maybe simply how many rolls.

Exemple : 500 vs 350, I want play 100 rolls (or 200 troops)

Have a good day

[Pedronicus]

I already have the moderate assault option set as default on my account. I shit you not...

[agentcom]

I already have the moderate assault option set as default on my account. I shit you not...

Is that some sort of plug-in that you've made? I've never seen anything like it, but I wouldn't imagine that it would be difficult or impossible to program something like that.

[darth emperor]

I already have the moderate assault option set as default on my account. I shit you not...

Is that some sort of plug-in that you've made? I've never seen anything like it, but I wouldn't imagine that it would be difficult or impossible to program something like that.

Well, I think it is BoB add-on who has it, you have to press ctrl and then something, but it doesn't work always perfectly (or I haven't been able to use it correctly)

[snoogans]

how about an option to limit the number of troops you are willing to lose. allow for scrolling the max number of troops to risk before attacking. similar to how you reinforce. it would speed up games, because you would not have to click each time for a single assault, this is especially time consuming when experiencing lag. also it would reduce player frustration during times when auto attacking and losing 20 troops attacking 5. for example, if you have a 50 stack and are attacking a 30 stack, you could scroll to 25 which would stop your auto assault after you lose 25 troops or take the territory.

[chapcrap]

Here: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=171166

[snoogans]

i would like any of the suggestions to be "tried out". anything would be better than the current format.

[agentcom]

Doesn't seem to be going anywhere ... Also doesn't this kind of defeat the purpose of the FOG of war? Anyway, REJECTED

[PapaGeek]

Add the ability to control the stop points for auto-assult:

• The current limits are to attack until either the defender is down to 0 or the attacker has only 2 or 3 remaining.

Specifics/Details:

• Add a setting or separate option to allow the attacker to change the end points of an auto-assault
• Another method of doing this would be to set up two limited engagement setting in preferences so we could set them to something like stop when defender has 10 or we have 50, or whatever we choose.
• Then have another button for limited engagement.
• The other option is to preset these numbers to something we all agree to. Just the ability to reduce huge stacks down to reasonable smaller numbers, then do single assaults to get to where we want would be a huge help.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• There are many cases where I want to knock down the size of a stack that is facing me, but I don’t want to reduce it to zero and advance 1 to give my opponent the opportunity of an easy card.
• When this happens I have to single attack until the result I want is visible. When the attack is for escalating games and the stacks are 1,200 vs 950, this takes a huge number of single assaults.

[chapcrap]

Already been suggested. It's still a good idea.

[darth emperor]

Already been suggested. It's still a good idea.

Yes, and till is implemented you can use the function in BoB. But it doesn't work proprely. Or I don't how to use it well

[PapaGeek]

Concise description:

• The ability to assault until either attacker or defender falls below a specified value

Specifics/Details:

• Right now we have two options: assault and auto assault
• Add a third option for a “limited assault” and a field where you can specify how far you want to reduce the troop counts.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• In an escalating game you sometimes find yourself in a situation of over a thousand troops facing over a thousand troops.
• You don’t want to destroy the stack facing you and leave an easy small stack that the other player can re-take to get a card.
• You want to reduce his stack to just a few so he can’t continue his assault on you.
• Doing so now require hitting the assault button hundreds of times until the opposing stack is down to the level you want.
• It would be nice to “auto-assault” until either you or your attacker is down to, let’s just say 10 troops, or whatever level you choose. The attack would automatically stop when either of you reach the 9 or 10 level.
• If a user defined limit is difficult, maybe we could have a button or two with limits set by the ops, maybe 25 and or 10.
• From that point it would only take a few clicks of the assault button to zero in on the level you want.

[Kaskavel]

a button "attack 20 times" would be much simpler I think...

[Funkyterrance]

a button "attack 20 times" would be much simpler I think...

That's not nearly the same as what he's suggesting though...
You could attack 20 times and go below your "safe" number or conversely you could attack 20 times for several times and not get your opponent lowered anywhere near the desired number.

While I think this suggestion has its merits, I don't think I personally would use it much.

[HardAttack]

this is a very good one

+1.

[greenoaks]

a button "attack 20 times" would be much simpler I think...

That's not nearly the same as what he's suggesting though...
You could attack 20 times and go below your "safe" number or conversely you could attack 20 times for several times and not get your opponent lowered anywhere near the desired number.

While I think this suggestion has its merits, I don't think I personally would use it much.

it is pretty close to the 25 times the op suggested