Auto-Assault or No Auto-Assault, that is the question

[zebraman]

There is no difference whatsoever in the dice. you have the same odds of losing 10v2 when auto-attacking as when attacking one by one.

kp

logically, that may be true. however, EVERYTIME i auto, my luck is either amazing (i win 40-60 with 20 leftover) or my luck is terrible (i lose 20v3). if you singularly click attack, i find that my dice are a lot more...stable. instead of winning by huge margins or losing by huge margins, i kill 1 for every 1 i lose. this makes my dice something like 10-10 down to 3v1.

I agree with this assessment. The dice here are hardly ever balanced between good and bad rolls. When I've used auto-attack, I either get extremely great dice rolls or the crappiest ever. There has been no middle ground during my experience when using auto-attack.

[shidarin]

I have found that if I am playing over my phone, or in a situation where I am experiencing lag; hitting assult tends to get me double losses 20 times in a row, where auto-assault gets me more normal dice. This doesn't happen over normal, low latency situations.. but in lag situations, hitting assault always, always, causes me to lose.

[jleonnn]

I find most of the time that assaulting, my dice are better, don't know why.

[darkangelsguy205]

for me it depends on the map if it is one of the age of realms map i will assault on a a nutrual but if it is againts the other player i auto assault on a other map like classic shapes i wil auto asssault

[sailorc]

I tend to use assault much more, just so I can quit before my armies gone. Unless I'm on some map with high numbers, like City Mogul, in which case I would use it or else I'll be assaulting forever.