[UI] Semi-Auto Assault

Jafnhár · Post by **Jafnhár** » Wed May 16, 2007 9:29 am

I want a moderator to comment on the idea.

poo-maker · Post by **poo-maker** » Wed May 16, 2007 12:38 pm

Its already on the to-do list.

joeyjordison · Post by **joeyjordison** » Wed May 16, 2007 1:37 pm

its been suggested a few times before. and i think the to-do list needs to be prioritised if it isn't already.

Gilligan · Post by **Gilligan** » Wed May 16, 2007 3:01 pm

Yeah, I suggested this.

Jafnhár · Post by **Jafnhár** » Wed May 16, 2007 4:30 pm

Oh, sorry. What is its name there?

Gilligan · Post by **Gilligan** » Wed May 16, 2007 6:46 pm

Jafnhár wrote:Oh, sorry. What is its name there?

No problem. The one I posted was http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... highlight=

It got locked though

Jafnhár · Post by **Jafnhár** » Wed May 16, 2007 7:01 pm

You must love when you get so positive answers like you did there.

Gilligan · Post by **Gilligan** » Wed May 16, 2007 7:02 pm

Jafnhár wrote:You must love when you get so positive answers like you did there.

Yeah, I know, huh?

icemonkey · Post by **icemonkey** » Thu May 17, 2007 12:17 pm

I want something like this too but i would prefer it to be a bit different. I think there should be an option to attack more than once. Like a button (could use a slider or something) to attack 10 times. So you push the button, the game does ten rolls then you look. You could have various numbers 10, 25, 50 etc. This way I think you would have more control over how much attacking you do instead of some number you pick.

lackattack · Post by **lackattack** » Sat May 19, 2007 11:40 am

I think I like the x10 concept better than specifying the number of rolls in a drop down or text field.

Since I don't want to clutter the interface, what about getting rid of the Auto-Attack button and instead having optional checkboxes below the attack button:

Auto-Attack [] x5 [] x10 [] until 3 attackers

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Sat May 19, 2007 11:44 am

lackattack wrote:I think I like the x10 concept better than specifying the number of rolls in a drop down or text field.

Since I don't want to clutter the interface, what about getting rid of the Auto-Attack button and instead having optional checkboxes below the attack button:

Auto-Attack [] x5 [] x10 [] until 3 attackers

would we have to check it each attack, or would it remember which one you used last time?

cyberdaniel · Post by **cyberdaniel** » Sat May 19, 2007 11:45 am

Or you might have the text field, or drop down box somewhere else, say in "my settings" and keep the interface the same just the auto attack button will roll up to the number specified by you in the settings page.

lackattack · Post by **lackattack** » Sat May 19, 2007 12:24 pm

wcaclimbing wrote:would we have to check it each attack, or would it remember which one you used last time?

check it each attack. the default should be normal because your next attack might be something completely different.

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Sat May 19, 2007 12:41 pm

lackattack wrote:
wcaclimbing wrote:would we have to check it each attack, or would it remember which one you used last time?
check it each attack. the default should be normal because your next attack might be something completely different.

to me, that doesnt sound like a great idea.
I think it should keep both the attack button and the autoattack button, with the auto-attack button defaulted at attack until 3 are left like normal, but with check boxes under just the auto-attack button.

Having to check the boxes for EVERY attack would take a lot of time, and would also just be another "I CLICKED ATTACK WITH ALL INSTEAD OF ATTACK ONCE!!! YOU NEED TO FIX THE BUTTONS!!!".

If you are going to do this, at least leave the two buttons the way they are, just add the check boxes under the Auto-attack button.

lackattack · Post by **lackattack** » Sat May 19, 2007 3:23 pm

i think you misunderstood. the checkboxes would be optional and you attack normally if none are checked. Maybe it would need to say:

Auto-Attack (optional): [] x5 [] x10 [] until 3 attackers

Is that clear enough or will newbies be confused?

happy2seeyou · Post by **happy2seeyou** » Sat May 19, 2007 3:30 pm

lackattack wrote:i think you misunderstood. the checkboxes would be optional and you attack normally if none are checked. Maybe it would need to say:

Auto-Attack (optional): [] x5 [] x10 [] until 3 attackers

Is that clear enough or will newbies be confused?

Maybe instead of "attackers" you could say "armies". Some people may not get it.

AAFitz · Post by **AAFitz** » Sat May 19, 2007 3:31 pm

lackattack wrote:i think you misunderstood. the checkboxes would be optional and you attack normally if none are checked. Maybe it would need to say:

Auto-Attack (optional): [] x5 [] x10 [] until 3 attackers

Is that clear enough or will newbies be confused?

there will undoubtedly be some new players that will be confused, and it is approaching the complicated zone, but its not too bad...its too bad you cant just have Auto [] x5 [] x10 [] all but 3

but then new players would definitely be confused

lackattack · Post by **lackattack** » Sat May 19, 2007 3:34 pm

I said attackers instead of armies to differentiate between defending armies.

How about this...

Auto: [] 5 rolls [] 10 rolls [] to the death!

EDIT: Now I'm having second thoughts about this whole thing. It will mean an extra click to do an auto-attack which would annoy me because I use it very often!

happy2seeyou · Post by **happy2seeyou** » Sat May 19, 2007 3:41 pm

lackattack wrote:I said attackers instead of armies to differentiate between defending armies.

How about this...

Auto: [] 5 rolls [] 10 rolls [] to the death!

EDIT: Now I'm having second thoughts about this whole thing. It will mean an extra click to do an auto-attack which would annoy me because I use it very often!

hahaha. Nice (to the death) but I thought that was what Auto did anyways... well I guess when ever I use it. I really like the idea of this option, but I am pretty sure that newbies won't understand it. What if it was an add on option that you could use on Mozilla?

AAFitz · Post by **AAFitz** » Sat May 19, 2007 3:49 pm

lackattack wrote:I said attackers instead of armies to differentiate between defending armies.

How about this...

Auto: [] 5 rolls [] 10 rolls [] to the death!

EDIT: Now I'm having second thoughts about this whole thing. It will mean an extra click to do an auto-attack which would annoy me because I use it very often!

i think thats the cleanest....and youre gonna get questions anyways...so it might as well be pretty i was going to suggest that exactly, but i figured you wanted to put the 3 in there...I say leave it out...much more sporting looking...

also...you may want to hold off on the auto...you might win one...i stopped using it gained 1100 points...got cocky...and lazy...used it again and lost 800

lackattack · Post by **lackattack** » Sat May 19, 2007 6:41 pm

happy2seeyou wrote:Nice (to the death) but I thought that was what Auto did anyways...

Yes, checking that off would be the equivalent of today's auto-attack button. Maybe this could be tucked away untill you click an [options] link next to the attack button. Maybe then we could also display

Advance: [] all [] none

Maybe all this should go live along with in-game popup help, which is somewhere on my to-do list...

AAFitz wrote:also...you may want to hold off on the auto...you might win one...i stopped using it gained 1100 points...got cocky...and lazy...used it again and lost 800

I dunno... I sucked at this game even before we had auto-attack

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Sat May 19, 2007 10:31 pm

Too many buttons. remember everyone complaining when new ones were added?

cicero · Post by **cicero** » Sun May 27, 2007 7:46 pm

I believe that a good interface, taking into account clicks and clarity for all levels of user, would be as set out below. Since Lack has raised Advance in addition to the original Auto-Attack discussion I've included that too.

I think that auto-attacking, to a user-defined army limit; "whilst I've got 20 armies or more left" for example, is better than for a user-defined number of attacks. (Note "whilst I've got 4 armies or more left" is the equivalent of the current auto-attack.) Limiting by number of attacks still leaves you particularly vulnerable to:

joeyjordison wrote: ... got down to u havin 2 and them havin 6 ...

... if I understand his meaning correctly.

Note that, in my personal-just-made-it-up-notation, this:
[12] is a dropdown
and this:
<Attack> is a button.

attacking
<Attack> or <Auto-Attack> with [4] armies or more.

The dropdown list defaults to 4, since that is the current auto attack equivalent, but it will be coded to include all values from 2 up to one less than the maximum number of armies the player has on any one territory. (There will have to be some checking producing a warning similar to the existing "illegal attack" warning if a dropdown value inappropriate to the attacking territory is chosen.)
This interface allows players to be more cautious or more reckless than the current auto-attack allows and with the efficiency of the auto-attack button.

advancing
<Advance All> armies from East Anglia to Lincolnshire or <Advance Specified> [0]

The dropdown list defaults to zero since this allows an "advance none" order with one click and doesn't add too much clutter to the interface. (The dropdown, as now, will be coded to included all values up to one less than the number of armies in the 'from' territory.)

The italicised 'or' is intended simply as that - italicised text on the page.

Cicero

cicero · Post by **cicero** » Sun May 27, 2007 7:52 pm

re attacking
The <Attack> button could be called <Single Attack> for emphasis, but that would go against the established norm.

Hence, for the same reason, ...

re advancing
The <Advance Specified> button should perhaps just be <Advance>.

Cicero

khazalid · Post by **khazalid** » Sun May 27, 2007 8:34 pm

im a firm advocate of auto attack.

the dice are always better when you use it.

to the death i say, be damned.