• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can
    REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
  • We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Won't you join us for out latest contest?
    You can check out the newest one here.

Army management auto battle confirmation

Do you want a confirmation for your auto battle from the army management?

  • No

    Votes: 16 76.2%
  • Yes

    Votes: 5 23.8%

  • Total voters
    21
Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser113901

Proposal: Add a confirmation when hitting auto battle from army management.

Have you Checked the Ideas section for the same idea posted by someone else?
Yes.
Is this idea similar to one that has been previously suggested?
No.

Reason: On mobile devices it is too easy to touch something you shouldn't, wich can make you auto battle with armies you're still adding units to, and that may be damaged, uncomplete, made only of rogues, made of the wrong units... The army is then lost since you can't retreat.

Details: A confirmation similar to the one you get when hitting auto battle in battle would be added to the auto battle from army management, allowing you to safely finish choosing your army before going into battle. An option to desactivate this can be added for those who want to fight faster.

Visual Aids: I don't have.

Balance: No balance issue I can think about.

Abuse Prevention: No abuse I can think about.

Summary: A confirmation would be added when hitting auto battle from army management.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser99588

If the idea included the option of turning the confirmation on/off it would get a positive vote from me. That way those that need it can have it and for others that might find it an unnecessary addition and slowing down their fighting can disable it.
 

DeletedUser99588

I mean when the button gets blurred out until 8 slots are filled. If you fight with only 6 units you will be forced to at least start the fight before you auto. It's a much easier option then a confirmation.

Unless you want to autobattle quickly with six units. Not sure who would but there's always someone. Could be a preferred option for developers though and probably a small minority that fight with less than 8 on regular basis.

+1 now option to deactivate included in idea.
 

Emberguard

Legend
Unless you want to autobattle quickly with six units. Not sure who would but there's always someone. Could be a preferred option for developers though and probably a small minority that fight with less than 8 on regular basis.

+1 now option to deactivate included in idea.
Me (Desktop): in GvG when 7 of the 8 DA's are spearmen and I don't want to manually fight to avoid the one DA that has the surrogate soldier. 5 units are much better then losing 8 at a time

Me (Mobile): When attacking a neighbour to kill off some troops for a quest that needs me to recruit and I can't be bothered using the delete button.

Me (GE): If most of my men are wounded and I feel I can win with less then I may choose to go in with a partial army so those who only have a fraction of HP left don't die.

+1 (With option to disable popup)
 

DeletedUser50023

DeletedUser99588

Me (Desktop): in GvG when 7 of the 8 DA's are spearmen and I don't want to manually fight to avoid the one DA that has the surrogate soldier. 5 units are much better then losing 8 at a time

Very good example of why the OP's idea is more encompassing than the one suggested by Agent.

Me (Mobile): When attacking a neighbour to kill off some troops for a quest that needs me to recruit and I can't be bothered using the delete button.

I cannot encourage laziness don't you know there is an obesity crisis Those extra clicks might burn another 0.0001 of a calorie.

Me (GE): If most of my men are wounded and I feel I can win with less then I may choose to go in with a partial army so those who only have a fraction of HP left don't die.

Doesn't really require you to autobattle quickly but I'm with you on the OP's idea with disable option.
 

Agent327

Overlord
No because:
  • In this idea there is a confirmation even with a full army.
  • In this idea there is no confirmation when attempting to start a manual battle.
This idea is about auto battle, the other is about incomplete armies.

Seems to me that it would be smart to combine both in one idea.
 

DeletedUser113901

Seems to me that it would be smart to combine both in one idea.
The two ideas are very different, only the problems they are trying to solve are similar.
Or if you want to say this idea and that one are the same, why not say getting rid of GvG and solving GvG bugs are the same idea? Or removing plundering and forbidding plunder complaints? (Exemples)
 

Agent327

Overlord
The two ideas are very different, only the problems they are trying to solve are similar.
Or if you want to say this idea and that one are the same, why not say getting rid of GvG and solving GvG bugs are the same idea? Or removing plundering and forbidding plunder complaints? (Exemples)

Problems are the same, so what do you think makes a better chance. Two ideas combined and worked out, or two ideas partly covering the same?
 

Vesiger

Monarch
The main issue with anything that asks for confirmation every time you use it is that the player will inevitably get into the habit of automatically adding a second click to dismiss the confirmation box, etc, and then you're back where you began. It would only really work for people who (like me) hardly ever use the auto battle option in the first place.

(Having said that , the option to switch to auto-battle to complete an existing fight already has a mandatory confirmation on it...)
 

Zeratul 2.0

Lieutenant Colonel
+1 (kind of...)

The REAL problem is that the two buttons are two similar (and both too small) and the words "Auto" and "Attack" are too similar, too.
Same problem while in battle, between the Surrender button and the Auto-battle button -- too small and too similar. I clicked "Auto Attack" when I really wanted is to surrender -- it was one time. From then on, I always take caution when plundering. Seeing the neighbor has for example 198% defense (you cannot really directly see the percentage before entering the battle but can only go so far as "OK, they have a lot of ritual flames -- I think I'll pass.") seeing the neighbor has 198% defense, I always take caution: "click the white flag, not the sword"!...)

A confirmation, that is optionally and can be disabled... Meh... I proposal two BeTtEr solutions:

1) As mentioned above, the problem is weak contrast. So, increase the contrast. How about interchange (interchanging?) the two words? to "Auto Attack" and "[Manual] Battle"? If not, how about using different, high-contrast colors? Again if not, (perhaps incompatible with the theme color), how about keeping those two buttons further apart? Still if not, how about using two different icons, for easy recognition? (will not always work, but helpful to some extent, like with the White Flag and the Cross Swords mentioned above.)

2) Another solution, that I think I'll prefer... is to add a countdown when the player chooses "Auto" -- a countdown that says "Auto-battle starts in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1..." with a Cancel button.

Now I think about it -- I'd like to change the above-said "two BeTtEr solutions" to "three"!

3) When the player clicks the "Auto-battle" button, the game should make an approximate estimation and ask for confirmation... (OK stop here and it'll be the exact same proposal as the op) -- BUT: only in case it seems the player has no chance to win. And the confirmation should say "The enemy army seems overwhelming. Are you sure you want to auto-battle?" -- Otherwise, when there is good chance to win, then no confirmation is required. Auto all you want...
 

rjs66

Lieutenant
auto-battle is on the left , attack is on the right

simple enough to remember, it''s not as though the buttons move around in some random fashion

adding confirmation or delay timers would become extremely annoying extremely quickly in GvG where speed is of the essence when defending or attacking sectors, especially when many players are on both sides at calc.
for PvP and GE , quest and continent maps there is no need for speed, take your time and you won't have a problem
 

DeletedUser113901

auto-battle is on the left , attack is on the right

simple enough to remember, it''s not as though the buttons move around in some random fashion

adding confirmation or delay timers would become extremely annoying extremely quickly in GvG where speed is of the essence when defending or attacking sectors, especially when many players are on both sides at calc.
for PvP and GE , quest and continent maps there is no need for speed, take your time and you won't have a problem
I don't understand that argument. Your enemies would be slowed down the exact same, so no advantage is lost.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top