New Army Management

[DeletedUser107616]

.

 

[DeletedUser96901]

-1

current version is already too slow
that would make it even slower

 

[DeletedUser12400]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/SQIjbSW.png[/IMG] ​

-1​

 

[Vesiger]

I'm not sure this would work in practice, because in later ages the troops get different bonuses relative to each other - in the Postmodern Era light troops (commandos) actually have a bonus against heavy troops, for example. And it's perfectly possible to find yourself battling an army with troops from two different eras, too...

 

[Andrew420]

-1
Army Management is fine the way it is and doesn't need to be changed again

 

[DeletedUser110433]

Defending army should be kept in current format, as to larger selection window, it would not change things too much. I already know what i want to place and just filter out with [unit class] and [attached/unattached] and select from there. I manage to find the correct troops in just a few clicks and seconds.
P.S. Your doing a fine job of not posting any more ideas

 

[DeletedUser108842]

+1 to the idea.
+1 to make the game on a PC install version (ALREADY!) so haters here gonna stop crying about lags.

 

[DeletedUser108047]

I'm neutral, probably negative on this idea.
First - the idea that it displays only 8 troops per type. It makes sense from a loading point of view but I can foresee circumstances particularly in GvG when I might be thinking about troops for DAs, wanting to know how many troops I have left for future fights etc
Second - the idea that it does most of your thinking for you... I don't like the idea of making the game easier or reducing the skill component.
Third - it changes the balance in GvG rendering DAs (and particularly mixing DAs) less effective. In my experience DAs are all beatable, but a good mix of DAs requires you to either keep aborting the fight or changing your troops. I think your change would speed up attacking armies too much

 

[DeletedUser108842]

Kids, more accurate interface helps everyone so it is not an abusive feature/suggestion anywhere, at all. The more accurate interface speaks for a more intelligent and advanced development as the gameplay should come from the strategy of the game, not fighting with the interface.

Unfortunatelly I just heard that the purpose of this game was to be a "family game" which reminds me of the simple happiness we all had from Monopoly.
It's not bad but in the virtual reality things can always be done much, much better and is hard to stop that.

 

[DeletedUser108047]

My comments were based on your original proposal which, based on your detailed reply, apparently needed more fleshing out which you have now done. I'm not a mind reader

in your original post you say

"and in doing so, all the units that have attack bonuses against the units that are the enemy are shown and the units with NO bonuses against the enemy are hidden"

This action of hiding 'no bonus' units does make it easier and in my opinion, removes an element of skill and expertise or perhaps care (not all skill and expertise.. but at least a bit). Put another way... an idiot could then choose from the units shown in your system and have a better chance of winning than choosing from all the units at their disposal in the current system because the 'no-bonus' troops are hidden.

I still believe it will speed up army selection when fighting in GvG once you know what the defending armies are. Making army selection faster will change the balance in GvG because the strategy of mixed Defending Armies in a GvG sector will be less effective thus making sieges go faster and be harder to defend against.

How would the process of hiding no bonus troops work when you can't see the enemy army eg in pvp fights in the neighbourhood?

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm neutral, probably negative on this idea.
First - the idea that it displays only 8 troops per type. It makes sense from a loading point of view but I can foresee circumstances particularly in GvG when I might be thinking about troops for DAs, wanting to know how many troops I have left for future fights etc
Second - the idea that it does most of your thinking for you... I don't like the idea of making the game easier or reducing the skill component.
Third - it changes the balance in GvG rendering DAs (and particularly mixing DAs) less effective. In my experience DAs are all beatable, but a good mix of DAs requires you to either keep aborting the fight or changing your troops. I think your change would speed up attacking armies too much

Netural as well.

 

[Vesiger]

(NB it helps not to assume everyone is hostile.)

In my current situation, where I'm mainly fighting troops of the age above mine, the troops that have a bonus to attack the opposition are often the same ones that are particularly vulnerable to that same opposition (e.g. battle tanks have a bonus versus light troops but commandos have a bonus against heavy troops). So the situation really isn't always that clear cut - I don't want to send my troops into battle against an army to which they are particularly vulnerable, and it's probably better to pick a neutral force. And most of my battles take place against mixed forces, so troops that have a bonus against half the opposing army may well be vulnerable to the other half of the opposition.
It seems to me that an automatic 'pick the right army' feature is more difficult to implement than that.

 

[Nilopertiso]

There was quite a comprehensive suggestion made some years ago here which involved sorting the army units more appropriately; the army management has had an update since that thread was made, but the fundamental suggestion about grouping same units together (including those with same health) made alot of sense at the time and indeed still does now.

The prototype that member made here is still something i'd like to see as an update to the current laggy-overloaded army management screen we have at present (that being, same units with equal damage or health are all shown, and all units with any degree of damage are shown individually, rather than simply being grouped).

So really, for me the idea of a further improved army management in this manner is +1, but the proposal in this thread, whilst well considered, falls short of the efficiency suggested a few years ago, and thus the proposal in this thread for me is an unfortunate -1.

 

[DeletedUser110581]

I like Lab32's proposed new army management arrangement. +1.
What would also be great is if your units weren't randomly placed (e.g. units move-about in the list when rostering them and attached/unattached units are jumbled. could we just have the attached units first and the unattached ones after?)

 

[Nilopertiso]

My way - ALL 5 unit types are in their OWN rows

This part of the idea is not necessarily a bad one as it goes, though if looking at the all ages view, it won't help a great deal.

Meanwhile, the army management suggestion thread I posted earlier on, which simply put all same type, same health together in a single click, with a number in the corner denoting how many of that unit is available, is surely a further improvement over what you have already suggested here, which would work around the excess units being viewable whilst not detracting from informing the player how many of that unit is available.

I have long felt that the army management area still can be improved considerably to what it is now, and that is despite the overhaul it had 12-18 months back which didn't address all the concerns of the time (and may have even caused some of the lag/timing issues we experience now).

 

[Vesiger]

CURRENT WAY : choose your army from 2 rows - with no grouping
MY WAY : choose your army from 5 rows - Grouped by type

So basically, you're just proposing a vertical rather than horizontal ribbon display? Sounds reasonable.
+1