Built-in autosave feature (for the TE version).

I suggested this idea to Horn. He refused, arguing that games would drag on much longer. Plus, you wouldn't be able to step away from the computer. So this feature is only for specific fixed maps. Although there is something to it, yes.

Battles will take more time on average - but this is exactly where TE-style clocks will act as a stimulant, ticking for both sides in battle and preventing them from relaxing. And we will gain speed in the fact that each of the opponent's heroes won't have to conduct 3 fights, or they will simply surrender more often after a loss.
There will also be a gain in that it will slow down development and increase the overall game duration and the development of the Castle/troops/heroes.
Again, the balance of magic schools will change, as stupid lures in crypts or taking cons from mass low will simply no longer work... not to mention utopians.
If it is technically possible to activate the battle for neutrals - then Horn's refusal seems unconvincing (it only expresses his taste)

Well, that's your opinion. But for me, randomness in the game that doesn't depend on the player but is critical for the result is undesirable (imagine if in chess a queen suddenly just failed a morale check).

We know the rules of chess and the nature of the moves... if we are to project chess pieces onto heroes - then they are undead (and without luck), so they can't fail a morale check.
On one hand, a strong player finds the element of randomness undesirable because it's the only chance to lose to a weaker player, but there is another side to it: sometimes the one considered weaker simply plays more reliably (Qwerty already tried to say this), and that is exactly the indicator of skill—playing slightly worse but not collapsing. And you often play very riskily, even if 90% of the time it's justified - but if you made a mistake, it's no big deal... the practice of taking and giving autos is widespread.
I often see 1, 2, 3, 5 autos per game in your reports and I don't understand it! Because it contradicts the indicator of skill and professionalism.
I have never taken an auto myself, and I calmly accepted the loss of a hero, a lack of time, or accidentally building a silo instead of a market.
But winning after a loss (without an auto) is the indicator, regardless of whether someone was unlucky 3 times and another was lucky... it's just like the random gold in chests, artifacts, and so on. Probability is a neutral indicator ;)

Here, sometimes you have to risk the entire stack several times per turn

And you decided to legalize such a thing by making it unpunished and not risky at all?

Only it's just that for some reason morale brings me either grief (if it rolled for the opponent) or dissatisfaction (if it rolled for me). Plus it increases the number of autos taken.

Just don't take and don't give autos - it's a bad habit just like alcohol or smoking.

Yes, with a competent approach, you can fight so that neutral morale isn't particularly critical. That is also part of the skill.

These are special cases of risky battles - which are completely distorted by the traditions of auto-taking. Moreover, no one controls when, who, and why asks for an auto.

I went in from the same save, with the same hero and the same army. The ability to fight neutrals is a very important indicator of skill. Just as the ability to assess their number, danger, and predict the outcome of the battle.

The ability to fight is necessary, but let's not forget that this is AI, and we sat down to play not 1 against 7 computers, but against an opponent; the fact that one handles neutrals better shows a slight superiority in skill, but a very doubtful one. And I repeat, by having the ability to conduct all battles manually, we can much more effectively eradicate that same element of randomness in the game and, on top of everything, strengthen true combat skills. It's no secret that for many, the final battle is the most interesting element of the game (tournaments like Tactical Corners are built on this).

For the most part, you can be unable to conduct final battles, not know a mass of nuances, but thanks to a clever spread, resource gathering, army, and hero leveling, win games in a landslide. Which is actually what happens regularly - a full-fledged FF doesn't happen in every game.

And it's a shame, because ideally, there should be either an equal amount or plenty of both. As it stands, if we exaggerate a bit, the strongest players at the moment are the best resource gatherers.

More commonly - how many times while clearing the map in the 1st week did the units for luring run out. How many times did the fodder for hives/utops run out.

Doesn't it seem that this is the most tedious element of the game... this fussing, scraping for every butterfly and every little skeleton is what drags out the time.
One such battle between your army and my horde of neutral lizards and you'll have at least no units left, or at most, significant losses.
And the game will move faster.

That's why top players ...play very cleanly, with polished battle techniques, map movement and chain building, saving every butterfly, every move-point, every single point of mana.

This is undoubtedly a class of its own - but also an enormous tension, which doesn't let you step away from the computer - or even blink ;)

P.S. Neutrals need to be domesticated! :smile51: