in practice, everyone will use autobattle
2. If, as you say, autobattle will be used more often, and the losses will really be acceptable, how will this prolong the game in real time? Do you use autobattle when you have 2 angels against a horde of boars? Or not? This is actually a plus, as it will leave more time to think about the global strategy and the game itself pvp.
It is possible to achieve a similar game format (if someone likes it) even now, just by agreeing to play with mandatory autobattle.
I'm afraid that autobattle "fool vs fool" is not the same as autobattle "smart vs smart"
Battles with neutrals will be reduced to abusing several "ironclad" ways to overwhelm the opponent with superior forces and standard protection against surprises from smart neutrals.
So, according to you, is it normal when you take 1 dragonfly and start abusing neutrals, leading them around the map, shooting and spitting at them? Is this the level of play?
It is expected that some will cling to this, presenting it as the holy grail, but no one is forcing you guys to play anything else. Play the classic. Enjoy leading a horde of golems back and forth, it's so skillful.
Otherwise, God forbid, all the schemes that have been spent years studying will stop working, no, we don't need that.
make the AI a more interesting opponent
In general, I don't believe in the success of this project. The author of the topic did not leave any contact information: who he is, where their website is located, how to track the progress, etc. This is just a conversation for the sake of conversation.
За то что нейтралы не бегают за единичкой, для меня это уже стоит того