Posts from How to effectively use quick battles (autobattles)? Auto-translated

AlexSpl, thank you for the information. We will have to post a ban on the use of quick combat at the WCL tournament today. Just in case someone uses it. Unfortunately, we will have to check games more often, which takes up a lot of time. Or, as an alternative, we could restrict a) the use of units that don't retaliate and b) additionally ban the use of quick combat if the total health of a player's army is clearly less than the health of the neutral units.

Yeah... this topic has given me a lot to think about...
I think those who read the thread on the forum saw that I want to create an algorithm for any battle: the quick battle result is shown, and you can either accept it or replay it in a real battle. But here's the thing...
This would significantly speed up the game for many situations:
- some battles in the first week - minimal guard of a tower, skeleton, golem against an initial army; it often happens that the quick battle results in no losses, which corresponds to reality - you can save from 20 to 60 seconds per battle.
- many battles in the second week - when you transfer an army from the second week to a tower to defend resources against minimal guard
- battles in hives
and others.

It will be possible to try disabling the "no retaliation" ability in the quick battle and view the battle logs.

That is, the task is to make the quick battle give a maximum result that is not significantly better than what you can achieve yourself. Then it can be implemented in the form that I propose.

2asm: We just need to find the reasons why quick units are ineffective against Hydras, Cerberuses, and so on. In auto-battle, it performs quite well. Where is the problem with quick? That's the question.

apparently, the root of the problem is that they attack everyone regardless of their location,
and since they attack everyone, that's why they don't take any action.
However, finding the bug that causes them to attack everyone might be more difficult than disabling the ability... although it's worth investigating.
P.S. Send me a message on ICQ: 343-425-087.

ASM is right, quick battles can really save time. Therefore, patching quick battles is a very important task. If AlexSpl can fix the obvious bugs in quick battles, that would be great! By the way, I tested it – immunity is checked in quick battles – I was able to kill a Golden Dragon with 7 Gnomes plus Implosion, but I couldn't kill a Black Dragon.

Why ban quick-farming at all? And how do you save time then?

You could try banning some of the quick-farming strategies that involve units with no retaliation, but not quick-farming as a whole. Besides, except in rare cases where it gives a significant advantage, it doesn't really matter. Taking hives with 2 Hydras has been the norm for a long time; they're even used in tactical battles, you just need to add some healing. And dragons, at the stage when you have 8 Hydras, don't pose a threat, even in tactical battles.

Perhaps the developers made a tiny mistake in Quick Combat, maybe they put a "-" sign instead of a "+" sign somewhere, or something like that. But even in the worst case, I don't think it will be a big problem for Alex to make a patch, for example, replace the Quick Combat procedure with the auto-battle procedure, and remove the visualization. :)

2vbn: Initially, when I became interested in what was happening in quick combat, I wanted to include this visualization. :)

If no other issues with quick combat are found, then we just need to find the cause of the inadequate multi-attack function. Although, it wouldn't hurt to also test liches and ogres.

Don't touch the quick battle option!!! You're acting like you're saving humanity, you unfinished reformers, thinking you're the salt of the earth? Not at all!! :smile38: And don't treat me like a dumb, old-fashioned person. :smile25: Then let's just remove luck and morale as well, because they can also be critically important. The game is created to be played, not to be endlessly modified by everyone, and then to shove the resulting mess onto others, while shouting about not disrupting the balance, etc. :cool:
Let's better figure out its "features" together, present the results for everyone to see, and then we'll all use it. It turns out great and with taste. Innovation, damn it! And you immediately want to cut it down.... Maybe we can breathe new life into Inferno, turning it from a complete outsider into one of the leaders.
That's just my personal opinion.:smile36:

The point of quick battles is to speed up the combat, not to give players an unfair advantage. If in quick battles, units attack all enemies without considering distance, then this is clearly a bug, not a feature. And it needs to be fixed as quickly as possible, or at least prohibited by the rules. By the way, since we're talking about morale and luck, it seems we'll have to either remove it completely or make it fully visible... since the LMOracle program is now publicly available.

By the way, since we're talking about morality and luck, it seems we'll have to either remove it completely or make it fully visible.

1) Morality, luck, abilities.
This issue has already been resolved with the LM Patch.

CALM DOWN!! Just calm down! Here's what I propose:

Quick Combat is allowed, but only if you are 100% sure you will win the battle manually!

This restriction allows for Quick Combat while also preventing abuse.

Respect for the work and research. It's interesting and informative to read. As for the patch for Quick Battles, most people here are wild conservatives. They're full of nonsense about protecting intellectual property, silly stereotypes, and other rubbish. That is, even if something decent comes along, but it doesn't have "3DO" written on it, most people will perceive it as "some kind of crap," "who are they to interfere with the game and change the balance," and other "smart" and "correct" comments. The TE is an example of this (especially TE Light. The balance is the same, convenient buttons have been added, but the patriotic conservatives continue to play SoD because it's better! Because it's a classic! Because there are buttons for quick army transfers (in TE Light), and we like to click the mouse a lot in SoD). And there are many such people.

So, creating a fixed version of Quick Battles will be progress. But I'm sure most people won't accept it. Another "branch" will occur :D

So, creating a fixed quick battle option would be progress. But I'm sure most won't accept it. Another split will happen :D

+1! It's better to limit it with a rule than with some patch! I think my wording meets these requirements!

Where can I read more about the LM Patch?
I'm not counting on SOD; experienced players will switch to one of the TE versions anyway (not necessarily TE-full). Especially when simultaneous turn-based gameplay and other planned features are implemented. So, the patch can be integrated without any problems; the main thing is to find the right section of code.