Movement Queues


#1

The idea is that people should be able to queue at most 1 more movement after a squad has landed somewhere or attack an OP. Of course this will not apply to attacks on colonies as they just return automatically.

But for instance, I have an attack on a colony done in 1 tick, but my exam starts in a tick too :confused: so I can’t send a squad back to return to base, even if in an ideal world I could and this win an important battle.

This won’t be a cheat by restricting it to 1 queue. It would just help players who have important rl stuff they can’t miss which gets in the way of BD a bit.

  • Add Movement Queues (1 maximum)
  • Add Movement Queues (no Maximum, sometimes I have to be AFK for ages.)
  • No queue

0 voters


#2

It helping but not too help, but it great idea


#3

I like this idea, it’s a useful tool but, if you rely on it too much it may backfire badly. So I feels balanced already


#4

@Germanicus yea it must be balanced,


#5

I disagree. When moving something could unexpectadly turn up at the location you’re moving to and cost you your army. If you have something like an exam coming up, don’t launch a major attack that could risk your troops. Managing ticks is an important part of this game as no one can be on 24/7.


#6

Actually, I’m for this. Though I’m a huge advocate of high activity (feel free to ask any of my old members), I think this could help alleviate some current problems. One being, burn out for serious players. This can be a helpful tool, and although it kind of seems like a cheap way to play to some of the more serious players, it can also be taken advantage of by players who count on players attempting to use this. If you know a player is up late at night and they’re making a big attack, you could assume they’ve queued up a move to fall back after and try to take advantage of the opportunity. And as you stated, sometimes life just simply get’s in the way! During those times, I simply killed myself getting online when necessary. This could help alleviate that by a lot.

The other issue being, it might help curb cheating via account sharing. Most do this because of how hard it is to stay active. But with this type of feature, it may make people less likely to resort to cheating first and instead, on this.


#7

I’m on the fence on this one, I see what you mean and I do think it would be useful, but at the same time I think that things like that are just part of the game and although it won’t majorly affect activity I just think that burnout for instance, as Malice says, is a huge aspect of war and it would affect outcomes a lot. However, just a simple feature like that could make gameplay more interesting as it would add more strategy and thinking because it would keep the battlefield occupied, instead of having players running back because they have to be gone for a coupla ticks and losing ground it would lead to more epic battles and fighting.


#8

I like the idea, but maybe you should restrict the amount of ticks movement i.e. you can’t queue a 12 tick movement across the map to get away after you attack something. Because that would be really frustrating for people potentially trying to kill you, and could make this idea overpowered.


#9

I voted no.
It’s a game and irl stuff happens but are atypical cases which u can either manage or not. It’s about activity and how you can manage it with ur irl. If the game start helping u on many ways it will slowly lose it’s purpose.
If u have any compromisse that u can’t miss, skip the attack, move back… It’s the same as if u go sleep, then start it again. I will defend activity at all costs.


#10

Its basicly like a script