Warrior General Games

Merged.

Originally posted by Bort
Harder than it sounds, when you really think about it. Consider the following scenario:

I am at 97% strength, I have it set to train until at 99% (or higher).
Next day rolls around, it trains and gives me +10%. Now I am at 7%.
7 is less than 99, auto training keeps going.

How to handle this exactly?

By reading my OP.

Oh, and PS I'm putting this up for voting since there were two threads on it, they went far, and Bort commented.

Originally posted by daunteblack
Originally posted by PackMan97

I don't think we need two....just add "% " as an option and I'd be happy.



Then don't activate the second option. Also, if you read Bort's quote, without the second one, the percentage one might not work if the percentage would flip back to a lower number once the attribute gets to +1.

Originally posted by Bort
Harder than it sounds, when you really think about it. Consider the following scenario:

I am at 97% strength, I have it set to train until at 99% (or higher).
Next day rolls around, it trains and gives me +10%. Now I am at 7%.
7 is less than 99, auto training keeps going.

How to handle this exactly?

Not that tough with an interval, but Ubass's idea works well too.

Honestly, I have no problem with your scenario where the auto train keeps going. If someone is stupid enough to set their percentage at 99, they deserve to continue having that attribute trained. Set it to 95, or hell, even 90 and you'll be good to go.

How about an option to train something X number of times?

He said "Boolean," ha ha

Catch has said that training by % will never happen, but whatever. Maybe he will change his mind.

To clarify, I'm not advocating that a second condition be mandatory, just optional...hence the on/off part of the example I gave.

I can't believe that people actually voted against this. It wouldn't change anything, it would only make it easier for some people to build dots.

I have wanted this since auto-training first came out. The ability to train up and stop at the point where the next training will fill up the bar and send it over to the next point.

Originally posted by mandyross
Can't you just stop at the integer and then manually train a few days for the %?

If this idea is implemented, I can see people crying to support when a breakthrough, or their own stupidity, knocks the bar over.

but I wanted it to stop at 99% waaaaaaa waaaaaaaa waaaaaaaaaaaa

I say just leave it as it is so as to not confuse or upset the proles.

-1

maybe if it had said allow 2 instead of have 2, more people would have voted yes

-1

I'm actually going to vote against this, in my opinion there are few things that make a difference between good and bad builders, and this is one of them. Some people don't readily think about %'s and this will just make it allot easier for that kind of person to make players. Essentially it takes quite a bit of the skill of building good dots away from the game.

I would actually say that another very important reason is that without the automatic training it makes you review your players allot, you have to make sure you know what your doing, checking your players on pretty much a daily basis. If you add an automatic percentage field, you will massively lower the amount of time you spend on your players, basically meaning that you can run your dots on a weekly basis, with this lowering of player participation extremely counter-productive to the well being of the game.