Geologist, Explorer, Wheatfields, Wells, Mines, Star Menu, annoying,repetative

[Truck]

Why cant we do something about the repetative clicking backwards and forwards that is involved with sending out Geologists, Explorers, placing Wheatfields, Wells, Mines and moving stuff from the Star Menu to Inventory.

Why cant it be made so we can click on multiple explorers that we want to send out on the same mission then click on the mission. ie click on say 4 explorers then click on the mission you want them to do, saves a lot of boring repetative stuff that is surely give players the creeps having to do it over and over and over. (Same for Geologists)

Matter of fact why cant this also be done so that we can click on a wheatfield than place it multiple times rather than have to go backwards and forwards time after time. (Same for Wells and Mines)

Why do we have to clck on an item in the Star Menu then drop it on the mayors house why not have it so we can click on all the items we want to move to mayors house in one go then click on mayors house, or if thats too hard click on all the items of one time ie multiple marble then drop it on the mayors house. or have it so that each item placed into the Star menu is added to be each additional item ie first item 200 marble then 350 marble added would mean One icon in Star Menu with 550 marble in it and so on with the option of just dropping the lot into the mayors house or being able to take out a set amount.

lets have a poll to see what you all think.

[Brankovics]

Yes! And further! Why not tso without any click, just let us watch how things go...

So, let's calculate a little. For example wheatfields. Usually plant only one, but because of building queue you can max. three (or if you paid, four) at a time. So without "repetitive clicking" it should looks like you pick up the planting tool, click one/two/three/(four), then put down the planting tool. Cliks are 3/4/5/(6), otherwise 2/4/6/(8). So what did you save? Imho nothing, because more of buildings builded one by one...

[MeatyTackle]

I think it would be reasonable to not have to click back through the building menu if you want to build multiple fields, wells eg. Which I think most people will do fairly often.

[Brankovics]

I think it would be reasonable to not have to click back through the building menu if you want to build multiple fields, wells eg. Which I think most people will do fairly often.

Tell me, please, only one click per turn, really so much? Contrast other cases plus one click more. So you do not win anything with it...

[Saraptheold]

I don't build wells and wheat fields, but I do have a lot of explorers and geos. I would love to be able to select them all to send them on the same mission. And we have adventures that takes soooo maaaany troops. Even with blocks (which BB doesn't support, because they'd like it to cost even more troops) it's a click fest of enormous proportions to replace the troops you have lost. Let us build as many troops as we want and have resources to. It was possible to do with trade so why not fix provision house and barracks? Why this silly 25 units limit? Let us hold down shift and select as many explorers and geos as we want when we send them all on the same mission.

[Kotugo]

Yes! And further! Why not tso without any click, just let us watch how things go...

So, let's calculate a little. For example wheatfields. Usually plant only one, but because of building queue you can max. three (or if you paid, four) at a time. So without "repetitive clicking" it should looks like you pick up the planting tool, click one/two/three/(four), then put down the planting tool. Cliks are 3/4/5/(6), otherwise 2/4/6/(8). So what did you save? Imho nothing, because more of buildings builded one by one...

I think you missed the point, asking for less clicks isn't the same as asking for automation, I would still want the same amount of decision making. Some functionality like you use when dealing with files on a computer might help, eg:

double click a building to select all of the same type, can sleep/unsleep all selected from one menu (like anno online has)
ctrl+click would keep your current selection but add/remove whatever you are ctrl+clicking on (so you could select all and then deselect one)
click followed by shift+click would select everything from the first click to the shift clicked item (wouldnt work for buildings, but would allow you to select multiple geos/explorers for giving similar orders or to select multiple items to add to storage at the same time).

Ideally it needs to avoid situations when you are potentially giving players RSI, stuff like making 1mil fish then adding those 1mil fish to a deposit, at the moment this would require 1200 clicks to queue then 800 clicks to put them in a deposit. Your not taking anything away from the game making this take 5-10 clicks instead (2000 less clicks!). Also with ~2s lag between actions, this fish production run would require 30 minutes worth of waiting on interface lag. It would mean a lot less server strain if the user didn't require so much interaction to do these things.

[Funky23]

Pretty sure in a Dev diary from July 2012 they mentioned a new news interface which would tell you about mines that needed refilling and from that you would just click the news bit and a geo would be sent to look straight away also things to do with explorers and other stuff too. Dont know what happened to it though.

http://forum.thesettlersonline.com/t...iary+july+2012

about half way down this page, if it works!

[Brankovics]

I think you missed the point, asking for less clicks isn't the same as asking for automation...

I don't feel so. As we can experinece, every new implementation is perceived natural over the second minutes, so raise two new claims. This direction ends up in automation. Firstly. Secondly: NOT all the "repetitive clicking" are "time wasting", I tired to show just one example when such "solution" is probably more clicks and/or more complex interface in result, because the natur of general use. So the wording the above question is a little bit misleading, because is too generalized. (I like the examples what you told, but they are not directly derived from the original question.)