I really don't like the new default attack picker...

[Rhuvaen]

I'd like no attack selected when you open the attack box

I also like Na'enthos' idea: no default selection. Sometimes less is more.

I'd disagree here. Although personally I almost always ignore the computer's choice (nowadays), I think it is a worthwhile aid for the newcomer. Seeing and understanding why an attack was chosen will help them learn the game faster, and perform better in most situations initially, easing the initial frustration of learning all the factors that need to be considered. Certainly I found it a very useful feature when I first started.

If the computer chooses an obviously stupid attack, then IMO people should report this as a bug, and help improve the default selection. Of course, a player taking his time considering the attack combinations of a number of units should not whine about being unable to save a second of time by assuming that the default will be what is needed for the particular situation and tactics. This time won't be saved either if there is no default selection. I think this is a matter of personal discipline rather than a UI problem.

[Sapient]

So far none of you critics has provided what I requested:

1) HP of your unit and defender
2) DEF of your unit and defender
3) all possible attacks of your unit and defender (including time of day, resistance, and/or leadership modifiers)
4) default attack vs. chosen attack

[Darth Fool]

So far none of you critics has provided what I requested:

Don't tell me that you expect people who are in the midst of a complaining frenzy to actually listen to someone who can do something about it!

I do think that it is useful to have a default value, and besides, I think that the code requires one. I empathize with EPs desire to have a default value that he can predict what it will be, but I don't think that it necessarily has to be or should be the "smartest" choice, as "smartest" can have many meanings (best chance to kill, highest probable damage to enemy, minimum damage to self, etc.) Some of these might be harder to predict at a glance (chance to kill comes to mind) than others. A simple rule such as by default choosing the damage that minimizes the damage to your unit may not be so simple if you consider that killing the enemy will significantly reduce its ability to damage your unit. Similarly a rule that chooses the one that does the most damage may be complicated for large # of attacks by the ability of the opponent to kill you before you finish all of your attacks. Thus, really, the only way to have an easily predictable default choice is to have it allways be chosen based on the order, such as always being the first one.

It might be nice to have a "recommendation" which is not the default selection, but that is not currently possible.

[Elvish_Pillager]

Another problem situation: against a high-melee, no-ranged enemy with 20 HP left, the game picks 7-3 melee over 6-4 ranged.

Higher CTK.

I know that, but really!

btw, I think the default selection should be the attack that deals the most damage. This really would make the expected selection quite predictable and in most cases appropriate. I believe this is what we had before. It was perfect.

Exactly.

(I like Na'enthos's idea because it would make people less likely to try to make the default "smart", but really, the old way was just fine... better even.)

[Leo]

As for me I prefer no default selection at all. Dialog should be redesigned. Now we have:

Bla-Bla-Bla
First attack
Second attack
[OK] [Cancel]

I suggest
Bla-Bla-Bla
[Melee] First attack
[Ranged] Second attack
[Cancel]

[Elvish_Pillager]

Leo is right! Instead of attack selections, they should be buttons (and have a seperate damage calculations button for each as well.)

It's a basic interface design principle. If you want to do one thing - attacking with a certain weapon - then you should make one click to do it.

[Zhukov]

If they were buttons, how would you bring up the statistics window?
If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

[turin]

(and have a seperate damage calculations button for each as well.)

[Elvish_Pillager]

If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

I am trying to improve Wesnoth. This saying tells us to never add new features; they don't fix problems. That is wrong and destructive.

[Soliton]

I am trying to improve Wesnoth.

Woah! I need to memorize that! It rarely shows in your posts.

[Elvish_Pillager]

Come now, would I post something that I thought would be a detriment to wesnoth?

[Soliton]

Come now, would I post something that I thought would be a detriment to wesnoth? :roll:

Right, it's a detriment to wesnoth that the weapon picker doesn't work 'correctly' for your 9999HP unit. Let's change it back at once and not even think about improving the current behaviour. It probably was just a silly idea from a misguided coder anyway.

I might have missed some tags here.

[JW]

I know I've had instances where the choice boggled my mind, but I haven't played in a while so when I find an instance again I'll let you know.

[Sapient]

Don't tell me that you expect people who are in the midst of a complaining frenzy to actually listen to someone who can do something about it!

Well... ah... I meant critic as in 'constructive critic.' Yeah.

Those of you who think you can improve weapon selection may wish to bring it up with Decker. Here's the relevant thread:
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9164

[Dave]

Darth Fool: If the AI decides to attack one unit with another before deciding which attack to use, something is pretty screwed up inside the AI.

Given that the AI is going to attack one unit with another, there is an algorithm the AI uses to choose the attack to use.

The approach of considering every possible attack is not feasible because the number of combinations the AI would have to consider would grow exponentially when multiple AI units are considering attacking an enemy. For the same reason, the possible tiles an AI unit can attack from are heavily pruned.

David