"Undo" can be used for recon - not a good idea

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

Lobster you did not read what he said.

"Undo is cheating. If a move provides info of any sort such as learning the enemy is not there, the undo should be greyed out".

On the other hand if I am moving about begin the lines and I select the wrong unit then obviously I should be able to undo.

Many war games achieved this in the last century.

Please read the post I am replying to where Oldwave thinks you should get to undo if you don't see enemy units.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Not all undo is cheating - I am notorious (to myself) for destroying bridges instead of digging in, or vice versa, and as far as I'm concerned undoing those is not cheating.

We are talking about moving units.

[Karri]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Not all undo is cheating - I am notorious (to myself) for destroying bridges instead of digging in, or vice versa, and as far as I'm concerned undoing those is not cheating.

We are talking about moving units.

Well, rail movement comes to mind. I remember moving units and accidentally clicking on the wrong hex which might change the route to run through enemy ZOC. Undo should definitely be disabled if anything of recon value is found.

[SMK-at-work]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Not all undo is cheating - I am notorious (to myself) for destroying bridges instead of digging in, or vice versa, and as far as I'm concerned undoing those is not cheating.

We are talking about moving units.

Yes I know - but undo is a single function and if you turn it off for movement then you turn it off for everything.

Perhaps one possibility is to have separate undo functions for movement and other things?

[larryfulkerson]

Perhaps one possibility is to have separate undo functions for movement and other things?

Sorry to burst your bubble my friend, but I'm not sure it can be explained adequately to the computer programmer what is desired
EXACTLY so that he produces the function you desire. I used to work as a computer programmer to external specifications and
I know from experience that about 75% of the time the person describing the process leaves something out, embellishes something,
asks what can't physically be done, or somehow misses the full description needed by the programmer and that the whole process
becomes trial and error with at the very least two iterations.

Please describe what function you'd like to see happen.

EDIT: Are you talking about two different "undo" buttons?

[SMK-at-work]

Yes - 2 undo buttons, and I am completely familiar with the need to give programmers clear specifications - but this is a general discussion, not a scoping document so no need to be a jerk.

[larryfulkerson]

so no need to be a jerk.

I certainly didn't mean to come off as snarky. I apologize if I sounded that way. I'm mainly curious as to how TOAW would work
with two undo buttons. I'm not sure Bob is going to go for that.

[Lobster]

I've had unfortunate events happen also. The one I really dislike is accidentally clicking the map when you want to move an entrained unit. Usually it ends up going in the opposite direction I wanted it to. So I just say WTF and get on with the game. So yeah, we all have miss clicks. S*it happens. [:D]

Oh, and the one that tops them all, accidentally clicking end of turn.

There is no undo for doing something that stupid. [:D]

[Fred98]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson


but I'm not sure it can be explained adequately to the computer programmer what is desired

EXACTLY so that he produces the function you desire.

Well, it has been done with other wargames dating back to 1998 so obviously it can be done.