Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(+4)

The possibility of automation has been discussed many times. The results of those discussions are on the roadmap (https://trello.com/c/VuYstcev). 

But the short answer is that I'd never allow queueing a full loop at the start, as that would remove all sense of discovery when the player stumbles across new actions, and practically guarantee that they'd not see the logs that come from those new actions unless they were at the end of the loop (which they're often not).

Not on the first loop, only after you've done it once can you queue it up for the next loop.

At the moment you have to babysit the game to get back to your last point.

(+2)

But new actions and logs appear early in the loop as well. So either you can only queue actions up to the first "new action" (which would be difficult to calculate and confusing to players), or I limit how much you can queue at once.

When a new action appears it would pause the current loop by default. It's not that confusing, Idle Loops does exactly this.

(+1)

Idle Loops expects you to queue up any new actions in the next loop after you discover they're possible.

(+1)

there is fun and enjoyment in figuring out the most efficient way to do things, if you go that approach you would be able to leave it idle like that, maybe set an auto clicker on to click the restart loop button overnight until the stacking effects make it so that you would be able to reach your last point.  You want the game to play itself