;)

If you can just change to link that says "back for another" from "https://subeta.net/games/battle/quest.php"

to "https://subeta.net/games/battle/quest.php/start"

It would at least cut out one page load. It is the link from the start quest button on the first page of BQs. I have it saved on my bookmarks bar and have been using it to skip a page load for a few months now. So all that should need to be done is to change the official link.

The other possibility I could think of would be that it appears that that message blanks out the quest page, if instead of blanking out that page, if the interface for starting the next quest was right below it.

is there a downside to accepting a quest and not finishing it?

If they didn't want to do another quest wouldn't they just click away?

Armory looks good. Thanks

If you don't finish a battle quest in progress, and then finish it on the next day, it will consider that you beat level 1, even if you beat the level 30 challenger from the day before.

I guess I would trade an extra 30 page loads per day for a few extra times of accidentally starting a quest I don't have time to finish.

The button does say back for another, which seems to imply that they want to go start another quest.

There are currently 6 clicks and 5 page loads to get from the end of one battle to get to the start of the next, which are the same linear set of clicks without any real choices being made with them. I would make a lot trade offs to reduce that mindless clicking. If we could give up those weapon prizes I woudl do that to reduce clicks, but apparently that keeps malerias quests balanced or something.

The next automatically accepted quest will still be active the next day (and only count for beating level 1) if it's left hanging around. Unless of course, there's a "Give Up" button that ends all your BQs for the day. That button could be added to the new BQ format.

I don't think it works like that (or I don't understand what you mean) - my pet cannot beat all lvl 30 opponents yet so I usually keep on accepting and skipping in the hopes of getting one I can beat. Often my luck runs out and I get Prodigy 3 times in row, meaning I can't skip or beat the last one. I can even click the Challenge button to check the opponent stats or something, that makes no difference either. I'll end the day's BQs with the last quest accepted but not completed. Despite this, the next day's BQs start from 1, not 2.

The other quests carry over/stay active like you say, but BQs reset after each day. There's no downside/penalty for starting a BQ and not finishing it, so the Start button is essentially pointless.

(Also, the ideas discussed here are great! Full support ^^)

I think means if you are actually in a battle with an opponent from the previous day (rather than just accepting the quest or stopping at the challenge page to take a sneak peek at their stats) and you complete the said battle the next day, you'll essentially beat a hard opponent for the EXP payout of level 1.

But I think if we use the forfeit option in the Statistics page we can skip that unfinished battle and start from level 1 again , though I have never tried this.

I also support the reduction of the number of pages we're currently going through to get to a new level of BQ. Can the prize page be merged with the start page somehow? So whenever we click on 'Back for another' we'll get the item prize and also a button that says 'Start a new quest', which takes us directly to the next opponent, instead of having to go back to Reischen to start a new quest on a separate page. Btw I love the change to the Armory page. Thank you.

Ah, ok. But since clicking the Start button doesn't take you to the actual fight, I think what THESOVEREIGN suggests above ("If you can just change to link that says "back for another" from "https://subeta.net/games/battle/quest.php" to "https://subeta.net/games/battle/quest.php/start"") doesn't affect the process in any other way except reduce the amount of required clicks/pageloads ^^

I think was replying to 's question of whether or not there was a penalty for starting a quest and not finishing it. I think was referring to the scenario of actually being in a battle and then completing it the next day, which does have a drawback. But yes, clicking Start to a BQ doesn't automatically take one directly into the next fight/ battle, which is what I understood from 's post. The 'Back for another' link could safely be replaced with a link to actually start a new quest without automatically engaging one in a fight, because after clicking Start a new quest one would be showed the next opponent and the option to skip that opponent, and even if one accept the quest there is still another hurdle to jump over, and that is the challenge page where one selects a pet and a weapon/ scroll set. So the possibility of jumping right into a battle will not happen even if we replace the link. I could misunderstand though.

This is the ugliest CSS I've ever written but I think it does what you want. However, it uses CSS Flexbox which is supported by most browsers but notably not supported by older versions of IE. =flexbox">Check here for more browser compatibility information. Flexbox is definitely the easiest way to achieve what you want here; if your browser doesn't support flexbox, I can try to make a non-flexbox version but it will likely be much uglier and not work as well...

> table > tbody { display: flex !important; -webkit-flex-direction: column; flex-direction: column; align-items: center; flex-shrink:0;} > table > tbody > tr { display: block; width: 100%; } table tbody tr { display: inline; } img { width: 40px; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(7) > td { display: block; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(1) .sp-header { display: block; float: left; width: 50%; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(5) { order: 1; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(6) { order: 2; display: none; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(7) { order: 3; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(1) { order: 4; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(2) { order: 5; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(3) { order: 6; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(4) { order: 7; } > table > tbody > tr:nth-child(3) > td { display: block; float: left; }

In addition to switching the order of things around, this code also makes the item images a little smaller since they still take up most of the page (I hope you don't mind - you can remove the CSS code for the img if you want). Also, I hid the header that says "Submit Turn" because it just took up space and was kind of useless in my opinion, because we know what the button does - we don't need a header there telling us that the button submits our turn :P

[edit] I should also mention, when the battle is over, the Game Over button will be at the very top of the screen - I thought this was desirable since that's the only thing we care about when the battle is over, most of the time.

Thanks for the ping here!

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but can you add hovering to scrolls to show you their stats? I forget what a lot of them do and it sucks I can't just hover over them in my library. Scaling scrolls can show the base stats like weapons.

Also the dragon soul weapon does not show you base stats when you hover over it.

I think doesn't show base stats because it's custom coded, so it doesn't have base stats.

If you forfeit the battle from the status page, the challenger is still there. It doesn't end the BQ. Edit: Actually, yes this could work if it's the next day. I think that's the exception.

The page looks ugly as hell right now (I'm using chrome, maybe thats what you were talking about with different browsers not supporting something)

but functionally perfect. Good enough for me.

Yeah, flexbox is a somewhat new CSS thing and not supported perfectly yet. If you can post a screenshot of what you see, though, I can see if I can improve it? Or describe what is making it ugly, and I'll look into it.

The problem is that the layout of the battle screen is made of HTML tables inside of tables, and we can't control the HTML, we have to change the order using CSS somehow (the sections are written in a specific order on the page, which we can't actually change). Using flexbox allows me to do this with CSS only, but it messes up the display for every element in the process (the container changes from "table" to "flex", which causes everything inside it to behave differently in terms of what height/width they are, how they align next to each other, etc...) The nice thing is that these things can be manually fixed, it's just messy and easy to overlook something >_<

Did that image work for you?

Here is the URL if it didn't

http://i65.tinypic.com/20qauj4.jpg