Tweaking Attack Settings

[background color=var(--bbc-body-bg-color)]Hi, I'm not typically one for contributing towards threads in general let alone suggesting a new mechanic, however I'd like to ask the question anyway.[/background]

Proposition and Explanation
Would it be reasonable to suggest an addition to players' "attack settings" to allow for more precise and elaborate set ups. Rather than just a slider, allowing for a "per turn" pre-set. Having a system that allows you to plot specified uses of weapons per turn. Turn 1 use melee, turn 2 use secondary as examples. The catalyst in my mind for this was the addition of RW weapons with unique effects. If a weapon has the "Assassinate" effect, which deals increased damage on the first turn, it would be beneficial for users of such weapons to be able to fine tune it to activate on the first turn during a defend. This addition would complement weapons that players have access to.

Underpinning Knowledge
As far as I gathered, we currently have sliders as shown in this screenshot which allows you to edit the "probability" of a type of weapon/temp to be used each turn while defending against an incoming attack. Over the years this lack of specificity, lead by pure probability leaves much to be desired in my humble but critical POV. Having the choice to choose the probability option and having the option to fine tune it seems reasonable.

Opposing Points
You could argue having pre-sets could render you more predictable to attackers.
Without knowing the man power needed to pull this off if deemed value adding, I don't know if it would be worth the time of the already thinly spread dev team.
I do not fully understand the implications of this while defending against multiple attackers. Weather it would help or be more of a hinderance to the defender.

Apologies for the multiple replies, for some reason it was prompting me with a "too many characters" message?

Are you suggesting adding Twerk to the attack options in addition to Punch and Kick? There are other dance options rather than [image: img.freepik.com]

Case in point
[image: media.tenor.com]

Surprisingly mate, no.

Whoa, this is wild but I had a really similar idea that I finally got around to posting today. Great minds think alike I guess; I’d really like to see something like this implemented.