Cuddles wrote:
"Hindsight is 20/20"
Also
Simple things gets complicated rather quickly when you get down to writing code. It actually makes allot of sense when you start thinking that the logic for it must be coded. What happens when the unit it is attacking moves out of range? It must know not to switch targets and not to chase. Or must it switch targets, too what? What happens if you give another move command, should there be two forms of move commands? Are you sure it's the attack order and not the mover order that must change? You could just as easily have a second move order that doesn't cancel an attack order. If you change the move order then you can use it with ground fire also.
It's almost never just adding one thing. The ACU isn't alive, it's a peace of dumb code, it doesn't care about your logic.
No point in getting upset about these things, the programmers probably had to follow a billion logical paths and get the job done within a time limit.
what is the point of this reply besides discouraging non-coders to make suggestions ever ?
Of course, it might be not possible, because coding reasons.
Of course it would lead to further discussions and choices to be be made for moving out of range scenarios.
So what ? Suggestions are being made, some can't happen, some might, and coders can use that "suggestions" forums to fish for ideas and select from what can be done.
Maybe this particular one can't, and so be it, but I'm sure it's something many have wished, and if someday someone can use this as incentive to spend some coding effort, then great.
If it's all pointless because "code it yourself", this subforum is rather useless.Statistics: Posted by Zoram — 22 Nov 2017, 00:48
]]>
If the target is in range, he will fire, if not, it wont/jump to the next in the quee.