This is just my insight as a professional defense analyst, but looking at the scripting language in DW, I can't help but wonder if SCS was trying to copy GCAM, which is programming language for modeling war and is
a lot more flexible. I wonder if their language is in fact much more extensive and the user interface keeps us from fully exploiting it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Molon Labe
I know how you feel. As many features as the editor has, it just feels like they never "filled out" all the possibilities that should logically (to me anyways) follow the features they implemented. If you have the capability to test for the presence of an object, why not have an argument that allows you set the # of those objects to test for? If you can test for the presence of an object in a circular area, why not be able to test for one in a retangular area? If you can test a platform for relative position, why not include an argument to restrict its bearing? I can go on..... It's really frustrating because inevitably any great idea you get will probably have to be dumbed down in some way to get it to work, and even then it only works so well. We just have to do the best we can with the tools we have.
|