Fix the horrid VTOL Strike/CB rearming behavior #3449
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
While using a single VTOL is fine on these sensors, problems arise when there are multiple. If multiple VTOLs are assigned to the VTOL sensors they would only attack if full as a group if the target didn't die. Causing 1 attack per VTOL of the whole group on the target.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While using a single VTOL is fine on these sensors, problems arise when there are multiple.
If multiple VTOLs are assigned to the VTOL sensors they would only attack if full as a group if the target didn't die. Causing 1 attack per VTOL of the whole group on the target.
Perhaps not perfect but at least makes these VTOL sensors feel a lot better to use. There is another line with allVtolsRearmed() elsewhere but I have no idea how that gets triggered, if ever.
Closes Trac ticket 4135 I suppose (10 year old bug report!).