Lone Wolf Development Forums  

Go Back   Lone Wolf Development Forums > Army Builder Forums > Army Builder

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
hunton at hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Old May 30th, 2000, 12:28 PM
Hey,

Don't know if anyone out there can help, but I figured it couldn't
hurt to ask...

I run an ongoing Warhammer campaign in my store, and am desperately
sick and tired of hand-checking 50-150 army lists every 3 months! So
I'm working to add our campaign additions to the Army Builder lists
for Warhammer Fantasy Battles.

So far, I can do most of the simple things (making dragons available
to all the races, for instance), but we have some more complex
things, which I really need help with:

1. We have footmen for all the races. Adding these is easy.
However, allowing them the option of taking a mount is hard, due to
the cost calcuation (i.e. add in all equipment and base cost, double
it, then add the value of the mount). Any ideas?

2. We allow some war machines to all races (special ones we've made
up). These use the above mentioned footmen as crew. I want to make
crew a required "child" unit, but how do I give the option of having
either human or dwarf or skeleton or... (you get the idea) as crew?

3. Oh, and how do I overwrite values in the main race files with
Warhammer (i.e. I need to dis-allow all races from having allies)? I
plan to make an augmentation file (like has been used to add the
rules from a White Dwarf article), but don't know how to use one to
make changes in the original files instead of just additions.

There are some other problems I'm facing, but these are the big ones,
and if I can find a way to solve these, I should be able to solve the
others.

I would appreciate any help anyone can give.

Thanks,
Debbie


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the salesman clueless? Productopia has the answers.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4633/3/_/36190/_/959718484/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
  #1 Reply With Quote
demandred at skrill.org
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Old May 30th, 2000, 01:23 PM
One fine day in the middle of the night, hunton@hotmail.com got up to
write:

>1. We have footmen for all the races. Adding these is easy.
>However, allowing them the option of taking a mount is hard, due to
>the cost calcuation (i.e. add in all equipment and base cost, double
>it, then add the value of the mount). Any ideas?

Make the 'Mount' option the lowest priority (after all weapons, etc.)
then use the:

ucst:all*2

attribute. I think this won't include the cost of the mount.

>2. We allow some war machines to all races (special ones we've made
>up). These use the above mentioned footmen as crew. I want to make
>crew a required "child" unit, but how do I give the option of having
>either human or dwarf or skeleton or... (you get the idea) as crew?

You'll need to make one 'Add Crew' option for each race. Each option
should have (for example, the Undead):

legl:race=un // un = Race attribute for undead
unit:unZombie@per=3 // For 3 crew per machine
hide

Don't put the bits after // in...

>3. Oh, and how do I overwrite values in the main race files with
>Warhammer (i.e. I need to dis-allow all races from having allies)? I
>plan to make an augmentation file (like has been used to add the
>rules from a White Dwarf article), but don't know how to use one to
>make changes in the original files instead of just additions.

Hmm. I don't think you can stop anyone from taking allies. Rob? You
could use an ally cost multiplier (acst) of about 1 million, to make all
allied units ridiculously expensive, I suppose.

--
'Not Colin' McAlister - License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the salesman clueless? Productopia has the answers.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4633/3/_/36190/_/959721812/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
  #2 Reply With Quote
rob
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8,232

Old May 30th, 2000, 03:47 PM
>1. We have footmen for all the races. Adding these is easy.
>However, allowing them the option of taking a mount is hard, due to
>the cost calcuation (i.e. add in all equipment and base cost, double
>it, then add the value of the mount). Any ideas?

Unfortunately, Colen's recommendation here was incorrect. *ALL* cost
calculations are performed *AFTER* all processing of options is performed -
it's a two-pass process. There is no way within AB to only apply a
multiplier to the entire unit EXCEPT a particular option - even with the
careful use of option prioritization. So, the solution is to do stuff in
the background so that the user SEES the proper NET behavior on the screen.
The simplest solution here is to simply assign the mount option at
half-cost, which is then doubled to the proper value. This is ugly to the
user, though. I recommend creating a hidden option called "Mount Rebate" or
some such. Chain to this option from the "Mount" option via
"more:rebate=auto". Give this hidden option a cost of half the normal Mount
cost and make it a NEGATIVE cost value. The net effect is that the Mount
LOOKS like it costs the full amount, but when it is added, the rebate cuts
the cost in half and THEN the cost gets doubled, resulting in no NET
doubling occuring for the Mount.

>2. We allow some war machines to all races (special ones we've made
>up). These use the above mentioned footmen as crew. I want to make
>crew a required "child" unit, but how do I give the option of having
>either human or dwarf or skeleton or... (you get the idea) as crew?

Do you want the user to SELECT the crew type or have it always be the crew
type for the native race? In the latter case, Colen's recommendation is
correct. You'll need a separate option for each child units. Each of these
options would be linked to the war machine unit, and each option would be
assigned "legl:race=xx". In the end, only the proper crew will appear for
the war machine. If the user can SELECT the crew type, you have two
choices. First, you can do as outlined above and omit the "legl" attribute
from the options - the user can then pick from the list. Alternately, you
can use the "list" attribute to let the user pick the crew from a list of
available units.

>3. Oh, and how do I overwrite values in the main race files with
>Warhammer (i.e. I need to dis-allow all races from having allies)? I
>plan to make an augmentation file (like has been used to add the
>rules from a White Dwarf article), but don't know how to use one to
>make changes in the original files instead of just additions.

There is no way to DELETE things from existing files, such as allies. The
simplest solution here is to create a new mode for your campaing rules (you
probably already have). Then, define a new composition rule-set for that
mode and select it by default for that mode. You can specify this
composition rule-set to impose a maximum limit of 0% allies. The net effect
is that any roster with allies will fail in the composition and validation
checks, automatically flagging the issue.

Hope this helps,
Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failed tests, classes skipped, forgotten locker combinations.
Remember the good 'ol days
http://click.egroups.com/1/4053/3/_/36190/_/959730420/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
rob is offline   #3 Reply With Quote
demandred at skrill.org
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Old May 30th, 2000, 10:46 PM
One fine day in the middle of the night, Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
got up to write:

>
>>1. We have footmen for all the races. Adding these is easy.
>>However, allowing them the option of taking a mount is hard, due to
>>the cost calcuation (i.e. add in all equipment and base cost, double
>>it, then add the value of the mount). Any ideas?
>
>Unfortunately, Colen's recommendation here was incorrect. *ALL* cost
>calculations are performed *AFTER* all processing of options is performed -
>it's a two-pass process. There is no way within AB to only apply a
>multiplier to the entire unit EXCEPT a particular option - even with the
>careful use of option prioritization.

You are making the invalid assumption that the mount costs are
controlled via options. The last time I looked at the FB files, they
used the list: attribute to select a mount from, i.e. the actual option
cost 0 and the child unit cost the points. IIRC, whatever I suggested
doesn't multiply the cost of child units - I had some major annoyances
when making the 40K files with it.

>There is no way to DELETE things from existing files, such as allies. The
>simplest solution here is to create a new mode for your campaing rules (you
>probably already have). Then, define a new composition rule-set for that
>mode and select it by default for that mode. You can specify this
>composition rule-set to impose a maximum limit of 0% allies.

Or, indeed, to just not have an ally group (I think), using xbrk:.

--
'Not Colin' McAlister - License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hot off the press- summer's here!
School's out and it's sizzling hot. Whether you're planning a
graduation party, a summer brunch, or simple birthday party,
shop GreatEntertaining.com before your next celebration.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4473/3/_/36190/_/959755611/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
  #4 Reply With Quote
rob
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8,232

Old May 30th, 2000, 11:49 PM
> >>1. We have footmen for all the races. Adding these is easy.
> >>However, allowing them the option of taking a mount is hard, due to
> >>the cost calcuation (i.e. add in all equipment and base cost, double
> >>it, then add the value of the mount). Any ideas?
> >
> >Unfortunately, Colen's recommendation here was incorrect. *ALL* cost
> >calculations are performed *AFTER* all processing of options is performed -
> >it's a two-pass process. There is no way within AB to only apply a
> >multiplier to the entire unit EXCEPT a particular option - even with the
> >careful use of option prioritization.
>
>You are making the invalid assumption that the mount costs are
>controlled via options. The last time I looked at the FB files, they
>used the list: attribute to select a mount from, i.e. the actual option
>cost 0 and the child unit cost the points. IIRC, whatever I suggested
>doesn't multiply the cost of child units - I had some major annoyances
>when making the 40K files with it.

Sorry. When I simply saw the word "mount", I assumed horses and the like. I
did NOT realize that a "monster mount" was implied, especially since
generic "footmen" were the unit in question. You'll need to clarify this
issue for us if you continue to have problems, since this is clearly an
open issue. :-)

> >There is no way to DELETE things from existing files, such as allies. The
> >simplest solution here is to create a new mode for your campaing rules (you
> >probably already have). Then, define a new composition rule-set for that
> >mode and select it by default for that mode. You can specify this
> >composition rule-set to impose a maximum limit of 0% allies.
>
>Or, indeed, to just not have an ally group (I think), using xbrk:.

That would get dangerous. I considered that, but it would result in there
being NO ally group. While this is conceptually "good", it's also BAD. If
there is no ally group, AB will put allied units in with other normal units
of their composition group (e.g. an allied character gets lumped into
characters). Since this does NOT preclude the user from taking allies, it
simply masks the problem, thereby making it a bigger issue to track (and
MANUALLY, too). By leaving an ally group with a limit of 0%, AB tracks
allies normally, and the use of allies will set of bells in the composition
and validation rules to be easily identified.

Hope this helps,
Rob

P.S. Don't you just love all these subtle little behaviors lurking in the
bowels of AB? :-)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hot off the press- summer's here!
School's out and it's sizzling hot. Whether you're planning a
graduation party, a summer brunch, or simple birthday party,
shop GreatEntertaining.com before your next celebration.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4473/3/_/36190/_/959759390/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
rob is offline   #5 Reply With Quote
demandred at skrill.org
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Old May 31st, 2000, 03:02 AM
One fine day in the middle of the night, Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
got up to write:

>
>> >>1. We have footmen for all the races. Adding these is easy.
>> >>However, allowing them the option of taking a mount is hard, due to
>> >>the cost calcuation (i.e. add in all equipment and base cost, double
>> >>it, then add the value of the mount). Any ideas?
>> >
>> >Unfortunately, Colen's recommendation here was incorrect. *ALL* cost
>> >calculations are performed *AFTER* all processing of options is performed -
>> >it's a two-pass process. There is no way within AB to only apply a
>> >multiplier to the entire unit EXCEPT a particular option - even with the
>> >careful use of option prioritization.
>>
>>You are making the invalid assumption that the mount costs are
>>controlled via options. The last time I looked at the FB files, they
>>used the list: attribute to select a mount from, i.e. the actual option
>>cost 0 and the child unit cost the points. IIRC, whatever I suggested
>>doesn't multiply the cost of child units - I had some major annoyances
>>when making the 40K files with it.
>
>Sorry. When I simply saw the word "mount", I assumed horses and the like. I
>did NOT realize that a "monster mount" was implied, especially since
>generic "footmen" were the unit in question. You'll need to clarify this
>issue for us if you continue to have problems, since this is clearly an
>open issue. :-)

Hmm... I wonder. You might be right about that, for the warhorse (etc.)
options.

>> >There is no way to DELETE things from existing files, such as allies. The
>> >simplest solution here is to create a new mode for your campaing rules (you
>> >probably already have). Then, define a new composition rule-set for that
>> >mode and select it by default for that mode. You can specify this
>> >composition rule-set to impose a maximum limit of 0% allies.
>>
>>Or, indeed, to just not have an ally group (I think), using xbrk:.
>
>That would get dangerous. I considered that, but it would result in there
>being NO ally group. While this is conceptually "good", it's also BAD. If
>there is no ally group, AB will put allied units in with other normal units
>of their composition group (e.g. an allied character gets lumped into
>characters). Since this does NOT preclude the user from taking allies, it
>simply masks the problem, thereby making it a bigger issue to track (and
>MANUALLY, too). By leaving an ally group with a limit of 0%, AB tracks
>allies normally, and the use of allies will set of bells in the composition
>and validation rules to be easily identified.

I think it'd be amusing to make all allies cost 100,000 times what they
do normally. "OK, I'll add a unit of knights.. OMG!" * faints

>P.S. Don't you just love all these subtle little behaviors lurking in the
>bowels of AB? :-)

Oh yeah. It's almost as annoying as a real programming language

--
'Not Colin' McAlister - License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hot off the press- summer's here!
School's out and it's sizzling hot. Whether you're planning a
graduation party, a summer brunch, or simple birthday party,
shop GreatEntertaining.com before your next celebration.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4473/3/_/36190/_/959770942/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
  #6 Reply With Quote
hunton at hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Old May 31st, 2000, 09:41 AM
>>1. We have footmen for all the races... allowing them the option
>>of taking a mount...

>I did not realize a "monster mount" was implied, especially since generic
>"footmen" were the unit in question. You'll need to clarify
>this issue for us.

Well, they probably could be treated as monster mounts, but I was
thinking more of making them a "child" unit like a horse (the mounts
are things like horses, wolves, bears, cold ones, etc). So, if I
need to do the "mount rebate," how can I do that?

>>2. We allow some war machines to all races... I want to make crew a
required "child" unit, but how do I give the option of having crew for
each race?

>Do you want the user to SELECT the crew type or have it always be the
>crew type for the native race? In the latter case, Colen's recommendation
>is correct.

Thanks, that's what I want to do.

>>3. Oh, and how do I overwrite values in the main race files with
>>Warhammer (i.e. I need to dis-allow all races from having allies)?

>The simplest solution here is create a new moe for your campaign rules
>(you probably already have). Then, define a new composition rule-set
>for that mode and select it by default for that mode. You can specify
>this composition rule-set to impose a maximum limit of 0% allies.

Ummmm... well, I'm feeling a little extra silly. I haven't been able to
find enough information in the Construction Kit paperwork to figure out
how to set up a mode, or how to put those into my data file. I've made
a copy of all the Warhammer data files and changed the .wfb to .pgc and
then made a new file called Rulebook.pgc where I'm defining the new
stuff.

Can you help?

>>P.S. Don't you just love all these subtle little behaviors lurking in
>>the bowels of AB? :-)

>Oh yeah. It's almost as annoying as a real programming language

Actually, I find it more annoying. <g>

Debbie

P.S. Don't you guys ever get tired of answering these silly questions
from dumb people? Oh... ummmmm, I take that back... from highly
intelligent, beautiful people. <g>
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4634/3/_/36190/_/959794890/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
  #7 Reply With Quote
demandred at skrill.org
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Old May 31st, 2000, 10:56 AM
One fine day in the middle of the night, Debbie Hunton
<hunton@hotmail.com> got up to write:

>>>1. We have footmen for all the races... allowing them the option
>>>of taking a mount...
>
>>I did not realize a "monster mount" was implied, especially since generic
>>"footmen" were the unit in question. You'll need to clarify
>>this issue for us.
>
>Well, they probably could be treated as monster mounts, but I was
>thinking more of making them a "child" unit like a horse (the mounts
>are things like horses, wolves, bears, cold ones, etc). So, if I
>need to do the "mount rebate," how can I do that?

As long as the actual 'Add Horse Child Unit' option costs 0, you won't
need it. If the 'Add Horse Child Unit' option costs, say, 4 points,
you'd need to chain in an option (i.e., with 'more') that cost -4 points
to negate it.

>Ummmm... well, I'm feeling a little extra silly. I haven't been able to
>find enough information in the Construction Kit paperwork to figure out
>how to set up a mode, or how to put those into my data file. I've made
>a copy of all the Warhammer data files and changed the .wfb to .pgc and
>then made a new file called Rulebook.pgc where I'm defining the new
>stuff.
>
>Can you help?

Use a race augment of 'xx'. In that augment, define a mode (using
'mode') and then specify the behaviours you want with the
'-mode=yourmode' qualifier.

>P.S. Don't you guys ever get tired of answering these silly questions
>from dumb people? Oh... ummmmm, I take that back... from highly
>intelligent, beautiful people. <g>

These questions? No. The "I can't find Obvious Thing 1, where is it?"
questions? Yes.

--
'Not Colin' McAlister - License to Skrill
Email: demandred@skrill.org | Visit http://www.skrill.org/ today!
-----------------------------+------------------------------------
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain" - Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4634/3/_/36190/_/959799375/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
  #8 Reply With Quote
hunton at hotmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Old May 31st, 2000, 12:47 PM
>>>>1. We have footmen for all the races... allowing them the option
>>>>of taking a mount...
>>
>>>I did not realize a "monster mount" was implied, especially since
>>>generic "footmen" were the unit in question. You'll need to clarify
>>>this issue for us.
>>
>>Well, they probably could be treated as monster mounts, but I was
>>thinking more of making them a "child" unit like a horse (the mounts
>>are things like horses, wolves, bears, cold ones, etc). So, if I
>>need to do the "mount rebate," how can I do that?
>
>As long as the actual 'Add Horse Child Unit' option costs 0, you won't
>need it. If the 'Add Horse Child Unit' option costs, say, 4 points,
>you'd need to chain in an option (i.e., with 'more') that cost -4 points to
>negate it.

Actually, each mount has a different value. I can provide them as an
option at full price, but I don't know how to auto link (and hide) the
discount of half price before I double the cost. Or, quite honestly,
how to make it double the cost *only* if they choose a mount. *sigh*

>>Ummmm... well, I'm feeling a little extra silly. I haven't been able
>>to find enough information in the Construction Kit paperwork to figure out
>>how to set up a mode, or how to put those into my data file. I've made a
>>copy of all the Warhammer data files and changed the .wfb to .pgc and then
>>made a new file called Rulebook.pgc where I'm defining the new stuff.
>>
>>Can you help?
>
>Use a race augment of 'xx'. In that augment, define a mode (using
>'mode') and then specify the behaviours you want with the
>'-mode=yourmode' qualifier.

I'm not typing directly into the files, I'm using ABCreator. Where do
I find the area to add the race augment, and what format do I use to
define the mode? I know that's probably simple and right in front of
me in the paperwork, but I'm not seeing it. I know I need to do an
augmenation for each race to say ally=0%, but where? How? I feel so
dumb sometimes with this program!

> >P.S. Don't you guys ever get tired of answering these silly questions
> >from dumb people? Oh... ummmmm, I take that back... from highly
> >intelligent, beautiful people. <g>
>
>These questions? No. The "I can't find Obvious Thing 1, where is it?"
>questions? Yes.

Thank you for making me feel a little less stupid for having to ask for
help with these questions. <g>

Debbie
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4634/3/_/36190/_/959806033/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
  #9 Reply With Quote
rob
Senior Member
Lone Wolf Staff
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 8,232

Old May 31st, 2000, 01:21 PM
At 05:41 PM 5/31/00 +0000, you wrote:
> >>1. We have footmen for all the races... allowing them the option
> >>of taking a mount...
>
> >I did not realize a "monster mount" was implied, especially since generic
> >"footmen" were the unit in question. You'll need to clarify
> >this issue for us.
>
>Well, they probably could be treated as monster mounts, but I was
>thinking more of making them a "child" unit like a horse (the mounts
>are things like horses, wolves, bears, cold ones, etc). So, if I
>need to do the "mount rebate," how can I do that?

Here's the answer I posted previously. Let me know if this isn't clear
enough....

The simplest solution here is to simply assign the mount option at
half-cost, which is then doubled to the proper value. This is ugly to the
user, though. I recommend creating a hidden option called "Mount Rebate" or
some such. Chain to this option from the "Mount" option via
"more:rebate=auto". Give this hidden option a cost of half the normal Mount
cost and make it a NEGATIVE cost value. The net effect is that the Mount
LOOKS like it costs the full amount, but when it is added, the rebate cuts
the cost in half and THEN the cost gets doubled, resulting in no NET
doubling occuring for the Mount.

> >>3. Oh, and how do I overwrite values in the main race files with
> >>Warhammer (i.e. I need to dis-allow all races from having allies)?
>
> >The simplest solution here is create a new moe for your campaign rules
> >(you probably already have). Then, define a new composition rule-set
> >for that mode and select it by default for that mode. You can specify
> >this composition rule-set to impose a maximum limit of 0% allies.
>
>Ummmm... well, I'm feeling a little extra silly. I haven't been able to
>find enough information in the Construction Kit paperwork to figure out
>how to set up a mode, or how to put those into my data file. I've made
>a copy of all the Warhammer data files and changed the .wfb to .pgc and
>then made a new file called Rulebook.pgc where I'm defining the new
>stuff.

With the "mode" attribute for races. This attribute allows you to define a
new mode, which appears on the "Create New Army" dialog under the list of
scenarios. If you make the mode global (by defining it via an Augmentation
record with race "xx"), then it will be defined for all races.

Once you create your new mode, you can use the "legl" attribute on units
and options. This will restrict them to only be available when that
scenario is selected by the user.

You can then use "xbrk" to define the custom composition rule-set that sets
the allies limit to be 0%. You can establish this rule-set as the default
as part of the "mode" attribute you define above.

Your use of a separate file for all of your customizations is perfect. With
the above technique, you can then lump your custom file in with the regular
files and have them co-exist nicely. The user can select "Debbie's Rules"
as a mode when they create an army and get all the custom stuff you've
added. Or, they can select the default scenario and create a roster for
normal WFB rules.

> >>P.S. Don't you just love all these subtle little behaviors lurking in
> >>the bowels of AB? :-)
>
> >Oh yeah. It's almost as annoying as a real programming language
>
>Actually, I find it more annoying. <g>

It's a different way of thinking. You'll get used to it pretty quickly, I'm
guessing. The initial learning curve to do complicated stuff like you're
tackling is pretty steep. But once you get the hang of it, you'll have no
problems doing all sorts of customizations. :-)

>P.S. Don't you guys ever get tired of answering these silly questions
>from dumb people? Oh... ummmmm, I take that back... from highly
>intelligent, beautiful people. <g>

Actually, they're not silly. As I mentioned, it's a steep learning curve to
tackle this complex stuff. The only questions I get tired of are the ones
from people who clearly just never bothered to go through the tutorial and
get the basics down. Those questions are irritating. The WORST questions
are from people who didn't even bother reading the topics under the Help
menu within the program (for AB questions). Those questions really tweak
me. :-( In your case, though, you've been asking valid questions about how
to best leverage the tool to solve your objectives, and you've clearly got
a grasp of the basics. There's nothing wrong with that in my mind. :-)

Thanks, Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws.
http://click.egroups.com/1/4634/3/_/36190/_/959808055/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this group, email

armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
rob is offline   #10 Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Adding options to unit thru augmentation... alexdipinto at tiscalinet Army Builder 3 September 7th, 2003 05:09 AM
Need some expert assistance on a complex situation (long po Randel.Clawson at CTBTO.o Army Builder 1 September 2nd, 2003 04:34 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
wolflair.com copyright ©1998-2016 Lone Wolf Development, Inc. View our Privacy Policy here.