[DiscordArchive] but isn't the entire reason for uniquebitflag being contained in questv2.dbc, because blizz uses it
[DiscordArchive] but isn't the entire reason for uniquebitflag being contained in questv2.dbc, because blizz uses it
Archived author: Telegrill • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:10:42.825000+00:00
Original source
PTR is the best to test theorical implementations
Archived author: Kelpie • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:10:56.700000+00:00
Original source
so my question is, is that the purpose of uniquebitflag...should we as an example, not be using exclusivegroup and instead group things by bitflag unless we need to change it manually for some reason?
Archived author: Kelpie • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:11:34.102000+00:00
Original source
because I'm asking is the implementation of exclusivegroup currently semi-redundant
Archived author: Telegrill • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:11:51.782000+00:00
Original source
i think it's more script-wise approchable
Archived author: Kelpie • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:11:57.896000+00:00
Original source
ahh
Archived author: Kelpie • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:12:27.983000+00:00
Original source
it's just something I've had an interest in, because I notice we always use prevquestid, and not like...prevbitflag
Archived author: Telegrill • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:12:46.713000+00:00
Original source
we're not to modify the client on our own term we'd cause things to break constantly, and I don't think that Shauren, if that were to be the case, would allow us to modify such a field without setting specific protection not to mess things up
Archived author: Kelpie • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:12:48.953000+00:00
Original source
and it seems that using prevbitflag rather than prevquestid would allow us to eliminate some redundant conditions
Archived author: Kelpie • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:12:54.270000+00:00
Original source
which group by bitflag anyways
Archived author: Kelpie • Posted: 2024-03-07T10:13:09.922000+00:00
Original source
not talking about modding the client