At the moment you require A!=1 and B!=1 and A!=4 and B!=4 and A!=7 and B!=7. The three conditions you put there are interpreted as an "and" if you don't specify otherwise.
That's right, all three 'And' conditions must return true for a marine to spawn, but that's how it should be as far as I can see.
Incorrect logical. It would be EACH of the three "and" conditions, not all three at once. A or b can't be three things at once. In its current state you might as well restructure it to just have everything under one giant "and" instead of 3 seperations.
Hi! I want this to create a 9x9 grid of marines(for now), with 3 exceptions: row 1 column 1, row 4 column 4, and row 7 column 7.
However, row 1, 4, and 7, and column 1, 4, and 7, are devoid of marines.
Am I not doing it the right way?
You could go
if not((A == 1 and B == 1) or (A == 4 and B == 4) or (A == 7 and B == 7)) then create
But there are other possibilities using the laws of logic (if you like thinking)...
@Elmaex: Go
I've made a boolean array that works in a similar trigger. I do like thinking, but I think it should work as it is. So I'm curious why it doesn't.
At the moment you require A!=1 and B!=1 and A!=4 and B!=4 and A!=7 and B!=7. The three conditions you put there are interpreted as an "and" if you don't specify otherwise.
@Elmaex: Go
That's right, all three 'And' conditions must return true for a marine to spawn, but that's how it should be as far as I can see.
What isn't working about it? Is it not spawning marines at all?
Take A = 1 B = 2. This does not satisfy A !=1 and hence no marine is created.
edit: I think I now understand your reasoning. Your mistake:
not ( A and B) is not equivalent to not(A) and not(B)
Incorrect logical. It would be EACH of the three "and" conditions, not all three at once. A or b can't be three things at once. In its current state you might as well restructure it to just have everything under one giant "and" instead of 3 seperations.
make an "or" element in your if statement, then move all of your and statements into the "or".
@GI70ST: Go
That would be another awesome way of doing it wrong. Take A=1,B=1 => (A!=4 and B!=4) = true => or (....) = true.
@Elmaex: Go