mpausi: Yes, it is possible to make things more flexible - a couple of methods spring to mind. Sorry, but I'm in a bit of a rush at the mo but I'll try and get back with some code soon. Of course, anyone else is free to post their own methods in the meantime. :)
Slenkar: Not sure why you would need to contain everything in a single type but I guess you have your reasons. Given that restriction, the only why to achieve this is to 'hardcode' the various fields into a single type, like:
However, this is alot less flexible than using the array method as you can probably imagine. Actually, there are other ways like using a bank to hold the various turret properties and using peek/poke to read/write them, but this makes things unnecessarily complicated, IMO.
Nacra: You're more than welcome! ;)
Slenkar: Not sure why you would need to contain everything in a single type but I guess you have your reasons. Given that restriction, the only why to achieve this is to 'hardcode' the various fields into a single type, like:
Type tankType tankName$ turret1_rot# turret1_ele# turret2_rot# turret2_ele# turret3_rot# turret3_ele# turret4_rot# turret4_ele# turret5_rot# turret5_ele# End Type
However, this is alot less flexible than using the array method as you can probably imagine. Actually, there are other ways like using a bank to hold the various turret properties and using peek/poke to read/write them, but this makes things unnecessarily complicated, IMO.
Nacra: You're more than welcome! ;)