This is interesting....

Ebon Heart · June 09, 2011, 12:48:35 PM

I've built a line of dark mirrors in a pool of creeper, and turned every 4th one down. (first picture) then I can unpause for a moment, and pause again... and only the ones pointing down are alive. (second picture) How odd. Thoughts?

Michionlion · June 09, 2011, 12:50:36 PM

weird.... none of them should live
i'll see if i can replicate

Ebon Heart · June 09, 2011, 12:55:16 PM

it's every 4th dark mirror that survives, direction doesn't matter... I tried it with blasters too, but with less predictable results.

Kithros · June 09, 2011, 01:08:00 PM

When he means unpause for a short time, he means a small fraction of a second, it's only a matter of a few frames that it takes for them to all die. I suspect this is the result of some sort of optimization for efficiency, and it doesn't have any realistic applications or harmful effects.

Oh, and if you pause/unpause at extremely small intervals, they die in more groups than just 2 groups, I haven't been able to see any simple pattern to how it works.

Ebon Heart · June 09, 2011, 01:28:47 PM

well, when I do that with dark mirrors, it's every 4th one that survives every time. So there has to be SOME predictable pattern.

Kithros · June 09, 2011, 01:47:55 PM

When I have done it, it *usually* has half of them dying each frame (for you this probably means that each time you pause/unpause that 2 frames are actually passing, not just one), but occasionally it tends to do something completely different. None of them seem to be completely without any kind of pattern, but I don't think there will be any consistent pattern that's easy to find without actually seeing the code.

Sqaz · June 09, 2011, 02:07:27 PM

This behavior is already known of in the beta.
It has to do with when the building ckecks whether there is creeper underneath it.
Due to placement it's possible that a unit only checks after 4 frames. I guess the checking every 4 frames is needed for performance issues.

The same happend in CW1 there have been some threads about blasters capping or not capping emitters due to their placement.

Edit: For those of you wanting to unpause and repause so exactly one frame passes by you can download the O = 2xP script somewhere.

Ebon Heart · June 09, 2011, 05:51:05 PM

Quote from: Sqaz on June 09, 2011, 02:07:27 PM
This behavior is already known of in the beta.
It has to do with when the building ckecks whether there is creeper underneath it.
Due to placement it's possible that a unit only checks after 4 frames. I guess the checking every 4 frames is needed for performance issues.

The same happend in CW1 there have been some threads about blasters capping or not capping emitters due to their placement.

Edit: For those of you wanting to unpause and repause so exactly one frame passes by you can download the O = 2xP script somewhere.

I figured it was something like that... but the pattern may be more predictable than you think. Also, it seems to go by build order.

knucracker · June 09, 2011, 07:05:53 PM

The 4 frames thing is designed to keep everything from blowing up all at once in situations like this. I wanted some small difference in destruction times for otherwise identical units in distress. Part of it is a performance optimization and part is just what I wanted. But, it can't be truly random, hence the repeatable nature you have observed.

Ebon Heart · June 09, 2011, 08:02:05 PM

I figured it was something like that... In cw1, I you build a bunch of units in the creeper like that, they all explode at once and lagg up your computer.

CobraKill · June 11, 2011, 08:29:11 AM

Quote from: Jeff on June 10, 2011, 04:23:58 PM
that should not be!

Please Jeff, it's fine you want to make short comments and get a star, but does it really hurt to elabarate on it? Only reason I'm a senoir memeber is I spend way too much time on these forums :P. And guys, maybe we should cut him some slack. It's probably is his first forum like it was mine. In due time he will be just like the rest of us.

Ebon Heart · June 11, 2011, 10:42:14 PM

Quote from: The Commander on June 11, 2011, 08:29:11 AM
Quote from: Jeff on June 10, 2011, 04:23:58 PM
that should not be!
Please Jeff, it's fine you want to make short comments and get a star, but does it really hurt to elabarate on it? Only reason I'm a senoir memeber is I spend way too much time on these forums :P. And guys, maybe we should cut him some slack. It's probably is his first forum like it was mine. In due time he will be just like the rest of us.

He's learning... and that's the only reason I'm a hero member. lol, I've very active, but at least I elaborate on everything. I'm usually on here a lot if I have work to do or something. It's called procrastination, deal with it. :P

Jeff · June 12, 2011, 12:46:33 AM

thanks ebon heart for explaining it it helps.

Michionlion · June 26, 2011, 05:24:05 PM

hmm... when did you become a beta ebon? or have i just never noticed....

Kamron3 · June 26, 2011, 05:30:51 PM

The right way to post off topic:

Quote from: Michionlion on June 26, 2011, 05:24:05 PM
I am going to make a comment that is on topic and useful! This is a really good idea, etc etc. I believe this should be in the game!

PS
when did you become a beta ebon? or have i just never noticed....

THE WRONG WAY TO POST OFF TOPIC:

Quote from: Michionlion on June 26, 2011, 05:24:05 PM
(hey, look, there's absolutely no useful information in this post!)
hmm... when did you become a beta ebon? or have i just never noticed....