The issue with Napalm is that it is hard to define "stickiness" in programming, you need to draw the line between not moving and attachment. You need a mechanism for testing the area around a particle for other particles without causing unnecessary lag, you need a velocity duplication code that allows the particles to stick to other moving particles.

@taytalon (View Post)
Napalm doesn't explode, it burns very slowly at high temperatures.

@taytalon (View Post)
Soap is a prototype code, it is one of the substances that has been created because it's coding can be very useful for simple connected substances.

@taytalon (View Post)
I have devised a concept that may make cohesion possible, however, it would sacrifice the life, tmp and temperature variables in order to allow such an entity occur but the fact that it sacrifices the temperature variable would completely screw up the physics.Thus your idea is fundamentally flawed.

Also, I should note that the concept I have devised relies on the use of SOAP's code.

Equalsthree mentioned three uses, which is the minimum requirement for an element to even be considered not to mention that one of those uses is a possible development path to create simple moving solids.

@taytalon (View Post)
Well that simplifies things. GBMB just stops moving when it touches something that code can be reused.

@TYPE-LANCEL (View Post)

TYPE-LANCEL:

I have devised a concept that may make cohesion possible, however, it would sacrifice the life, tmp and temperature variables

Isn't there also a tmp2 variable you can use?
Also, CLST particles are somewhat cohesive (at low temps); maybe you could look at that....

@abczyx123987 (View Post)
Ah, I forgot about that! I guess it could work in theory but reusing the CLST physics would definitely be more efficient.