Layers
-
A mod told me they would implement layers on tpt, but only on tpt++ (im not sure... ) but he said: "We MAY do layering, eventually, but it isn't likely to be very soon. More likely is that it will be subsystem blocks."
What do you think if this layer system is like this:
"If you have a pixel of METL on layer 1, and other pixel of METL on layer 2 at the same point of the metl on layer 1, it will conduct energy from the METL on layer 1 to the METL on layer 2. Did you understand? If the metal is exacly ON the other metal in an other layer, the energy will pass through them. "
And how many layers you think its enought? 2 or 3?. I want to remeber the new processors that are being developed are very powerful, so...
-
@New-IdeasForYou (View Post)
If at all, I'd go for as much as possible without noticeable framerate drops. 4-5 should provide plenty entertainment for the electronics fanatics. There should be only one element conducting "between" layers though, maybe TTAN? -
Maybe TITAN, or PSCN and NSCN. Its a good idea. And an option is to activate 40% of visibility of the underlayer would be good idea too.
-
Maybe have a new element called LINK. It could operate on the same layer that energy type particles do now so that regular particles would be able to be placed on top of them. if tmp == 0, whenever a conductive element is placed on the same coordinates as it on 2 different layers, the spark would be sent from one to the other just as if they were on the same layer. if tmp == 1, then whenever a particle went over it, it would be sent to the same layer as another LINK with 1 tmp.
-
METL should not be the conductor. It should be something that isn't normally used in electronics, like iron or titanium
Edit: or the new LINK
Another question is, should wifi only work transmit on one layer, so that wifi on layer2 communicate, and on layer 1 communicate, but not in between?
-
I really think wifi should work on all layers. Its a great tool for the interaction between them.
The link idea is also great, but i just didn't get it...
-
@dnerd (View Post)
wifi should prolly be tmp specific. Like tmp 0 is only on the layer and tmp 1 is inbetween layers -
YES i love it.
-
This post has been removed by Pilihp64: pointless offtopic
