Archive: 24 posts

---

As you can see from my signature, I make calculators and I'm not done until I have the greatest calculator(s) in LBP. The problem in making calculators is the thermometer as you could've guessed. I have to use A LOT of OR-gates in my calculators, so please tell me: what kind of OR-gate uses up the least thermometer? Pictures of your idea would be nice too. P.S. I have just finished my new calculator and will publish it when I get the internet working.

2009-10-25 18:38:00 Author: Chamion B Posts: 124

---

How many inputs do you need per OR-Gate? I guess using a mix of piston-based tech, emitters and low-vertex objects (DM triangles) should save as much thermo space as possible.

2009-10-25 18:43:00 Author: Treas Posts: 223

---

rtm223 has pioneered one that can have as many inputs as you want and only has one moving part. It's basically: http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/2290/66357248.jpg c's are backwards chains with a strength of 10. p is a backwards stiff piston with a strength of 5. left pink is a magnetic key switch on dark matter right pink is a magnetic key on cardboard or some material that isn't dark matter.

2009-10-25 18:43:00 Author: BSprague Posts: 2325

---

Just pipped me to the post BSprague AND Gate (4 inputs shown, but will work with any number) Dark Matter moving Part |------| |------| | gS |wwwwwwwwwww| gK | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |ppppppppppp| | |------| |------| where: wwwww is a winch, set to strength 10, ppppp is a piston set to stiff / strength 5 gK is a green mag key gS is a green mag switch (set to invert) Set your inputs to directional and connect them to the chains and the piston. gS is your output. OR Gate (4 inputs shown, but will work with any number) Dark Matter moving Part |------| |------| | gS |wwwwwwwwwww| gK | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |ppppppppppp| | |------| |------| where: wwwww is a winch, set to strength 10 and backwards, ppppp is a piston set to stiff / strength 5 and backwards gK is a green mag key gS is a green mag switch (do NOT invert) Set your inputs to directional and connect them to the chains and the piston. gS is your output. The difference between AND and OR is that you just invert all inputs and outputs.

2009-10-25 18:45:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Yup, rtm is a god among men. This is lowest thermo whether you have 2 inputs or more than a dozen. There is no reason it shouldn't work with 100+, but if you're concerned you could add a piston on opposite ends to "distribute" the forces... although I'm not sure it would matter.

2009-10-25 18:47:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

There's a lower-thermo version of this. I might be a perfectionist, but you could get rid of 2 vertices on rtm's version by cutting away half of each rectangle, turning them into right-angled triangles. I think though that the tool thermo will clearly overtop the vertices thermo per OR-gate. Unless you use lots of vertices in the rest of your level apart from the logics (which I clearly don't think being the case in a calculator showcase), I guess those 2 vertices won't make any difference. Plus, rectangular shapes look way better than triangles

2009-10-25 19:10:00 Author: Treas Posts: 223

---

Yup, rtm is a god among men. See how well trained he is? Good minion! There you go, have some scraps from my table! You might just about get less therm using 2-input emitter ORs - reduction in moving parts and connectors but increase in collected objects and emitters. You need to really know exactly what your thermo requirements for the level are before you make a decision on that one. Over 2 inputs I think it's theoretically impossible to do better than this, outside of /sniped Edit didn't someone do some testing and find there was no difference between squares and triangles? Anyway, I still couldn't bring myself to make triangular logic TBH.

2009-10-25 19:12:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Thank you, so far I have used pistons in my OR-gates which eats a lot of thermo. Maybe I can make a bigger and better calculator with these. And to answer Treas, I need 5,4 and 2 input OR-gates.

2009-10-25 19:38:00 Author: Chamion B Posts: 124

---

There's a lower-thermo version of this. I might be a perfectionist, but you could get rid of 2 vertices on rtm's version by cutting away half of each rectangle, turning them into right-angled triangles. I think though that the tool thermo will clearly overtop the vertices thermo per OR-gate. Unless you use lots of vertices in the rest of your level apart from the logics (which I clearly don't think being the case in a calculator showcase), I guess those 2 vertices won't make any difference. Plus, rectangular shapes look way better than triangles Another thing you can do to really cut down on thermo is to make the DM part really tall and put all of your AND and OR gates anchored to the same DM rectangle, thereby saving lots of vertices. I believe rtm uses a U-shaped design, with two long vertical sections connected at the bottom, slightly resembling a U. Two vertical pieces are required for other logic pieces. I leave the two sections detached, but it's the same idea. Kind of like this (completely ripped off rtm's diagram): Dark Matter Moving Parts |------| |------| | gS |wwwwwwwwwww| gK | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |ppppppppppp| | | | |------| | | | | |------| | gS |wwwwwwwwwww| gK | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |ppppppppppp| | | | |------| | | | | |------| | gS |wwwwwwwwwww| gK | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |wwwwwwwwwww| | | | | | | |ppppppppppp| | |------| |------| Etc...

2009-10-25 19:42:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

@ treas: Yes, you can cut down on a tiny bit with the two vertices, but it won't always make that much of a difference. Especially if you're doing your logic in the Big U shape like comphy mentioned. Also, i think it was CC who found that squares have about the same effect on the thermo as triangles in comphy's comphrehensive... er... comprehensive thermo guide.

2009-10-25 19:48:00 Author: Burnvictim42 Posts: 3322

---

I believe rtm uses a U-shaped design, with two long vertical sections connected at the bottom, slightly resembling a U. Two vertical pieces are required for other logic pieces. I leave the two sections detached, but it's the same idea. Like this: http://www.lbpcentral.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1608&stc=1&d=1256496718 I do a U shape because it actually has the same number of vertices, yet less objects, plus I don't have to remember how far apart the two sticks are

2009-10-25 19:54:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Oh teh noes! Secrets! Yeah, kinda like that.

2009-10-25 19:55:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

Oh teh noes! Secrets! What the fudge?

2009-10-25 19:57:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

I was making a joke that assuming anyone could understand what was going on, they could reverse engineer it. Obviously, anyone who can do that could probably figure it out on there own. Now, you said something about fudge?

2009-10-25 19:58:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

Lol, yeah. I will admit that giving it away as a prize was kind of a private joke. Especially giving away the very first super-simple prototype and then that monstrosity. I don't really expect anyone to learn anything from it. Actually I haven't bothered to look up if someone else has tried to rip it off yet lol.

2009-10-25 20:05:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

I wouldn't be surprised if the U shape takes up more vertice thermo than two rectangles, as it has been shown there are certain optimizations for standard shapes. For instance, you can describe any rectangle by three points (which would explain why the thermo on triangles and rectangles seems to be the same). But it is nice to have a single shape, I suppose.

2009-10-26 11:10:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

There isn't a default rectangle shape It's an interesting point though, we checked to see that triangles and squares have the same therm, and assumed it was the same for all quadrilaterals. Maybe triangle logic is the way forward.

2009-10-26 11:20:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

noes mister Rtm you cannot use triangular logic mister rtm, itll make it look cheep and tacky and not awesome like all your logic seems to... can i have some scraps?

2009-10-26 16:45:00 Author: Kern Posts: 5078

---

Oh, I dunno. Using the triangle with three equal sides you would end up with a structure like a bee hive. Imagine hundreds of pistons and winches wriggling about such a structure like bees. Seems pretty awesome.

2009-10-26 17:29:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

what would be the point in that? it would affect other factors aswell

2009-10-26 20:07:00 Author: Kern Posts: 5078

---

what would be the point in that? I think rogar already answered your question: Seems pretty awesome. .

2009-10-26 23:02:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Did you guys see the new video MM made about the Thermometer? In it, they explain that circles _CONTAIN NO VERTICES AT ALL_, so are actually the cheapest to use. So, I think logic gates with circles would take up the least amount of thermometer

2009-10-29 16:44:00 Author: robbit10 Posts: 450

---

Yup, we saw it and showed it to be false. Basic shapes all take essentially the same thermo, with circles a bit more thermo heavy.

2009-10-29 16:56:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

Did you guys see the new video MM made about the Thermometer? In it, they explain that circles _CONTAIN NO VERTICES AT ALL_, so are actually the cheapest to use. So, I think logic gates with circles would take up the least amount of thermometer Yeah, but many of us don't trust that video to be 100% accurate in all honesty. The circle is far simpler than a normal 20 sided shape (which is how it is rendered), however: Ok, I've run some basic tests, and here's the data: As a preamble, these tests were run in a completely empty level void of anything except the basic background and Sackboy. All items placed down were 2 small grid spaces in width and in height, not counting the triangle shape which does not extend all the way to the top of a 2x2 square, and all items were thin (though preliminary testing showed that thickness has no effect). The level overheated after placing... 1400 dark matter circles. 2500 dark matter squares. 2500 dark matter triangles. 1400 cardboard circles. 1500 cardboard squares. 1500 cardboard triangles. This means that contrary to what Mm's thermometer video says, circles are not the least thermo-heavy items. In fact, they did worse in all tests. It seems that using triangles over squares has no discernible effect either.

2009-10-29 16:57:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.