Home    LBP Showcase / Reviews / Recommendations    Object Showcase
#1

tap grab

Archive: 124 posts

i was just wondering, with all the buzz going around about the tap grab mechanism. who really made it first??? because im not sure about you guys, but i made an early one a long time ago for my Maus tank. im not sure the exact date, but it was at least 5 months ago. so when did you guys make yours.

ALSO im not trying to start a ruckus im just curious as to whom the credit goes to because it is a very useful contraption.		2010-01-10 20:31:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Looks like this guy (https://lbpcentral.lbp-hub.com/index.php?t=t=8253) was on the ball almost a year ago, and even he talked about previous versions which also could be described as a "tap grab" switch mechanism.

Credit for something is only due when your designs are influenced by or make use of another's design / mechanism. In this case it seems that the "tap grab" switch, or more generically; a switch which changes function on taps and holds, seems to be a fairly common idea which a lot of people may have designed independently - without the knowledge that something similar has already been created.

I agree it's a good idea, but its not like it deserves its own patent rights ^.^.		2010-01-10 23:14:00

Author:
GTA_Chaos
Posts: 25

i know but people seem to be making a big deal about it. especially in a contest thread where someone entered this as an invention, but i doubt he was the first to make it.

https://lbpcentral.lbp-hub.com/index.php?t=t=18908		2010-01-11 01:57:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

It's a very useful switch, but I don't know who made it.2010-01-11 02:06:00

Author:
Unknown User

I first came across it in johnee's vertigo dropship, where holding r1 fired paint but tapping fired missiles. I then made a version myself for my rhemora (small, pretty bad flying machine), where tapping made it take off / land and grabbing made it fire paint. This system has been drastically improved upon in my barracuda gunship, though it still does the same thing.2010-01-11 21:53:00

Author:
croissantbuncake
Posts: 572

hello, "he" has a name, and i never claimed i was the original, i just made it differently2010-01-11 22:53:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

hello, "he" has a name, and i never claimed i was the original, i just made it differently

Although I agree in every aspect that it doesn't matter who made it, your thread said "new logic mechanism" in giant letters and you constantly refer to it as yours, /runs*		2010-01-12 01:32:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

maybe we should see who can make the most effective and thermo friendly one???

i would pwn.		2010-01-12 03:08:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Horwitzer, you're not very good at low-thermo logic /hides*2010-01-12 04:38:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

of course i refer to it as mine! i wouldnt say imma gunna use horwitzers when i have my own that works, and it is new, the concept might not be but the logic is2010-01-12 07:01:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

maybe we should see who can make the most effective and thermo friendly one???

Hmmmm, didn't we already do something like that? 		2010-01-12 08:14:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

Woo hoo I got linked to
Tap grabs are awesome, who made it? Hm, the world may never know. I want a lolli pop		2010-01-12 08:34:00

Author:
thefrozenpenquin
Posts: 479

I MADE IT!!

Yep, the secret is out.


I originally made it when I wanted to choose between picking up my milkshake, or just drink directly from it. Yep, that's right! 		2010-01-12 13:36:00

Author:
Fredrik94
Posts: 342

Im not sure if you mean this, but I made something some time ago that you needed to grab and release within a certain amount of time for it to activate a switch. It was just a magnetic switch with two magnetic keys on pistons set to flipper (like an and switch) with the pistons being controlled by two one shot grab switches on the same object with one of them inverted.

I called it a quick grab, lol. Tap sounds like its probably the same thing. I made it like about two months ago maybe??? So after you, but I never got the idea from anyone or anything… just come up with it myself.

Its a really simple concept, so I dont think any one can claim to have made it first. I had never heard of a “Tap Switch” up until now, and Ive already made one XD

All that really matters is, more people know about it now (I think) and we’ll hopefully see a lot more weird and wonderful contraptions that would benefit from this tap switch.		2010-01-12 15:04:00

Author:
oLMCo
Posts: 96

okay i can fit 161 of my tap grabs into a blank level before it overheats what about you guys?2010-01-12 15:42:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

I MADE IT!!

Yep, the secret is out.


I originally made it when I wanted to choose between picking up my milkshake, or just drink directly from it. Yep, that's right!

your thinking of the straw and no i made that and am currently rolling in pennies that i receive per straw sold 		2010-01-12 16:30:00

Author:
Littlebigdude805
Posts: 1924

I can place about 2000, I lost count.


Not thinking of the straw, but my super tap grab mechanism. 		2010-01-12 17:43:00

Author:
Fredrik94
Posts: 342

Horwitzer, you're not very good at low-thermo logic /hides*

my logic is just fine and besides, its what it controls that counts, not that it slightly more thermo friendly.anyway i think mine may not be the most thermo friendly but it is very fast.

maybe i should overhaul all of my logic again....		2010-01-12 20:52:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

What to you mean by fast.....2010-01-12 20:55:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

What to you mean by fast.....

all tap grabs must work by cancelling the tap command if the switch is held too long, unlike some switches, my delays are very short which means less lag especially for the tap function which requires some delay at least to work properly. basically: you tap and there is little delay, and the hold function kicks in sooner too.		2010-01-12 21:01:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

my tap has a latency of .1 and a hold latency of .2 is that fast enough?


EDIT Sorry its .3		2010-01-12 21:25:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

my tap has a latency of .1 and a hold latency of .2 is that fast enough?

that doesn't make sense, if the hold takes .2 than the tap must at least take that long, otherwise the tap function would activate every time.

and no it isn't fast enough.		2010-01-12 21:37:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

play my tech showcase, it makes perfect sense!2010-01-12 21:41:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

play my tech showcase, it makes perfect sense!

i don't have doubt in your mechanism but your explanation is confusing. it has to differentiate between tap and grab. however for the tap function you must make sure that it waits before it is activated, ie. there is a delay between the tap and and the actual function activating. that delay is directly related to the amount of time it would take to activate the hold mechanism. other wise it would activate every time as any grab could be interpreted by the logic as a tap. what i means is, there must be a delay between tapping the sponge and the function activated because the logic must be sure that this tap is not actually a hold, the only way it can do this is wait a little bit longer (the delay) to be sure. but what makes my so fast is that the tap is very fast, but when you hold the sponge the hold function activates very quickly, much faster than others i have seen. that is what i mean.		2010-01-13 00:16:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

mine doesnt need a delay2010-01-13 06:21:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

Just a quick question...

Why did you guys have to start a new thread?

BTW: I made one yesterday.. could fit 156 before i maxed out..
And mine has single-tap grab and multitap (if you just keeps tapping it registers everytap as multitap...		2010-01-13 07:16:00

Author:
Tamland
Posts: 106

"we guys" never started a new thread, i would have been more than happy to talk about it on another thread that had some relevance2010-01-13 17:28:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

"we guys" never started a new thread, i would have been more than happy to talk about it on another thread that had some relevance

don't get mean, i would have but wasn't sure where to put it. i don't see what the issue is anyway.

and kernel IM GOING TO PUT THIS IS WORDS YOU CAN UNDERSTAND im not trying to be mean im just confused:

any tap grab mechanism has to differentiate, other wise any hold could also be interpreted as a tap. so to fix this you have to make a mechanism where if the switch is held, than it cancels the tap function. so to do this it must wait a second to make sure each tap, isn't a hold. this means no matter what, the tap function will always be delayed atleast the amount of time it takes the hold to activate, it would be possible to also have another delay exclusively for the hold function, but this would be meaning less. ex, in my variation, an emmitter emmits a block with a key on it in the air, but it takes time to fall to the range of the magnetic switch, but if you hold the switch, another key comes and destroys that one before it reaches it.

no offence, im sure your mechanism is great, i doubt i could fit more than 100 in my level, by i don't really need to. and besides, with the complexity of my tanks the logic barely takes up anything at all.		2010-01-13 21:30:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

mine doesnt need a delay2010-01-13 22:30:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

Between the two of you typing so many mistakes and fragments I think I'm going to explode, lol.2010-01-13 23:17:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

im sorry, is suck at sentence fragments. i never understood it.

and kernel, if yours has no delay how does it cancel the tap function if you hold the spronge. (just to be clear there are always delays, but many of them (such as mine) are incredibly fast, less than .2 or even .1 .		2010-01-13 23:38:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

I mean, it annoys me that "u talk like dis all the time and dont seem to know capital letters exist"... lol...

As for your thing about the grab switch, the fastest sackboy can grab and then ungrab, I think, is about .15 seconds so I don't see how some or your statistics are posiible.		2010-01-14 00:01:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

I mean, it annoys me that "u talk like dis all the time and dont seem to know capital letters exist"... lol...

As for your thing about the grab switch, the fastest sackboy can grab and then ungrab, I think, is about .15 seconds so I don't see how some or your statistics are posiible.

i try not to talk like that, and my caps aren't an issue in my mind. and i mean that... you know what, i will just send you the object, its too hard too describe.

maybe i will publish a level with some of my logic.

BTW i think i figured out a way to make a very fast double tap (no offence but yours is kind of slow, i noticed your life time on the emmiters is 0.4, i have managed to make a design that works a 0.3 or maybe even less.) it is extremely simple. and works faster (less break between taps).


i just realized something, many people have complained about this thread as it is seemed unnecessary, but i think it has sparked a good disscussion. in retrospect i think it actually should be in "everything else LBP". maybe a moderator could move it "wink wink"		2010-01-14 01:30:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

i try not to talk like that, and my caps aren't an issue in my mind. and i mean that... you know what, i will just send you the object, its too hard too describe.

maybe i will publish a level with some of my logic.

BTW i think i figured out a way to make a very fast double tap (no offence but yours is kind of slow, i noticed your life time on the emmiters is 0.4, i have managed to make a design that works a 0.3 or maybe even less.) it is extremely simple. and works faster (less break between taps).

What the heck do you mean? It can activate in .2 to .3 seconds if you grab fast enough. And the lifetime is supposed to be .4, it's to help people who grab slow.

ii just realized something, many people have complained about this thread as it is seemed unnecessary, but i think it has sparked a good disscussion. in retrospect i think it actually should be in "everything else LBP". maybe a moderator could move it "wink wink"

You just realised that? lol



----------------------------------------------		2010-01-14 02:49:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

i guess you made it slow on purpose, but for me it has to be fast. and when i tried to speed yours up it failed.

and yes i did just realize that.		2010-01-14 02:56:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Do you mean it resets too slowly, or it activates too slowly? It activates faster than sackboy can even grab. And it's deactivation can easily be tweaked.2010-01-14 03:06:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Well, this is getting interesting.
I'm sure that each creator's own device suits their purposes just fine, and there's not a way to say whether or not a particular way of doing it is "better".
I hope that this is less of a competition and more of a showcase now, because I'm interested in seeing how each of you made it. That is, unless I just made this even more heated. In that case, I'll get some popcorn and watch 		2010-01-14 03:36:00

Author:
Hibbsi
Posts: 203

Mine is clearly and unequivocally mathematically the fastest, simplest, lowest-thermo, most tweakable, and most consistent. Har har har. With a quick-reset function included.2010-01-14 04:25:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

What i mean is that your taps are slow and have time in between, i like it more when its very fast and almost immediately one after the other. Yours unfortunately cannot be tuned that way, at least i can't seem to make it faster. Not that thats a bad thing its just my opinion. Also i agree with Hibbisi91, lets not get hostile. all the designs are good and suited to the creator.

AND I USED CAPITAL LETTERS THIS TIME!!!!!		2010-01-14 04:58:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

lol. barely. Mine may look slow but it's still faster than sackboy can grab. If you grabbed twice and two blocks didn't come out that would mean it's too slow but that never happens.2010-01-14 05:02:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

lol. barely. Mine may look slow but it's still faster than sackboy can grab. If you grabbed twice and two blocks didn't come out that would mean it's too slow but that never happens.

Well, its obviously not faster than sackboy can grab because i made a faster one. ( I think from experience that when using the 1 function on grab switches limits grabs, i think its faster to use a directional switch that pulls a piston with a magnetic key on it to emmit the blocks.)		2010-01-14 05:48:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

''I' is always written with a capital letter, even if it is in the middle of an sentence...

I like cookies because I like them.



Can't you just meet up in LBP and go flashing all your logics to see who has the best one..?


/runs away'		2010-01-14 06:58:00

Author:
Fredrik94
Posts: 342

Competition Time!?

Everybody that thinks that they have the best tap/grab publish a level with it, showing all the components and all.. And then we decide for you!
Why? Because right now its just words against words...

You talk the talk, but do you walk the walk?

2010-01-14 07:25:00

Author:
Tamland
Posts: 106

Gimme' a break incinerator, Im on my PSP. Ok Tamland lets do that, I already have one published, which i believe is the fastest (0.1, 0.3) and the most reliable. 2010-01-14 07:40:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

I don't claim mine is the best but it suits my needs. Other creators may have different needs, I like my logic to be extremely fast and reliable with minimum delay, whereas I don't really care too much about thermo usage as long as it isn't crazy.

BTW, thanks for the english lesson, its not my fortay, all the French screws me up.

Est-ce-que il y a quelqun qui parle le francais ici, non, donc tu ne saiverait jamait comment superieur je suis comparer au vous. mais serieusement, tous le monde sais ca.

If anyone else speaks French my grammar there was probably terrible.		2010-01-14 07:42:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

I do believe mine is faster.



.		2010-01-14 07:47:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

I don't claim mine is the best but it suits my needs. Other creators may have different needs, I like my logic to be extremely fast and reliable with minimum delay, whereas I don't really care too much about thermo usage as long as it isn't crazy.

BTW, thanks for the english lesson, its not my fortay, all the French screws me up.

If anyone else speaks French my grammar there was probably terrible.



K, good you got the I's right.

Huh funny how you write French with a big F but not English with a big E. Remember that in English all languages etc. are written with capitals.


Anyway, do what Tamland said.


EDIT:

KernelM, accept my friend request! >		2010-01-14 14:59:00

Author:
Fredrik94
Posts: 342

Mine is faster then sackboy can grab. Just because yours is faster than mine doesn't mean mine isn't faster than sackboy can grab, it means yours is also faster than mine, which means it too is faster than sackboy can grab. It's not rocket science. lol.2010-01-14 20:55:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Yesit is actually, because mine uses rockets.2010-01-15 02:45:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

for what? Double tap or Tap grab?2010-01-15 16:11:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

Reading this thread reminds me of System's CIGARO.

"MY **** IS MUCH BIGGER THAN YOURS!"

=P I use paint for my tap/grab mechanic and it works rather well for what its worth. Regardless, it's pretty fun seeing all the different ways creators tackle a similar issue.		2010-01-15 21:44:00

Author:
gevurah22
Posts: 1476

I just improved my design!! It is now faster than before and more thermo friendly (only one piston, one emmiter, and 2 magnetic keys and switches). The only downside (if it even is) is that it requires 2 grabs on the input, one set to "one" function and the other to "direction" function. i can currently fit around 176 before it starts to overheat and 189 until it overheats (without sponges). And best of all like i mentioned it is extremely fast.2010-01-18 04:53:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

that sounds exactly like mine 2010-01-18 07:27:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

Mine is faster then sackboy can grab.

Hang on now. Faster than sackboy can grab? Is that even possible, and how exactly did you measure such a thing?

Edit - Oh, maybe it is. I was thinking that sackboy could grab at 0.1s, but he probably can't now I think about it.		2010-01-18 10:06:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

Ya, sackboy grabs at about .15 or maybe even .2 .2010-01-18 14:30:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

actually horwitzer that is mine, you used a false account to ask me how to make it, so i told you, now you know... Suspicious? i think not!
2010-01-18 15:30:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

Kernel, that's quite the accusation!

@Everyone - I've had about enough of all the bickering over who created what and which version is better. It does not matter! You guys sound very shallow in your intent to make these objects... are you looking for recognition? If those are your goals, then you need to reevaluate why you are creating these things in the first place. You don't gain anything by the first do this this or the best person to create that. Instead, you should try to make the game better for everyone. There's no sense in creating an idea and then condemning everyone who uses it. You should be happy that people are using it. If you feel that someone is taking credit for your work - oh well. They aren't truly gaining anything from it either.

If you all continue to argue, the image you are [seemingly] trying to work for will be shattered, and replaced with one that people regard as selfish and childish. I have half a mind to close this thread down. Prove to me that this doesn't have to happen.

-Comph		2010-01-18 18:16:00

Author:
comphermc
Posts: 5338

I respectfully disagree, while some of us are acting like children "cough"kernel"cough" i don't see anything wrong with healthy competition. I am in fact no longer interested in seeing who was the first to build it, but to challenge my other fellow creators to improve their designs and share there knowledge. Everyone builds logic differently and while some methods may be faster or even better than others, it is always interesting and educational to see how other people conquered the same challenge. After all if only one person invented civilization, it would probably suck hard

Thats all i intended and i think the others will agree

Also, im not sure but i think that in some cases the one tap function limits sack boys grabbing speed, but i will have to research further.		2010-01-18 20:33:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Kernel, that's quite the accusation!

@Everyone - I've had about enough of all the bickering over who created what and which version is better. It does not matter! You guys sound very shallow in your intent to make these objects... are you looking for recognition? If those are your goals, then you need to reevaluate why you are creating these things in the first place. You don't gain anything by the first do this this or the best person to create that. Instead, you should try to make the game better for everyone. There's no sense in creating an idea and then condemning everyone who uses it. You should be happy that people are using it. If you feel that someone is taking credit for your work - oh well. They aren't truly gaining anything from it either.

If you all continue to argue, the image you are [seemingly] trying to work for will be shattered, and replaced with one that people regard as selfish and childish. I have half a mind to close this thread down. Prove to me that this doesn't have to happen.

-Comph

Well said. For example, Tamland has brought to our attention the incremental bolts. I knew that property of motor bolts, but never told anybody about it (I thought people knew about it already O_o). Am I going to say that he stole my idea or that I thought of it first? Nope. He may have known about this for a long time, or he might have a better way to use them. It's not his fault that I didn't show anybody, and I'm glad he did. Regardless, it doesn't matter in the end who made it. People are going to use these ideas no matter who discovered or devised it. If you don't want people to know how your creation works, why tell people that you've made it in the first place?

Competition = Good
Claiming intellectual property in a game that's about creating for the masses = Not good		2010-01-18 21:23:00

Author:
Hibbsi
Posts: 203

actually horwitzer that is mine, you used a false account to ask me how to make it, so i told you, now you know... Suspicious? i think not!


Agreed that this is far to big an accusation to make with zero evidence. Remember that I built that configuration around a week before you did and then you came up with the same method indepenently. Note the key word there. If two of us managed to come up with the same technique, is it that hard to believe that a third has? Not really.


This thread has been really quite bad, just people flaming each other and refusing to respect each others' skills, then dropping to the levels of "your grammar is off" and baseless accuasations.


If you don't want people to know how your creation works, why tell people that you've made it in the first place?
I don't actually agree with this. Especially if it's some gameplay element. You can produce a level using some technology you have designed and I don't think you should be expected to share the workings with the world - in fact it's downright rude to expect that of someone. However, if you do choose to keep stuff to yourself remember that there will always be others who can create the same effect (whether through the same means or different) and when that happens, respect is due.		2010-01-18 21:46:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

"your grammar is off"

Hey now, that had nothing to do with any of this, I'm just a grammar nut.

Well, to steer this in the right direction, does anybody think they know how fast sackboy can actually grab and then release? It's slower than .1, that's for sure.		2010-01-18 22:11:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

@rtm223: In the context of this thread, where they are discussing how their devices work (or at least some of them were), I think what I said is valid. I did state that wrongly if I were to say that in general, however. I was trying to say:

However, if you do choose to keep stuff to yourself remember that there will always be others who can create the same effect (whether through the same means or different) and when that happens, respect is due.
but it seems that I failed

On topic:
As to figuring out how fast one can grab, I think I can devise a way to have a controller send a "R1" signal to a PS3 faster than humanly possible, and consistently, and then create something in-game to count how many grabs there are in a certain amount of time. (This is all a maybe, I'm not exactly sure)		2010-01-18 22:49:00

Author:
Hibbsi
Posts: 203

you mean a modded controller, does anybody have one????

Also i have been able to make a fairly simple but reliable tap/hold/double tap, i know this is old news but i just thought i should say. unlike others i have seen, mine features a very unique but very simple double tap using emmited triangles. Why triangles you may ask? Well if you emmit one at a corner and another over top of it quickly, it will glance off and trigger a separate magnetic switch (indicating a double tap).

here is a rough idea:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4065/4285950003_3548c15871_o.jpg		2010-01-19 00:47:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Well a modded controller would be easier than what I was thinking of, so I'll see if I can find somebody that has one I could borrow.

(I was thinking about sending signal via IR or Bluetooth)		2010-01-19 01:07:00

Author:
Hibbsi
Posts: 203

so stealing my design wasnt enough?2010-01-19 07:42:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

Well a modded controller would be easier than what I was thinking of, so I'll see if I can find somebody that has one I could borrow.

(I was thinking about sending signal via IR or Bluetooth)

haha!
My first guess was also to pair the ps3 with a bluetooth-device and then pulse at i.e. 500/sec...
I guess we do think alike sometimes

We shouldn't overthink stuff! 		2010-01-19 08:16:00

Author:
Tamland
Posts: 106

unlike others i have seen, mine features a very unique but very simple double tap using emmited triangles. Why triangles you may ask? Well if you emmit one at a corner and another over top of it quickly, it will glance off and trigger a separate magnetic switch (indicating a double tap).
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4065/4285950003_3548c15871_o.jpg

Looks a lot like what wex had originally in his robot invasion level ^^ yay for great minds thinking alike! Personally I'm not keen on anything that has parts flying around in such an uncontrolled manner, but the theory is sound.		2010-01-19 08:43:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

It's good to see the 'tap grab', as you guys are calling it, is catching on. I used that in my latest level, thanks to the LBPC logic pack, and one person said those tap grab elevator switches were counter-intuitive. However, they did get the hang of it while playing through the level.


Personally I'm not keen on anything that has parts flying around in such an uncontrolled manner, but the theory is sound.

I agree - could be too unpredictable....		2010-01-19 13:01:00

Author:
Powershifter
Posts: 668

actually horwitzer that is mine, you used a false account to ask me how to make it, so i told you, now you know... Suspicious? i think not!

If you're referring to the PM I sent asking - that was genuine. It may have seemed suspicious as I don't post much but that's because I don't have PSN at the moment, and trying other levels in the community is half the fun, and half the discussion. Until I get online I have limited contribution.

Also, I asked you because you were the first one that I saw who posted about the tap grab mechanism - so I assumed yours would be the most comprehensive and practical design. Sorry for the confusion.		2010-01-19 21:11:00

Author:
GTA_Chaos
Posts: 25

you mean a modded controller, does anybody have one????

Also i have been able to make a fairly simple but reliable tap/hold/double tap, i know this is old news but i just thought i should say. unlike others i have seen, mine features a very unique but very simple double tap using emmited triangles. Why triangles you may ask? Well if you emmit one at a corner and another over top of it quickly, it will glance off and trigger a separate magnetic switch (indicating a double tap).

here is a rough idea:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4065/4285950003_3548c15871_o.jpg

Emmiting simple squares on top of each other uses less corners and is a lot faster though, and you can never emit more than two at once. I've seen that triangle double grab method in dan_westy's level.

Heck, you could even emit circles on top of each other (the lowest thermo shape I believe.) (Due to impact detection, and a circle's perfect roundness registers as just one side.)		2010-01-19 22:03:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Emmiting simple squares on top of each other uses less corners and is a lot faster though, and you can never emit more than two at once. I've seen that triangle double grab method in dan_westy's level.

Heck, you could even emit circles on top of each other (the lowest thermo shape I believe.) (Due to impact detection, and a circle's perfect roundness registers as just one side.)

This post is riddled with misconceptions and I couldn't ignore it.

Through our testing circles are more thermo heavy than squares and triangles. Squares have more corners than triangles, but it turns out to not matter. Impact detection on a circle would likely take more calculation than that of a square. Yikes, Careful.		2010-01-19 22:52:00

Author:
comphermc
Posts: 5338

Actually, if they simulate perfect circles the way i think they do, it's a lot cheaper than poly based collision. Basically a perfect circle can be simulated with a radius and a position, which makes for a lot cheaper calculation (i have some experience with physics engines so i can be fairly confident of my opinion). The minute you start using it to cut away or start drawing with a circle brush though, all that goes out the window.2010-01-19 22:59:00

Author:
RCIX
Posts: 250

Try placing X number or circles in a level and then do the same with squares or triangles. You may be surprised.2010-01-19 23:10:00

Author:
comphermc
Posts: 5338

But? I thought you said in testing something like that the maximum number of circles you could fit in a level was more than the maximum amount of squares? And, don't be afraid to point out my misconceptions, I want to learn new things. Overall though, something that emits squares on top of each other uses less corners because you don't need an extra area for the second shape to slide off the first.2010-01-19 23:14:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Try placing X number or circles in a level and then do the same with squares or triangles. You may be surprised.

I shall do so...		2010-01-19 23:27:00

Author:
RCIX
Posts: 250

Would there be a difference in cardboard circles and squares versus dark matter circles and squares?2010-01-19 23:41:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Yes. Dark matter does not contribute to your moving objects thermo.

Collision detection for a circle is based upon the radius of the circle, but it still has more thermo usage than a square. Although.... have we tested this since leerdammer - thermo updates took place then. Mr Moderator may have to back down some

Edit - see 2 posts below:


It would appear that a circle costs the same as a square!		2010-01-19 23:44:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

I know dark matter uses less, I meant if circles and squares would use a different proportion of thermo with different materials.

And new leerdammer testing definitely seems like I good idea, like how creators are reporting emmiters using up to 50% of the thermo of what they used before the update.		2010-01-19 23:50:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Ok i whipped out my copy of LBP GOTY to test. Empty spot on my moon, basic sponge circles and squares:

It took 143 circles to reach the middle of the small tick mark, while it took.... Drumrolll please...

Da da dun... 143 squares to reach the exact same point. It would appear that a circle costs the same as a square!		2010-01-20 00:14:00

Author:
RCIX
Posts: 250

I declare comph now owes me 200 rep. lol.

(Don't infract me )		2010-01-20 00:23:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Try placing X number or circles in a level and then do the same with squares or triangles. You may be surprised.

You should post a link to your assessment on the thermometer. I looked for it but couldn't find it. It's definitely a must read for those interested.		2010-01-20 00:26:00

Author:
Powershifter
Posts: 668

Comphrehensive Thermo Overview and Guide (https://lbpcentral.lbp-hub.com/index.php?t=16840-Comprehensive-Thermo-Overview-and-Guide) - That what you're looking for powershifter? Tutorials forum and stickied, for future reference

Kernel, I think it was actually the double grab method that we came up with an identical solution to, not the single grab, but the principle is the same, it's perfectly feasible for two creators to independently come up with the same solution.

Anyhoo, so seeing as someone over at LBL was asking for a function alternator on double grab, I put this together for them:


Double Tap

Resting point of the double tap switch. The grab switch is set to 1-shot and connected to the emitter:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_1.jpg


Grab the switch and we get an emitted key:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_2.jpg


This activates the magnetic switch which makes the piston extend:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_3.jpg


If you hold the grab, or just tap once, then the emitter times out and you return to start:
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_1.jpg


If you tap once to trigger the motion of the emiter and then tap again before the emitted key times out, then the following happens:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_1.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_2.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_3.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_4.jpg

The left hand mag switch detects a double tap and triggers the required function.

Single Tap
Just cause it was there:

Resting Position, grab switch is directional and connected to the piston.

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_1.jpg


Grab and the piston extends:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_2.jpg


The extended piston triggers a one-shot emitter:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_3.jpg


If you hold the grab switch too long then the key dissapears and then when you release it returns to resting position:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_2.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_1.jpg

If you grab then let go quickly, the piston returns before the emitted key times out and you trigger the output (key that moves on the piston)
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_1.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_3.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_4.jpg


Adding Functions

So once you've got that working, the output from your tap / double tap switch should be fed into a toggle device and then you need to combine that with a delayed (delay is needed to prevent function triggering unless you actually hold - otherwise it will trigger on tap too) input from the grab (to detect hold AND whichever function). The complete devices (for two functions - requires minor modification for more) are shown below:


Double Tap:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_alternator.jpg


Single Tap:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_Alternator.jpg		2010-01-20 01:01:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

I still believe that on its own, (if you don't need extra grab functions) a square based emmiter uses the least thermo. Two keys, a keyswitch, an emmiter, a one-shot grab switch and you're good to go.

I also made a rapid-grab switch that's kinda similar to yours rtm, if you're interested.

But nice post.		2010-01-20 01:12:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

I'd still not use the bouncy emitter techniques for the simple fact that it has the feel of instability, even though I'm pretty sure it's perfectly stable. You are right on the therm though, and you could actually drop it into something like the system above with lower overall therm than what I posted. I just like having everything held in place with stiff pistons and dark matter.


As a side note, anyone spotted the implied right-angle shated input AND gate on those contraptions above. If not: Read Mah Blog!		2010-01-20 01:18:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

Talk about instabilty, your emmiter-based toggle is crazily annoying to box-select because of the double-emmiting

Have you ever seen the simple three-piece cardboard toggle? I'm starting to prefer using that kind for more complex things.		2010-01-20 01:30:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

Talk about instabilty, your emmiter-based toggle is crazily annoying to box-select because of the double-emmiting I still have no problems with this whatsoever. I literally have no idea what all of y'all are talking about. I gave up trying to reproduce it and decided everyone else in the world was a right muppet


Have you ever seen the simple three-piece cardboard toggle? I'm starting to prefer using that kind for more complex things. I have no idea, although for some reason me not knowing what to do with the three pieces of cardboard reminds me of demolition man....

I have lots of toggles, including a winch-based toggle with one moving part, the toggle in the images above which uses two parallel pistons, notched wheels and incremental blots can be reduced down to simple 2-state toggles too. I'm pretty much all toggled out if truth be told! I don't even use toggles that often!		2010-01-20 01:58:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

Really? Kidding aside, it is a fairly irritating problem. Sometimes if you move it or rewind, or do disruptive things like that, it'll re-emit another square on top of itself.

And if you have more toggles, please explain them more or send 		2010-01-20 02:02:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

I'd also like to see more toggles plox 2010-01-20 02:13:00

Author:
iGotFancyPants
Posts: 1355

Ok i whipped out my copy of LBP GOTY to test. Empty spot on my moon, basic sponge circles and squares:

It took 143 circles to reach the middle of the small tick mark, while it took.... Drumrolll please...

Da da dun... 143 squares to reach the exact same point. It would appear that a circle costs the same as a square!

From a few months back...


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.

As you can tell from the non Dark Matter stuffs, the relationship between circles and squares and triangles is close, but circles do lose out. You may not have been able to discern a difference only going as high as you did.


I'd also like to see more toggles plox

The one that rtm has hidden in those pictures is all you need. Super low thermo and and is very quick.		2010-01-20 03:31:00

Author:
comphermc
Posts: 5338

Really? Kidding aside, it is a fairly irritating problem. Sometimes if you move it or rewind, or do disruptive things like that, it'll re-emit another square on top of itself.
Well you shouldn't have anything emitting from that in create mode, let alone re-emitting. Rewinding should only cause a problem like that if the input switch is activated at the point of rewind (the whole emitters emitting when they shouldn't thing).


And if you have more toggles, please explain them more or send
Uh yeah, will do at some point. I'm not too sure about the winch one though, when I made it way back, I think it switched at 0.2s. It now does 0.1 but it's really aggressive. Seems stable but I haven't tested it too much.


The one that rtm has hidden in those pictures is all you need. Super low thermo and and is very quick.
The emitter toggle is faster 		2010-01-20 15:54:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

If you're referring to the PM I sent asking - that was genuine. It may have seemed suspicious as I don't post much but that's because I don't have PSN at the moment, and trying other levels in the community is half the fun, and half the discussion. Until I get online I have limited contribution.

Also, I asked you because you were the first one that I saw who posted about the tap grab mechanism - so I assumed yours would be the most comprehensive and practical design. Sorry for the confusion.


Coincidence then that the same day that i tell you Exactly how to make my version Horwitzer comes up with it? coincidence? ************* More like 		2010-01-20 17:19:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

Once again, I'll bring up the point made earlier.

You made your version of it. Whether or not somebody "took" it or not is a moot point, as "your" design is the one that people are using. Isn't that what you made it for, for others to use your design?		2010-01-20 17:30:00

Author:
Hibbsi
Posts: 203

yeah, but for Horwitzer to steal it and take credit for it is undesireable2010-01-20 17:36:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

As is making baseless accusations against others. Please stop this kernel, there really is no need for it.2010-01-20 17:44:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

there is a base to it...

fine i'll stop. 		2010-01-20 17:48:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

The emitter toggle is faster

Yeah, but I hate emitters. If I can avoid them I can. No real reason though...		2010-01-20 18:47:00

Author:
comphermc
Posts: 5338

Yeah, but I hate emitters. If I can avoid them I can. No real reason though...

Funny, because I just recently added emitters to a lot of my logic. I seem to prefer them :S		2010-01-20 20:31:00

Author:
iGotFancyPants
Posts: 1355

kernel, i didn't steal your design. i have made many variations of this and my first i made a long time ago. so really YOU STOLE MY IDEA, but you don't hear me whining about it.
i don't want this thread to be a flame war, and i saw your photos and mine looks nothing like it.

so calm down...n		2010-01-20 23:47:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Coincidence then that the same day that i tell you Exactly how to make my version Horwitzer comes up with it? coincidence? ************* More like
It's my understanding that having double accounts is against the forum rules / terms of service. Accusing me and horwitzer of this is pretty rude considering I've only recently joined here, and all I wanted to know was how to make the mechanism for a vehicle of mine.

This thread is ridiculous. If you guys are so petty about a simple "invention" you can't be enjoying LBP much. I can just imagine you, Kernal, trying to contact the Intellectual Property Office in attempt to get patent rights for something you made in LBP. Seriously that's how stupid this looks.

LOLZ		2010-01-20 23:58:00

Author:
GTA_Chaos
Posts: 25

It's my understanding that having double accounts is against the forum rules / terms of service. Accusing me and horwitzer of this is pretty rude considering I've only recently joined here, and all I wanted to know was how to make the mechanism for a vehicle of mine.

This thread is ridiculous. If you guys are so petty about a simple "invention" you can't be enjoying LBP much. I can just imagine you, Kernal, trying to contact the Intellectual Property Office in attempt to get patent rights for something you made in LBP. Seriously that's how stupid this looks.

LOLZ

I'm sorry, but i think i misunderstood. Did kernel think i made a second account to figure out how a tap/grab works?!?! Kernel, i mean this sincerely, no offence but if you really think i need help with a simple tap grab mechanism, considering that i believe that my tanks/other vehicles have logic far beyond that of a tap/grab, including toggles, tap/grab/holds, and tons of or gates, then i think you need to pull your head out of the gutter.

seriously, stop the hate, i didn't steal it i even made one for my maus tank almost 8 months ago. so how could i have?? im just trying to challenge others to share and improve there designs because the more ideas there are, the better for the inventions. maybe even you can learn how to create a better one. I will even upload photos ASAP to prove mine is different which it is. (not to say yours is bad, in fact i would have never thought of doing it that way, see what a little collaboration can do??).		2010-01-21 01:08:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

I can just imagine you, Kernal, trying to contact the Intellectual Property Office in attempt to get patent rights for something you made in LBP. Seriously that's how stupid this looks.

LOLZ

Sounds familiar...



Competition = Good
Claiming intellectual property in a game that's about creating for the masses = Not good




Anyway, why don't you guys just show us your designs? That way I can steal all of the designs for myself mwahahaha people will know who made what and if somebody else does claim one of them as their own design, we'll know if it is theirs or not.		2010-01-21 01:26:00

Author:
Hibbsi
Posts: 203

this game is all about sharing (play create share at all??). we all should share all of our contraptions. besides when it comes to logic it isn't really a big deal. logic is to improve other objects, not to be its own contraption. Its understandable to be annoyed if you build an awesome car or a tank or a crane and someone steals it, its unique, but logic isn't. it simply performs a task and how it does it isn't important, neither is who built. don't get me wrong they should be recognized and if they don't want there objects shared then you'd best not share them, but don't be a jerk. play create and SHARE.2010-01-21 01:42:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Yay! Some progress! Now, lets have everybody get on board..2010-01-21 02:07:00

Author:
Hibbsi
Posts: 203

Horwitzer, if the inventor of a logic device is so unimportant and insignificant why'd you make a thread about it? lol.

Back on track: I don't think you'd need a hacked controller to test tapping and releasing. I pressed R1on a piece of sponge ten or so times in about five seconds and it seemed like it only registered a grabseven or eight times.		2010-01-21 02:13:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

hummm, thats interesting. i just thought a hacked controller would be more controlled as it is probably set on a timer. And the reason i started this thread was not to gloat about who invented it, but to spark a conversation of intellect and ingenuity in hopes of improving the logic of littlebigplanet in general. BTW add "PurelyWisdom" i created it in case i don't get my account back, actually i don't think i have much to loose, im only loosing the levels i published (which are all outdated) and my MW2 rank, which btw im trading that game in, that game is super inconsistent and very annoying, if you've ever played it you know what i mean, im gonna try BFBC2, but i digress.

anyhoo, i have a challenge for all those logic pros out there. you can make a sponge with a "one" output and make it go to a toggle device which toggles between different modes. however to make one with multiple outputs the best way seems to be to make a circle with notches and make it move x number of rotations. each one having a different mode. (such as in the logic pack). anyway i was thinking of building a piece of logic which can be hooked up to another one (copies) and toggles between modes. however, if you want to add one more mode or function, you could simply attach another one to add one more function. i built something like this a while ago, but it was very thermo heavy... anyone up to the challenge???		2010-01-21 04:29:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Please explain more. Such as what would you use something like that for?2010-01-21 04:32:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251

I think that you are looking for this: Incremental Bolt (https://lbpcentral.lbp-hub.com/index.php?t=19915-Incremental-Bolt)2010-01-21 05:03:00

Author:
Tamland
Posts: 106

Okay, let me specify: the whole point of my challenge is so that you can easily customize the number of outputs without modifying it (by adding or subtracting one of the "pods" of logic). so all of the "pods" of logic are the same, and can be hooked up to make x number of outputs: ex. 2 pods = 2 outputs, 5 pods = 5 outputs. the reason i think this would be useful is for customizing vehicles and making it easier to modify logic.2010-01-21 05:44:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

Hate to pop your bubble guys but it sounds liek you're asking for the ability to trigger more than one thing with a switch and the switches do that already....

I have another question for you all: with tap grab switches, isn't the tap function briefly activated even if one grabs and holds?		2010-01-21 07:22:00

Author:
RCIX
Posts: 250

Okay, let me specify: the whole point of my challenge is so that you can easily customize the number of outputs without modifying it (by adding or subtracting one of the "pods" of logic). so all of the "pods" of logic are the same, and can be hooked up to make x number of outputs: ex. 2 pods = 2 outputs, 5 pods = 5 outputs. the reason i think this would be useful is for customizing vehicles and making it easier to modify logic.

Yeah, I've done that. It'll go up to about 30 odd outputs before you have to start faffing and resizing stuff. It was one of the first logic systems I actually made. No one else seems to appreciate the benefit of modularity though and I always get faced with the "a wheel is simpler" argument


Hate to pop your bubble guys but it sounds liek you're asking for the ability to trigger more than one thing with a switch and the switches do that already....

I have another question for you all: with tap grab switches, isn't the tap function briefly activated even if one grabs and holds? I think you have completely missed the point. The whole idea here is to differentiate between a tap and a held grab. Most of us have achieved that through various means and it is certainly not something that the switches already do.		2010-01-21 10:16:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

I know what you mean about the wheel, it is simpler, but harder to customize, i think what i would really like is to standardize all of my logic, so i can implement it seamlessly to whatever i want.2010-01-21 19:48:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

I think you have completely missed the point. The whole idea here is to differentiate between a tap and a held grab. Most of us have achieved that through various means and it is certainly not something that the switches already do.

But i'm confused how that's actually done :S maybe if i see one working it will make sense...		2010-01-21 22:28:00

Author:
RCIX
Posts: 250

But i'm confused how that's actually done :S maybe if i see one working it will make sense...

Like this (or some other way)


Single Tap
Resting Position, grab switch is directional and connected to the piston.

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_1.jpg


Grab and the piston extends:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_2.jpg


The extended piston triggers a one-shot emitter:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_3.jpg


If you hold the grab switch too long then the key dissapears and then when you release it returns to resting position:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_2.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_1.jpg

If you grab then let go quickly, the piston returns before the emitted key times out and you trigger the output (key that moves on the piston)
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_1.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_3.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/ST_4.jpg		2010-01-21 23:30:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

I know what you mean about the wheel, it is simpler, but harder to customize, i think what i would really like is to standardize all of my logic, so i can implement it seamlessly to whatever i want.

Standardized logic isn't all that great. I prefer to build logic from scratch; no problems making it fit, and probably more efficient, too. It's all about techniques, not toolboxes, IMHO.


Yeah, I've done that. It'll go up to about 30 odd outputs before you have to start faffing and resizing stuff. It was one of the first logic systems I actually made. No one else seems to appreciate the benefit of modularity though and I always get faced with the "a wheel is simpler" argument

Is it the ordered input you're referring to? Come one, of course we liked that! 		2010-01-22 17:05:00

Author:
Rogar
Posts: 2284

Standardized logic isn't all that great. I prefer to build logic from scratch; no problems making it fit, and probably more efficient, too. It's all about techniques, not toolboxes, IMHO.

Absolutely. I do like the idea of being able to create generic devices that can easilly be adapted extend out for N-inputs / N-outputs / whatever without rebuilding from scratch or having to do a major strip down, but actually having all your logic plug and play is just more bother than it's worth and too inefficient.




Is it the ordered input you're referring to? Come one, of course we liked that!
it was a precursor to the ordered inputs tool. My first attempt at dark matter blocker logic waaaay back when. It's also the central mechanic for the water levels puzzle in cap'n sackBeard's treasure. Very similar idea with the modularity of the ordered inputs tool. If you set the pistons and winches up to much longer length than you need then you can place dark matter to cap them at a certain range, implement stepped linear motion between 0 and the capping point and once you have done that you can change the length by moving the cap and adding extra modules in.		2010-01-22 18:39:00

Author:
rtm223
Posts: 6497

I disagree, i almost always use the same logic organized in different ways to build my vehicles (although most of my vehicles operate similarly) and i am always scavenging off of one of my previously built ones. and if your saying its more inefficient i don't see how. if you use the same logic, but it is efficient i don't see how it could possibly be less efficient , unless you need to purpose build a logic piece from scratch that you don't have.2010-01-22 20:45:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

I prefer my Logic to be uniform, But i have no trouble re-editing/Re-making stuff, Thats why the logic pack is fantastic!2010-01-22 20:47:00

Author:
Kern
Posts: 5078

I agree with you, its much easier to see and figure out whats happening when it is all uniform, not to mention easier to build and modify when its easier to understand. Ex: i use the exact 3 way switch mechanism and tap grab mechanism for all of my vehicles, rather than building a new one each time.2010-01-22 21:27:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

I disagree, i almost always use the same logic organized in different ways to build my vehicles (although most of my vehicles operate similarly) and i am always scavenging off of one of my previously built ones. and if your saying its more inefficient i don't see how. if you use the same logic, but it is efficient i don't see how it could possibly be less efficient , unless you need to purpose build a logic piece from scratch that you don't have.

Have you read the Logic Blog? All of those questions have already been answered. You can use previously constructed logic, but modify it to your desired needs. Sometimes this means that you need to build from scratch, but if you capture certain logic components, piecing them together is quite simple.

switchGeek Logic Blog (https://lbpcentral.lbp-hub.com/index.php?t=t=19365)		2010-01-22 21:30:00

Author:
comphermc
Posts: 5338

I haven't read the logic blog actually, but i think its kind of a no-brainer anyway, its much easier and faster, maybe i will read the logic thingy now. and btw, i don't really see the question in my quote, its just sort of a statement, but it doesn't really matter anyway. Lets have a poll, all creators reply to this thread saying if you do or don't standardize all of your logic.2010-01-22 21:35:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

I disagree, i almost always use the same logic organized in different ways to build my vehicles (although most of my vehicles operate similarly) and i am always scavenging off of one of my previously built ones. and if your saying its more inefficient i don't see how. if you use the same logic, but it is efficient i don't see how it could possibly be less efficient , unless you need to purpose build a logic piece from scratch that you don't have.

By inefficient I mean it uses more parts (vertices, switches, pistons, etc) than necessary, which means it eats more thermo and might be slower to react. In some cases efficient logic built from scratch will be more complex to understand, but sometimes it might be simper. I'm sure there are some cases where reuse works just as well, and your vehicles might be one of them, but I usually find myself building from scratch (and then rebuilding again, after I get a better grip on what I really want it to do ).

And do check out Rtm's blogs, he has some good stuff on efficient logic. The implied logic one is particularly useful in showing why building from scratch is generally a good thing.		2010-01-25 15:08:00

Author:
Rogar
Posts: 2284

By inefficient I mean it uses more parts (vertices, switches, pistons, etc) than necessary, which means it eats more thermo and might be slower to react. In some cases efficient logic built from scratch will be more complex to understand, but sometimes it might be simper. I'm sure there are some cases where reuse works just as well, and your vehicles might be one of them, but I usually find myself building from scratch (and then rebuilding again, after I get a better grip on what I really want it to do ).

And do check out Rtm's blogs, he has some good stuff on efficient logic. The implied logic one is particularly useful in showing why building from scratch is generally a good thing.

That is very true, however I at least always try to make my logic as fast as possible and take those things into consideration. However many creators may not.		2010-01-25 19:23:00

Author:
horwitzer
Posts: 255

how do you make the tap grab2010-05-20 02:56:00

Author:
shadowsythe456732
Posts: 176

how do you make the tap grab

This is an old thread. It's best not to comment on old threads. It bumps them to the most recently commented threads lists. Also, your answers are just a few pages ahead of you in this thread.

Method 1:


Double Tap

Resting point of the double tap switch. The grab switch is set to 1-shot and connected to the emitter:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_1.jpg


Grab the switch and we get an emitted key:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_2.jpg


This activates the magnetic switch which makes the piston extend:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_3.jpg


If you hold the grab, or just tap once, then the emitter times out and you return to start:
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_1.jpg


If you tap once to trigger the motion of the emiter and then tap again before the emitted key times out, then the following happens:

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_1.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_2.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_3.jpg
http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt82/rtm223/Tap%20Switches/DT_4.jpg

The left hand mag switch detects a double tap and triggers the required function.


Method 2:


Also i have been able to make a fairly simple but reliable tap/hold/double tap, i know this is old news but i just thought i should say. unlike others i have seen, mine features a very unique but very simple double tap using emmited triangles. Why triangles you may ask? Well if you emmit one at a corner and another over top of it quickly, it will glance off and trigger a separate magnetic switch (indicating a double tap).

here is a rough idea:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4065/4285950003_3548c15871_o.jpg		2010-05-20 04:22:00

Author:
Incinerator22
Posts: 3251


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

Datenschutz
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.