Archive: 29 posts

---

It's been awhile since I created this state of the art locking device for my level back in March 2009. But even so, I think my push for high efficiency and versatility still holds true. When checked on the thermometer, the gauge didn't even pass one notch. What's more impressive is that the pin number is virtually uncrackable! How so you ask? The answer runs down to a simple math problem, 10^8 power. The design is simple yet eloquent. The user has the ability to input a 8 digit pin no. on a virtual keypad via a sticker switch. A unique logic system then distinguishes between inputs and verifies the pin no. Its very simple. The great thing about the 8DSV is that it's very adaptable. You're pin no. can use the same number multiple times. You don't have to worry about the amount of space taken up by 3 way switches because its wafer thin. You simply plug n play to change the master code. I'm in the process of posting pictures, so sorry I can't explain more. Also I'm having a contest to see if anyone can break the system. So prove me wrong and I'll reward you with the 8DSV As for everyone else, I'll be giving away the 8DSV at a later time. I'm sure it'll be a great addition to your levels.

2010-02-07 05:42:00 Author: M_R_Enigma Posts: 161

---

Less that one notch of thermo? rtm's ordered input device with 8 inputs might be even lower, but I'm not sure...

2010-02-07 08:30:00 Author: Incinerator22 Posts: 3251

---

The thermo efficiency of a device cannot be measured by how much it fills the thermo shown in create mode, only an objective analysis based on all the types of thermo can. It still sounds interesting, have you already published it?

2010-02-07 09:00:00 Author: Shadowheaven Posts: 378

---

I've played with it, but The difference between the two is if you mess up on rtms you reset it no? But with this one it doesnt reset automatically it has to be reset manually

2010-02-07 12:55:00 Author: Kern Posts: 5078

---

I dunno I haven't seen this one directly. The reset on incorrect input and external reset can both be removed quite easilly on mine. Although depending on what setup you have, then not resetting sia very good feature. This one, as far as I can, tell requires you to input 8 digits then hit enter. Mine would allow you to keep hitting inputs in sequence until you reach the right pattern somewhere in there. Mine was developed as a puzzle mechanic rather than a security device initially, but security is pretty much comparable on the both of them. I think the clear difference here is the number of symbols in the sequence, which is fully customisable, rather than fixed at 8. Possibly also the number of symbols available (is it fixed with 10 digits, or can you use 4 / 20 etc. without any rebuilding?). Edit, I just modified mine to take a 100-inputs sequence and it still barely breaks past half a thermo notch lol. Who fancy cracking the code with a google of combinations, hmmm?

2010-02-07 13:07:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

We're also talking about two completely different behaviours - Rtm's makes a check at every input, while Enigma's records the digit and then checks it - it's much more heavier on the thermo, but again, it does something different.

2010-02-07 13:09:00 Author: Shadowheaven Posts: 378

---

Enigmas does work... Just differentiy

2010-02-07 13:11:00 Author: Kern Posts: 5078

---

We're also talking about two completely different behaviours - Rtm's makes a check at every input, while Enigma's records the digit and then checks it - it's much more heavier on the thermo, but again, it does something different. Exactly, that's part of my point. Depending on how you retain the "memory" of the sequnce, in order to check it later, then that behaviour is always going to require a resonable amount of resource.

2010-02-07 13:13:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Wow, I'm surprised to see what reaction this object has got. What solely started as a side project for fun seems to have turned into a competition. Clearly, you guys have a lot of free time on your hands. Yes, I could probably make my lock take a 101 inputs subsequently, but I've got better things to do with my time. What I was going for was a simple lock that a person with the littlest knowledge of logic systems could incorporate to their levels. Honestly, I wasn't sure if my level was going to get a lot of plays so I was going to incorporate it into another level. Lastly, I meant no offense to anyone by what was said. I just really didn't care much for where this conversation was headed. So kudos to you my friend, for making an impressive lock.

2010-02-08 03:31:00 Author: M_R_Enigma Posts: 161

---

Lolwut?????? This isn't arguing this is heated logic discussion... It always happens

2010-02-08 07:48:00 Author: Kern Posts: 5078

---

I think I've been trying to make something like this for a while now! I've been trying to make a little section where you hold a button which shows you a little sequence of 4 beats, and then you have to copy the sequence in the right order, and doing that opens the door But I had so much trouble getting my head around it! So confusing :S I'm not sure whether this section is just to say that you have been able to make something, do you offer it for other people to use too?

2010-02-08 11:42:00 Author: Minty Posts: 29

---

Yes and quite a discussion at that. What I can't fathom is why anyone in their right mind would ever want to input a 100 digit sequence to unlock the door. I mean, honestly, who would have the patience for that. I have a hard time remembering 8 digits. To answer your question Minty, yes it can be used for that as well. In fact the idea spawned out an attempt to make a device could be used for a Zelda themed lvl. The player would have to hit the correct notes in order to unlock a door. I never did make that level, but I wouldn't mind helping you out.

2010-02-08 21:25:00 Author: M_R_Enigma Posts: 161

---

Yes and quite a discussion at that. What I can't fathom is why anyone in their right mind would ever want to input a 100 digit sequence to unlock the door. I mean, honestly, who would have the patience for that. I have a hard time remembering 8 digits. Of course you don't want 100 inputs, but the point is extensibility. Which would you prefer, a device that would take 8 inputs in the sequence, or a device which could take n inputs in the sequence? I don't know how easy yours is to customise, to different sequence lengths. It would take me around a minute to change the device to take however many inputs you want, so I don't think that "too much time on my hands" is really the issue here. But tbh, if you are going to post things here, people will discuss alternative methods / devices. Especially if you tout the key benefits as you have in the OP, people will compare those with other devices that they are aware of. As kernelM says, that's just simply what happens. We like to think of it as competitive creative collaboration, If you want you can have a cookie too, would that help cheer you up? @Minty, you could also check out comphermc's ordered inputs tutorial online. He improved upon my original design and made a pretty darn good tutorial about how to configure it, whcih should be understandable to most creators.

2010-02-08 21:48:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Your "ordered input device" as it is called, works on the principal that inputs are checked as they are administered, correct? Well, I've had a look into this and I see how you were able to accomplish this. When you make a mistake, the device simply starts over again until a correct input is administered and then it advances. If you approach it in that manner, then of course you could put as many inputs as you wanted. I commend you for such fine logic. As far as a "heated logic discussion" is concerned I agree with you. Competition does bring about innovation. What I didn't like was the context of your words and the fact that you thread-jacked me. I guess I should have expected that my object would catch the eye of a logic guru so to speak. It's not often you find someone who thinks at the same level as yourself. With that said, I'm willing to let bygones be bygones, if and only if you show me this design someday. One last thing, yes I know my humor is a little dry, but at least its not as played out as your comeback. I can see a great friendship forming over the horizon. Until then, I can tell you where to put that cookie!

2010-02-09 04:08:00 Author: M_R_Enigma Posts: 161

---

You can check the ordered input device by search @CompherMC.

2010-02-09 07:51:00 Author: Kern Posts: 5078

---

I've decided to edit this out of respect to my fellow creator.

2010-02-11 07:35:00 Author: M_R_Enigma Posts: 161

---

All I can say is well done on actually making one. I downloaded comphermc's one, I couldn't figure put where to put the switches :blush:

2010-02-11 17:28:00 Author: kirbyman62 Posts: 1893

---

I don't blame you Edit: I was simply stating that this method may seem difficult for some to comprehend.

2010-02-11 17:40:00 Author: M_R_Enigma Posts: 161

---

Edit: never mind.

2010-02-11 18:07:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

Woah... *runs away*

2010-02-11 18:18:00 Author: Kern Posts: 5078

---

Because locks really need to be thermo friendly.

2010-02-11 18:46:00 Author: Syroc Posts: 3193

---

Because locks really need to be thermo friendly. lol @ syroc. Mine was made to be a puzzle mechanic in a real level, so thermo consideration is always a factor there, but this debate has got to the point of rediculousness. However, as that has never stopped me before, allow me to make a couple of points: Seriously? You put the switch on the emitters that are color-coded in the same fashion. Seriously indeed. It's something I've never worked out myself: People have alwas been confused by the left-right progression. Even without the colour coding you line a row of emitters and you wire up inputs left to right. That's it. It's one of the simplest devices ever to wire up. left emitter is first, right emitter is last. But that is a taxing concept I have been led to believe 1. Although RTM223's design is capable of having a higher number of digits in sequence, it uses a higher number of emitters which drains the thermometer. When compared side by side, RTM223's design, with 8 digits, exceeded over a half thermometer notch. My design on the other hand, didn't pass half a thermometer notch. Looks about bang on half to me, I would get my micrometer out and check yours, but uh, yeah... I can't, so moving on. 2. Both designs are capable of exceeding double digits, however my design requires a bit more work. I'd be interested to know how much work. If your puzzle requires say 5, or 7 inputs, how long would it take to customise, and how user friendly is the operation, in comparison to counting number of emitters placed down? Again, I'd check, but... 3. RTM223's design requires one thick layer which, depending on the creators constraints, may or may not be a problem. However, my design is wafer thin and takes up less cubic space. No need for thick layer as comphermc says, and you can make any logic device tiny, I just like mine grid aligned. You can always move it slightly further away It doesn't make sound when you enter a correct digit and it has all the functions of a realistic security device. If you are referring to the tiny sound of materials knocking against dark matter that is largely covered up by the emitter sound and drowned by in-game music, I found I could hear that around 50% of the time on a correct input. But I could also hear the same noise 50% of the time on an incorrect input. Not entirely sure how this affects security Also, see above point about moving logic out of the way. Lastly, my design doesn't sacrifice aesthetics for thermometer space. Do what now? My darkmatter and poystyrene colour scheme is a little bit extravagant, granted, but I don't think there is any sacrifice being made here! I've already stated that on the surface of what I know, both devices are as just as useful as each other, whilst offering a slightly differing functionality, but if you are going to pick out negatives of someone else's design and publish them, at least attempt to be accurate and reasonable about it and maybe publish your own design for similar inspection?

2010-02-11 19:11:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Seriously? You put the switch on the emitters that are color-coded in the same fashion. Also, I have a version (as does rtm) that uses a single thin layer. It's just easier to visualize in the thick layer (going for ease-of-use). And for the emitters, you gain certain features that go hand-in-hand with the expandability of it all. Using emitters allows for recognition of the same button being hit twice in a row, a complete reset of the device in the event of the wrong button being pressed, the inclusion of dummy buttons (that don't do anything) which will also reset the device. I'm not sure which version you were using, but I have a hard time believing your device does the same as the Ordered Input Device, while being as thermo friendly. Rtm's old one was made many months ago. If you didn't want aggression, you might've considered your last post before making it. That wasn't aimed at me was it?

2010-02-11 20:27:00 Author: kirbyman62 Posts: 1893

---

That wasn't aimed at me was it? No, not at all. His response to your statement. You're fine. But if you are still lost: yes you just wired up the emitters along the bottom row from left to right. The level is copyable (but has the Music Pack DLC), if you want to check it out in action.

2010-02-11 20:41:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

You guys seriously need to calm the heck down. Learn from each other instead of beating each other to death about who's is better. And in any case, this is a GAME. It's not like anyone's making money off of this.... Fame, you say? That means NOTHING. Take pride in the simple fact that you guys can all create mechanism most people wouldn't dream of being able to create. This is almost like the War of Currents..... if there's a better system, admit it instead of electrocuting animals in a failed attempt to prove the other wrong (It's an Edison vs. Tesla analogy).

2010-02-11 21:05:00 Author: Astrosimi Posts: 2046

---

Look RTM, I think you're an intelligent person who has a lot of knowledge in respects to logic switches. Perhaps you're an engineer, perhaps not. Either way it doesn't really matter. My point is this, if we put aside this nonsense perhaps we can find common ground. I've seen your design work on your own level. As far as design is concerned, both objects do what the creator intended, correct? Your is a puzzle device, while mine is a security device. Both objects are a different approach to solve a similar problem. Yes they both have their advantages and disadvantages, but that's beside the point. What I'm trying to say is this, there's no use arguing about whose is better than whose, because in the end what have we accomplished? I think there's a lot we could learn from each other if we just put this all behind us. So once and for all, I extend my hand to you. Can we put an end to this nonsense, Edison?

2010-02-12 00:14:00 Author: M_R_Enigma Posts: 161

---

You requested I close this thread, but I think this thread can be salvaged yet. I'm not one to hold grudges, so I will let bygones be bygones. If you'd still like it closed beyond this point, let me know. I assure you, we just enjoy a healthy debate. Perhaps it slipped past healthy, but we can only try and bring it back on track. *Shakes hand that was extended for rtm*

2010-02-12 02:29:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

---

You people act like you killed each others' parents . Cmon, no one is very offended... M_R_Enigma, will you put yours in a level soon?

2010-02-12 05:25:00 Author: Incinerator22 Posts: 3251

---

Locked by request.

2010-02-12 11:23:00 Author: comphermc Posts: 5338

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.