Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

Shield link behavior chatlog

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
8/4/2014 2:57:20 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:55:28 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:52:00 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:48:32 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:41:33 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:41:18 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:38:35 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:38:02 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:37:16 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
8/4/2014 2:36:13 PMMYrankxponen before revert after revert
Before After
1 [quote]On another note, the system as you explained means that if you have x thugs in one ball and an empty shield touching exactly one of the thugs, then charge rate to the empty shield goes down the higher x gets. I find that unintuitive at best and (mechanically) unreasonable at worst... Is that part of the design idea? [/quote] 1 [quote]On another note, the system as you explained means that if you have x thugs in one ball and an empty shield touching exactly one of the thugs, then charge rate to the empty shield goes down the higher x gets. I find that unintuitive at best and (mechanically) unreasonable at worst... Is that part of the design idea? [/quote]
2 ZK v1.2.7.9 charge-sharing strategy cannot adopt smarter distribution even if we wanted to, because its charge-sharing code is expensive.ie: ZK v1.2.7.7's charge-sharing code can run at 30frame per second while ZK v1.2.7.9 charge-sharing code only run at 15frame per second. But both had similar cost at current state with ZK v1.2.7.9 use abit less CPU (but adding smarter distribution to ZK v1.2.7.9 will increase cost exponentially unfortunately) 2 ZK v1.2.7.9 charge-sharing strategy cannot adopt smarter distribution even if we wanted to, because its charge-sharing code is expensive.ie: ZK v1.2.7.7's charge-sharing code can run at 30frame per second while ZK v1.2.7.9 charge-sharing code only run at 15frame per second. But both had similar cost at current state with ZK v1.2.7.9 use abit less CPU (but adding smarter distribution to ZK v1.2.7.9 will increase cost exponentially unfortunately)
3 \n 3 \n
4 Also @GoogleFrog doesn't want the shield-link to be any more effective at sharing charge. (Probably because it will make Felon OP, like in ZK v1.2.7.7 ) 4 Also @GoogleFrog doesn't want the shield-link to be any more effective at sharing charge. (Probably because it will make Felon OP, like in ZK v1.2.7.7 )
5 \n 5 \n
6 Also ZK v1. 2. 7. 7's linking-strategy cannot adopt smarter distribution either because its link is fixed/permanent. It will have to re-link to be smart but unlike ZK v1. 2. 7. 9 it re-link only every 1 second, but unfortunately alot of CPU cost will still be spent on re-link. 6 Also ZK v1. 2. 7. 7's linking-strategy cannot adopt smarter distribution either because its link is fixed/permanent. It will have to re-link to be smart but unlike ZK v1. 2. 7. 9 it re-link only every 1 second, however the re-linking will be CPU costly still.