Talk:Arika Rotation System: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:: It's a good question. How about synchro moves? In terms of a system, they are implied by the order rotate->move->gravity in the game logic. ARS without synchros doesn't feel like ARE to me but maybe others disagree. -- colour_thief | :: It's a good question. How about synchro moves? In terms of a system, they are implied by the order rotate->move->gravity in the game logic. ARS without synchros doesn't feel like ARE to me but maybe others disagree. -- colour_thief | ||
::: Yeah I definitely agree that ARS should include the order of operations. I think it's an assumption that can be made that all ARS games follow this unless otherwise specified. There's also a page for [[IRS]] already. I think it's worth keeping, but it could potentially be merged here or in another page. I think it's fine to have it's own page as more and more games use it. --[[User:Simonlc|simonlc]] ([[User talk:Simonlc|talk]]) 15:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC) | ::: Yeah I definitely agree that ARS should include the order of operations. I think it's an assumption that can be made that all ARS games follow this unless otherwise specified. There's also a page for [[IRS]] already. I think it's worth keeping, but it could potentially be merged here or in another page. I think it's fine to have it's own page as more and more games use it. --[[User:Simonlc|simonlc]] ([[User talk:Simonlc|talk]]) 15:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC) | ||
In the center column rule section, this sentence: | |||
: "However, there are very similar situations where additional off-center blocks will enable a wall kick, because the additional blocks are encountered by the search algorithm first. In the situations illustrated below, the upper occupied blocks are off-center and enable the kick even in the presence of occupied blocks in the center column." | |||
is given. With just the above sentence, I would assume both clockwise and counterclockwise rotation should succeed when following the previously described algorithm. However, the examples actually disallow 4 additional rotations -- two additional counter-clockwise rotations in the first set of examples (the text says clockwise is allowed, '''but the previous algorithm description already allowed this'''!), and two additional clockwise rotations in the second set of examples (the text says counter-clockwise is allowed, '''but the previous algorithm description already allowed this'''!). Are those four "rotation not allowed" exceptions an exhaustive set of rotations that should be disallowed relative to the more generic text algorithm described earlier? | |||
Revision as of 18:55, 1 October 2022
Everything is framed in terms of kicks. Where are we supposed to include other differences such as IRS behaviour? Eternal Heart let the player rotate during ARE so you could even double rotate for what is effectively a 180 IRS. -- colour_thief
- To me it's not clear that IRS is part of ARS. Would it be better to specify this behavior in the page for CCS? --simonlc (talk) 20:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- It's a good question. How about synchro moves? In terms of a system, they are implied by the order rotate->move->gravity in the game logic. ARS without synchros doesn't feel like ARE to me but maybe others disagree. -- colour_thief
- Yeah I definitely agree that ARS should include the order of operations. I think it's an assumption that can be made that all ARS games follow this unless otherwise specified. There's also a page for IRS already. I think it's worth keeping, but it could potentially be merged here or in another page. I think it's fine to have it's own page as more and more games use it. --simonlc (talk) 15:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- It's a good question. How about synchro moves? In terms of a system, they are implied by the order rotate->move->gravity in the game logic. ARS without synchros doesn't feel like ARE to me but maybe others disagree. -- colour_thief
In the center column rule section, this sentence:
- "However, there are very similar situations where additional off-center blocks will enable a wall kick, because the additional blocks are encountered by the search algorithm first. In the situations illustrated below, the upper occupied blocks are off-center and enable the kick even in the presence of occupied blocks in the center column."
is given. With just the above sentence, I would assume both clockwise and counterclockwise rotation should succeed when following the previously described algorithm. However, the examples actually disallow 4 additional rotations -- two additional counter-clockwise rotations in the first set of examples (the text says clockwise is allowed, but the previous algorithm description already allowed this!), and two additional clockwise rotations in the second set of examples (the text says counter-clockwise is allowed, but the previous algorithm description already allowed this!). Are those four "rotation not allowed" exceptions an exhaustive set of rotations that should be disallowed relative to the more generic text algorithm described earlier?