|
Is there a way to fast forward while testing? Getting to the ticks part and everything is soo slow. edit: Fast forward button unlocked when doing Delay Count, ignore the question. ymgve fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Sep 25, 2017 |
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 02:54 |
|
|
And now I'm stuck on Combiner. How the hell are you supposed to solve this with a single memory reader? I can play with delays and stuff and get the correct sum, but the problem then is to delay the memory writer from doing anything until the value has stabilized (which takes mutiple cycles due to the latches involved)
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
ymgve posted:to delay the memory writer from doing anything until the value has stabilized (which takes mutiple cycles due to the latches involved) a little trick I used
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
I could do with a pointer on Faux-Reg. I have a (straight-forward) solution with 8 modules, but I don't yet see how I would get that down to the ideal 6 modules, so one of my assumptions (e.g. I need a counter) must be wrong. Any gentle prods?
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 13:26
|
|
|
y_y posted:I could do with a pointer on Faux-Reg. I have a (straight-forward) solution with 8 modules, but I don't yet see how I would get that down to the ideal 6 modules, so one of my assumptions (e.g. I need a counter) must be wrong. You do need a counter  Have you noticed the optional variants that appear in the description after you beat the puzzle? The one you want is variant #2.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:You do need a counter Duh. Got it. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
Our second weekly update is now live on almost* all platforms! Highlights:
This update focused heavily on the late-game; the goal for next week’s update is to focus on earlier parts. If you got stuck somewhere, let me know where - that’s where I’ll add more puzzles. Enjoy! *The Steam Linux demo is slightly delayed, but will be out later today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Ah, I got around to starting this and so far, so good! Cows is hard. A couple previous challenges were about 2 or 3 minutes of thinking. Cows is...Well, I'll edit this post when I have a solution. E1: I have the whole design mapped in my head, but memory starting in a null state is a huge issue for my brain right now. Canine Blues Arooo fucked around with this message at 06:13 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 05:44
|
|
|
The hardest for me was Threes because I just could not figure out the sequence co-feeding. I actually got the optimal solution and I could not tell you how it works, I just happened to incidentally wire the modules I had the right way at some point. One feature I really wish this game had was comments. The ability to draw a colored rectangle under a bunch of components and name it (and ideally draw sub-rectangles over that). It would be nice to keep track of what different parts of your module are doing (i.e. this is basically a while loop, this is the program counter, etc). Right now you can label individual components, but that means if you have a multi-component bit corresponding to a single piece of functionality, you have to arbitrarily choose one to be labelled or label all of them and it isn't always obvious which one to do (and tedious to label all of them).
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 06:04
|
|
|
Alright, Cows has officially stumped me for now, but I've moved on. I'm at 'Instructions', and I think I cheated? I ended up with this:  I feel like that's somehow not in the spirit of using the opcode for stuff. Is that the intended solution or am I misunderstanding the use of the Instruction Decoder?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
That's the intended solution I'm pretty sure. An opcode just means on a certain value do a certain instruction, but IIRC for Instructions it's an introduction so you only need to do 0MEM, which is trivial. It's just to get you used to using the instruction decoder. Later on you'll get a few more opcodes so you'll need to directly use it in some way to decide what to do with the given values.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
Alright, I'm at Arith CPU. I'm calling it a night, but I'm having a pretty good time thinking through these puzzles. I got caught up not remembering that I can expand some of those components to up to 8 units. Cows still is kicking my rear end...
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 07:38
|
|
|
I liked the demo on steam. Might buy this even though these kinds of games make me feel dumb. (COWS! Argh!). I like to keep torturing myself I guess. (I have tried TIS-100, Shenzen IO and Spacechem too. Why do I do this to myself?) Good game from the looks of it. There have been some people showing the game on youtube, like Northernlion and Quill18, but I did not know the developer was a goon. They got me interested in this one first. I will throw my money at you next month probably. You're doing good work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 08:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 02:54 |
|
|
Just dropping in to give my appreciation for the game. Solved cows, now on to the board 2. Any plans for workshop support? Canine Blues Arooo posted:Cows is hard. A couple previous challenges were about 2 or 3 minutes of thinking. Cows is...Well, I'll edit this post when I have a solution. Yeah, the fact that <initial> is not the same as <zero> really gets in the way of things. Is this the intended solution:  ? I kinda dislike it because to get to 10 modules I had to make a connection that works and should work no matter how long the thing runs, but still seems icky. It should really be a number module with a constant 0 there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2017 19:12
|
|
