altho i did not know this, i'm just wondering wouldn't it be better if the layers number didnt change so if lets say you were to lazy to name everything and then suddenly you need a new layer ,you wont have to go through the problems outlined by this post? its not real important but i can see ppl getting real pissed off when they forgot to name one layer and that screws up there game code completle

no because the layer numbers represent their Z order, if you added some more in the middle and it didnt change the number this wouldnt be the case anymore.

In all the events that you'd input a layer number into, that help box at the top just says layer number, or just says "layer that is affected" or something and has a number in the box by default. If it said "layer name or number that is affected" instead people would realise you could put in a name aswell. I think thats all that needs to be done about this.

It would be very cool if you could describe a set of points in the object overlaps point condition.

Such as:

sprite2 overlaps X = sprite.right

Y=(sprite.top, sprite.bottom)

so it registers collision for any y in that interval

would be really nice and easy to make sensorless custom movements using this.

EDIT: come to think of it this could potentially be used in a lot of other places too.

like compare: sprite.x = {0,20} would be equivalent to sprite.x>0 and sprite.x<20, if you really wanted to take it extremely far something like, sprite.x={int|0,20} would qualify true when sprite.x was equal to an integer in that interval.

That's quite alright

Yeah the function object is a bit weird at first, but extremely useful in these situations where you need to get information on another object that you can't pick (for whatever reason) in the same event.

I mean you needed to pick instance 1, which automatically unpicks instance 2. So you call a function (forgetting objects), go to a new event where you can pick whatever you want again, then send info back to the first event.

yeah anyway you get the picture

(I think??) you can use layer names in place of numbers, which don't change when you add new ones

but yeah this would be nice, just had this problem myself actually - find is a huge help heh.

http://www.quotecats.com/what/congaline.cap

tada!

The key is the function object and forget picking, whenever you get into picking troubles this is your friend.

nice one thanks!

EDIT: out of interest what does this do other than make erase work? (any side effects?)

From my understanding erase blend is meant to erase things on it's layer and show the things below right?

When I try to use it it just looks all garbled.

What am I doing wrong?

It would also be nice, if a single existing condition could be turned to an event or subevent with only dragdropping. Currently you must first create a new event, then move the condition there and then delete the first condition. Especially with subevents this is a pain since you often want to make a subevent by moving a condition from the main event.

you can already do this, drag slightly to the right you'll see the black line move slightly to the right aswell, when you do this it drops it as a subevent rather than an event

(EDIT lol i realised this isnt what you were saying... gonna keep here anyway though)

oh while im here, you can also add subevents to an included event sheet using the above thing... not sure what it does but i bet it crashes or something lol, its a bit weird.

also it would be quite nice if you could expand included event sheets to show (and use find on) the events inside, maybe not even edit them just have it greyed out or something. It's just that if you have a few of these, its hard to track down events if they're all spread across.

but micro$$$$$$$$$$$$$oft!!!

next time firefox loses my tabs again or pisses me off in some other way I'll probably give chrome a try

I wasn't sure if this was a bug or not, but its pissing me off heh...

I want it to centre on the sprite when it zooms in, but be limited to the boundries of the screen, if you tick unbounded scrolling it works, but goes off the screen.

What it should do is scroll to the left with the zoom somehow, so that the visible screen can't go beyond the left boundry of the layout.

Can anyone see a workaround?

EDIT: heh I guess this was a little hasty as I've just found a solution myself. (scroll to: min(1024-1024*50/zoomx,max(1024*50/zoomx,Sprite.x)) and similar for y)

Do you agree?

maybe a tickbox?

what do U and V displace do?