that's like saying you're planning to have race tracks at the moon colonies :P

i'll have to fix it up a bit so it's closer to what you are looking for, but i'll post it then.

a less complex example of your problem would have been helpful - i had a lot of confusing moments trying to comprehend that cap... i see two things:

for correct pairing, you not only need the 'For each paired' condition, but you also need to follow it up with a 'Pick paired' to get the correct instances.

you are referencing image points by numbers, which (afaik) selects them in the order of their creation. i guess you want to select them by name, because you named them with numbers.

if i fix those, it sometimes works (a mech with 2 weapons appears). i've got no idea why this is random, but i strongly suspect your questionable practice of spawning families. to sum it up: i have no idea what's going on :P

i agree with ashley; your graphics card only needs to load the texture once, and putting it on a few dozen sprites will barely impact performance.

for those cases where you need really big diameter circles, you could use distorted sprites as a workaround ( example ). note that this will impact render performance more than a simple sprite, because the graphics card needs to process more vertices. but it's still a viable alternative if you don't have enough vram, dislike blown-up blurry pixels yet don't mind aliased edges.

this is by no means a comfortable way to do it, but if you really need it, i guess you could bend sprites into other geometric shapes as well.

turns a square into a circle, using the distort map feature of the sprite object.

to pick your current node, you could use the 'Pick by evaluate' condition and use the expression "node('nodeID') == character('nodeID')". i don't know if there is a better way than using a single condition for this :P

you might need to invoke the condition through a function set to forget your picked objects if you plan on doing this in the scope of the 'node clicked' event (to gain access to the non-clicked nodes).

i once tried a few of the abundant interpolation expressions we've got in construct to build an acceleration/deceleration system (simpler than the one you described), and it worked rather well. i think the mathematical/code side of that is covered.

the animation of the characters is probably the key challenge to this. if sophisticated realistic movement is the goal, most of the weight and inertia of the body has to be conveyed through that. quality animation is still a rare sight even in 3d production, where there are rather advanced tools for it. in case of construct, i can only begin to imagine the huge effort it would take to really make it work ...

i saw alot of stuff i did not know about. it would be really cool if you could supply a list of the games & authors, with links to their projects.

so you've checked? ;P

so i guess you just wanted to get that out of your system, because i can't spot any questions that you didn't answer yourself ... :P

now that would be fine with me, but labeling your posts both 's**t' and 'ideas' in the same sentence really puts a test on my motivation to read them ;)

i could only guess that the physics engine wants to have a word with you about spawning one box at the exact same position as another box. something about that being physically impossible :P

but that's only a guess. i've got no idea when and how the physics engine is doing his thing, and if he can really catch you doing that in the timeframe of 2-3 events.

i recently noticed that i can max one core of my 1.8ghz processor out to 100% usage just by wiggling my mouse over a moderately big event sheet. with an empty sheet, i can still push it to around 60%. is this just me, my processor, or the reason the event sheet editor needs a rewrite? ;P