Well, Construct shadows do add. I've been trying to find a workaround, but it'd end up setting the shadow to 'invisible' while passing over the shadow... I'd have to do pixel-perfect detection, which is simply too much hassle.

One thing - an inverse collision mask that would function as some sort of 'tunnel' within the sprite. A simple toggle should set the mask to inverse and back...

Okay, get this...

450 of 32x32 box objects... ~180 FPS

450 of 32x32 sprite objects (just a box drawn)... ~450 FPS

450 of 32x32 tiled background objects (same box drawn inside)... ~220 FPS

ONE 32x32 tiled background stretched over 800x600 layout... ~ 420 FPS

Well... what can I say? Goodbye, Box.

P.S.: My machine is Intel Celeron 2.4 GHz, 1.5GB ram, ATI Radeon 9550 256 MB. The mother board is insanely crappy, though, they've subbed the suckiest one in for the one I fried.

Edit: I went ahead and gave each of tiles five different animations - just a different color - and randomized each tile.

450 of sprites, each has five different one-frame animations... ~260 FPS

Why was I worrying about tiled maps again?

Edit2: Tried creating 10000 sprites... Doesn't show the window at all, though debugger shows 10003 instances and 0 (1.#Jms) as FPS. Yikes.

If hitbox is in family and is contained with sprite, then the contained sprite will be picked whenever the hitbox is picked. Or so it works in theory.

Also, there is this new Pairer object.

Mmm salad!

But yeah, that is a good and clear example of pairing, thanks

That sounds like an idea!

As for the math solution to orbiting, that would be too complex, because it'd have to take the parent object's movement into account (the velocity vector and such). Using maths would be like recreating the physics in Construct, where I just want the object to revolve around the parent object without messing with the hotspot

They won't kick you unless they're one of those schools that are tangled with Microsoft... y'know, if the headmaster is receiving some cut from the big Microsoft cake baked at the school, he might remove you forcefully if you ever suggest using some OTHER software....

Or a condition that checks whether there is any of the objects (say, 'Celestial bodies' family) is between points A and B. That should be an efficient solution.

Hmm, maybe draw an invisible line between Light and tested position, whenever it overlaps any of the objects, it would mark the position as 'shadowed'. I'm going to try that now.

Edit: If only there was a "Rotate around position" action...

This is just a simple demo of shadowcaster behavior in tandem with Light object. Move the light, watch the rotating planet and moon's shadows...

Is there a way to detect whether an object is overlapped by the shadow?

Snow is a change from the tedium, it brings something new to the boring day-to-day life... a challenge. It spices things up.

That would come out roughly as:

"Once upon a time, in a land far, far away,

a brave not-so-young hero had stumbled upon an artifact of immense power!

Woe is the hero, for he rubbed the artifact not once, not twice, but many times,

yet grant his exact wishes it would not!

Where he wished for women, he got bitches;

where he wished for drinks, he got water;

where he wished for riches, he got a Construct developer!

Thus our frustrated hero howled at the artifact."

Moral of the story: just keep rubbing, eventually you'll figure out how to make it grant your exact desires.

Aren't they removing the UID in future release? As an alternative there is the Pairer Object, which should work for situations like that... or so I am informed. When you create object C, pair it to the object A and pronto.