|
GuavaMoment posted:Yeah so this game. I think I now understand how everyone else feels when looking at SpaceChem leaderboards. I'm more than happy to simply solve and maybe tweak my terrible solutions a little bit, because there is no way I'm catching up to you wizards. Ahahaha! Feel the stupid! Revel in how us mere mortals feel! Now, imagine feeling like that on all three games AND having WildM on your friendslist. 
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 14:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:03 |
|
|
Speaking of friends lists, anyone want to become my friend so we can compare scores? http://steamcommunity.com/id/threedotonefour/ edit: I pressed "ignore" on one of you by accident and I don't recall the name. If you sent me an invite and didn't get accepted, try again. ymgve fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
ymgve posted:Speaking of friends lists, anyone want to become my friend so we can compare scores? http://steamcommunity.com/id/threedotonefour/ Hell yea! I don't have anyone to compare to either, so I'd be glad for some more names to show me how terrible I am. http://steamcommunity.com/id/megabound/ I've taken one subject in programming (MATLAB) as part of my engineering course and I'm so hooked on this game. I've sunk 11 hours and only finished the first 2 lines. Just I keep on going back and refining. I hit a wall with Spacechem at one of the bosses and stopped playing. It'll be interesting to see where or if I hit a wall in this. Megabound fucked around with this message at 15:18 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
Add me to your friends list: http://steamcommunity.com/id/myhf/ And tremble in fear as I keep track of my position in a list, instead of starting from the beginning every time: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
So, is this game like Infinifactory, where you can solve every puzzle with a stupid, slow and overbuild solution? Or more like Spacechem where you can get totally stuck if you aren't smart enough?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
You can certainly solve many puzzles with a stupid overbuilt solution but the limitations of how many instructions are in a node and nodes available do put a limit to how far you can go with that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Goddamnit game, I figured out a solution, it's not my fault that your randomized test input has numbers that cause a fault. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
This game. It was made for me. Made for me. It is also my personal hell. Junior year is haunting me, as are my college failures.Vlad the Retailer posted:You can move values back where they came from (ex. MOV LEFT, LEFT), which can be used to turn nodes into single-use registers. Alright, someone's gonna have to explain this to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
Color Printer posted:This game. It was made for me. Made for me. It is also my personal hell. Junior year is haunting me, as are my college failures. I've found this incredibly useful. If you have a node that's just "mov dir dir", if you mov a value into it, it'll just sit there until the original node asks for it. For example, if you wanted to have a node that took two numbers and moved the first (from up) down if it's less than the second (from right), you could do it like so: code:
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Assembly was pretty much my favorite coding course in college, so this poo poo is right up my alley. Bought it because of this thread and no regrets whatsoever. It's the only game that's managed to pull me away from Splatoon for the last two weeks.  I too need more friends to compare over-optimized solutions with http://steamcommunity.com/id/qwarq/ Arcsech posted:I've found this incredibly useful. If you have a node that's just "mov dir dir", if you mov a value into it, it'll just sit there until the original node asks for it. That's pretty drat clever but, dammit, now I need to do another optimization pass with that in mind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
Arcsech posted:I've found this incredibly useful. If you have a node that's just "mov dir dir", if you mov a value into it, it'll just sit there until the original node asks for it. I just figured that out, but thanks for showing how it's useful since when I did it, I paused and went "wait, this doesn't help me here, really."
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
I swear, every time I get into one of these Zachtronics games before I even have the chance to figure out the basics, someone else has already gone HAM in the sandbox doing stuff that I won't even understand by the time I finish the game-provided puzzles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
Moog posted:I swear, every time I get into one of these Zachtronics games before I even have the chance to figure out the basics, someone else has already gone HAM in the sandbox doing stuff that I won't even understand by the time I finish the game-provided puzzles. Wizards  
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Ignoring things that are clearly impossible, seeing my exposure mask viewer solution draw poo poo is immensely satisfying. edit: signal window filter down. suck it bitches. (I don't understand how it works, but it does and that's all that matters.) uXs fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Jun 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 09:53
|
|
|
This game's pretty hardcore old school no narrated tutorial, text graphics, and a fourteen page manual, good luck! Like it could only feel more like an old computer game more if the manual had copy protection codes to enter before the title screen. How'd you guys get cracking on this so fast. Hemingway To Go! fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Jun 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
The highlighted passage in the manual pointing you toward the secret level felt kind of like an old-school copy protection code.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
Holy gently caress this game was made for me. I love it and want to marry it and I've only done two levels so far. (Maybe this will be the Zachtronics game I can actually be good at, ahaha no)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Just got done with the Sequence Peak detector, and it was the first time in the game I ran into a problem where the row and storage limits in each node became an issue. I'd love to see an actual clever solution to this one if anyone has it. I assume I could've used the "Faux register" method posted earlier, but I hadn't seen that post when I did this. Broken Cog fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Jun 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
I really like this game because it allows me to pretend I'm very creative at coming up with very inefficient solutions for simple problems, as opposed to being the world's worst programmer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Just got done with the Sequence Peak detector, and it was the first time in the game I ran into a problem where the row and storage limits in each node became an issue. Caveat I'm not an expert or anything, but here are my tips. I'm especially interested in Peak detector as it's the level where my friends have the biggest relative score advantage over me so I've rewritten it several times in attempts to improve it. 1) This one more than most levels really can make use of that faux register pattern, fyi 2) You have lots of space, you should consider splitting up the logic much more if possible. For example split up: - Spreading the values to the different pipelines - Recognizing zero - Comparing to the current min/max - Storing the current min max 3) Reduce instruction repetition. I notice in your first node you repeat move down + move right (or right then down, equivalently) quite a lot. Some of those repetitions can probably be factored above the jez check. 4) I'm spoilering this, since it's almost cheating, but the jro command is by far the most powerful of them all. It allows you to create functions, and use your instruction position within a block as a second variable. edit: 5) Little things count, such as ensuring you only jump when you have to, which is one instruction more than letting the code wrap around the bottom. So for this puzzle, zeros are less frequent than nonzeros, so make sure to use jnz so that once you're done receiving the new value you don't have to jump to the top, you only do that on the less frequent 0 inputs. OK now for some example solutions. Here is my first one that I did the day I got the game:  The basic idea is I pass the current value and new value around twice, and throw out the result that I don't want. The first thing you see is I'm not following tip number 4 yet. I'm also doing a lot in the second nodes. Both comparing with zero, communicating with the node that maintains the minimum, resetting that child node, and passing the final value down. This solution is 375 cycles, not bad for a first try. Here's number two  So this solution uses JRO. The first node splits the signal, and the second one checks for zero and sends the appropriate offset to the next node, which sits in the cmd label most of the time. You can save on jmp commands a lot by ordering your labels too. After a reset you will always save, and after a flush you will always reset. This solution still sends the value twice and discards one input depending on which is smaller. I'm not actually too happy with it, even though it's 346, several cycles faster. I've gotten a 345, and the high score on my friends list is a significantly faster 295. Anyways, hope this helps. Does anyone have any scores they're really proud of? I am most pleased with my solutions for Sequence Generator @ 101 cycles Interrupt Handler @ 172 cycles Sequence Reverser @ 286 cycles Histogram viewer @ 2078 cycles Window Filter @ 428 cycles and Sequence Indexer @ 1195 cycles Fuzzy Mammal fucked around with this message at 04:53 on Jun 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Peak detector Peak detector, 27 cycles.  363 for my non-cheaty solutionExposure Mask Viewer: solved and 2nd on my friends' list somehow at 736 cycles. That was very close to being a Not Fun Level.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
Ok I rewrote it one more time and got it to 329. Less passing of values around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
GuavaMoment posted:Peak detector, 27 cycles. Nice. I have 569 on the mask viewer  . I'm pretty stumped with the sorter though. I've tried several approaches and need to take a break.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
GuavaMoment posted:Peak detector, 27 cycles. 22 on peak detector for me. Also, 100 on prime detector when that was still around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
Can the Signal Amplifier be moved to 3 core operation? I have 2 working nice and sweet, but when I try and do 3, because of the error nodes I have to force 2 of the 3 codes through a single node on their way to the final output node, and sometimes that causes issues. You also don't always get stuff going through at the right time leading to out-of-sequence errors.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
I'm really digging TIS-100, but--and I say this with all love--it's the sorriest excuse for a "game" I've ever played. At least SpaceChem had colors and animations so you could kind of pretend you were playing something other than an edutainment computation/logic puzzle game. I guess it was inevitable that Zachtronics would release a game with even fewer frills and distractions from the real core of their puzzle design philosophy. The peak detector is killing me, but I just figured out how to test for min in an n-length list. Yay!
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Signal Edge Detector is kicking my arse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Update with puzzle creator has just dropped. There's something perverse about having to learn Lua to wrote your assembly-language-game problem
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Does anyone know the new undocumented opcode?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Prenton posted:Update with puzzle creator has just dropped. There's an amusingly angry thread on the Steam forum where someone is upset that it's a Unity game.  Edit: the new opcode is going to be really useful, it definitely fits my coding style. Well I guess if you really want to know(opcode spoiler -->)it's HCFand reboots the system. 90s Cringe Rock fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Jun 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
I'm also curious about the new opcode. Did they add something in the game to hint at it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Not that I know of. A guy on Reddit dropped a big hint that let me get it though Hint It's a fairly well-known "joke" opcode Actual answer HCF
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Right, Signal Edge Detector. http://tis100pad.com/134 I have a block of (really bad) code that successfully moves the ABS difference between the last two values to the node below. I now need to see if that number is greater than 10, and I have no idea how to do it. All I know is I can compare to zero. I guess I need some kind of loop but I'm struggling. Frankly I can't believe I made it this far!
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
You can subtract and add immediate values. e:vvvv You should add some people to your friends list. The best on the goon group is 200, and the best on reddit is 133. Dr. Stab fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Jun 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Playing this is so weird after SpaceChem, I didn't really ever get how to optimise in that until I watched solutions for the tournament a while back and even then I didn't properly get it. Meanwhile I've only done three levels in this and I just spent some time playing with Differntial Converter to knock 1 off my best cycle count to get 202 (which I think is the fastest possible, I can't quite tell if anyone is lower than my on the histogram).
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:You can subtract and add immediate values. Well, right now I've gone for this: http://tis100pad.com/134/1 It works for everything apart from the very first value, which everybody on reddit seems to think SHOULD be a 1 because the difference is between 0 (or no input) and 25. I could cheat and just have the lower node write 0 and then enter a handling loop for everything else but that's a really lovely thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
thehustler posted:Well, right now I've gone for this: You know you can just do 'sub 10' instead of 'sub 1' 10 times... Also 'JRO -5' is kind of a stupid command when you might as well jump to a label. JRO is only useful when you get the value from something else, most likely some other node that is steering the JRO'd node. Or maybe the first value from a stack or whatever. I'm currently doing sequence sorter. I can sort the first sequence, now to just get everything to reset so I can sort the rest. I wonder if I can get away with using no JRO commands at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
You can subtract more than 1 at a time. Also, yes, you need a special case for the first value, but it doesn't take any more than simply re-arranging your loop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
uXs posted:You know you can just do 'sub 10' instead of 'sub 1' 10 times... I honestly did know you could do sub 10 and have absolutely no idea why I did that 10 times, but it's already fixed  I think I was thinking in terms of loop iterations.http://tis100pad.com/134/2 The JRO was because I didn't know if you could nest labels, but if you can I'll put a label jump in so it's more readable. Can you do it? Edit: yes Anyway, that first result shouldn't be a loving 1, and I've just cheated the solution to pass a zero down and skip to the next pair. I feel dirty 
thehustler fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Jun 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:03 |
|
|
What do you mean by "nest labels?" Labels are just identifiers given to lines. A line can only have 1 identifier, but you weren't jumping to a line with one already, and if you were, you could just use the label it already has. e: you don't really need to "cheat" your solution Just take the line labelled LESS and move it to the top.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 21:06
|
|