lol, that is certainly an idea!!!

i totally APPROVE this one! fragile ones will break upon hitting non-fragile or solid etc. metal dynamite will destroy anything wooden, and explode if it hits anything solid. wooden dynamite will always explode.

so, awsome, wow.

so:

if wooden hit solid: wooden would break
if solid hit solid: both would break
if wooden dynamite hit anything, they would both explode.
if solid dynamite hit solid: both would explode
if wooden hit wooden: both would break.

cool, like survival of the fittest, and if they are equal in power, then they both blow up. Maybe we should have an option for that too. even if we go with another way

I was gonna post something similar to what Acce suggested.

I think each crate should have the following two values for falling speeds, one for falling in air (differences would be caused by air resistance, btw), and one for falling in water (buoyancy). I was seriously thinking about this as I went to sleep yesterday. Let's say the number is... 100 to -100 or something, with 0 meaning the object doesn't move, and positive 100 meaning the objects moves down REALLY FAST, and -100 moving up really fast. The sign of the values would have to affect whether or not the object check above or below to see if it should fall. Here's an idea of what the numbers might be for certain objects (approximations):

Crate / Air Speed / Water Speed
HATPC Crates: 50 / 25
Platforms/Ladders: 0 / 0
Floating Crates: 50 / -10
Balloons: -50 / -25
Jet-Engine-Propelled Anvils: 100/100

You guys aren't rejecting floating crates, but you forget those will have the same problems and flying crates, except in water. That's a bit of a problem, but there are a few things you could do. One, you could make it so that stacks of crates all fall together (which actually makes a lot more sense than HATPC's way or doing it, remember that the fastest-falling object would dictate the falling speed of the whole group), and when two objects meet you go all physics on it and multiply the total mass by the speed and move the group of objects in the direction of the difference between the two falling stacks momentum. In order to do this, you'd have to deviate from HATPC a little bit, and apply a little bit of actual physics. Acceleration, momentum, energy... that kind of stuff. It'd be weird, though, so see a couple of big stacks of items just pushing against each other in mid air without toppling over... so... yeah this wouldn't work. The easiest thing you could do is just have them fall past each other, but you could get fancy, and monitor for when this happens, and have some animation of them hitting and rotating around each other (kinda like how it looks in RR).

The other thing is that objects will have to stack both ways, so platforms, as they look in HATPC, wouldn't really work with floating and flying crates... Of course, this isn't really a problem if like, the objects also go up through the platforms, but if there's something sitting on the platform, then there's a new problem? So yeah, things'll need to stack from both sides.

And you know what won't make sense? When a rising object lands against a crate that's currently not moving, and then by destroying the rising crate, then the crate that wasn't falling before, falls now? You know, if HATPC had rising crates, and a rising crate hit a crate that was in the air, that crate'd fall through the floor like what happens when you push a boulder under one... Maybe, balloons (that's when I'm calling them), since they're so light, objects that are sitting on them don't fall when you destroy the balloons? It makes sense that the object should have crushed the balloon if that objects was planning on falling... I'm just rambling at this point. Floating/Rising crates have issues, but we'll make them work. This game isn't going to be EXACTLY HATPC+, so we'll find a way to make them work.

that's a great idea, to have a separate gravity stuff for water.

I honestly would really like to see some sort of physics thing that would control this 2-way stacking and moving. Because that could create some really awesome trap setups. But would it be continuous with the rest of the game? And do we need to worry so much about objects being in the right tile, instead of being in between tiles? Or will we have ended up creating a whole new physics "style" for the game?

Looks like we'll have to do lots of testing with this. If we have objects stopped in mid-air, I think they should at least wiggle a bit, like rock back and forth slowly (but the hit tests shouldn't move, only the graphic; so it'll be slightly).

I don't think objects should go into "falling mode" if a balloon (lol we need a better name) tile comes up and collides with it. It should only go into "falling mode" if the balloon actually moves the tile. And I think we're going to add regular physics and actions to falling objects identical to those if they were stationary. So that combined with all this falling/flying stuff could turn out to be really cool. For example, we could make a room that is just an elevator flying up. And if we still decide to have that option for "survival of the fittest tile" (which should also be able to be set for individual tiles ), then the raising crates could trigger dynamites and arrows. Oh wait, now I'm just starting to ramble...

So basically, I'd really like to make all this physics stuff. Because it feels like it'll work the smoothest with the whole 2-way falling with different "weights", and because it just feels like we'll have less issues. But I also think we should have an option to turn off the physics. Like make them pass through each other (or flip around each other or something), or to strictly have survival of the fittest.

Lol, go ahead and figure all that out if you want...

I'm not sure how complicated it would be. It probably won't be much since we're dealing with linear motion here. I could probably also add in momentum and acceleration to make it look nice.

gee i can't believe i read all this.

look; what csd says is totally reasonable, and it makes me REJECT flying crates...further. see, in our usual world, the only 'flying' things are struggling against gravity and thus anything that hits them downwards, even if it's lghter than them, would make a big hit. floating objects do exist and they exist alot, so i do support that, cuz unless it's some kind of a buoy, it's easy to drown. in other words; the physics should be quite complicated to do. if you want to try that out, you're welcome, and i'll be glad to help with the physics background.

well. i think we should use floating crates, and avoid using flying ones.

I think we should make the physics for both water and air just for greater variety. The water physics and the air physics will be the same thing. So might as well, make it possible to edit the air falling speeds and directions as well, since we can.

And it shouldn't be too hard to implement. To make something fall, you just add or subtract from the y position of the object by a certain number every frame. And when in water, that number is different. So to have objects affect each other's falling speeds upon collision, we just change that object's falling constant. And making things like acceleration is really easy, b/c you just have to gradually change the falling constant every frame. In fact this is all quite simple.

sure, but what happens if, suppose, we have two metals falling down on top of each other, and they hit a set of flying crates that fly up on top of each other that contain 2 metals and 1 wooden box?

study the RR game carefully. in RR, try to put same-width squares on top of each other; one is a height of 70, one 71. one will push the other upwards, and the topmost one will push the other downwards. you have to consider that too. oh, and put them in the same number in the x-axis.

I think with variable weights, everything will get too complicated. I think we need to make everything as understandable as possible.

you know what, in second thought jell is right - suppose we DO do that, how will kro or catta manage?  

what do you mean how will me and catta manage? will it effect the when two tiles collide and EXPLODE thing?

no, they won't explode, but if we make it RR style, you'd have to consider weights and angles; things like that would probably come to us automatically, since we know some physics and stuff~ but you guys will just have to learn by mistaking. i don't know if it's very major, but it may create confusion with our younger members, and any new members too, perhaps.

that's why I think my EXPLODE idea is better.  

I think it will be too confusing anyway. I personally would prefer it if there were only 4 weights: regular, boyant, flying and weightless. Perhaps flying and boyant will get too complicated, but we could include the weightless crates.

which would be confusing? the explode idea or the idea that people seem to like.

The variable weight idea.

by weightless you mean things that don't fall, or things that are put in the air from the beginning and *may* fall in certain situations?

i reject flying crates; i do think buoyant should exist tho. if anything, anything, falls on them, they'll drown together, unless they're both buoyant, and then...we have a problem?

They won't fall, ever. Not if anything beneath it gets removed, not if anything falls ontop of them. I could also call them motionless.

wait. are we even talking about flying crates anymore?

no kro.

so you mean static crates; that sounds like a nice class. but how will we make this in the coding? will there be a special character for static dynamite than regular dynamite? or is this livio's problem? =\ i have no word in this case; if it's possible, i totally support.

maybe static crates could have a greens circl in them.

and if a non-static crate is placed in mid-air, will it fall?

Static crates. Perfect naming.
And the coding will be very different from the HatPC coding anyway.

but it IS going to be the same style, aka, each object has its own character(or characters? if needed?).
we'll see about that when livio gets here. he has enough to read; one more thing though. static boulders?