Official Everybody Edits Forums

Fam, he's realmasterie40, somebody who brings light on a game into a community where everyone hates the owner, so they can raid it. And I guess they failed.

Proof I hack people?

What's the problem with using a specific forum provider?

Again with the "psycho cat" argument. Can't you, like, shut up? Just because you've been rejected since you said the same **** about me doesn't mean I'm like that to everyone.

Assuming usage of specific tools without actually knowing them. Nice. First of all, how does one use transparency and gradients in MS Paint? Second, it doesn't really mean what tool you use, as long as its limitations are fine to you.

* In case you are wondering why I even bothered to respond, well, I have no idea. I'm bored.

Well, he assumes a lot of things, for example Tundrum is not even a moderator. He's a graphic designer. There's a big difference.
So it's either you or realmasterie40 (from YW) has returned.

oh
that makes sense

b-but... t-they b-bring u-us c-cool u-updat-
Something amazing was added. Unfortunately, we were too lazy to test it, so we'll let our beta members do it instead! See you in 2 weeks

... *woots thread*

GG

So, lock?

suicidal

Banned for mod abuse

Or perhaps EE could actually try to do something about cheaters.

ew scratch

Sorry for gravedigging, but seriously, EE's implementation of different block types is the worst way they could have possibly done it. (Well, apart from using a different message for every single block that exists lol) "m.Count" exists. object array exists. Where's the problem with having a single Block class with x,y,layer,block id and an object array for the arguments which are then simply put into a simple "b" message? Just like sending "b" just puts the arguments after the block ID. Well, even if they won't put everything into "b", at least fix that issue where different special block messages literally have the player ID at different indexes. A switch case: case: could be done, but... seriously? Example: pt (portal) has all the data THEN the player ID, at index 6. Regular "b" has it at index 4, once again the final index. Not only that, most (if not all) other messages have the player ID at index 0. I'll take a nice m.GetInt(0) over some m.GetInt(m.Count - 1) any day.
Anyways, about ints and uints, I think either one works. I have an overall better model, though, which would add those 4 integers to a byte array with 6 bytes:

xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxx
yyyyyyyy
yyyyyyyy
liiiiiii
iiiiiiii

x = block x pos
y = block y pos
l = layer, duh
i = block id

tl;dr new block messages
send: "b", {0, 42, 0, 69, 0, 9}, <insert args here>
receive: "b", 3, {0, 42, 0, 69, 0, 9}, <no args here cuz gray basic>

Perhaps bgs could be moved to the 32768-65535 range? I'm not exactly sure how it would exactly be ported over, but if it's magically done with every level and bot updated, it's WAY simpler to just check a single bit than have a lookup table. And no, this won't allow fake foreground blocks or solid backgrounds (could be server checked), although I don't exactly see the issue with doing that; IMO it would make for some fun concepts. (And if the bgs DO end up being moved to 32768+, packs should also be moved to a consistent range; kinda annoyed by some basic blocks being single/double digits while others are 1k+. Perhaps lower 5 bits in block IDs could be ID of the block in the pack (e.g. different colors), bits 6-13 (starting from 1, right to left) are for the block packs (e.g. basic or brick), 14-15 for function, and 16th is that BG thing I talked about earlier. Would prevent stuff like that happening again. Maybe different colors of blocks should be morphs, though; also morphs would be able to be selected before you place them, but I guess I'm going a little far, so I'll stop now.)

You know that's impossible, right?