The Castle Doctrine Forums

What if you simply *couldn't* live without a family? If you come home and discover that your wife and kids are dead... You're so depressed that you commit suicide. Then the first thing you'd want to protect would be your family. You would even consider putting them in separate rooms to avoid group murders. You would also have the possibility to permadeath your neighbours...

Oh yeah, while you're at it, you could consider doing the same for drugged pitbulls. This would eliminate 30% of my deaths!

The cheapest way to go through this is to bash through the middle concrete walls and drug the pitbulls. The cost is 700$ per square on the Y-axis, that's not too bad...

The answer should be in this thread: http://thecastledoctrine.net/forums/vie … php?id=944

I don't think an universal optimal solution exists. Given the space you allocate to protect your family, try different layouts and for each one, think about what is the minimum cost (guns/club/explosive/etc.) a robber would have to spend to get to your family. Look around the forum, many people post their house design after they die, you'll get many ideas...

There could still be electronic glitches at that point, but at least they would only happen locally, without magically affecting other parts of the house.

I guess if a button makes a link between two components A and B, A and B are connected (and thus behave as a single component) if and only if the button is pressed.

These are 2 different numbers. The gate delay is the time required for a circuit to settle down. It already has a meaning in TCD: the number of sub-steps required before the circuit settles down. This new magic number N is another input data, which would arbitrarily put a cap on how long we allow the circuit to fluctuate before freezing it.

I wouldn't consider sub-step 1 as a fall back state, but the start of loop detection. If a loop is detected or the step count is exceeded, then electronics would settle down to their lowest seen state (as it is implemented right now, if I'm not mistaken). The only difference is, sub-step 0 would never be "visited".

EDIT : I think this would be equivalent to your purge system, with a purge counter set to 1. In other words, why would we want to set it to 8 or 16, wouldn't simply 1 do the job?

The problem with such magic numbers are that they don't look natural in-game, and they are arbitrary. So with this purge system, if we want to understand electronics, we will now have to deal with the 32 step limit counter, PLUS an 8 (or whatever) "purge limit counter", and understand the purge. To me that doesn't look like solving the problem, but increasing the overall complexity of the rules... If it goes on, soon we will have to read the source code to understand how electronics works
Wouldn't it be simple to use the first electronic step (instead of the zero-nd one) as a reference for looping states? Things that are directly plugged to a power source would be powered in any case.
EDIT: By the way, in real life this 0-nd step should never occur, whether someone is in the house or not...

Really fun stuff, and great discovery! Too bad it is game breaking... As some people proposed already, I think dealing with each electronic connected component independently seems to be the way to fix it. Let's enjoy wireless transmission before v33 is released!

For people who want a simple 1-bit clock, this may be more compact:

The pulse generator (top 3 rows) is identical, while the bit counter is a design I found some time ago. I wonder if there exists a way to combine the generator and the counter to make an even more compact clock...

Oh yes you right, I forgot about that detail! To set up your fallen cats in the zig-zag scheme, you could consider letting one robber getting for free to your vault, in return he would permanently drive the cats into the pits. Then re-arrange the house. Would you consider that cheating? (I don't)

As far as I can remember, I've seen this technique very often in most top houses since I started to play this game (november). I've used this http://castledraft.com/editor/MVz1dv also, it is a bit similar to Josh's proposition. Actually it may be a bit more efficient, because you can't force any pitbull to jump into a pit by bricking a cat.