Specify an output value for Decider Combinators / Negative Output Signals

[tcecrog]

-1 is better than 1.

Decider Combinator should have at least an output of -1.

Decider Combinator only have two outputs.

The Decider Combinator can output two types of signals:

1. The same value the selected signal as its input signal.
2. The selected signal with a value of 1.

Capture Combinator UI.PNG (26.86 KiB) Viewed 4500 times

We need more.

We need more outputs. Generally, infinitely more, but specifically, instead of having an output of 1, have a value output instead.
The player can enter a number in a box like as with the input, or have a signal translation to selected signal.

There is an issue.

Yes, you can achieve this by using arithmetic combinator by multiplying the 1 with said value, but it come with two problems.

1. Twice as many combinators.
2. More the delay.

I want to use the combinators of addressing stations, but I always have these two problems with the decider combinators, along with zero being null(but that is another topic.)

[foamy]

I wouldn't mind being able to specify a number, yeah. The UI already exists and it would (in some cases, greatly) simplify combinator builds.

[darkfrei]

Positive 1 to green and negative 1 to red output, that was my first mind about combinator's logic.

[orgy230]

Something I find myself doing very frequently is multiplying the output of a decider combinator by -1.

Since the combinator already has output options for 1 and Input Count, it would be a nice to see this expanded to include output options for -1 and Negative Input Count as well.

[ssilk]

merged to similar topic

Keywords: negative minus one multiply combinator

Also about the same topic/problem:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=74875 Allow scroll wheel to set -1 in arithmetic combinator

[Dark_Wynd]

TL;DR

Decider combinator could be updated to include the possibility to specify a custom value when the condition is met.

What ?

Currently, Decider combinators have two possible output values: one or input count. I believe that it would be worthwhile to include a third option : value, which would let the user set a given number.

Why ?

In compact designs, space is crucial, and minimum usage of combinators is preferred. Achieving what I am proposing can be achieved using a decider combinator and an arithmetic combinator that multiply the decider combinator result by the wanted value. However, this requires two combinators. Allowing to specify a custom output value in the decider combinator instead of one or input count would allow a mechanic similar to a switch statement, for example :

Code: Select all

if Iron = 100 then A = 1
if Iron = 200 then A = 2
if Iron = 300 then A = 3
[...]

This way, I can use the value of A to do some other calculation or decision.

[disentius]

For your use case, I would use an arithmetic combinator with value/100 -> value. and with an AC you can choose wich output signal you want too.

[Dark_Wynd]

Granted, now that I look at my example, it could be as easy as you describe it. Which is value / 100 -> value.

However, that was merely an example to illustrate what I was trying to explain. The values themselves are of no importance, it could even be as wacky as the following example, which is why I believe it may be useful to specify a custom output value for a Decider combinator instead of just one or input count.

Code: Select all

if Iron = 1025 then A = 15
If Iron = -678 then A = 67
If Iron = 865 then A = -1

[Impatient]

+1

[ickputzdirwech]

[ick] Merged with very similar suggestion.

[boran_blok]

instead of multiplying you can provide an input constant combinator with a given value and then use input count.

[MEOWMI]

It was always one of those (many) weird design choices with combinators in my opinion.

If you allow 1/input, just allow any value/input. Yes you can work around it easily most of the time but that's the point: why require a workaround at all?

Needless to say, I support the suggestion, but I think it's quite unlikely, as it seems to be a deliberate design choice for weird artificial extra difficulty.