 | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| (...) ... Whoops; you're right. --Travis (22 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| (...) From the way Steve explained it, it sounds like stug4 would be a 4x4 square, not a 2x2 square, in which case going from stugN to stugN+1 actually does give you another 2N+1 studs. When you think about it, by your reasoning, you'd never (...) (22 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| Since I haven't authored any parts, I'm not going to go into this too deeply, but I think that square groups is a good idea. One minor note. Going from one group size to the next gives you 2 * sqrt(N) + 1 new studs, not 2N + 1. --Travis (22 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: "Clusters" of Studs?
|
| Steve, I say, "Go for it." ;) Franklin (22 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
| | | | | Re: magnet.dat
|
| The first question: I don't have the older trainsets. Have LEGO magnets always been the same size? (I think they have) Unless they've changed in size, we should all be using the same size magnet in LDraw. You are correct, s\magnet.dat is both the (...) (22 years ago, 25-Oct-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
|
