Game Mechanics Improving Teleporter Mechanics

[Zwift]

Them teleporters tho.

 

[TerraNova Gaming]

Name them! And choose! Easy!

 

[Jofairden]

I actually suggested this too a while ago.
http://forums.terraria.org/index.ph...wiring-more-specifically-for-teleporters.7518
[DOUBLEPOST=1420972386][/DOUBLEPOST]

so...this will makes things easy....a LOT easier. Too easy actually.

why? if you place an unlinked teleported at home, and take a teleporter with switch to you, then you can easily build a 'magic mirror' to go back to home and go back to the place where you teleported.

I find that a bit too lame, if you place teleporters everywhere because it's so easy, then you wouldn't even enjoy a normal walk through the forest. no, you just skip everything,

"oh look, i found the lihzahrd, time to set my teleporter and lets use that when ready"
"who needs hellevators? just one time going to hell, set my teleporter, and done"
"who gives a thing that i lose time to go to my farm? I'll simply set my teleporter there"

Places you don't bother will you never visit in that way,
That's not really what I like

PS: I didn't read every post, may happen someone already said that multiple times

Solution: the frequencies only have xxx range.. If you're further than xxx, they won't work. Although you could still work around this, it will make the problem you mentioned above a little bit more difficult to perform.

 

[Kazzymodus]

Wiring is a necessary evil in my opinion. Teleporting across the map is for those who have enough persistence to farm the required wire and place it.

 

[Baconfry]

What I'm getting at is that if teleporters would work like this they would only work in pairs, severely limiting the possibilities that we currently have been working with.

What if i want to teleport from point A to point B to point C in a continuous loop to juke a boss? I don't want to waste time walking over to a seperate set of teleporters or changing its frequency every time.

It would actually still be possible to teleport to multiple destinations if teleporters worked in pairs, thanks to hoiks, but I don't like the idea of relying on a glitch.
Anyways, both methods, the current one and the one proposed here, have advantages and disadvantages, so the easiest thing to do is to take no action.

 

[SnailsAttack]

Your insane if you think it shouldn't be. The whole point of teleporters is to make travel easier. Imagine having a room full of them, all of which lead to different locations, like the jungle temple, the underworld, the sky island, the ocean. It would save time for everyone!

 

[Thee Pie Man]

Spoiler: Myrmeleon

No no no. NO.

This would break a lot of teleporter mechanics SO bad.
The nice thing about wiring them is that you can wire a single teleporter to multiple other ones. To create chain teleports, or have multiple destinations from just one start. None of that would be possible with this.

What I'm getting at is that if teleporters would work like this they would only work in pairs, severely limiting the possibilities that we currently have been working with.

What if i want to teleport from point A to point B to point C in a continuous loop to juke a boss? I don't want to waste time walking over to a seperate set of teleporters or changing its frequency every time.

From what I gather teleporters are for ease of travel and covering distance; not juking a boss. While you may use them for this purpose you could be fighting it "properly" as anyone would be- before teleporters were even introduced; not cheesing it. Creative sure- but there's other ways that don't involve cheesing the boss with teleporters to "juke" it so that point is irrelevant it's not breaking a "lot" just a few that you personal enjoy including using only x amount of teleporters to get around; it would take what- half a second more to climb onto another teleporter that's lined up next to it? Don't get me wrong; I understand what you're getting across but "wasting time" and "not wanting to set the frequency every time" seems kinda weird for someone that would rather make thousands of wires across a world and connecting teleporters. If anything this saves more time. If you don't agree well, I guess it's just a matter of perspective. I digress...

OT:
I think a separate kind of teleporter would be nice; either way I think it would work.
What might really do the job well is making the "new"(Or not) teleporters run on channels and then have a small remote "UR" (Universal Remote) sending you to that channel while standing on any teleporter, this allows you to teleport to multiple teleporters. You click the remote- type in the number, click the remote once more and poof, you're off. Sounds really simple- no idea on how it would work coding wise however that's my thoughts on it. I'd assume the values would be the frequencies and while on the teleporter you'd have a "Beam me up" buff; the buff is consumed with the teleporting and depending on the values (the numbers you type in) determines where you go with the remote (The reason of the buff is because otherwise the remote might not need a teleporter to port you around and this ties into it (so you have to be on a teleporter) as well as making a joke.) This would also give a sign another use as you could place a sign next to teleporters with the numbers and the associated area of the teleporters.

That's my two cents though; take it how you will.

 

[Jason_c_o]

I think it should be special, more expensive teleporters that don't require wires. And instead of frequences, each teleporter would have 5 slots in which you put a permutation of gems which acts as the link between teleporters with the same allotment. If more than 2 share a sequence, you'd just cycle through them in the order they were placed.

 

[HDanke]

The cost for a teleporter is determined by the wire required and base price of the teleporters, thus balancing themselves, adding a higher price to it might make it redundant for small distances, or exploitable for large ones.

I think it should be special, more expensive teleporters that don't require wires. And instead of frequences, each teleporter would have 5 slots in which you put a permutation of gems which acts as the link between teleporters with the same allotment. If more than 2 share a sequence, you'd just cycle through them in the order they were placed.

Might be better to add this feature to a standalone mechanism with limited range (still uses frequences) such as a transceiver, out/input through wire, cost still based on the rounded up distance, more balanced, easier to place than wire, and a far larger range of uses than a teleporter with the said features (discussed on the T-MEC social group)

 

[Youfad]

Red plz

 

[Jason_c_o]

The cost for a teleporter is determined by the wire required and base price of the teleporters, thus balancing themselves, adding a higher price to it might make it redundant for small distances, or exploitable for large ones.

Might be better to add this feature to a standalone mechanism with limited range (still uses frequences) such as a transceiver, out/input through wire, cost still based on the rounded up distance, more balanced, easier to place than wire, and a far larger range of uses than a teleporter with the said features (discussed on the T-MEC social group)

I don't really see wires as much of an added expense, especially if you've got a jellyfish or other similar gold-farm going. In the end, Anything that only requires Gold isn't going to tax the player much.

As an alternate price, I'd suggest gameplay. Make a necessary part for this special teleporter a Boss drop, or a quest reward. Make the player work for the extra convenience of wire-free teleportation.

 

[HDanke]

I don't really see wires as much of an added expense, especially if you've got a jellyfish or other similar gold-farm going. In the end, Anything that only requires Gold isn't going to tax the player much.

As an alternate price, I'd suggest gameplay. Make a necessary part for this special teleporter a Boss drop, or a quest reward. Make the player work for the extra convenience of wire-free teleportation.

I don't see why it has to be a teleporter specifically, when it can be something else that it's more universal, and usable in other wiring projects? Wireless signals look more useful than wireless teleportation.

I agree that adding a crafting recipe to it might make it a challenge, though, I don't vote for uncommon boss drop only materials, as there'd be as many complaining about it as the ones complaining about price.

 

[Jason_c_o]

I don't see why it has to be a teleporter specifically...

Yeah that's true. A transceiver would work just as well and open up many more doors for wiring. But this thread is about teleporters, so I decided to stay on topic is all.

 

[IvoryPlants 🌳]

Support! I HATE teleporters just for the reason that you have to wire them up...
Support!

 

[The Hexagonal Donut]

Before I say anything here, I want to address two things:

1. There's a very fine line between "hard" and "tedious". Teleporters tend to delve very firmly and painfully into the latter when used for long-range teleportation.
2. This is an unchanging fact no matter how much you people want to argue about it.

That out of the way, I want to suggest two things in regards to this that should hopefully satisfy both sides of the argument. First, leave the regular teleporters in (with an added change that I'll get to shortly) as an option for short-range wiring setups (and an option for the haters), and have Wireless Teleporters crafted using a regular Teleporter, 10 Shroomite Bars, 20 Nanites, and 10 Cogs. The second thing is for these Wireless Teleporters to operate off of a byte-based frequency system (1-255), with the added option to name frequencies (ala various methods of wireless transmission from various Minecraft mods), and an additional option- the ability to assign a second number to the teleport for use when you have a bunch of teleporters on the same frequency, allowing you to set a teleportation order, enabling cyclical teleportation setups. If the field is left blank, it'll pick a random teleporter on the frequency. Normal teleporters would also get the random-teleport feature in the event that multiple are on the same stretch of wire.

A simpler explanation for those having a hard time figuring this out:

• Wireless Teleporters: 1 Teleporter, 10 Shroomite Bars, 20 Nanites, 10 Cogs
• Frequency anywhere between 1 and 255 to determine the destination (this should be more than enough)
• Can name frequencies
• An "order" value to determine teleportation order; teleporter 1 on x frequency goes to teleporter 2 on the same frequency, etc.
• If there is no "next" teleporter in the frequency, cycle back around to teleporter 1
• If there's more than one teleporter on the same frequency (and with no order value) or wire, pick one randomly; applies to normal teleporters.

Sound good?

 

[Lumini]

Before I say anything here, I want to address two things:

1. There's a very fine line between "hard" and "tedious". Teleporters tend to delve very firmly and painfully into the latter when used for long-range teleportation.
2. This is an unchanging fact no matter how much you people want to argue about it.

That out of the way, I want to suggest two things in regards to this that should hopefully satisfy both sides of the argument. First, leave the regular teleporters in (with an added change that I'll get to shortly) as an option for short-range wiring setups (and an option for the haters), and have Wireless Teleporters crafted using a regular Teleporter, 10 Shroomite Bars, 20 Nanites, and 10 Cogs. The second thing is for these Wireless Teleporters to operate off of a byte-based frequency system (1-255), with the added option to name frequencies (ala various methods of wireless transmission from various Minecraft mods), and an additional option- the ability to assign a second number to the teleport for use when you have a bunch of teleporters on the same frequency, allowing you to set a teleportation order, enabling cyclical teleportation setups. If the field is left blank, it'll pick a random teleporter on the frequency. Normal teleporters would also get the random-teleport feature in the event that multiple are on the same stretch of wire.

A simpler explanation for those having a hard time figuring this out:

• Wireless Teleporters: 1 Teleporter, 10 Shroomite Bars, 20 Nanites, 10 Cogs
• Frequency anywhere between 1 and 255 to determine the destination (this should be more than enough)
• Can name frequencies
• An "order" value to determine teleportation order; teleporter 1 on x frequency goes to teleporter 2 on the same frequency, etc.
• If there is no "next" teleporter in the frequency, cycle back around to teleporter 1
• If there's more than one teleporter on the same frequency (and with no order value) or wire, pick one randomly; applies to normal teleporters.

Sound good?

I think that there should be two text boxes: one to name a teleporter to receive from, and another one to send to; these two names can be the same teleporter. This would enable teleport-chains while also allowing wireless teleporting.

 

[DarkWiz17]

This is really cool. I would have never thought about this. You could have a total of about (doing this all in my head) 498 or something pairs of teleporters. Now who would have that many teleporters? Unless you have teleporters every 5 blocks on a small world I don't think you could use that many with a reason.