WaffleChurro wrote:

MathlyCat wrote:

WaffleChurro wrote:

TheMonsterOfTheDeep wrote:

WaffleChurro wrote:

No Support.

Its useless seeing all these silly workarounds come. Wouldn't this just make Scratch too easy..

What workaround is there for bounce? I would seriously like to know, because it requires deciding an arbitrary point on a costume to calculate a normal, and then calculating that normal, so…

All I am saying is why make Scratch any easier? It easy enough.

Here is a link to a video of a sprite bouncing off another sprite Your text to link here…

Just like how easy it is to mock your grammar there

I have one question…

awesome5185 wrote:

No support. This would make scratch way too easy.

Why do you keep bumping up old topics? Like sure they're relevant but they're ages old

Very sorry Mr MathlyCat, but I am on a tablet and I am not used to typing on them.

I am sure Reddit has lots of people to mock.

+1
I agree
(Gosh I should stop some of these short useless posts now)

if <touching (sprite) ?> then
bounce off at () degrees ::motion
end

i think this block would work

WaffleChurro wrote:

Here is a link to a video of a sprite bouncing off another sprite Your text to link here…

That techniquie only works for bouncing off circles. There is also a way to bounce off a line that you know the angle of, but no general method for bouncing.

No Support. There are many ways to do this, so we don't need this block.

(Sorry for necroposting, but I am just putting my opinion here)

How do you get the bloc without it staying red???
O_o

redstonelasher2010 wrote:

How do you get the bloc without it staying red???
O_o

Ok.

redstonelasher2010 wrote:

How do you get the bloc without it staying red???
O_o

The user did this:

bounce off at () degrees :: motion

But you need to do that in between (scratchblocks)(/scratchblocks) (replacing parentheses with brackets)

Charles12310 wrote:

No Support. There are many ways to do this, so we don't need this block.

(Sorry for necroposting, but I am just putting my opinion here)

Is there really though?
No support for the OP because of ambiguities.

There's too much ambiguity to how this would work. Not to mention all the glitches..
I feel like that's why the;

<when [  v] recieved :: events>

block is rejected.
I assume this might go for the “bounce” block too.
A better solution?

bounce off of [ v] :: motion

You cannot bounce off nothing.

donotforgetmycode wrote:

You cannot bounce off nothing.

That's true, which is why we've declined to add this. I'm not sure it was really necessary to bump this to say that.