安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题










I was just noticing that there's no panels for the 2x1 sloped base & tip panels? You've got all the ones for the sides, but none for the face.
Yes, as you're reducing the block count you're still saving performance.
True Armour (ones using the actual Armour TypeID, which gets unstable above 1x1x1 due to its culling system and assembly) does have additional tricks but this stuff here is still an Improvement. Now there is an upper cap to the gain with either, and thats about in the double to triple digit sized blocks since then MountSurface size starts to eat performance or overwhelm the engine, as this is VERY far from that point, you should see performance increases.
For context, the Armour panels are not the same TypeID as blocks like the Armour Cube, InvertedCorner etc which are actual armour TypeID users while Panels are just cubeblocks which lack the fancy stuff.