   Puzzle game problem: Loose pieces
  I'm currently working on a puzzle game, where the player manuvers square, tetris type pieces into place on a board. the sqares are one of four different colors; if three pieces of the same color touch, they dissapear and earn the player points. (piece = 1 individual square, block = 4 pieces)Here's the problem: becuase of the unusual (for Puzzle games) shape of the block, they tend to leave behind "loose" pieces--pieces that are just hangin in midair.Here's a really poor example:Picthe three red pieces dissapear, and...PicPresto, a loose piece. That one green one.So, any ideas on how to work around this tastefully? I was thinking about having all "loose" pieces (pieces not touching three or more other pieces, of any color--essentially, groups of one or two pieces hanging in midair) move until they hit something, but I read someone else's thread where they had problems with that. So, any other ideas?   
  I would think pulling down any "loose" pieces (those not anchored to the ground by other blocks) as if by gravity would be a fine solution that would also allow for chain reactions.  I love chain reactions.   ;  Yep most of the bean type games where you have to position same coloured beans to make them vanish use the "hanging beans fall" system Frequency mentions.   ;  I was aware of the hanging-blocks-fall-down thing, but I didn't want chain reactions going off all over the place (EDIT: I wanted to try and do chains of maybe one, two combos at a time. I don't think that game, or the way I coded it will work very well for that). That's why I'm asking for any other ideas.besides, my code (using gamemaker 5.3 ^__^) doesn't like combos of any sort at this point.;  If your code can't handle combos, I think it'd probably be fine to turn it into a "feature" as opposed to a limitation - have the blocks pulled down until they come into contact with blocks that are anchored to the ground and make it so sets of three that are chained by the fall aren't set off until another of the same color triggers it.  Either way, I don't think it'll do to leave 'em just floating there, they'll probably cause serious clutter fast unless you want to make that part of the difficulty. ;)   ;  I have an idea. Let the loose pieces stay in place, but if a falling block falls on a loose piece, it will become part of the block, so if the block continues to fall, it will take the piece with it.If you like, you can give different weight to the different colored pieces. So if a green piece weights like 3 red piece, if you land a block made out of 2 red pieces on a green loose piece, the block will stop. This can add lots of thinking and planning to your game, or it can just make it clumsy, so use this idea with caution.   ;  You could always just have the loose pieces fall down but do nothing. And then when the next block is placed, you may get a superblock that is taken away.   ;Quote:Original post by someboddyI have an idea. Let the loose pieces stay in place, but if a falling block falls on a loose piece, it will become part of the block, so if the block continues to fall, it will take the piece with it.I REALLY Like that idea. And, in typing that I wasn't sure how to implement it, I just realized how I could. so, yeah. thanks!;  Will you implement the weight idea? I think you should if you have a way to avoid the problem Frequency mentioned.   