Change a touched parts transparency?

[AstroStudioz]

How can i achieve this? I could just put a script inside of each part but that would cause massive amounts of lag. I have a folder inside of another folder located in the workspace.

How can i get all parts in the folder?

[DasKairo (Cairo)]

@Sepruko

You could also consider using CollectionService (Roblox Creator Documentation).

That is unnecessary.

---

ServerScriptService:

db = false -- This is important so the Code doesnt spam

for number, index in pairs(ExampleFolder:GetChildren()) do -- goes through the "Folders" Instances
   if index:IsA("Part") then -- if found objects is under the class of part
        print(number) -- prints number of Instances found that are under this condition
           index.Touched:Connect(function(hit) -- Applys a Connection to all Instances under that condition
              if not db then -- if db is false
               db = true  -- Event cant be used
               print(hit.Transparency) -- prints the transparency of the part that it touched
               task.wait(1) -- delay
               db = false -- Event can be used
         end
      end)
   end
end

This is a great way to reduce the amount of Resources the Server uses

---

CollectionService just Applys a tag that can be used later or other tasks, its a bit unnessacary for this case as the Table is Applying a Connection to stuff under a Condition, it can be useful here when you want to disconnect the Event.

Instead of having a Script for one Killbrick, you can have the Server go through itself and Apply those Connections to the objects under a specified condition (Sorry if I repeat this word)

---

pairs and ipairs | Documentation - Roblox Creator Hub

[Den_vers]

If you’re saying that you have folder-ception, or multiple folders inside of multiple folders, you can easily just use a recursive function. This is assuming that is the case, of course.

local folder = game.Workspace[your folder here]

function loopfolder(item)
    for _, v in pairs(item:GetChildren()) do
        if v:IsA("Folder") then
            loopfolder(v)
        elseif v:IsA("Part")
            v.Transparency = .5 -- your transparency here
        end
    end
end

loopfolder(folder)

[DasKairo (Cairo)]

@Sepruko

@xGOA7x’s example will only run once every second regardless of which part is touched

@Sepruko This isn’t true,

Touched events only fire when the Object is moving, or has detected a Collusion, when not moving, Detector or Detected, it wont fire, unless there is a change, either by another collusion or movement, I think you may be confusing GetTouchingParts here.

@Sepruko

as well as yielding in an event listener (avoid this)

Its called a Debounce, its use to yield code from firing too many times (A Cooldown), plus, it wont effect any code below the Event, I’m not sure where you are going at here.

@Sepruko

calling the inferior wait function (use task.wait instead if you must yield the current thread).

The Post clearly says task.wait()

[Blafert]

Your code would give a 1 sec waiting time to all parts once one is touched. A dictionary denounce is all that would be needed. It still yields in an event listener, but I’m not sure why this would be a big issue.

[DasKairo (Cairo)]

@Sepruko

Do not insinuate that I do not know what I’m talking about here, do not lie to those reading this topic and myself (saying you did not use wait when you only edited your post to use it after I said task.wait was better).

Last edit was 6 hours ago, you posted then 5 hours ago, i did originally use wait(), but a few minutes later I switched to task.wait()

@Sepruko The first 2 edits contained wait, the third had task.wait(), other than that minor spelling checks and then clarifying on more details

@Sepruko

I know what it is, yielding is not the only way to create a debounce effect. Yielding in an event listener is an incredibly bad idea, because if you get in that habit you’ll eventually run into problems. My example uses a timestamp-based debounce system that avoids yielding.

another alternative to this would be to have Bool Attributes as a debounce, but that might cause issues

@Sepruko

I was only pointing out things in your code that I felt could be done better and provided code samples that I felt were better implementations, I was not in any way trying to attack you.

Who said that I was offended, or that you were attacking me? I was only stating on why i disagreed on some parts, I’m not sure at what point you thought that.

[Blafert]

Can you elaborate a bit on why yielding in an event listeren is a bad idea? What kind of problems will you run into, or how?