7Konstantin7: Well, let it move as it does now, depending on the step of the grid - well, everything according to the current algorithm, only the other way around)
But it is better not to increase the volume, but make it constant. Otherwise, such a grid will generate a losing storm at the slightest reverse movement)
OnGoing: Only it is better not to increase the volume, but to make it permanent. Otherwise such a grid will create a losing storm with the slightest reverse movement).
It's better always with one lot) even now I'm looking at the permanent lot and I like it better)
OnGoing: It's not a problem to turn it over, as long as you don't put ticks for a while and play it live. We need to think about whether it's worth it.
Well, let it move as it does now, depending on the step of the grid - well, everything according to the current algorithm, only the other way around)
Only it is better not to increase the volume, but to make it permanent. Otherwise such a grid will create a losing storm with the slightest reverse movement).
Except that all these ideas without a coder) won't work in reality).
I'm my own coder, if only I had an idea) But without a comprehensive calculation I won't waste my time.
Ahh, that's good, but how do you calculate? It's clearer on the test, and I was watching by eye long time ago I knew such an idea...
It's not a problem to turn it over, as long as you don't put ticks for a while and play it live. We need to think about whether it's worth it.
I'm in))) We should get someone else to think it over then)
Yeah and silent) We should have a Senate-Summit)