dcsimg

Environment rules

Printable View

..and the direction the other creature is facing
Quote:

  • There are four types of cell contents:
    1. empty cell
    2. wall cell
    3. food cell
    4. another creature

  • Actually there are six:
    1. off-bounds (== outside the arena)
    2. occluded
    3. empty cell
    4. wall cell
    5. food cell
    6. another creature
  • January 17th, 2003, 09:18 AM
    Yves M
    Dimitry, once the initial rules have been finalized, I'll place them in a sticky thread, same with the initial version of server and clients.
    Quote:

    Move forward and attack are the same thing
    Seems fair enough to me.

    Quote:

    ..and the direction the other creature is facing
    Sure, I forgot about that ;)

    Quote:

    off-bounds (== outside the arena)
    occluded
    empty cell
    wall cell
    food cell
    another creature
    Right, I was thinking that we could have a wall all around the world or maybe even make it 'round' so that if you go past the north border, you end up on the south border (not for the initial version though).
    "Occluded" is of course a possible response from the server for some cell contents.
  • January 22nd, 2003, 03:42 AM
    galathaea
    some more clarifications needed
    I haven't had a chance to look through the server coder yet to see if these questions might be answered there, but I was organizing some notes on a creature I've been considering and have a small little list of things I am still a bit unclear about. I thought maybe it might be good to post them, in case others needed the info as well.
    • I have seen mention of the move as 1 space forward and as a move being possible in any of the 8 directions. Which is the actual rule right now? This is basically asking if orientation is tied to movement, or if they can vary independantly (and if we may move only forward, this takes out direct diagonal moves).
    • Is the only action that consumes food right now the attack? I can't seem to find any rules for the food consumption of the other moves, but I do see a separation of a theoretical consumption for attack and a general modifier that applies accross the board.
    • Is there a life max beyond which you cannot regenerate (probably your starting amount, I would guess), or does regeneration occur with out capping? There is mention of life percentage (in regards to enemy stats visible) which does indicate a special reference value, but I could imagine percentages over 100 as well.

    Those are the major confusions I have right now. I'm sorry if these are answered somewhere I have overlooked, but any assistance will be greatly appreciated!
  • January 22nd, 2003, 04:52 AM
    Elrond
    I think every single turn should require food consuption. Even staying idle should require some food consuption (maybe just 1, the minimum). One creature doing nothing still require energy just to stay alive. This will also force creature no to stay idle for too long.

    It could be something aroung the following ratio:
    Staying idle -> 1
    Scanning -> 2
    Turning of 90 (270) degrees -> 4
    Turning of 180 degrees -> 6
    Moving forward -> 6
    Moving diagonal -> 9 (if diagonal moves are used)
    Harvesting food -> 8 (of course it will bring more, but you need at least 8 to begin harvesting, otherwise, ... you are as good as dead).
    Attacking -> Depends on the attack capacity, ... Say the formula given by Yves M (I think).

    This is just a ratio that may be doubled or changed to find the best possible balance.

    I agree that the issue with the moves must be clarified. But may be it would be simple in the first stage to make only forward move with no diagonals.
  • January 24th, 2003, 08:20 PM
    SolarFlare
    I may be a little late in saying this, having not seen this project until now.

    In any environment with many characters, such as this, there is bound to be some level of diplomacy. Whether two units decide to share vision, or protect each other, or ambush another unit, or if a unit robs another unit of its food in exchange for sparing its life, etc., there will always be something. It would be a mistake not to include some sort of communication method between units. Perhaps not in the original version, but if possible it should be incorporated.

    At any rate, there would have to be some defining communication technique that would say who you can talk with (i.e. would it have to be someone in your sight range? would it have to be someone who isn't necessarily in your sight range but that you've met before?), when you can talk with them, what you can talk about (a limited set of keywords so that any unit can be programmed to understand them), how units send messages and respond to them, etc.

    I think it would add depth to the game and make it more "realistic". It could be simple, the conversation could initially consist of a few keywords, and each unit could send one message per turn and respond to one message before deciding on its action for that turn.

    If this sounds like a horrible idea, sorry! I think that if this isn't added, people would try to take alliances out of the game, and program it into their units for an advantage. Just an idea ;).
  • January 24th, 2003, 10:55 PM
    Goodz13
    I beleve communication between 2 creatures would be for a version 2 or 3. I think it might be a good idea, but I think that it would be a lot of work for the first version, or even second. Of Cource they wouldn't communicate directly, but through the server.
  • January 24th, 2003, 11:16 PM
    SolarFlare
    As I've read through this, I have realized that there is a critical flaw in the movement of units.

    To begin with, these units will be smart; and all I mean by that is that they will know whether or not they should engage in battle with another particular unit based on the formulae of the outcome. If a unit is near enough to attack them, the about-to-be-attacked unit (which wishes not to be attacked) can avoid the attack by continually moving forward! The only way for the attack to work is if the runner runs out of food or if he runs right into an obstacle.

    It would not be very useful for a unit to be running after another unit for several turns merely to attack it. The attacker must have some sort of "attacker's advantage" to prevent this. For example, allow attacks to be diagonal, or allow units "in pursuit" to travel two squares while units "not in pursuit" travel only one.

    I do not wish to further complicate the initial version of the game, but unless I'm missing something (please point it out if I am!), the attacks will be a great disappointment.
  • January 25th, 2003, 02:49 AM
    Yves M
    solar, I don't think that this will happen simply because a creature only sees forward and turning costs a game turn. If a creature saw its attacker and tried to run away, that means that it would have to turn and then begin moving. Plus it would never know whether the attacker is still follwing it (as it doesn't have eyes on the back of its head). And it is bound to run into a wall as well.

    We'll see with the first round of the competition whether the rules are OK or not and what should be changed.
  • January 25th, 2003, 12:25 PM
    SolarFlare
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Yves M
    solar, I don't think that this will happen simply because a creature only sees forward and turning costs a game turn. If a creature saw its attacker and tried to run away, that means that it would have to turn and then begin moving. Plus it would never know whether the attacker is still follwing it (as it doesn't have eyes on the back of its head). And it is bound to run into a wall as well.

    We'll see with the first round of the competition whether the rules are OK or not and what should be changed.
    I agree with the last sentence ;).

    But I'd still like to point out that according to the damage formula, the creature would not necessarily die after a single attack. Once it is attacked for one turn, it could immediately set all its moves to "forward," as it assumes it is being chased for however many turns. The creature usually won't have to turn before it runs, either.

    I agree that you should make the initial version with no heed to this issue. Consider this only a prediction of a weakness of the program which can be corrected in version two if necessary.
  • January 27th, 2003, 08:20 AM
    Elrond
    Quote:

    Originally posted by solarflare
    In any environment with many characters, such as this, there is bound to be some level of diplomacy. Whether two units decide to share vision, or protect each other, or ambush another unit, or if a unit robs another unit of its food in exchange for sparing its life, etc., there will always be something. It would be a mistake not to include some sort of communication method between units. Perhaps not in the original version, but if possible it should be incorporated.
    It may or may not be a good idea. In the real world, dogs do not communicate with cats and horses. If we see it as a competition in a natural-like environment where each creature represents a species, then communication may not be a good idea.

    We were speaking at one stage of having creatures that can breed (for a future version). In this case, it could be an advantage to allow creatures of the same species to communicate. This is something we find much more in nature.

    But we could also decide that any creature could communicate with any other as well. It is probably something we wil have to think about for some future versions, but it's probably not needed for any of the first two or three versions, while we will be trying to balance more raw parameters.

    At one stage it will be interesting to have a from of communication. Good idea.
  • February 21st, 2003, 09:05 AM
    Marina Vaillant
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Yves M
    Ok, this seems too complicated, so maybe we'll just stick with "seeing" up to two squares in front of the robot, like in the attachment.
    Yes this one is better then the first because the creature will "sense" the environment more than "see" it :)
    It should know what is around, or in front according to what is decided.

    You are giving good suggestions. Thank you.
    I don't agree in your complicated way of counting the power we get from eating and the power we get for resting. I would like the strength of the creature calculated both from what it eats and how long it sleeps.
    I think the same counter should take this into account.
    It would raise of 10 when you harvest. Raise of 1 per turn when you sleep. Lower of let's say 4 when it attacks, and the wounds can be calculated according to each creature's strength. We'll see the rule when we know roughly how much is an average amount of strength, and how much difference there can be between creatures.

    Marina
  • September 8th, 2003, 11:28 PM
    Joseph_R_Thomas
    can u pls keep me in the loop too???
    i want to participate too.....:)
  • September 9th, 2003, 02:00 AM
    dimm_coder
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Joseph_R_Thomas
    can u pls keep me in the loop too???
    i want to participate too.....:)
    Um... This thread is dead... already for a long time. There were enough members who wanted to participate and there was even some work under code development, but people had enough other work to do and it is seemed that there was not so easy to orginize a sirious work under such project here. May be it was an organization problem (no any organization at all) , may be something else, but now U can see that the last post here was 7 monthes ago.
  • September 9th, 2003, 02:34 AM
    Joseph_R_Thomas
    i got time..i am willing to start....:)
    can we start it since its dead???
    anyone with me????:)
    me a novice programmer so dont excpect much thought...:(
  • September 9th, 2003, 03:06 AM
    dimm_coder
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Joseph_R_Thomas
    anyone with me????:)
    me a novice programmer so dont excpect much thought...:(
    Well, in my brief view, this project do not need many programmers... simple beginning version could be done by one-two coders. That what about code development. Another thing is a ideas sharing. Here anyone can give advise. And there were enough different ideas. The main problem is to find enough free time for someone (not a beginner programmer of course) and put all those ideas in a code, but not sharing code development among defferent persons (at least during a first step until the first working version will be done). Of course, this is my 2 cents on the organization side.
    As I remember, Gabriel wrote some code and he was a beginner of this idea. I donot know what about this code now.
  • September 9th, 2003, 03:20 AM
    Joseph_R_Thomas
    so you are saying i should abandon it or should i go on
    ???
  • September 9th, 2003, 04:04 PM
    SolarFlare
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Joseph_R_Thomas
    so you are saying i should abandon it or should i go on
    ???
    If enough people had been interested and had the resources to devote to it, Code War would have been a huge success. But as you see, the reverse determination has been made naturally.
  • September 11th, 2003, 02:35 AM
    Joseph_R_Thomas
    i want to start it again...i want to make it......
    i want....
    is there anyone else who can gimme a hand..or rather i'll give u a hand since i am not an expert:D
    tks
  • September 12th, 2003, 09:38 AM
    Kuruto
    I have posted a skeleton here: Server and C++ client skeleton code -- BETA
    But it seems that everybody is still on holiday :p.

    In the mean time, I have added some DirectX3D stuff so that you can see the action at server-side. You can also walk in all directions and shoot if another robot is in sight.
    This latest release is not yet posted, since there is no more interest :(

    Kurt
  • September 13th, 2003, 02:00 AM
    Joseph_R_Thomas
    i have intrest....:)
  • September 15th, 2003, 03:08 AM
    Kuruto
    I have recently seen a very nice and simple simulation.
    And I want to change my client into the same thing.
    A framework is still a framework,
    so adding a little sense to it, is more fun :p.

    It's basicly like this:
    A client is alive until it is killed by a zombie.
    Then it turns into a zombie also.
    At the end, only zombies wander around :D.

    It shouldn't take much time to implement this.
    So I'll try to do this as soon as possible.

    Kurt

    PS: Have you had a chance to look at the server I've posted?
  • September 15th, 2003, 12:47 PM
    Joseph_R_Thomas
    i cant read yourm file...cannot open workspace....why?:eek:
    is it Visual Studio.Net???
  • September 16th, 2003, 02:57 AM
    Kuruto
    .NET indeed
    It is VS.NET indeed, but it's very easy to create a new project.
    Just add all the necessary files, add a button and link it with this code:
    Code:

    CodeWar m_CodeWar;
    m_CodeWar.initialize( 9, 9, m_Port );

    And you're all set.

    Kurt
  • November 22nd, 2010, 06:59 PM
    Dragster93
    Re: Environment rules
    Where can I find source code for some of the creatures that have been created? I am new to Code War. So I'm not really sure of what I am supposed to create or HOW exactly to create it. If any of you could point me towards any sample programs or participant source codes, that would be great. Thanks.
  • November 23rd, 2010, 04:47 PM
    S_M_A
    Re: Environment rules
    Nobody has shown any interest in this the last 7 years... Anyway, look here http://www.codeguru.com/forum/showth...r=3#post787538