Code center > Bug reports
body and mass
EricL:
When your environment is bascially a pond, being pond scum makes you king of the jungle...
Adding moving shapes actually discourages the pond scum adaptation. Finding food is harder, mobility is favorred, and large masses get chopped up and/or can't fit into narrow passages....
Griz:
--- Quote ---Are your bots actually dying in 2.4 when they lose mass?
--- End quote ---
they were ... as they seemed not to be able to feed/fire effective shots with
too small a body/mass at some point.
I cannow feed the body a bit as PY suggested and that helps them hang
around but they still have small bodies/mass and no longer affect other
bots/veggies much in collisions.
and I can only store small amounts per cycle or it diminishes their energy
more quickly than they can gather it and they do die.
I haven't got that worked out very well yet ...
how much to store as body and at what energy level to begin.
perhaps I'll have to use a body condition as well to ensure they
don't reproduce unless they have sufficient body.
still tweaking/experimenting with all of that.
--- Quote ---Try running a sim with the dynamic sizes disabled. (or static sizes enabled, I forget what the widget is called): if you can't tell a difference between 2.4 and 2.37 we know it's just a cosmetic instead of core problem.
--- End quote ---
right. did that.
but as eric says ...
it's not just a display artifact and any function that relies
on a bot's physical size will be impacted ...
and there are differences in the physics between 2.3/2.4.
I liked the early versions of 2.4 for that reason ...
the physics ... the collisions and ties to veggies and the
resulting acclerations seemed pretty realistic.
now, with a mass of .25, they have little effect in moving
veggies around.
what I'm trying to do is run things the way most folks are
going to be running their sims/bots ...
so the bots designed and/or mutated can compete on the
same playing field in leagues, etc ...
so we all get on the same page and can exchange and
share our bots and have some consistant results.
so let me ask others again ...
do YOUR bots end up looking like specks of dust with small
body/mass?
(seems like there is a lower limit of .25 for mass regardless
of how small the body gets. I'm talking about < 1 for body)
I even use the smallest field possible and still
can hardly tell the color of a bot or distinguish between any
two species by appearence.
are people using bots that store body as PY's C_Orbis does?
PurpleYouko:
--- Quote ---so both nrg and body must be greater than something ...
could you explain just what value they are being compared to?
just > 60 and >61 ???
--- End quote ---
*60 and *61 are both memory locations that store values used as a threshold for reproduction.
As the bot gets older they are incremented so that a young bot reproduces quite quickly but as they age they get bigger and stronger.
I think Eric is missing the point when he says that ALL older bots will work in 2.4.
Some of the old ones that don't use body controls barely work in pre-2.4 when compared to the ones that manage their own body successfully.
IMO all modern bots need to use some sort of *.body conditional if they want to compete.
EricL:
--- Quote from: PurpleYouko ---I think Eric is missing the point when he says that ALL older bots will work in 2.4.
Some of the old ones that don't use body controls barely work in pre-2.4 when compared to the ones that manage their own body successfully.
--- End quote ---
Of course I meant it as a general principle, a criteria by which someone who sees a difference between 2.3X and 2.4X can use to determine whether they should expect me to spend time and energy reducing or illiminating that difference.
As a general principle, if a bot works poorly in 2.3X, I am committed to making it work equally poorly in 2.4X.
--- Quote from: Griz ---do YOUR bots end up looking like specks of dust with small
body/mass?
--- End quote ---
I see this often in my evo sims, depending upon the conditions. All else being equal, organisms with shorter generation times win. If you can reproduce more/sooner, selection will favor you. If you spend cycles and energy on your own growth and mass, instead of reproducing, you will loose, all else being equal. In an asexually reproducing population (no sexual selection) with no prediation (no reason to defend or compete) there are few or no reasons to be large and this is what a lot of evo sims are like. In fact, being large actually works against you in such cases. The vast majority of biological organisms on this planet are single celled, their niches don't favor larger size. It is only our own marco, multi-cellular predejuce that views smallness as less evolved.
You can set up your sim to favor larger size to a certain extent. Making veggies scarce or hard to find encourages energy storage. Using a small number of very high energy veggies encourages competition for access space to the energy supply, encouraging larger size. Using a simple maze makes finding food more difficult and favors longevity over immediate fucundity.
I have been considering adding some costs that would in themselves, favor larger size such as a thermal loss cost which would be function of the ratio of surface area to mass. But until then, in most evo sims, I suggest using the zoom button.
Elite:
I was running an evosim with A Minimalis and the bots never gained any aditional body, so they just halved their body with every repro until they couldn't reproduce anymore.
In 2.37.6, If a bot was killed, say if all it's energy dropped to zero, then all it's remaining body was transfered to the killing bot. If a bot's body dropped to zero, the bot died, but transfered all it's remaining energy to the attacking bot
So, for 2.4, we need to have any body or energy remaining upon death transfered, rather than being lost to the vaccum.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version