In conditions this extreme, even a tiny difference in these rules can make a decisive difference. I say we make a few 'benchmark' bots first, then fine-tune the costs so they aren't too harsh (we might learn to survive in a desert, put not in an active volcano )
OK, how about Bacillus's ant-bots, bouncer, a MB (PY's Inchworm2? Kinda old, but if there's a better MB that only uses ties to move, use that), ... any other IBbots that would qualify? We should also try the sim with a non-complex F2 bot, so long as it qualifies, and make sure that an IBB can actually survive better than a kill-all bot. If not, maybe continue decreasing bang efficiency..
Who would like to run the trial sims? I can't this week or next week... or any time soon. Sry.
Rules 0.5:
- Add 20 random shapes at beginning of tournament.
- No memory shots.
- No venom.
- No viruses.
- Size 12 field.
- Walls (non-toroidal)
- Low veg repop threshold, Veg repop 1, long repop delay.
- Transitory fluid resistance.
- F1 costs, with slightly higher movement costs, no/low code execution costs.
- Only negative tieloc values allowed.
- Decreased bang efficiency (30%?)- I like this idea, encourages MBs and sophisticated movement strategies
- Veggies fed based on kilobody
- (?) Lowered age costs
- (?) Lowered tie costs
- (?) High veggy cap
- (?) F1, or slightly lowered, per-bot costs
Note that poison and shell are still allowed, but should have very high costs.
Controversial?:
- low age costs? I think lowered age costs will allow more complex MBs to be made, since they don't have to constantly repair themselves. However, it will also encourage some sort of Big berthas... But, if all the bots on both sides use this strategy, then there's nothing problematic with it- we should still be able to encourage complex behavior among the Big Berthas.
- Decrease tie costs? If we increase tie costs it's just another obstacle to making IB MBs.
- High veggy cap? I like this idea.
- I don't like increasing per-bot costs either. (Also works against IB MBs)
- Also, not exactly controversial, but we need to decide on exact settings in most instances.
Perhaps all the controversial rules can be decided upon when we do the test runs.
Also, what does higher movement costs do? Charge extra energy per bang or charge extra for any movement?
A new idea- Make bang efficiency 0.
Moonfisher-
Decreasing bang-efficiency means it takes more energy to move the same distance using .up, .dn, etc... but tie-based movement systems are unaffected. Decreasing it to 0 means that the only way for a bot to move is through ties.