Author Topic: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48  (Read 7760 times)

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #15 on: August 22, 2014, 12:55:02 PM »
We might end up adding chloroplasts loss. We just may.

Offline Panda

  • Global Moderator
  • Bot Destroyer
  • *****
  • Posts: 476
  • Computer Science Undergraduate (nerd)
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #16 on: August 22, 2014, 01:00:41 PM »
Correct Panda, Robots that are not set to repopulate can still make chloroplasts if want. (As long as you do not restrict them from settings)

What I meant was, a lot of bots will get some chloroplasts, even if they don't have a programmed role of veggie (rather than in the repopulation setting).

I recommend you actually play with the program Panda.

When I get a chance to, I will. I've been really busy at the moment preparing for my final year project and helping my girlfriend pack for France.

As far as automatically chloroplasts loss, I was playing with that idea in my minds eye and came to the conclusion that it is a bad one, now if only I can remember why. Definitely was something with balancing out cost for chloroplasts production and makes the ambient light feature useless.

I suggested this because of my first point; bots who's roles are not veggies are having a few chloroplasts (though this may be prevented by a linear mass addition. Why does it make the ambient light feature useless (I cannot work that out, sorry)?

On a final point, after making mass liner I think it is looking way better, still I want specifically Panda to play with 2.48 (drop any day now, I want IM)

That's really good. I think it was a bad idea to do it in the first place now; I cannot remember why we wanted it in the first place.

When you go back to school Panda?

I travel back next Saturday but I don't start until the 22nd of Sept. I am quite busy until then, though. I hope to continue being part of this community during the year but I'm quite worried that I won't be able to.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #17 on: August 22, 2014, 01:03:08 PM »
Shvarz believe or not wanted non-liner, who would have thought?
« Last Edit: August 22, 2014, 04:57:08 PM by Botsareus »

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #18 on: August 22, 2014, 01:08:16 PM »
Quote
Correct Panda, Robots that are not set to repopulate can still make chloroplasts if want. (As long as you do not restrict them from settings)

What I meant was, a lot of bots will get some chloroplasts, even if they don't have a programmed role of veggie (rather than in the repopulation setting).

Hmm... I guess you are asking if there is a restriction for chloroplasts for non-repopulating robots, there is not.

Offline Panda

  • Global Moderator
  • Bot Destroyer
  • *****
  • Posts: 476
  • Computer Science Undergraduate (nerd)
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #19 on: August 22, 2014, 01:12:35 PM »
Quote
Correct Panda, Robots that are not set to repopulate can still make chloroplasts if want. (As long as you do not restrict them from settings)

What I meant was, a lot of bots will get some chloroplasts, even if they don't have a programmed role of veggie (rather than in the repopulation setting).

Hmm... I guess you are asking if there is a restriction for chloroplasts for non-repopulating robots, there is not.

I'm not asking about that. I was asking it rhetorically. What I am saying is: in evo sims, all bots will often generate small amounts of chloroplasts; unless that is just something that has happened to me.

lol Shvarz believe  or not wanted non-liner, who would have thought?

lol Panda believe  or not can be wrong, who would have thought?

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #20 on: August 22, 2014, 01:24:42 PM »
Well hopefully the non-liner will fix it. Time will tell.

It was weird for me that even a phd can make a mistake, that's all.

Offline Panda

  • Global Moderator
  • Bot Destroyer
  • *****
  • Posts: 476
  • Computer Science Undergraduate (nerd)
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #21 on: August 22, 2014, 01:30:49 PM »
Well hopefully the non-liner will fix it. Time will tell.

I assume it will. If we want to restrict moving bots around more, could we increase their volume? In leagues, drag is enabled; volume will make it more difficult for them to move.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #22 on: August 22, 2014, 01:34:59 PM »
Volume has a hard limit due to ties code, sorry.

Offline Panda

  • Global Moderator
  • Bot Destroyer
  • *****
  • Posts: 476
  • Computer Science Undergraduate (nerd)
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #23 on: August 22, 2014, 01:38:30 PM »
Volume has a hard limit due to ties code, sorry.

It could be increased more than it does now, couldn't it? Or is it already pushing those limits?

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #24 on: August 22, 2014, 01:41:50 PM »
Correct, limit is reached.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Re: Proposal: New chloroplast engine and DB2.48
« Reply #25 on: August 22, 2014, 02:22:55 PM »
Looking like it would not hurt to add very slow chloroplast loss.