Code center > Suggestions

Physical Sizes

(1/5) > >>

Numsgil:
I'm trying to assign physical sizes to all the components a bot has (muscles, nrg, carbs, etc.)

Carbs, it has been suggested (by schvarz) make a bot swell up since carbs are highly hydrophilic (I think that's what it is).

So I'll be assigning physical sizes to the bits.  A bots' physical size (the size of its circle) is deteremined by the sum of all its bits' physical sizes.  Anyone have any idea how big each bit should be?  This will affect things like friction, sunlight recieved, and proportions in a returned shot.

Also, everything will need a mass, to affect how heavy they make the bot.  This will affect things like accecleration and momentum.

There are already the beginnings of some of this in the program.  I'd like to flush it out.

I can come up with the numbers on my own, but I'd like some feedback on the relative size and mass of all the game components.

Here's a list of all the components I can think of the would have size and mass applied to them.  Things like nrg and amino acids (I'm thinking of having amino acids.) and Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide are considered too small to affect size or mass.

Shell (silicate and calcium)
Carbs
Fats
Proteins
Slime,
Venom,
Poison

So far I have
Carbs >> Fats in size (this is true in real life).
Shell is most massive per unit.

That's all I have.  We can make this arbitrary if we like, but I'd prefer a system that mirrors real life.

PurpleYouko:
My comments and a few thing from the first time I introduced the idea of size and mass

* Shell should be very dense. It should add quite a lot to mass but little or nothing to size
* Carbs should go mostly to size with only a little mass.
* Fats likewise should go mainly to size with some mass.
* Proteins are more dense than fat or carbs so should add mainly to muscle mass with less effect (but still some) on size.
* Slime I don't really see effectig size or mass by a significant ammount. Could reduce friction though.
* Venom and poison are actually proteins so should be treated as such.Possibly more later. Gotta go right now.

 :D  PY  :D

Numsgil:
In mass:

Shell > Muscle > fat > protein > carbs

In size:

carbs > X > X > X >shell

We could do the obvious and have sizes go carbs > protein>fat > muscle > shell.  That would be nice and symetrical.

or size:

carbs > fat > muscle > protein > shell

SyndLig:
I like the reversal method.

Shell > Muscle > Fat > Protein > Carbs
Carbs > Protein > Fat > Muscle > Shell

That way, carbs are biggest in size, but smallest mass, shell is biggest mass but smallest size, protein is slightly less mass and slightly more size, muscle is slightly more mass and slightly less size, and fat is equal all around.

As I see it, that seems about right to me.   ;)

Zelos:
syndlig, most people I know which is big in size doesnt have lots of proteins, they got enourmus amount of fat in teir body. dont you agree? so I think it should be:
Shell > Muscle > Fat > Protein > Carbs
Carbs > Fat > Muscle > Protein > Shell

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page