Author Topic: Defence stuff  (Read 3422 times)

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Defence stuff
« on: October 04, 2005, 04:20:11 PM »
Some things relating to defense:

1.  Shell and slime should be able to be built based on location.  That is, protect all over, just your front, just your back, your sides, etc.  Shell/slime built in this way can't be "moved around".  That is, wherever you build it, it stays, unless you unbuild it, it gets destroyed, etc.

2.  Shell and slime should have a maximum constructable amount per turn that's based on something the bot can set.  Body is an obvious choice.

3.  Shell/slime effectiveness is based on the surface area trying to be protected.  Larger bots need alot more shell/slime to protect them than smaller bots.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2005, 04:20:23 PM by Numsgil »

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Defence stuff
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2005, 04:44:25 PM »
How about some kind of SuperShell and SuperSlime. Seriously tough but you can't shoot or fire ties through your own layer.

Great in combination with your positional shell and slime.

A bot could lurk on the bottom of a pond with one side super shelled then when something comes into range, he flips over and blasts them.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2005, 04:44:46 PM by PurpleYouko »
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Defence stuff
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2005, 04:47:03 PM »
A further interesting side effect of this could be a density effect such that a bouyant bot will naturally float with the shelled side down.

Acceleration could get screwed up if the bot has more shell one side than the other, causing it to spin as it accelerates forward.
This would also entail some kind of cost for rotation based on the robot's mass.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Defence stuff
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2005, 05:49:22 PM »
I'd be all for a cost to rotate.  Maybe we should charge based on change in orientation based on moment of rotational inertia... over time (usually 1 cycle).

let me look some stuff up real quick...

edit:  I'll start a new topic for this, so this stays on topic...
« Last Edit: October 04, 2005, 05:52:32 PM by Numsgil »