h a l f b a k e r yNo, not that kind of baked.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Conway's Game of Life is a cellular automaton developed by
John
Conway in 1970. The Game of Life is a "zero-player game"
where its
evolution needs no human input to continue after the game's
initial
state is determined.
(To save myself the burden of explaining the rules of 'Life',
from
now
on I will assume that the reader already knows them. If you
don't, I
advise you to skim through the provided link and gain a basic
understanding of the game's principles.)
Conway's Game of Death is, in contrast, a two-player game. The
rules are quite simple. Each player, on opposite sides of a four-
sided
grid, rapidly draws designs in real time to launch gliders, rakes,
puffers and spaceships at their opponent. Squares that each
player
places are that player's color (example: red vs. black) and react
with
live squares of their own color normally. However, the grid is
divided
into three sections; each player is on their own section, with a
neutral zone between them. If two squares from opposing
players
come into contact, the square that is on its own side is
annihilated.
If the squares are in the neutral zone, both are annihilated.
The game is divided into thirds. Each third of the game ends
when a
player has a pulsar oscillator going in their side for a specified
amount of rounds.
That player
wins the third. To win the game, a player must win two out of
three
thirds.
READ THIS!
http://en.wikipedia...ay%27s_Game_of_Life
Rules to Conway's Game of Life. If you don't read this, the above idea will seem like absolute nonsense. [DrWorm, Sep 01 2009]
[link]
|
| |
A two-player version of the Game of Life was a central plot feature of David Brin's book "Glory Season". It didn't feature real-time interaction, just teams creating initial conditions. |
|
| |
[21 Quest], didn't you know? The winner's prize is the Conway
Twitty Collection. And [lurch], with realtime interaction I
think the game is more like a "dynamic game" and less like a
"math problem", if you know what I mean. |
|
| |
What is the frame ('round') duration? And how wide are the sections? |
|
| |
You see, the winning condition ("...when a player has a pulsar oscillator going in their side for 30 rounds") seems a bit easy to me.
Suppose I draw a pulsar to the rear of my section in the first frame. If nothing modifies this, I'll win the round in 30 frames.
The best the opponent can do is draw a lightweight spaceship at the front of their section. This will advance at one row per 2 frames, so the furthest it can progress in 30 frames is 15 rows. |
|
| |
Even so, the idea of maintaining something for a duration as a winning condition is a good one. I just think you've slightly over-specified the rules in that respect; they may need iterating to give a good game. |
|
| |
You're right, [Loris], and in fact I was just thinking about that
very problem. 30 rounds is far too little time. Perhaps it
would be better if I left it ambiguous. In fact, I'll change that
now, thanks. |
|
| |
One thing that I question: some structures tend to be very durable; some react to collision (in a normal rule-set) with a violent spray of moving debris. However, under your rules ("If two squares from opposing players come into contact, the square that is on its own side is annihilated.") no pulsar, block, fence, glider, automaton or whatever, stands a chance: at first touch, they die. |
|
| |
Feeling terribly old and obscure, I raise my hand
knowing what a Conway Twitty was, without looking
at link. |
|
| |
The astonishing thing is that he changed his name *to*
Conway Twitty. |
|
| |
[MaxwellBuchanan] I was just about to say the exact same thing! |
|
| |
I am thinking that a game as proposed might not require much strategery. |
|
| |
2. plant things (eg gliders) that will fly over and hit your opponents pulsar. |
|
| |
3. plant things (eg stable shapes) that will intercept or block incoming flying things from your opponent. |
|
| |
[bungston], what? No guns? Also, you can't plant stable
shapes to block the opponent's gliders, because you can only
draw in your own zone, and your stable shapes would only
get destroyed anyway. You need to carefully send ships and
gliders to intercept. Or make glider guns. |
|
| |
This might be the "killer application" for a touch table the same way Solitaire was for Windows... |
|
| |
I might make the game a bit easier to win. Also, some "cheats" might be helpful (pre-made glider guns, etc that you can cut & paste). |
|
| |
It'd be interesting to bake this and tweak the speed, etc. I suppose it would be easier to implement as a networked game for now. |
|
| |
It may also be interesting to simply let the squares interact normally on all parts of the grid, with the rest of the rules intact -- that way, you could set up defenses for your side, etc. I am not a life expert -- I wonder if a 'reflector' is a possibility. |
|
| |
Do you mind if anyone here bakes this? |
|
| |
Having cut-and-paste patterns is a brilliant idea. Maybe there
could be a "library" of patterns for players to choose from, so
they don't have to remember so many. |
|
| |
Also, I would love it if someone baked this. In fact, I would
be the first to try/buy it. |
|
| |