Anti-creeper vs Ceeper: A-C Wins?

Started by CobraKill, November 19, 2011, 11:37:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

CobraKill

I got bored one day and ran some tests. A-C vs Creeper.

Here's What I started with:



Here's what happened:



How is this?

(Here is the map)
Never trust a computer that doesn't fit through your nearest window.

eudrick

#1
Interesting.  I note that the bottom row of creeper is actually 2m as opposed to 1m and as such the creeper is 'stronger' than the AC.  Opened the file in the editor, didn't see anything that would favor one over the other.

Never teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Lazarus Long, Time Enough For Love, Robert A. Heinlein

Grauniad

Creeper and anti-creeper are simply numbers. Positive for creeper, negative for anti-creeper. If the two meet, arithmetic resolves the issue. There is no "stronger" vs. "weaker." Math doesn't work like that.
A goodnight to all and to all a good night - Goodnight Moon

eudrick

Quote from: Grauniad on November 20, 2011, 01:15:44 AM
Creeper and anti-creeper are simply numbers. Positive for creeper, negative for anti-creeper. If the two meet, arithmetic resolves the issue. There is no "stronger" vs. "weaker." Math doesn't work like that.

My point.  There's more creeper than anti but the AC 'Wins'.
Never teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Lazarus Long, Time Enough For Love, Robert A. Heinlein

Grauniad

I didn't go and count cell for cell the creeper in the example map. But here is a counter-proof.

I created this map with exactly the same amount of creeper as anti-creeper.  When running it, you may want to turn on the speed increase, since elapsed time is about 20 minutes.

Don't do anything. Just watch and observe the outcome.
A goodnight to all and to all a good night - Goodnight Moon

Kithros

#5
I noticed the bottom row of subcells for the creeper are 2B density where the anti-creeper is only 1B density - intuitively you would think this would mean the creeper should win, but because you're using such ridiculous densities there are issues with overflows and such. Try reducing the densities all to 1M instead of 1B (and fix the bottom row of subcells on the creeper), so you don't need to worry about overflows which can easily mess up calculations - you also might want to set the gravity  to 0.

There's also some small source of error in creeper evaporation - any subcell with less than 10 density will be deleted, which can add up to a few thousand - they should be equal if the distance to the centre is equal, but the anti-creeper field is 3 subcells wider than the creeper field.

EDIT: Here's what I consider to be the fixed version:

CobraKill

You're right. Ughh, I could have sworn I checked everything over. :(

*LOCKED*
Never trust a computer that doesn't fit through your nearest window.