|
|
Post by evolution4weαk on Mar 11, 2016 21:34:01 GMT
Disclaimer below If This Have Been Discussed before then can you link me the thread. Now On to The Topic  Will Auto-evo Prefer human like animals,or other type of animal? |
|
The_Wayward_Admiral
Spacefaring
The_Real_Slim_Shady
Atrox drew this awesome image of the Keldori!
Posts: 1,011 
|
Post by The_Wayward_Admiral on Mar 11, 2016 21:51:07 GMT
I believe that Auto-Evo won;'t have preset body types, but will alter the organisms in response to their survival deficiencies. I could be wrong, but that would then lead to a bunch of random forms each game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oliveriver on Mar 11, 2016 21:51:50 GMT
It will prefer whatever body plan is best adapted to survive in a species' environment. Auto-Evo is meant to be as organic as possible (with some mitigations to prevent ugly-looking creatures).
|
|
|
|
Post by evolution4weαk on Mar 11, 2016 22:08:09 GMT
It will prefer whatever body plan is best adapted to survive in a species' environment. Auto-Evo is meant to be as organic as possible (with some mitigations to prevent ugly-looking creatures). ok |
|
RoboTrannic
Spacefaring
haunting deviantart
Posts: 1,005
|
Post by RoboTrannic on Mar 11, 2016 22:31:37 GMT
can we set a prefrence for it
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 11, 2016 23:04:21 GMT
I remember we used to have an idea for, instead of making incremental edits, you could use the editor to make a goal organism - then, over however many generations of small changes is needed, your creature would evolve into that form.
So, you could use this, and revert to autoevo when your organism is close enough to the form you want.
Would this be the kind of thing you're asking about?
EDIT: regarding the main topic of this thread, ideas for auto-evo have varied from anything between completely random, to intelligently deciding what changes would be beneficial and making only those. If we had the time, we could probably make a slider for this behaviour - almost like a difficulty slider (random being more difficult).
|
|
|
|
Post by Moopli on Mar 16, 2016 0:10:47 GMT
EDIT: regarding the main topic of this thread, ideas for auto-evo have varied from anything between completely random, to intelligently deciding what changes would be beneficial and making only those. If we had the time, we could probably make a slider for this behaviour - almost like a difficulty slider (random being more difficult). To add on to that history recap, the current plan (and also the plan for the foreseeable future, which we are working to implement) has auto-evo behaving intelligently, within the limits of the simulations not always catching everything that would make sense in real life. |
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 16, 2016 16:39:47 GMT
EDIT: regarding the main topic of this thread, ideas for auto-evo have varied from anything between completely random, to intelligently deciding what changes would be beneficial and making only those. If we had the time, we could probably make a slider for this behaviour - almost like a difficulty slider (random being more difficult). To add on to that history recap, the current plan (and also the plan for the foreseeable future, which we are working to implement) has auto-evo behaving intelligently, within the limits of the simulations not always catching everything that would make sense in real life. The idea of intelligent auto-evo has always bugged me a bit. If it works, then okay, but that's quite a task to achieve. For example, wouldn't this result potentially major inaccuracies for small populations / gene pools (inbreeding)? How would this be solved? |
|
|
|
Post by alexthe666 on Mar 25, 2016 4:07:57 GMT
I remember we used to have an idea for, instead of making incremental edits, you could use the editor to make a goal organism - then, over however many generations of small changes is needed, your creature would evolve into that form. If this was how it worked, how would the goal creature be fit for your final habitat? For example, if you live in a swamp, you design your auto-evo to turn you into a frog. However, over millions of years, your swamp turns into a vast desert. your goal creation no longer fits this habitat. |
|
Poisson
Multicellular
Semi-active
Posts: 16
|
Post by Poisson on Mar 25, 2016 18:30:06 GMT
Yeah, I would say a goal organism creates a lot more headaches than it really solves. Maybe later, but it shouldn't be base.
|
|
The Uteen
Sentient
my status: very quo
Posts: 83
|
Post by The Uteen on Mar 26, 2016 0:02:54 GMT
I remember we used to have an idea for, instead of making incremental edits, you could use the editor to make a goal organism - then, over however many generations of small changes is needed, your creature would evolve into that form. If this was how it worked, how would the goal creature be fit for your final habitat? For example, if you live in a swamp, you design your auto-evo to turn you into a frog. However, over millions of years, your swamp turns into a vast desert. your goal creation no longer fits this habitat. It was considered as an additional option, rather than a replacement for anything. Obviously it's impractical for huge changes, but smaller changes might actually be completed in a reasonable timescale, and save multiple trips to the editor. Though I agree with Poisson that it needn't be a priority. |
|
