Re: [stella] New and improved Warring Worms.

Subject: Re: [stella] New and improved Warring Worms.
From: Thomas Jentzsch <tjentzsch@xxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 09:11:24 +0100
Billy wrote:
> I have fixed several of the problems with the AI in warring worms.  It is
> now more difficult to beat it, though I am afraid still a little to easy to
> beat, let me know.

AI is working much better now. It's not perfect, but I think it will be hard to make it work much better.

> I have fixed the problem where it would shoot its own tail.  It now doesn't
> look "shaky" as it moves around.  It is harder to hit with the missiles,
> though it doesn't actually actively avoid them, I made the AI snake not like
> to be on the same X or Y as the Player snake.

The evading algorithm works very good, perhaps a bit to predictable. I think it would be good, if the AI also doesn't like to be on the same X/Y of the enemy *missile* and instead of immediately changing X/Y this should be done a bit more random. E.g.: you could just increase the chances of the AI for turning then. That would look even more clever, because the AI then doesn't always turn when the player is just *crossing* it's direction. 

> You will still see missiles missing the head occasionally, I am currently
> working on getting that resolved.

I didn't notice that anymore, because the AI succesfully prevents me from hitting. :-)
(But being predictable as it is now, somebody will find soon a trick to cheat it)

> Thanks for being honest about the game's shortcomings, I grumbled a bit to
> myself after reading them, but of course it did make me fix the problems...

I hope this post doesn't let you grumble again. ;-)

> Also, try to track down someone to play it with, I think the game really
> shines as a 2-player game.  The AI was originally just intended to be a way
> to amuse yourself with the game, not be really hard to beat.  Though now I
> am trying to make it harder.

Unfortunately many people (like me :-( ) have to play the games alone, so a good AI adds a lot of value to a game.

Glenn wrote:
> Also, I really don't like the way you can accidentally crash into your own 
> tail by reversing direction.  Surround, and presumably all the other games 
> of this sort (like Checkmate on the Astrocade, Dominos and Tron Light 
> Cycles in the arcades), all prevent this.

> If you look at the Surround disassembly posted some time ago, you'll find 
> the logic that determines which of the 3 directions are allowed based on 
> your current direction.

IIRC, Surround isn't very optimized coded. So don't expect to find something very clever. I'm sure, you can do it yourself and perhaps even better.

> I strongly suggest you put this constraint in.

Me too!
Have fun!
Thomas Jentzsch         | *** Every bit is sacred ! ***
tjentzsch at web dot de |

Seien Sie dabei und sichern Sie sich 100% Leistung, 100% Prämie und 
100% Zufriedenheit. Jetzt anmelden unter

Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread