Re: A more sophisticated demonstration of change-type

[Lincoln Peters <sampln at sbcglobal dot net>]

On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 19:25, Eric McDonald wrote:
> > Here is a game module that uses the new change-type mechanism to
> > implement d20-style combat.  It contains 7 types of cities and 20 types
> > of knights.  The cities gain levels by growing them to a threshold size,
> > and the knights gain levels by gaining CXP.  In the case of cities,
> > higher-level cities can build higher-level knights, and higher-level
> > knights are more effective combatants than lower-level knights (+5%
> > chance to hit, -5% chance to be hit, +1 damage per level).  A city can
> > be automatically captured by a knight (100% chance) if the city has no
> > armed defenders (0% chance to capture unless the defenders are
> > destroyed).
> 
> I read your game file while I was eating supper. Looks nifty; I will try
> it shortly.
> 
> I did notice your comments regarding 'acp-to-attack' and 'hit-chance'. I
> believe the problem is in the fact that you are dealing with a list of
> lists rather than a list of atoms in the case of 'hit-chance'. Your
> 'levels' definition:
> 
> (define levels (l1 l2 l3 l4 l5 l6 l7 l8 l9 l10 l11 l12 l13 l14 l15 l16
> l17 l18 l19 l20))
> 
> expands to this:
> 
> ((knight-1 goblin) (knight-2) ... (knight-20))
> 
> and thus an atom is being iterated against a list of lists, but needs to
> be iterated against other atoms (such as a list of atoms) in order to
> locate distinct positions in the table to fill in.

I think I get it.

> 
> > In its current form, this module effectively demonstrates (at least to a
> > point) how the new change-type code can be used, but I plan to do a lot
> > more work on it before I would consider adding it to the library as
> > anything other than a test module.
> 
> In your comments you say that 'bolodd3.g' was the first game in the
> library to use 'change-type', but I think you must mean
> 'auto-upgrade-to'.

Yes, that is what I meant (although I don't think that any other games
use change-type correctly; space-civ.g might work but I haven't tested
it since change-type was made to work at all).

> 
> > If the future isn't what it used to be, does that mean that the past
> > is subject to change in times to come?
> 
> The future isn't what it could be, because the past was subject to
> change in times past (and present).
> 
> But maybe that is just a revisionist take on the question.

It's just a fortune, as per the popular UNIX application.
It might seem a little spooky that it related to the message at all, at
least until you look at the fortune attached to the bottom of *this*
message.

---
Lincoln Peters
<sampln@sbcglobal.net>

Humor in the Court:
Q: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
A: Yes, I have been since early childhood.