Difference between revisions of "Talk:Fluid Movement"
(content isn't the same as the one from old wiki, misunderstanding?) |
(respond) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Reading the old wiki article about this movement, it isn't the way you describe it. From the old wiki, it look like that you represent the moving vector as a 'force'. Then for each object you want, assign a 'force' perpendicular to it i.e. you will have 2 forces that will let you move forward/backward perpendicular to the object. Combine all forces together to create one result force and move with that force. The part I didn't understand yet is the the combination process. Anyway, this is not a movement that you 'stay perpendicular to all the forces acting on you'. » <span style="font-size:0.9em;color:darkgreen;">[[User:Nat|Nat]] | [[User_talk:Nat|Talk]]</span> » 15:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC) | Reading the old wiki article about this movement, it isn't the way you describe it. From the old wiki, it look like that you represent the moving vector as a 'force'. Then for each object you want, assign a 'force' perpendicular to it i.e. you will have 2 forces that will let you move forward/backward perpendicular to the object. Combine all forces together to create one result force and move with that force. The part I didn't understand yet is the the combination process. Anyway, this is not a movement that you 'stay perpendicular to all the forces acting on you'. » <span style="font-size:0.9em;color:darkgreen;">[[User:Nat|Nat]] | [[User_talk:Nat|Talk]]</span> » 15:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | From the way I understood it, it seemed as if the goal of fluid movement was to try to remain perpendicular to the forces acting upon your robot. From the old wiki: "The trick is now to assign good force-sizes to reflect the importance of being more perpendicular to some objects (nearby objects, perhaps?) than others." I may have misunderstood it however, so go ahead and change the page if you feel like it.--[[User:CrazyBassoonist|CrazyBassoonist]] 17:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
== Compared to Min Risk == | == Compared to Min Risk == | ||
I wonder if this overlaps with [[Minimum Risk Movement]] a bit. When checking points to move to, very many (or almost all?) of the stronger min risk movements have code to prefer directions which are perpendicular to the directions to enemies. This naturally results in a movement along the lines of [[Fluid Movement]] really. --[[User:Rednaxela|Rednaxela]] 12:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC) | I wonder if this overlaps with [[Minimum Risk Movement]] a bit. When checking points to move to, very many (or almost all?) of the stronger min risk movements have code to prefer directions which are perpendicular to the directions to enemies. This naturally results in a movement along the lines of [[Fluid Movement]] really. --[[User:Rednaxela|Rednaxela]] 12:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:46, 8 July 2009
Reading the old wiki article about this movement, it isn't the way you describe it. From the old wiki, it look like that you represent the moving vector as a 'force'. Then for each object you want, assign a 'force' perpendicular to it i.e. you will have 2 forces that will let you move forward/backward perpendicular to the object. Combine all forces together to create one result force and move with that force. The part I didn't understand yet is the the combination process. Anyway, this is not a movement that you 'stay perpendicular to all the forces acting on you'. » Nat | Talk » 15:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
From the way I understood it, it seemed as if the goal of fluid movement was to try to remain perpendicular to the forces acting upon your robot. From the old wiki: "The trick is now to assign good force-sizes to reflect the importance of being more perpendicular to some objects (nearby objects, perhaps?) than others." I may have misunderstood it however, so go ahead and change the page if you feel like it.--CrazyBassoonist 17:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Compared to Min Risk
I wonder if this overlaps with Minimum Risk Movement a bit. When checking points to move to, very many (or almost all?) of the stronger min risk movements have code to prefer directions which are perpendicular to the directions to enemies. This naturally results in a movement along the lines of Fluid Movement really. --Rednaxela 12:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
