Building Microbe Stage

~sciocont wrote:

[About health...] -I have to agree with nimbal here. I'd rather just stick to an energy meter measuring energy and not have a dedicated "health" bar.

Either I'm misunderstanding you, or you don't actually agree, because my vote is for a health bar, just not a combined energy / health bar. If I understand you correctly, you'd like a "touch it and you die" mechanic, with little or no grey area between alive and dead. Apart from being pretty unforgiving, it also raises the question what happens if two cells touch each other with something that causes damage. Do they both die? If not, who wins? In any case, it will feel pretty random to the player. And what about stuff like poison that (traditionally) kills slowly? Especially when the player first encounters a toxin cloud and maybe thinks it's a weird compound, he should have some time to realize his mistake and get out of there.

If you just meant "health bar" as in "UI element", but agree on a "health number", please disregard the above.

By the way, we should probably document not only what we agreed to put in, but also what was rejected along with the reasons. If the same suggestions ever comes up again, we can dig the reasons up again. And if the circumstances change, invalidating the reasons for rejection, we can reconsider it.

I agree on having a "health number" of sorts, I was mostly arguing against that number defining membrane integrity and having a UI element to represent a health number. Also, what would the "health number" measure? Again, I vote that membrane integrity is out of the question here. I would like any toxins in the game to target specific organelles and reduce their efficiency directly, rather than chip away at hitpoints.

You have a good point in asking what to do about accidental collisions. I suggest that attacking with a weapon be active rather than passive, to prevent unwanted damage to your cell and other cells you don't want to eat.

Nimbal wrote:

By the way, we should probably document not only what we agreed to put in, but also what was rejected along with the reasons. If the same suggestions ever comes up again, we can dig the reasons up again. And if the circumstances change, invalidating the reasons for rejection, we can reconsider it.

This is a good idea.

I rather agree with ~scio's 'binary life/death' system. That's how it is IRL, and it should add a nice challenge element to the game. Just like he said, it shouldn't be like Spore's cell stage where you just poke at another cell 'till it dies. You should strategize what types of cell you can actually attack based on what offensive abilities you possess, whether it be a strong cytoskeleton or secreting deadly toxins.

I'm also with a binary life/death system, as long as the player is not too penalized for dying. Its the way all interactions happen anyway, in all levels. Unless both oponents are really trained in the fight style they are doing and are on a similar level, all interactions end really quickly:

A predator hunts its prey: Either the predator quickly bites/ripes/whatever its victim and it ends there, or the prey just outruns the predator.

Two microbes: They get close to each other, and one swallows the other. It ends there.

Two men fighting each other (for example, with swords): The first men that lands a hit either kills or leave the other heavily damaged, so the fight is over anyway.

Thats the way nature imposes anyway. If the predator doesent kill its victim right away, it will just run away inmediatly, and the predator will lose its food.

Ok, I have the impression that we're drifting off into vague-land here, which makes it extremely difficult to have a focussed discussion about what could and what wouldn't work. So please, if you have an idea on the health system (or anything else, for that matter), write it down as detailed as possible. Also note any concepts in the current specification that need to be modified or outright removed to make it work as a whole.

Here's mine:

• Each microbe has a health number, initially ranging from 0 to 100
  
• The maximum health can be modified by organelles
  
• When health reaches 0, the microbe dies
  
• Health slowly regenerates by itself up to the maximum amount. The regeneration rate can be modified by organelles.
  
• Lingering in an environmental hazard such as a poison cloud slowly reduces health over time
  
• Touching another microbe's offensive external organelles reduces health by a variable amount for each collision. The minimum and maximum damage depend on the offensive organelle and the external organelle of the damaged microbe at the point of contact
  

Note that the above is more of a clarification of the current specification. It doesn't need to modify or remove current concepts. It also makes no mention of any UI elements, mostly because I think those are of secondary concern. Gameplay should be the first thing to agree on. Then we can flesh out what numbers to display, and how to display them.

Ok for me. Just one thing i would like to add:

• Hitting a microbe smaller than you (rate depending on the organelle) will make it stick to you, slowly extending your membrane around the other cell to assimilate it and obtain all its compounds.

Yes, engulfment, very good. But to make that more challenging and less passive, I have an idea that involves some changes to the microbe editor. It may also simplify the animation for engulfing a cell. And it's very possibly a disrespect for the actual biology involved, so if it makes our biologists too uncomfortable, please say so.

• Engulfing another microbe requires a specialized organelle at the point of engulfment (both external and internal, but see below for why this might not matter anymore)
  
• To swallow another cell, the attacker must keep that organelle near the victim for a short amount of time
  
• The engulfment organelle must also match the size of the victim for swallowing to be possible
  
• After successfully assimilating the victim, its interna are visibly "sucked" into the engulfment organelle to be digested
  
• To support organelles that have both an external and an internal part, remove the distinguishment between those in the microbe editor
  
• Formerly external organelles now occupy their own hex grid cell(s) and are "external" by virtue of being placed at the edge of a cell
  
• Some organelles (for example, the engulfment organelle) can only function properly if at least part of their edge is along the microbe's border. Placing them completely internal results in a warning being displayed to indicate that those organelles will be useless
  
• Organelles that change the surface texture of the microbe (e.g., spikes protruding from the cell) should only display those surface graphics for edges that are adjacent to another occupied hex cell
  

Ok, so I'm going to be 'that guy' whose uncomfortable with that. IRL, similarly sized cells don't engulf each other. Phagocytosis (cellular eating) involves extending the cell membrane around the other object until it forms a vacuole around it. This means that normal sized cells will only be able to wholly engulf small cells, and so on and so forth. The whole use of another organelle to allow engulfment has no base in science as far as I know, and seems confusing as well. The only real way for two similarly sized cells to kill each other are to either puncture the other cell's membrane or to secrete a compound that will kill the enemy cell without killing yourself as well.

Anyone with more biological knowledge please feel free to edit/correct me here, but I think this is correct.
Let's keep refining this. we are getting close to a final concept!

True, yet it is a game the guys are trying to make and organelle for phagocytosis would make animating it convenient. As far as i know i don't remember cells killing each other with spikes the only weapons cell are using are chemicals but again its a game so spikes are to be added and such organelle doesn't have to be even visible to the player just some kind of cytoskeleton upgrade in a place near the membrane would be kinda scientifically correct and would look good ingame too.

Although I wholeheartedly agree with Nimbal on the implementation of an engulfment surface organelle, I disagree on the issue of health. The hitpoint system is neat and tidy, and will be easy to implement, especially in the first few releases, I'd like a more interesting system.
Here's how an alternate, compound management-based system for health would work:

• Each organelle is constantly processing compounds, whether it be to produce energy (mitochondria, chloroplast), store energy in fats and sugars, regulate protein synthesis, etc.
  
• Each organelle processes compounds at a certain rate (given that it has enough of the original compounds that it requires), dictated by how it has been upgraded in the Editor.
  
• Toxins can be emitted by cells. These toxins affect organelles directly in specific ways. For instance: Toxin A decreases mitochondria efficiency by 70%:the effect is that your cell loses energy. Toxin B decreases flagella efficiency by 90%: the effect is that your cell's flagella can no longer propel you away from a predator. Toxin C dissolves your cell wall, exposing your fragile outer membrane to the environment.
  
• Toxins don't need to be bad or aggressive. Other toxins could have positive effects. Toxin X could increase chloroplast efficiency by 10%. Toxin Y Repels predatory cells. Toxin Z is a food product with 1.3 times the energy of glucose that other cells can ingest for energy.
  
• Toxins will work just like other compounds in the environment- they will be represented by a specifically colored and shaped particle and will float along through the environment until they decay (their rate of decay can be modified in the Organism Editor)
  
• Toxins are emitted by a "toxin vesicle", a bubble-shaped organelle that can be placed inside your cell. The behaviors of the toxin that vesicle contains can be modified in the editor (What the toxin affects, how the toxin affects it)
  

Why do I think this is a good idea?

• It may seem complex, but the system relies completely on Organelles and Compounds, systems which we are already going to implement and which we know a lot about.
  
• It creates a new dimension of gameplay, where the focus is on chemical warfare rather than ramming into other cells with a sharpened appendage (though you can still do that if you want to)
  
• It makes gameplay more diverse. Since the toxin is based on just a few factors [(target organelle, efficiency change) or (target cell, behavior change)] it is very easy for many different toxins to be generated, each with interesting effects.
  
• This system also implies the implementation of Toxin resistance, where a separate organelle would produce resistance to specific toxins [(target organelle, toxin effect resistance) or (behavior change resistance)]
  

That would really be something great, ~sciocont , would give a huge strategy element to the game but lets say a player wants to wage spikes wars he would be frustrated to die instantly from one puncture. Maybe some kind of health bar at least to the cell wall so it can tank few hits?

Hi, i'm new to the forums but i've been following this game for a while. First I wanna say that i'm only a freshman in high school, but i'm taking college level biology classes, so I could probably help with the scientific knowledge bit. I was wondering, could we use perforin? It would be like puncturing cells without actually needing to use spikes

Welcome to the forums, Atrox! I too am a Freshman in high school (for two more days anyway) so we are probably taking the same level biology. Thats a really interesting idea, but I've actually never heard of it. It seems plausible to add that, but I'd probably need world from either the programmers or ~sciocont. (He's in charge as you probably know.)

Again welcome!

Thank you WJacobC perforin is pretty much a protein released by natural killer cells (i think it's natural killer cells...i always get mixed up) that pretty much punctures an "enemy" cell. It could be released as a cloud or something and I'm guessing that it would be a one hit kill since it is allowing for water to enter the cell which in turn causes it to pop ._. though mybe that would be a bit over powered...maybe it's encountered later in the microbe stage?

Why is everyone so afraid of insta-deaths? As i said, its the way it works in nature, all the time. Anything else would mean the predator organism would lose their food.

@Daniferrito well i for one am okay with instadeaths. im just saying that it could pose a challenge if you had just started a new game

I completely agree with Scio's suggestions for toxins, that's very close to how I imagined they'd work, though I never developed the idea that far.

However, it does still leave the issue of how 'physical' combat would work unsolved. I'm in favour of something a little more black and white, as scio suggested, rather than a health bar and the possible slog fest that would result in. That said, insta-death on physical contact (with a sharp implement) would get frustrating, so maybe we need to find a middle ground - either require a minimum impact speed for insta-death (which is unrealistic, but then so is mounting spike on a cell), or allow a cell to expend (large quantities) of energy and compounds to try and repair breaches to it's membrane, allowing it to survive minor hits.

Daniferrito wrote:

Why is everyone so afraid of insta-deaths? As i said, its the way it works in nature, all the time. Anything else would mean the predator organism would lose their food.

Completely agree. We have to realize that in a microbial world, death comes much more often than in a macroscopic world. The goal of the game is not to survive, it's to evolve and flourish as a species. You'll be dying a lot, and we'll try to make it a fairly small setback. You won't be punished for being in a competitive and dangerous environment.

Ok... 4 posts in the time it took me to write mine. It may be worth implementing the insta-death to see just how annoying it may or may not be, rather than discussing it much further here.

Quote :

allow a cell to expend (large quantities) of energy and compounds to try and repair breaches to it's membrane, allowing it to survive minor hits.

This would most likely be a good idea, especially as your cell gets larger. I'm also against rhino-style spikes, but we will in all likelihood have a predatory pilus organelle, which is essentially a hypodermic needle through which you suck out another cell's cytoplasm.
Let's keep discussion to a minimum for now. Please, only post if you have a distinct disagreement or highly novel idea. I don't want to discourage discussion, but I also don't want for any of the big players here to have to read through three pages of thread every time they come back here to confirm the concept.

Daniferrito wrote:

Why is everyone so afraid of insta-deaths?

I am certainly not everyone, but I can tell you why I am wary of such a mechanic. The current specification in the git repository says that death is pretty much game over. I realize now it may not have been clear, but I thought this implies that the player has to start fresh again. Losing an hour of progress because of a minor mistake in maneuvering the microbe is a surefire way to a ragequit, which we should avoid.

~sciocont wrote:

You'll be dying a lot, and we'll try to make it a fairly small setback.

Now, here's something that makes insta-death a viable alternative to a health pool. If we can make deaths small, but meaningful, I could warm up to the idea. How about this as an alternative to a simple game over:

• When the player dies, he sees his microbe burst, giving him some time to recognize what killed him
  
• After a few seconds, the camera zooms to a new cell that is the version of the player's microbe before the last reproduction
  
• Care must be taken that the player is relatively safe in the new location. For at least a few seconds, nothing should attack him, lest he tumbles down the evolutionary ladder without a feeling of control.
  

So, on death, the player loses some mutations. If we make those mutations small enough, this shouldn't be too hard on the player.

By the way, since it's closely tied to the above suggestion, have we come to a conclusion on the reproduction / mutation issue? As far as I can tell, these are the options presented so far (please speak up if I forgot one):

Spoiler:

Personally, I gravitate towards the last option. It's a little bland and overused, but I think the novelty of the cell editor should make up for it.

~sciocont wrote:

alternate, compound management-based system for health

I like it! What would you say to allowing the player to adjust his microbe's metabolism on the fly, setting priorities for the toxin organelles? It would give the player something to do besides moving around. And in the cell editor, he could decide between having a few very good toxins (we may need a better name for those, if they can also be beneficial) and many different, but weak ones in his arsenal.

The major problem I see with such a system is the visuals. It should be relatively easy to recognize and distinguish toxins floating around. At the very least, it should be quickly apparent what a toxin does once the microbe touches a cloud of it. How about this:

• Toxins are clearly distinguishable from compounds, and, to a limited point, from each other
  
• Touching a toxin cloud causes the microbe's organelles to indicate the toxin's effect. If the toxin is harmful to an organelle's effectiveness, the organelle glows red. If the toxin is beneficial, the organelle glows green.
  

Note that there are probably more appealing effects than a red and green glow, but I'll leave that to the artists. Anyway, the above visual cues would require the player to carefully "taste" a toxin to determine whether it's harmful or not. Especially when low on energy, it could be a thrilling decision to either hope for nutritious stuff, but risk further harm, or moving on and trying to find less risky food sources.

Edit: Added Seregons mutation model

Nimbal wrote:

I like it! What would you say to allowing the player to adjust his microbe's metabolism on the fly, setting priorities for the toxin organelles? It would give the player something to do besides moving around. And in the cell editor, he could decide between having a few very good toxins (we may need a better name for those, if they can also be beneficial) and many different, but weak ones in his arsenal.

Enzymes? Then the chemicals you would use to bond to other cells of your species could be incorporated as one of these.

Excellent discussion guys. I've been reading through this whole thing, and I didn't want to not have said anything.

Nimbal wrote:

The current specification in the git repository says that death is pretty much game over. I realize now it may not have been clear, but I thought this implies that the player has to start fresh again. Losing an hour of progress because of a minor mistake in maneuvering the microbe is a surefire way to a ragequit, which we should avoid.

Does it? I dont think dying should be game over at all. Extintion probably will mean game over, but a single creature dying shouldnt matter too much. Anyway, as scio said, and you quoted him just in the next line, with deaths being not too hard on the player, a more realistic insta-death isnt bad at all (you would just need to run away inmediatly, not after recieving six hits from the oposing creature)

Ok, to clarify: at the time you asked why everyone is against insta-death, nobody has explicitly pointed out that it should come with only a small penalty for dying, while the specification I posted explictly stated that death means game over, which is a pretty harsh penalty. Then, finally, scio suggested a lesser penalty, which I agreed to. Oh, and before you point it out: yes, I know that something akin to a respawn was suggested before, but no, it wasn't in the specification. Thus, it should have been mentioned as an additional requirement to make instant death work without being too punishing.

This is really exemplary of a real problem that is apparent throughout the forums. Someone makes a suggestion, but doesn't care enough to go over the current concept and make the suggestion work in that context. Instant death with a simple game over on death is a bad idea, period. Coupled with a mechanic for demoting death to a minor inconvenience, it can work.

Sorry, I suspect we've all been working off what has been agreed elsewhere, that death of your individual organism simply results in you taking over another member of your species. I think the specs on the previous page also mentioned that perma-death was only for convenience, and that we would work towards a better system later.

Back to mutation, I prefer the second third option, mainly becuase it's the most realistic, but I can also address a few of your concerns and provide other advantages:
- It could actually give you more freedom to experiment with your playstyle and your organisms metabolism, as the amount of mutation you can do is no longer tied to how often your cell can reproduce, or how quickly it can gather resources.
- Instead, mutation rates go up based on how succesful your species, rather than the players individual cell, is. I realise the current spec doesn't include modelling populations, but it's something we will have to do eventually, and can be done more simply, and computationally cheaply, than you might be worried about.
- Having mutation based on population introduces a bit of a metagame, so that the player has to try and evolve not only a single cell which is good at collecting resources, but a species which is capable of surviving in its environment. This needs some thought, but if the player only has to worry about their own cell, then we're building something very similair many other games out there (osmos, asteroids...).
- We've already agreed on nuclei drops granting new organelles, or possibly other upgrades. To keep the player connected to their mutation rate we could offer other sorts of drops which boosts the MP/genetic diversity gain, though I can't think of a realistic counterpart just now (apart from radioactive or other mutagenic substances...).
- I know we're not evolving the AI species yet, but when we do, this system will be the easiest for them to work with, as they don't have a single 'player' cell to gather mutation resources or to level up. As mentioned above, this way both the player and the AI are working at the population level, rather than that of individual cells, which makes auto-evo significantly simpler.
- Finally, to encourage experimentation, from the genetic diversity perspective it's quite reasonable to refund some genetic diversity if you undo a previous mutation.