Some ideas...

It doesn't look like these have been suggested yet, so I'll share my ideas (Even though they're unlikely to be used, I guess anything is possible);
Idea #1:
Slight mutations from generation to generation. Each body part would be assigned values- For example, arm could be A and the type of arm it is could be a number. So, something like; A1, or B2 being the second type of leg in the leg set of parts. Each limb part would also have a value for the joint position and size. They could be graphed on a 3D graph the the player wouldn't be able to see, but the computer would use to track the part's positions.
So, an arm could be something like this;
A3(2,3,3) (2,3,-3) (3in) (3in) (3in)
With it going from 1st joint position, 2nd joint position, 3rd joint position, then each one's size going in the same order as their position.
There would be sets of numbers similar to this for every part of the creature, but with the information the numbers are representing changing accordingly (Spikes would have height an width rather than joint position).
The body would also have information like this, only the body width and position of each vertebrae being graphed.
With each new generation, the computer would randomly select three things to change, and add or subtract 1 from each value of that type.
There would also be data for organs and colors.
With each new generation, if the creature gives birth to two or more babies, then one of the babies will be the same as the parent. The player would get to select which one they want to play as.
If the new baby has a negative trait, then it would die off or evolve with the next mating.

Idea #2;
Environment. The computer would graph out different environments and assign them a value. Like, a swamp could be 2, or fields could be 5. It would monitor how much time a creature spends in the environment, along with study the predators (their speed, attack types, etc) or if it's an amphibian, reptile, etc. and make changes accordingly to the creatures. If it was a predator, then it monitors it's prey.
So, let's say you live in a swampy area, and there are a lot of slow but strong predators. Your creature could evolve the ability to swim, become amphibious and grow to become fast.
With this method, their would be diversity from environment to environment, with there still being realistic similarities within the environments, like in real-life.

I know these are unlikely to be used, but still, I guess their's always a chance that they're usable.

Oh, and sorry if these ideas have already been posted. I didn't see them yet, so sorry if their is/was.

Idea 1 (I haven't got the key for the... I can't show you the symbol, I haven't got the key. I mean the symbol you put before 1. Sometimes  annoys me)

Anyway, I'll start again.

Idea 1 sounds a lot like our 'share codes' idea. I'm glad to see support for it.

Idea 2 sounds like a good solution for that biased only-good-evolution idea other people seem to want, but how would the game work out what a field or swamp is? A forest would be the worst, the chance of alien trees evolving is more remote than most people think (mainly sci-fi writers ).

But good ideas, I hope, in some form or other, these ideas get used in-game.

The Uteen wrote:

Idea 1 sounds a lot like our 'share codes' idea. I'm glad to see support for it.

QFT. Already agreed upon. This is one of the easier parts to do.

The Uteen wrote:

Idea 2 sounds like a good solution for that biased only-good-evolution idea other people seem to want, but how would the game work out what a field or swamp is? A forest would be the worst, the chance of alien trees evolving is more remote than most people think (mainly sci-fi writers ).

This brings up a good point however. We need to descide on pollinating systems. This idea could work potentially if we use a biomes system that marked all appropriate organisms for a specific area/climate. If we did that, there would actually be a whole slew of things we could play around with to make evolution work better. The downside of course being either pre-defined biomes that limit possible evolution, or incredable difficulty figuring out what makes a biome, where does one end and another begin, etc.

Tenebrarum wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

Idea 1 sounds a lot like our 'share codes' idea. I'm glad to see support for it.

QFT. Already agreed upon. This is one of the easier parts to do.

The Uteen wrote:

Idea 2 sounds like a good solution for that biased only-good-evolution idea other people seem to want, but how would the game work out what a field or swamp is? A forest would be the worst, the chance of alien trees evolving is more remote than most people think (mainly sci-fi writers ).

This brings up a good point however. We need to descide on pollinating systems. This idea could work potentially if we use a biomes system that marked all appropriate organisms for a specific area/climate. If we did that, there would actually be a whole slew of things we could play around with to make evolution work better. The downside of course being either pre-defined biomes that limit possible evolution, or incredable difficulty figuring out what makes a biome, where does one end and another begin, etc.

Pollination system=PPG

~sciocont wrote:

Pollination system=PPG

We need to expand on that.

Tenebrarum wrote:

~sciocont wrote:

Pollination system=PPG

We need to expand on that.

What expansions would you suggest? (continue that on the PPG thread, please)

The Uteen wrote:

Idea 2 sounds like a good solution for that biased only-good-evolution idea other people seem to want, but how would the game work out what a field or swamp is? A forest would be the worst, the chance of alien trees evolving is more remote than most people think (mainly sci-fi writers ).

Okay. "Swamp" would be having a certain percentage of water/land ground, and then having a certain moisture percentage in the soil, speaking from Ecology. It also would be shallow and have a certain type/amount of groundcover, which we will probably get to... someplace else.
Environmental paramaters, based on different values, would be used to determine any general sort of biome.

As for the possibility of alien forests... speaking as a sci-fi writer, I beg plot convenience. But really, the possibility of having large plants is pretty high with the right conditions. And to get very high versus the gravity of their planet, they'd have to have stiff or woody stems.

Also, the "only good evolution" is bunk. A lot of genetic diseases that we have are mutations - they don't spread, because they're harmful, but they aren't so immediately damaging that they die out.

Sounds a bit hard to set up, but it could work... But we'll have to list every possible type of area.

And a 'forest' could be calculated by a dense population of immobile central-nervous-system-less organisms.

Not really. We'd have to have variables rather than set boxed biomes:
For example -
Area 1: Temp avg value range: derived#1 - derived#2
Precipitation value: derived#(or possibly range)3
Ground water retention: another derived#
Frequency of disturbance: Some scale number or range, I don't really care how it's set up value-wise.

There's probably one or two other moderately crucial things I've forgot about, but even considering those four, depending on how we work the ranges, we could have millions of seperate biomes without the need to create them all by hand. Autotrophs and other organisms that are painted on are already, to the best of my knowlege, going to be flagged with their survival requirements in terms of resources - each biome then necessarily needs to be tagged with whatever kind survival resources it has. Stuff will end up in places that it is suited to, adapt, or die out.

The Uteen wrote:

Sounds a bit hard to set up, but it could work... But we'll have to list every possible type of area.

That's just it. We have to make biomes manually for auto-evo to function correctly.

roadkillguy wrote:

The Uteen wrote:

Sounds a bit hard to set up, but it could work... But we'll have to list every possible type of area.

That's just it. We have to make biomes manually for auto-evo to function correctly.

Though we'd need some tags regardless of whether we make them manually or not.

Tags?

Explained, to some degree, and certainly discussed, here.

Basically, a "tagged" item is assigned a series of "properties" with values standing in for them. Under-the-hood and pretty much easy to do.

I understand what tags are, but I don't understand how they'll be used.

Are you talking about a biome database lookup system?

I would think to compare the dependencies of each with your current planet and organisms.

Currently Dealing with the particulars of each biomehere.
We'll come back to Auto-evo when we have that figured out. Until then, we can stand to have the procedures over here unanswered, I think.