Armadillo Run forum

I have a question to AR developers.
Will bugs fixed in next versions in future?
And will in next versions abitity to regulate material charachteristics?

I do intend to fix all the physics-related bug in the next version of the game, but this will mean that the simulation will play out differently for all previously created levels and solutions. It might not cause a noticeable difference for some levels, but would likely totally break others - for this reason, there will essentially be two versions of the simulation: the current rules (including all force bugs) and the new ones, which will hopefully prove to be free of all current bugs (and not introduce any new ones).

I am considering allowing modification to the material characteristics, but the downside of this is that there would be more capacity for confusion if the modified parameters are not made clear to players. Since there are quite a few parameters, this could add some complexity. With the basic selection, I tried to create a canonical selection of materials that would not restrict creation. The physics simulation also puts bounds on certain material properties.

It's great news to hear you are still considering a new version of the game with the physics force bugs removed.

I thought I would add my personal opinions on this subject. AR is great due to the simplicity of its ruleset. To be able to simplify this ruleset even further by removing the vagueness of "light" and "dark" solution would be a great addition. This of course would be done by removing dark forces from the engine.

I wouldn't even worry too much about breaking old levels, and old solutions. I don't think anyone really cares anymore. All the best solutions for the original game levels are old news now. It would actually be great fun for the current community to go back to those old levels with an improved physics engine and reset all the records.

As for allowing the alteration of material properties... I don't think this is generally a good idea. I think it will cause confusion. If I had to relearn everything for each new level I'd get bored of that very quickly. The competitions already take long enough without having to relearn the game each time.

However there is one suggestion that I think would increase my enjoyment. The prices for elastic, rubber, tension, rockets, and timers is too high. It is so incredibly rare for any of these things to be used in a winning solution that they are almost irrelevant in the game. Allowing the level creator to set the price of these items would I believe be worth considering. The ruleset and physics that we are all used to wouldn't need to be relearned for each new level, but it would allow for a far more interesting game with more varied solutions.

The price of rope, metal bars/plates, and cloth is perfect and I believe should remain locked. To allow us to alter the price of these would once again introduce too much confusion when trying to solve a level, but to allow me to create a level and reduce the price of timers or tension would open up many new possibilities. I would love to create a level and tell everyone that tension is free for example, or that timers only cost $50.

Keeping the basic materials locked in price retains a solid foundation for every level, but giving us the option to set prices on the more exotic materials and tools is an exciting idea. I'd like to see this option introduced even without any alteration to the engine.

V4nKw15h wrote:I wouldn't even worry too much about breaking old levels, and old solutions. I don't think anyone really cares anymore. All the best solutions for the original game levels are old news now. It would actually be great fun for the current community to go back to those old levels with an improved physics engine and reset all the records.

Go carefully when you say this..
I, for example, am working hard to improve some of the solutions on the original AR web site.. Although some of them are more than 2 years old, there are still people that are submitting new solutions.
I can assure you, it's a great source of pride for someone who manage to create the "perfect" solution for a default level, (even for me) so it's not so easy to say: "yeah Peter, go and reset all"!!
Moreover, I suggest you to try, you are a skilled player and you can give your contribution!
There are so many people that everyday submit a solution, even if it's not the best one for that level..

It would also be great to integrate people that are playing in this forum and people that are playing original levels set. For example ZX is a great player of the other side, I think he should really start playing here, as true as for other players here...

I started playing AR default levels just 7 months ago, but, after a bit I started submitting some new solutions, which I am so proud of!

Go and have a look, it's really instructive!
(even for the level that I'm hosting)

Oh, okay, sorry about that. I stand corrected.

I had no idea that there was still life in the old levels, so yes, releasing a second physics engine isn't as clean as I thought.

What did you think to the idea of having the ability to set the price on elastic, timers, tension Cresta?

I think it's a good point!
It raises a big problem, the problem of the unuseful items...

Maybe it could be nice to set their price definitely, lower than now, instead of leaving it free..
It could be:

elastic: 2 x rope: 12$ + 4$ each piece (like cloth) (now it is 90$ + 30$ each piece...)
timers: 50$ (instead of 200$)
tension: 70$ (rubber + tension could not cost too little, it would kill the contruction of structures in lifting the dillo...)

This is just an idea, what do you think?
Maybe the users opinions could be useful for Peter...

Changing their prices permanently would cause the same problem we just discussed. It would affect all the best solutions to existing levels.

However, allowing us to alter them at the point of level creation, means that all the existing levels remain the same but new levels we create for competition could have the prices tweaked until we find a nice balance for competition.

Cresta wrote:elastic: 2 x rope: 12$ + 4$ each piece (like cloth) (now it is 90$ + 30$ each piece...)
tension: 70$ (rubber + tension could not cost too little, it would kill the contruction of structures in lifting the dillo...)

I'm wondering if this would make a bunch of level solutions have that a a clear cheapest route. (Tensioned elastic)

Would it be possible to possibly make different materials' tension cost cost different amounts?

Thanks for the comments - it's always useful to get different opinions.

The current physics rules will continue to be supported in all future versions of the game. I know it makes it a bit less clean to have 2 versions of the physics rules, but there have been so many people create levels for the current system that totally dropping it isn't really an option.

I'm glad that there is some agreement on leaving the existing materials. I see the point of being able to change the cost of items, since the optimum balance might require different prices for one level to another. And again I can see that having tension (and possibly timers) cost different amounts based on the material used could also improve the design of levels.

Hi guys, I am new to this site. I bought the program only two days ago, and am already addicted. The most fascinating aspect that I found so far is the solution to the old problem of perpetual movement. An example of it is in the solution to the Level 2 problem given by bagpuss 148. Can somebody tell me why such an obvious bug is still there?
Franco

I'm very glad to hear that Armadillo Run is still being worked on. Though I hope it's not the only thing you're currently programming, Peter...