4 ms·
it would also make the game cheaper if you figure out les[s] computationally intensive algos to win. Yes but a player who was an absolute shite programmer
by valarauca1 10y ago
it would also make the game cheaper if you figure out
les[s] computationally intensive algos to win.
Yes but a player who was an absolute shite programmer could just throw their bank account at the problem.
While my O(n) solution maybe eloquent, they can afford O(n^n) so provided our _players_ make the same outcome the algorithmic complexity is irrelevant if you can afford it.
The game uses a soft turn based _ticks_ timer. So provided your O(n^n) solution can execute in 1 tick. Their is no difference.
- archgoon 10y ago> The game uses a soft turn based _ticks_ timer. So provided your O(n^n) solution can execute in 1 tick. Their is no difference. I don't think you're giving your hypothetical shite programmer enough credit here.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> Yes but a player who was an absolute shite programmer could just throw their bank account at the problem. Seems to model reality fairly well.
- stcredzero 10y agoWhile my O(n) solution maybe eloquent Screeps has a speech API?
- KirinDave 10y agoHoly crap if Screeps allows webhooks to generate events to your modules you could easily use api.ai to do just that!
- stcredzero 10y agoCool, but my comment was really a veiled correction to the previous comment's English.
- KirinDave 10y agoCool, but that's an incredibly boring comment so I made it better. I am confused why you did not accept this pull request.
- stcredzero 10y agoCool, but that's an incredibly boring comment It worked on you!
- KirinDave 10y agoThis is that thing where people throw a dart then paint a target around it.
- karlalexpauls 10y ago> a player who was an absolute shite programmer could just throw their bank account at the problem There aren't (yet) any public codebases which have a handle on endgame combat. It's still more or less competitive after 2 months of play.