Posted by Dave Longley on April 17, 2001 at 13:12:17:
In Reply to: Re: Another Error or my Misinterpritation? posted by Nadine on April 17, 2001 at 01:58:37:
The "too dumb to eat" concept was not the base behind deciding this issue. It was meant to help explain or give a "real-world" explanation of why a grendel wouldn't eat something that entered its square. The original reasoning, i believe, behind why a grendel wouldn't eat something that entered its square is because all animals "move" and THEN eat. In order to "move," animals must follow the same pattern throughout their lifetime. After they have executed their "move" then they can look for food in the square they are in. If a animal executes a move of "none," then the animal will look for food in the square it has "moved" to (which will be the same one it was in previously). This is the same as moving "east" and then "west" in the same tick and then searching for food.
: I have to agree with you here, if we are sticking with the "too dumb to eat concept" as it says explicitly in the spec, then the grendel should not actively check for food if it knows its in the same place, because no one coming in wll apply as good food.
: : : In case my point wasn't implied--a grendel checks its movement pattern and executes a move if one is expected, it then checks for food. Whether or not it moves doesn't determine its eating; it always checks the area for food.
: : See, I was confused b/c I was going by the line in the specs that says:
: : "As a general rule, a predatory creature will only decide to consume another creature when the predatory creature first enters the square." -- First line of the first paragraph on page 2 (right after the grendel discription)
: : Thus, since the grendel doesn't move "into the square" as the browser, it should not attempt to consume the browser. Therefore, the browser should get away scott free.
: : Is this a correct reading of the specs or am I reading into this too much?
Post a Followup