Roleplaying Video Games Entertainment & Media Politics & World
General Spirituality & Philosophy Worldbuilding Creative Forum
The Sports Center Science, Math, & Technology The Nostalgia Forum Sexuality
Community feedback needed: add_comment New add_comment New request

Video Games

Mutation mechanics

Posted Over 11 Years ago by bloodb4roses

[unparsed]I have the mechanics for passing on genes and other such things in my pen and paper game, but I still don't know how/when mutations should occur. Since it's basically a sim for micro-evolution, I do need some way of deciding this and whether the gene's mutated will produce something automatically bad/good, or something conditional. I'm leaning toward adding a card element for mutations, and keep dice for saving rolls and such.

There are 17 Replies


[unparsed][quote:1d4487e9ee="bloodb4roses"]I have the mechanics for passing on genes and other such things in my pen and paper game, but I still don't know how/when mutations should occur. Since it's basically a sim for micro-evolution, I do need some way of deciding this and whether the gene's mutated will produce something automatically bad/good, or something conditional. I'm leaning toward adding a card element for mutations, and keep dice for saving rolls and such.[/quote:1d4487e9ee]
The game Ecotopia has both cards and dice and a spinner.
The dice are the pieces; which face is showing represents the population of that species in that area of the gameboard.
If you spin for mutation you either replace one gene or two genes. The current genes are the cards in your hand; they are replaced by whatever genes you draw from the slush pile.
Genes are described by their effects; for instance, ability to cross a highway, or resistance to disease.
The spinner also controls when you migrate (if you can -- your genes tell you whether you can migrate across the barriers that exist), and when you reproduce (which you can do only in hexes with a die showing at least a two but not more than a five), and when plagues happen (when there's a plague, every hex that contains more than two specimens gets its population reduced; to zero, or to one, or to two, depending on how resistant to disease you are).

I don't remember the whole game, but maybe that will give you some ideas?

Over 11 Years ago
chiarizio
 

[unparsed]I might work on this again. I'm still not sure how to decide mutations, but I'll include some kind of "environment cards" to help decide what direction evolution would move in. (Among other cards? Maybe a whole deck.)

Over 11 Years ago
bloodb4roses
 

[unparsed]Maybe you could make it work a bit like flux, where the mutations constrain or augment each other?

Over 11 Years ago
Blake
 

[unparsed]I've worked out a few details, which lead to some more details I need to work out.

There are two alternating phases of the game and two corresponding card piles. In the first phase, the player pulls a card from the first card pile for each organism the player controls. Each card in this pile will say either "live", "die", or a capital or lower case letter. Live and die are pretty self explanatory, as the organism they are played on will either live or die automatically. The capital and lower case letters are conditional: If the organism has that phenotype, they will survive. If not they die.

Ex: Player draws a card with "a" on it. They organism it is played on is Aa, so its phenotype is A and it dies. Player next draws "B", and the organism its played on is BB, so the organism lives. The final card is "c", and the organism is cc so it lives too.

Problems that come up:
1) How many organisms to start with for each player?
2) How many genes should each organism start with? More to start means there's fewer left when things start to mutate, less means a higher chance of the organisms dying early in the game.
3) Should players have "hands", so they can play cards to their advantage against opponents, or should it mostly be by chance? Would it be good to have rules for both variations?
4) And this ties in with the next phase: Should a specific set of genes control sex (if the species is asexual, hermaphroditic, male/female) and/or ability to reproduce?

The second phase is where the organisms reproduce. A die is rolled* and the number that comes up is the number of offspring that individual has.
If I have purely asexual reproduction, then the die might also be used to decide which allele is passed on to each offspring. For each offspring, one card is played from the second card pile. Most of them won't do anything, but some will double a gene, change a gene to a new type (next unused letter in the alphabet usually), or make a new allele (I might restrict this to just capital/lower case.

1) I'll need a lot of cards in this pile to make it anywhere near realistic for mutation, but I'll probably limit this to 100-200 cards. I still don't know how to decide which genes or alleles to change, but it'll probably be either listed on the card or an official rule (like, say, unless specifying the sex genes, mutate the last gene).

I'm still debating having an "environment" pile, with only a few cards, or they might go in with the first pile. The environment would choose for a specific allele of some gene or genes, and it would work better if people had hands they played from, instead of complete chance. In which case I would restrict playing one per player turn.

But, as I have it now, the normal turn for one player in each phase would be:
-Take a card for each organism, figure out which ones live and which die.
-If they get an environment card, play it immediately and include its effects one the individuals. This is an automatic live for the organism it is played for, even if they don't have the gene required (to help balance things).
-In the second phase, roll dice for offspring of each organism.
-Roll (preferably even-odd or high-low), to decide which allele get passed for each gene of each offspring.
-Play mutation cards. Follow directions on the cards if a gene is going to mutate.

Over 11 Years ago
bloodb4roses
 

[unparsed]This is an interesting set of questions.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are essentially three things which an organism may, or may not, do, in each generation. In order by descending desirability, they are:

  • It may have a clone-offspring then die; alternatively, it may live to the next generation to have another opportunity to reproduce.

  • Independently, it may have one near-clone offspring that has one gene mutated.

  • Independently, it may mate with another organism to produce one offspring that has half of its genes and half of someone else's genes.

    So, for each organism there are eight possible outcomes. Some are more desirable than others. Here they are in descending order by desirability.

    8. [b:c1cb5f56b1]Value = 2 - epsilon + 1/2:[/b:c1cb5f56b1] Have a clone in the next generation, and a near-clone with one gene mutated, and also mate to sexually reproduce one offspring that has half of your genes and half of somebody else's -- or, live to reproduce again in the next generation, and also produce one mutated-clone offspring and one sexually-reproduced offspring which may reproduce in the next generation.

    7. [b:c1cb5f56b1]Value = 2 - epsilon:[/b:c1cb5f56b1] Have one clone and one mutated clone -- or, live to reproduce again in the next generation, and also have one near-clone offspring in this generation, which has one gene mutated.

    6. [b:c1cb5f56b1]Value = 1 + 1/2:[/b:c1cb5f56b1] Have one clone, and mate to sexually reproduce one offspring -- or, survive to reproduce again in the next generation, and also have an offspring that carries half of "your" genes and half of someone else's.

    5. [b:c1cb5f56b1]Value = 1 - epsilon + 1/2:[/b:c1cb5f56b1] Have one mutated clone, and mate to sexually reproduce one offspring -- then die.

    4. [b:c1cb5f56b1]Value = 1:[/b:c1cb5f56b1] Have one clone in the next generation -- or, live to (maybe) reproduce in the next generation, but don't reproduce in this generation.

    3. [b:c1cb5f56b1]Value = 1-epsilon:[/b:c1cb5f56b1] Have one near-clone offspring in this generation, which has one gene mutated, but then die.

    2. [b:c1cb5f56b1]Value = 1/2:[/b:c1cb5f56b1] Mate to sexually reproduce one offspring, that carries half of "your" genes and half of someone else's -- then die.

    1. [b:c1cb5f56b1]Value = 0:[/b:c1cb5f56b1] Just die.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Do you want players' mating organisms to be able to mate with those in others' hands only, or in their own hands only, or either or both?

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When you draw an environment card that selects for or against a certain phenotype, you should probably allow the organism to roll against a number on the card to see what outcome it has. If the card selects against the organism's phenotype, it must roll against a high number; if the card selects for the organism's phenotype, it must roll against a low numbe.

    Maybe you'd have an 8-sided die; or maybe you'd use two 6-sided dice; or whatever. A "selection for" dice-modifier might be +1 or +2, a "selection-against" dice-modifier might be -1 or -2, and a neutral one might be 0.

    For instance, suppose your S card represented a gene for sickle-cell anemia.
    It could have the following on it:
    SS = -1 (vulnerable to malaria, but no sickle-cell disease)
    Ss = 0 (resistant to malaria and doesn't have sickle-cell disease)
    ss = -3 (has sickle-cell disease; resistant to malaria, but so what? that's cold comfort)

    After a player draws it, he rolls an 8-sided die for each of his organisms.

    If the organism is an Ss heterozygous organism, then it acts according to the outcome corresponding to the number rolled.
    8 -- clone, mutated clone, and mate.
    7 -- clone and mutated clone.
    6 -- clone and mate.
    5 -- mutated clone and mate.
    4 -- clone.
    3 -- mutated clone.
    2 -- mate.
    1 -- die.

    If the organism is an SS homozygous organism, subtract 1 from the die-roll, and it has the outcome corresponding to that resulting difference. So it can't have outcome 8, and it has a 25% chance, instead of a 12.5% chance, of having outcome 1 -- just die.

    If the organism is an ss homozygous organism, subtract 3 from the die-roll, and it has the outcome corresponding to that resulting difference. So it can't have outcome 8 or 7 or 6, and it has a 50% chance, instead of a 12.5% chance, of having outcome 1 -- just die.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You could do the same thing with all your genes and all your environment cards.

    For instance, suppose A is dominant over a which is recessive; and suppose you have an environment card in which A is favored.
    Your card could have:
    AA +1
    Aa +1
    aa -1

    OTOH if you also have an environment favoring a over A, you could have on the card
    AA -1
    Aa -1
    aa +1

    You could have both of those cards in your deck.

    If you have a B-locus with two alleles, B and b, neither of which is dominant over the other, you could have three (or six!) environment cards, such that each combination is favored.
    One card could say
    BB +1
    Bb -1
    bb -1

    Another card could say
    BB -1
    Bb +1 (hybrid vigor!)
    bb -1

    Another card could say
    BB -1
    Bb -1
    bb +1

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You could also have environment cards that depend on two loci instead of just one.

    A card could have values for all of
    AABB
    AABb
    AAbb
    AaBB
    AaBb
    Aabb
    aaBB
    aaBb
    aabb

    But if you do that, then even if you have only two loci, and only two possible modifiers (namely 0 and -1), you might have a total of 512 cards. So maybe you don't want to do that. (Of course nothing says you'd have to include all 512 in your deck. You certainly wouldn't need to include any in which all values are the same.)

    If you assume both loci have dominant (capital) and recessive (lowercase) alleles, then a two-locus environment card would contain only four, instead of nine, values
    phenotype AB for genotypes AABB, AABb, AaBB, and AaBb;
    phenotype Ab for genotypes AAbb and Aabb;
    phenotype aB for genotypes aaBB and aaBb;
    phenotype ab for genotype aabb.

    Three possible modifiers (say -1, 0, and +1) would give you 81 possible environments for each pair of loci; that's probably OK with you. You'd probably still want to eliminate any in which all the DMs (dice-modifiers) are the same, or all are positive, or all are negative.

    Four (say -2, -1, 0, and +1) would give you 256 possible environments for each pair of loci, which might be too many for you. But you might include almost all of them. (Leave out those in which all DMs are positive, or all are negative, or all are equal.)

    If you had three loci, each of which had one dominant and one recessive allele, and you had the three possible combinations of two loci for your environment cards, and three possible DMs for each phenotype on each card, that would give you 3*81=243 cards, which also might be too many for you. But again, you might include just almost all of them, instead of all of them.

    But with two possible modifiers (-1 and 0), you would have 16 possible environments for each pair of loci. We'd want to leave out those in which all the DMs are -1 and those in which all of them are 0. So we'd really have only 14 environment-cards for each pair of loci. So, with four loci, there'd be six pairs of loci, thus 6*14=84 cards; with five loci, there'd be ten pairs of loci, thus 10*14=140 cards; with six loci, there'd be fifteen pairs of loci, thus 15*14=210 cards.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Alright, let's suppose that you've decided that you don't want any environment cards with two loci on them, but you're willing to have loci in which neither allele is dominant over the other.

    Each environment card, then, would have three (possibly different) DM values on it.

    For instance for an environment card that interacted with the A-locus, you'd have a value for genotype AA, one for genotype Aa, and one for genotype aa.

    Let's suppose you don't have any cards in which all values are positive, nor any in which all values are negative, nor any in which all values are zero. Or, at least, that you don't have any in which all values are equal to each other.

    If there are two possible values (say 0 and -1), there are 2^3 - 2 = 6 (six) possible environment cards for each locus.

    If there are 26 loci that makes 6 * 26 = 156 environment cards.

    Suppose there are three possible DM values, say 0 and -1 and -2.
    There could then be 18 possible environment cards for each locus; we'd leave out all the combinations of all-negative values, and the all-zero combination.

    So, with 11 loci, you'd have 18*11 = 198 environment cards.

    If the three values are, instead, +1 and 0 and -1, we could have 24 environments per locus, because we'd leave out only three combinations, namely all-+1, all--1, and all-0.

    So with 8 loci you'd have 24*8 = 192 environment cards.

    With four DM values possible, if they were +1 and 0 and -1 and -2, you'd get 54 environment cards per locus. So with just four loci you'd have 216 environment cards.

    If you have four DM values possible, you could insist that all three genotypes have different DM values; that would give you 24 cards per locus instead of 54.

    You could even insist that every card have a positive value and a negative value and a zero value. Then, even with five possible values (+2, +1, 0, -1, -2) there'd still be 24 cards per locus, and you could have 8 loci and 192 cards.

  • Over 11 Years ago
    chiarizio
     

    [unparsed]After reading your post, I think I will need to limit environment cards to select for one gene locus at a time, but I will include the ability for players (or possibly a game master of some sort) to play multiple environment cards as long as they don't work on the same locus. If a card is played that effects a locus that's already affected, the old one gets thrown out.

    Hmm... It might be fun to make the cards for every possibility of the alleles, but limit the cards in the game's deck. Even if the deck is still in the 100-200 range, that would be a lot of possible decks and very different games.

    If I still decided to have two decks in the game, one could be a player's deck to use certain cards on themselves and their opponents. I was thinking the organisms would stay within each player's "gene pool", but it might add to a tactical aspect if players and their organisms could make alliances.

    Over 11 Years ago
    bloodb4roses
     

    [unparsed]Please forgive the "stream-of-consciousness" flavor of my last previous post.

    [u:e2cdf72a6d]______________________________________________________[/u:e2cdf72a6d]

    In real life, for most variable loci (loci that have more than one allele in the same species), it is [u:e2cdf72a6d]not[/u:e2cdf72a6d] the case that one is dominant and the other is recessive.
    More commonly the phenotype of a heterozygous individual is some kind of blend of the phenotypes of the corresponding homozygous individuals.
    Frequently the heterozygous individual has an advantage over both homozygous types. (That's where "hybrid vigor" comes from.) (Sickle-cell trait is an example.)
    As we've seen it would probably be perfectly playable for you to have a deck of cards for your environments that included some in which the heterozygous phenotype was superior to either of the homozygous phenotypes.

    [u:e2cdf72a6d]______________________________________________________[/u:e2cdf72a6d]


    Also, in real life, some loci have more than two alleles that can fill the locus.
    For instance, consider the color-vision locus on the X chromosome of that species of South American monkeys of which two-thirds of the females are trichromats but all the males and one-third of the females are dichromats.
    Let's call that locus [b:e2cdf72a6d]C[/b:e2cdf72a6d], and its alleles [b:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]R[/size:e2cdf72a6d][/b:e2cdf72a6d], [b:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]Y[/size:e2cdf72a6d][/b:e2cdf72a6d], and [b:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]G[/size:e2cdf72a6d][/b:e2cdf72a6d].
    If a female's two X-chromosomes are heterozygous, so that their phenotype expresses both R-cones and Y-cones, or both R-cones and G-cones, or both Y-cones and G-cones, then they can see in three colors. (B-cones are provided for by a non-sex chromosome.)
    But if a female's two X-chromosomes are homozygous, so that their phenotype expresses only R-cones, or only Y-cones, or only G-cones, then they can see in only two colors; Blue and Red, or Blue and Yellow, or Blue and Green.
    Males have only one X-chromosome so they're all dichromats.

    You don't have to make such a trait sex-linked.

    You could have a card for such a tri-allelic locus that was something like:
    C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]1[/size:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]2[/size:e2cdf72a6d] : 0
    C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]1[/size:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]3[/size:e2cdf72a6d] : 0
    C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]2[/size:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]3[/size:e2cdf72a6d] : 0
    C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]1[/size:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]1[/size:e2cdf72a6d] : -1
    C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]2[/size:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]2[/size:e2cdf72a6d] : -1
    C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]3[/size:e2cdf72a6d]C[size=9:e2cdf72a6d]3[/size:e2cdf72a6d] : -1

    Such a card would be interesting only if for each pair of alleles there was some situation in which the outcome for one of them were different from the outcome of the other. For instance, either C1C1 is different from C1C2, or C1C2 is different from C2C2, or C1C3 is different from C2C3. You don't want C1C1, C1C2, and C2C2 to all be the same; you don't want C1C1, C1C3, and C3C3 to all be the same; and you don't want C2C2, C2C3, and C3C3 to all be the same.

    So I think it might be playable to have some tri-allellic loci. The most obvious challenge remaining is a notational one; that you can't use "[b:e2cdf72a6d]A[/b:e2cdf72a6d]" and "[b:e2cdf72a6d]a[/b:e2cdf72a6d]" as the two alleles for the [i:e2cdf72a6d]A[/i:e2cdf72a6d]-locus; you'll have to find some way besides uppercase-vs-lowercase to denote them.

    [u:e2cdf72a6d]______________________________________________________[/u:e2cdf72a6d]

    In real-life there are genes that make other genes more mutable.
    Maybe you'll have an [i:e2cdf72a6d]M[/i:e2cdf72a6d]-locus with two alleles, [b:e2cdf72a6d]M[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and [b:e2cdf72a6d]m[/b:e2cdf72a6d], such that [b:e2cdf72a6d]mm[/b:e2cdf72a6d]-homozygous organisms mutate one gene (preferably not the [i:e2cdf72a6d]M[/i:e2cdf72a6d]-gene!) [u:e2cdf72a6d][i:e2cdf72a6d]every turn[/i:e2cdf72a6d][/u:e2cdf72a6d] while heterozygous ones mutate more rarely -- say whenever they roll a 2 or a 1 on a six-sided die, or roll snake-eyes or boxcars or seven when rolling two dice, or whatever.
    It needn't be the double-recessive that does the faster mutating; you could instead make the "every turn a mutation" condition apply to [b:e2cdf72a6d]MM[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and [b:e2cdf72a6d]Mm[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and the "slower, rarer mutation" apply to [b:e2cdf72a6d]mm[/b:e2cdf72a6d].


    [u:e2cdf72a6d]______________________________________________________[/u:e2cdf72a6d]


    [quote:e2cdf72a6d="bloodb4roses"]... I will include the ability for players (or possibly a game master of some sort) to play multiple environment cards as long as they don't work on the same locus. If a card is played that effects a locus that's already affected, the old one gets thrown out.[/quote:e2cdf72a6d]

    Can't environments change as the game progresses?
    Oh, I think that's what you mean.
    Yes, I can't think of anything else that could make sense.

    In real life, of course, the environment selects -- or once selected, or eventually will select -- simultaneously upon [u:e2cdf72a6d][i:e2cdf72a6d]every[/i:e2cdf72a6d][/u:e2cdf72a6d] locus with more than one allele in the gene-pool; at least, all those where the allele produces different phenotypes.

    [u:e2cdf72a6d]______________________________________________________[/u:e2cdf72a6d]



    [quote:e2cdf72a6d="bloodb4roses"]After reading your post, I think I will need to limit
    environment cards to select for one gene locus at a time, ...[/quote:e2cdf72a6d]
    [quote:e2cdf72a6d="bloodb4roses"]Hmm... It might be fun to make the cards for every possibility of the alleles, but limit the cards in the game's deck. Even if the deck is still in the 100-200 range, that would be a lot of possible decks and very different games.[/quote:e2cdf72a6d]

    In real life, few genes have an effect on the phenotype independent of any other gene.
    But as we've seen, it might make better sense, if you're going to use a deck of cards for your environments, for any environment-cards that interact with two loci interacting with each other, if both loci have a dominant-and-recessive pair of alleles.
    A two-locus environment card, say for the A-locus and the B-locus, with both loci bi-allelic, with the A-locus alleles being [b:e2cdf72a6d]A[/b:e2cdf72a6d] dominant and [b:e2cdf72a6d]a[/b:e2cdf72a6d] recessive, and the B-locus alleles being [b:e2cdf72a6d]B[/b:e2cdf72a6d] dominant and [b:e2cdf72a6d]b[/b:e2cdf72a6d] recessive, won't be interesting unless both loci make a difference in some situation. So you don't want both "[b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] cause the same outcome" and "[b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] cause the same outcome"; neither do you want both "[b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] cause the same outcome" and "[b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] cause the same outcome".
    Just assuming the only DM values are 0 and -1, the cards for this locus-pair could be any of these ten combinations:
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0
    or
    [b:e2cdf72a6d]AB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]Ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]aB[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = 0 ; [b:e2cdf72a6d]ab[/b:e2cdf72a6d] = -1
    .

    If you had five such bi-allelic loci with dominant-and-recessive alleles, you could pair them up into as many as ten pairs. If you had ten cards for each such pair that would make 100 cards. Of course there's no rule saying that you need to use all ten pairs; and theirs no rule saying that for each pair you use, you need to use all ten environments.

    [u:e2cdf72a6d]______________________________________________________[/u:e2cdf72a6d]


    [quote:e2cdf72a6d="bloodb4roses"]If I still decided to have two decks in the game, one could be a player's deck to use certain cards on themselves and their opponents. I was thinking the organisms would stay within each player's "gene pool", but it might add to a tactical aspect if players and their organisms could make alliances.[/quote:e2cdf72a6d]

    Were you planning on making each player represent only, and all of, a single species? If so, one player's organisms couldn't mate with another's.

    But "lateral movement" of genes does happen. You might have circumstances under which two players may or must exchange gene-cards (or whatever they use to denote alleles of a locus).

    As for alliances, there are allied species in nature.

    Players would need to be able to keep track of their organisms; if they use a deck of cards to do so, that's one deck. Furthermore the entire party of players needs a way to keep track of the environment; if they use cards to do so, that's another deck. So, indeed, you might need two decks.

    If there's no game-master to handle the environment, then randomness or opponent-strategy or some combination of them would be a playable way to make players have to deal with situations outside their own control.

    If a player's organisms are represented by a sort of sub-hand of various alleles, one pair of alleles for each locus, then the gene-deck might have to be huge. If you have 26 loci then each organism will need a 52-card sub-hand. If there are 2 alleles per locus, then the number of gene-cards you'll need is:
    104 * (max # of organisms a player can have) * (max # of players in game).

    I'm assuming that each player has a "gene-pool" out of which his organisms are assembled.
    The frequencies of the various alleles in each locus will change non-randomly, so each generation -- each time the player's organisms either reproduce or die (or neither, in some cases, I guess) -- they'll need to be able to draw extra cards [u:e2cdf72a6d][i:e2cdf72a6d]of a given type[/i:e2cdf72a6d][/u:e2cdf72a6d].

    (Unless you've arranged that no-one's population ever grows.)

    [u:e2cdf72a6d]______________________________________________________[/u:e2cdf72a6d]


    When organisms mate, some organisms have the advantage of being able to choose their mate, while others have the disadvantage of having to wait to be chosen. You might have players roll dice for this advantage; or there might be some genetic factor, or some environmental factor, or some combination of genes and environment, that grant certain organisms the "right to choose". And, of course, among those with the "right to choose", some have an advantage of being able to choose before others; you'd have to work it out somehow, maybe not until in version 2.0 of your game.

    Otherwise you'd just have to work out some random way of assigning mating-pairs to each other. You'd still need that to take over in case all of the mate-pool had an equal right to choose, or none of them did.


    [color=darkblue:e2cdf72a6d][b:e2cdf72a6d]EDIT:[/b:e2cdf72a6d]
    [u:e2cdf72a6d]______________________________________________________[/u:e2cdf72a6d]


    [quote:e2cdf72a6d="bloodb4roses"]Hmm... It might be fun to make the cards for every possibility of the alleles, but limit the cards in the game's deck.[/quote:e2cdf72a6d]

    Various ways to keep things from getting out of hand:

  • You might want to make a rule that every environment either only disfavors one phenotype or only favors one genotype.

  • If you allow positive effects, you might want to not allow any positive effect to be more than minimally positive (+1).

  • You might want to allow only neutral (0) or negative effects.

  • You might want to limit even negative effects to one or a few values;
    say, just -1,
    or, -1 or -2.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    But I really think realism requires that some environment cards have at least three values.

    For instance, if you have one for sickle-cell trait, you need the heterozygous phenotype to be most-favored (or neutral, or least-disfavored), and the homozygous sickle-cell phenotype to be most disfavored, and the homozygous normal phenotype to fall somewhere between; neutral or somewhat disfavored, but less favored than the heterozygous phenotype and less disfavored than the homozygous-sickle-cell phenotype.

    In general there may be a biallelic (or triallelic or whatever) locus, e.g. the biallelic [i:e2cdf72a6d]A[/i:e2cdf72a6d]-locus with alleles [b:e2cdf72a6d]A[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and [b:e2cdf72a6d]a[/b:e2cdf72a6d], for which the three phenotypes all have different outcomes.

    For instance, maybe the [b:e2cdf72a6d]Aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] falls between the [b:e2cdf72a6d]AA[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and the [b:e2cdf72a6d]aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d].

    You might reasonably be willing to sacrifice that much realism to make the game more playable; it could be pretty realistic otherwise. Or you could include it either as an "optional rule", or in version 2.0.

    Maybe the [b:e2cdf72a6d]Aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] will be favored and both the [b:e2cdf72a6d]AA[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and the [b:e2cdf72a6d]aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] will be equally disfavored. (hybrid vigor)

    Or, maybe the [b:e2cdf72a6d]Aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] will be [u:e2cdf72a6d][i:e2cdf72a6d]dis[/i:e2cdf72a6d][/u:e2cdf72a6d]favored and both the [b:e2cdf72a6d]AA[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and the [b:e2cdf72a6d]aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] will be equally [u:e2cdf72a6d][i:e2cdf72a6d]favored[/i:e2cdf72a6d][/u:e2cdf72a6d]. (incipient speciation)

    Or, maybe the [b:e2cdf72a6d]AA[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and the [b:e2cdf72a6d]Aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] will be equally favored and the [b:e2cdf72a6d]aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] will be disfavored. (deleterious recessive)

    Or, maybe the [b:e2cdf72a6d]AA[/b:e2cdf72a6d] and the [b:e2cdf72a6d]Aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] will be equally disfavored and the [b:e2cdf72a6d]aa[/b:e2cdf72a6d] will be favored. (advantageous recessive)

    All four of those possibilities have only two possible outcome-modifiers (DM values). At four environment-cards per locus, if you have 26 loci you'd only need 104 environment cards; that could be very playable.

    [b:e2cdf72a6d]/EDIT[/b:e2cdf72a6d][/color:e2cdf72a6d]

  • Over 11 Years ago
    chiarizio
     

    [unparsed]This is why I was trying to figure out how many variable loci to start with. There would be 26 [i:c6d078b7d0]possible[/i:c6d078b7d0] variable loci but none of the species (or populations if they are the same species) will start with more than a few. It's also why I want to keep the number of alleles for any locus to two. While there would be some allowance for hybrid vigor and similar situations, that will be left to the environment card. I also don't want to specify what any given gene does. So while I know there are genes that make others mutate faster, and that in real life most genes work with others to get things done, I'm ignoring them (in the first version at least) to make the game more playable for people who aren't into genetics.

    For breeding between populations, I'll make a rule of the two organisms can only have so many differences (because they might have the same genes but in different places).

    I was thinking that players would just use papers with each organism's genetics on it.

    Over 11 Years ago
    bloodb4roses
     

    [unparsed][quote:7b4f40f1ca="bloodb4roses"].... reasonable things ....[/quote:7b4f40f1ca]

    I think you either might be right, or are probably right.

    I can see why you wouldn't find it playable to have any two-locus environment cards; it would complicate the heck out of the game-master's job.

    So I guess you're going to want all the loci to interact independently with the environment, or, to put it another way, only additively with each other.

    I still think that environment cards that favor the heterozygous phenotype over either of the homozygous ones, or that select against the heterozygous phenotype as opposed to either of the homozygous ones, would not be an excessive complication.

    If for each biallelic locus [i:7b4f40f1ca]X[/i:7b4f40f1ca] you had the following four environment cards:

    [b:7b4f40f1ca]XX[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := -1 ; [b:7b4f40f1ca]Xx[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := 0 ; [b:7b4f40f1ca]xx[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := -1 ;;
    [b:7b4f40f1ca]XX[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := 0 ; [b:7b4f40f1ca]Xx[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := -1 ; [b:7b4f40f1ca]xx[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := 0 ;;
    [b:7b4f40f1ca]XX[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := 0 ; [b:7b4f40f1ca]Xx[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := 0 ; [b:7b4f40f1ca]xx[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := -1 ;;
    [b:7b4f40f1ca]XX[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := -1 ; [b:7b4f40f1ca]Xx[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := -1 ; [b:7b4f40f1ca]xx[/b:7b4f40f1ca] := 0 ;;

    that would take care of all four of the situations "good hybrid", "bad hybrid", "good recessive", "bad recessive".

    Basically, then, you're letting the environment choose whether the locus is dominant-vs-recessive or not, whether the hybrid is vigorous or the opposite, whether the recessive is advantageous or deleterious.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you use the set of 8 possible outcomes I mentioned in an earlier post, --- and you haven't said you will ---, then note that the DM=0, which I've been calling "neutral", is actually favorable; an organism has a 50% chance of having more than one offspring, and only a 37.5% chance of having less than one (here I'm counting sex as having half an offspring; and counting mutation as having 1-epsilon offspring).

    On average, each 8 organisms will have, between them, 10 offspring; so, on average, the population will grow by 25% per generation, if the average DM value is 0.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    But if there are four negative outcomes (unbalanced by positive outcomes), the population can't grow; if there are five, it also can't avoid mutation; if there are six, it has to shrink by half each generation; and if there are seven, the population goes extinct immediately.

    OTOH if there are three positive outcomes (unbalanced by any negative outcomes), no genotype will disappear, if there are four positive outcomes, each specimen will have more than one offspring, so the population will have to grow exponentially each generation; and so on.

    Here's a table:
    Total DMs: . . . . . Average # of offspring:
    +7 or more . . . . 2.5-epsilon
    +6 . . . . . . . . . 2.4375-epsilon = (7/8)(2.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(2-epsilon)
    +5 . . . . . . . . . 2.3125-epsilon = (3/4)(2.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(2-epsilon) + (1/8)(1.5)
    +4 . . . . . . . . . 2.1875-epsilon = (5/8)(2.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(2-epsilon) + (1/8)(1.5) + (1/8)(1.5-epsilon)
    +3 . . . . . . . . . 2-epsilon = (1/2)(2.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(2-epsilon) + (1/8)(1.5) + (1/8)(1.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(1)
    +2 . . . . . . . . . 1.8125-epsilon = (3/8)(2.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(2-epsilon) + (1/8)(1.5) + (1/8)(1.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(1) + (1/8)(1-epsilon)
    +1 . . . . . . . . . 1.5625-epsilon = (1/4)(2.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(2-epsilon) + (1/8)(1.5) + (1/8)(1.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(1) + (1/8)(1-epsilon) + (1/8)(1/2)
    0 . . . . . . . . . 1.25-epsilon = (1/8)(2.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(2-epsilon) + (1/8)(1.5) + (1/8)(1.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(1) + (1/8)(1-epsilon) + (1/8)(1/2) + (1/8)(0)
    -1 . . . . . . . . . 0.9375-epsilon = (1/8)(2-epsilon) + (1/8)(1.5) + (1/8)(1.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(1) + (1/8)(1-epsilon) + (1/8)(1/2) + (2/8)(0)
    -2 . . . . . . . . . 0.6875-epsilon = (1/8)(1.5) + (1/8)(1.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(1) + (1/8)(1-epsilon) + (1/8)(1/2) + (3/8)(0)
    -3 . . . . . . . . . 0.5-epsilon = (1/8)(1.5-epsilon) + (1/8)(1) + (1/8)(1-epsilon) + (1/8)(1/2) + (4/8)(0)
    -4 . . . . . . . . . 0.3125-epsilon = (1/8)(1) + (1/8)(1-epsilon) + (1/8)(1/2) + (5/8)(0)
    -5 . . . . . . . . . 0.1875-epsilon = (1/8)(1-epsilon) + (1/8)(1/2) + (6/8)(0)
    -6 . . . . . . . . . 0.0625 = (1/8)(1/2) + (7/8)(0)
    -7 or less . . . . . 0 = (8/8)(0)

    Over 11 Years ago
    chiarizio
     

    [unparsed]I like your dice idea for reproduction but I'm not sure it would work for this, unless the environment cards effected reproduction rates instead of/in addition to whether the parent generation survives.

    I don't know if I made it clear, but one could have multiple environment cards in play, as long as they all work on different genes. So you could have one acting on the A genes, another on the Ds and a third working on Fs, but if you wanted to play another that acts on Ds, you'd have to get rid of the old one.

    Over 11 Years ago
    bloodb4roses
     

    [unparsed][quote:6df6efb678="bloodb4roses"]I like your dice idea for reproduction but I'm not sure it would work for this, unless the environment cards effected reproduction rates instead of/in addition to whether the parent generation survives.[/quote:6df6efb678]But that would be realistic, wouldn't it? Surviving's not important unless you eventually get to reproduce. Or am I right?
    Evolution's mostly the result of differential success in reproducing. It also is the result of mutations; differential success in scattering (leaving home and colonizing new territory); and differential success in surviving.

    [quote:6df6efb678="bloodb4roses"]I don't know if I made it clear, but one could have multiple environment cards in play, as long as they all work on different genes. So you could have one acting on the A genes, another on the Ds and a third working on Fs, but if you wanted to play another that acts on Ds, you'd have to get rid of the old one.[/quote:6df6efb678]That's how I eventually understood it; but at least to me it wasn't obvious at first glance that that's what you meant. I assumed it was just me.

    I sure look forward to hearing the results of play-testing.
    Naturally you're far ahead of me in that. You probably already know why some of my strange ideas won't work in practice.

    Over 11 Years ago
    chiarizio
     

    [unparsed]I ended up shelving this temporarily, mostly to work on writing and because I need to let it stew before I work on it again. I mean I want the game to be robust and interesting and somewhat realistic, but not overly complicated to play.

    Over 11 Years ago
    bloodb4roses
     

    [unparsed]Have you thought of anything since your last post?

    Over 10 Years ago
    chiarizio
     

    [unparsed]Well, there is an online breeding game I've been playing, "The Order of the Griffin". The creator/programmer made a set genetic code and each griffin has certain genes, which even with a small number of alleles allows for a lot of variation. There's a limit on how many griffins you can have, though, so if one isn't useful for whatever you're breeding for, it's better to "release it". There's a day in which someone else can pick up the griffin if they like it, but after that, it's dropped from the system.

    Also, since each griffin is numbered and their pedigrees are tracked (and inbreeding), if you have two accounts and pick up the same egg from the home page (genes are already decided) and have one sex as female and the other male (heat based sexing), despite having identical genetics, you could breed the two griffins and it doesn't count as inbred as they are both "from the wild". Which in some ways, is almost a glitch, but not really.

    I don't know anything about coding outside of very basic HTML tags, so I would have a hard time making a game that's similar online even if the Griffin's creator shared the basics for me to go off of. But I almost think I'd need to have a "program" and database to actually work with the idea I'm going for.

    Over 10 Years ago
    bloodb4roses
     

    [unparsed]We've got programmers here.
    If you're willing to, tell one of them your ideas; if you can explain it to a programmer, the programmer can explain it to a computer.

    Over 10 Years ago
    chiarizio
     

    [unparsed][quote:6e12fb4ccf="chiarizio"]if you can explain it to a programmer, the programmer can explain it to a computer.[/quote:6e12fb4ccf]

    Can, but said explanation can also be prohibitively time consuming. ;)

    It'd make a great school project, though.

    Over 10 Years ago
    Blake
     

    Bump

    1 Week ago
    chiarizio
     

    Reply to: Mutation mechanics

    Username
    Password