Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Please read the forum rules before posting.



Check if you are posting in the correct category.



The Off Topic section is not meant for discussing Cookie Clicker.

Destroying Wall Destroyer [An Informal Retrospective]

kirdnehkirdneh Member, Cool, Conversationalist Posts: 2,964 ✭✭✭✭✭
So way back when, I had gotten every achievement and upgrade and such on Wall Destroyer, the game by Tellurium years back. And I became curious to see that given the continual increase of "Future Knowledge Capsules", the prestige system used by the game, how far one could go.

A bit of background / flavour text:
I have a specific java booklet, some or most of the coding done by MasterSparky, but compiled by myself to all fit in one command,
javascript:(function(){with(document)(head.appendChild(createElement('script')).src='http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=j5uxcnr7')._})();

that what I was most proud of was all the "extra roots" beyond a million, that just veered off into SI prefixes, greek letters, all of the periodic elements, based off of the walls themselves, and silly self-inserts of people here.


The pastebin creation link says that was made in November of 2014, so I was just entering high school at that point, and was around the height of Wall Destroyer.
But what's interesting about those silly roots is that because Idle Game Maker for the variables like money, damage, etc., the game uses float values, which are read as infinity after around kryptos or rubidus, which I had labeled with a (101). That internal number was a quick reference I used to mentally know how many sets of 3 powers of 10 after 3 a number was, or (n) = 10^(3n +3); a million was a (1), which would mean that you would take the 3(1) + 3) and know that a million is 10 to the 6th, or a 1 followed by 6 zeroes. Billion is (2), and this follows the "number-y" names of the roots until I decided to just go wild with cool-sounding names. So in the end, the last 200 roots are not usable because they are "beyond" what the code thinks as infinity.

After beating the game, most people moved on from Wall Destroyer and went on to do other things. I, however, wanted to know how far I could go.
My end goal was to reach the maximum float value for as many variables as I could; but before that, my first goal was to see if there was a diminishing or increase in resetting rounds and prestige. Each run, the -dupleness of my prestige was indeed increasing, meaning that there wasn't a diminishing return on resetting. It was very small at first, but was promising. My save file is tied to this old, cracked laptop that I'm using right now to type. It's had periods of sitting in a case, moving back and forth, being shipped across states, its up key is broken and I have to use a numberpad up to use that button, the touchscreen is immensely cracked like a hallucinogenic spiderweb and doesn't respond to touch, and I have to be careful to not knock off tiny glass shards. But after many months of forgetting about it and coming back to the game off and on, my save file has always patiently sat in the hard-drive.
Around January of 2018, this year as of writing, I was for personal family reasons back at home not in college or in a job yet. It was a pretty low point, and this year hasn't been good, but things after 6 months are looking marginally upwards and I'm growing as a person and will in not too long be back in school and able to learn. But that aside, in that down-period of nothingness, I was able to push the game around the 40th to 50th reset to be able to destroy every single wall in the game in a single click from the start, without any buildings. This was promising, and eventually each run I was able to increase the root of my knowledge capsules, and all else, by (3), meaning that each round I was able to trillion-tuple my strength. This increase of root I could tell was slowly increasing, from just (1) or (2) later on in the rounds to get to One Click Total Destruction, like some arcane architectural demolitionist Saitama from OPM. Eventually I became busy with my job and forgot about my goal.
Tellurium, or Luri, the creator of Wall Destroyer (if you are not aware or wasn't here when WD was significant), is in my discord server and I'm very fortunate to be able to talk to them and others. At some point, we had talked about WD again to explain it to some of my other friends, and so this weekend, I resolved to finish what I had started: Infinity.
The multibuy program I had used in the past, created by Sparky, simply was not fast enough to purchase the buildings I needed. Back around January, I had created a "Buy 100" button after the "Buy 10" button, but this weekend I created an additional "Buy tons" button that would attempt to buy up to 10,000 of a building, which significantly decreased my run times. My prestige root increase would increase by (4), then (5), and finally by (6). Every half dozen runs or so I increased my punchers by another thousand. I worked on it today in between doing other things I've been watching and doing on my new main laptop, and on run number 90, I had done it:
Infinity cash.
I was then quickly able to push Punchers and other buildings beyond the "Infinity dollars" amount for each building.
After resetting for the Knowledge Capsules for run 91, I had Infinite Cosmic Knowledge, meaning that my first initial click did infinite damage for infinite cash.

69 true victory points. Nice.
As you can see, I tried messing around with the buy buttons and changed the "buy tons" button into buying 1 million of a building, which is enough to put the cost of everything to what the game considers infinity.
Non-standard bricks cannot increase by more than the walls, random bonus points are entirely random, and upgrades and achievements are similarly a set number. The only other variables that can increase, then, are those related to amount of run count, time since resetting / minutes run, and number of buildings.
When setting "buy tons" to a million, the game lags for about 22- 27 seconds. This is limited because the "buylots" method consults a loop:

So running it into a loop a million time slows down the computer significantly.
I looked into the code for the game, and based on how buildings are set as a variable in the pastebin for the source of Wall Destroyer, most likely they are also floating points which become "infinity" around (101) or (102). I had tried using the purchase a million button for everything as in the screen capture, but if I had an autoclicker to purchase a million buildings every 30 seconds, it would take about 8 hours to reach a billion. My initial idea is that if they are integers, then 16 hours per building of sitting on an autoclicker to purchase buildings would be able to reach Integer max, but given that they appear to be floating points much as the price for the buildings, I cannot say. It's hard to see the source code for idle game maker itself or haven't found it. I'm not too experienced in programming, I took a few years of JAVA in high school and know enough about computers in general how to tinker with things and see what happens. I believe CSS has Number and Integer classes, which I would assume Number is more like float and Integer is like what is standard Integer. While it wouldn't take relatively too long to have an autoclicker purchase the million buildings every 30 seconds after computer unfreezes for 16 hours, I find it unlikely that for just buildings the game would use a different variable type than everything else in the game.

Comments

  • YosukeHanamuraYosukeHanamura Member Posts: 870 ✭✭
    EHEM. This subforum category is for posting IGM Games, not breaking them. And the NEW IGM.
    In modern physics, antimatter is defined as a material composed of the antiparticle (or "partners") to the corresponding particles of ordinary matter.

    In theory, a particle and its anti-particle have the same mass as one another, but opposite electric charge, and other differences in quantum numbers. For example, a proton has positive charge while an antiproton has negative charge. A collision between any particle and its anti-particle partner is known to lead to their mutual annihilation, giving rise to various proportions of intense photons (gamma rays), neutrinos, and sometimes less-massive particle–antiparticle pairs.

    Annihilation usually results in a release of energy that becomes available for heat or work. The amount of the released energy is usually proportional to the total mass of the collided matter and antimatter, in accord with the mass–energy equivalence equation, E = mc2.

    Antimatter particles bind with one another to form antimatter, just as ordinary particles bind to form normal matter. For example, a positron (the antiparticle of the electron) and an antiproton (the antiparticle of the proton) can form an antihydrogen atom. Physical principles indicate that complex antimatter atomic nuclei are possible, as well as anti-atoms corresponding to the known chemical elements.

    There is considerable speculation as to why the observable universe is composed almost entirely of ordinary matter, as opposed to an equal mixture of matter and antimatter. This asymmetry of matter and antimatter in the visible universe is one of the great unsolved problems in physics. The process by which this inequality between matter and antimatter particles developed is called baryogenesis.

    Antimatter in the form of anti-atoms is one of the most difficult materials to produce. Individual antimatter particles, however, are commonly produced by particle accelerators and in some types of radioactive decay. The nuclei of antihelium have been artificially produced with difficulty. These are the most complex anti-nuclei so far observed.

    Formally, antimatter particles can be defined by their negative baryon number or lepton number, while "normal" (non-antimatter) matter particles have a positive baryon or lepton number. These two classes of particles are the antiparticle partners of one another.

    The idea of negative matter appears in past theories of matter that have now been abandoned. Using the once popular vortex theory of gravity, the possibility of matter with negative gravity was discussed by William Hicks in the 1880s. Between the 1880s and the 1890s, Karl Pearson proposed the existence of "squirts" and sinks of the flow of aether. The squirts represented normal matter and the sinks represented negative matter. Pearson's theory required a fourth dimension for the aether to flow from and into.

    The term antimatter was first used by Arthur Schuster in two rather whimsical letters to Nature in 1898, in which he coined the term. He hypothesized antiatoms, as well as whole antimatter solar systems, and discussed the possibility of matter and antimatter annihilating each other. Schuster's ideas were not a serious theoretical proposal, merely speculation, and like the previous ideas, differed from the modern concept of antimatter in that it possessed negative gravity.

    The modern theory of antimatter began in 1928, with a paper by Paul Dirac. Dirac realised that his relativistic version of the Schrödinger wave equation for electrons predicted the possibility of antielectrons. These were discovered by Carl D. Anderson in 1932 and named positrons (a portmanteau of "positive electron"). Although Dirac did not himself use the term antimatter, its use follows on naturally enough from antielectrons, antiprotons, etc. A complete periodic table of antimatter was envisaged by Charles Janet in 1929.

    The Feynman–Stueckelberg interpretation states that antimatter and antiparticles are regular particles traveling backward in time.

    There are compelling theoretical reasons to believe that, aside from the fact that antiparticles have different signs on all charges (such as electric charge and spin), matter and antimatter have exactly the same properties. This means a particle and its corresponding antiparticle must have identical masses and decay lifetimes (if unstable). It also implies that, for example, a star made up of antimatter (an "antistar") will shine just like an ordinary star. This idea was tested experimentally in 2016 by the ALPHA experiment, which measured the transition between the two lowest energy states of antihydrogen. The results, which are identical to that of hydrogen, confirmed the validity of quantum mechanics for antimatter.

    Positrons were reported in November 2008 to have been generated by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in larger numbers than by any previous synthetic process. A laser drove electrons through a gold target's nuclei, which caused the incoming electrons to emit energy quanta that decayed into both matter and antimatter. Positrons were detected at a higher rate and in greater density than ever previously detected in a laboratory. Previous experiments made smaller quantities of positrons using lasers and paper-thin targets; however, new simulations showed that short, ultra-intense lasers and millimeter-thick gold are a far more effective source.

    Antimatter cannot be stored in a container made of ordinary matter because antimatter reacts with any matter it touches, annihilating itself and an equal amount of the container. Antimatter in the form of charged particles can be contained by a combination of electric and magnetic fields, in a device called a Penning trap. This device cannot, however, contain antimatter that consists of uncharged particles, for which atomic traps are used. In particular, such a trap may use the dipole moment (electric or magnetic) of the trapped particles. At high vacuum, the matter or antimatter particles can be trapped and cooled with slightly off-resonant laser radiation using a magneto-optical trap or magnetic trap. Small particles can also be suspended with optical tweezers, using a highly focused laser beam.

    In 2011, CERN scientists were able to preserve antihydrogen for approximately 17 minutes.

    Scientists claim that antimatter is the costliest material to make. In 2006, Gerald Smith estimated $250 million could produce 10 milligrams of positrons (equivalent to $25 billion per gram); in 1999, NASA gave a figure of $62.5 trillion per gram of antihydrogen. This is because production is difficult (only very few antiprotons are produced in reactions in particle accelerators), and because there is higher demand for other uses of particle accelerators. According to CERN, it has cost a few hundred million Swiss francs to produce about 1 billionth of a gram (the amount used so far for particle/antiparticle collisions). In comparison, to produce the first atomic weapon, the cost of the Manhattan Project was estimated at $23 billion with inflation during 2007.

    Several studies funded by the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts are exploring whether it might be possible to use magnetic scoops to collect the antimatter that occurs naturally in the Van Allen belt of the Earth, and ultimately, the belts of gas giants, like Jupiter, hopefully at a lower cost per gram.

    Matter–antimatter reactions have practical applications in medical imaging, such as positron emission tomography (PET). In positive beta decay, a nuclide loses surplus positive charge by emitting a positron (in the same event, a proton becomes a neutron, and a neutrino is also emitted). Nuclides with surplus positive charge are easily made in a cyclotron and are widely generated for medical use. Antiprotons have also been shown within laboratory experiments to have the potential to treat certain cancers, in a similar method currently used for ion (proton) therapy.

    Antimatter has been considered as a trigger mechanism for nuclear weapons. A major obstacle is the difficulty of producing antimatter in large enough quantities, and there is no evidence that it will ever be feasible. However, the U.S. Air Force funded studies of the physics of antimatter in the Cold War, and began considering its possible use in weapons, not just as a trigger, but as the explosive itself.
  • TelluriumTellurium Friendly, Cool, Idle Game Master, Conversationalist, Turquoise Posts: 5,360 Mod
    (moved to the old games subforum, not sure where else to put it)

    gosh this is an excellent last ribbon on the WD saga... thank you :'D

    I can just picture Johnson lying back on a lounge chair made of every strongest material his universe has to offer, lifting his interminable shades that have never once come off in the four years the game has existed, to peer into the great infinity & eternity that with the final hand of Kirdneh he and the rest of the RUC have been able to reach.

    ...and smirking with smugness unfathomable.


  • YosukeHanamuraYosukeHanamura Member Posts: 870 ✭✭
    OMG, Lord Tellurium
    In modern physics, antimatter is defined as a material composed of the antiparticle (or "partners") to the corresponding particles of ordinary matter.

    In theory, a particle and its anti-particle have the same mass as one another, but opposite electric charge, and other differences in quantum numbers. For example, a proton has positive charge while an antiproton has negative charge. A collision between any particle and its anti-particle partner is known to lead to their mutual annihilation, giving rise to various proportions of intense photons (gamma rays), neutrinos, and sometimes less-massive particle–antiparticle pairs.

    Annihilation usually results in a release of energy that becomes available for heat or work. The amount of the released energy is usually proportional to the total mass of the collided matter and antimatter, in accord with the mass–energy equivalence equation, E = mc2.

    Antimatter particles bind with one another to form antimatter, just as ordinary particles bind to form normal matter. For example, a positron (the antiparticle of the electron) and an antiproton (the antiparticle of the proton) can form an antihydrogen atom. Physical principles indicate that complex antimatter atomic nuclei are possible, as well as anti-atoms corresponding to the known chemical elements.

    There is considerable speculation as to why the observable universe is composed almost entirely of ordinary matter, as opposed to an equal mixture of matter and antimatter. This asymmetry of matter and antimatter in the visible universe is one of the great unsolved problems in physics. The process by which this inequality between matter and antimatter particles developed is called baryogenesis.

    Antimatter in the form of anti-atoms is one of the most difficult materials to produce. Individual antimatter particles, however, are commonly produced by particle accelerators and in some types of radioactive decay. The nuclei of antihelium have been artificially produced with difficulty. These are the most complex anti-nuclei so far observed.

    Formally, antimatter particles can be defined by their negative baryon number or lepton number, while "normal" (non-antimatter) matter particles have a positive baryon or lepton number. These two classes of particles are the antiparticle partners of one another.

    The idea of negative matter appears in past theories of matter that have now been abandoned. Using the once popular vortex theory of gravity, the possibility of matter with negative gravity was discussed by William Hicks in the 1880s. Between the 1880s and the 1890s, Karl Pearson proposed the existence of "squirts" and sinks of the flow of aether. The squirts represented normal matter and the sinks represented negative matter. Pearson's theory required a fourth dimension for the aether to flow from and into.

    The term antimatter was first used by Arthur Schuster in two rather whimsical letters to Nature in 1898, in which he coined the term. He hypothesized antiatoms, as well as whole antimatter solar systems, and discussed the possibility of matter and antimatter annihilating each other. Schuster's ideas were not a serious theoretical proposal, merely speculation, and like the previous ideas, differed from the modern concept of antimatter in that it possessed negative gravity.

    The modern theory of antimatter began in 1928, with a paper by Paul Dirac. Dirac realised that his relativistic version of the Schrödinger wave equation for electrons predicted the possibility of antielectrons. These were discovered by Carl D. Anderson in 1932 and named positrons (a portmanteau of "positive electron"). Although Dirac did not himself use the term antimatter, its use follows on naturally enough from antielectrons, antiprotons, etc. A complete periodic table of antimatter was envisaged by Charles Janet in 1929.

    The Feynman–Stueckelberg interpretation states that antimatter and antiparticles are regular particles traveling backward in time.

    There are compelling theoretical reasons to believe that, aside from the fact that antiparticles have different signs on all charges (such as electric charge and spin), matter and antimatter have exactly the same properties. This means a particle and its corresponding antiparticle must have identical masses and decay lifetimes (if unstable). It also implies that, for example, a star made up of antimatter (an "antistar") will shine just like an ordinary star. This idea was tested experimentally in 2016 by the ALPHA experiment, which measured the transition between the two lowest energy states of antihydrogen. The results, which are identical to that of hydrogen, confirmed the validity of quantum mechanics for antimatter.

    Positrons were reported in November 2008 to have been generated by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in larger numbers than by any previous synthetic process. A laser drove electrons through a gold target's nuclei, which caused the incoming electrons to emit energy quanta that decayed into both matter and antimatter. Positrons were detected at a higher rate and in greater density than ever previously detected in a laboratory. Previous experiments made smaller quantities of positrons using lasers and paper-thin targets; however, new simulations showed that short, ultra-intense lasers and millimeter-thick gold are a far more effective source.

    Antimatter cannot be stored in a container made of ordinary matter because antimatter reacts with any matter it touches, annihilating itself and an equal amount of the container. Antimatter in the form of charged particles can be contained by a combination of electric and magnetic fields, in a device called a Penning trap. This device cannot, however, contain antimatter that consists of uncharged particles, for which atomic traps are used. In particular, such a trap may use the dipole moment (electric or magnetic) of the trapped particles. At high vacuum, the matter or antimatter particles can be trapped and cooled with slightly off-resonant laser radiation using a magneto-optical trap or magnetic trap. Small particles can also be suspended with optical tweezers, using a highly focused laser beam.

    In 2011, CERN scientists were able to preserve antihydrogen for approximately 17 minutes.

    Scientists claim that antimatter is the costliest material to make. In 2006, Gerald Smith estimated $250 million could produce 10 milligrams of positrons (equivalent to $25 billion per gram); in 1999, NASA gave a figure of $62.5 trillion per gram of antihydrogen. This is because production is difficult (only very few antiprotons are produced in reactions in particle accelerators), and because there is higher demand for other uses of particle accelerators. According to CERN, it has cost a few hundred million Swiss francs to produce about 1 billionth of a gram (the amount used so far for particle/antiparticle collisions). In comparison, to produce the first atomic weapon, the cost of the Manhattan Project was estimated at $23 billion with inflation during 2007.

    Several studies funded by the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts are exploring whether it might be possible to use magnetic scoops to collect the antimatter that occurs naturally in the Van Allen belt of the Earth, and ultimately, the belts of gas giants, like Jupiter, hopefully at a lower cost per gram.

    Matter–antimatter reactions have practical applications in medical imaging, such as positron emission tomography (PET). In positive beta decay, a nuclide loses surplus positive charge by emitting a positron (in the same event, a proton becomes a neutron, and a neutrino is also emitted). Nuclides with surplus positive charge are easily made in a cyclotron and are widely generated for medical use. Antiprotons have also been shown within laboratory experiments to have the potential to treat certain cancers, in a similar method currently used for ion (proton) therapy.

    Antimatter has been considered as a trigger mechanism for nuclear weapons. A major obstacle is the difficulty of producing antimatter in large enough quantities, and there is no evidence that it will ever be feasible. However, the U.S. Air Force funded studies of the physics of antimatter in the Cold War, and began considering its possible use in weapons, not just as a trigger, but as the explosive itself.
Sign In or Register to comment.