Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 4619775" data-attributes="member: 1656">No, it isn't.Because the distance from the banana to square b is 3, and the distance from square b to the monkey is 1, so the distance from the banana to the monkey is 4.  You measure the most direct path.This doesn't violate the requirement that you count around a solid obstacle!  I'm not counting through a solid obstacle.See the attached picture.  The red path is not how we count distance.  It goes through a solid obstacle, and we must count around the solid obstacle.The orange path is not how we count distance.  It goes around the solid obstacle, but it is not the most direct path.  It is, however, how you must travel if you are walking, since you cannot move across the diagonal.The green path is how we count distance.  It goes around the solid obstacle, and it is the most direct path.The distance between M and B is 7 squares.  But one must move through 8 squares to travel between M and B, because one cannot travel the path the distance is counted along.The distance between two squares is the same whether you count forwards or backwards, because you can count across a diagonal around a corner.  You can see, shoot, cast, teleport, or make a melee attack across a diagonal around a corner; the only thing you can't do is move.So when you count across a diagonal around a corner, you're counting around the obstacle.  That single point removes the inconsistency you claim, for counting forwards or backwards, or for starting further from the corner.-Hyp.</blockquote>

Verification