Polls for possible adaptations to the level design contests.

[IchoTolot]

Now, buckets for different rules won't merge. Should the author commit the two-rule-satisfying level to only one rule? Can the author submit the level to both rules? If we want to forbid this: Can the author submit variants of the level that differ only minimally? How big a difference is enough?

My first hunch is to allow the same level to enter both rules and possibly win both. It's boring but clear, it leaves no room for arguments.

It can be quite easy to make a level for multiple rules. Especially if one rule is to simply use a certain tileset. They still merge for the final round.

Until now the author could choose for themselves to which rule the level should count towards.

I would be against letting a level enter in multiple rules. It just feels wrong to me to have a level be voted on in multiple brackets and possibly win and move on more than once.
Also I have a feeling that this will be abused and we get a lot of double-rule entries in the future.

I would still suggest to let the author decide to which rule the level should count towards.

Can the author submit variants of the level that differ only minimally? How big a difference is enough?

This I would catch and prevent during the submission phase. In terms of how big of a difference is enough - It needs to be a completely different level and not just a modification.

[IchoTolot]

As input dries up: I've listet the new format in the first post here.

If I get no further objections or further edge cases we should define, I plan to start a new contest in about a week from now.

I will not try out anonymizing the authors names in this one though as we already have quite a few changes and let's see how the new format goes first.

[WillLem]

I suppose if an author wanted to create a level which satisfies all rule sets, they could then choose a rule for which to submit their level. No bonus points for doing so, of course, but contest players might regard it as a nice easter egg if nothing else

[IchoTolot]

I will lock this topic for now.

It will be reactivated when more discussions regarding possible rule changes arise and the need fur further polls is there. 

[IchoTolot]

I want to clarify the "Note that levels that won a level design contest during the eligible timeframe get an automatic nomination, unless their author requests otherwise." point for LOTY as the runner-ups did also fall under the winner clause the last years.

So: Which levels of the top 3 shall automatically qualify for LOTY? I've put up a poll. 

[namida]

So, the top three will always be one level from each rule, right (except perhaps in very specific edge cases with tiebreakers?).

If so, then IMO, from most to least preferred:

All three > 1st place only > None of them > 1st and 2nd place

[IchoTolot]

So, the top three will always be one level from each rule, right (except perhaps in very specific edge cases with tiebreakers?).

If so, then IMO, from most to least preferred:

All three > 1st place only > None of them > 1st and 2nd place

Exactly.

2+ levels from a rule would be an edge case where even in the optional tiebreaker round we have a tie and then in the final round those 2+ levels would all do better than the ones from the other rules.

[IchoTolot]

Alright, I've put the result in the first post and according to it the top 3 qualify for LOTY. 

[WillLem]

One thing occurs to me when reading over this topic and the discussion topics: it's still possible for the same designer to take all 3 of the top spots.

The main goal of the discussion topic I started was to see more designers in the top 3, for the reason that it might help to encourage more participation in the contests. And OK, polling and general discussion seems to reflect a lack of interest in this happening for its own sake, fine.

I do still wonder, though, whether it might be worth at least mentioning the next 2 highest-placing designers when publishing the final result of the contest. That is, if there are < 3 designers in the top 3 spots.

It's then up to the winner if they want to share the prize of determining the next contest's rules, of course But, getting a mention in the final result post can be a decent enough reward if your level has done particularly well in the contest.

[IchoTolot]

You can't reliably state the next places after the top 3 in this format.

We would need to go into the 3 seperate results from the rule votings and here we would have 3 (or more) equal sencond places.

As then the final result post would tend to simply shout out most of the designers, my suggestion would be to give a general thanks to all participants by name in the results topic. That way everybody gets a mention.

[Crane]

One thing I'd like to change with the current voting system is, if there are four or more levels in a category (or in a mixed round... four or more levels from different authors), to allow people to vote for up to two levels, mainly because with 1 person, 1 vote, the level creators are very likely going to vote for their own levels (unless someone is feeling very generous) and the swing votes are those who didn't design for a category.  With 2 per person, a creator can vote for their own level as well as one they were particularly impressed by.  Granted, that gives non-designers two votes, so I'm not sure if that's good or bad.

[IchoTolot]

Regarding this post and the additioal discussion on discord, I plan to make 2 more polls after the current contest regarding the following 2 points:

1.) Allow more than 1 vote during the voteoff inside the rules depending on the number of entries inside each rule. Again, this does not effect the finals!
2.) Making the poll result only visible after the voting has been concluded. So only the end result will be visible after the time ran out.

Again if people have more input here be free to post! 

[Flopsy]

I've tried to stay out of contest participation and discussion but after reading the topic created by WillLem linked above in the first post for the first time. I feel like I need to explain why I stopped participating as my name is mentioned as being one of the people who only reached the top 3 once in the sample of LDC contest podium displays.

First of all, it should be pointed out that I only reached the top 3 once and it was in the only design contest I participated in for that period I believe.

The contests don't allow collaborative levels. About 50% of levels I create nowadays are collaborations of some sort. I understand that collaboration levels is a big can of worms in itself and allowing them in contests is complicated. But I'm curious, were they ever allowed in contests? And if so, why were they then subsequently not allowed?

It seems like the contests don't allow anything made outside of NeoLemmix or Lix. While I'm active in the Lix community, I excel at making multiplayer levels more in that community and my single player efforts are largely non-existent. I did try making contest levels using Lix at one point but then I ended up making them into multiplayer levels instead. Multiplayer levels in Lix are not allowed in contests.
Also, why is superLemmix not allowed in contests? I'm actually working on a project in superLemmix at the moment and anything I make there is automatically non-eligible for contests...?

I also backed out of the contests because my levels were not getting played by many people, there seems to be a bias towards voting levels which are made using the classic Lemmings tilesets. I was entering contests with tilesets I had made and it feels like my levels were at a disadvantage at the start for being unfamiliar and as a consequence they weren't being played let alone getting voted for. A few people did play them but they were always the same people, the kind who would bulldoze all the levels in the contest and want a full plethora of replays before posting their results.

In the current contest, the whole 1 vote per person across the 4 or 5 levels was too low I thought. I agree that people would just vote for their own level. I would also be in favour of keeping results hidden until the conclusion of the voting round.

I'm just throwing out there my reasons for quitting the contests, I'm not nit picking and I feel like I just wanted this written down here. I'm not an active NeoLemmix solver anymore, I do fire up the contest levels every now and again and see what I can solve. I usually have a bad time and rarely solve many levels. I vote based on which levels I enjoyed trying to solve even if I don't end up getting there.

[kaywhyn]

Copy/paste from Discord what I wrote/discussed:

That was exactly my concern from the start with the 1 vote system, where creators would likely just vote for their own level because, why wouldn't you? There's no reason to vote for anyone else's level this way. That's why under this change my hope was that creators/participants would use the honor system and not vote for their own level or just not vote at all, but this is asking a lot of the contest entrants, and unless there's a setting only admins can set for that, I don't think it can be prevented.

To be honest, I don't think I've even voted in any of the rounds since the contest voting system overhaul and shift to the 1 vote system, especially if my level is in the running. I personally don't believe in putting a vote for my own level to win, but at the same time I haven't been helping any level or anyone to win this way by not putting in a vote at all.

Another possibility to consider might be to not show poll results at all until the poll expires, which the poll creator can select when making the poll. This would mean a change to a longstanding thing with contests of switching from results being visible after one has voted to not being able to see results at all until the poll has ran its course, but again just a thought. In this way, it will now be the same for everyone by not allowing results to be seen until the poll expires. Before, with the results being visible after one has voted option, this would allow only those who have voted to be able to see them, but those who haven't voted will either have to vote to see the results, or just wait for the poll to expire. Of course, people are still free to discuss the levels via PM or offsite, but at least now in this way e.g, it won't be possible to know if levels are tied at any given moment until after the voting ends for the round.

Honestly, thinking about this, I really should had spoken up a lot sooner about my concerns with the first point Instead, I decided to give the 1 vote system a chance to play out, hoping that contest participants would have some kind of honor system in place when it came to the voting and not vote for their own level just for the heck of it.

In any case, what we're currently doing now with the reduced number of votes and rounds is still a huge improvement in general over what we were doing before! However, as can be seen, we can potentially still do better!  

[IchoTolot]

I know you stated that you are not an active NeoLemmix solver, but I still want to explain some things.

The contests don't allow collaborative levels. About 50% of levels I create nowadays are collaborations of some sort. I understand that collaboration levels is a big can of worms in itself and allowing them in contests is complicated. But I'm curious, were they ever allowed in contests? And if so, why were they then subsequently not allowed?

We had a special collaboration contest at some point. If, for example, a collaboration rule is chosen I would not be against it.

It seems like the contests don't allow anything made outside of NeoLemmix or Lix. ... Multiplayer levels in Lix are not allowed in contests. ... Also, why is superLemmix not allowed in contests?

For these I would recommend organizing seperate contests.

Multiplayer levels are completely different from single player in design, way of playing and target audience. A seperate contest would be the best option here.

I even mentioned to Simon about hosting a Lix Multiplayer contest.

In the case of SuperLemmix:

For one, I also would point at different target audiences - execution focus (SLX) and puzzle focus (NL + Lix). One of the main reasons I highly encouraged Will in his SLX effort was so that excecution difficulty and all the old mess can stay out of NL while still finding a new engine for it and the target audience.

But exactly because of the different engine focus that I personally really fed up with over the time (timed bombers, gimmicks, radiation etc etc....), I will make a hard call here:
As I won't play SLX content, I won't host SLX contests. I would be biased and therefore unfit to host such a contest.

People can host their own contest for it, but I would stay out of it.

I would call myself one of SLX supporters, but purely that I can play in peace.

I am aware that this seems harsh, but I don't want to be involved and even organize something that I do not enjoy and therefore do a bad job. That would be unfair to everyone.

I also backed out of the contests because my levels were not getting played by many people

Here from my experience many people simply play in silence and do not post about their experience. My general expectation is no feedback apart from the vote and if I get any it is a nice surprise.

In the current contest, the whole 1 vote per person across the 4 or 5 levels was too low I thought. I agree that people would just vote for their own level. I would also be in favour of keeping results hidden until the conclusion of the voting round.

This sounds like the proposed polls are indeed a good thing to do.