Version 1.8 Uploaded

One level has been updated for general platform compatibility.

Black Hole 21 Final Frustration
• Moved terrain to left of entrance inwards by 8px to make it easier for Builder bridges to connect
• Increased skill count from 20 to 21 of each
• Reduced save requirement from 100 to 90 so that the player can use up to 10 Bombers

2 replays are included, a save-95 and a save-100. This level is still extremely difficult to solve and execute, but it's now much more compatible with RetroLemmini. Since the level has been ported over from NeoLemmix, where it's possible to solve it using backwards framestepping, skill shadows, and various other player assists not present in RetroLemmini, it seems right to make these changes.

Get the latest version of NepsterLems for RetroLemmini here.

Version 3.0 update

We're on the home stretch! I'm very happy with RetroLemmini as it is now and will most likely enter a period of maintenance-only development for the forseeable future.

3.0 is a major update, as there are significant updates to the physics this time around which may affect replays and levels. There are also a few UI updates and bugfixes.

Here's what's new:

Physics

• Left-facing Builders now place bricks identically opposite to right-facing Builders. In practice, this means that the bricks are 3px further to the left than previously. This is a significant physics update which will affect most replays involving left-facing Builders, and could even affect levels which rely on pixel-precise left-facing Builders (hopefully there aren't too many of these!)

• To account for the update to left-facing Builders, all left-facing sprites have been updated so that the sprite position relative to the actual position of the lemming now mirrors right-facing lemmings more accurately. This doesn't affect physics, but does affect how the lemmings appear to the player when they're facing to the left.

• Miners now check sooner for steel collision during the 'swing' phase (fixes this bug). This may affect levels or replays which involve turning a Miner using a OWW.

• Gadget priority is now hard-coded by general type rather than by individual gadget, meaning that wherever they overlap, the highest-indexed gadget in each type is the one that takes effect in-level (see this topic for more details). This should fix any levels that were broken by the previous hard-coded gadget priority. Meanwhile, Exits continue to override everything else wherever a trigger overlap occurs.

• Only the top-most visible pixel interacts with one-way-arrow objects. This prevents "Allow One Way" flags on hidden, invisible, or eraser terrain/steel from affecting OWW trigger areas. Levels and replays involving complex OWW/terrain setups may be affected by this.

UI

• Music & Sound volume control is now logarithmic rather than linear, meaning that it's easier to make fine adjustments to the volume at lower levels.

• Visual SFX images are cleared at the start of the level, preventing them from continuing to be displayed when restarting a level.

Styles

• Added Up/Down OWWs to SEGA.
• Added several pieces to Special.
• Added half-size water to Bubble.
• Updated Up/Down OWWs in Pillar to look more like the Left/Right counterparts.
• Added white OWWs to Brick.

Editor

• RL Editor version 1.6 is included with the download. See the Editor's "About" dialog for update info.

A reminder of what's new as of 2.9.

---

Get the latest version here.

Quote from: hrb264 on April 27, 2026, 06:56:45 PMWill this be in the next update?

Yes, I'll aim to get a release ready for this weekend.

We seem to have consensus on everything except the vine trap animation. Anybody have any ideas regarding this? It would be nice to have the OG styles sorted for the upcoming RotL re-issue, so ideas and suggestions are welcome at this time!

To be clear, here's what's been (more or less) agreed so far. Any of these can be further revised if anyone has any suggestions. But, if no ideas from others are forthcoming, I suggest we go ahead with these:


Bubble trap


Crystal trap


Chameleon trap

Rock trap will stay as it is (i.e. more frequent drips)

We just need to sort out the vine trap. I still think my version is enough of an improvement, but if anyone has any better ideas let's hear them.

-->

Update to 'special' - added crystal exit as separate base/top images for upcoming RotL reissue.

A quick comment regarding numbers.

I'd like us to aim for 120 levels (4 ranks of 30) for packs 1 and 2, but if push comes to shove I can concede that it might end up making more sense for one of the packs to have 100 levels. I'd probably suggest that we flip the script here, though, and make pack 1 the 100-level pack with 5 ranks of 20 levels. Reason: pack 2 is supposed to be the more difficult pack. There are more difficult levels than there are easy levels, and there will be less of an upward difficulty curve between ranks for pack 2. Ergo, it makes more sense for pack 2 to be bigger, and have fewer ranks.

The alternative is to keep RotL as a single pack, albeit with fewer levels than the existing version. This is the least preferable option IMHO. I'd rather source some duplicates from packs made around the same time as the original RotL (essentially making the 2-pack version something of a "best of" collection) rather than end up with what would essentially just be a slightly less bloated version of the existing pack.

It shouldn't come to that though. Hopefully, between myself, mobius and kaywhyn, we'll be able to re-approve enough of Proxima's shortlisted levels to make the numbers up without it feeling too much like we're keeping levels just for the sake of it. If at least one of us genuinely likes the level, that's good enough for me.

Quote from: Guigui on April 23, 2026, 08:55:37 PMYes you're right, the firewall was blockinh NL from launchung via NLEditor. Solved now, thank you.

Glad to hear it, I'll close this as resolved.

Quote from: Guigui on April 22, 2026, 10:23:09 PMAny idea what the problem might be ?

I've been unable to replicate this. Editor 2.0 correctly opens playtest levels in both NeoLemmix 12.14 and NeoLemmix CE 1.1 on my system.

"L'opération a été annulée par l'utilisateur" translates as "the operation was cancelled by the user", which suggests that something is stopping NeoLemmix from running on your friend's computer.

Best guess is that AV/firewall is blocking the .exe from running, or Windows has the app marked as untrusted. To fix this, NeoLemmix.exe will have to be added to the 'safe programs' list in whichever AV your friend uses. If that doesn't fix the issue, report back and let me know.

@Proxima The 1-20 draft is looking good so far. I have only these comments to add:

Quote from: Proxima on April 19, 2026, 02:03:20 AM1-7 The Small Jail: From v4. Should we cut out one group of lemmings?

I would say don't cut a group of lemmings. The level's symmetry is part of its aesthetic and appeal.

Quote from: Proxima on April 19, 2026, 02:03:20 AM1-19 Lem Dunk: From v4. Increased RR and lowered save requirement, since we can't use (NeoLemmix) RR below 50.

We can use RR <50 for the NeoLemmix version, no need to change it. IMO, the RetroLemmini version can be different in this regard.

Quote from: Proxima on April 19, 2026, 02:03:20 AMPipe Dream: Not sure about including this, but if we drop "Gotta Save 'em All!" this could replace it so we still have a bubble level in the first 10.

Of the two, Pipe Dream is easily the better level, but "Gotta Save 'em All!" has a better title. Feels like it (the title) should be used somewhere.

Quote from: Piedro0 on April 16, 2026, 10:24:44 PMNope, still not loading. Maybe it's because i'm using CE?

It's not a CE issue. ericderkovits has tracked down the cause of the error you're seeing: it has to do with the piece names in the style itself. In the actual style, the piece names don't have underscores, but in the levels that use this style, for some reason underscores snuck in.

Eric's now fixed this and sent the levels to me via Discord (which you're welcome to join). Download the attached levels and replace them in your copy of the pack.

@kaywhyn Would you be happy to replace these levels in the OP attachment? Thanks.

OK, so Proxima mentioned on Discord that we can start suggesting levels for Pack 1 Rank 1, particurly those that might make good X-of-each repeats.

These would be my top picks:

9 Ways To Live - perfect start to the pack, an excellent take on tutorial levels in general
Over or Under - provides an interesting challenge, and multiple possible ways to solve it
Snowy Caves - snow levels usually aren't my favourite, but this one is very well put together. 20 of each is excessive though, 10-15 would probably be fine
Pipe Dream - this gets more interesting the more you look at it. I'd probably suggest reducing it to 3 or 4 of each
Lemmington Spa - presents multiple 'get down from there' challenges in a single level, but isn't too difficult for the first rank by any means
Surrealism - probably my favourite level visually, could be good as a 2 of each
Neighbours - rock levels usually put me off, but this one is very well done as a 'use this crowd to save that crowd' challenge
Let's Play Lemmings! - very good pillar level, well put-together and requires use of several different skills to get a basic solution. Shame it doesn't make use of the OWW, but other than that it's a decent candidate for inclusion
Crystal Caves - this one's a classic custom level, and makes for an interesting challenge given only 1 Basher
Lem Dunk - a favourite of mine, just a shame it isn't possible to save 100%!
Minesweeper Lemmings - include it for sure, maybe reduce the X to some amount that makes the level require floaters?
THE FEARSOME FOURSOME - excellent level, a great multi-tasker with many possible solutions, perfect for X of each

In general, my criteria for X-of-all repeats would be: how many different skills are needed to create a basic solution? If the level can be done with just one or two skills, it's perhaps either not worth including, or the X amount should be reduced so that other skills need to be used.

That's it for now, I'll report back more when I've worked through more of the pack.

I agree with Simon, these are all excellent. Nice work, Lana!

It looks like Simon will already be adding them, but just to document some comments anyway:

Quote from: Lana T. on April 15, 2026, 04:25:25 PMI wasn't sure how to update the "surprised" one. Each time I retouched the pupils, it looked weird and bad, so I added an exclamation mark instead:

Good call.

Quote from: Lana T. on April 15, 2026, 04:25:25 PM"Lemcat" has his little nose:

Much better, thanks! This one is probably my favourite.

Quote from: Lana T. on April 15, 2026, 04:25:25 PMHere are the two new versions of "sleep":

The one on the right (with the Zs) is the best IMO.

Quote from: Lana T. on April 15, 2026, 04:25:25 PMNerd:

Perfect! The raised finger is a nice touch, and definitely makes it clearer. I'll use this one when I'm nerdsplaining, for sure!

Quote from: Lana T. on April 15, 2026, 04:25:25 PMAngel:


Lip Sealed:

We must have these. Simon, please add them.

Quote from: Lana T. on April 15, 2026, 04:25:25 PMTo be honest, the hands in some of the lemoticons are still bugging me, but I can't spend more time on them when I still have other ones to finish.

Take your time and make whatever changes you need to. If Simon uploads what you have for now, I imagine it will be easy enough to replace them later if you've made revisions.

Quote from: kaywhyn on April 16, 2026, 01:05:21 PMI'll see if I can interpret what you mean correctly. If you mean what I think you mean, essentially your approach goes like, "I choose this level, that level, etc." without needing to necessarily play the levels beforehand as your list we can analyze as a group to see what we can further cut down. Yea, this way of doing so would likely introduce arbitrary bias as Proxima mentioned. I'm definitely not in favor of randomly picking levels that should and shouldn't make the cut without properly analyzing the levels first

I've highlighted in yellow bold the parts that are being misunderstood.

The following is the approach I suggested, as clearly as I can make it. I've spoiler tagged it to make this post smaller as this part of the conversation has taken up enough of this topic already!

Suggested approach, and discussion thereof

(1) Make a list of 30 x 4 levels which will form the "working playlist" (Draft 1) - they can be any levels at this point, and have no priority over anything not on the list. We do NOT decide at this point which levels should and shouldn't make the cut.

(2) Play through every level in the total pool (i.e. all levels on the list, and all levels off the list). During this step, we make notes, update any levels that need updating, and identify which levels should and shouldn't make the cut.

(3) Having completed step 2, we should now have a more firm idea of which levels will actually make it into the pack. We go through the process of swapping, moving, and replacing all levels in Draft 1 until we have Draft 2, which will be much closer to what the pack will actually end up looking like.

(4) Play through Draft 2 as if it's the completed pack, making note of how well the levels flow from one to another, etc. to get Draft 3, which would likely be a release candidate by that point.

All that's happened is, Proxima doesn't think step (1) is necessary and so we're starting from step (2). And that's fine, level selection was delegated to him for a reason and I'm happy to support the approach he wants to take - he has my full confidence.

The only difference it will actually make is to step (3). I imagine that it might it take a bit longer or be slightly more difficult if we don't already have a working list at that point. Then again, it might not. I could be wrong. It's natural for me to want to refer to a method has repeatedly worked for my own projects when suggesting how to go about this particular project - but, of course, I'm always happy to try new ways of doing things!

Anyway - by now, I'm explaining this only because I dislike misunderstandings. I haven't suggested rushing anything; on the contrary, my suggestion was that we add an extra step, which would actually slow the process down initially, but (maybe) make a later part of the process quicker and easier.

Think of it like this: when you take your washing out of the dryer, do you first sort everything into piles by clothing type (shirts, t-shirts, pants, socks, etc) or do you sort through the whole pile one item at a time? Is that first step necessary? I'd argue it is. It makes it much easier to see what you're dealing with, makes the total task feel less daunting, and increases the chances that the task will get completed by > 0%

---

Again, bottom line: I'm no longer making the case for my suggested approach at this point. We've already decided to do it Proxima's way and that's absolutely fine by me. Happy to leave it there and move on

Quote from: roltemurto on April 14, 2026, 09:44:07 AMCongratulations on the 3.1 Update!!!
Personally I think it's a work of art!
...
May life put a smile on your face. Have a wonderful day!

Thank you for you kind words of appreciation. They are a rare currency in this day and age, I shall treasure them

Quote from: kaywhyn on April 15, 2026, 12:34:53 AMthe problem was with you suggesting it be done quickly, which Proxima and I think isn't the approach to take with this. There's a lot of levels to scrutinize here, and that will take a lot of time in general.

There has definitely been a misunderstanding about what I mean by 'first draft'. Essentially, what yourself and Proxima want to do is skip what I'm calling the 'first draft' and go straight to sorting through the levels.

And that's totally fine, as I said previously I support whatever approach Proxima wants to take. If it doesn't help you guys to have a 'working playlist' (which is probably a better descriptor for what I'm referring to than 'first draft'), that's not a problem. Do what works best for you.

Anyways, take all the time you need with sorting through the levels. You're right, it's important not to rush that particular part of the project.