I'm just in the middle of downloading all the styles for 12.6.1. It's too loooong. I wonder if it's possible to reduce the size and thus, the length of the download. One possibility maybe is to only include the official graphic sets, and put all the custom ones in a separate thread.

I think we are past the point where the original ones are enough. Seperate downloads will only result in the reappearance of posts and topics of the type: "I am getting this error that this file is missing". And we link the full styles download.

If NL can fetch missing styles automatically from the site in-game when it notices missing ones then I would consider this a good option. How long does the download take for you btw? I just tested it and it is <10 secs for me.

I think the V12.6.0 queued idea has potential. So for example, if your lemming is building a long stair and you have 5 builders, assign the builder five times to the lemming quickly and fast forward a couple of times, voila! Your long stair is completed!

Yes, in game it makes sense, but that is not discussed here. Skill queueing like in Lix is a desired feature that I am totally 100% in for! (I think this is already brought up in the feature wish list as well.)

We are talking about not queueing invalid skill assignments in replays here. Invalid skill assignments that were not wanted before and that are now distrupting solving replays. This has nothing to do with queueing 5 builders for easy stairs in game. In fact queueing skills for a few frames in game is already implemented for quite a while in NL now.

For the duplicated case you still must manually edit the file to do that. So it's a corner case. Back then I did not forsee this result when not only it but every invalid assignment gets queued.

To be consistent I would argue for discarding the second assignment in this specific case as well, as it is by double-assigment rule invalid. So simply ALL invalid assignments in replays get discarded.

Well, that's not what I meant. I am referring to already existent replays that cointain "dead" skill assignments that now get reawakened as zombies if that's a good comparison.

Let's say you assign a builder at frame 20 to a Lemming. The replay solves the level. At some point the level gets changed so that the builder in the replay cannot be assigned, but is still present inside the file as an invalid skill assignment. The replay is altered to solve the new version of the level and the not assignable skill is still in it. Now in the new version they get queued and become active again, breaking the replay. I had quite a bunch of replays in each pack get broken because random skill assignments to wrong Lemmings appeared out of nowhere.

I would propose to let the sleepers rest again. Replays normally solve levels and and this change brings unwanted skill assignments back again. They were invalid for a reason. I would rather argue for deleting invalid assignments.

I'm not sure where this fits in, if anywhere, but I do think the "Wild 15 Glitch" (digger changes direction if another lemming nearby is made a blocker, even though said blocker is instantly released) needs to be introduced somehow, because the lack of initial visual feedback and its niche use make it easily overlooked by someone not in the know.

It definitely can in the last rank where some basic level solving skills and essential tricks are introduced. I would consider the "digger-blocker combination" easy enough to understand for new players and of essential level solving knowledge, as it is used quite regulary.

In general, with tricks there is a line to draw here. An introduction pack should, out of the near endless ammount of tricks, only introduce easy ones that are of essential level solving knowledge (like digger holding pits for example).

Just a little post to bump this topic as I put the finishing touches on my 2nd entry.

@namida: Yes, you got the new intended solution.

@Armani: First of all, welcome to the forum!

Your solutions are all intended or just very slight alternatives. Great job!

I've added the things you listed. Also I plan to introduce a few basic mechanics in rank 4 as well, like the ones you mentioned, I've added them to the list as well.

Now let's talk about structure. Do you envisage a separate level for each skill, object and function? I'm very wary of that, since it sounds like you would have forty-two trivial levels before we even reach the "beginner puzzles". The pack needs to introduce everything clearly, for sure, but it should also be fun to play -- otherwise new players probably won't get all the way through it.

You are right that this may be overkill, but I also want the introduction as easy as possible. As I result, I should start with a few seperate introductions and then move on to some double introductions (like floaters+gliders for example). This middle way should cull the level number by a bit.

Also, you introduce fast forward in rank 3, but a majority of levels are more pleasant to play when the player knows about FF, so that they can speed through the rest of the level as soon as the route is complete. (When I was a kid, my sister and I always enjoyed watching the crowd walk to the exit and cheering them on -- but NL isn't aimed at kids.) Similar remarks apply to most control features. I would, at the very least, drop the "control features" rank and decide where to introduce these features in the natural play of rank 1 (e.g. directional select can be introduced with one of the skills it's frequently used with, probably builders). Some levels can introduce more than one skill. At a rough guess, I would say the full introduction of all NL features could be done in around 20 levels, and would be much the better for it.

I was unsure about FF. I think it should be introduced still. I planned to make the skill introduction levels not much larger than 1 screeners so that FF would not be essential. But I could at least mention FF earlier.
For the rest, I think here comes the combination idea into play again: I could drop the rank entirely and combine them with rank 4 so they give some trivial puzzels more meaning. I think it would be better if I rename rank to theme for my list and only later form rank groupings.

I am still highly in favor of keeping skills mostly seperated from other themes as the core element should be introduced as clearly as possible without distractions. Combining skill inroductions though should be alright.