Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - namida

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 846
Lemmings Main / Re: Xmas 1991, Xmas 1992, HL 1993, HL 1994.
« on: June 07, 2023, 10:50:16 PM »
We have the "Skills You Can't Live Without" challenge, although take note that this is simply the skills that must be used no matter what solution you use, not a complete set that the level can be solved with these and nothing else. (ie: if a level can be solved with 1 Builder + 1 Basher, or 1 Builder + 1 Miner, then the SYCLW result would just be "1 builder", as you can avoid the basher or the miner by using the other one instead, but you can't avoid the builder no matter what you do).

There's also fewest skills challenge, but this is purely about a quantity of skills, not specifically which ones.

The other thing to keep in mind is both of these lists include results that require glitches to achieve.

It sounds like what you're after is basically just a more restrictive skillset for each level, akin to the repeat versions of levels in L1. There isn't really a single "right" answer to any of these - taking Tricky 1 as an example, one person may suggest 2 bombers 2 builders 1 basher with a lose-2 save requirement; another might suggest 10 builders (and nothing else) with 100% required, and there's plenty more possibilities too.

NeoLemmix Main / Re: Join development team
« on: June 02, 2023, 03:44:09 AM »
There's no "fix" because this is not a bug; it's the intended behavior.

Lemmings Main / Re: New idea?
« on: May 31, 2023, 09:48:18 PM »
Regarding the bomber - ask yourself if this is meant to be focusing on puzzle solving, or action. In the case of the former, bombers should not be timed. It's more debatable in the latter case, if you're going for a more action-focused game. Flinging could very well follow similar logic - although the fling adds different puzzle possibilities, depending on the implementation it could end up very fiddly.

SuperLemmix / Re: [SUG] Level top and sides
« on: May 14, 2023, 11:55:18 PM »
On the Amiga, the left and right sides are both solid. I wonder whether that's why the level designers made the levels with loads of space either side; it's possible that there wasn't a way to make the sides deadly, or maybe it was buggy to do so, so they opted instead to just place the level stuff in the centre so that the edges would never be reachable (effectively making the sides deadly)?

On DOS (and presumably Mac), the right side of the level gets cut off by 16px compared to Amiga - resulting in levels being 1584px wide on DOS but 1600px on Amiga. Perhaps the physics still expects the right boundary at 1600, but the pixels beyond 1584 become non-solid? This is purely guessing, though.

I also vaguely recall the sides acting solid for a walker but deadly for a climber in some port. I don't think DOS has this behavior; possibly Master System?

SuperLemmix / Re: [BUG] Blockers don't work on One-Way Fields
« on: May 06, 2023, 02:21:18 AM »
One or the other has to take priority in this case. Which one it is, is not going to be changed at this point.

Lemmini / Re: The Future of Lemmini - Java developers wanted!
« on: April 30, 2023, 04:55:09 AM »

NeoLemmix Main / Re: Question about hires physics in NeoLemmix
« on: April 22, 2023, 05:06:49 AM »
Even in low res, two seperate bitmaps are used. Only the visual bitmap is ever high-res; the physics one is always low-res. There are no physics differences between the modes, it's purely visual.

The lemming's foot position works the same way it does in Lemmix; ie: it is one pixel inside the terrain.

Trigger areas work somewhat like Lemmix, but with more than one trigger area map (for different kinds of objects). There's no restriction to 4x4 regions; they can be any size / position.

NeoLemmix Styles / Re: Style updates topic
« on: April 16, 2023, 12:43:40 AM »
Updated style manager and all-styles zip to here.

NeoLemmix Main / NeoLemmix will reintroduce timed bombers.
« on: April 01, 2023, 09:33:57 AM »
Well, timed bombers have been a constant request from new players in particular. Even some experienced players have occasionally had a very strong desire for them.

Bomber timing was removed from NeoLemmix because all it does is add execution difficulty that becomes almost meaningless in the face of NeoLemmix's framestepping and other advanced features. The bomber is actually a very versatile skill when the ability to use it precisely is there, but bomber timing made this very frustrating in practice.

However, NeoLemmix has indeed changed even further since then. In particular, we now have skill shadows, which would serve as an alternative means of assisting precise bombing. In light of this, I feel timed bombers could be reintroduced.

I know this will cause issues for existing content that relies on bombers in the first 5 seconds; this will break some of my levels too. But like many physics changes before, content will be able to adapt to this.

I guess it really came to this because the frequent requests, and the existence of a fork that originated with a goal of reading timed bombers, makes it clear. When it comes to timed bombers, there are people who are quite simply never gonna give it up, never gonna let it down, never gonna run around and desert it, never gonna make it cry, never gonna say goodbye, never gonna tell a lie and hurt it. April fools, y'all. Nothing is changing.

I would suggest checking the state of the Classic Mode checkbox rather than of the actual setting. This is because (at least if it was implemented the same way as the other options) the setting isn't actually changed until the options menu is closed. This way, you could call the same function when the checkbox is clicked, rather than duplicating the code.

If I remember correctly, you implemented this so that it disables the checkboxes when Classic Mode is turned on. If the config menu is opened with Classic Mode already turned on, this code would likely not trigger (though it depends exactly how the code is written).

The best way to handle this might be to create a procedure "SetCheckboxesEnabledByClassicMode" which sets the enabled / checked values of checkboxes as applicable based on the Classic Mode setting (or on a boolean value passed to it, either way works), and call this in any situation where the checkboxes' states need to be set - so, when the form is first shown, and when the Classic Mode setting is changed.

Fixed in commit 46f7128.

It broke the pause after backwards skip because of the lack of begin / end around the lines you wanted to group together.

Commit 9249ee0 fixes the bug in NeoLemmix. It doesn't touch GameWindow at all; rather, it fixes it in GameBaseSkillPanel via a slight change to how the selector is drawn (in particular, it erases the selector always before drawing it). This means other code can simply continue saying "I want this selector on" or "I want this selector off", without worrying about if it's already on or off.

The countdown is not a state. It's a seperate property. When the countdown reaches zero, they transition to baExploding or baStoning as appropriate (a seperate flag is used to determine which). Until then, they remain in baWalking or whatever else.

It's important to note that not all skill assignments immediately translate into the associated state. For example, assigning baClimbing simply turns on the "is a climber" flag, it doesn't change the lemming's current actions. Some may do so only conditionally, eg. baSwimming assignment changes the state immediately for a drowner, but not for any other lemming.

You could also just check if the lemming's countdown timer is nonzero, rather than a special state. This would also prevent assignment of a timebomber to a lemming who is counting down due to the nuke (but still allow it for one the nuke has not yet reached).

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 846