In the original contest #3 it was randomly selected by the host, from among the people who entered, so everyone who submitted terrain for a level was implicitly marking themselves available for receiving someone else's terrain to complete.

As I said, though, another contest using the same general idea doesn't necessarily have to do exactly the same thing; it's up to the new host to decide on the rules.

I think the collab idea based on contest #3 is a great idea too, I never got a chance to participate in the original one but Wafflem did and he liked the format I believe.

Myself and Wafflem have made many levels using the Contest #3 format and it is such a good system for making levels that we have made 2 level packs based on the format (MegSEBytes and MegSEGAbytes). I'd be up for entering the contest but I'd need a new user to buddy up with as Wafflem won't be available, or is it random who we work with on the contest?

Quote from: WillLem on September 27, 2026, 07:18:07 PMInteresting. What would a 'collab contest' constitute?

Well, it would be similar to how it played out in the original contest. Each person designs the main bulk of the terrain following specific rules. Then another person later on in the contest is given the level to place the objects and decide on the solution with allowance on minor edits to the terrain. You can choose to nominate someone to be the collaborator and if they agree than they are the ones to pick up your part of the level or if you prefer the collaborator to be a surprise, you could tell the host to choose someone for you based on who asked to help finish levels.

Basically someone could send their levels to the host and nominate which people for each level they want to give their levels to then the host sends a message to those people they chose to finish their levels then...

If they agree: Then they create the rest of the level.
If they decline or don't respond: Then the host messages the person who sent the levels in stating that they couldn't get that person onboard with the collaboration and will request a substitute or whether to have that level placed into a community folder where other people request for them to finish said level for you on a first come, first serve basis.

That one idea I have. I'm open for other ideas for the format.

Contest 3 had a "tag team" format where each contestant would build the terrain for one level, then levels would be shuffled at random and each contestant would receive terrain built by someone else to turn into a finished level by adding objects and deciding on stats and skillsets.

Of course, a collaborative contest is a broad idea and doesn't need to follow the previous format exactly.

I am open for a possible collab contest like contest#3.

Maybe as a special round or a seperate contest from the regular one so that the normal prize does not get lost.

Quote from: Kingshadow on September 27, 2026, 07:16:21 PMI've had thoughts of considering whether to push to bring in collab contests like Contest #3 used to be

Interesting. What would a 'collab contest' constitute?

Quote from: IchoTolot on September 27, 2026, 06:48:17 PMYou can host your own contest if you want, but I would suggest you try and enter one first. 

That way you can experience what is needed to host one before. My first tipp would be that level creation takes time, so contestants need a longer timeframe to enter.
Also if you would start one right now you would run a contest parallel to this one which might result in next to no entries.

So as you are creating new levels right now anyway - try to make one that satisfies one of the rules here and submit it as described above in the first post! 

I've had thoughts of considering whether to push to bring in collab contests like Contest #3 used to be (So I've heard). That is whether I attempt to host the collab contests myself or somebody else decides to do so instead. Collab contests are completely different beasts entirely so it probably would require a good amount of planning beforehand as well as longer timeframes for the creation phases compared to regular contests as it would require communication between two people for the level creation process. 

Level Search now filters by Author as well as title.

Implemented in NLCEPlayer commit 47bfebf.

Also, the search results remain open until the user hits 'Close' on the search results panel. This is so that the results can be browsed without having to repeat the same search.

Implemented in NLCEPlayer commit 9000c81.

Filtering by style is also something I'd very much like to add, but would require a slight refactoring of what level info gets stored in the level object itself, as well as adding significant time to the initial search.

Armani - if you're happy to send me a link to your source, I'd be interested to see how you resolve these particular concerns.

Quoteso i feel like i wanna host one of these...

but how do i do it?

You can host your own contest if you want, but I would suggest you try and enter one first. 

That way you can experience what is needed to host one before. My first tipp would be that level creation takes time, so contestants need a longer timeframe to enter.
Also if you would start one right now you would run a contest parallel to this one which might result in next to no entries.

So as you are creating new levels right now anyway - try to make one that satisfies one of the rules here and submit it as described above in the first post! 

Made some progress on this in SuperLemmix (if successful, the code can be ported over).

We can add a small talisman button to the skill panel just to the right of the replay 'R'. This can be clicked multiple times to cycle through the level's talismans. If the talisman is not yet obtained, display the usual '?' version of the icon, otherwise display the full-color 'solved' version.

As the talismans cycle through, the requirements can be displayed in the panel in the following ways:

Save requirement - Show the talisman save requirement in blue, change the 'available' count to red early if too many lems have been lost and the talisman can no longer be obtained

Time limit - Show the talisman time limit in yellow (or blue for consistency with save requirement, and to differentiate between a normal time limit and a talisman time limit)

Skill limits - Individual skill limits can be displayed by changing the displayed 'available' count to the talisman limit (the actual quota for that skill would of course remain unchanged). We can hue-shift it to green if within the limit, and to red if the limit is passed (and therefore the talisman is failed)

Skill type limits - This requires a bit more UI than the others. We can print a simple purple square with the type limit displayed within. As skills are used, we highlight them with a purple rectangle. Once the type limit is passed, we display the type limit in red and change to red highlights

That's it for now. Here's an example of how the above looks:



Before anyone complains about using text color to show talisman requirements: we can also hue-shift the icons for further clarity, and to avoid asset clash: