Guigui, thanks for the feedback!

Yeah, execution with our suboptimal way was still bearable enough that we nailed it after a few tries. I assume that, had we not solved it like that, we would have tried things similar to your spoiler.

---

The next stream will be Sunday, June 21, starting 13:00 UTC (= 15:00 CEST). https://www.twitch.tv/simonnaar

The levels yet unsolved are 1 by Giga (Palace of Ice), 3 by kaywhyn, and 6 by Dexter. Guigui backroute-fixed his So Many Spikes, we'll see if we have time to return to that.

-- Simon

Your examples have fixed saturation boundaries of 999 or 1, and that is common indeed. For the dynamic boundaries, I haven't found other examples within the year.

I'll see if I ever the dynamic boundary for something. It fails to conserve physical energy, which grows quadratically, i.e., speed of 2 + speed of 2 = speed of sqrt(8) = speed of 2.82842... And it doesn't compensate with over-the-top cartoon physics, unlike Lix's current plain addition. But saturated addition is probably reasonable nonetheless. You shouldn't stack 3 steam blowers, it's hard to see the stacking anyway.

---

Link dump: daniel.games, tips for board game designers by designer Daniel Piechnick. Many things apply to video game design equally well. Such as these chapters:

Chapter 3 on the Depth-Complexity ratio:

QuoteThink of complexity as a kind of money you can spend. When you spend it, you want to add as much good stuff to your game as possible. Also, you want to "sell" (remove) parts of your game that are complex, but don't add much to the game. That complexity can then be re-spent elsewhere, to add something that adds great gameplay.

Yes! Cut cut cut, and then you can fill the void with something better and smaller.

The wording with "sell" is wonderful.

Chapter 82 on Terminology:

QuoteIf anyone is failing to understand something [in your game], it's your problem.

Happy Simon indeed. Yes, you must make your users guess right. When users have a problem with X and come to you, it's not enough to tell them how X works by describing it in the report/chat/forum. You must redesign X, or replace it.

As I still joke: "Design" comes from "de" and "sign", i.e., it's the removal of signs. When you don't have to explain something, it's well de-signed.

Mobius asked in Twitch chat: What does the red cursor mean in NeoLemmix CE? I told him: Please guess, this is user testing for WillLem. Mobius guessed: I don't know at all, maybe it's that we are in replay mode. I said: Yes, you are correct, but we should tell WillLem that you felt unsure.

QuoteDo not cater to rules pedants, by adding extra text to your cards to make them exactly accurate. Cater to the 99% of reasonable people.

On this, I disagree. Okay, you can't make everything 100 % rock-solid, but you want to make stuff more solid than he makes it sound. He also overestimates (he says 99 %) how many players will enjoy ambiguity.

It's especially important with the kind of cards of his paragraph's concern: Cards that you hold in your hand, hidden from other players, until you decide to use them. You must understand what your cards do, and you can't ask the other players because the information (that you hold this card) is supposed to remain hidden.

Many board games suffer from this. The only reasonable antidote that I found: Memorize the entire deck of bullshit cards by heart. Then harvest and memorize all the information on the internet about relevant corner case rulings and interaction technicalities. Extra fun is due when your game got reprinted 3 times, each with subtle wording changes because the publisher didn't notice the ambiguity and confused it more. Then have the right judgment about when and how much to explain this to other players (who will certainly not have done this) before/during play, so that it doesn't feel ad-hoc.

-- Simon

Quote from: GigaLem on June 14, 2026, 10:36:56 AMMy main issue with this era is how, hard it is to play it now through legitimate means. I bought a PS Vita myself last year just to finally play Lemmings Touch. It's never given enough of a push especially in lemmings touch's case to make enough of an impact to make the series have more support on current gen consoles, let alone being on a platform that not everyone is willing to own. Because I like a lot of things about this era, I like how it looks, I like the designs of the Lemmings, but because of how neglected the IP became, most of its entries became abandonware. Would I love to see a third party take the original games and put it on other consoles? yes! if the series was allowed to exist multiplatform like it used to, then yes. But because it isn't, its gonna be the one series that you can only play through emulation unless you have the physical copy and hardware to play it on.

Even as someone who grew up on DOS Lemmings, I like the way this era looked, but it needed more than just what it had.

That's a very good idea! Sony should just re-release the original 1991 Lemmings along with ''Oh No'' and the Christmas Holiday expansion packs and put them in one nice collection much like what Sega did with ''Sonic Origins'' and dare I say it? ''Mortal Kombat Legacy Kollection'' and they could also include all the different ports of Lemmings to make it one massive collection, as long as they don't screw up the emulation like what Digital Eclipse did to MK Legacy Kollection and what Sega also did with Origins by making only half the game a physical release and the other a redeemer code downloadable digital game. The whole collection has to be physical and digital to cater to all audiences.

I hope that you enjoy the new update.
* All levels have titles
* All levels have new ID numbers.

Again happy 30th Birthday Colorful Arty!!!

Quote from: WillLem on June 15, 2026, 03:24:30 AM'Previous' and 'Next' rather than << arrows >>

Neither says of what it will be the previous/next. You can print the filename next to these buttons. Or you can caption the buttons with "Level <<" or "Previous Level" or similar.

Quote from: WillLem on June 15, 2026, 03:24:30 AMactually mean 'Previous' and 'Next' as per their intended positions in the level pack, the level files should be named in such a way that their order is correct within the folder itself (which is good practice anyway IMHO).

With this implementation, there are now three meanings of "next level" in the NL ecosystem:

• Next filename by lexicographical order, presumably wrapping back to first in same directory
• Next level by level-ordering file, wrapping back to first in same directory
• Next level by level-ordering file, proceeding to first level in the next directory

The discrepancy between #2 and #3 appears in the NL game application: Left/right arrow keys on preview screen do #2, and the next-level button on the after-play results screen does #3. It's not in the editor. I should file that as a separate issue. This discrepancy has annoyed me a few times and I had to open the level selector that shows the entire level tree.

The concern for the editor: Do you really want a third way #1? Which of #2 and #3 makes more sense?

-- Simon

Excellent job. Simplicity is best way to perform any task. Just the file name will do.
Do whatever convenient for you.
I am looking forward to use the editor with the modified version ASAP.
Thanks again.

OK, got the filename displayed and added working Previous/Next buttons.

The buttons wrap around when the first and last file in the folder are reached. Note that if you want the buttons to actually mean 'Previous' and 'Next' as per their intended positions in the level pack, the level files should be named in such a way that their order is correct within the folder itself (which is good practice anyway IMHO).

One question is where to put the buttons. The position shown in the screenshot in the OP is already taken by the status bar. I suggest that we put them at the top right, just underneath the _ [] X buttons. This keeps them always accessible without interfering with any other controls:



If desired, we can also label them with 'Previous' and 'Next' rather than << arrows >>. I've tested these for a little while and they're so useful, it's surprising that this hasn't been suggested before.

Another question is: do we want to display the full file path, or just the name of the level file?

Paint and Background objects added to 'ignore these when rendering' if Disable Backgrounds is active.

Implemented in NLCEPlayer commit e931353.

Option bool flipped from 'Disable Backgrounds' to an opt-in 'Show Backgrounds and Decorations'.

Implemented in NLCEPlayer commit 2727cf2.

The 12.14 new objects were considered for inclusion in SuperLemmix, and the following was decided:

Skill Assigner - This has been added, and is capable of assigning other skills as well as the permaskill set - namely Jumper, Ballooner, Blocker, Walker, Grenader, Laserer, Spearer and Cloner. Other skills were considered as well, but it doesn't really make sense for a static skill assigner to assign Bashers, Builders, etc. because the lemming makes changes to the surrounding terrain immediately (Laserer is a bit of an odd case but was ultimately accepted because well, why not).

Skill De-Assigner - It was decided not to include this in SuperLemmix as it adds unnecessary complexity to the skill mechanics, which is something I'd prefer to avoid. If enough users want it in, we can possibly add it at a later date.

De-Neutralizer - This has been added as 'Normalizer' and is identical to its NL counterpart; SuperLemmix will treat a designated 'De-Neutralizer' object as a 'Normalizer' accordingly.

Neutralizer - It was decided not to include this for reasons similar to the Skill De-Assigner. A Neutralizer is something of a 'soft trap' - it doesn't remove the lemming altogether, but is still best avoided; the complexity it adds isn't worth the relatively small feature gain. Again though, if enough users want to see it in SuperLemmix, we can possibly look at adding it at a later date.

Discussion is welcome, I can generally be persuaded. Input from users is likely to result in change. Silence is not.