More thoughts on rank names in a bit  Firstly, here's the spreadsheet updated with all levels from RotL version 2. (The current RL version is based on this, but there are slight differences; I'll check with WillLem to see whether these are actual differences in level selection, or just levels being retitled.)

I've done my best to indicate exactly which levels are common to the two versions -- this task is complicated by some levels being retitled, and sometimes being given a title that belongs to a different level in the other version!

In any case, here are the important statistics:

Version 4 has 240 levels, 127 unique and 113 in common with version 2.
Version 2 has 210 levels, 97 unique.
Therefore, in total there are 337 levels between these two versions.
(We can regard the 113 shared levels as the core of the pack; all these will be kept unless there is a really strong reason for dropping any of them.)

The levels unique to version 2 mostly fall into two categories: easy repeats of later levels; and levels by Martin Zurlinden, Clam Spammer and Insane Steve (which were removed from version 4 because these levels are available in MazuLems, Clammings and Insane Steve's World in NeoLemmix). I think WillLem is leaning towards leaving these levels out; certainly, if we want to reduce the pack to two packs of 120 each, 337 levels is a lot to work from, and cutting these out makes the task easier!

Quote from: Proxima on March 31, 2026, 07:47:47 AMPack 1: Picnic, Hootenanny, Riot, Carnage

This works well to continue the "social gathering" theme, nice.

Quote from: Proxima on March 31, 2026, 07:47:47 AMPack 2: ?, Pain, Frenzy, Armageddon

This group I'm less sure about. There doesn't appear to be a common theme between them.

'Frenzy' and 'Armaggedon' could work well together I suppose, I'd suggest 'Calm' and 'Ruckus' as leading ratings for these.

So: Calm / Ruckus / Frenzy / Armaggeddon

Side note: 'Frenzy' and 'Carnage' are interchangeable here IMO. We could have:

Picnic / Hootenanny / Riot / Frenzy

and:

Calm / Ruckus / Carnage / Armaggeddon

But honestly, the other orderings work just as well.

Quote from: Proxima on March 31, 2026, 07:47:47 AMPack 3: Kind, Devious, Menacing, Absurd

'Absurd' definitely doesn't fit here. The leading theme appears to be "character traits", which is why I went with 'Cunning' between 'Kind' and 'Devious'.

Honestly, I think my original suggestion is better here:

Kind / Cunning / Devious / Menacing

If you don't like 'Menacing' as a final rating, here are some other suggestions:

Relentless
Intense
Savage
Brutal

All of these fit with the "character traits" theme.

I've attached a spreadsheet with the titles, authors and styles of all 240 levels in the latest NeoLemmix version. Next, I'm going to go through the level list (which WillLem has provided) for the RL version and compare the two, so that we know how many levels we have in total; that will help when it comes to time to start the selection process.

Since we want to keep the NL and RL versions synchronised, I've highlighted levels that use styles that don't exist (currently) in RL. Fortunately, there are only seven of these: three in L2 Circus, one in L2 Medieval, one in Persia and two (a repeat pair) in Minesweeper. (At some point there was discussion about having one "special graphics" level per rank and treating the Persia and Minesweeper levels as this, but that never got off the ground. Of course, we can still keep these levels even if we don't have others.)

I know we haven't absolutely decided on 3 packs x 4 ranks yet, but I wanted to put down some thoughts on rank names before they leave my head. Firstly, an important resource: Akseli's list of rank names in other packs. We don't absolutely have to avoid duplication, but it's one factor to consider; we should definitely avoid duplicating a name already used twice, like "Breezy" or "Perplexing".

The existing RotL ranks have some individually good names, but they don't cohere all that well as a series: there's a mixture of nouns and adjectives, and no consistent theme; "Picnic" and "Hootenanny" start a "social gatherings" theme, which is then dropped. "Pain" coming after "Frenzy" feels the wrong way round.

I guess that the intention is for pack 2 to be overall harder than pack 1 but not to the extent of pack 1 containing the easiest 120 levels and pack 2 the hardest 120; so the difficulty order of the ranks might be 1A, 2A, 1B, 2B, 1C, 2C, 1D, 2D; the rank names should at least roughly reflect this (which means 2D should be "Armageddon").

Of WillLem's suggestions (above), "Kind" and "Clever" are non-duplicates.

My suggestions:

Pack 1: Picnic, Hootenanny, Riot, Carnage
Pack 2: ?, Pain, Frenzy, Armageddon
Pack 3: Kind, Devious, Menacing, Absurd

"?" obviously isn't a suggestion, it's a blank to fill in later    "Absurd" is inspired by WillLem's "Ridiculous", but changed to a synonym to avoid a duplicate.

Quote from: WillLem on March 31, 2026, 02:08:08 AMThanks for reporting this. I've prepared a test version with the suggested fix (see attached), although it uses "ToUpperInvariant()" and "ToLowerInvariant()" instead, as this is shorthand for the same thing.

Can you confirm that this indeed fixes the issue?

---

NOTE TO ALL: Please do not use the attached Editor for anything important as stability cannot be guaranteed. Thanks.

Dear WillLem,

Thank you so much for your rapid response and quick fix. I tried the exe and the fix indeed works as intended.   
To test it, I first opened a level with swimmers and used Save As. The saved copy did in fact carry the skillset forward and the spelling is now correct.
Then I edited the file, set the hatch object piece to spawn swimmers re-saved and that file is also saved correctly and both levels open correctly in the player.
You can count the infamous "Turkish I problem" as 'solved' for your release candidate.

I also set the level to spawn ten lemmings and added a lemmings object, setting it's skill to swimmer. As mentioned earlier even with the hatch being set to spawn swimmers and manually added a lemming, the Globals tab still shows "11 Normal" under the Lemmings spawn/release rate and save options. I am not sure if I am doing something wrong or if it's a bug I wanted to let you know about this as well.

Once again, I thank you so much on behalf of all the players who suffered from the "İ" problem, for fixing it.

Version 2.9.6 hotfix update

Stabilized replay auto-saving, and made some UI improvements.

Here's what's new:

Replay Autosaving

• Auto-saving has been refactored for stability. Previously, a bug occurred in which replays were sometimes not auto-saved if a replay had been manually opened during the session. This (amongst other things) has now been fixed, and auto-saving replays is now much more solid and maintainable.
• Improved default name string - pack titles are now also concatenated (as well as level titles and ratings) for replays, but not for the auto-save pack subfolder.

Unlocking Levels via Code

• Previous behaviour for unlocking a level via a code (the level remains unlocked in 'Choose Level' dialog for the current session, and reverts to being locked for subsequent sessions) has now been restored following the Player Records refactor.

Skill Panel

• RR buttons are now much more responsive, and repeats kick in sooner when holding the buttons.
• Dragging the cursor between -/+ RR now produces continuous RR updates (modelled on the Amiga skill panel!).

Styles

• Red and green gems in 'sugar' are now a touch darker and more like rubies/emeralds.

Editor

• RL Editor version 1.5 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.

Version 1.5 hotfix

A small update this time.

Bugfix/UI

• When typing a level title, if the limit of 32 is exceeded, the title is shown in red as a warning (but still allowed).

---

Download the latest version of the RetroLemmini Editor.

Thanks for reporting this. I've prepared a test version with the suggested fix (see attached), although it uses "ToUpperInvariant()" and "ToLowerInvariant()" instead, as this is shorthand for the same thing.

Can you confirm that this indeed fixes the issue?

---

EDIT: Attachment removed.

Quote from: Proxima on March 30, 2026, 11:04:52 PM* Avoiding miles-out-of-place howlers like "Crossing Paths" being in the first rank
* Keeping the focus either on NeoLemmix, or on NL and RL equally
* Working together on level selection so we can come up with a final version we're all satisfied with, and we won't have to have the same discussion and yet another version five years down the line 

Agreed on all points. I think it probably makes sense to keep the focus on NL (since that's the most popular engine), and then cross-port the resulting pack to RL.

As for porting to RL, the process will be generally this:

1) Is the level playable in RL without changing anything? If yes, add it. If no, move to (2)
2) Is the level playable in RL by making a small change to the level layout or release rate? If yes, make the change and add it. If no, move to (3)
3) Is the level playable in RL by making a small change to the skillset, lem count, or time limit? If yes, make the change and add it. If no, move to (4)
4) Is the level playable in RL by making a large change to anything? If yes, make the change and add it. If no, move to (5)
5) Find a suitable replacement level in the reserve pool and add it

It should be understood that replacement levels would be added at the same listing slot as the level being replaced, in order to preserve the ordering.

Quote from: WillLem on March 30, 2026, 10:33:45 PMThe thing I feel strongest about is the amount of levels, the pack titles, the music (there's currently way too much), and the overall presentation.

Good to know, and fortunately I agree with the proposed pack titles, number of levels, and about the music.

As for me, the things I feel most strongly about are:
* Avoiding miles-out-of-place howlers like "Crossing Paths" being in the first rank
* Keeping the focus either on NeoLemmix, or on NL and RL equally
* Working together on level selection so we can come up with a final version we're all satisfied with, and we won't have to have the same discussion and yet another version five years down the line