I'm going to keep the Lix Levels as a backup/bonus incentive, sorry for not including them directly

Okay, I've submitted the Showcase. Here's the announcement video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8ImSdL-oGA
and here are the three parts:

Part 1: Mayhem https://youtu.be/dzBPmVkd83A
Part 2: Vanilla https://youtu.be/I6quaYio47o
Part 3: Speedrun https://youtu.be/usUrlFYFs7w

If you see anything that needs fact-checked or corrected, please let me know. Big thanks to everyone who participated

Quote from: Proxima on July 14, 2026, 11:39:52 PMThe proposal at the bottom of your post doesn't include the pack name (unless you are proposing that the "Position" line should include this).

Sure, we can look at adding the pack name in if people think this is a good idea. Although, as with not needing to display the Author's name every time if it's the same, perhaps displaying the pack name every time is equally redundant (if not more so, because the pack name definitely won't change per-level, whereas the Author name might)?

Quote from: Proxima on July 14, 2026, 11:39:52 PMThe obvious solution is to structure the "Position" line as [pack]: [rank] [number].

We want to aim to avoid colons wherever possible. We've just removed one from the Author line, let's not now add one to the Position line.

Quote from: Proxima on July 14, 2026, 11:39:52 PM(Possible solution: read the full tree and structure the line as [top-level folder]: [sub-folder]: [rank] [number], and allow this to go over two lines if necessary.)

I agree that we need some elegant way of dealing with long pack/group names, but we should probably aim to keep it to a single line if possible. I suggest we either simply omit displaying the pack name if it would take this line over a certain number of characters, or display the pack name on its own line.

Again, though, since the pack name remains the same, do we need to keep displaying it (this isn't a rhetorical question btw; perhaps we do!)?

Quote from: Proxima on July 14, 2026, 11:39:52 PMWhen a pack is single-author, the author's name doesn't need to be displayed on every preview page. The author can add their name on every level if they want, of course, but if they choose not to, the engine should not force them to.

Agreed, we don't always need to display the Author name. If it's blank or Anonymous, then, let's not print it.

Quote from: Proxima on July 14, 2026, 11:39:52 PM

QuoteIncidentally, the latest NL Editor automatically populates the 'Author' field with the username from NeoLemmix/CE's settings. However, it's likely that not everybody will have the latest Editor.

No. If you want this to be a thing, take the username from NLEditorSettings; then for people who don't want it, it is obvious how to disable it.

Actually, I misremembered this. It was originally implemented using the Game's settings, but I later added a field to the Editor's settings, which can be easily edited from within the Editor's UI, and left blank if the user doesn't want to automatically populate the Author field. So, it's already exactly as you've suggested.

I've corrected my post above.

Quote from: Proxima on July 14, 2026, 11:39:52 PM[Release Rate] was removed by group consensus after discussion, so you shouldn't have put it back of your own accord without discussion.

And the reason for removing it is clear: it's clutter, and it doesn't give the player any meaningful information while still on the preview screen

Here we simply disagree. I like to be able to see what the RR for the level is from the Preview screen, and I don't think it adds unnecessary visual noise. We can quieten it using different line colours, as suggested above.

Regarding putting it back in - I'd honestly prefer to re-open this discussion if it does need to be had. NeoLemmix development was very cull-happy at one point, and I don't think that those of us who wanted certain aspects of the game to be preserved had a strong enough voice at the time.

FWIW, had I been part of that discussion, I would have been strongly against culling Release Rate from the Preview screen, especially for the weak reason that it's "clutter". The Preview screen is a relatively quiet place compared to a lot of in-game UIs nowadays; if anything, I think that more information should be displayed there.

However, for the sake of keeping things simple, I wouldn't suggest adding more than is necessary at this point.

Quote from: Proxima on July 14, 2026, 11:39:52 PMThe release rate becomes helpful when the level is opened and the player can begin to strategise.

Well, to some extent, the player doesn't need to know any specifics until they're actually playing the level. From that point of view, the Preview screen only really needs to display the title and a preview image, if anything at all.

As I see it, the main 2 reasons that any information about the level's properties is displayed on the Preview screen is to (a) give the player an idea of what the level will present to them before they start playing and (b) (perhaps more importantly) provide the player a moment to orient themselves after completing the previous level. With a game like Lemmings where every level can be very different and very challenging, this respite between levels is vital.

More power, then, to the Preview screen and all of the information it can possibly provide - regardless of whether the player actually needs any of it at that particular moment.

Quote from: Proxima on July 14, 2026, 11:39:52 PM

QuoteSave 14 of 67 Lemmings
4 Normal, 10 Neutral, 53 Zombie

Zombies can never be saved, so 4 normal + 10 neutral + 53 zombie should be displayed as "Save 14 of 14".

Agreed.

I'm unsure exactly how to display this information to be honest. If we were completely redesigning the Preview screen (not out of the question), I'd probably suggest that we use icons + digits (similar to the Level Select menu). Or, maybe it is better to explicitly write 'Neutral' and 'Zombie' to keep this as clear as possible.

Open to suggestions.

Little fix. That was my own error.   accidentally check my own solution.

Quotewhile level 16 is fully intended as I was informed.

So far level 16 was the hardest for me due to all the possible routes you can take here.

Yes your solution is not intented, but is sure accetable and impossible to patch so congrats about it.

Nice Job IchoTolot and Plodderuk.

IchoTolot succesfully completed Step 5 level 9 Fiery Cells. Plodderuk skip that level. IchoTolot route not are intention, its still genius and maybe impossible to patch. So congratulations about it. Its might very nice alternate route.

We are tested quite much levels at least Step 5. Level 3 Lethal Sidewalk was already totally broken. So new version will be very different looking level and contains also new tool sets (thanks Plodderuk tested my new version level). I did some serious hours work to fix that level. Its one harder level to make, because its allow backroutes nearly everywhere. Old tool sets used that was impossible level to fix. I think i´ll guess i goes right with this time. Plodderuk not are respond yet my newest version.

I took a brief look;

firstly; the graphics are amazing, great job on that. Music is great and fitting too. I almost get a Ori feel to it.

Unfortunately I'm totally confused; I can't even figure out how to make a fizzle do anything. Click on a skill doesn't do anything, I can highlight a fizzle but nothing else. How do you assign??

Here are my solutions for "Step 5 Level 15 Scorching Terminal" and "Step 5 Level 16 Gloomy Night". 

The level 15 solution is not 100% intentional, but still acceptable, while level 16 is fully intended as I was informed.

So far level 16 was the hardest for me due to all the possible routes you can take here.

Quote from: WillLem on July 14, 2026, 09:06:10 PM'Level by Author in Pack' makes more sense because we have several compilations available on the Forums, and many packs by singular authors feature the occasional collaboration level.

The proposal at the bottom of your post doesn't include the pack name (unless you are proposing that the "Position" line should include this).

In fact, I think we should at least consider including the pack name somehow; "Taxing 4" isn't very helpful when many packs have a rank named Taxing.

The obvious solution is to structure the "Position" line as [pack]: [rank] [number]. However, there are two issues: what happens when the pack or rank name is long, and what happens for packs with more complicated structures?

(Possible solution: read the full tree and structure the line as [top-level folder]: [sub-folder]: [rank] [number], and allow this to go over two lines if necessary.)

Quote

Quote from: Simon on July 13, 2026, 10:26:35 PMIf author is anonymous, you can hide the author line entirely

I'm about 50/50 on this. Printing 'Anonymous' is redundant, but it may indeed prompt an author to include their name.

I am not at all 50/50 on this. When a pack is single-author, the author's name doesn't need to be displayed on every preview page. The author can add their name on every level if they want, of course, but if they choose not to, the engine should not force them to. (If I were actively making levels at the moment, I would have complained about this very loudly before now.)

QuoteIncidentally, the latest NL Editor automatically populates the 'Author' field with the username from NeoLemmix/CE's settings. However, it's likely that not everybody will have the latest Editor.

No. If you want this to be a thing, take the username from NLEditorSettings; then for people who don't want it, it is obvious how to disable it.

Quote

Quote from: Simon on July 13, 2026, 10:26:35 PMRelease rate/spawn interval feels irrelevant. I'd ditch that entirely. I believe it's a leftover from Lemmings 1 because Lemmix replicated that screen and nobody had the guts yet to cut it.

Strongly disagree. It is in fact the exact opposite: it was removed from NeoLemmix and I had the guts to put it back in!

It was removed by group consensus after discussion, so you shouldn't have put it back of your own accord without discussion.

And the reason for removing it is clear: it's clutter, and it doesn't give the player any meaningful information while still on the preview screen, because they haven't seen the level yet, don't know what skills they have, where the lemmings start -- nothing except a vague impression of the shape of the level. The release rate becomes helpful when the level is opened and the player can begin to strategise. The preview screen also doesn't need to show whether the release rate is locked, because the player can see this as soon as they begin.

QuoteSave 14 of 67 Lemmings
4 Normal, 10 Neutral, 53 Zombie

Zombies can never be saved, so 4 normal + 10 neutral + 53 zombie should be displayed as "Save 14 of 14".

Existing implementation in NL-CE 1.1.2 is really three different modes, but only two are accessible during play, and you choose which two in the user options.

• Normal, red R:
  Air clicks cut the global future. Assignments cut the global future, then add the assignment. (The cutting of the global future will have removed any existing assignments on the same physics update as the new assignment. Therefore, this new assignment will never collide.)
  
  
• Insert, blue R, keep everything:
  Air clicks do nothing, they preserve all future. Assignments preserve all future, even the same lemming's future, and insert the assignment. If the assignment would be at the same physics update as an existing assignment, instead nothing happens, i.e., the replay will reject the new assignment.
  
  
• Insert, blue R, cut same lemming:
  Air clicks do nothing, they preserve all future. Assignments preserve other lemmings' futures. Assignments cut the same lemming's future, then insert. This can overwite a same-lemming same-physics-update assignment. If the assignment would be at the same physics update as an existing assignment to a different lemming, instead nothing happens, i.e., the replay will reject the new assignment.

You can switch between the red R and blue R during play.

You must change your user options to switch between the currently possible behaviors of the blue R, i.e., to switch between blue-R-keep-everything and blue-R-cut-same-lemming.

None of the blue R modes allow different-lemming overwriting. You must ditch that explicitly from the replay editor. That's good, because NL doesn't allow (as a physics rule) two assignments to two different lemmings at the same physics update. This prevents accidental deletion of different lemmings' futures.

I'll write a response to your suggestions these days.

-- Simon

This is the follow-up design to the successfully implemented [✓][SUG][PL] Insert Mode: Same-Lemming-Overwrite.

Quote from: Simon on June 14, 2026, 07:19:29 PMSeveral times, I wanted to cut during insert mode by air click. Neither option allows cutting by air click. I had to exit insert mode and cut.

I conjecture that ultimate truth will be found in merging regular replay mode with insert mode.

Quote from: WillLem on June 14, 2026, 10:47:26 PMYou're probably right, but let's start a new topic for this.

Quote from: Simon on June 21, 2026, 10:26:38 PMIn my stream today [June 19th, 2026, about the Level of the Year 2025 nominations], again I wanted to be in insert mode by default. I imagine the following development progress.

• I implement always-insert in Lix.
• I playtest that on livestream with Nepsterlix, Clamlix, or Rubix's pack.
• I'll summarize results. Maybe I'll have confused myself with always-insert.
• I'll make a new topic about NL-CE.

Of course, other forumers are free to make a case for always-insert in CE before I finish my investigation in Lix. If you think that I'm on the right track, spearhead the discussion, I'll be happy. And if you think that I'm insane, make your case against it.

Quote from: WillLem on July 14, 2026, 09:25:16 PMWe can also consider simplifying Red and Blue replay modes to a single replay mode which behaves how most players would expect it to; if we do this, though, I'd want to make 'click air to cut replay' optional.

-- Simon