Author Topic: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini  (Read 2052 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Turrican

  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #30 on: November 09, 2020, 08:27:15 pm »
AFAIK, these climber issues are not present in the Dos version (climber doesn't climb through several pixels of ceiling in the way like you see in the screenshot, 3 builder wall stops climbers properly).

There are dos/Lemmix custom levels that you need to build a 3 builder wall to contain the crowd , and then strategically , to assign some climbers , that they will climb through the 3 builder wall , and will prepare the path for the other lemmings!

I have the videos of the solutions for two of these levels in my channel! Now , I know that you don't like to have solutions , or parts of solutions of custom levels , spoiled , but I will post the link for one of these , so anyone else that will watch it , will be able to confirm here that this is possible!

Link for the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kDTPPi-qPs

The level is :
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Also I'm not sure if it's 100% similar to the situation that is showcased in the screenshot , but here is an example of a dos/Lemmix that I think it showcases something similar:
 
The level is "Rise Through the Ranks" by Clam , from the ClamSpam04 pack ( link for the pack: http://lemmings-db.camanis.net/levelpack/ag1zfmxlbW1pbmdzLWRichALEglMZXZlbFBhY2sY4gIM/ )

As you can see in the preview picture of the level in the link , there is ceiling above the opening hatch! If you assign a lemming as a climber in dos/Lemmix , it will climb through that ceiling! In Lemmini/Neolemmix that's not possible!

Also @ericderkovits : I know that it's up to Superlemmini players to decide if these climber behaviours need to be changed! What I'm doing here is my favourite subject : exploring and discussing physics! That's why I'm playing Lemmings at three different engines right now! I like comparing physic engines , and what is possible on each of them! In the thread about my Superlemmini project , I have posted some "Lemmix to Neolemmix" level conversions of some very old levels! One of these is practically Lemmix/Superlemmini physics exclusive (It's main trick is completely impossible in Neolemmix)! Another of these also uses a trick that is not possible in Neolemmix , and in my solution of another of these , I also use another "not possible in Neoleemix" trick , that it can be avoided ( so that level is still possible in Neolemmix)!

At the future expect more levels or levels conversions by me that's not possible in Neolemmix because of differences in physics! (And that is as I said , because I like to explore the differences in physics between the engines)!




« Last Edit: November 09, 2020, 08:36:22 pm by Turrican »
My Youtube channel ( Turrican Lemm )  :
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYGFBOHdYITHlsqa203Tu8Q

Online ericderkovits

  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #31 on: November 09, 2020, 08:47:14 pm »
yes, I see you like to explore physics in different engines. I just thought of an idea(not sure if Tsyu would ever do it since he wants to model Amiga). I wonder if Tsyu could have an option(under the options menu), if he could have one choose what behaviors a climber could have (ie 3 builder or 4 builder wall to stop climbers (ie: choice to model Amiga, Dos or NL as an option)). Although
not sure is this would be easy to implement.

This way one could choose what behavior a climber should have, to allow for normal behavior or irregular behavior. This way it would satisfy both regular play and irregular play(such as levels that Turrican likes). Make the climber behavior a choice in the Options menu.

Online kaywhyn

  • Posts: 706
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #32 on: November 09, 2020, 09:16:51 pm »
There are dos/Lemmix custom levels that you need to build a 3 builder wall to contain the crowd , and then strategically , to assign some climbers , that they will climb through the 3 builder wall , and will prepare the path for the other lemmings!

I have the videos of the solutions for two of these levels in my channel! Now , I know that you don't like to have solutions , or parts of solutions of custom levels , spoiled , but I will post the link for one of these , so anyone else that will watch it , will be able to confirm here that this is possible!

Link for the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kDTPPi-qPs

The level is :
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

You need to first be aware that it's possible for a climber to get over the builder wall in certain engines and then enforce it so that the player is forced to discover that it is indeed possible, since again none of the official games require this, nor do any of the custom packs made for Superlemmini, and most certainly not the ones that got converted to SL due to being made from other engines where it's not possible. Even though I haven't viewed it yet, the fact that you posted a video proving that it's possible suffices. Also, I just tested the builder wall on Tame 1 of ONML on Dos. Indeed, a climber is able to get past it, so I stand corrected. So, it turns out that it's possible in more engines than I thought possible: Amiga, Dos, Lemmix, and Superlemmini. In particular, I grew up with the Dos version of the game and only discovered just now that it is indeed possible for a climber to get over a builder wall. Now that I think about it, it was premature for me to say that it's not possible for a climber to get over a builder wall in Dos, since I have never ever tried assigning a climber. I have only seen walkers turn around on a builder wall since it prevents lemmings from stepping up, but I haven't ever tried to see what happens when I assign a climber.

Quote

Also I'm not sure if it's 100% similar to the situation that is showcased in the screenshot , but here is an example of a dos/Lemmix that I think it showcases something similar:
 
The level is "Rise Through the Ranks" by Clam , from the ClamSpam04 pack ( link for the pack: http://lemmings-db.camanis.net/levelpack/ag1zfmxlbW1pbmdzLWRichALEglMZXZlbFBhY2sY4gIM/ )

As you can see in the preview picture of the level in the link , there is ceiling above the opening hatch! If you assign a lemming as a climber in dos/Lemmix , it will climb through that ceiling! In Lemmini/Neolemmix that's not possible!

Yes, this is indeed similar to what you saw in the screenshot. You can't test it right above the entrance, but you can on the right side. I just tried out the level you mentioned on Dos and once again I stand corrected. When climbers climb on the right side, they can still get above the ceiling even though there is terrain in the way. So yet another thing that I thought wasn't possible on Dos but it is. To be fair, even though I have played so many custom level packs for Dos in the last several years, I have yet to encounter a level where a climber is still able to climb even though there is ceiling in the way being integral to the solution. You can guess that I have yet to play any of Clam's packs.

Even though the two things I brought up which I thought weren't possible on Dos are possible with the climbers, it doesn't mean that they're intended behaviors in SL. SL is its own engine and there are still plenty of differences between it and Dos and Lemmix. eric and I would like these so-called bugs in our eyes fixed for SL, but again it's ultimately up to Tsyu to decide if they should remain or be fixed.

Quote
I have posted some "Lemmix to Neolemmix" level conversions of some very old levels! One of these is practically Lemmix/Superlemmini physics exclusive (It's main trick is completely impossible in Neolemmix)! Another of these also uses a trick that is not possible in Neolemmix , and in my solution of another of these , I also use another "not possible in Neoleemix" trick , that it can be avoided ( so that level is still possible in Neolemmix)!

As I mentioned before, I'm indifferent to glitches, but I lean more towards don't like them vs do. My reasoning is that skills should act reasonably and predictably, not the other way around! That being said, I still enjoyed the custom pack Pimolems on Lemmini very much. Other than one or two that definitely shouldn't be possible but is because of the way the miner works in Lemmini, the others aren't as strange and they generally don't take too long to hit upon in the pack. One of them is a climber glitch that I'm quite familiar with because it's also present in Dos, while the other one is strange but can simply just be thought of that the level sides has invisible solid terrain so that lemmings can climb or simply turn around in Lemmini.

Yes, I agree with Kaywhyn. Although these issues may be present in the Amiga version levels and no original levels require these, I do also think they should be fixed. Because most people don't just want to play the original games with Superlemmini. Many people also want to play custom packs too. Also if Superlemmini is going to even remotely compete with NL, they should be fixed, otherwise people will just want to play custom packs in NL.

Glad to hear it and completely agree with all of the above.

Quote
Also people should be glad that I'm fond of Superlemmini and am willing to take the time to make more custom packs for Superlemmini.

eric, WillLem, and I are huge fans of SL. The fact that I stayed with Lemmini/SL for at least 4-5 years before I finally tried out NL last year certainly supports this. Indeed, I am thankful for all the packs that eric has converted to SL, as I too felt SL doesn't have enough custom packs. I haven't played them yet, but they're on my to-play list at some point.

Quote
I've read Tsyu's info doc on how packs work(levelpack.ini and .ini's work). Even Willem requested info on this as I posted a small example on how to pack levels,
as I know Willem likes Superlemmini too. He found this part difficult, where I find it rather easy(with help from Tsyu's doc)

It's just a matter of brushing up on reading on how to, like you did with Tsyu's documentation, as well as find a level pack for SL and simply imitate the structure of the levelpack.ini file. NL is the same way, imitate the various files for levels/level packs.

Offline Turrican

  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #33 on: November 09, 2020, 09:24:26 pm »
yes, I see you like to explore physics in different engines. I just thought of an idea(not sure if Tsyu would ever do it since he wants to model Amiga). I wonder if Tsyu could have an option(under the options menu), if he could have one choose what behaviors a climber could have (ie 3 builder or 4 builder wall to stop climbers (ie: choice to model Amiga, Dos or NL as an option)). Although
not sure is this would be easy to implement.

This way one could choose what behavior a climber should have, to allow for normal behavior or irregular behavior. This way it would satisfy both regular play and irregular play(such as levels that Turrican likes). Make the climber behavior a choice in the Options menu.

That is a nice idea , but it also may be risky too , because many players from what I'm seeing , like to have one physics engine for their lemmings clone , that covers all the custom content , without small execeptions , or options like these!

As I said , it's up to the players to decide , if things like these climber behaviours need to change, and personally I don't have any problem , with whatever will be decided! That's not a big deal for me!

EDIT:
As I mentioned before, I'm indifferent to glitches, but I lean more towards don't like them vs do. My reasoning is that skills should act reasonably and predictably, not the other way around! That being said, I still enjoyed the custom pack Pimolems on Lemmini very much. Other than one or two that definitely shouldn't be possible but is because of the way the miner works in Lemmini, the others aren't as strange and they generally don't take too long to hit upon in the pack. One of them is a climber glitch that I'm quite familiar with because it's also present in Dos, while the other one is strange but can simply just be thought of that the level sides has invisible solid terrain so that lemmings can climb or simply turn around in Lemmini

I'm not talking only about glitches here! It is possible due to differences in physics to have also non-glitch tricks that's possible to one engine , but not in another! The "Lemmix/Superlemmini physics exclusive" level I mention , requires a really awesome non-glitch trick in order to be solved , that unfortunately that's not possible to Neolemmix due to differences in physics!
« Last Edit: November 09, 2020, 09:50:06 pm by Turrican »
My Youtube channel ( Turrican Lemm )  :
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYGFBOHdYITHlsqa203Tu8Q

Online kaywhyn

  • Posts: 706
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #34 on: November 09, 2020, 10:18:09 pm »
yes, I see you like to explore physics in different engines. I just thought of an idea(not sure if Tsyu would ever do it since he wants to model Amiga). I wonder if Tsyu could have an option(under the options menu), if he could have one choose what behaviors a climber could have (ie 3 builder or 4 builder wall to stop climbers (ie: choice to model Amiga, Dos or NL as an option)). Although
not sure is this would be easy to implement.

Code-wise, it's probably not complex. My main concern with this would be depending on the levels and you encounter an impossible level later on due to switching off modeling Amiga behavior for the builder wall. I don't think this will affect any level, other than possibly the ones that Turrican posted above, that's currently available, but it can be a bit annoying to switch between options for when you do encounter an impossible level later on due to having the wrong one enabled or disabled. In addition, I also like being consistent, meaning I prefer to play with one set of physics and not have to keep switching between differing physics of various engines.

Still, you can post this in the "feature requests for SL" topic and see how well it goes down with the other SL fans.

That is a nice idea , but it also may be risky too , because many players from what I'm seeing , like to have one physics engine for their lemmings clone , that covers all the custom content , without small execeptions , or options like these!

Yup, as I stated above, I am one of those who prefers playing with just one set of physics and not have to bother switching between them.

Quote
As I said , it's up to the players to decide , if things like these climber behaviours need to change, and personally I don't have any problem , with whatever will be decided! That's not a big deal for me!

I don't mind either as to whether they get fixed or not. I simply have the preference that they get fixed. All that matters to me is consistency.

Quote
I'm not talking only about glitches here! It is possible due to differences in physics to have also non-glitch tricks that's possible to one engine , but not in another! The "Lemmix/Superlemmini physics exclusive" level I mention , requires a really awesome non-glitch trick in order to be solved , that unfortunately that's not possible to Neolemmix due to differences in physics!

I'm aware that you're also referring to non-glitch tricks being possible in certain engines but not in others. A really good example would be Ron Stard's Rodents level pack which he made for 3 different engines. I have only tried it in NL and SL, and in an early version, I encountered a level where there was a certain level that was possible and much easier in NL but it was originally impossible in SL due to the author not extensively testing the level before release. The level in question was due to the basher checks being drastically different in SL from that in NL. I'm not sure what Ron Stard did to fix the level in SL, but it's now possible with the most recent update. Probably just moved the walls a tiny bit so that even that tiny difference now made the level possible.

Online ericderkovits

  • Posts: 556
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #35 on: November 10, 2020, 12:41:48 am »
Yeah, both you are right. It was a suggestion only. Most people wouldn't want the option, although Tysu mentioned something about 2 game modes(original-using timed bombers, and easy mode-where it currently stands). So I believe Tsyu likes having options. I know Willlem liked the Idea. How about if when designing a level,  there will be a line in each levels .ini file that uses climbers, there will be a line that states climber_type = Amiga or Non-Amiga and then when one plays the level, the climber will be a different color so for example blue-where a climber doesn't climb 1 pixel terrain(whether terrain or 3-builder walls, and when he is perhaps red or green he can climb 3 builder walls or places like crosses or wells or 1-pixel ceilings)). Then if the climber is green or red when playing one knows it's an Amiga version climber(can climb 3 builder walls and 1 pixel ceilings and things like wells and crosses). I know this sounds kinda goofy, so if it's dumb it's ok.

Or maybe make suggestions on how to accomplish this climber issue so if one still like the irregular climber issue, then one can still have those levels.

Offline WillLem

  • Posts: 1285
  • The Optimizer 8-)
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #36 on: November 11, 2020, 12:26:52 am »
I don't think Tsyu is active on here any more, haven't heard from him in aaages. Does anyone else know how to code in Java?

Online kaywhyn

  • Posts: 706
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #37 on: November 13, 2020, 10:25:39 am »
Yeah, both you are right. It was a suggestion only. Most people wouldn't want the option, although Tysu mentioned something about 2 game modes(original-using timed bombers, and easy mode-where it currently stands). So I believe Tsyu likes having options. I know Willlem liked the Idea.

Let me be clear that I wasn't 100% in opposition to your idea. The idea itself sounds great and could work, but in theory I'm not sure how well it would work. Since I believe there's not that many levels in which the Amiga builder wall/climber mechanics will make a difference, it probably won't really matter too much overall. Also, as I mentioned before, I prefer to simply stick to one set of physics rather than change between them via an option. They can get quite confusing at times as well. On the other hand, I'm definitely fine with timed bombers possibly making a return via an option for SL. I definitely miss it and one of the few players that don't mind them.

Quote
Or maybe make suggestions on how to accomplish this climber issue so if one still like the irregular climber issue, then one can still have those levels.

Other than your suggestion, I don't have anything better. Instead, I simply would like to see these fixed if Tsyu agrees they should be changed.

I don't think Tsyu is active on here any more, haven't heard from him in aaages. Does anyone else know how to code in Java?

I think that person probably would had done some changes to SL already if he or she knew coding in Java. In my case, even if I did know some Java (which I 100% don't have any knowledge of Java coding), I'm one who wouldn't touch another person's project, at least without permission. Asking for permission is, after all, the courteous thing to do.

Offline WillLem

  • Posts: 1285
  • The Optimizer 8-)
    • View Profile
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #38 on: November 14, 2020, 06:09:27 pm »
I think that person probably would had done some changes to SL already if he or she knew coding in Java. In my case, even if I did know some Java (which I 100% don't have any knowledge of Java coding), I'm one who wouldn't touch another person's project, at least without permission. Asking for permission is, after all, the courteous thing to do.

Absolutely, I agree. But:

a) SuperLemmini's source code is available for making alternative versions, and it's my understanding that anybody with the necessary coding skills is welcome to do so. SL itself is an offshoot of the earlier program Lemmini.

b) If an open-source program's creator has been inactive for a long time, and therefore isn't around to ask for permission, there comes a point when it's reasonable for someone else to take the reigns (again, if they have the necessary skills). I would suggest giving the project a different title, and making it very clear that it's an offshoot, in this scenario. That way, should the original program's creator make an appearance at a later date, their project is exactly as they left it.

Having said this, I am fully in agreement with you that for the sake of courtesy (and due acknowledgement) it's by far preferable to do any kind of alternative/offshoot project with the blessing of the original creator, no doubt about that.

Offline namida

  • Administrator
  • Posts: 10984
    • View Profile
    • NeoLemmix Website
Re: [BUGS] Several bugs in Lemmings behaviour within SuperLemmini
« Reply #39 on: November 14, 2020, 08:03:40 pm »
Quote
a) SuperLemmini's source code is available for making alternative versions, and it's my understanding that anybody with the necessary coding skills is welcome to do so. SL itself is an offshoot of the earlier program Lemmini.

It is not obvious what licence SuperLemmini's source code is under. The readme in the source code does not specify a licence for SuperLemmini itself; it only clarifies that one of the libraries it uses is LGPL. Lemmini's is under APL 2.0: http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html

With that being said, I would consider it safe to assume that Tsyu intends for it to be useable under similar conditions to Lemmini's. Of course, if he were to clarify otherwise later, you would technically need to abide by that - this is more a "you are not likely to actually run into trouble here" than a "you have an explicit right to do this".