Perhaps you could create a poll about this. I'd vote for the third option.
Thanks for your input, I've added a poll.
The answer to this is better UI: While bomber icon is selected, the cursor should only consider lemmings that are old enough
This is a neat idea, but it could confuse the player if they are unable to assign a Bomber to a lem who has only just spawned, which is one of the reasons why option (2) is my least favourite. You also mention that player confusion could result from the cursor not opening on newly-spawed lems; I'd ideally want to avoid this sort of thing as
much as possible.
What will you write to the replay? You'll want recorded assignments to replay with the same physics, no matter whether the player's option is timed or untimed bomber.
Hmm, good question. I suppose that the replay file would have to consider the player's choice, and write the replay accordingly. The simplest way that I can imagine:
In the case of Timed: the replay file waits 5 seconds before recording the assignment of a Bomber. Then, when playing back, the engine shunts the assignment backwards 5 seconds. That way, the .rpl would be compatible with either option.
In the case of Untimed: it remains as-is, with the assignment being recorded at the time & place of the explosion. Again, though, if the same .rpl is played back with Timed bombers selected instead, the engine shunts the assignment back 5 seconds.
I can imagine this being a lot of very tricky code that I currently wouldn't have a clue how to do, but a solution
is there somewhere... it's probably in the same ballpark as backwards framestepping.
I at first thought that the physics update of the explosion should be written into the replay but then again you could then cancel the skill after you've assigned it in the timed bomber's case.
Wait, hang on - this is a good idea! What do you mean about cancelling the skill?
Ummm... I gotta say that I prefer the third option as well. I think that having it tied to the level's integers is the best to avoid inequalities
I agree, and option 3 is definitely a close second for me. I prefer option 1 generally because I like the idea of completely opening it up so that both can be used in the same level. But, if option 3 turns out to be the most popular then I'd happily focus on that implementation. I'm really only offering option 2 as lip-service, I think making it player-side is far too complicated, restrictive and UI-messy.
the physics are different enough (different shaped craters, and one type flings nearby lix) that it has to be creator's choice, otherwise you would not be playing the puzzle as it was designed, and it might become impossible or trivial.
If option 3 gets the most votes and we end up going with that, it'll be interesting to see if SL users
prefer the idea of allowing the author to specify which type of Bomber is used in a level, and remove the notion of a player-side option entirely. That way, both exist in the game but it's always up to the author which appears in any given level. Given that the SL user-base seems to mostly enjoy Timed Bombers, I can imagine that this might end up being the best and simplest way to go.
A quick reminder: this is all theory at the moment, I absolutely
do not have the technical/programming knowledge to actually go ahead with anything at this point, it's just good to have the discussion and see if there's interest. There have been a healthy number of replies, which is encouraging, and I myself would like SL to have Timed Bombers, so... maybe this will provide me with the spur of motivation that I need to persevere with it.