[NL/RL] Community Collaboration Packs Project

[mobius]

Just to quickly add; in case I didn't mention this before; every time I produced an update; my biggest concern was taking in everyone's feedback. "a level=incompatible with NL (or visa versa) wasn't the only reason levels got removed or altered. Obviously every single piece of feedback isn't available in the threads, but some of it should be. At one point Akseli and Pieuw made entire google docs with feedback on every single level. And there's opinions by those who LP'd the games like kaywhyn. Again, its not my call anymore, but imho these opinions should be taken into account. Atm, i don't know where to find those docs, I'll try looking if anyone wants.
I bring this up because the Lemmini version is older and therefore contains levels removed from later versions, like 'Oh no, not again', for example because only 1 person I remember liked it; everyone else that voiced an opinion pretty much hated that level.

Another important thing is backroute fixes and polishes and that sort of thing. I haven't looked at these recent updates of the Lemmini version (and frankly don't intend to) but I wonder if older problems and mistakes in those were brought back here.

Anyways; no intents to be a downer or anything; I fully support whatever you guys do with this. If we start a new pack (sequel or whatever) I'd recommend making a new topic for that, inviting people to post levels and go through a playtesting period, like we did with the lix community set. That was tons of fun honestly, I hope we can do that again, even if my involvement is minimal.

[WillLem]

taking over the RotL project and moving it back to RL
...
The only way that I can see this working is if those who are interested ... work together to agree on the level selection (and then ordering, backroute fixes etc), with the aim of producing final RL and NL versions with the same levels

Agreed, absolutely. Both versions should be as identical as possible. We all need to co-ordinate.

If it helps, I'm actually not too fussed about level selection/ordering, or backroute fixing. I'm happy for others to take that on.

The 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.

Here's what I'd suggest:

Revenge of the Lemmings (120 levels)
Picnic / Hootenanny / Carnage / Armageddon

Return of the Lemmings (120 levels)
Kind / Cunning / Devious / Menacing

Lemmings Assemble (120 levels)
Breezy / Clever / Perplexing / Ridiculous

[Proxima]

The 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 

[WillLem]

* 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.

[Proxima]

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.

[Proxima]

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.)

[WillLem]

Pack 1: Picnic, Hootenanny, Riot, Carnage

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

Pack 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.

Pack 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.

[Proxima]

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, 67 unique and 173 in common with version 2.
Version 2 has 270 levels, 97 unique.
Therefore, in total there are 337 levels between these two versions.
(We can regard the 173 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!

[namida]

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.

"Pleasure" feels like it would fit there and keep the "nice thing for the first rank's name" approach the other two have (although "Hootenanny" could perhaps also be considered "nice"... there again, it's the first pack, maybe the first pack should have two "nice" ranks).

[Proxima]

It sounds like we're agreed on the rank names for pack 1 (although these are not set in stone, so anyone is welcome to speak up still!)

For pack 2, I like "Ruckus", and the sequence Ruckus - Frenzy - Armageddon does work better than Pain - Frenzy. We don't have to keep all the original seven rank names.

However, while "Calm" fits well with the others, it's already been used by three other packs. We could replace it with "Quiet"; or since pack 2 is overall harder, we could do something like Ruckus - Frenzy - Berserk - Armageddon.

For pack 3, "Cunning" has been used by four other packs. "Brutal" would be very good but it has been used twice. I need to think more about this one.

[kaywhyn]

Right, a few days ago WillLem asked for my input on if things sound good on what he's proposed in regards to the general development of this pack being something that will come of it. Here's what I honestly think:

I think what's been put forth so far are excellent suggestions and valid points from which to base development decisions on for when work does get underway, especially on a long overdue update for the v4.0 of the RotL pack. Before any work goes towards Lemmings Assemble, however, I think it's best if WillLem first focuses on the two mini-packs of 120 levels each first. After those are done and maybe deciding on some more things on the third pack, then see if you still feel like it's best to collaborate our efforts on updating the V4.0 New Formats Nl version of RotL for Lemmings Assemble to closely resemble and follow. I certainly don't mind and would agree here that we should, but I believe you also mentioned that people who want to contribute to the Lemmings Assemble pack are free to create levels for it. If so, it does sound like it'll be its own project independent of the New Formats NL version of RotL. Again, see if you still feel like it's best to collaborate our efforts between v4.0 RotL and Lemmings Assemble after you do and finish the first two packs of 120 levels each first Level creation for Lemmings Assemble might not even be necessary, given the amount of unique levels Proxima was able to find after comparing the levels in the v2.0 and v4.0 of the RotL packs and compiling the results in an Excel spreadsheet being way more than enough!

As has been pointed out, RotL is a very huge undertaking for anyone alone, especially given the current sizes of all of them being over 200 levels each. A lot of collaboration is needed among several people so that RotL is as good as it can be. Of course, it won't always be possible to come to a consensus on everything, but we do what we can!

Ultimately, just remember that there's no rush or even any real urgency to do this, especially as the v4.0 RotL pack is at least completely playable, though possibly way too huge on the number of levels. I agree with Proxima that doing nothing with it anymore isn't the way to go, as it's been in need of a long overdue update for a while now. Even though the level ordering is far better than in earlier versions of the pack on different formats of NL and even the Lemmini version, the very first RotL pack there is available, it's still far from perfect on that. Not only that, backroutes need to be fixed, deciding what levels to cut, if any, and what their replacement should be, etc.

To be clear, I think this project that WillLem proposed is a great idea. I just think it's best to focus on a few things at a time so as not to overwhelm oneself, though this is likely just me talking, as I personally like taking my time and baby steps with anything I do    

[WillLem]

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!

Thanks for investigating this, nice work! And sure, whatever we can do to get the level count down to 240 is fine by me. Obviously there's no need to remove all levels by these authors, but certainly if a large chunk of them are repeats from other packs, it seems a good way to get the numbers down initially.

We don't have to keep all the original seven rank names.

Strongly agreed. As far as my opinion goes, we can make up a completely new set if necessary.

since pack 2 is overall harder, we could do something like Ruckus - Frenzy - Berserk - Armageddon.

Frenzy and Berserk feel like they're both too similar (in terms of the difficulty level they might represent), and also too different (in terms of what the words describe). Ruckus, Frenzy and Armageddon all seem to refer to catastrophic happenings, whereas "Berserk" is more of a descriptive word. The difference is subtle and nuanced, but it is there.

If "Calm" has been used too many times, here are some possible alternatives that fit well with Ruckus - Frenzy - Armageddon:

Hubbub / Quibble / Quarrel / Scrap / Brawl (actually, this one could come after Ruckus)

or

Peace / Quiet

already been used by three other packs
...
has been used by four other packs. "Brutal" would be very good but it has been used twice

Honestly, I don't think we need to worry too much about rating names having been used elsewhere if they fit well with what we have.

That said, I'm open to coming up with completely new ideas and concepts for the rating names as long as they fit well as a "1 - 10 - 100 - 1000!" series.

Before any work goes towards Lemmings Assemble, however, I think it's best if WillLem first focuses on the two mini-packs of 120 levels each first.

Agreed. We should get the NL 4.0 version sorted first, and it should be the proposed 2 smaller packs. Assemble development can follow once we have this sorted.

After those are done and maybe deciding on some more things on the third pack, then see if you still feel like it's best to collaborate our efforts on updating the V4.0 New Formats Nl version of RotL for Lemmings Assemble to closely resemble and follow.

Ah, perhaps there's a misunderstanding here; the proposal is indeed that we update the V4.0 New Formats NL version of ROTL. Did you think we meant something else? We should clarify this before moving any further ahead with anything. See the this post for exactly what's being proposed.

you also mentioned that people who want to contribute to the Lemmings Assemble pack are free to create levels for it. If so, it does sound like it'll be its own project independent of the New Formats NL version of RotL.

Again, please see this post for a response to this.

Ultimately, just remember that there's no rush or even any real urgency to do this

Agreed, but things do need to move or nothing will get done. I'm happy for the general pace to be slower than it would be if I was working on it alone, but I'll also probably push for regular, tangible progress wherever possible. It's probably a good idea to set small goals that we can tick off once they're achieved, and try not to go back over stuff we've already decided on.

To be clear, I think this project that WillLem proposed is a great idea. I just think it's best to focus on a few things at a time so as not to overwhelm oneself

Strongly agreed. Small achievable goals, little and often, is key to the success of this project for sure!

[WillLem]

ATTENTION!

Please read the overall proposal and vote in the poll before continuing discussion any further. Thank you!

We need to be very clear at this stage exactly what's being proposed, so that there is no confusion when we seem to be referring to different "versions" of the pack. The following is exactly what's being suggested, and ideally we need to all agree on this before we move forward with anything:

This project can be thought of as a 'community packs' project, consisting of level contributions from anyone who's ever made a custom lemmings level!

1) The existing pool of levels (as identified by Proxima here) should be split into two packs: Revenge of the Lemmings and Return of the Lemmings

2) Once these are done, we can then focus on the development of the third in the series: Lemmings Assemble

3) The outcome of this project is that we have one version of each of the above packs, ported to both NeoLemmix and RetroLemmini

4) The NeoLemmix port will be the one being worked on primarily (so, v4.0 as it is currently, which will be replaced by the result of this project). The NL version will be cross-ported to RetroLemmini as we go, keeping the two versions as identical as possible

5) All previous versions should then be considered obsolete, but can of course remain available in the forum archive

Do we all more or less agree on this? Please vote in the poll either way, thanks!

Please note that this topic has now been moved to the Lemmings Main board, hopefully to reduce/prevent any possible confusion regarding which engine it's for.

[Proxima]

1) The existing pool of levels (as identified by Proxima here) should be split into two packs: Revenge of the Lemmings and Return of the Lemmings

Yes, with some caveats 

The RL version of RotL contains four levels not found in either NL v2 or NL v4 (the versions on my spreadsheet), so we have a pool of 341 levels to draw from. Excluding the levels shared with MazuLems (16), Insane Steve's World (17) and Clammings (21) still leaves 287. WillLem has talked about 2 packs of 120 each, and while we don't have to aim for a round number, that feels like a reasonable target (especially considering the original Lemmings has 120 levels, so we have an idea what a pack that size feels like).

So the process of splitting the pack will also be a selection process -- some levels won't make the cut any more. It might be that this process ends up with more, or less, than 240 levels we want to include, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.

2) Once these are done, we can then focus on the development of the third in the series: Lemmings Assemble

I'm not entirely sold on the proposed pack titles, but they'll do for now while we talk about plans.

We should decide what restrictions we want to impose for levels in the third pack. Since we want the pack to have NL and RL versions, levels will need to work on both engines, and I'm not sure exactly what set of features are available in RL. Are we restricted to the original 8 skills, and objects that existed in L1?

I know that RL has a total of 33 graphics styles, and we might not even allow all of these, as the first two packs will use only the originals plus a handful of L2 styles, so it might be good to do the same in the third pack for consistency.

4) The NeoLemmix port will be the one being worked on primarily (so, v4.0 as it is currently).

Well, we are producing a new version, so it would be silly to refer to it with the same version number -- this will be version 5.

[WillLem]

still leaves 287
...
So the process of splitting the pack will also be a selection process -- some levels won't make the cut any more.

Easier repeats are another gimme. Any stats on the level count once these are removed?

Also, are any other levels featured in other packs, or is it just the ones from Mazu, Insane Steve and Clam?

levels will need to work on both engines, and I'm not sure exactly what set of features are available in RL.

At a very quick glance:

NL/RL shared level properties

Max level size: 3200 x 3200
Release Rate: 1-99 (locked RR supported)
Time limits (<= 99 minutes, infinite time supported)
Max lem count: 999
Normal lems only (no zombies or neutrals)
Classic 8 skillset only (<=99 thereof, infinite skills supported)

Available objects:

Fire
Water
Continuous traps (i.e. one-shot is not supported)
One-Way-Arrows (all directions are supported)
Force field left/right (essentially the Blocker effect)

One important difference: RetroLemmini supports optional Timed Bombers. Levels which feature the Bomber skill should ideally not require the skill to be used within the first 5 seconds of the first lem spawning. Should this come up, the ported level may need a small layout tweak to ensure that the standard solution is still possible with Timed Bombers.

Other physics differences are likely to be insignificant, or easy to handle when porting.

the first two packs will use only the originals plus a handful of L2 styles, so it might be good to do the same in the third pack for consistency.

Strongly agreed. This project should only feature OG / L2 styles ideally. Level contributions using other sets should be remade, wherever possible.

Important note: RetroLemmini does support tileset mixing, so if a level uses mixed styles it can be ported.

Well, we are producing a new version, so ... this will be version 5.

Sure, but we're working from version 4.0 - that's significant, and should be understood by all concerned. Also, this project is intended to replace v4.0, not follow it. I'll make that clearer in the above post.


Please vote in the poll if you haven't already done so. Thanks!