NL platformers suck majorly

[mobius]

I've run into this again and again and again. This is preventing me from making good levels. So rant incoming:

NeoLemmix platformers suck majorly:

-you can only assign at the ledge; why this is bad:

1) it's rare that you cannot assign a skill at any time. Digging skills cannot be assigned on steel... with a few other exceptions you usually can assign skills most of the time. With platformers you can NOT assign them most of the time. It feels weird to have a skill that's so limited in what you can do with it. It makes this skill weak compared to the others. And as stated above it limits level designers in what they can do; how they can use it.

2) Because of the above this greatly limits what you can do with them. You can know right away which spots on the level a platformers going to be used, but there's no wiggle room here; with builders you can build a little sooner or later if you need extra length or less. Not so with the platformer. It's much harder to achieve precision this way. Sure you could use a builder first to achieve this, but why do I have to use another skill just to do this; making the very powerful builder even more powerful. Besides that just means the level designer has to add a builder; what if the builder adds a backroute?

3) the reason the builder is so powerful is it has many uses; can do many things. I don't see the reason to limit the platformer.  If the skill could do more things it would be more useful. Why not add height and do more things? It's a minuscule amount of height anyway; it's not the same as the builder at all. It makes the skill feel not very useful often and as a result I rarely have put it into levels. I realize I haven't made level lately but when I was I thought of using it often; ultimately didn't because it could not do what I wanted.


-benefits:

1) they gain no height what-so-ever. I guess this serves some puzzle purposes? I can see where it comes in handy: if you want to bridge gaps but not make a deadly fall safe for instance. That's all I can think of for now.

-I's meaningful but the cons greatly outway the pros imo. And I've never found L2 or Lix "height-gaining" platormers ever problematic in this regard the slightest. I don't recall ever complaining about this or needing any kind of change. If there is anything I complain about in regards to Lix platformers it was how they don't turn around when hitting a wall. But this I can live with far more than the NeoLemmix MAJOR issue.


I am not a fan of how the platformers work at all and I'm strongly in favor of reverting them to L2 or Lix's behavior.

Or perhaps; a compromise: they still do not gain height; but can be assigned anywhere; when assigning on solid ground the lemming platformers but no terrain is added (it's added but embedded into the ground). Honestly I don't think I like this idea much.

-----------------

to pre-respond to everyone that's obviously going to get angry and say "no don't change anything because I have a thousand levels depending on how it currently is:

1) First of all; and I've said this before but again I'm in the minority; I have no problem with older and newer versions floating around. We had Lix, Lemmini and Lemmix for years and I don't recall problems because there were too many versions of anything.

2) Can the game never change? never improve? all because of existing content that relies on what more people consider bad mechanics?

3) I'm not going to engage in that argument. That argument does not need to happen every time a new feature or change to a feature is brought up.

[ccexplore]

Interesting, didn't know NL does this with platformers.  Even Lix stuck with L2's take.

Perhaps the assignment checks can be loosen slightly so you don't have to assign exactly at the ledge.  Or some form of assignment queuing can be implemented so that the assignment is queued until the lemming reaches the ledge.  But perhaps it'll be better to not block assignments at all, ie. the "compromise" proposal mobius mentioned.  Maybe the ground curves down a little further ahead, so just because some pixels of platform are wasted at the moment on locally flat ground, doesn't mean it'll be that way further ahead.

[IchoTolot]

Again I think the complete opposite even if I disregard the extremely huge existing content factor:

For me L2 and Lix platformers are horrible.

1.) Height gain. Enough platformers can replace builders making them a replacement and a backroute hazzard. Also it seperates the platformer from the builder more and makes it a more unique skill. No height gain is far more consequential.

2.) No turn. This is completely inconsistant to builders. If they hit into the terrain on the other side they should turn. Namida had great taste back then at this point I think.


To counter your points and why assigning on non-ledges is bad:

1.) 3 possibilities for alternatives:
- Height gain and building on the ground leads to builder replacements and unwanted backroutes. Also cheap stalling is possible which can only be blocked by fire diectly on the ground as a 1 pixel height gain must be punished. --> Annoying design.
- Adding terrain into the ground which is just weird and pointless. Again cheap stalling.
- Just turn which makes them a very cheap walker replacement and they weaken the walker.

All these things add a lot of backroute potential, too.

2.) This would mean they can be assigned anywhere to stall safe and cheap. You can prevent this effect for builders with something like a flamer a bit above the area. You wouldn't be able to stop stalling with platformers in most cases!

3.) Currently you are still able to create a bit of extra length. You can get a few extra pixels with platformer stretching no problem.

4.) Platformers are still one of the if not THE most used skill of the new ones. I've had a ton of situations where I used platformers over builders, because of builders being backroutish and the platformers assure no height gain and other bullshit.
Rather because not despite the current mechanics I could make a ton of great platformer levels!

Now regarding the existent content thing:

to pre-respond to everyone that's obviously going to get angry and say "no don't change anything because I have a thousand levels depending on how it currently is:

1) First of all; and I've said this before but again I'm in the minority; I have no problem with older and newer versions floating around. We had Lix, Lemmini and Lemmix for years and I don't recall problems because there were too many versions of anything.

2) Can the game never change? never improve? all because of existing content that relies on what more people consider bad mechanics?

3) I'm not going to engage in that argument. That argument does not need to happen every time a new feature or change to a feature is brought up.

1.) The problem with a lot of versions floating around and being actively used is the seperation of the already small community, which would ultimatly lead to a slow death. Also a ton of versions with all different physics is a nightmare to play with.

2.) It can change, it can improve, but first the platformer change you proposed I wouldn't call an improvement and more a downgrade. Second for this change nearly every platformer level is going to break. Just for a little improvement for yourself you would sacrifice a ton of existent content.
Existent content is the heart of NeoLemmix. Without it the engine would be nothing. What's the point in creating content when it breaks a few weeks later anyway and not just a few levels, even a large part of the pack.

3.) A new feature will most likely not break anything existent, as it only adds and not removes. I most likely do not shoot against new things if they just add and not remove. Here you want to remove and replace a core mechanic. So you want to remove core tools from the existent engine, because you prefer otherwise, breaking a ton of other peoples work.

At some point level and pack creators will simply say: Screw it! No more updates! It stays broken and I am sick of it! ---> Most of the existent content for the new version will vanish and the new version is not attractive anymore compared to the recent one. 
And for such a platformer change in the future I would be likely to join this side and stay with the old version. I am currently busy with content changes from ceiling and tileset changes already while also being busy with other life aspects. Also I still must help to repel the turning-teleporters cull, as even despite a huge chunk of people being against the cull this is still up-to-debate. At some point it's simply too much for me, sorry.
That's why somebody has to defend the currently existent content, because I think otherwise exactly the thing I described above here will happen. And as I really want to preserve all the great packs out there I will gladly jump into the gap here and shoot down all the mad suggestions!
Otherwise the so called fixes and improvements will run wild and there won't ever be a stable database of content. I know this will happen as the suggestion history of some people here who sometimes don't even maintain anything (yes I am going to mention this too ) actively speaks for itself. Let's say I've made myself my own little list here.

Sorry for being mean here, but I want to bring this up as well: You are letting your packs rot away anyway, not even updating them to assure running smoothly with new versions. Levels could be broken and unsolvable by now or have a ton of new backroutes. Also, I recall from a week ago in IRC you said the reason for this were too many changes.

I know I can most likely not change your mind, but maybe all the points I listed will highlight the huge downsides better. Changes like this would cut everything in half and undermine our achievements!

[IchoTolot]

I might have a very simple idea what could work for you mobius:

If NL platformers are in your way for a level and you don't like them: Make the level in Lix!

Why change the entire platformer of one engine when you can have the version you want already in another? And I think Lix could use more Singleplayer content.

"I am not a fan of how the platformers work at all and I'm strongly in favor of reverting them to L2 or Lix's behavior."     Simply do it in L2 or Lix and you're fine anyway!

[Strato Incendus]

I'm in some kind of moral predicament here. On the one hand, I'm a firm defender of existing content like IchoTolot, and I'm glad we can agree on that . On the other hand, I've also been confused by the way the platformer (and also the stacker) works in NL, mainly because I was first introduced to these skills in L2.

The main advantage of height-gaining platformers would be their ability to cover up trap triggers, as it is often required in L2... at the same time, this would end up breaking a lot of levels with platformers and triggered traps. That said, trap triggers generally extend into the vertical dimension. And since hidden traps are not favoured by the community, it's usually common practice to place the trigger high enough for it to be seen above the terrain. So I can't think of any trap which could be covered up by a 1 pixel height gain.

Also, if a fall is deadly just by one pixel, I think that's something a level could be adjusted to without major change otherwise (just displace the higher or lower terrain by 1 pixel vertically and leave the rest as it is). It's a bit like the ambition to make gaps in such a way that it doesn't matter whether one stretches builders or not.

Where I see potential for actually breaking levels is the ability to turn around a platformer on steel, by creating terrain of 1 pixel of height and then mining into it. That's something only builders (and possibly stackers) can do thus far.

With regards to the turning issue, a compromise would be that a platformer would still turn around when attempting to place a brick into a wall rather than on top of it. This would be the behaviour most consistent to the builder - but it all boils down to:

It would have had to be this way from the start for this to work. Even if other behaviour would be more logical or consistent, the community has gotten used to the current behaviour and has created their levels based on that.

I also get annoyed by platformers usually turning around when finishing their job, unless the gap exactly matches the length of one platform. However, I also have a lot of levels now which depend on this type of behaviour. The remaining argument I see for the change would would be cross-platform consistency between NL, L2, and Lix - but that's kind of a pointless ambition, since different designing options are the reason we have different platforms (pun intended) in the first place.

Lix is really generous with its skills, thinking that there are two bomber skills which only differ in the one aspect that one of them creates a knockback while the other one doesn't.

Hence, the only way I see to solve this for both sides would be the introduction of a new skill - i.e. the versatile brick skill from Lemmings 3. And that's because I just came over here from the thread where GigaLem brought up downward building again.

An L3-style "bricker" could do it all - build, platform with height gain, stack, and build downwards diagonally. It would be about as powerful as the roper (which I proposed in turn). So the use would be very different than the standard platformer. In order not to make it even more broken than the builder, one could give this skill fewer bricks to use, as a trade-off for the increased versatility. Also, it should turn when hitting a wall in any way, but not when placing the last brick on top of terrain.

I'm not saying this should be done, because it would probably be a buttload of work due to the entirely different behaviour inspired by L3. I'm just putting this out there as what I think would hypothetically be the optimal solution for both sides.

Because yes, I want the game to improve. And yes, I want to value and preserve old content. This dilemma is as old as the question of timed and untimed bombers. From our point of view, this also was a change to the better. Now that I'm playing ONML again on NeoLemmix however, it's laughable how many levels were broken by this .

The reason we're ok with this is that we value community-made content more than the original DMA levels. And rightly so, because community content is what keeps this game going.

[IchoTolot]

Thinking about this once more and I even came with more reasons why a change wouldn't make any sense at this point and you can easily even now achieve every wanted situation :

Turn or no turn question

You can easily replicate all 3 possible behaviors with the current mechanic:

1.) For Turn let the platformer simply hit the edge.

2.) No turn + gap sealing: Make the other side 1 pixel lower than the starting side.

3.) No turn + no gap sealing: Make the other side >=1 pixel lower than the starting side.

So you can have all 3 behaviors already. A change would mean no gain here and just cause everybody to fix a ton of broken levels + replays and new backroutes.


Assignment

You can't assign while on flat land or on an upwards hill. Why should/must you be able to? This would only lead in a possible extra turn or some stalling and we've got tons of skills to achieve that already! (Walkers for example)

Again: A change would mean no gain here and just cause everybody to fix a ton of broken levels + replays and new backroutes.

Heigth gain

Why does the platformer need to achieve this? We've got builders, stackers and even stoners for this. This would make the platformer inconsequentional as it isn't flat anymore and achieves even more of the builders use space.

Not to sound like a broken record but: A change would mean no gain here and just cause everybody to fix a ton of broken levels + replays and new backroutes.

[Colorful Arty]

I'm in agreement with Icho here (rare I know). I massively prefer the NeoLemmix platformer to the L2 and Lix platformer. I don't like the height gain, especially because I have played one or two Lix levels that require you to spam platformers a ton to gain height when builders should have been used instead.

[Nepster]

No gain in height
Height-gaining platformers are a lot more powerful and have a far bigger chance to create backroutes. Yes, the current platformers are rather weak, especially compared to builder or L2 platformers. However I feel that this is a major advantage over them, as you sometimes need a skill to bridge a gap, but want to reduce the risk of adding backroutes with this.

The main advantage of height-gaining platformers would be their ability to cover up trap triggers, as it is often required in L2...

This only works, because trigger areas in L2 are just one single pixel. As NeoLemmix has bigger trigger areas, you won't be able to use height-gaining platformers in NeoLemmix that way.

Turning when hitting terrain
I believe Simon mentioned at some point, that the no-turning platformer in Lix was a mistake, which cannot be reversed now due to curtural moss.
In L2 almost all skills don't turn lemmings when they hit terrain, so keeping this behavior for platformers is only consequent and a good decision.
And the same argumentation applies to NeoLemmix: Here basically all skills turn lemmings (except for some stupid reason walkers assigned to working lemmings ), so a new player will expect this behavior. Yeah, coming from Lix or L2 this might be unexpected, but please blame them instead of NeoLemmix.

Relaxed assignment checks
I totally agree that the assignment checks are far too strict. Actually I already tried to implement relaxed assignment checks some time ago, but haven't found a way to do that that meets general approval.

Or some form of assignment queuing can be implemented so that the assignment is queued until the lemming reaches the ledge.

NeoLemmix already does exactly that: The assignment is queued for about half a second.

2) Can the game never change? never improve? all because of existing content that relies on what more people consider bad mechanics?

I am totally with you here: I would rather make a dozen players happy (or happier), even if that means removing a dozen levels that no longer work. It is still a complete mystery why some people would rather stick to problematic behaviors instead of sacrificing a few levels...

PS: No worry, I don't intend to change the behavior of the walker skill.

[Strato Incendus]

I don't like the height gain, especially because I have played one or two Lix levels that require you to spam platformers a ton to gain height when builders should have been used instead.

Of course, for every mechanical thing possible, there has to be some troll trying to exploit it...

@IchoTolot: That's a nice overview of how to handle this, thanks!

This only works, because trigger areas in L2 are just one single pixel. As NeoLemmix has bigger trigger areas, you won't be able to use height-gaining platformers in NeoLemmix that way.

That was exactly my point as to why a single pixel in height gain wouldn't break traps by itself. For L2, it's a combination of things: On the one hand, yes, you're right, the trap triggers are just 1 pixel high; on the other hand, the platformer bricks are more than 1 pixel high, so they'd probably even cover up a trap trigger placed slightly in the air.

Perhaps kieranmillar can provide some more insight on this, since he has created a bunch of L2 levels?

I believe Simon mentioned at some point, that the no-turning platformer in Lix was a mistake, which cannot be reversed now due to curtural moss.

"Cultural moss" is a nice term to describe it! Essentially what I meant by "it would have had to be like this from the start". Now each specific community has gotten used to and created levels for platformers of their respective engine, and making things cross-platform-consistent would mess up NeoLemmix, or Lix, or both (if the programmers on both sides could even agree on compromises, because naturally everyone enjoys the freedom they have as far as their own "baby" is concerned ).

So it's essentially the old wisdom "different engines, different uses" again, as IchoTolot has pointed out already . I'm also thinking of creating something for Lix, because I had some jumper-based ideas... however, these ideas are also music-themed, and Lix not having any music support obviously is a downer for that.

Probably depends on what can be done more quickly: Implementing music into Lix or implementing the jumper into the new formats version of NeoLemmix...

It is still a complete mystery why some people would rather stick to problematic behaviors instead of sacrificing a few levels...

There are three different levels to this :
1. Adding features - no damage to existing content at all.
2. Changing the behaviour of existing features - may just require some modification of a level, or potentially destroy it (example: turning teleporters and receivers)
3. Outright removing existing features (examples: radiation, slowfreeze, anti-splat pads, ghosts, and of course: all the gimmicks) - almost certain to destroy a level based on them

That's why you will see people's approval for change measures vary depending on which of these categories they fall into.

[Nepster]

Probably depends on what can be done more quickly: Implementing music into Lix or implementing the jumper into the new formats version of NeoLemmix...

That would almost certainly be Lix, as Simon basically has all the music code already written, while I haven't even started with the jumper (or even the shimmier) yet.

[Strato Incendus]

Thanks for the info! Then I will certainly create all jumper-based ideas in Lix first, with the option of migrating them to NeoLemmix later on.

[kieranmillar]

Perhaps kieranmillar can provide some more insight on this, since he has created a bunch of L2 levels?

Hell yeah. I'm someone who has opinions.

Before I begin I should make 2 things clear: 1) In my level pack I deliberately imposed onto myself stringent limits on what skills could be used, so often had no luxury in choosing between the platformer and builder. 2) L2 has significant limits on what you can do with terrain due to its grid system, while in L1 you have pixel precision in your layouts.

Height gaining with platforms
In L2 where I have less control over terrain, platform stacking is horrible. It's at its worst when trying to do interesting things with skills like the magno booter where tiny thin gaps really matter a whole lot, and has other unfortunate consequences for skills like the pole vaulter or skier where tiny height changes can really matter, etc. It's true that if the platformer were completely flush with the ground you wouldn't be able to platform over traps, but honestly there are so many other skills in L2 that can fulfil that task, like the filler, that it doesn't really matter in the big picture. You'd easily live without it.

I really like that NeoLemmix's platformer can't be used to gain height, it's definitely its biggest strength. It ensures that the platformer is actually meaningfully different from the builder in an important way. The builder is extremely powerful in how multi-purpose it is, the platformer is a lot less powerful but often times being less general-purpose is much more useful for a designer. It's certainly less prone to endless backrouting.

The fact that L2's platformer doesn't have to be used right at the edge of a platform is also handy though, especially given that L2 doesn't have any replay or rewind functionality at all. If it was like Neolemmix then you'd be constantly missing your assignment and be forced to redo the whole level.

In this regard, if I were designing Neolemmix's platformer from scratch I'd make one key change in this regard, I'd allow a platformer to build even if the brick he was placing was placed entirely inside terrain. This would let you start building from anywhere on flat terrain, and when you think about it, is consistent with how the builder works too, where what triggers the lemming to cancel building is not that the brick cannot be placed, but the lemming himself is blocked from moving by terrain. This would also mean the lemming would not stop platforming if he reached the other side of a gap at the same height and so not turn around, but that's fine too I think, if it had been this way from the start I don't think anybody would have complained.

Turning around when hitting terrain
When designing my L2 levels, I wanted to focus on interactions between the skills for two main reasons, 1) the skills are like the whole point of the game and 2) I wanted to focus on the ways in which L2 was different from L1, and the skills were the primary difference.

Often I was faced with an interesting design conundrum, in order to utilise the interaction between two skills, I would first need one lemming to use one skill, then have another lemming come along and finish the job with another skill, but couldn't have the first lemming be the one to finish the job or else the interaction wouldn't work or be interesting. But often this meant somehow ensuring that the first lemming behaved differently to the second lemming in a fundamental way. My most common solution was to make the first lemming a climber, so that he is forced to take a different path by not being able to turn around as easily. I use this technique quite a lot. And now the magic of QFK2 is ruined as you notice many levels are just formulaic differences on the same basic design, I just spoiled it all sorry

And one thing I discovered early on is that the fact that the platformer does not turn the lemming around when stopping due to hitting terrain was incredibly useful for enforcing this. In the first race where geoo and Simon played the Sports tribe, it was funny (or maybe depressing?) to watch them spend 40 minutes on Pole Position, a level where I had to use the builder, trying to turn around a climber instead of doing the actual cool and interesting solution. Oh the horrors that could have been avoided if the builder didn't let you turn a lemming around. It turns out that this difference is actually a lot more meaningful than you might at first think. By not having to worry about arbitrarily turning around a lemming, you can make the puzzle more focussed, cleaner, and more forgiving, instead of every little bump in terrain being a backroute hazard.

A really important lesson that the design of L2 teaches us (by getting it so horribly wrong) is this: Making skills is all about maximising utility while minimising the actual number of different pieces. L2 has a huge number of skills that are often barely different from each other in all but a few nitpicky differences that it actually ends up a bit worse off as a result than if it didn't have them. Part of this is because it is almost inevitable when making puzzles for video games to focus on the nitpicky mechanical differences, I too am guilty of this, so the more the differences can be made clear by having less parts overall, the cleaner things will be for everyone and the more time will be spent on thinking about the logic of the puzzle and not mechanical nuance. Meanwhile L1's skillset is supremely focussed and well-rounded, and while there is welcome room for a bit of expansion, you want to ensure maximal impact of each skill so that you can cover your bases with fewer moving parts. This is especially true if the new skill covers some similar ground (in this case, being another skill for creating terrain), you want the difference between the two skills to be as meaningful as possible so you don't have to add even more skills to fill any mechanical gaps.

If I were designing Neolemmix's platformer from scratch, I'd change it in this regard by not having the lemming turn around when it is forced to stop building. That way if all your level needs a construction skill for is to cover a gap, you sometimes have the option to add one without also running the risk of neutering the single powerful mobility skill, the climber, letting players focus on the fundamentals of your puzzle and things being overall a bit cleaner.

Incidentally, the fact that L2 miners don't turn when hitting steel was also the preferred behaviour for me almost all the time (no I'm of course not advocating for any changes here). If I want the lemming to turn, I have general terrain for that. Similarly with Neolemmix having walker and cloner skills, how many more turning methods do you really need?

[IchoTolot]

Oh the horrors that could have been avoided if the builder didn't let you turn a lemming around. It turns out that this difference is actually a lot more meaningful than you might at first think. By not having to worry about arbitrarily turning around a lemming, you can make the puzzle more focussed, cleaner, and more forgiving, instead of every little bump in terrain being a backroute hazard.

Actually I use exactly this turning around behavior when hitting terrain to enforce these focussed, clean solutions. Often a lemming needs to go back in my levels, but I wanted to force away the general crowd too ---> a platformer gap solves both problems.
This can be seen as different design styles and I must say I rather focus on unique tricks and skill combinations than hindering a climber to turn and for these I want the extra control of the Lemming's direction in which platformers and builders are a great help.

I think you could argue in both directions here. But if builders and platformers (even miners) do not turn this would load all focus on the walker and give it extreme backroute potential and power as it has too many uses.
Also, as I explained a no-turn solution can easily be gained by lowering the other side of the gap.

I still think a lemming platforming when all the bricks are going into the terrain is pointless. It just seems weird that an ongoing construction skill does nothing and won't cancel and I would keep the restrictions, that in my opinion make it a cleaner skill. There are better non weird stalling methods and a change would be for the worse in my opinion.

[kieranmillar]

That sort of touches on my point though that these behaviours are already doable with the builder, so if you're gonna add another construction skill you might as well make it not behave in the same way wherever possible, because in the situations where you do want the constructor to turn around you can just use a builder instead. Offer as much opportunity to the designer as you can with a single skill addition by not having it behave in the same way as existing skills, then the designer can get the behaviour they want at the times when it ends up mattering.

[IchoTolot]

That sort of touches on my point though that these behaviours are already doable with the builder, so if you're gonna add another construction skill you might as well make it not behave in the same way wherever possible, because in the situations where you do want the constructor to turn around you can just use a builder instead. Offer as much opportunity to the designer as you can with a single skill addition by not having it behave in the same way as existing skills, then the designer can get the behaviour they want at the times when it ends up mattering.

Exactly that is not completely true. The builder has (in NeoLemmix) a lot higher backroute potential as the platformer. The height gain and the all time assignability comes into play here. I rather give the player a platformer than a builder, because of all the side effects. Things like builder-stair-blocks and stuff are just not possible with platformers and it's far more reliable in that case. If it would have no turn all the time I would even say the potential is lowered.
I still say L2 got it wrong back then.