2.00 "Disable direct drop" and "Timed bombers" options

[namida]

Final decision on "Disable direct drop": The option will remain.
There is no final decision yet on "Timed bombers"

Currently, NeoLemmix allows for creator's choice in regards to these factors on custom NeoLemmix packs. I'm wondering whether people feel these options should remain available in V2.00n, or if they're considered obsolete now.

In general, virtually all NeoLemmix content does not use the timed bombers option. The only exception I can think of off-hand is GeoffLems, which was originally a traditional Lemmix pack. On the other hand, I believe the "disable direct drop" option is a bit more frequently used, and unlike the timed bombers option, was specifically requested. However, either of these options does mean some degree of inconsistency between packs with game physics - of course, with that being said, it can always be displayed in a pack's info what the settings are, so the player knows in advance. It could also be argued that Cheapo Mode is a precedent for allowing such differences, which certianly is nessecary to properly support Cheapo content without requiring extensive modifications (especially because of the fall distance being significantly different).

What are your thoughts on these?

(Note: The "timed bombers" option actually affects Stoners too, but I'm not aware of any packs that use Stoners *and* have the timed bombers option on. Thus it's primarily thought of as being associated with bombers.)

[Proxima]

Keep both.

I would certainly use "disable direct drop" if producing NeoLemmix content (which I hope to in the future). This may be because I'm more used to games without it (I grew up on Mac Lemmings, and recently I've mostly played Lix); but I just feel the mechanics are "cleaner" without it -- if there is a long fall, you definitely have to find a way to break it into a series of survivable drops or create a slope (or use one already present elsewhere on the level). In the Cheapo days, direct drop was often an unwelcome source of backroutes that had to be clumsily prevented. I'm not arguing for taking direct drop out of the game completely, just explaining why I don't like it and would like to be able to disable it.

As for timed bombers, for a long time I've felt that if I ever created NeoLemmix content I would leave them timed, but now that I've actually had a go at playing with untimed bombers in the new Lix, I find that I would choose untimed. A few of my levels have used bomber timing as the primary source of difficulty, but there are also many of my old levels (LIX, Halfway Down the Stairs, Changing of the Guards, Behind Bars, Toccata, Hotel in Hell, Rhapsody in Blue...) where the extra difficulty of bomber timing just adds frustration and the level is much better with untimed bombers. Even so, I'd prefer the option to exist as others may want to use it.

[Simon]

I assume "remove option to disable direct drop" means "never allow direct drop". Then yes, consider removing the option. Most perceive direct drop as an unwanted bug in L1.

-- Simon

[namida]

Standard NeoLemmix mechanics (without any configured options) allows for it. This is in line with literally every other kind of object, which can affect a faller - would we expect, say, a fire area to not burn a lemming because they're falling? And what about floaters - it has always been the case that they are affected by an exit without needing to hit the ground first, in both L1 and NeoLemmix (including with Disable Direct Drop option active).

It also must be considered there are some graphic sets in NeoLemmix that are specifically designed to have midair exits - most notably, the Sky set - which may sometimes include accessing them by direct drop - though cases like this where it's the standard for a graphic set, rather than an occasional level that calls for it, could be handled by defining them as a slightly different object (perhaps splitting exit into "direct-droppable exit" and "not direct droppable exit").

In L1, an argument could be made that "the exit should behave differently, because unlike other objects, it is helpful to the lemmings, not harmful", but the exit is no longer the only object with this distinction in NeoLemmix (with other potentially helpful objects including pickup skills, updrafts, antisplat pads, teleporters...). The only one of these that requires the lemming to be standing on ground is the anti-splat pad, and that's specifically because it affects a faller's interaction with the ground while inside its trigger area. In the case of updrafts in particular, it would make zero sense to require the lemming to be standing on ground; and levels have been made that require nabbing a pickup skill in mid-air. It should also be noted that, going by an established, consistent, behaviour, the best analogy is to teleporters - both will affect a falling lemming. Because the exit removes the lemming from the level, it never reaches the point at which it splats. On the other hand, a teleporter, the lemming will go through it, then splat on the other side if it were coming from a too-high fall.

[ccexplore]

This is in line with literally every other kind of object, which can affect a faller - would we expect, say, a fire area to not burn a lemming because they're falling?

One can argue that rather than the exit object innately causing the lemming to exit, it is only the lemming itself who recognizes the exit and reacts accordingly.  In that interpretation the exit can be expected to be different from everything else, and one can construct arguments around lemmings unable to successfully perform an exiting maneuver whenever they are performing certain actions like falling.

Still, it is a fair point that "exit as sucking black hole actively affecting lemmings" concept is more consistent with pretty much how every other object except entrance trapdoors work in Lemmings.  And I don't really have a satisfying way to explain the discrepancy between faller and floaters in exiting, other than speed (except of course, even before the floater actually starts slowing down, it still has exiting capability).

From a pragmatist viewpoint, I think people dislike direct drop mainly as it tends to be a source of backroutes.

[namida]

There are other ways backroutes can be solved. Perhaps an alternative choice to having two different sets of mechanics, is for some kind of trap to be created for every graphic set that's specifically designed to sit above the exit, and be highly visible while having minimal interference with thing outside of direct dropping. The downside here would be, the absence of it would specifically hint at a level being solved via (or at least using at some point) a direct drop, unless the creator made sure to only use it where specifically needed to prevent a backroute. This has already been used in some cases where the graphic set already provides for such, most notably with the flamethrowers / ice blowers in the Fire / Snow sets.

This kind of tradeoff would allow direct drop-caused backroutes to be avoided in the majority of cases, while still allowing for a consistent set of mechanics that doesn't break existing levels that specifically rely on direct drop. I can think of a few such cases in my levels, with varying impact if direct drop were to be removed.

Spoilers for various levels in LPI, LPII, LPIII, LPOmega

Lemmings Plus I Medi 7 "Leap of Faith"
The solution - in particular, the talisman solution, is set up to make use of direct drop. Could possibly be avoided by making the fall less high; in terms of simply solving the level (not the talisman) it would remain possible as the level provides enough floaters for 1 per required-to-save lemming. There are alternate, slightly-more-complex solutions that also avoid direct drop, but none of these would earn the talisman.

Lemmings Plus I Psycho 6 "The Bulldozer"
The only workaround here would be to use antisplat pads on ground near the bottom, which the fire set does not currently have (of course, with NX2 planning to allow mixing-and-matching of graphic sets in a single level, this is not such a huge deal there); with an exit also on that platform. The most obvious thought to come to mind may be to simply pre-assign all lemmings Floaters (or provide 80 floaters in the skillset), but this would in fact open a major backroute.

Lemmings Plus II Genius 20 "Cactus Central"
This level is intentionally designed to make use of direct drop, without being obvious that it exists. Even the above alternative might not work great here, as the whole point is to not draw attention to the feasibility of direct-drop. With that being said, most levels in LPII where direct drop poses a threat already have measures in place to avoid it (see Diet Control for example).

Lemmings Plus III Timid 11 "A Digger Would Be Handy"
This one could be worked around by placing steel underneath the exit. The height of the window and exit would have to be adjusted so that the fall from the window to the newly-placed exit platform is not fatal (or alternatively, all lemmings pre-assigned floaters, which could confuse players into thinking that the floater, rather than the radiation fields, is the key to the solution; or use updrafts, which would mean introducing two new objects in a single level - although with that being said, this is less of an issue now that the NeoLemmix Introduction Pack exists for this purpose).

Lemmings Plus III Fierce 1 "Dead Is The New Black"
This is perhaps the strongest example. Although this level involves an ohnoer, not a faller, exiting; the overall nuance is the same - NOTHING other than allowing direct drop would leave this level solvable, especially because of the case being an ohnoer - unless someone can think of a reasonable argument as to why an ohnoer should be able to exit (whether on land or not), yet a faller and perhaps even a floater should not? The only real alternative is to replace the bomber with a blocker, but that in turn replaces the level's very unique trick with one that's rather commonplace.

Lemmings Plus III Fierce 5 "In The Frenz-zone"
Although this one doens't require it in any way, this is a very fast-paced and hectic level, where the player may not have the time or reflexes to ensure the bridge goes to the exit, rather than over it. In this case, allowing direct dropping into it removes one element of artifical difficulty. Granted, that's a bit hypocrital to focus on considering that this level probably has more artifical difficulty than the entire remainder of the Lemmings Plus series combined; but even so...

Lemmings Plus Omega Puzzling 3 "Horizontal Access"
Similar to the above case, it avoids the need to accurately aim for the exit. The difference is that here, there's no pressure in terms of time as such, but rather the approach towards the exit is horizontal from all the way across the other side of the level (due to a lack of constructive skills other than platformers).

Lemmings Plus Omega Perplexing 20 "Current Affairs"
This is another no-alternative case, except by discriminating between fallers and other actions in midair (in this case, gliders). Aside from the initial setup to get gliders for both lemmings, the main puzzle here comes from that you have no way to reach the exit apart from gliding into it, even though the level appears to offer alternatives at first glance.

Lemmings Plus Omega Mental 18 "...wait, what?"
Due to the exit being upside down, the only really obvious way in is to drop in from above. The level's earlier clone provides enough skills that you could create a solid standing spot below the exit's trigger area, but this version (as far as I'm aware) leaves no other option.

Lemmings Plus Omega Mental 28 "The Troublesome Trio"
This is one where it's not such a huge deal, because the exit could be moved. This would have some impact on disguising the solution, and may also require improved accuracy when aiming for it (but not to nearly the same difficulty of such as other levels with this problem), but should at least not open backroutes.

One can argue that rather than the exit object innately causing the lemming to exit, it is only the lemming itself who recognizes the exit and reacts accordingly.  In that interpretation the exit can be expected to be different from everything else, and one can construct arguments around lemmings unable to successfully perform an exiting maneuver whenever they are performing certain actions like falling.

I see your point here, though I would think the same could be argued for at least teleporters and perhaps even pickup skills; maybe not so much so for updrafts and anti-splat pads.

[Simon]

Yes, the exit should handle fallers differently than other gadgets.

The L1 exit never sucks in fallers. The exit sucks in splatters and floaters.

Lemmix was designed with a black-box-approach, by replicating the behavior, not the coding logic. It's therefore possible that in Lemmix, fallers with ground can exit, and the Lemmix code explicitly allows this, whereas fallers are forbidden to exit in the unknown L1 source with identical behavior. They turn to splatters in L1, and immediately become exiters in the same frame.

The most probable explanation behind the L1 behavior is: The devs have programmed all the gadgets, then notice that fallers exit, and they didn't want that that. So they test would-be-exiters for being a faller, and don't have them exit. They then completely forget that splatters might happen in front of the exit. And they have never tested it with floaters in particular, because mentally, they're neither too different from fallers nor from workers.

I'm extremely confident in this assertion because I have experienced it myself from the developer perspective. In 2003, I had written a Lemmings clone called GS Lemmings within 2 or 3 months, a Lua game running within a C++/A4 game that allowed for extensive Lua scripting. I have no idea anymore what test level eventually led up to the decision that fallers should not exit, but to ignoring splatters at the same time. Eventually, a user painted a level featuring exits without ground, and you had to float lemmings in.

So, this is the psychological explanation. You don't have to analyze how Lemmix works, you have to analyze the behavior that it tries to exactly replicate, no matter how Lemmix's own code would look afterwards. The L1 devs would never have come up with this on purpose. It's an unwanted bug.

-- Simon

[Nepster]

There are other ways backroutes can be solved. Perhaps an alternative choice to having two different sets of mechanics, is for some kind of trap to be created for every graphic set that's specifically designed to sit above the exit, and be highly visible while having minimal interference with thing outside of direct dropping.

That would disable non-fatal drops to the exit and lemmings building over the exit (or doing some other stuff) may trigger this additional trap. 

Still, it is a fair point that "exit as sucking black hole actively affecting lemmings" concept is more consistent with pretty much how every other object except entrance trapdoors work in Lemmings.

True for L1, but the other objects are hazards and having lemmings actively working on committing suicide would be very weird...
Secondly your statement is less valid for L2: The sprites of the catapult and the cannon explicitely hint that lemmings actively modify these objects and not the other way round. Do you know, whether these objects trigger for falling lemmings as well?

[namida]

That would disable non-fatal drops to the exit and lemmings building over the exit (or doing some other stuff) may trigger this additional trap. 

This is a valid point. I did think of the building over the exit situation, but I couldn't think of cases where this would need to be done at such a position that the trap (in practice, most likely a fire object rather than a triggered trap) could be located so it doesn't affect it. Of course, I haven't played every level ever (nor do I remember every level I have played) so I could be overlooking something. In terms of non-fatal drops to the exit, similarly, this kind of trap would just be one method the creator could use to avoid it; alternative methods (which too have also seen use in current levels) could include placing steel (or even regular terrain, if no suitable destruction skill is available) in a position that avoids the direct drop. No fix can universally suit all levels, but the more options are available, the less likely an option that gives rise to inconsistent physics need be included.

The alternative point of view, of course, can also be considered - adding options such that direct drop is no longer needed. The question then arises of what impacts it might have on levels that have been designed around it working, especially cases where the usability of it isnt' meant to be immediately obvious.

[Nepster]

Indeed, in all instances I remember, putting either traps or terrain somewhere over the exit works to prevent backroutes. But if we decide to stick to that, then the current options are sufficient and we don't need an alternative exit&trap object. Mixing the exit&trap object option and the usual exit&terrain option would only make the downside "usual exit = direct drop works" more serious.
IMO the whole point of (optionally) disabling direct drops is to replace such (sometimes non-reliable) case-by-case modifications with terrain pieces or traps by one universal change in the game mechanics.

[namida]

It seems that people are universally in favor of keeping the "disable direct drop" option, while opinions are a bit mixed on whether or not timed bombers should be kept as an option. I'll leave the timed bombers thing open for discussion for now; personally I'd love to see it go as aside from frustrating the player via bomber timing (and a somewhat-artificial fix for backroutes that involve using a bomber early in the level; which can easily be substituted for with a pickup skill in most cases) it doesn't really serve any purpose. But if there's really a lot of interest in keeping it...

[namida]

No need for an urgent consensus here - but does anyone have any really strong feelings as to why timed bombers should stay? I would strongly like to remove this option if not.

In particular, input from Lix players (who've already gone through such a change from timed bombers to nontimed bombers recently) would be nice to hear.

[Simon]

It seems that people are universally in favor of keeping the "disable direct drop" option

No. Fix the physics bug that is direct drop, and abolish the option. :->

strong feelings as to why timed bombers should stay

Remove altogether, including removal of the option, for simplicity.

There exists behavior that you can't replicate with untimed exploders: Assign, touch zombie, walk on for a while, then explode. This is a curiosity of the many extra features and should not be a concern for the core game design.

Lix users were happy about untimed singleplayer exploders.

In general, you shouldn't make physics depend on level-specific settings. That would only confuse players. They can't play levels anymore without carrying along cruft in the back of their head.

For experiencing bug levels in all their glitchy glory, there's vanilla Lemmix.

-- Simon

[geoo]

It seems that people are universally in favor of keeping the "disable direct drop" option

No. Fix the physics bug that is direct drop, and abolish the option. :->

Seconded. Direct drop is a nuisance being a source of backroutes, while I don't think any level should use it legitimately as it's rather obscure and not quite in the spirit of the game. If you really wanted to replicate it you could just place a little landing block over the exit to allow a safe fall without fooling new players unaware of this behaviour.
Or at least have to default behaviour be no direct drop. Having an option though has the big downside that there will be an inconsistency between level packs that is not easily visible until you test it out, and in fact a player might test the behaviour in a level pack without direct drop and then conclude it's impossible, and then choking on a level designed to explicitly use direct drop in another level pack.

The option for timed bombers is a lot more visible and thus wouldn't cause such an issue. But I don't think any lix player really misses the timed bomber in singleplayer. Most levels for whom bomber timing was an element of difficulty are still non-trivial with instant bombers, and if you have a level that becomes outright trivial without bomber timing then it's a bland level in the first place.

[namida]

Alright then. While it's strongly not my preference to remove it altogether, I've put a poll up. If enough people are in favor of removing it entirely, I'll do so. (Personally, my preference is "always allow it", but I can see that this option is definitely not going to be popular; hence why I'm currently leaning towards "make it an option".)

To those of you who do advocate removing it - what's your opinion on whether floaters / gliders should be able to use an exit while falling, and if you're in favor of "yes, they should", why do you figure this should be different from a faller? I'm not sure what Lix's behaviour is in this regard, but as far as I'm aware, every other engine allows this, and there is nothing in Lemmix's code (and presumably, in turn, in DOS L1's code) that would suggest this is a bug rather than intentional.