[LP Series] WillLem Plays Through Just The First Rank Of A Bunch Of Custom Packs

[WillLem]

The lesson to release blockers with walkers etc is subject of a level in the next rank, which your format excludes. That's why it's called "Basic Training".
---
The things missing you mentioned at the end are all addressed in the following ranks, especially the experimenting/creative learning part.

I figured it might be the case that the next few ranks introduce more creative learning; that's great, for sure.

I'd still assert that one or two levels in these early ranks being more along the lines of "any way you want" would not go amiss, to help propel the player through these more instructive levels.

The hotkeys displayed in your test are taken directly from your setting, so if there is a "None" then it's missing in your settings. It sadly cannot recognise all your special mouse buttons though, so that's why it's not 100% working for you here.

My mouse side buttons are configured to key presses (via X-Mouse Control), so not sure why these don't show up... maybe it's because they're Numpad keys?

I highly disagree though with pointing beginners to the original games or packs with just loads of skills, as these doesn't really teach anything in my opinion and the player will be WAY worse off.

I disagree; everybody has different learning styles. You're clearly more suited to being given specific instructions and having a specific path to follow. I get frustrated with this, since I prefer to learn in a more exploratory, experimental way.

My first driving instructor insisted on explaining everything in detail, and spent the entire first lesson on seat belt, mirror checks and theory of clutch control; the car never moved. Needless to say, that was the only lesson they ever gave me. My next driving instructor took me to an empty parking lot and had me driving around corners and reversing by the end of the lesson. And, they would only explain things to me in detail if I asked. That was the instructor I stuck with (and, incidentally, I passed both theory and practical tests first time).

Players who play this pack won't get stuck on "Postcard from Lemmingland" and "No Added colors or Lemmings"! I teach those behaviors!

I didn't get stuck on either of these levels, wierdly; I completed both without hints. Strangely, the ones that stumped me the first time I played them were those featuring splat drops with not enough Floaters (Pillars Of Hercules, Steel Works) and those requiring reverse-facing skills to prepare the path (The Crankshaft, Mary Poppins' Land). To this day, I've no idea how I was able to figure out the various tricks required to complete No Added Colours whilst the arguably more obvious reverse-Miner in The Crankshaft had me reaching for the manual...!

Thank you very much for the feedback though and I noted some things down for the next patch!

You're very welcome, and it must be said that you've done a more than admirable job of the Introduction Pack, it's a pack that NeoLemmix definitely needs. I've suggested in its own topic that it get bundled with NL along with Redux.

I agree, let's split this discussion off into a separate topic, if possible.

No need to do this, mods. Learning styles is relevant to first rank levels, since many of these are aimed at teaching the player.

I'm with Proxima on this one: theory-driven learning can be frustrating for some people, and the Introduction Pack is a bit on the text-heavy side; I forget information presented in the preview screens on at least 3 occasions during the LP (one such instance leaving me unsure as to what the point of the level was).

However, I can recognise the importance of theory, and it absolutely should be learned, but not necessarily in the first instance. I'm more of a practice-first, theory-second learner. I like to discover something on my own, then find out exactly why it worked. Having something explained to me before I've seen it in effect is very unlikely to gel in my mind, because there is nothing for it to gel with at that point, it's just abstract.

Ultimately, different people learn in different ways. The OGs cater more to my own learning style, but I can certainly see why the Introduction Pack caters better to more theoretical learning styles. I work in education (or, at least, I did) so I'm well aware of the need to differentiate learning based on these sorts of things.

[kaywhyn]

However, I can recognise the importance of theory, and it absolutely should be learned, but not necessarily in the first instance. I'm more of a practice-first, theory-second learner. I like to discover something on my own, then find out exactly why it worked. Having something explained to me before I've seen it in effect is very unlikely to gel in my mind, because there is nothing for it to gel with at that point, it's just abstract.

If I'm interpreting this correctly, it means you're a kinesthetic learner. I'm not sure what term they teach you it in the education courses, but that's what I was taught when I was doing my teaching credential.

Ultimately, different people learn in different ways. The OGs cater more to my own learning style, but I can certainly see why the Introduction Pack caters better to more theoretical learning styles. I work in education (or, at least, I did) so I'm well aware of the need to differentiate learning based on these sorts of things.

Yes, absolutely! I have had to adapt my lessons constantly to cater to the different modals of learning, so I can relate since I too work in the field of education. This we know as differentiating instruction, and is essential given the diverse student population. As you know, there's no one size fits all for any classroom. What works for one student will likely not for another. Especially in the subject content I teach, which is math, I always show my students multiple ways to solve the same math problem so that they can then take their pick on what works best for them.

In my case, I'm a visual learner, and so in the math pedagogy courses I have had to take we were learn to do concrete first, then abstract. Indeed, I learn best by examples, and my biggest complaint with math textbooks is that they don't show enough examples, which I feel largely explains why students struggle with the math. At the same time, it's a bit difficult to come up with examples on your own of a similar math problem, so most of the time I look to the problems/exercises section of the textbook.

However, if you have heard of Common Core, this is a new way of teaching here in the USA in that the goal is to get students to discover the math on their own rather than being handheld by the teacher saying, "Here's the formula, now memorize it and apply it over and over to these homework problems." While I understand that this is in response to how the old curriculum just wasn't working and effective, now that instructors have had the chance to train under the new curriculum, the agreement appears to be that it's doing students more harm than good. It's just too difficult for them, and I certainly can see that, as even I don't understand the way the math is sometimes taught in elementary. It's just way different from the way I learned it when I went through school.

Anyway, I think the NL Tutorial Pack was a great choice to LP. I've yet to watch any of it, but I'll be sure to sometime! Indeed, I also told Icho he did an excellent job with the pack and that it should definitely be included in the next stable NL version before he released v1.0 from the feedback I gave him.