[DISC][PLAYER] New skills general discussion

[WillLem]

It is a strike against the skill, as it limits how useful it will actually be in practice.

I disagree. The only limitations are the abilities of the level designer to backroute-proof against it, should they wish to. The skill itself is not the problem in this regard.

it may indeed turn out that useful tricks to backroute-proof against grenaders without giving away too much, will come to light

That's more like it. Level designers shouldn't worry about including any skill - they should simply design the level so that it can't be used in an undesirable way (should they wish to backroute-proof the level, that is).

Also - it's not "know what the designer had in mind", it's "figure out what the designer had in mind".

This is a topic in and of itself, I'll come back to this in a bit and post a new topic

[kaywhyn]

3) The Spearer has a great unique application in which... it can oftentimes create the right spot from which other things need to be done - meaning without the correct Spearer placement first, the correct position to assign a given other skill does not exist yet.

This is one of the reasons I don't like this skill, and for me would be a strong argument against it. My experience of the skill so far is that it's very fiddly and unintuitive, and will likely rely on long periods of pausing the game, finding just the right spot with the skill shadow, etc.

I agree with you here about the Spearer being extremely fiddly. I've been able to solve all the levels that feature the new skills except for like 3 of them. It's likely that I'm just not that good at levels that use the spearer out of the other new skills, but there's just too many things that can happen with the spearer, I feel. For example, whether or not lemmings can step up out of a spear depends on how it lands, because either it will result in a 6 pixel wall or less or 7 pixel wall or higher. Even mantha's basic spearer level was difficult for me even though nothing but the spearer skill is provided. While playing through the new skills levels, one crucial difference between the projectile skills that took me by surprise is that the grenade doesn't disappear when it goes beyond the top of the level, but the spear does. I got to ask why is that? I'm guessing it's because the spear is added solid terrain and just like the builder, where you can't even build beyond the ceiling and the lemming dies when reaching it anyway, while the grenade itself isn't solid and doesn't interact with anything but the terrain?

That's why I'm still for either 0, 1, or 2 at most new skills added. If the maximum of two new skills, my choices would be in favor of the laser blaster and the slider, but not the range projectile skills. If less than 2, then either one of the skills I'm in favor of is fine with me, although I'm more in favor of to go laser blaster over the slider, as nice as the latter is. Otherwise, I'm perfectly fine with the status quo, with the 19 skills we currently have. 

[namida]

one crucial difference between the projectile skills that took me by surprise is that the grenade doesn't disappear when it goes beyond the top of the level, but the spear does.

This is not true; though it should be noted the grenade is tracked by the middle of its graphic, while the spear is tracked by the "point". Either projectile will be removed if it ends up more than 8px outside the level. This tolerance might need to be tweaked, though should be nonzero IMO.

[kaywhyn]

one crucial difference between the projectile skills that took me by surprise is that the grenade doesn't disappear when it goes beyond the top of the level, but the spear does.

This is not true; though it should be noted the grenade is tracked by the middle of its graphic, while the spear is tracked by the "point". Either projectile will be removed if it ends up more than 8px outside the level. This tolerance might need to be tweaked, though should be nonzero IMO.

Oh, I see. In that case, I haven't played enough levels where they can cross the top border of the level to see other possibilities. The level I noticed this happening was Icho's experimental 7, I believe. It's one where you just have stoners, spears, a grenade, and cloner. The grenade will cross the top border but still come back down to finish the animation, but the spear will go over the top border but disappears, i.e, it never comes down. Probably the top border was just borderline so that the grenade still can be successful but the spear disappeared when it happened. Perhaps if the level was slightly taller and the spear would not had disappeared, just like the grenade.

[Strato Incendus]

Btw, one question: Can a lemming land on the spear as it's flying through the air?

For example, you throw a spear through the path of some Faller to break its fall (by turning him into a Walker for like 1-2 frames), and then the spear travels on to land somewhere else.

I'm not saying this is a level anyone should make - most likely, you should NOT - I just want to know whether it's theoretically possible. Or whether the spear only "becomes" terrain after having landed somewhere.

b) there are thin pieces of one-way arrows that the Grenader can simply ignore

Ah! Music to my ears!

Are you really sure about a skill flat-out ignoring one-way arrows being a good thing?

It's already enough of a constant issue with Diggers, because it has been esablished by the original game that they can go through horizontal one-way arrows (which was all the original game had anyway). You can make a wall Miner-proof without it being Digger-proof if you install horizontal one-way arrows pointing in the opposite direction than the one the Miner would be facing. But you can't do the opposite, i.e. making a wall Digger-proof without making it Miner-proof as well. The only type of one-way arrow that can stop a Digger are upward ones, and those can only be overcome by Fencers right now (and Laserers soon).

Bombers can ignore all types of one-way arrows, which is their distinct power, but they do so at two very considerable costs:
a) the loss of a lemming
b) the very small size of the area of terrain destroyed

The Grenader destroys more terrain than the Bomber, has range, AND is not lethal. In many contexts, it will thus be flat-out superior to the Bomber.

To be clear, this is not me putting the Grenader under general suspicion of causing backroutes, or advocating against its introduction. I still very much enjoy the skill. But calling the fact that it can so easily ignore any type of one-way arrows an improvement to the game as a whole, especially because it supposedly adds "unpredictability", is quite baffling to me. If you say this...

That's more like it. Level designers shouldn't worry about including any skill - they should simply design the level so that it can't be used in an undesirable way (should they wish to backroute-proof the level, that is).

...you do realise that one-way arrows are one of the primary ways to accomplish precisely what you expect every level designer to be capable of, i.e. backroute fixing?

And that therefore, a skill removing large chunks of terrain without caring about any one-way arrows at all poses inherent and completely new problems?

For me, the Grenadier feels like something of a blast of fresh air that the game sorely needs: its unpredictable nature offers much-needed counterpoint to the many fiddly, finnicky uses for most of the other destructive and constructive skills.

I don't see what's "unpredictable" about the Grenader at all. It's one of the two skills that has a skill shadow already now in experimental testing, so that actually makes it more predictable than the Laserer currently is.

And finally, if you say my comments about the Spearer are an argument against its implementation in your book, then I would like to remind you that you praising the Grenader's supposed "unpredictability", if people agree with you on that, would most certainly be a mark against its implementation for the vast majority of other NeoLemmix players. Because unpredictability, as I've outlined to you repeatedly, is the last thing the puzzle enthusiasts would want in the game.

So even if that's your personal opinion, and I can see how the Grenader might indeed "tip the balance away from high-precision solutions", not because of the arc, but because its crater is quite big and also irregularly shaped:
By highlighting this factor of supposed "unpredictability" as an "advantage" of the Grenader, you're still just adding more arguments against its introduction in the court of NeoLemmix public opinion.


I'd rather frame it as an argument against pixel precision. Preventing pixel precision is indeed something most NeoLemmix players can probably agree upon. And if the Grenader lends itself well to crafting less pixel-precise solutions (while the Spearer actually invites more pixel-precise solutions if you have to attach several spears to each other), then this could be an argument in the Grenader's favour instead.



Speaking of things the projectiles ignore:
What about one-way fields? They only affect lemmings, right? Neither the laser beam, nor the spear, nor the grenade?
If you can even straight up throw a grenade through a one-way field, while I could see some fun puzzle applications for that - that would make backroute fixing even harder. Basically, only steel works (pun intended ), and nothing else.

[namida]

I'm not saying this is a level anyone should make - most likely, you should NOT - I just want to know whether it's theoretically possible. Or whether the spear only "becomes" terrain after having landed somewhere.

Correct - the spear has no solidity until it impacts.

But you can't do the opposite, i.e. making a wall Digger-proof without making it Miner-proof as well.

You cannot have a "miners can destroy this but diggers cannot" pixel of terrain. You absolutely can create an overall structure that can be dealt with via a miner but not via a digger (while still providing both in the skillset).

What about one-way fields? They only affect lemmings, right? Neither the laser beam, nor the spear, nor the grenade?

One-way fields affecting the Laserer is out of the question due to the potential complexities on the rendering side of things. On the other hand, it is feasible to make this happen for projectiles if the community supports the idea; but they currently are not affected by them.

[WillLem]

Are you really sure about a skill flat-out ignoring one-way arrows being a good thing?

Yes!

It's already enough of a constant issue with Diggers

I don't see that as an issue at all. OWWs by their nature are a "softer" obstacle than steel, whilst still being "harder" than terrain. It's a good thing that there are multiple ways to deal with them; it makes them an interesting and dynamic obstacle rather than just either being terrain or steel.

The Grenader destroys more terrain than the Bomber, has range, AND is not lethal. In many contexts, it will thus be flat-out superior to the Bomber.

I agree about the Grenadier being generally more powerful than the Bomber, but it's worth noting the ranged skills are not the easiest skills to deploy. The lem has to be standing in just the right spot, and oftentimes these skills are useless at close range - that's one thing the Bomber has over the Grenadier: you can use it anywhere!

But calling the fact that it can so easily ignore any type of one-way arrows an improvement to the game as a whole, especially because it supposedly adds "unpredictability", is quite baffling to me.

I'm thinking as a player rather than as a level designer. There are already so many ways to make a level so ridiculously complicated that even a highly skilled puzzle solver would have to spend many hours unravelling and unpicking it. I like the idea of a skill that can literally just blast its way through an obstacle! Of course, I wouldn't advocate this being the only destructive skill - but, it's good to have it alongside all the other more careful, precise ones.

...you do realise that one-way arrows are one of the primary ways to accomplish precisely what you expect every level designer to be capable of, i.e. backroute fixing?... And that therefore, a skill removing large chunks of terrain without caring about any one-way arrows at all poses inherent and completely new problems?

I didn't say I expect every level designer to be capable of backroute fixing, please don't put words in my mouth. The point I was making is that the skill itself is not necessarily a cause of unfixable backroutes; it just means that designers have to find other ways to backroute-proof their levels if they're choosing to provide Grenadiers in the skillset. One simple way would be to make the OWW thicker than the grenade blast (that's just one idea, I'm sure that there are many, many others).

The bottom line from my point of view is that "backroute-proofing" should not even be a concern when it comes to thinking about a new skill. Every skill is prone to backroutes, or not: there are far too many other variables to even make the statement "this skill will directly cause backroutes" with any degree of certainty.

By highlighting this factor of supposed "unpredictability" as an "advantage" of the Grenader, you're still just adding more arguments against its introduction in the court of NeoLemmix public opinion.

Not necessarily. My main argument is specifically that we have an opportunity to balance the skillset a bit: there are already plenty of high-precision, fine-detail skills. It's interesting to include one that's a bit more irregular and more difficult to predict how it might be used by the player.

I'd rather frame it as an argument against pixel precision... if the Grenader lends itself well to crafting less pixel-precise solutions... then this could be an argument in the Grenader's favour instead.

Sure, OK. That probably is a better way of selling it, to be fair

[namida]

The bottom line from my point of view is that "backroute-proofing" should not even be a concern when it comes to thinking about a new skill. Every skill is prone to backroutes, or not: there are far too many other variables to even make the statement "this skill will directly cause backroutes" with any degree of certainty.

It absolutely should. NeoLemmix's primary focus is on puzzles, don't forget - if a skill is hard to include in a puzzle without either having backroutes, or giving away the solution in an attempt to prevent backroutes, it is not a good fit. It might indeed be a much better fit for an engine like SuperLemmini.

Again, to be clear, I am not by any means saying "the grenader is rejected because it's too backroute prone". All I am saying is that this is a line of thought that needs to be given attention for all four skills, but that in particular the Grenader is of concern in regards to it.

[Proxima]

3) The Spearer has a great unique application in which... it can oftentimes create the right spot from which other things need to be done - meaning without the correct Spearer placement first, the correct position to assign a given other skill does not exist yet.

This is one of the reasons I don't like this skill, and for me would be a strong argument against it.

It's worth pointing out that creating ledges for other skills to start from is a particular strength of the Spearer, but not unique to it -- we can already do this with bombers (and indeed that's one of my favourite uses of bombers -- see for example "Close to the Edge" in the Lix community set), and it's also possible with grenaders (see the level I posted, "You Scratch My Brick").

So even if that's your personal opinion, and I can see how the Grenader might indeed "tip the balance away from high-precision solutions", not because of the arc, but because its crater is quite big and also irregularly shaped:

It is now, but of course that's still up for debate if the Grenader gets accepted. I, for one, will strongly push for the Grenader to be given a circular crater. But the present discussion isn't the place for that. I'm just saying -- and this applies to all four new skills -- don't assume that the current implementation is exactly what we'll end up with; the details are still up for debate and possible change.

[namida]

It is now, but of course that's still up for debate if the Grenader gets accepted. I, for one, will strongly push for the Grenader to be given a circular crater.

Created a separate topic for this point (as well as another, closely-related one): https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=5262.0

[IchoTolot]

I don't really get the "projectiles create pixel precise levels" comments.

The arc is shown with a skill shadow and the result of the impact will be as well later. Also, why should most throws be precise? Even in my test levels there was usually tons of leeway given!

You can make every skill pixel precise if you want to! If you only use pixel precise assignments then this rather shows bad level design than a deficit of a skill.

[namida]

It's worth pointing out that creating ledges for other skills to start from is a particular strength of the Spearer, but not unique to it -- we can already do this with bombers (and indeed that's one of my favourite uses of bombers -- see for example "Close to the Edge" in the Lix community set), and it's also possible with grenaders (see the level I posted, "You Scratch My Brick").

I should also point out here the most obvious example of all, and perhaps the most comparable: Stoners.

[IchoTolot]

It's worth pointing out that creating ledges for other skills to start from is a particular strength of the Spearer, but not unique to it -- we can already do this with bombers (and indeed that's one of my favourite uses of bombers -- see for example "Close to the Edge" in the Lix community set), and it's also possible with grenaders (see the level I posted, "You Scratch My Brick").

Both stoner and bomber miss the range aspect though. One of the main reasons the projectile skills were proposed in the first place. With both stoner and bomber you have to get a lemming exactly to the point you want to create a ledge. The projectile skills do not have this precondition.

I also think that there is a big difference in creating a ledge through a crater and through the creation of terrain. With the creation of terrain you can immediately drop onto it while the crater needs a lemming to get inside.

[Strato Incendus]

I don't really get the "projectiles create pixel precise levels" comments.

To clarify, I was specifically referring to the Spearer here; for the Grenader, WillLem and I agree that it is a less pixel-precise skill than many others.

I didn't say I expect every level designer to be capable of backroute fixing, please don't put words in my mouth. The point I was making is that the skill itself is not necessarily a cause of unfixable backroutes; it just means that designers have to find other ways to backroute-proof their levels if they're choosing to provide Grenadiers in the skillset. One simple way would be to make the OWW thicker than the grenade blast (that's just one idea, I'm sure that there are many, many others).

Yes, and those "other ways to backroute-proof their levels", if not on the skillset side, are usually on the terrain side. One-way arrows being the main thing until the designer is forced to resort to steel.

Sure, you can make one-way walls thicker... or you can make the Grenader's crater smaller.

Wasn't that the original intention of the Grenader anyway? I remember the "dent the ceiling to stop Shimmiers" discussion. A "dent" to me sounds like a Bomber's crater at max. (Probably like an actual Bomber standing upside down on the ceiling, like in a Lemmings-Revolution gravity-reversal scenario; if you currently bomb a Shimmier, that crater is even smaller. So I'd be fine with a standard "inverse" Bomber crater in the ceiling if the grenade hits it). What the Grenader currently produces is more of a cavern than a dent!

If the crater is smaller, the Grenader still retains the other upsides over the Bomber - namely, its range and being non-lethal. But it immediately becomes less backroute-prone, because you'd have to chain many more Grenaders into each other to blast through the same one-way wall than now, where providing 1 or 2 Grenaders on the skill panel can already be "too much" to make your average one-way wall of 16 to 32 pixels width safe.

Personally, if the danger should arise that the Grenader might get dropped completely, before that happens, I'd rather just see its crater shrunk to what many of us probably had in mind originally. The craters created by the Bazooker and Mortar in L2 are also not much larger than those created by Bombers/Exploders.

Finally, also just within NeoLemmix, the terrain created by the spear is much smaller than the terrain destroyed by the Grenader. Maybe that's the main reason for their difference in power/backroute potential. If the spear were as long as e.g. an entire Platformer bridge, it would also cause many more backroutes.

This is not me calling for the spear to be longer, of course - instead, it's me using the relatively short length of the spear as yet another argument to shrink the Grenader's crater.

And then, there's the flavour argument: Why should an actual Bomb cause a smaller crater than a Grenade? ^^
(Yes, sure, the "Bomber" is not technically a bomb, but more of a lemming wearing an explosive belt, but still, it's in the name...)

[WillLem]

The arc is shown with a skill shadow and the result of the impact will be as well later. Also, why should most throws be precise? Even in my test levels there was usually tons of leeway given!
---
You can make every skill pixel precise if you want to! If you only use pixel precise assignments then this rather shows bad level design than a deficit of a skill.

Interestingly, this is the exact same argument I'm using against "this skill is backroute-prone". That is, every skill is backroute-prone; it depends on the design of the level, the ability of the player, and a whole host of other difficult-to-predict factors. Therefore, saying "this skill is pixel-precise" is exactly as absurd as saying "this skill is backroute-prone". Neither statement is necessarily true, as it depends on many other variables.

That being the case, I retract my statements regarding pixel-precision as an argument against the Spearer, in the same way that I still don't believe that the Grenadier is necessarily "backroute-prone", and to give marks against it in this regard seems unfair. How is it any more backroute-prone than any other skill?