[DISC][PLAYER] New skills general discussion

[Strato Incendus]

Let's get back to the issue of crater size for the Grenader.

Assuming that every level which actually requires the player to use Bombers will have a sufficiently low save requirement for all those Bombers to be used, the fact that the Grenader is non-lethal shouldn't play too much of a role in its potential to cause backroutes. Therefore, I would say crater size is the more crucial aspect of the Grenader being a backroute-prone skill.

In other words: Reduce the size of the crater to that of the Bomber, so that the only difference is range and non-lethality, and the backroute potential of the Grenader shouldn't be higher than that of the Bomber, while still adding the new aspect of a throwable destructive range skill.

[namida]

The grenader makes that challenge much more boring anyway IMO

(Equally irrelevant to whether or not the Grenader makes the cut; just to be clear.)

In other words: Reduce the size of the crater to that of the Bomber, so that the only difference is range and non-lethality, and the backroute potential of the Grenader shouldn't be higher than that of the Bomber, while still adding the new aspect of a throwable destructive range skill.

Alright. Let's try this in the next update - making the crater bomber sized. I do wonder if it should be at least a tad larger, so as a sort of compromise here, I'll base it on the bomber's height rather than width (while keeping the circular shape). As always - this doesn't mean we can't go back to larger, or try out based-on-bomber's-width, or any other possible implementations, in a later exp build. EDIT: I didn't realise how close this is to the current size. So, no, we'll go with width, or if that feels too small, the midpoint between the two.

[WillLem]

The grenader makes that challenge much more boring anyway IMO

I disagree. I'm looking forward to giving it a go! (I'll likely do the challenge as an experiment before the build expires)

[Strato Incendus]

IchoTolot's newest level once again shows the immense potential of all four skills, and yes, that includes the Grenader!

Especially the interaction with Neutral Lemmings is a crucial point in favour of adopting all three range skills. Since Neutral Lemmings can't be assigned any skills, so far you pretty much always have to get a lemming over to them in order to free them. But if that's what you have to do, you can pretty much only make the journey of that lemming to the Neutral crowd interesting - otherwise, you might just as well place at least one regular lemming in the Neutral crowd, or make them regular lemmings right from the start.

Range skills however allow the regular lemmings to modify the path for the neutral ones, even while they themselves are doing something completely different. And this forces the player to integrate the solutions for the Neutral and the regular lemmings in parallel.

I haven't seen that many levels featuring Neutral lemmings so far to begin with - maybe the range skills will boost their popularity quite a bit!

Regarding backroute vulnerability of the Grenader: How many genuinely unfixable levels do we have so far? I really mean "not possible to fix them without seriously altering the intended solution", not just "a prior version of this level had a backroute because I overlooked what the Grenader or any other new skill can do, but now it's been dealt with"?

Because even the level I made with the particular intent of demonstrating backroute-prone-ness of the Grenader ("Boom! Beer Me") has been in a backroute-proof state for a while now.

[WillLem]

Because even the level I made with the particular intent of demonstrating backroute-prone-ness of the Grenader ("Boom! Beer Me") has been in a backroute-proof state for a while now.

My point exactly (and the reason I challenged Strato to do this in the first place).

We can talk all day and night about how "backroute prone" the Grenader is and how "difficult" it might be to fix the backroutes it causes, and it may even be enjoyable to do so over a few bevvies! But, without actual practical evidence, it's all just speculatory waffle which is potentially holding back a very fun and useful skill!

EDIT: OK, mini-rant over

I can of course see the benefits of discussing the backroute possibilities, since it will hopefully help to improve the skill to a state which is more conducive to its inclusion on the panel!

[WillLem]

Following my previous post, it's dawned on me that what's needed to Save The Grenader is in-depth discussion of its various attributes, limitations, and power.

So, question to all those who don't like the Grenader: what would you do to make it better (besides getting rid of it!)?

[Gronkling]

Personally I'd make the grenader crater a lot smaller to offset the advantages it has over a bomber, making it more of a strategic thing for stopping climbers/shimmiers and things rather than a destructive skill that's used to get through terrain

[Proxima]

I like the crater size as it is, but I don't mind trying out a smaller crater to see what that feels like.

I would, however, reiterate that I believe the arc for both projectile skills should be narrower. It may sound like that would bias things still further towards short-range uses of the skills, but I believe the opposite is the case. It would make long-range uses more user-friendly and thus easier to have as part of a solution. Playing around with them in my Fun-type levels has shown that they need a great deal of space, which not only forces the designer into awkward rearrangement, it leads to Pole Vaulter Syndrome: it's obvious where the skill will be used because it's where you have the open space for it.

Should I make a separate topic for discussion of the arc distance?

[WillLem]

It might be interesting to try going the other way with the crater size, i.e. make it much larger!

I jest, of course

Like Proxima, I too think that the size and shape are pretty good as they are currently. At the moment, you need to be very careful when using it. You can't just spam loads of them because you invariably end up destroying terrain you didn't mean to, so I find it unlikely that designers would use the skill purely for terrain destruction anyway. So far, most of the uses I've seen have been singular, and mainly for instant destruction of thin platforms, rescuing Blockers and - as Gronkling mentioned - stopping Climbers and/or Shimmiers.

In fact, Icho's latest video shows the Grenader being used to enable a Shimmier to go further, by destroying part of the ceiling that would otherwise have stopped the Shimmier.

All of this being the case, I see no harm in leaving it the size that it is so that it can also be used purely for terrain destruction purposes. That said, smaller may be more manageable in certain settings, so is definitely worth a try.

[IchoTolot]

V6 grenader observations:

It's very hard to go down anymore when throwing right against a wall. I think it's only 2 pixels now. Also in general the digging upwards/downwards capabilities took a hit, they are still good/effective though!

Most importantly all my levels could be easily adjusted terrain wise --> all behaviors from before are still there and effective. Just to a lesser ammount and when the goal was to decrease the level-breaking potential I think this has been accomplished based on my first observations!

[WillLem]

A general comment regarding both projectile skills: it's very difficult to make repeat assignments to the same lemming, since it always seems to favour the new lemming walking past.

If there's a way to make it always favour the current lemming until after their shrugger state has finished, that would be swish

[Proxima]

I haven't yet had time to try out the new grenader, but I have an observation to make that's general and not tied to the specifics of the skill.

A new skill being backroute-prone is a good reason to tinker with its specifics, while it's still in the development phase and we have the opportunity to do so. It is a very bad reason to consider culling the skill altogether.

I know that none of the existing skills will ever be in danger of being culled because of existing content, but just suppose we were starting from scratch and considering which of the 19 existing skills should be implemented. If we considered backroute-proneness, the skills most at risk of being culled would be... builder and walker. They are the most versatile skills, because they have so many different ways they can be used and contribute to a solution; and that can be a weakness, but it's also their great strength. It should be obvious (in hindsight after so many levels have been made) that the wealth of puzzle possibilities they contribute to far outweighs the downside of being especially backroute-prone. In a year or two, it will be obvious for the grenader as well.

Besides, while IchoTolot-style one-solution-only levels are one end of the spectrum, NeoLemmix has room for a lot more than that, as shown by the popularity of the "skills you can't live without" challenge.

[namida]

A new skill being backroute-prone is a good reason to tinker with its specifics, while it's still in the development phase and we have the opportunity to do so. It is a very bad reason to consider culling the skill altogether.

This depends on the severity of it. Builder and Walker are very backroute prone, but the vast majority of backroutes caused by them are fairly easily fixable, and their puzzle usefulness greatly outweighs the hassle they cause via backroutes.

I had been hoping to gather some "problem" levels and get some community feedback on ideas about how they could be fixed / to see if any really couldn't be, to get more info on this. However, there simply wasn't enough useful levels for this being provided, so I'll have to simply try and gauge from feedback / level updates / etc to get an idea of this.

Besides, while IchoTolot-style one-solution-only levels are one end of the spectrum

This style does tend to be the majority of content (well, maybe not IchoTolot-style in terms of difficulty, but the "puzzle with one or at best a few specific solutions" style in general), so it should be the primary concern for something as major as a new skill. I would not want to be adding a new skill at this point that does not have much use in this kind of level, no matter how neat it is in easier Fun-style levels. Of course, if a skill is already great for the puzzle-style levels, and can be made better for the open-ended ones without harming the usefulness in puzzle levels, even better!

[Proxima]

That still doesn't consider hard open-ended levels, my favourite type

Over on discord, a few of us have gone through the original Lemmings levels to see which could be solved with an unlimited quantity of the four new skills. (The reason I'm posting here and not in Challenges is that this can't be an official challenge while the skills are still in an experimental phase. It can be added to Other NL challenges if all four make it in; I don't know whether anyone will be interested enough to redo it if only two or three do.)

We solved the following levels:

Fun: All solved
Tricky: All except 12, 27
Taxing: All except 11, 13, 16, 22*, 28
Mayhem: All except 1, 10, 12, 18, 21, 28, 30

*This assumes Amiga level stats (Taxing 22 requires 100%). With DOS stats (80%), the level is possible.

Of the fourteen unsolved levels, some are obviously impossible (e.g. Tricky 12 and the other levels with an initial splat), and there are some we are nearly certain about, but there are a couple remaining that may turn out to be possible.

[Strato Incendus]

V6 grenader observations:

It's very hard to go down anymore when throwing right against a wall. I think it's only 2 pixels now. Also in general the digging upwards/downwards capabilities took a hit, they are still good/effective though!

This is a great point, as it used to be one of the main ways Grenaders could abused for backroutes. If this use as a surrogate non-lethal Bomber "in place" (instead of throwing) is now severely hindered, that is going to eliminate a huge portion of the former potential backroutes in my book!

Most importantly all my levels could be easily adjusted terrain wise --> all behaviors from before are still there and effective. Just to a lesser ammount and when the goal was to decrease the level-breaking potential I think this has been accomplished based on my first observations!

And this, simultaneously, shows that the Grenader is still a unique and valuable skill. So it's not only no longer as prone to backroutes as it used to be, it even adds tremendous and unique incremental value to the game!

I haven't yet had time to try out the new grenader, but I have an observation to make that's general and not tied to the specifics of the skill.

A new skill being backroute-prone is a good reason to tinker with its specifics, while it's still in the development phase and we have the opportunity to do so. It is a very bad reason to consider culling the skill altogether.

I wholeheartedly agree! And I believe this "tinkering with the specifics" is precisely what we have done with the Grenader now.

Now the crater is (as far as I can tell?) the same size as that of the Bomber, or just barely larger. Thus, it shouldn't be any more prone to creating backroutes than the Bomber.

Bomber backroutes can be more easily prevented by adjusting the save requirement; but in turn, Grenader backroutes can be easily prevented by a) making the ceiling or another obstacle too low to even throw the grenade in the first place, and by b) using what IchoTolot described to prevent a Grenader abuse in terms of "I'll just bomb straight through the ground where the lemming is currently standing, without actually losing the lemming".

Since this "surrogate bombing" no longer works, and the chunk of terrain taken out by the Grenader is considerably smaller now than it used to be, thus preventing "surrogate Bashing through one-way arrows from the opposite side" as well,
I am convinced the two major prior sources of potential Grenader backroutes have been eliminated.

Adding its unique new versatility on top of that, as IchoTolot has demonstrated in countless of his advanced levels with indeed very specific, non-open-ended solutions, I think there is absolutely no reason anymore to not include the Grenader into NL!

And in case double negatives are easily misunderstood:
The Grenader should make it into NL as it currently is!

(Voice your support if you agree with this, since it currently seems to be the skill in most "danger", in comparison. But as I said, I don't believe the formerly valid reasons for doubt about this skill apply any longer, thanks to the recent physics changes.)