02-Oct-2018, 6:56 PM
Quote:On 10/1/2018 at 4:42 PM, quiznos00 said:
1) What should the set be named?
2) How many levels?
3) Allow levels with CC1 boot rules?
4) Consistent viewport size (9x9 or 10x10)?
5) Map size limit? Namely, should the 40x40 limit from the CC2 main game be retained?
6) Should any tiles or techniques be banned? Some "unsupported" tiles are innocuous, like the zero-directional block or the blank "no" sign, but hex editing can lead to weird and wild tiles, as seen in TSAlpha's Enter the Void. There also are some non-obvious techniques, like block slapping and the gimmicks in TSAlpha's Great Job CC2! levels, that may not be well-suited for an official pack.
7) Any other standards that should be set in place?
1) I think the set should be named CC2LP1 or CC2LP2, since either name is simple and communicates what it means (A level pack for Chip's Challenge 2!) I slightly prefer CC2LP2 to make it clear that it's a "sequel" to CC2's main game and not a "replacement" like CCLP1 was (unless we intend it to be!)
2) 149 (or close to it) makes sense to me. As much as I wouldn't complain about more levels, I don't think it makes sense to build a set that's larger than a CC1 community level pack from a pool of levels that's much smaller than the CC1 level pool. 120 might be a good number.
3) Only if there's a good reason, and if there's an indication of this in each level that forbids boot dropping (perhaps a hint, or an agreed-upon symbol like a "no boot" tile surrounded by walls near the start of the level)
4) I'd prefer 10x10, but would be willing to make exceptions if there's a good reason. Still, most levels that would want the 9x9 view for whatever reason could probably be redesigned to use 10x10, so I'm not sure if there is such a "good reason".
5) I think I'd like the longest levels in the set to be about the length of the longest levels in official CC1 sets. Map size is not always a perfect indicator of map length, so there might be levels larger than 40x40 that still fit the expected length. (Especially levels with lots of offscreen logic.) I think we should let the voting process sort out the "good" large levels (the ones that do something creative with the space) from the "unnecessary" large levels (the ones that just exist to pack multiple levels' worth of content into one).
6) I'd prefer to ban any tile that can't be produced by the official CC2 editor without glitches. Just to ensure people who use the official tools have the same capabilities as everyone else, and aren't confused by glitch tiles. (The game has enough complex interactions without taking into account glitch tiles.) Further, I think unintuitive "nice job CC2" interactions should be at least frowned upon, unless explained in the level that uses them. (I realize that "unintuitive" is kind of subjective. I'm thinking of things like pushing a block against a force floor slide to "nail" yourself up the slide, or using an equipped hook to somehow redirect a monster.)
7) Try to make some easier levels and some harder levels using as many different new tile types as possible so that the staff can build a "difficulty curve" for each? (Not limited to exploring one new tile type per level, of course.) Borders on all levels unless it makes thematic sense not to use them? (Thin walls can go with everything now, so there's no excuse for skimping on them due to lack of space.
) I think ports of CC1 levels in general should be valid candidates for this level pack, but NOT ports of levels that have gotten into a CC1 level pack. I'd encourage recorded solutions on all submitted levels, but we shouldn't require them to include the max bonus. (Especially since some levels may be designed to have an extremely difficult to obtain max bonus that's even beyond the designer's capabilities.)