CCLP1 Voting Pack News and Releases

[Bowman]

Only one 5-star level so far? Interesting...I've voted dozens of 5s. And 4s. And a smaller but still significant number of 3s, 2s, and 1s. Well, we're all different, I suppose.

Anyway, here are my (rough) criteria (lengthy explanations, so click to view):

5



<div class="ipsSpoiler" data-ipsspoiler="">

[Click to Show Content]

Any one of the following:

• The level is solid (no significant design flaws) AND highly original AND nice to look at AND a joy to play.
  
• The level is solid AND gave me some of the most fun I've ever had playing CC, and I can tell the level designer put effort into it, even if the aesthetics OR the originality (but not both) wasn't knock-your-socks-off great.
  
• "Underdog candidate"--The level might ordinarily get a 3 or 4, but it's solid, fun, shows effort on the part of the creator, AND demonstrates an important concept in a nontrivial, intuitive way. However, due to its relative simplicity OR the fact that it doesn't seem spectacular until you really start playing it, AS WELL AS the fact that it didn't get a lot of pre-voting hype, I am afraid others will overlook it. Thus, I give it a little boost to compensate. Usually, levels I put in this category are what I think are the best levels for the 10s-early 30s. We do, after all, need levels in these slots, but since levels with this difficulty aren't usually huge epic memorable adventures or priceless works of art, I fear others will have a hard time voting them highly. So I try to help out.
  

​

4

[Click to Show Content]

A 4-star level includes the characteristics of a 5-star level, but...

• Just wasn't quite fun or memorable enough for me to consider it one of the best.
  
• Included a small design flaw, such as a brief but unnecessarily tedious section.
  
• I found it to be only moderately fun, but that was clearly solely because the level's genre clashed with my own tastes; it really wasn't the designer's fault, and it deserves not to be dragged down unduly by my vote.
  
• Had a "trick" just slightly too far into the level--a situation where I failed when I could have found the right course of action if I'd looked ahead a little bit, but I was not given adequate warning I'd need to do so.
  
• Or, had a trick that I was only able to avoid because of my experience playing CCLP3 and custom sets, one that would almost certainly catch a beginner the first time. But the trick doesn't cause too much lost progress, and may even be a good learning experience, otherwise this would get a much lower rating.
  

3

[Click to Show Content]

• The level was based around a concept that, while enjoyable for a moment, wasn't really challenging or intricate enough to stand on its own, OR the concept WAS good enough to base a level around, but the level was far too short and didn't live up to potential.
  
• The level was enjoyable in its own right, not highly flawed, but not original enough to be memorable. (Nuts-and-Bolts style hodgepodge levels don't necessarily fall into this category, since even they tend to include a couple original mini-challenges or just new takes on known ideas.)
  
• Penalty: If it's very likely you'll boost into the back end of a monster in MS even if you're being careful, the level can't get above a 3 because of the inequality.
  

​

2

[Click to Show Content]

• The level -- even if it demonstrated an original concept -- just wasn't fun to play and clearly wasn't made with a lot of effort. (Sadly, I think of one of my own levels as the platinum meterstick for this category.)
  
• The level had an egregious, unneeded unfair moment (lucky timing or potentially fatal guesswork) that was likely to result in more than about 20 seconds of lost difficult progress or a couple minutes of lost easy progress (Note: A level can have unfair moments and still be a 3, 4, or 5 if they won't likely result in too much lost progress, or if they are needed for the level to work but don't make things too frustrating or confusing.)
  
• The level -- while good -- is borderline too hard for CCLP1.
  
• The level is just tedious.
  
• The level is frustrating and not satisfying to finish (usually, because it's medium-to-long and it's highly likely you'll die near the end)
  
• Penalty: If you need to dodge monsters with 0 ticks margin for error more than twice, or have to do so after making significant progress, then the level's rating is capped at 2.
  

[Click to Show Content]

• The level has an egregious, unneeded, unfair moment very late into it OR has one or more such moments that will likely take many tries to pass.
  
• The level is just needlessly or excessively difficult, so much so that I could not beat it in multiple playing sessions, and don't think beginners would like getting stopped by it either.
  
• The level is trivially solvable and doesn't offer any originality or nice artwork. It's pointless to play, being too easy and unfun to serve even as a "breather" level. (Thankfully, I haven't run into any levels in this category so far.)
  
• The level is SO HARD ALL THE TIME that I can't even survive for 10 seconds in it, and have to wonder how it got into voting. (Yes, I DID find a level like this, no I will not name names.)
  
• My Biggest CC Pet Peeve Penalty: If the level involves 50-50 monster timing, it cannot score higher than a 1. 50-50 monster timing is when you need to let a monster out of a 2x1 room. It's difficult to time, even if you're looking carefully, and I think there is no reason this much precision should ever be expected of the player. (Note: Grabbing a single chip being circled by a single bug is technically 50-50 in terms of when it's safe or when it's not, but it's far easier IMO since you can time it by focusing on one of the four corners. It's much harder to focus on one of two points than one of eight. So single bug and single chip does not count, as long as it isn't repeated too many times.)
  

​

Note that nothing said above is set in stone. Not even the penalties; they're just rules for which I haven't found any exceptions yet.

One question I do have: how should I rate levels that require full knowledge of how teleports work? If there's going to be a level explaining partial posting and the reverse-reading-order rule, that might cause me to rate some levels higher than if not. (For instance, one of my own levels requires the player to know reverse-reading-order to avoid death traps. If we won't have a lesson explaining this, I will vote my level and any similar levels a 1, otherwise I will probably vote them higher.)

Edit: fixed those messy extra bullet points >_>

Wow. I'm glad someone else put a lot of thought into this too, probably more than I did.

That's the beauty of voting on these levels: everyone has their own opinions and, in the end, we have a levelset voted on by the community that is as diverse as everyone's opinions and that reflects what the community at large enjoys to play. My vision of what CCLP1 should be is not what it's going to be. Nor should it.

The reason I'm very strict with my 5 star rating is because it is 5/5. It can get no higher. And it's hard to find a "perfect" level that satisfies all my expectations. Not that I have a checklist. I'm picky when it comes to CC, that's just me.

I also try to vote on how I felt the first time I played it. If I loved a level years ago, and now it's gotten old, I know that it feels really good the first time you see it so I still vote it high. I'd like to think I don't consider what other people would vote on a level, simply because I don't know whether a level will be overlooked or not. I just vote on how I feel about the level.

It was cool to see how someone else thinks about their voting. Thanks for the response, ajmiam.

And I have rated quite a few levels 4 star (very good) btw.