So last time we discussed some principles we want to follow in creating an edition of CCLP2 for Lynx. Now I'll fill you all in on some basic issues that need to be considered before the bulk of the practical work can be done.
Our primary goal is to make the set accessible and fun for players who want to play the set in Lynx. This main goal needs to be approached through the principles outlined last time, bringing forth issues that open up into several directions that we could take and the philosophy of how to proceed. These were discussed in a team and for each we chose a path to follow, leading to the following goals and guidelines for the rest of this project:
1) Do we need the permission of the designers to do anything?
Yes, we want to contact all the original designers we possibly can. If some of them do not want their levels included in this release, then they will not be. We want to cater to their wishes also in informing them of the types of changes we propose to their levels and allow them to be involved in the process if they so wish.
2) What are we willing to do with the levels? Why exactly do we want to change levels?
We want to leave a level untouched when possible. Our goal is not to go back and make the existing levels better or more to our liking just because we could. Many of the levels already work in Lynx, and there is no need to change them from a solvability point of view. Admittedly, some levels are what would now be called "unequal" in both difficulty and possible logical approaches, but this is more of a concern for new sets than for CCLP2. Here, these are more of a richness and signature, than an issue we need to set right. This also means we are not setting out to fix busts in levels, but rather leave these in as they are. (There are less Lynx busts in the set than MS busts.)
3) What types of changes are we willing and looking to make?
We wish to alter levels so that they work in Lynx in a way that does not affect the MS player. This is not possible for all the levels, but luckily it can be done for some levels. Measuring how well this goal is achieved is not simple, but one way is to compare how the level plays in MS in both the original and the altered version. When possible, it is preferable that at least the fastest known route could be kept intact in such a way that the altered level is not possible to be solved any quicker than the original. We also want to be careful not to introduce new types of busts only for Lynx to any levels, so while the solution may look different in Lynx than MS, the concept for the solutions should stay similar.
4) Will all the levels be made to work in Lynx?
Some levels just do not stretch enough to both convert for Lynx while leaving the MS experience intact in a satisfactory way. The reasonable possibilities here are to simply identify these levels as not solvable in Lynx, or alter them to be solvable in Lynx in a way that keeps the basic structure of the level intact even if it alters the MS experience, or to create completely new levels to fill these holes, perhaps in a way that thematically references the originals. Of these three options, in our opinion the middle one seems more in tune with both creating a full Lynx play experience and honoring the original MS set, so we have leaned towards that direction.
5) Will changes be made to any of the levels that already can be solved in Lynx?
We want to examine the solvable levels for "high unequalness" between rulesets and address these issues on a case by case basis. Though this might seem to go against leaving a level untouched when possible, it is also unwise to not take a look at these levels and see if changes are needed. After all, for the normal player there is very little that sets apart an unsolvable level from one that can be solved only by using some elaborate scheme or unreasonable skill in the face of some unfortunate ruleset behavioral difference in a level.
6) How will the altered levels work in MS? Is there a threat of having "new records" set in MS due to the changes?
As stated above, the main objective criteria we can use to measure the success of a proposed change is to compare the MS routes between the original and altered version of the level. Most of the levels can receive edits that do not influence the highest possible score obtainable in MS. Some changes that cause the best possible time in MS to not be as good as in the original may also be accepted. For levels that have larger changes made to them, such that the best route in MS might require fresh analysis, we opt to make these levels unsolvable in MS. This will highlight the degree of changes made to the level, and eliminates the concerns for someone to feel the need or even accidentally optimize these in MS, possibly creating non-standard records for these levels.
7) What other issues are there? How much work is still left?
There are other issues that need to be addressed and some that might still not have surfaced. Where will we host the final product? What is the name of this release? How will the changed levels be identified from the ones that stay unaltered? Will there be a high score table? Can we add a ccx-file that expands the story? When will this be released? How awesome will it be? We know the answer to some of these, and are working on the others. As stated in the previous post, the goal now is to open up the discussion to include anyone else who might be interested in having a say in these things. Hopefully everything will gel and once we are ready to release it, it will be great.
Up next is an update on the status of the practical work that has been done, what needs to be done, and how we all can help bring this thing together. We can't wait to share some of the levels with everyone! Before we sign off, however, we want to stress again that we are not looking to replace the original set in any way. We are not working to supplant CCLP2; at the most this project could be a supplement to it. If done the right way, it can hopefully even draw attention to the MS playing of the set, and everyone wins.
Thanks again, and may you not be cornered by Teeth!
On behalf of the CCLP2 Lynx Team,
-Miika Toukola
Our primary goal is to make the set accessible and fun for players who want to play the set in Lynx. This main goal needs to be approached through the principles outlined last time, bringing forth issues that open up into several directions that we could take and the philosophy of how to proceed. These were discussed in a team and for each we chose a path to follow, leading to the following goals and guidelines for the rest of this project:
1) Do we need the permission of the designers to do anything?
Yes, we want to contact all the original designers we possibly can. If some of them do not want their levels included in this release, then they will not be. We want to cater to their wishes also in informing them of the types of changes we propose to their levels and allow them to be involved in the process if they so wish.
2) What are we willing to do with the levels? Why exactly do we want to change levels?
We want to leave a level untouched when possible. Our goal is not to go back and make the existing levels better or more to our liking just because we could. Many of the levels already work in Lynx, and there is no need to change them from a solvability point of view. Admittedly, some levels are what would now be called "unequal" in both difficulty and possible logical approaches, but this is more of a concern for new sets than for CCLP2. Here, these are more of a richness and signature, than an issue we need to set right. This also means we are not setting out to fix busts in levels, but rather leave these in as they are. (There are less Lynx busts in the set than MS busts.)
3) What types of changes are we willing and looking to make?
We wish to alter levels so that they work in Lynx in a way that does not affect the MS player. This is not possible for all the levels, but luckily it can be done for some levels. Measuring how well this goal is achieved is not simple, but one way is to compare how the level plays in MS in both the original and the altered version. When possible, it is preferable that at least the fastest known route could be kept intact in such a way that the altered level is not possible to be solved any quicker than the original. We also want to be careful not to introduce new types of busts only for Lynx to any levels, so while the solution may look different in Lynx than MS, the concept for the solutions should stay similar.
4) Will all the levels be made to work in Lynx?
Some levels just do not stretch enough to both convert for Lynx while leaving the MS experience intact in a satisfactory way. The reasonable possibilities here are to simply identify these levels as not solvable in Lynx, or alter them to be solvable in Lynx in a way that keeps the basic structure of the level intact even if it alters the MS experience, or to create completely new levels to fill these holes, perhaps in a way that thematically references the originals. Of these three options, in our opinion the middle one seems more in tune with both creating a full Lynx play experience and honoring the original MS set, so we have leaned towards that direction.
5) Will changes be made to any of the levels that already can be solved in Lynx?
We want to examine the solvable levels for "high unequalness" between rulesets and address these issues on a case by case basis. Though this might seem to go against leaving a level untouched when possible, it is also unwise to not take a look at these levels and see if changes are needed. After all, for the normal player there is very little that sets apart an unsolvable level from one that can be solved only by using some elaborate scheme or unreasonable skill in the face of some unfortunate ruleset behavioral difference in a level.
6) How will the altered levels work in MS? Is there a threat of having "new records" set in MS due to the changes?
As stated above, the main objective criteria we can use to measure the success of a proposed change is to compare the MS routes between the original and altered version of the level. Most of the levels can receive edits that do not influence the highest possible score obtainable in MS. Some changes that cause the best possible time in MS to not be as good as in the original may also be accepted. For levels that have larger changes made to them, such that the best route in MS might require fresh analysis, we opt to make these levels unsolvable in MS. This will highlight the degree of changes made to the level, and eliminates the concerns for someone to feel the need or even accidentally optimize these in MS, possibly creating non-standard records for these levels.
7) What other issues are there? How much work is still left?
There are other issues that need to be addressed and some that might still not have surfaced. Where will we host the final product? What is the name of this release? How will the changed levels be identified from the ones that stay unaltered? Will there be a high score table? Can we add a ccx-file that expands the story? When will this be released? How awesome will it be? We know the answer to some of these, and are working on the others. As stated in the previous post, the goal now is to open up the discussion to include anyone else who might be interested in having a say in these things. Hopefully everything will gel and once we are ready to release it, it will be great.
Up next is an update on the status of the practical work that has been done, what needs to be done, and how we all can help bring this thing together. We can't wait to share some of the levels with everyone! Before we sign off, however, we want to stress again that we are not looking to replace the original set in any way. We are not working to supplant CCLP2; at the most this project could be a supplement to it. If done the right way, it can hopefully even draw attention to the MS playing of the set, and everyone wins.
Thanks again, and may you not be cornered by Teeth!
On behalf of the CCLP2 Lynx Team,
-Miika Toukola
