Jump to content


Senior Staff
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Blog Comments posted by M11k4

  1. Hi Chipster!
    I always enjoyed your input on things. If you need to step back from CC, that's understandable, but remember that you are always welcome back. I hope you drop by when CCLP4 comes out and maybe tell us how you are doing. Have a good 2017 and beyond!



    P.S. Nobody replied in three days during the holidays? Not many had a chance to see your post :)

    • Upvote 1

  2. We all have times in life when we can't be as active as we'd like. One of the cool things in CC is that is often brings people back, even if just for a short stay. So don't worry if you have to focus on other things when it's wise. On the other hand, if you do know something like that is coming up, a brief good bye statement is also appreciated, but not required. I fear we will be seeing you around for years to come ;)


    P.S. I also only play CC.

    • Upvote 1

  3. You are being quite generous here with your review! I haven't played the level but watching your solution to it, I think I would have not been impressed by it. I don't like that there is an extra block. I don't like that you can make the two bridges on any of the three rows with chips. I don't think there is really any challenge in getting the blocks out from their starting position. I don't think this is a good level to start a set. All those things tell me that the design was possibly just thrown together without review. Any of those things I don't like have the potential to be turned into something cool if the design tried to emphasize them or do something unique with them. As it is, I feel the level is very mediocre, but then again I realize making an exciting block pushing levels is not a simple task.


    I do like the format you have chosen for these reviews. The five scales allow you to touch on many aspects of a level. Your solutions are a nice inclusion. Will definitely keep reading more!

  4. Thanks Josh for your feedback! It's so nice to hear that something we put a lot of time into is doing at least something right and even more importantly is still fun.


    Currently we have released the first version of CCLXP2 and a "game play update" that was meant to allow reporting scores on levels without fearing further updates. However, your comments on a couple of levels do make me think if we should still issue some small changes (which wouldn't affect reported times) when we get to updating the ccx file and other documentation.


    Glider and Fire: the choice to not change levels when they were already solvable in Lynx was costly on some of the levels, like this one. In the end, we did edit some of those levels as well so maybe here too we could at least remove a few of the gliders at the end. That's only reasonable, but mirroring the level is still too different when the original kind of worked already, unlike Time Bomb. At the other end of the spectrum, Ranger Denmark was flipped even though the original worked, but this is justified by the flipped version playing much more like the original in MS. The other main level that was solvable but left unchanged was Run-a-Muck. In both these we tried to add a hint in the ccx file, but perhaps that was not enough to avoid all the frustration. At least we made small changes to Cloner's Maze :)


    One-Block Sokoban *: Maybe we could do something about getting stuck on the teleport due to splash delay. No clear best solution jumps right at me, but let's give it some thought.


    Yet Another Puzzle LX: I would have considered making the race easier for Chip had I thought of it. Now it's a bit too late as it would change the times reported for the score boards.


    As I write this, more replies and comments on other levels come to mind, but I eventually plan on writing my own thoughts on all the levels (including a response to Chipster's review), so I'll stop here. Hopefully someone is still playing this set when I get around to it :)


    I like how you comment on a few levels we didn't touch, bringing out how different they felt in Lynx compared to MS. Those differences are what interested me in this project from the beginning. (That, and how some levels needed only the slightest changes to make them work.) I didn't imagine at the start that we would get a version for all the levels! One person couldn't have done it alone, and I am glad you were part of the team! Your contributions (plus this review) were valuable, so a big thank you!



    • Upvote 1

  5. Wow, thanks J.B. for sharing your reaction and thoughts. There's something there for everyone to digest, I'm sure. Will have to read it again in the morning to allow everything to sink in properly. For example, I hadn't thought of there being an audience for CC that might enjoy the game for years to come but only really check out these major releases in the CCLP series. For any of these projects, understanding the audience really will make a better set.

  6. Thanks for the graphic! :)


    There's only one impossible bold on TW so maybe you could extend the yellow to mean something like "you can't score it because it is impossible in TW or the bold route is not public and you have not found it yet".


    Feel free to update the bold difficulty ratings on the wiki, particularly after you have played even more levels. I think there are several reasons why they aren't yet quite consistent. They were added in all at once by a veteran who was very familiar with the levels and routes. They haven't been updated much since then so there is not as much peer review on them as with the actual difficulties of the levels. I'm not sure quite how much of the bold difficulty reflects the bold performing difficulty and how much the bold discovering difficulty, or how consistent this distinction is. Additionally, I don't know whether this scale is independent of the set, or if it scales to a bit like the other difficulty rating.


    The reason Lemmings (and Amsterdam) do not have avis is because our avi expert Andrew Bennett was no longer around when those routes were discovered and published. Maybe someone with MSCC can record those for us at some point??


    Good luck with your quest!



  7. Good to hear an update!


    No graphic to compare your progress? How about reporting your score each time at least?


    I'm still not convinced going in level order is the best way to approach this, but I guess it's ok if you are in it for the long run. I fear you will give up at some point and your total score won't reflect what you have actually accomplished. I do agree though that once you work on a level it's good to go straight for the bold.


    Any plans on trying the Lynx side of the fence? I only ask because there are more records there that need confirmation or even beating. :)

  8. Jimmy Vermeer's site listed the easiest bolds for CC1, ranked by how many people had scored each one. Going in level order might not be the fastest way to rack up one's bold count. Of course it's up to the player what approach to take, like I tried CCLP2 by first doing some of the tougher levels and then worked myself down from 149 towards the beginning. If you intend to keep at this, I recommend setting some intermediate goals and then reward yourself somehow for reaching them :)

  9. Those two levels definitely are on the radar. Ranger Denmark might be changed to make it a bit more fair in Lynx. Frozen Birdbath is one of the tougher ones, but since we want to do something Lynx-compatible with all the levels, we have a few options created that work in Lynx and try to copy various aspects of the level. It will be hard to decide which one of those suggestions we ultimately want to use, so if that interests you, we can definitely open a discussion and maybe even vote on it. There are other levels like that too, and I'll try to give a summary of all that info in the near future. Sound good?



  10. Thanks J.B. for your thought out posts. They have been extremely nice to read. I agree with many of your points and it's good that you spell them out and write them down. I was already planning to go back and look at my top votes (once I'm done) and see what type of a set they would make and adjust accordingly, so thanks for the encouragement there. However, we can't expect all, or even many, players to be able to dedicate that amount of time (going through all the levels) so maybe it's enough for them to re-evaluate only the levels they have voted on. Perhaps for someone may have 30 levels that they have voted worth five stars, but they can still try to see what type of a difficulty curve and variety a set with those levels would have; and on the other hand there probably are those that have voted 500 levels with five stars and maybe they should tone it down a bit. Overall, I get the feeling that CCLP1 is in good hands and you guys will do what ever it takes to make this a decent set for beginners!



  11. For myself I can only say that I've been working on other CC related stuff, like playing and making levels! Well, actually some emails too. I do plan on writing a blog entry in the near future, so don't worry! It's nice to know that someone would care for more stuff to read! I have a long list of blog entry ideas to get through, and it seems they won't write themselves without at least a bit of help from me :-)


    As for the competitions, I think the three we have are good for recurring competitions. If you have an idea for something else, why not start it as a one off? I'm sure to do one of those once I get around to it...


    If you want to start a CCLPEVIL, go ahead, but how about not making it 149 levels? And I have an other idea for a collectively made set, but let's first get CCLP1 and that CCLP2 thing out the window, don't you think? :-)


    Be seeing you around!



  12. This post was actually published February 4th, though I did start writing it and saved a draft on the date it now claims as the posting time.


    And the first four views were all me, since that's how many times I opened the draft before publishing. Not that it matters, but just saying how this system seems to be working :-)

  • Create New...