>However, it may not be difficult at all to teach Enigma to cycle
>through the available difficulties when a level is selected - for
>instance, if a level has Easy and Normal, the selections will be
>available, but when there's only Normal, selecting Easy isn't
>possible. Once that's done, then if a level has Hard or Nightmare
>settings also, they would be selectable. So... basically, I'm mostly
>for giving the level designers the option in the Enigma game engine to
>do their best.
Methinks it's a good idea indeed ! I can't wait to see Nightmare
landscapes ! ;-)
>As for reordering the levels - I think it's now possible to do so
>(with the indexname field in the index files) without Enigma
>"forgetting" your best time after the move. But how should we go
>about re-ordering? Will someone propose a re-ordering and we all give
>feedback on it?
I think we should rate all levels from a single pack (that's 100 levels
in all) by difficulty on a 1 to 10 scale. This would include nine "regular"
landscapes plus one meditation landscape per "difficulty level". Once that's
done, just reorder them by difficulty. Ten "difficulty levels" seems
accurate enough to me. This should be something like "1-Obvious 2-Easy
3-Simple... 8-Hard 9-Harsh 10-Impossible !". ;-) I think if we all use
this system, instead of reordering the levels in a "linear" way, our
opinions about the ten level-groups order should not differ very much.
Cheers,
Aurore.
_______________________________________________
Enigma-devel mailing list
Enigma-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/enigma-devel
