2x2 strafing undermines character building [edited]

[Whisper]

Why adding new options (for those who wants them, those who dont - can just skil them) can be not good?


Maybe some people dont like dancing around monsters and just want brutal hand to hand combat? With current system its impossible - you are basicly FORCED to dance.

[1varangian]

Can the people who post in a dismissive and negative tone come up with any actual reasons why they think the 2x2 dance should remain as omnipotent as it is?

A valid argument would be to say that the appeal of combat is precisely to manually circle the enemies. If that is the game the devs wanted to make I would suggest simplifying the RPG elements of the game because they don't matter anyway and can only gimp your characters if you make the wrong choices. However, the devs did put in character progression, stats, skills, equipment.. all that. I can't see why they would then eliminate the need for all that by letting players control the monsters' ability to hit them back.

I for one would like the RPG elements come in stronger and have an actual impact on gameplay. The old school attitude is that games should be harder and force you to think. The 2x2 cheese is easy mode and it's the one feature of the golden oldies that should face merciless evolution. Although I do seem to remember DM didn't let you cheese-strafe your way through fights like Grimrock does...

[Eobersig]

Interesting discussion, though a bit too heated. I take no side in the argument (oh, I have a personal preference but what my preference is doesn't really matter).

Generally it's about the current balance between RPG-style mechanics and twitch mechanics. As of now the twitch mechanic is a sure winner in almost all fights. Nothing wrong with that per se - but it makes large parts of the skill tree and the gear choice (both RPG mechanics) rather useless. People can just go full-out on the offensive skills and ignore almost anything else. That's usually a sign that the balance is not fine as is.

But I believe that first the developers have to decide whether they want a more RPG-type or a more twitchy combat mechanic. If they want the twitchy combat style then there's no need to modify anything with the combat - instead the skill trees (and the gear choice) should reflect that decision, for example by introducing skills and gear that have movement (strafe) penalties or bonuses.

Only if the developers want a more RPG-type combat then they (and we) should think about how to modify combat rules.

[Insectoid]

First of all: I didn't mean to be rude or something. I just don't like the ideas. So don't take it personal.

Can the people who post in a dismissive and negative tone come up with any actual reasons why they think the 2x2 dance should remain as omnipotent as it is?

My simple answer and my strongest argument: Because it was 100% fun for me playing that way.

Also 2x2 technique is imho not as "omnipotent" as you describe. Maybe you're just way better than me (no sarcasm here, maybe you are!), but I still get hit sometimes using 2x2, especially when there is more than one enemy at once. Also in rare cases I get trapped into a corner.

Even if 2x2 would be somehow prohibited, there is another technique that is as "omnipotent" in your sense of argumentation:

SpoilerShow

You can hide behind doors/gates, open them, hit the monster really fast, then immediately close the door, wait until all party members have cooled down and repeat this until the monster is dead. Even the Goromorg which are able to open doors can be defeated like this, because you can just continue closing until you're cooled down.

There are other games that give you the "fairness" you demand here, but LoG is grid based with all the restrictions on the one side and advantages on the other side. I really really love it that way.

Here is a (kiddingly) suggestion for for you to improve the difficulty of fights:
Dissassign your strafe-keys and the backward-key. Playing like this will prevent you from 2x2 and from fleeing like a coward. Maybe AH could add a Steam achievement for playing like this.

Kind regards
Insectoid

[oodyboo]

The suggestion is to add a delay between clicking to attack and actually landing the attack. Before the attack, not a cooldown. So you would have to stay in the square longer for the mobs to get a chance to counterattack.

<Edit: consolidated quote>

With this change why wouldn't I just click the attacks earlier, i.e. before the monster is in front of me, with the result being identical to status quo?

This change would greatly diminish the player's ability to quickly react to the environment (e.g. surprise monsters), and essentially force you into starting each fight strafing while your attacks "warm up." If anything, due to missing attacks when your timing is off or the monster moves the other way and you don't turn in time, you would end up having to do the 2x2 strafing even more.

And so I suspect you would not like this change either, as it will be counter productive to your well-intentioned but (imo) misguided goal of shifting the focus of combat from player alertness/reaction (aka player skill) to your character stats.

If you care to know why I think this is a misguided goal, please continue reading:

-------
As a veteran power gamer I fully understand the appeal of trying to make the absolute best and most perfect party, as that is the focus of the vast majority of role playing games. I think most RPGs will fall somewhere on a scale between character and player based progression design. While most lean towards character based progression, Grimrock leans the other way.

Please allow me to clarify the distinction:

If a game's sense of challenge-reward is dependent on the player's ability to power-game their characters' stats, then there ends up being little more to that game than to build your characters according to the mathematically calculated maxima and/or "clever use of mechanics/exploits/gimmicks/power-gaming". This is often a rather complex and interesting puzzle itself, and herein lies the heart of the challenge-reward structure for these character progression based games. As a young gamer I gained a formidable understanding of mathematics from power-gaming/and min/max strategy games, and so I fully appreciate the benefits and enjoyment offered by this style of game.

In other words, character progression games' challenge is generally dependent on the Virtual skill of your Virtual character which is often a direct result of grinding Virtual experience. For many people in practice, this means they follow a recipe some smart power-gamer posts on a forum or else they feel they are not "playing" the game optimally/correctly/or whatever. And almost inevitably most games are trivialized by one set of tricks or another, or simply by dedicating enough time grinding exp so your character overpowers the challenges

Contrast character progression games to *player* progression games. These are games in which the challenge is regulated less by the player's choice of virtual character stats and more by the player's understanding of the game mechanics(combat, puzzles, etc) and ability to execute/react to the environment. In other words, the sense of challenge-reward in these style of games is based more on the player's skill which improves as the player gains experience with the game. As you progress through the game, it's more important that *you* get better from experience by developing reasoning skills to solve puzzles, training quicker hand-eye coordination, or whatever the game mechanisms are based on.

Dungeon Master incorporated many challenges of the latter type, and Legend of Grimrock is as far as I know is based on it. There are countless character progression based RPG's you can play but I submit that Legend of Grimrock need not, and imo should not, shift from its roots and core design to be more like most other RPGs.

Neither of these two style is objectively better than the other, they both have their pros, cons, and place in the gaming market. In fact all relevant games include aspects of both styles to varying degrees. It is important to consider Grimrock's design context when considering changes to it.

After decades of gaming I have come to realize that virtual character progression is a great and fun escape, but at the end of the game when your characters are done you have little to show for it. Your virtual character's skills and stats are of no use outside of that game. In my opinion, well designed player progression based games have a more lasting sense of reward and will often improve your ability not only to play other games, but may even improve your real life critical thinking, hand-eye coordination, etc.

While I disagree with the effectiveness of the particular suggestion I quoted way up at the top, I do agree Grimrock has some stat balance and other issues and it's good for people post their suggestions and feedback to help resolve them.

There is also huge room for improvement with the combat system by expanding on it, not destroying it. Additional combat complexity in the form of increased variety of options and 'smarter' monster AI could go a long way towards resolving the simplicity of the current combat dance. Simple AI changes or even just adjusting the placement/characteristics of monsters could go a long way towards breaking up a monotonous combat dance rather than simply disabling the movement dimension.

I think this is a better approach for Grimrock than replacing its relatively unique and defining feature with a character-based combat challenge like most RPGs. I much prefer the current "omnipotent" combat trick that requires some alertness and timing, and adds a second dimension to combat (moving while attacking) than the idea of one dimensional "wizardy (final fantasy for you youngin)" press fight fight fight and your character's effectiveness is entirely based on the number values representing virtual skills. There are plenty of other RPGs like this on the market.

[1varangian]

But I believe that first the developers have to decide whether they want a more RPG-type or a more twitchy combat mechanic. If they want the twitchy combat style then there's no need to modify anything with the combat - instead the skill trees (and the gear choice) should reflect that decision, for example by introducing skills and gear that have movement (strafe) penalties or bonuses.

This.

Right now they are halfway between two and the game isn't as good as it could be as either twitch or RPG based. It's counter-productive to have the twitch side of things make the RPG side mostly irrelevant. One side of things needs to support the other, not make it obsolete. The game essentially is RPG / stat based so the twitch side needs to work with that.

[Stamm]

I think that the fighting system is already suitably demanding, for us mortals anyway. When evasing monsters there is quite enough to do, loading spells in time stress, waiting your weapons to cool down, not cornering yourself, worrying if there are other monsters nearby, or just running away in panic!

[1varangian]

The suggestion is to add a delay between clicking to attack and actually landing the attack. Before the attack, not a cooldown. So you would have to stay in the square longer for the mobs to get a chance to counterattack.

<Edit: consolidated quote>

With this change why wouldn't I just click the attacks earlier, i.e. before the monster is in front of me, with the result being identical to status quo?

This change would greatly diminish the player's ability to quickly react to the environment (e.g. surprise monsters), and essentially force you into starting each fight strafing while your attacks "warm up." If anything, due to missing attacks when your timing is off or the monster moves the other way and you don't turn in time, you would end up having to do the 2x2 strafing even more.

And so I suspect you would not like this change either, as it will be counter productive to your well-intentioned but (imo) misguided goal of shifting the focus of combat from player alertness/reaction (aka player skill) to your character stats.

If you care to know why I think this is a misguided goal, please continue reading:

<snip>

Thanks for a well thought out post!

I understand and enjoy both styles of play, action/player skill and tactical stat based (where player skill is also a factor). The main argument for me is that the strafe is so easy that it makes combat trivial. And that it isn't optimal game design to make a system (preventing enemies from attacking by strafing) that trivializes other aspects of the game (skills/character building).

Concerning the attack timer: it could easily be made so that you need the intended target to be there when you first initiate the attack, and any attempts to zig-zag your way away and back when the attack triggers just interrupt the attack.

[Stamm]

..
-------
As a veteran power gamer I fully understand the appeal of trying to make the absolute best and most perfect party, as that is the focus of the vast majority of role playing games. I think most RPGs will fall somewhere on a scale between character and player based progression design. While most lean towards character based progression, Grimrock leans the other way.

Please allow me to clarify the distinction:

If a game's sense of challenge-reward is dependent on the player's ability to power-game their characters' stats, then there ends up being little more to that game than to build your characters according to the mathematically calculated maxima and/or "clever use of mechanics/exploits/gimmicks/power-gaming". This is often a rather complex and interesting puzzle itself, and herein lies the heart of the challenge-reward structure for these character progression based games. As a young gamer I gained a formidable understanding of mathematics from power-gaming/and min/max strategy games, and so I fully appreciate the benefits and enjoyment offered by this style of game.

In other words, character progression games' challenge is generally dependent on the Virtual skill of your Virtual character which is often a direct result of grinding Virtual experience. For many people in practice, this means they follow a recipe some smart power-gamer posts on a forum or else they feel they are not "playing" the game optimally/correctly/or whatever. And almost inevitably most games are trivialized by one set of tricks or another, or simply by dedicating enough time grinding exp so your character overpowers the challenges

Contrast character progression games to *player* progression games. These are games in which the challenge is regulated less by the player's choice of virtual character stats and more by the player's understanding of the game mechanics(combat, puzzles, etc) and ability to execute/react to the environment. In other words, the sense of challenge-reward in these style of games is based more on the player's skill which improves as the player gains experience with the game. As you progress through the game, it's more important that *you* get better from experience by developing reasoning skills to solve puzzles, training quicker hand-eye coordination, or whatever the game mechanisms are based on.

Dungeon Master incorporated many challenges of the latter type, and Legend of Grimrock is as far as I know is based on it. There are countless character progression based RPG's you can play but I submit that Legend of Grimrock need not, and imo should not, shift from its roots and core design to be more like most other RPGs.

Neither of these two style is objectively better than the other, they both have their pros, cons, and place in the gaming market. In fact all relevant games include aspects of both styles to varying degrees. It is important to consider Grimrock's design context when considering changes to it.

After decades of gaming I have come to realize that virtual character progression is a great and fun escape, but at the end of the game when your characters are done you have little to show for it. Your virtual character's skills and stats are of no use outside of that game. In my opinion, well designed player progression based games have a more lasting sense of reward and will often improve your ability not only to play other games, but may even improve your real life critical thinking, hand-eye coordination, etc.

While I disagree with the effectiveness of the particular suggestion I quoted way up at the top, I do agree Grimrock has some stat balance and other issues and it's good for people post their suggestions and feedback to help resolve them.

There is also huge room for improvement with the combat system by expanding on it, not destroying it. Additional combat complexity in the form of increased variety of options and 'smarter' monster AI could go a long way towards resolving the simplicity of the current combat dance. Simple AI changes or even just adjusting the placement/characteristics of monsters could go a long way towards breaking up a monotonous combat dance simply disabling the concept.

I think this is a better approach for Grimrock than replacing its relatively unique and defining feature with a character-based combat challenge like most RPGs. I much prefer the current "omnipotent" combat trick that requires some alertness and timing, and adds a second dimension to combat (moving while attacking) than the idea of one dimensional "wizardy (final fantasy for you youngin)" press fight fight fight and your character's effectiveness is entirely based on the number values representing virtual skills. There are plenty of other RPGs like this on the market.

Hear hear. This here is a well-thought analysis.

[Darklord]

Heh turn up game speed to 1.5 or 2 or something, then you'll have a challenge, good luck strafing away then! if with the enhanced game speed you find yourself getting slaughtered you could try changing it to easy. In combination you'll have much harder to outwit enemies that don't kill you instantly.

Worth a try!

Daniel.