Grimrock

Make 1vs1 fight more deep isn't necessary the solution, there's much more potential to orient the design for fights against group because this will naturally allows more variations.

And the more accurate and dangerous you make each enemy the more restriction you add to fight group design.

The big herders present quite a different tactical situation with their insta-gas cloud if you step near them and the fact that the cloud remains around for 10sec. I found the challenge a refreshing change of pace whenever they were in the mix

How about monsters that take more than one tile? =)

That would be frickin' awesome! Maybe if they turned their tail would push you over or squish you like the cube if you're up against a wall

Sol_HSA wrote:How about monsters that take more than one tile? =)

An interesting idea. I can imagine 1x2 and 2x2 sized monsters but that would require an engine able to support such oversized creatures.

Komag wrote:The big herders present quite a different tactical situation with their insta-gas cloud if you step near them and the fact that the cloud remains around for 10sec. I found the challenge a refreshing change of pace whenever they were in the mix

Aye the big herders are (beside the cube) the exception regarding combat because Poison Cloud is a Damage-over-Time-attack.

Dr.Disaster wrote:

Sol_HSA wrote:How about monsters that take more than one tile? =)

An interesting idea. I can imagine 1x2 and 2x2 sized monsters but that would require an engine able to support such oversized creatures.

Perhaps it could be done with two monsters; one always follows the other and the bodies connected via careful animation...

This might allow a dragon with a tail that could attack independently, instead of one that just occupies an adjacent square and requires all sorts of checks to avoid clipping walls and obstructions.

"Tail AI" could be dumb, and use a hook to receive it's animation choice, destination, and when to move, from the other monster.

**Except there might be an issue with walking, where the tail could not start to move into the head's square until after the head had moved to the next tile; that could be a deal killer.

Yeah, it's a lot easier said than done.

I have to say that this idea is bad, but I like the "side effect" ideas. As a rule of thumb, you don't want the enemies to be able to attack diagonally if the party can't do the same. And for the most part, this isn't an important thing to add because it's not a part of the tile-move RPG convention that LoG tried (and succeeded) to revive.

Dr.Disaster wrote:An interesting idea. I can imagine 1x2 and 2x2 sized monsters but that would require an engine able to support such oversized creatures.

This would be hell to try to add to the current engine, because it forces all entities to have a tile dimension associated with them and it forces the devs to add a bunch of additional if statements or whatever for each enemy that consists of multiple tiles. Not to mention the bug testing involved in this, as well as how easy such enemies would likely be to kite and avoid.

I'd rather have them focus on more important features, at least for now. Single-tiled mobs work just fine for this type of game. There's no need to fix it.

Darklord wrote:Well it would completely change the strategies! I think it would also cause animation issues though, so may not be easy or ideal to implement. I think increasing monster speed is an easier option, and would have a similar effect on difficulty.

Daniel.

just make monsters that nuke all 8 surrounding blocks with an aoe attack.

I tihnk ogres should be able to stunstomp and freeze a party for 3 seconds if they are in one of the 8 surrounding squares.

that's not a bad idea, and could maybe be hacked a bit - make screen shake for one second, do paralyzed for a couple seconds, could have it run on monster turn, or on all the squares he runs past while charging after onCharge