1varangian wrote: 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.
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. 
