How Do You Design Fights?

[Jacek Bourne]

What process do you undertake when creating a setpiece fight? If you use multiple processes then explain all of them and why you use certain ones for particular circumstances. I’m especially interested in how people design complicated setpieces that require many steps in order to survive. If you can, please be extremely specific and detailed in your explanation. I think I’d find it fascinating.

Edited March 18, 2022 by Jacek Bourne

[slugger]

- Make a fight that's too hard

- Play it fifty times until I figure out the ridiculous strategy that makes it survivable

- Done, release!

[NinjaDelphox]

I make a fight I find super easy, have a friend test the map and tell me it is too hard, make that version of the fight for multiplayer, and remove 2 of the Arch Viles for regular UV.

[xScavengerWolfx]

2 hours ago, Jacek Bourne said:

What process do you undertake when creating a setpiece fight? If you use multiple processes then explain all of them and why you use certain ones for particular circumstances. I’m especially interested in how people design complicated setpieces that require many steps in order to survive. If you can, please be extremely specific and detailed in your explanation. I think I’d find it fascinating.

Really it all depends on what type of fighting we're talking about. Like i've learned when first getting into doom (back in late 2015-early 2016) fights are a dime a dozen. Some are really great i.e if you grab an item the walls come down and boom spooky boners pop and scream, or if your a Casali you like to have a shit ton of monsters come crawling out and just murder you and laugh at your failed attempt at winning a fight. 

 

For me as a map maker i try to figure out when and how to put in a fight between the player and the monsters. One way i do it is when they least expect it like for example when i was doing my Underground Toxicity remake map (1 year remake when scavenger?) i had an area where as soon you walked into it the wall came down and you we're trapped with a shit ton of enemies and you had to slug it out in order to survive.....now granted that was a year ago when i made that but since then i learned from watching and playing wads that i've learned i should be more creative with the fights between the monsters and the player, if set player survives the onslaught then they get rewarded, if the player dies then they need to rethink on how they should go about it and re try. 

 

TL;DR: Basically it comes down to this, Depends on what type of fights you want. Do you want a mike tyson fight? Do you want a slaughter fight? Or do you want to be an asshole i mean a mad man like Dario and have a massive ton of enemies and have them laugh at your stupidly for failing to win fights? Really it's all up to the map maker and there chose of what to do for fights.  

[Stabbey]

Here's some good reading material on the subject:

 

Specifically note the categories of encounter:

Waste, Punish, Challenge, Kill

 

Waste encounters are easy fights intended for you to spend your resources to defeat. Punish encounters are the unexpected - they're things which are intended to add mental stress, to make the player less sure and confident and worried about what could happen next. Challenges are interesting fights which require more focus and attention than waste encounters, and are intended to cause damage even on good runs. Kill encounters are high lethality - play sloppy and the player will either die or suffer major damage.

 

I think one of these days I should put together a run-through of one of my own maps and explain which category the encounters fall into and why.

 

It's important to figure out what you want the fight to accomplish.

Do you want the fight to be avoidable or skippable? Can some or all of the fight be skipped?

Do you want the player to stick around until everything is dead?

What are the primary sources of challenge in the fight? Numbers of small weak enemies? Turreted monsters? Big bosses? Environmental Hazards?

 

What enemies would be a good fit for the fight? Do I need to adjust the architecture to accommodate the monsters I want to include? What mixture of monsters would be good here? What effect does height add to the fight?

 

Where is this fight in relation to the flow of the map, and the difficulty of nearby encounters? Do I want this to be the setpiece challenge encounter, or should be be a bit of a breather between difficult fights?

 

...The amount of questions you could ask is endless.

 

You really need to play the fight a lot of times over and over again. Play it how you intend to to be played. Then try to avoid the fight and move on. Try to see if you can escape and get soft-locked out. If you care about co-op play, see if it's possible for co-op players to be locked out of the fight. Is there a way to get them in? Do all that and get a fight you're satisfied with BEFORE giving it to playtesters, then see how they react and decide what changes - if any - are needed.

 

Edited March 18, 2022 by Stabbey

[Yumheart]

Cool idea for a thread. When it comes to set-piece encounters, I usually have a kind of list in my head, with things that make a fight interesting to me and I try to check off at least a few of these per encounter. If I were to write down a list like this off the top of my head, it'd look smth like this:

- Targets to prioritize

- Monsters attacking from multiple directions
- Height variation or turret enemies

- Not too much space to run around, though that can be fun ever so often

- Needing to employ multiple tactics / a fight having different stages

- A time limit of some kind, this may be through damaging surfaces or timed monster clostets / continuous spawning of monsters

- Some sort of additional restriction, like scarce resources of a particular type, darkness or parts of the arena's floor being damaging
- Danger, aka some sort of punishment upon failure to react appropriately to the current situation

I also try to pay attention to if I'm overusing a particular monster or type of fight. For example, Archviles can be used to make almost every encounter interesting, but having them in every encounter can quickly lead to redundancy and tediousness.
A few popular megawads suffer from this a little bit, imo.

When it comes to (sophisticated) incidental combat, which might be a very interesting topic on it's own, I tend to assign certain attributes to certain types of monsters, particularly their effect on a player when there isn't any, for lack of a better word, "artificial pressure" on them. For example, high-tiers or mid-tiers in bigger numbers will most likely cause a player to avoid them when they don't have any big guns or enough ammo yet, while hitscanners can "pull" the player into their direction when placed well, because of how running away isn't really an option when you can't physically dodge an enemy's attack, so you wanna kill them as quickly as possible.
Placing a desireable item or weapon of some sort will also usually motivate a player towards that, especially when they've already encountered monsters who would be easier to dispose of when in possesion of that particular item.

This definitely isn't the best way of constructing fights, having a checklist does limit my ability to construct truly original puzzle fights for instance, but it's what has prooven to work best for me if I want to map in a timely manner.

Edited March 18, 2022 by Yumheart

[El Inferno]

There are two methods I've been using lately to design fights in my maps.

First one is to prioritize the geometry over combat:

-Before starting a new area I have a rather clear picture of the arena I want to make. If the layout is complex enough then the chances are it may lead to some interesting combat scenarios.

-After finishing a rough layout I start placing monsters/monster spawners to apply enough pressure and avoid obvious camp spots etc. Then I may faceplant into the resulting mess to figure out what going on in the fight and what would be the strategy to beat it.

-With this strategy in mind, do the final balancing around the particular route I have in mind. 

This approach is great for speedmapping and usually leads to rather chaotic gameplay. Examples:

- Sol Ank map05 (3 or so hour speedmap): first I made a compact interconnected arena layout, then placed monsters and monster teleporters around, after playing the fight a bit I placed cell ammo and health to force the player to move around, then placed keys to the exit to make sure you can't escape too early. The result is not exactly great map but very fun to run around and bfg stuff in a complete mess. https://youtu.be/ZEG3Bxa15hs

 

- Sol Ank map03 (1 hour speedmap): I had an idea of a big city layout where you have to avoid large hordes of cybs and whatnot. First I tried to draw the layout on paper but it wasn't really looking good so I just went straight in the editor to draw something similar but was not really copying the paper drawing. The result turned out good enough and I didn't change it after that. Then just mindless placement of monsters everywhere and two large hordes of cybs and revs on opposite sides to hopefully create enough pressure. The rest of creation was rushed without too much though. There's actually a video of the process: https://youtu.be/fzxFnXNfTlA 

- Sol Ank map08 (initially 30 minutes speedmap) is an example where this approach gives undesirable results. I made a small maze-like map with the idea of player running around and fighting a ton revs in it. But the actual strategy turned out to just hold all revs in a corridor, essentially camping the fight. There was not much I could do to save the fight idea without completely changing the geometry so I went to balance the map around this boring strategy. https://youtu.be/U4HuPk4Cw2I

- A non-speedmap example, for a change: Advent, map01, the big fight in the castle. I was really struggling with making sensible interior areas at the moment and so I was mostly trying to get some geometry done, only after that I started placing lots of monsters in there to create a meaningful fight. The result is a pretty difficult to figure out but not too exciting gameplaywise encounter.

 

 

 

Second method is to focus on combat over geometry, obviously. For this I should have an vague idea of how the fight is going to play before making any or almost any geometry. Then I figure out what kind of geometry will serve the fight, and after that the usual balancing/testing iterations. Examples:

- Hyperload. All key fights in this map were designed using this approach. YSK: the fight is designed with direct sl29 reference in mind: raising and lowering walls which hide you from a group of viles forcing you to move quickly around the area. RSK: a platform with revs on 2 sides and the only cover is a raising and lowering crusher so you have to time the moment to destroy all missiles following you. This one didn't really work out well in the end. BSK: this one is kind of based on an older map of mine (Cave Maps, map01), or more specifically on the playthough of JohnSuitpee of that map. The idea was to have a big horde of enemies which you can get around only using a certain path which becomes unavailable once you cross it once but which can be opened again by pressing a switch or whatever. The final fight of Sunder map17 uses a similar idea btw. 

- Inferno's Cauldron final fight. The fight idea was inspired by HRII map29 final arena, totg01 caco fight and a certain fight from my wip project DotW, maybe also by the early cacocloud fight in okuplok. The idea was to have a large cacocloud which you have to circle around on boundaries on the 'cauldron' while doing some medium difficulty platforming. Pretty simple concept, but by adding area denial viles in the middle and limiting cells, it gave an ok-ish fight. It often happens with fights like this that the actual strategy the fight is built around is not terribly hard to execute, but figuring it out might be the main issue.

 

I haven't posted non-speedmaps in a while and don't really want to write about wip stuff, so I'll stop here :^) Nice thread idea btw

[PeterMoro]

Unless I have something specific in mind:

I design sets that have flow and contrast between space and narrowness. Then I test gameplay with different monster combinations. Trial and error until you get what you want. 

[Paf]

1: archvile

2: chaingunner

3: revenant

4: done

["JL" was too short]

Poorly.

[Solmyr]

Out of the 5 or 6 maps i released, the only ones that have setpice fights come from a single map called "Office Stalker", and the beginning of MAP 18 "Drowning Pits" from Rowdy Rudy's Revenge II: Powertrip!

 

They're different but share the same thought process at first: 

1. What sort of fight will be interesting and memorable for the player to face?
2. What interesting gimmick in relation to point 1) can i pull off?
3. How much can i direct and predict the monster pathfinding and how can i exploit that to push the player in a certain direction or play style?
4. What if i can make it so high level monsters chase the player and force him/her to move onwards, while fighting or running away due to the pressure put by the pursuing horde of monsters.
5. Let's try it with a lone monster let's say a Baron of Hell, or a Cyberdemon.

Thought process for Office Stalker:

Spoiler

 

1. Choose a spot in the map for a teleport destination, and surround it with blocking lines so when the time comes to teleport in the cyberdemon it won't stray far from the desired location and would chase after the player.
2. Draw the rest of the map with the purpouse of not letting the player go too far away, so cybie doesn't stumble around for too much before randomly "choosing" to go after the player.
3. Draw hallways big enough to fit 1 and a half cyberdemons so it doesn't feel too tight, with angled ends so it bounces from them and moves forwards instead of bouncing 2 or more times without moving away or into the hallway.
4. What if it corners the player in a thight area? I should draw some means of escape to get the player around and still get chased.
5. Making 4 small rooms where cybie can't fit through just to give the player breathing room.
6. Populate the rooms with monsters that annoy but won't kill the player just keep the player or limit his/her movement to buy cybie time to catch up.
7. Making windows for the cyber to shoot through (and monsters inside can attack the player as well), should prove interesting because it would limit player movement further and add to tension alongside the constant stomping sounds.
8. Once the cyber has moved far away into the hallway, signaled by the player hearing the mechanical stoming moving away, he/she will know when its time to open the door and run to another room, or dart away from the hallway to avoid getting splattered by cybie's rockets ,or kite him out of the hallway to get safely into the rooms.
9. Maybe i should provide an alternate way to access those rooms, as a back door into the first room at the hallway entryway and a small crate box inside the room to serve as a step for the player to jump out of the window and into the hallway so it doesn't waste too much time killing the mosnters inside.
10. Well now what? What about the rest of the map and it's stalker?
11. How about a staircase that the cyberdemon can't fit through but the player can? That will keep him in place from now on while the player explores the part of the map where he isn't chased by cybie.
12. To give the player a nasty surprise i should draw two sectors and raise them just enough to work as a roadblock for cybie, so it can't acess the room with the staircase in which a teleport line runs across near the first step.
13. once the player moves away into the left hallway that's in the room besides the staircase long enough he/she will cross a line that'll lower the roadblock, and let cybie reach a teleport line that will place him on a caged room where he'll assume the role of turret shooting rockets at the back of the player while he/she fights mid level monsters such as hell knights and revenants that push him/her back away in the middle of the hallway.
14. In order to not make the fight a nearly inescapable pincer, i should angle the walls to give the player breathing room to avoid rockets just enough for them to pass through soften up the oposition and ensure infighting with some of the remaining mosnters.
15. Once the player reaches the far end of the hallway where cybie can't attack him/her unless it gets shot, give him/her some breathing room with ammo and health to restock. That room should've two switches, one that tricks the player into lowering an adjacent floor with a teleport linedef from the cage where cybie is at, the other just lowers a roadblock on the room with the staircase that lets the player progress through another room.
16. What will make that room interesting? A blue key on an altar that when crossed it quickly lowers hidden doors to trap the player inside and the brightness levels of that room should drop to almost pitch black, then to make it worse lower floors with mancubi and spectres on them, once the player kills the last mancubus they should be free to get out of the trap room (I wanted to make a map that's not Dead Simple clone, so it's on the 07 slot)
17. Once the player gets out of the room they should find that no cyberdemon is inside the cage in the staircase room, and it teleported somewhere where it can't be heard.
18. The player should kill some minor oposition when they backtrack their way to the blue key door, once on the blue key room, they should see another hallway to their left and see the cyberdemon emerging from a dark room disguised by a fire midtexture so it looks like a shadowy silhouette emerging from the flames, there the player should kill it with the BFG so the final fight is short and sweet.

The map turned out a bit different in the mapping process, but this was the thought process as far as i can recall and if my memory serves me right.

 

 

 

 

Thought process for the starting area of Map 18 "Drowning Pits"

 

1. What if a horde of barons chased the player around and push him/her into a squad of hitscanners.
2. What if the player has to choose between jumping down the pit downstairs from the starting area because of the row of barons pushing forward and the lesser enemies shooting at him/her from another room to his/her right.
3. If the player chooses to "jump down" the pit they should face something else like those flame cacos that spew a steram of flame and maybe some rocket dudes that fires revenant rockets.
4. I'll make more barons teleport after the player crosses a line in the staircase.
5. To increase the tension, i'll put a couple of barons facing away at the start, so they'll wake up when the player shoots at the first enemies on the staircase.
6. If the player opts to not jump down the pit, then they should go to the hitscanner room, where they'll see another staircase with a high level weapon siting atop, this will lure the player into a trap where he/she will have to shoot flying enemies and monsters from adjacent rooms that keep him/her from moving, while the barons quickly catch up.
7. Then he/she will be forced to kill those barons first because of their proximity to the staircase, they can and will climb up to engage the player in melee.
8. Give the player an alternate route to escape to avoid getting overwhelmed by the mix of barons, flying monsters and hitscanners from adjacent rooms.

Once again it turned out differently but that was the thought process as i recall it.

 

Edited March 19, 2022 by Solmyr

[Thelokk]

My personal niche of mapping is adventure / exploration oriented maps, so I rarely rely on 'setpieces' and mostly focus on incidental fights, with chokepoints ever so often where the player is forced to confront a certain team in order to progress - sort of like a living, moving keyed door. 

I try, any time it's possible, to work on multiple heights. The lower to the ground hitscanners / turret monsters are, the more they will encourage infighting, shifting the battle in a different direction, so I tend to 'perch' turrets in hard to reach areas, usually going imps-mancubus-revenant-spiders in order of increasing difficulty, where they will get a clear potshot of the player and minimize infighting. Then, on the floor, I decide how much meat shield the heavy hitters in the back (usually arch-viles, but also pain elementals) should have, and place accordingly demons or knights. Remember than infighting is triggered by a counter tied to movement, the less a monster has to move to reach the player, the less it will infight. Confined spaces - less infighting.

 

I am very fond of 'team' encounters - where the player faces, in a limited space (either by architecture or damaging floors), a small but heterogeneous group of synergistic enemies. Ie: a vile perched above, which you can los by relying on geometry that, on the other hand, could get you trapped by a BoH or two-three HK if you linger too long. Then maybe a chaingunner above with a clear view of you hiding spot, so that the clever player will let the barons or knights live long enough that they provide cover, and maybe kill the chaingunner for you. 

 

Another thing I like (and that I often get flak for by my playtesters, heh) are traps that conjugate monsters and enviroment to put you in a 'lesser of two evils' scenario. A tiny ramp over a bottomless pit, and monsters waiting for you on both ends? it's up to the smart player whether they can afford to clear a path while negotiating the ground, or if they'd rather rush in and meet the monsters open arms, even in melee range with no cover, if that gets them out of hostile terrain. Do they have the health/armor to afford the maneuver? If there is an exit from the pit, is it perhaps better to drop down and take damage than having to face monster opposition? 

 

Golden rule: players alway follow the goodies, and they rarely will stop to consider whether those goodies are booby trapped. Starve them of ammo, lower a wall to a corridor with a stack of cells at the end of it, and 99% they'll run in without a single thought. This ties into another frequent player behavior - assuming they are actually tankier than they are. So used to blasting imps into oblivion, they go 'wow' when such imps show up in their face and mass claw them down in seconds. All these and other psychologies can be exploited to create traps that are basically unfair, but can serve their purpose from time to time. 

 

Another thing I sometimes disagree with playtesters with, but I still think is fair and square, is to provide a way out of a fight / exit from the map without the need to kill everything. Not everyone is a UV maxer, and I have no problem for players to find a way around my cleverly placed cybie if that requires some creative thinking on their part. Good for them. 

 

I usually first design a map's geometry, then work on the enemy planning and placement. From my experience, unless you literally design a series of empty squares, it's very hard not to have in your hands elements that either the player or the monsters can exploit. 

Edited March 20, 2022 by Thelokk

[Stabbey]

Monster composition and placement is a really important skill to develop. Players need to develop an instinct for what feels right and wrong. If you're only running around in circles for minutes at a time waiting for enemies to infight each other to death, or if you're killing tough enemies with weak weapons one at a time, it probably feels wrong, even if you can't place it into words.

 

In a map I'm currently working on, I set up a very nice ambush with the architecture.  Monster closets on two sides, and three raised positions for elevated monsters to attack from, plus an additional monster closet near the start which releases monsters to block the obvious easy escape that direction. One additional restriction I placed on the fight is that the player could only be assumed to have the single-barrel shotgun, chaingun, and chainsaw. So therefore, it was important to ensure that the fight isn't too much of a slog.

 

I plopped in a set of monsters which seemed right - shotgunners, imps, and demons with a couple Hell Knights for beef, and some Cacos coming from the raised areas and four hell knights blocking the entrance and tested it out. The fight didn't feel very good. I tried more variations, increasing the number of cacos, removing the ground-level hell knights, swapping in more shotgunners instead. It still didn't feel good. I played around with it more and trimmed out many of the mid-tiers, and settled on 2 Hell Knights ambushing from the start, 3 Cacodemons coming from the raised areas, followed up by 2 Revenants on each ledge to serve as pests, and on the ground-level, a bunch of demons and two arachnotrons. That produced a mix which felt more solid. The demons box the player in, and can be easily killed by the arachnos, the cacodemons snipe from above, and Revenants add a additional element of distraction. If the player tries to run, the Hell Knights will be there to block the way and let the demons catch up, while the cacodemons and Revenants have a clear line of sight on the escape route.

 

It could possibly be improved, of course, but that seems like a satisfying challenge for a limited arsenal (even the chainsaw can be effective there under the right conditions). In my tests the Revenants tend to stick to the end, but there's a reasonable amount of cover, and the downward firing angle means that even homing rockets can crash into the ground when they try and loop around. The Revenants are also optional and could be ignored, but there are rewards on their ledges in plain sight to tempt the player into sticking around to kill them, and make killing them feel more like a good idea and less like a slog.

[Stabbey]

On 3/20/2022 at 11:43 AM, Thelokk said:

I am very fond of 'team' encounters - where the player faces, in a limited space (either by architecture or damaging floors), a small but heterogeneous group of synergistic enemies. Ie: a vile perched above, which you can los by relying on geometry that, on the other hand, could get you trapped by a BoH or two-three HK if you linger too long. Then maybe a chaingunner above with a clear view of you hiding spot, so that the clever player will let the barons or knights live long enough that they provide cover, and maybe kill the chaingunner for you. 

 

Another thing I like (and that I often get flak for by my playtesters, heh) are traps that conjugate monsters and enviroment to put you in a 'lesser of two evils' scenario. A tiny ramp over a bottomless pit, and monsters waiting for you on both ends? it's up to the smart player whether they can afford to clear a path while negotiating the ground, or if they'd rather rush in and meet the monsters open arms, even in melee range with no cover, if that gets them out of hostile terrain. Do they have the health/armor to afford the maneuver? If there is an exit from the pit, is it perhaps better to drop down and take damage than having to face monster opposition? 

 

Golden rule: players alway follow the goodies, and they rarely will stop to consider whether those goodies are booby trapped. Starve them of ammo, lower a wall to a corridor with a stack of cells at the end of it, and 99% they'll run in without a single thought. This ties into another frequent player behavior - assuming they are actually tankier than they are. So used to blasting imps into oblivion, they go 'wow' when such imps show up in their face and mass claw them down in seconds. All these and other psychologies can be exploited to create traps that are basically unfair, but can serve their purpose from time to time.

 

All good stuff here.

 

Mixing enemies which make you want to move and enemies which make you want to stay still makes for a tricky encounter which can be a lot of fun. Arch-Viles are the most notable enemies which push the "stay still" button, so mixing them with Revenants and Demons to make the player want to move is often a challenging combination.

 

In one of my maps, I put the player in a "lesser of three evils" situation. They're at a 3-way intersection. The way they came in is suddenly filled with a mass of Imps teleporting in four at a time. The way forward has an Arachnotron, and a couple of Revenants initially out of sight, and the other way has a Baron and two Hell Knights. I leave it up to the player which they want to handle: Is it the glass cannon enemies ahead which are weak and easily stun-locked, but have high damage potential? Is it the tanky Hell Nobles which are easily dodged and fewer in number, but will buy time for the other enemies to swarm in? Or should the players try to bust through the wave of Imps to safety on the far side, taking some hits in the process? That's the player's choice. There's also a possible pit they can drop into to escape from the horde... temporarily.

 

EDIT: Sorry, this was supposed to be an edit to the above post. Oops.

Edited March 25, 2022 by Stabbey

[Megalyth]

I've kinda always just done whatever. It usually works out I guess. Most people seem to enjoy my maps.

[MemeMind]

1.Draw a room.

2.Put Monsters in.

3.Put Items in.

4.????????

5.Profit

[Pechudin]

I noticed lately that a lot of my maps tend to follow a predictable pattern of buildup to a big fight, usually involving a lock-in and teleporting monsters, and constricted space. I am trying to vary things up, however.

 

 

[Nine Inch Heels]

I think about what types of "problems" I want to create...

 

Have the player "cycle" between the fields of views of several perched viles..? Sounds alright, but how can I add another layer on top of that, such as making them fend off hordes of imps with a rocket launcher..? That's how I think about fights sometimes.. Add a dynamic element to an existing problem, and suddenly you have a fight or set-piece that is way less dull...

 

Use the player's strongest weapon against them, by forcing the use of said weapon, and then build an arena that turns the weapon's properties into a detriment the player needs to deal with... A necessary evil, if you will... Rocket launcher against PEs is the obvious candidate, slightly more tricky would be to make people use the BFG while having viles around they don't wanna hit with the tracers while still putting them under pressure to keep the melons coming...

 

Another example is dynamically changing cover (sunlust 29 comes to mind)

 

Basically I think about what I want a fight to be about, and then I think about how it can be made more interesting/challenging, and that usually gets me most of the way there...

[SilverMiner]

How do I setup linear fights(chaotic ones are harder to describe, so I won't do that):

 

Softlock

Give player some equipment

Release roaming monsters, open sight for turrets

Make beefy monsters guard the exit

Upon exiting activate some walkable lines needed for your level progression

[Doomsday]

I usually place a couple monsters in and they all start killing each other. No player input required!

[CittyKat112]

No matter what comes to my mind first - an idea for a combat scenario or what the arena / room should look like, most of the time I'm working on map geometry first and only when that's out of the way I start implementing ideas I had for the fights. That's not the best way of doing things because every once in a while I have to delete or change something because the fight is either too RNG bullshit or too easy or there's a way to cheese it. If it's #3, I usually just close the player in the arena which might not be good for replayability, but I don't like that the player can just skip my carefully poorly designed fight like it's nothing.

Edited March 27, 2022 by CittyKat112

[Nine Inch Heels]

1 hour ago, CittyKat112 said:

No matter what comes to my mind first - an idea for a combat scenario or what the arena / room should look like, most of the time I'm working on map geometry first and only when that's out of the way I start implementing ideas I had for the fights. That's not the best way of doing things

See highlighted part above, and I think I should have mentioned this in my first response here:

 

Geometry dictates gameplay... Yes, players will respond to different monsters in different ways, but the first and last thing in line that has any say over how any given fight can unfold and play out to begin with is the framework imposed by the map-geometry... So, if you have a specific idea for a fight, you need to consider first and foremost what kind of geometry it requires in order to function properly...

[CittyKat112]

3 hours ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

See highlighted part above, and I think I should have mentioned this in my first response here:

 

Geometry dictates gameplay... Yes, players will respond to different monsters in different ways, but the first and last thing in line that has any say over how any given fight can unfold and play out to begin with is the framework imposed by the map-geometry... So, if you have a specific idea for a fight, you need to consider first and foremost what kind of geometry it requires in order to function properly...

Yeah, that's why I have to spend some extra time rearranging arenas in my maps. In my defense, I usually have an idea of what arena is gonna look like but I almost always have to change it after testing.

Edited March 27, 2022 by CittyKat112

[Nine Inch Heels]

14 minutes ago, CittyKat112 said:

Yeah, that's why I have to spend some extra time rearranging arenas in my maps. In my defense, I usually have an idea of what arena is gonna look like but I almost always have to change it after testing.

What I do is I lay down the basic geometry that dictates how "things go". If I'm feeling like it, I add some textures that I would like to use, to see how they jam with the geometry, but usually I just make sure that there aren't any HOMs that can get in the way of testing... I wire everything up, and playtest the fight - if anything needs changing on the geometry side of things, I have very little in the way of reason to hesitate when it comes to reshaping or even deleting parts of the geometry, because I am still working with a very bare-bones scaffold. Had I detailed this hypothetical arena before I realized I would need to make some significant adjustments, I would have lost a lot of time...

 

Also, there is something to be said about how the geometry you lay down for any given encounter before playtesting it usually tends to resemble something anyway, with any luck it might even resemble something that goes with the theme of your map, at which point the area designs itself, more or less...