For those who dislike Slaughter maps...

[Fidchell]

There are plenty of people out there I noticed that don't care for maps that center around mass amounts of enemies in a concentrated space, aka Slaughter. I've been playing Speed of Doom recently and noticed that there was a bit of a split in player opinions on how it develops late into Episode two. As someone who enjoys fighting off armies of demons in this style, I have some questions:

• What don't you like about slaughter maps?
• What type of gameplay do you typically prefer?
• What do you consider your favorite WAD of all time and what do you love about it?

This is all purely out of curiosity and I'm not against anyone who dislikes slaughter. Thanks for your time!

[xScavengerWolfx]

25 minutes ago, Fidchell said:

• What don't you like about slaughter maps?
• What type of gameplay do you typically prefer?
• What do you consider your favorite WAD of all time and what do you love about it?

1. For me i don't like the idea of being trapped in a small room with no cover or breathing room to plan out how to get rid of most enemies. Like take go 2 it from plutonia for example, that map is hard as fuck, brutal to new people (rip keyboard players of '96) and how hard i can be with hit scanners being around every corner. 

 

I also don't like the fact that your getting assaulted with high tier enemies with low tier weapons to fight back with.

 

2. For me i like more of classic / hard but not slaughter hard type of maps, something inbetween like Scythe and Plutoina Experiment for the hard but not slaughter (expect go 2 it, that counts as slaughter because i about broke my controller playing the xbox version of doom 2). I also like exploring levels in wads like anything the community has made, i can't think of any at the moment.

 

3. If we're talking commercial release wads: Ultimate Doom. Why do i love it? I love it because i set the ground work for what doom 2 is and all the other wads / mapsets that came after it. Ep. 2 and 4 are my favorite because ep. 2 is where you get to meet the Cyber demon for the first time and ep. 4 was more like "well lets have some fun by being asses and make it hard for players to beat".

 

Now if we're talking solo projects made by one person i have to say Stickley Installation by Snaxalotl. Her Ultimate Doom map set is the reason why i started my own Ultimate Doom map set called Abandon: Shadows of darkness.

 

The reason why i love her map set is because she has stated that she loves the old 90's style of wads and how charming they are. I remember Sandwedge was doing a video on Snax's wad and she said "I think anyone who dose doom 2 mapping should give doom 1 mapping a try. Only because sure they maybe limited enemies in it and boring textures but if you play around with it you can make some fights really hard to deal with....but no one is going to do it only because they would miss there super shotgun and the other enemies". 

 

Overall i'm not the type that likes slaughter maps but i do like hard fights that i can overcome.

Edited March 21, 2023 by xScavengerWolfx

[continuum.mid]

I've largely avoided the truest slaughter maps, because I am not very good at Doom, so I'm not completely sure if I'd like them or not. I can enjoy more spammy fights, like in the last episode of Struggle, but it varies; they keep me moving and give me an adrenaline rush, but can often feel like I'm just waiting for them all to kill each other, or (if they have archviles or limited space) like it's just trial and error, and luck to avoid getting pinned too long or hit too many times. And while I like being forced to run around, there's a limit to my patience with it, and I prefer to have little breaks between those major fights.

 

I think I most prefer the Plutonia style of combat; maps that are not really monster spam, but get a lot of mileage out of every individual monster and force you to strategize somewhat as to how to deal with them while constantly moving to avoid fire.

 

My favorite WAD of all time is probably the Japanese Community Project, partly because it's important to me as the first community WAD I finished after playing all the PWADs, but also because of its excellent aesthetics in most of its maps, its variety, and how strong its pacing and general thematic and difficulty arc is done for a community project. Both the more advanced aesthetic powerhouses and the Doom 2/TNT-style novice maps are incredibly charming.

[Martin Howe]

Mainly three reasons: the sheer pointlessness, the turning of a challenge into a chore, the lack of respect for casual players or regular players who aren't Doom Gods.

 

1. Pointlessness: Why kill 8000 cacodemons in one part of one map? I know how to kill a cacodemon. I know how to kill a small group of them. Maybe there is a way to kill 8000 of them but I'm bored with cacodemons by now.
2. Turning of a challenge into a chore: I play for fun and expect a reasonable challenge; but even on the milder end of the slaughter spectrum and when I can beat it without cheating, when it becomes a chore it's no longer fun.
3. Lack of respect for casual players or regular players who aren't Doom Gods: very rarely does turning down the difficulty level change the map style from slaughter to regular.

 

In terms of gameplay: My reactions aren't that quick. I'm not really a badass Space Marine and never could be. This is meant to be a game. I enjoy ambushing demons and planning out how to get rid of them; I also like to enjoy the sights in a level; being trapped in a small room with no cover or breathing room more than once or twice on a map takes all the fun out of it. The same applies to doors that close and lock to trap you inside; for me, running back outside and using the door or other map geometry as cover to thin the numbers down isn't avoiding the challenge, it is the challenge. It wouldn't be so bad if, for example, on the lower difficulty levels the doors don't trap you in with the demons.

My favourite map, if you mean "challenging but not slaughter" is probably E4M2: Perfect Hatred; hard but fair. In terms of "sheer enjoyment", probably E4M8: Unto the Cruel; challenging but equally fun. In terms of "I just love it for its quirks": EVIL_E by Ian Surhstedt, one of the early PWADs and very likely the first one

Spoiler

to include a boat/ship in a body of water :)

; I still take it for a spin now and then.

 

Edited March 21, 2023 by Martin Howe

[Mr Masker]

Really depends on the slaughter map. I think my favourite ones are more forgiving and give you good weapons for them. Allow more cover and don't feel like they drag on too much. Does that mean I'm bad at certain true slaughtermaps? Probably, but I also enjoy having fun so eh.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Mr Masker

[continuum.mid]

1 hour ago, xScavengerWolfx said:

Like take go 2 it from plutonia for example, that map is hard as fuck, brutal to new people (rip keyboard players of '96) and how hard i can be with hit scanners being around every corner. 

I will say, I deliberately skipped the secret maps on my first Plutonia playthrough, but after going back to them with more experience (and a more optimal source port/controls), I really enjoyed Go 2 It. Keeps me moving and shooting nearly constantly, and relies a lot on infighting, but never gets to the point of just running into a crowd of enemies hoping I don't get pinned.

 

Brutal? Yes. It's a good thing this map was optional. But very fun.

Edited March 21, 2023 by continuum.mid

[⇛Marnetmar⇛]

I enjoy being able to play a bit recklessly and aggressively, and slaughtermaps require an amount of strategy that doesn't leave much room for this. Of course, that's not a bad thing, it's all a matter of personal preference.

Edited March 21, 2023 by ⇛Marnetmar⇛

[Sneezy McGlassFace]

Oh that's simple - it's a skill issue.

As far as I know, there's no strict definition of what slaughter is, let's not get into that heated debate now. Anyway, I find that many of the wads that classify as slaughter are pretty high in difficulty, for me at least. I'm here mainly to make maps, not for the gameplay challenge. Shooting a horde of monsters is great but if I get killed more than ten times in the same spot, I'm probably not gonna have a good time.

I do enjoy Rush a lot, which is a meme wad at this point but for a good reason. Especially the early snow maps which are high monster count and also pretty generous with resources and space to maneuver around. It's not terribly punishing, just high-octane fun. There isn't any other wad I know of with a this core concept.

[innerethos]

8 minutes ago, Sneezy McGlassFace said:

Oh that's simple - it's a skill issue.

 

Heheh this pretty much sums it up for me.

 

Slaughter-style is deliberately hard, not welcoming to newcomers.  The excruciatingly-hard difficulty is a turn-off for someone who just wants to:

• Shoot monsters
• Explore mysterious terrain
• Collect secrets
• Be challenged to win, not to lose

There's a huge difference in a game meant to be beaten and one meant to torture the player with loss on purpose.

 

However, I have to give the ultra-hard maps some credit: without their obscene difficulties, I wouldn't have anything to compare against when I defeat a "slaughter-style" encounter in a regular map/mapset!

Edited March 21, 2023 by innerethos

[Fairen]

"Slaughter maps" often run into two major problems:

 

1. They're unfair. Many of them often rely on waves of monsters where, if you aren't prepared for that exact threat, you'll often get overwhelmed. For example, when not having the rocket launcher/BFG already equipped means you won't have time to take out a horde with other weapons or switch to rockets/BFG. They often rely on hordes of annoying enemies such as chaingunners, revenants, and arch-viles—the latter being particularly problematic because they can hit you through groups of enemies and you cannot prevent this if there is no safe cover or too many enemies between you and the arch-vile. Cheap and unpredictable warp-ins/monster closets, limited supplies, unpredictable monster triggers—all of these make slaughter maps far more frustrating than challenging.

2. They're boring. As mentioned, most of these maps expect (and by virtue of needed DPS, demand) you to use nothing but rockets and BFG. You spam rockets and BFGs at large hordes until they die. Eventually, you reach the point where you're just slogging away to clear the last few monsters in an arena you've been killing the same monsters in for way too long. Then you do the same thing in a differently-shaped room. Tedium can be a greater threat than the initial encounter itself, where you just let your guard down because you're just bored of the fight already.

 

Honestly, Go 2 It is the perfect example of the problems with slaughter maps for me. It might look daunting at first but then you figure out how to cheese the hordes, you realize a lot of the enemies can be dodged fairly easily or gotten to infight, and eventually it becomes an exercise in tedium to kill everything rather than a challenge. (And all of those cyberdemons in narrow corridors can eat something that would not be pleasant to eat.)

[Shepardus]

I signed up to shoot demons, not study fluid dynamics.

[Decay]

Too much holding M1 while holding strafe+forward. I'd have to overdose on adderall to find slaughter maps even remotely enjoyable, rocking back and forth like a lunatic whispering "more monsters equals better game play" to pretend there is some thought there.

[Gifty]

Things tend to be improved by having dynamics

[Fidchell]

3 hours ago, xScavengerWolfx said:

The reason why i love her map set is because she has stated that she loves the old 90's style of wads and how charming they are. I remember Sandwedge was doing a video on Snax's wad and she said "I think anyone who dose doom 2 mapping should give doom 1 mapping a try. Only because sure they maybe limited enemies in it and boring textures but if you play around with it you can make some fights really hard to deal with....but no one is going to do it only because they would miss there super shotgun and the other enemies".

This is a very interesting point to bring up, never quite thought of mapping in Doom 1 and working with the lesser amount of resources. I personally have barely played any Doom 1 WADs because of what she said at the end there, but I did enjoy Episode 4 quite a bit.

 

3 hours ago, continuum.mid said:

I've largely avoided the truest slaughter maps, because I am not very good at Doom, so I'm not completely sure if I'd like them or not. I can enjoy more spammy fights, like in the last episode of Struggle, but it varies; they keep me moving and give me an adrenaline rush, but can often feel like I'm just waiting for them all to kill each other, or (if they have archviles or limited space) like it's just trial and error, and luck to avoid getting pinned too long or hit too many times. And while I like being forced to run around, there's a limit to my patience with it, and I prefer to have little breaks between those major fights.

Struggle is such a great example in aesthetics and gameplay. It's got a few unique maps that really accentuates Antares' style, ones where it's a large environment but enemies around every corner (yet having limited movement), which I can as being too intense, but I feel like every placement is deliberate and you still have plenty of room to move around and take cover.

1 hour ago, Sneezy McGlassFace said:

Oh that's simple - it's a skill issue.

As far as I know, there's no strict definition of what slaughter is, let's not get into that heated debate now. Anyway, I find that many of the wads that classify as slaughter are pretty high in difficulty, for me at least. I'm here mainly to make maps, not for the gameplay challenge. Shooting a horde of monsters is great but if I get killed more than ten times in the same spot, I'm probably not gonna have a good time.

I do enjoy Rush a lot, which is a meme wad at this point but for a good reason. Especially the early snow maps which are high monster count and also pretty generous with resources and space to maneuver around. It's not terribly punishing, just high-octane fun. There isn't any other wad I know of with a this core concept.

It seems people generally want a lot of space when it comes to hordes of enemies rushing in, and of course this is understandable. I'm amazed that despite the very tight spaces in it, Going Down is a WAD that many people seem to love despite the amount of enemies that are thrown at you later on. And sure, the spaces get more open later on in some maps, but I feel compared to many Slaughter maps it mostly maintains those tighter spaces. The way it seems to go against the grain is fascinating to me.

1 hour ago, Fairen said:

"Slaughter maps" often run into two major problems:

 

1. They're unfair. Many of them often rely on waves of monsters where, if you aren't prepared for that exact threat, you'll often get overwhelmed. For example, when not having the rocket launcher/BFG already equipped means you won't have time to take out a horde with other weapons or switch to rockets/BFG. They often rely on hordes of annoying enemies such as chaingunners, revenants, and arch-viles—the latter being particularly problematic because they can hit you through groups of enemies and you cannot prevent this if there is no safe cover or too many enemies between you and the arch-vile. Cheap and unpredictable warp-ins/monster closets, limited supplies, unpredictable monster triggers—all of these make slaughter maps far more frustrating than challenging.

2. They're boring. As mentioned, most of these maps expect (and by virtue of needed DPS, demand) you to use nothing but rockets and BFG. You spam rockets and BFGs at large hordes until they die. Eventually, you reach the point where you're just slogging away to clear the last few monsters in an arena you've been killing the same monsters in for way too long. Then you do the same thing in a differently-shaped room. Tedium can be a greater threat than the initial encounter itself, where you just let your guard down because you're just bored of the fight already.

 

Honestly, Go 2 It is the perfect example of the problems with slaughter maps for me. It might look daunting at first but then you figure out how to cheese the hordes, you realize a lot of the enemies can be dodged fairly easily or gotten to infight, and eventually it becomes an exercise in tedium to kill everything rather than a challenge. (And all of those cyberdemons in narrow corridors can eat something that would not be pleasant to eat.)

That can be true for some maps, I agree. Maps by Ribbicks or Danne, however, I found were exceedingly difficult, but usually had another way to approach the masses of demons, whether it was before or during the encounter. They had me think outside the box and approach the fight differently; I would often catch myself doing the same exact strategy over and over again which is a really bad habit of mine. When I tried something new and thought about the situation, I would usually succeed rather quickly! Slaughter I feel can be great if mapped with a lot of attention to the layouts of geometry itself and enemy placement.

[Murdoch]

5 hours ago, Fidchell said:

What don't you like about slaughter maps?

 

Primarily the monotony. The bottom line is that as much as I love Doom and it's gameplay, it is very basic and largely samey (obvious attack variations like the Archvile and Revenant excluded). The monsters all use the same basic AI, the same basic attacks, just with variation in speed, hit points and damage. Good level designers understand this, and know how to vary the terrain and encounters to not draw it into focus. Slaughtermaps, unless the designer is very very good at fight design, tend to by their very nature bring these limitations into lightning focus. And for me personally, that becomes pretty monotonous pretty quickly. Oh look here's a bunch of cells and a BFG so I can lay waste to this huge pack of Revenants. How is that interesting? 

 

Another thing that slaughtermaps tend to do by their nature is create a gameplay situation I really hate, and that is "fight rehearsal". I am impatient and busy. I don't have time to play sections in games over and over and over. And if I tackled a given horde in a slaughtermap differently to what the author expected and I run out of ammo, that's going to piss me off, especially if it keeps happening.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Murdoch

[continuum.mid]

18 minutes ago, Fidchell said:

Struggle is such a great example in aesthetics and gameplay. It's got a few unique maps that really accentuates Antares' style, ones where it's a large environment but enemies around every corner (yet having limited movement), which I can as being too intense, but I feel like every placement is deliberate and you still have plenty of room to move around and take cover. 

Don't get me wrong, I love Struggle, in fact it might be my favorite WAD combat-wise. But since it's the last WAD I played, it was what came to mind with "slaughter." Antares' status quo, with small but punishing fights in each room forcing one to strategize how to take out each enemy, and a few enemies to deal with around each corner is what I liked most. The hardest encounters though, in maps 15, 31, 27, 28, and 29, felt like I was either running around to encourage monster infighting and avoid attacks for 10+ minutes, or just save-scumming hoping that eventually I'll have the luck to not get pinned or hit too many times. They did work as climactic moments and were still fun for their intensity alone, but I prefer the less spammy fights.

Edited March 21, 2023 by continuum.mid

[Midnight_00]

I probably meet the description, since I usually avoid slaughter maps and I've quit WADs before after reaching them, but it's not really definitive since I've also ended up enjoying some of them. It's probably less that I dislike them and more that they often brings things that I don't like with them.

 

1. Most of the ones I've come across are insanely long. Sometimes they take at least half an hour to an hour to complete on the first playthrough, unless you're already very skilled. If they're in a 32 map megawad that makes it even more of a time investment. I also find having to crowd control advancing hordes of enemies to be monotonous and frustrating, especially if the margin of error is particularly low. Even more subjectively, I like it when Doom makes the monsters dangerous and scary individually, rather than disposable, especially the (former) bosses.

 

2. In a nutshell, challenging WADs with fewer enemies, items and everything else. See some of Plutonia's maps, the Chord series or Scythe 2's Map 26 (and I suppose Thy Flesh Consumed to a lesser extent, yet more famously). That or just easier WADs.

 

3. Scythe 2, believe it or not. There's a lot of reasons why I like it. The variety and atmosphere are definitely some of the biggest reasons. I didn't always like the slaughter maps in it though, they frustrated me a hell of a lot when I first played it, yet with familiarity they became easier and eventually more fun. So I'm happy to play those and a few others, but I've gotten increasingly less willing to spend time on unfamiliar slaughter maps.

[Ravendesk]

Everybody in the thread needs to play Junkfood immediately. You all have trauma from playing HR (pog) and Okuplok. Try something more yummy. It literally is NOT what all of the posters answered to question 1.

 

[HorrorMovieRei]

I don't hate or dislike slaughter maps (I'm totally in the mood for them sometimes), though if I had to point to a reason as to why someone else might not enjoy slaughter maps, i'd have to say it's probably because they're more like combat puzzles (pardon the buzzword). You probably hear the term "slaughter map" for the first time and go into it thinking you're gonna be killing by the dozens, but then you're actually herding demons most of the time, being very mindful of cover and item placement, and instigating infighting. The killing you'll be activelly doing most of the time is for the purpose of clearing escape routes.

 

Not saying non-slaughter maps can't have all that, but combat in the average Doom map is usually a lot more free-form, and instantly gratifying, as opposed to a slaughter map's more methodical, non-imediate satisfaction. It's also just hard and plain brutal and requires a certain level of mastery over the game's mechanics that it's unreasonable to expect from most people, and that's okay. No one should be expected to become godlike at every single game they play.

 

It's very fun, but also frustrating, and that's by design. Not everyone wants to tackle that level of challenge, or care to get that good, so I can see why you'd get frustrated to see a beautiful mapset that everyone is talking about and get completely steamrolled as soon as you start it up.

[Fairen]

6 hours ago, Ravendesk said:

Everybody in the thread needs to play Junkfood immediately. You all have trauma from playing HR (pog) and Okuplok. Try something more yummy. It literally is NOT what all of the posters answered to question 1.

 

To quote the WAD description:

Quote

The basic premise was to make "Junk Food" slaughter
ala BFG spammy, high monster count maps where not a lot of time is spent
deliberating about layout/detailing/fight design/other things that can
bog a mapper down. It's just good BFG fun.

That right there is a perfect summary of the problem with so many slaughter maps. The whole "why design interesting maps and encounters that take advantage of map design and the resources you're provided when you can BFG 1,000 revenants?" approach to their design.

[TheMightyWhoosh]

Spamming the bigger guns at hoards of monsters just doesn’t appeal. 
 

Also, I’m just too s**t at Doom.

[Majin]

15 hours ago, Fidchell said:

• What don't you like about slaughter maps?
•  

they can get very repetitive and there are little to no breaks between gameplay making it very exhausting to play for me 

also the architecture of these maps tends to be very abstract or and very repetitive, like let's say the theme is a military base

a standard military base map would have the base be about the size of a doom 2 level with intricate architecture and details in the environment

but slaughtermaps through no fault of the creators, sort of have to be bland geometrically so the gameplay won't suffer

as a result there is usually in some form a very huge flat area with little going on in it, if it were a military base theme it would just be like a giant over-sized hanger and maybe an outside area the size of texas with fences for the parameter 

[Ravendesk]

1 hour ago, Fairen said:

To quote the WAD description:

That right there is a perfect summary of the problem with so many slaughter maps. The whole "why design interesting maps and encounters that take advantage of map design and the resources you're provided when you can BFG 1,000 revenants?" approach to their design.

Yeah well the wad description is not 100% honest there, but you'll never know until you try.

[Azure_Horror]

12 hours ago, Ravendesk said:

Everybody in the thread needs to play Junkfood immediately. You all have trauma from playing HR (pog) and Okuplok. Try something more yummy. It literally is NOT what all of the posters answered to question 1. 

Junkfood is fun and approachable. It is still full of BFG fiestas and other stereotypical Slaughter-y things, however.

 

If a player finds the whole idea of slaughter maps novel and intriguing, then Junkfood is a good introduction.

But Junkfood still feels disconnected from "normal" Doom gameplay. It is a bad fit for players, who feel vary of slaughter genre in the first place.

 

I think, that there are quite a few WADs, that can smoothly transition from "normal" gameplay into real slaughter.

Personally, I would recommend either Ray Mohawk 2, or Eviternity for this purpose. Detailed explanation is in the spoiler:

 

1) Ray Mohawk 2 has a very simple premise: What if the Doom 2 arsenal was stupidly overpowered? It starts with relatively easy set ups in maps 01-04, proceeds to some scary, but still manageable levels in slots 08-13, and dives into real insanity around maps 14-17. Essentially, Ray Mohawk 2 goes like "I am OP, whoo-hoo!", to "this is scary, but I am still OP", to "Monsters are OP too! Who will win?". If somebody wants to try Ray 2 as a slaughter introduction, I suggest playing it continuously. The carry-over resources would help quite a lot, while not breaking any particular map. Oh, and don't forget to select a comfortable difficulty! Let's just say, that hardest difficulty is named "Seeking Validation" for a reason...

 

2) Eviternity is a good mapset from any metric imaginable. Every Doom fan should consider playing it one day. But how does it relate to slaughter? Glad that you asked!

Spoiler

Eviternity is split into 6 5-map episodes, and 2 secret maps. Weapons do not carry over bewtween episodes, so you may choose episodes freely. Now, lets talk slaughter. For a gradual, but straightforward slaughter introduction, I would recommend playing

- Episode 1 (maps 01-15)

- Episode 3 (maps 11-15)

- Episode 5 (maps 21-25)

- Episode 6 (maps 26-30)

Episode 1 can be skipped, but it does introduce core elements of Eviternity gameplay loop. Also, the map 05 is a single fight boss map, and the tricks from this map do prove useful in some micro-slaughter maps.

 

Episode 3 is our first main stop. It has beautiful Snow Castles to explore! More importantly, it gradually introduces more and more challenging fights. Map 11 is mostly chill, but a two or three battles are really dangerous. Map 07 is short, but its fights are scary. Don't worry, so far everything is Plutonia-style hard, not slaughter! Things get scarier from the middle point of map 13, continue escalating in map 14, and culminate in map 15.

 

The first real Slaughter encounter happens in the middle of Map 15. Have you ever seen Cacodemons blotting out the sky? This is quite a spectacle, and seeing it with your own eyes is a truly magical moment! But don't worry, map 15 is beautiful in general, so and a big slaughter fight is just one of many things to experience in this map.

 

(For learning the ways of slaughter, I suggest skipping the secret levels and the episode 4. They challenge the player in other ways, and they can get pretty tiring without any slaughter in sight. Still, those maps are cool too. Just not really slaughter-y.)

 

Our next step - Eviternity Episode 5. Welcome to hellscape! This episode is focused on cruel and chaotic set ups. It is an off-shoot of Plutonia and Scythe design apporaches, however it borders on micro-slaughter. Map 24, for example, eventually just unleashes 4 cyberdemons at once, and map 25 consits of a single scary fight, with monsters appearing everywhere. Overall, the episode 5 doesn't have anything as grand as Eviternity map 15, but despite that, it is a much harder Episode than 3. Like I said, all levels here border on Micro-slaughter, so it is very useful for players, who are a bit curious about slaughter genre.

 

In Episode 6, Eviternity just throws everything is has at the player. Some slaughter setups included! After the previous challenges, those particular slaughter fights do not feel unbeatable. They are still hard, though, but not unbeatable. But the main draw of this episode is the scenery. I won't spoil anything. It is best to see the maps with your own eyes...

 

 

P.S.: Almost forgot! Do not hesitate playing with saves. Bigger Eviternity / Ray Mohawk 2 maps can easily prove challenging enough to warrant 5-6 saves per map on a first playthrough, so unless you are saving every 15 seconds, you are not a save-scum!

Edited March 22, 2023 by Azure_Horror

[Bauul]

20 hours ago, continuum.mid said:

I've largely avoided the truest slaughter maps, because I am not very good at Doom, so I'm not completely sure if I'd like them or not.

 

19 hours ago, Martin Howe said:

Lack of respect for casual players or regular players who aren't Doom Gods

 

18 hours ago, Sneezy McGlassFace said:

Oh that's simple - it's a skill issue.

 

18 hours ago, innerethos said:

 Slaughter-style is deliberately hard

 

17 hours ago, Fairen said:

They're unfair

 

I think it's interesting how frequently the idea that slaughter == difficult is coming up here. In theory there's no reason why slaughter should automatically result in a hard map - it's a style of combat encounter, not a bar for difficulty.

 

My hunch is it's a lot to do with the shadow the Sunder casts over the genre: it's influence as the most famous slaughter wad, and the fact it is very hard and very long, means many other slaughter maps end up aping it's style, for better or worse.

 

One of the main aims of the Micro Slaughter Community Project was to dispell this notion that all slaughter has to be very hard and very long. The levels there are very short (5 minutes typically) and (at least on lower difficulties) not especially challenging. I think it was reasonably successful at providing a counter point to the extreme brand of slaughter most people think of when they consider the genre. 

[Kinsie]

While there are one or two classics out there, for the most part I find them to be boring, repetitive slogs by people who mistake sheer numbers for interesting encounter design. Lead me by the nose through interesting fights that take from location to location, and I'll follow you anywhere.

[Endless]

Slaughter maps can be a very fickle concept and require some experience from the map maker to properly work. At the worse case you have a room filled with 100 Barons of Hell shooting at you from every side, and let me tell you, that's not my cup of tea.

 

Personally, I dislike slaughter maps because they tend to inflate the play time by pitting you against large numbers of enemies that can take forever to kill. The Press Fire + circle strafe combo for more than 5 minutes can get boring fast. I personally don't think Doom mechanics are well fitted for high number of enemy encounters in the same arena/area. You can have it go this way: A. You just spam the fuck out of the BFG and while fun during the first few seconds, it becomes monotonous quickly. B, You don't have a BFG so you are probably going to be forced to use the rocket launcher of the plasma rifle, which takes longer to kill beefier enemies and can get annoying after a while, killing the same shit over and over. The challenge stops being about your combat skills, and more about your patience.

 

But probably my main gripe is that slaughter tends to be, by nature, challenging, and while I really enjoy a good challenge once in a while, slaughter is the opposite of a good time for me. Dying and dying and dying over and over again is extremely irritating and I have very little patience for it. It becomes a game of RNG after a point when you just lose the will to even play properly.

 

I'd rather take on E4M1 or E4M2 all day than Go 2 It.

[Borg]

I didn't used to like slaughter maps but I recently began to enjoy building strategies.

I have actually grown to like some of them. I have been playing Sunder map 11, Furnace, trying to get all the way through with only safe saves in UV. Finally did it. I am not a very good player which may partly come from the fact that I still play keyboard only. Probably the only really boring part for me was rocketing all the Hellknights on the ledge.

Okuplok gave me trigger finger. Just not a fun experience.

[Fiber Wire]

23 hours ago, Fidchell said:

• What don't you like about slaughter maps?
• What type of gameplay do you typically prefer?
• What do you consider your favorite WAD of all time and what do you love about it?

• I don’t like that most slaughtermaps rely on luck rather than truly testing skill. Smart enemy placement is always better than spamming a bunch of monsters in the map, and sometimes I feel like many of these so called slaughtermaps only add in so many enemies to make a small to medium size map take longer to finish. I’m all for high enemy count maps, but in a way that is fun and engaging, and not a slog to get through. 
• I prefer playing maps that feel like the designer truly understands what makes classic doom combat so much fun and puts that to good use in creating a level that is fun, challenging, and has multiple ways to approach it. 
• I would say Requiem because it was one of the first Megawads I downloaded.  
   

[Fairen]

3 hours ago, Bauul said:

I think it's interesting how frequently the idea that slaughter == difficult is coming up here. In theory there's no reason why slaughter should automatically result in a hard map - it's a style of combat encounter, not a bar for difficulty.

"Unfair" isn't the same thing as "difficult". With a lot of slaughter maps, they're quite simple once you know what's coming. If you don't have the right weapon out, or don't know where monsters come out of and what monsters, then you end up in situations where things spiral downward; if you know what's going to happen, they can often be extremely easy.

 

Ray Mohawk 2 was brought up earlier, and that's a WAD I really enjoyed, but that WAD still had a few obnoxious scenarios. Arch-Viland was one of the worst for this for two sections, one where crossing a linedef causes over half a dozen cyberdemons to spawn behind you, and another where a huge amount of arch-viles swarm into an area via teleporter. The former is simple if you know it's coming (and a map-design flaw lets you kill them without any threat whatsoever) and the latter is something I have no idea how you are even supposed to handle unless you know what happens beforehand, immediately go to where the arch-viles spawn in, and immediately start spamming the BFG. Otherwise, the arch-viles promptly chain-explode you to death.

 

(I'll note too that one of the things that makes Ray Mohawk 2's large-scale battles better than more vanilla slaughter maps is that the entire arsenal is viable, rather than expecting rocket/BFG spam 24/7. In fact, gunning down 6+ cyberdemons actually isn't that big a deal in Ray Mohawk 2.)