Is there a lack of complex combatants in doom's bestiary?

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

  Aren't most monsters in Doom, including it's several hundred mods, rather dull combatants on their own? Most of what makes Doom's combat fun and challenging is environment based, with limitations imposed on the player coming mostly from map geometry. Once a monster is put into an open room, it becomes a series of very simple, and easy strafes in order to defeat it. Not to say that most demons/possessed are lame, but they aren't very inherently threatening, unless they happen to be hitscan.

 

  Hitsscanners and homers have the opposite set of problems, but their own strengths. Such monsters are definitely inherent threats that require heavy attention, they can help create new roles for projectile enemies that couldn't exist otherwise, and their area denial can turn the normally quick and intense combat of Doom into a suspenseful horror; or a clandestine series of cautious standoffs between either well equipped hordes, or looming behemoths that shred in moments. The main flaw of such enemies is that hitscanners are impossible to dodge, meaning the only way to openly fight them is bum rushing, which doesn't allow for much in the way of more complex  combat, and enemies that use homing missiles can be circle strafed as well, then socked with their own projectiles.

 

  Putting it simply, I feel like Doom's combat system is missing a few "mid-to-big boss" tier projectile enemies with challenging attack patterns, or hitscan enemies with a barely out-runnable aim lag. While Doom's base monsters are fine; having an enemy that could out run the player, out react the player, or use aerial attacks in ways that make up for low maneuverability/reflexes compared to the player would provide a massive improvement to much of classic Doom.

[Xaser]

One of the great strengths of Doom (2)'s bestiary is that you can use the environment to greatly shape the gameplay, since monster behavior is simple enough that a mapper can precisely control their behavior with map geometry alone. Talking about monster behavior without considering the environment is a bit like trying to figure out how fast Usain Bolt could run with only one leg.

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

I get that, and I agree. Many of us have seen how quickly certain enemies can become massive threats when they're used for the right niche. The cyberdemon is still used more as a boss monster for a reason.  but I feel with how open some level design has been since e2m8 and e3m8, it would be nice if there were one or two monsters for each weight class that could be threatening more out in the open. After playing Doom for a while, the enemies can get their attacks choreographed pretty easily.

[Shepardus]

Individual enemies in Doom don't do very much, and I think that's fine. There are of course exceptions (you can simply throw a bunch of revenants in a hallway and still get engaging gameplay), but the strength in Doom's bestiary comes from how flexibly they can be combined with each other and the environment. The simplicity of each enemy type actually aids with this; they're like Lego bricks that can be built into many different shapes, rather than purpose-molded parts built for a specific purpose. That's not to say there aren't gaps that can be filled with new enemy types (the 1000HP cyberdemon is one that mappers commonly adopt), but I would be cautious of trying to design an enemy that tries to do too much, it's easy to end up with something that's too inflexible to be used anywhere except an arena designed specifically for it (fine for bosses), or something that's just a massive pain to fight.

 

I'm also going to nitpick your statements about hitscanners and homers: I think you underestimate the nuance in fighting hitscanners if you think the only way to deal with them is to bum-rush them (which is often the worst way to deal with them). You can't sock enemies with their own homing missiles because missiles go through the enemy who fired them, and don't do damage to other enemies of the same type.

[kalensar]

In the case of Vanilla Doom 93? I mean, what is there to say other its way better than Wolfenstein.

 

In the case of Doom 2 (1994)? Mid tier boss type monsters do appear as Fatso, Arachnotank, and the most infuriating monsters conceived even by modern standards(!) of Pain Elemental and Archvile.

 

In the form of other Doom Engine games? They're practically all based on Doom 2 beastiary in one form or another. Thats how well handled Doom 2 beastiary is honestly.

 

In the form of Monster mods? Well thats a far cry different because at that point you arent in Vanilla Doom Engine territory anymore and have better code playdough to play with. Everything from Brutal Doom to Castlevania has been replicated or expanded on. Its such an extravaganza that Realm667 exists to help facilitate modders and mappers get the Monster feels that helps the author's goals.

 

And as an example, my own shameless plug for alternative takes on Doom 2 monsters.

1. Doom THOHT ADV--- Monster set inspired by FEAR beastiary
    https://www.moddb.com/mods/doom-thoththeatrical-horror-of-hells-terror-monster-pack/downloads/jad3-adv 
2. Doom THOHT 3D + Definitive== its a two-fer of my own takes on Doom 2 beastiary that is a wee bit more rude than vanilla. Dont mix the Pk3 with each other.
   https://www.moddb.com/mods/doom-thoththeatrical-horror-of-hells-terror-monster-pack/downloads/thoht-definitive

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

13 minutes ago, Shepardus said:

 but I would be cautious of trying to design an enemy that tries to do too much, it's easy to end up with something that's too inflexible to be used anywhere except an arena designed specifically for it (fine for bosses), or something that's just a massive pain to fight.

 

I'm also going to nitpick your statements about hitscanners and homers: I think you underestimate the nuance in fighting hitscanners if you think the only way to deal with them is to bum-rush them (which is often the worst way to deal with them). You can't sock enemies with their own homing missiles because missiles go through the enemy who fired them, and don't do damage to other enemies of the same type.

I'm mostly focused on the idea of an enemy that's totally dodgeable, but can't just be dodged by simple strafes. I feel classic Doom in general is lacking of such enemies, especially easier variations of such.

 

I think bum rushing was a bad description, that was mostly focused on the mastermind, which is usually used either as a turret or joke boss. Most hitscan enemies are very weak, and are usually defeated through good corner usage and a series of "mow-downs". As for enemies with homing missiles, the no damage part doesn't matter as long as they're gone, but even with the phasing through, homing missiles can usually be outran until the monster's defeated, or at the very least dragged into the ground an detonated.

Edited May 27 by St. Mildly Annoyed

[TheHambourgeois]

I think doom 2 hit the nail on the head in terms of enemy complexity. Doom 1, Heretic, and Hexen are all a bit lacking on that front. Doom 2 has some enemies able to be individually threatening, while also having simple enough enemies that environment design comes to the fore to set the pace of a fight.

[Milkeno]

I agree, other than the revenant doom's enemies don't act very dance like when your doing one at a time, I think slaughter wads and alot of modern wads play to the strengths of them not being dance/trance/flow like state while fighting them on their own and use hordes along side an arena. I feel like a more scripted enemy like the bosses found in touhou(though way less hard) would make doom wads that much more hypnotic. I'm sort of working on and off on a wad with revanants as the "mid-to-big boss".

Edited May 27 by Milkeno

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

I feel like I may have misphrased my point. I'm mostly referring to how simple enemy attack patterns are. When put into the right niche, any of Doom 2's monsters can be a big threat or a fun challenge. My feeling of oversimplicity is related to how Doom's monsters can either be easily circle strafed, or are instead fought mostly behind a wall or pillar. The only close exception is the Mancubus, He actually takes a good bit of thought on how to dodge when put at mid range or closer. 

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

21 minutes ago, Milkeno said:

I agree, other than the revenant doom's enemies don't act very dance like when your doing one at a time, I think slaughter wads and alot of modern wads play to the strengths of them not being dance/trance/flow like state while fighting them on their own and use hordes along side an arena. I feel like a more scripted enemy like the bosses found in touhou would make doom wads that much more hypnotic.

Thanks, that's what I'm trying to express :D . While not every enemy needs to be a menace on it's own, having enemies with more advanced patterns like you're talking about would be a very nice addition, allowing for intimidating bosses and mini bosses that feel more on par to the player, and less like a coincidental threat.

Edited May 27 by St. Mildly Annoyed

[RDETalus]

26 minutes ago, St. Mildly Annoyed said:

either be easily circle strafed

Any variety of hitscan can make circle strafing invalid, for that reason I don't believe it is necessary to come up with an attack pattern to deal with this. You could have enemies that create physical barriers or "slow traps" but that seems too uncharacteristic of Doom.

 

26 minutes ago, St. Mildly Annoyed said:

or are instead fought mostly behind a wall or pillar.

Enemies with area of effect attacks that don't require line of sight, such as grenades? Doesn't Quake have one of these? How well does that work?

My wad has a small, agile enemy that has the health and speed of an Archvile, and shoots plasma projectiles that move at twice speed. They aren't too difficult in open areas. But if you're hiding behind a pillar or wall, they are a massive threat because they bum rush you and their double speed plasma projectiles are impossible to dodge at close quarters. That's what I use to flush players out from behind obstacles.

Edited May 27 by RDETalus

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

11 minutes ago, RDETalus said:

Any variety of hitscan can make circle strafing invalid, for that reason I don't believe it is necessary to come up with an attack pattern to deal with this. You could have enemies that create physical barriers or "slow traps" but that seems too uncharacteristic of Doom.

 

Enemies with area of effect attacks that don't require line of sight, such as grenades? Doesn't Quake have one of these? How well does that work?

My wad has an enemy that has the health and speed of an Archvile, and shoots plasma projectiles that move at twice the speed. They aren't too difficult in open areas. But if you're hiding behind a pillar or wall, they are a massive threat because they bum rush you and their double speed plasma projectiles are impossible to dodge at close quarters. That's what I use to flush players out from behind obstacles.

that's kind of the opposite of what I meant, hitscanners are mostly fought behind a wall, and projectile enemies are strafed easily.

also, I think the quake enemy you're referring to is the ogre. about you're archvile enemy, that open area thing was what I was referring to. there aren't really any mid-high tier classic enemies that can cause an "OH SHIT" moment in more open areas with a low monster count.

Edited May 27 by St. Mildly Annoyed

[Xaser]

FWIW, there definitely are a ton of "unfulfilled" niches in Doom's bestiary, and there's all sorts of cool stuff you can do when creating a new monster. If you're approaching monster design from a "what can I make that's different from all Doom's existing cast?" angle, you're doing it right.

[Pseudonaut]

1 vs 1 combat just isn't very relevant in singleplayer Doom. It's more of an interaction with the mapper than with any of the braindead enemies. 

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

5 minutes ago, Xaser said:

FWIW, there definitely are a ton of "unfulfilled" niches in Doom's bestiary, and there's all sorts of cool stuff you can do when creating a new monster. If you're approaching monster design from a "what can I make that's different from all Doom's existing cast?" angle, you're doing it right.

kind a what I'm trying to do right now, actually, this thread is related to( but not for) it. It's just something I've thought about, and wanted to see if anyone agrees, or has a plethora of counter examples.

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

4 minutes ago, Pseudonaut said:

1 vs 1 combat just isn't very relevant in singleplayer Doom. It's more of an interaction with the mapper than with any of the braindead enemies. 

I feel like that depends on the mapper. In most good cases you're right, but there could be some good cases where braindead doesn't apply to the fighting style.

[RDETalus]

12 minutes ago, St. Mildly Annoyed said:

that open area thing was what I was referring to. there aren't really any mid-high tier classic enemies that can cause an "OH SHIT" moment in more open areas with a low monster count.

 

I have a cool trick: Teleporting cyberdemon (with 2x faster rockets, if you want).

 

So the fight takes place in a large open area. There are a bunch of teleport linedefs and teleport locations all over the map. As the Cyberdemon moves towards the player, he'll cross teleport linedefs and get teleported into other locations in the area. You're shooting at the Cyberdemon when he suddenly teleports to the top of a rock pillar behind you, and your ass gets smoked with rockets as you waste precious seconds frantically looking around for where he went. You can give the player plenty of walls and pillars to hide behind too, but it won't help all that much because the Cyberdemon will eventually teleport to a location that has line of sight on you.

 

This trick can work with multiple Cyberdemons, and other enemies as well.

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

If you could make him self teleport, that would be a type of monster that would fill the niche I'm discussing.

[RDETalus]

22 minutes ago, St. Mildly Annoyed said:

about you're archvile enemy

My archvile enemy is for flushing players out from behind cover. He moves very high speed with nigh-undodgeable projectile attack, very similar to what you described in your OP post:
 

Quote

or hitscan enemies with a barely out-runnable aim lag. While Doom's base monsters are fine; having an enemy that could out run the player

 

If you want to see it in action, there is a video of it here at 15:00 minutes:

 

Edited May 27 by RDETalus

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

very well then, and thanks :) will check out your mod sometime soon.

Edited May 27 by St. Mildly Annoyed

[GreenAnime]

That would make DOOM annoying to play imo. The fun is it's simplicity.

[Chezza]

I think people already explained the rationale behind Doom's simple monster behaviour very well, so I won't need to add much to that.

 

But I can relate to the OP with appreciating more challenging and unpredictable enemies capable of giving a little bit of a challenge by their lonesome. If I were to work on the the original Doom's bestiary I would keep all the originals as they are and then create a mini boss version for most of them.

They wouldn't look extremely different, but distinctive enough to be recognisable and a bit more intimidating. Basically, the Baron to the Hell Knight but the Baron has more variety of lethal and attacks and less predictable behaviour. I prefer challenge in few skilled enemies over slaughter maps of many weaklings any day.

In a way, Doom Eternal has amped up the heavy demons with more mobility and attacks, and can be a little more exciting to take on in low numbers, however the trade off is when in high numbers it becomes too difficult for many players and chaos ensues.

Edited May 27 by Chezza

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

I could see why it could be annoying, but that's why I think such complex behavior should be limited to only a few

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

4 minutes ago, Chezza said:

But I can relate to the OP with appreciating more challenging and unpredictable enemies capable of giving a little bit of a challenge by their lonesome. If I were to work on the the original Doom's bestiary I would keep all the originals as they are and then create a mini boss version for most of them...

I prefer challenge in few skilled enemies over slaughter maps of many weaklings any day...

 

In a way, Doom Eternal has amped up the heavy demons with more mobility and attacks, and can be a little more exciting to take on in low numbers, however the trade off is when in high numbers it becomes too difficult for many players and chaos ensues.

Your Doom Eternal mention is pretty similar to what I'm feeling is left out in the classic bestiary. While it's important to not make common enemies too complex, Doom's basic enemies are a bit slow and simple for their own good. Many mid tier enemies and could make much more fun one-on-one fights if they were a bit faster and had harder to dodge attacks.

[RDETalus]

When you play Half-Life 1 you're dealing with headcrabs, zombies, vortigaunts, hounds, and bullsquids in the early game. These guys are equivalent to the Doom bestiary. Then you run into the HECU soldiers and they tear your ass open. That is enemy type that Doom lacks. That's how I feel about it

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

1 hour ago, RDETalus said:

When you play Half-Life 1 you're dealing with headcrabs, zombies, vortigaunts, hounds, and bullsquids in the early game. These guys are equivalent to the Doom bestiary. Then you run into the HECU soldiers and they tear your ass open. That is enemy type that Doom lacks. That's how I feel about it

I felt the HECU soldiers were pretty easy. There were times they could be tough, but I usually could oneshot them with the revolver

[yakfak]

I wouldn't put a complicated enemy in my own doom work! if there was a responsive enemy like those aliens from Unreal who were good at dodging it'd break the relaxing and atmospheric feeling I like in doom - instead of cruising around multiple enemy encounters made up of simple functions it'd feel more like duelling and I don't want that at all

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

ok, to show an extreme example of the enemy archetype I'm thinking of, I took Amuscaria's behemoth from Hellforged and gave him some special attack states when he reaches low health. I may be going overboard, but here's a mastermind replacement for demonstration. Make sure to run like hell when he gets pissed. behemoth.zip 

btw, you'll probably need a recent version of GZdoom

Edited May 27 by St. Mildly Annoyed

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

8 minutes ago, yakfak said:

I wouldn't put a complicated enemy in my own doom work! if there was a responsive enemy like those aliens from Unreal who were good at dodging it'd break the relaxing and atmospheric feeling I like in doom - instead of cruising around multiple enemy encounters made up of simple functions it'd feel more like duelling and I don't want that at all

I get that, a lot of people prefer to play Doom purely to get rid of stress, or have a fun and exciting experience. The enemy type I'm referring to is best used as a very late game boss, or uncommon miniboss. Plus, this thread was made by someone who feels that Doom is missing that almost duel like feeling at times.

Edited May 27 by St. Mildly Annoyed

[GreenAnime]

1 hour ago, RDETalus said:

When you play Half-Life 1 you're dealing with headcrabs, zombies, vortigaunts, hounds, and bullsquids in the early game. These guys are equivalent to the Doom bestiary. Then you run into the HECU soldiers and they tear your ass open. That is enemy type that Doom lacks. That's how I feel about it

Evil marines are equivalent to them. They're pretty much the first most advanced custom enemy that DOOM lacks. I personally love these guys desig-wise, they're such brilliant addition to the game's difficulty.