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

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

5 minutes ago, GreenAnime said:

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.

that's a good example of the enemy type I'm thinking of when I'm referring to advanced combatants in Doom.

[RDETalus]

8 minutes ago, GreenAnime said:

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.

Yeah, I totally forgot about them. They exactly fulfill that role.

 

[idbeholdME]

-fast somewhat improves the situation. It can make any monster threatening when it relentlessly attacks you as long as they have line of sight, but especially the faster projectiles do wonders in denying the player space. Even when circle strafing, you have to move much faster to avoid them and hitscanners become the king of area denial. Or you just pay the HP/armor tax.

 

And you don't want to see what happens if you let a -fast Lost Soul get behind you in a hectic fight :P

Edited May 28 by idbeholdME

[blueyosh43]

Yeah they're really pushovers on their own, only threatening in numbers and with good level design. I've looked into some mods to try to make them more threatening. There was a cool mod called Dumb Smart Projectiles that made the demons actually lead their shots and also adds a bit of randomness to their aiming, that alone really changes the way you play. I recently started getting into Zscript and am working on some enhanced enemies, mostly focusing on the mid to upper tier enemies. The rest serve their purpose as fodder. 

-pinkies now have slightly more range to their bite and will thrust themselves forward as they bite, you actually have to keep your distance from them now. Their bite is also much faster. 

 

-Hell knights are the same but throw 2 fireballs back to back, they throw slightly faster than usual

 

-Barons now run, they're just barely slower than pinkies. They now have 4 attacks. 2 fireballs back to back, a fast volley of 3 fireballs in random directions, an attack where they scream for one second then simultaneously throw 3 extremely fast fireballs, and an attack where they scream for one second then throw a fast blue fire ball that follows you like a revenant missile. Their melee attack is also way faster. 

 

-cacodemons are now slightly faster, and they will now quickly and randomly strafe left or right. My goal was to make them tricky to aim at and hit, they're quite agile and hectic. 

 

-Cyberdemon now fires his rockets much faster and has a few different patterns of rocket firing. There's a few volleys of 5 each in random directions, a volley of 3, and a single rocket. 

 

-spidermastermind hit box is way smaller and they move faster, the startup on their attack is also quicker. 

 

Even with these changes they're still not too difficult on their own in a big arena. My goal with the blue baron fire ball was to try to counter circle strafing.  I thought about giving the cyberdemon a tracer too but haven't got around to it yet. But adding varied patterns of fireball throwing with offsets is something I was trying to do, especially with the cyber demon, so you cant simply just strafe mindlessly, youd actually have to pay attention to where you're strafing. Thinking about adding more volley patterns to the baron but don't want to go overboard. If you could combine these somehow with the Smart projectiles mod I think the monsters could really be threatening.

 

I'd really recommend the Dumb Smart Projectiles mod though, it really alleviates the problem you describe. Here's my monsters if you're interested. 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qi9oL7IOu02zrdiHGmi1wrRizdVImt-k/view?usp=sharing

 

here's the dumb smart projectiles mod

https://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?t=76013

Edited May 27 by blueyosh43

[Jayextee]

10 hours ago, St. Mildly Annoyed said:

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. 

I wouldn't call "strafe left, right, left" a good bit of thought personally.

This being said, IMO DOOM's monsters weren't really designed to be tackled alone. Even the 'boss' monsters have accompaniments in their original appearances (Cyberdemon with lost souls, Mastermind's baron/tomato entourage). And actually, I'm going to agree with anyone who says that DOOM II's monster behaviour balance is near-perfect. Because it is.

Edited May 27 by Jayextee

[Gez]

What's better game design:

1. Simple pieces that allow complexity to be an emergent property of how you arrange the pieces together?
2. Very complex pieces that as a consequence can only be fit together in pretty much always the same way?

[blueyosh43]

6 minutes ago, Jayextee said:

I wouldn't call "strafe left, right, left" a good bit of thought personally.

 

I didn't realize it had a set pattern for awhile, maybe he doesn't either. Regardless it does make it slightly more engaging with the offsets. 

[blueyosh43]

6 minutes ago, Gez said:

What's better game design:

1. Simple pieces that allow complexity to be an emergent property of how you arrange the pieces together?
2. Very complex pieces that as a consequence can only be fit together in pretty much always the same way?

neither is inherently good or bad design. it depends on how the developer uses those pieces in the finished product. 

[Dheta]

Personally i find the Doom 2 bestiary have the perfect amount of complexity. Most monsters are simple but when considering geometry and other monsters, the combinations for fights are near endless. 

 

I'll be honest, just about all the custom monsters i've come across add needless complexity and somewhat drag down dooms combat, they restrict rather than expand combat scenarios.

 

For dooms combat, simple pieces are far my preference, arch viles, pain elementals and revenant are all the complexity doom needs. I don't think adding monsters with complex behaviors and abilities without changing combat while you're at it works out well.

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

1 hour ago, Gez said:

What's better game design:

1. Simple pieces that allow complexity to be an emergent property of how you arrange the pieces together?
2. Very complex pieces that as a consequence can only be fit together in pretty much always the same way?

it's best to use both, with more complex pieces in moderation. Having more complex pieces can help spice up gameplay, and make the player more weary of those simple pieces, when both are used properly. Having more simple pieces make more complex actors stand out, and allow them to provide a unique challenge, and better catch the player off guard.

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

16 minutes ago, Dheta said:

Personally i find the Doom 2 bestiary have the perfect amount of complexity. Most monsters are simple but when considering geometry and other monsters, the combinations for fights are near endless. 

 

I'll be honest, just about all the custom monsters i've come across add needless complexity and somewhat drag down dooms combat, they restrict rather than expand combat scenarios.

 

For dooms combat, simple pieces are far my preference, arch viles, pain elementals and revenant are all the complexity doom needs. I don't think adding monsters with complex behaviors and abilities without changing combat while you're at it works out well.

Well, complexity is a sliding scale. I think the vast majority of people in the classic Doom sect have experienced the fuckery that happens when someone makes a huge acs boss and preps the player like they're fighting a normal Icon of Sin. Still, wouldn't it be nice if Doom had one or two enemies that were good standalone challenges; best found peppered around maps or used as bosses.

[Helton342]

they're perfectly complex for what they need to be. If you want more complexity there are a multitude of wads that do so. And most of the time it feels kitchen sink-ish, or shoe-horned in, it is rare to see good modded Enemy encounters. But it is common for the main roster

[Gravepicker]

3 hours ago, Gez said:

What's better game design:

1. Simple pieces that allow complexity to be an emergent property of how you arrange the pieces together?
2. Very complex pieces that as a consequence can only be fit together in pretty much always the same way?

 

3 hours ago, blueyosh43 said:

neither is inherently good or bad design. it depends on how the developer uses those pieces in the finished product. 

 

I kind of agree with both accounts. I wouldn't say the "simple pieces" approach is good design, or better than the alternative (which, btw, seems a little of a strawman, as at least later the OP clarified that they wouldn't want overly complex pieces and would use them in moderation). I do think that it leaves more design space, as in, it leaves more room to design different combat encounters (please, any game designers/people with actual game design knowledge, correct my use of "design space" if it was inaccurate).

 

And I actually also think that a system that allows for more design space is desirable for a community like this one, that isn't trying to make one single game/mod but releases hundreds or even thousands of maps every year. Monster designs that are simple but fill a new role in the game seem to me far more likely to be found useful by other creators. Even then, it's not like we have to choose, either collectively or as individual creators.

 

tl; dr: I prefer the first choice given by Gez, but do what you like. Though do it knowing that you can either go Nuts or go Doom Eternal.

[Logamuffin]

One thing I don’t like about Doom’s Bestiary is how Hell Knights and Barons are just big imps. I would’ve liked it if they were given more distinct attack patterns, like how Brutal Doom made Barons throw 3 fireballs at a time. 

 

Otherwise, I think each monster has good roles in their respective tiers. I have gripes with vanilla Doom 2, but the bestiary ain’t one of em. They fuckin’ nailed it.

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

44 minutes ago, Gravepicker said:

I kind of agree with both accounts. I wouldn't say the "simple pieces" approach is good design, or better than the alternative (which, btw, seems a little of a strawman, as at least later the OP clarified that they wouldn't want overly complex pieces and would use them in moderation). I do think that it leaves more design space, as in, it leaves more room to design different combat encounters (please, any game designers/people with actual game design knowledge, correct my use of "design space" if it was inaccurate).

 

And I actually also think that a system that allows for more design space is desirable for a community like this one, that isn't trying to make one single game/mod but releases hundreds or even thousands of maps every year. Monster designs that are simple but fill a new role in the game seem to me far more likely to be found useful by other creators. Even then, it's not like we have to choose, either collectively or as individual creators.

The thought that inspired me to make this topic was e2m8 and e3m8. Like a lot of Doomers, I felt the mastermind was a let down. She could either get stunlocked, trapped in infighting, or one-shotted with the bfg. I've now realized that the Cyberdemon wouldn't much better if the maps were swapped. For Doom's open arena "boss" maps, there aren't any monsters which feel like bosses(at least not exciting ones), at least to me.

 

Imagine if the cyberdemon had an attack pattern which couldn't just be dodged by simple strafes( circle, figure 8, ect.), and actually required the player to think about where they're moving. It could still be the same rocket attack, it could still just be 1, but it would be great if ole cybie could fight like a monster trying to kill you. Maybe something as simple as firing ahead of the player, or for a bit more complexity, occasionally firing off rockets in all cardinal and intermediate directions facing the player.

Edited May 27 by St. Mildly Annoyed

[Not Jabba]

The simplicity of Doom's monsters is good, but complex monsters can work well as part of larger fight designs too. The Maulotaur from Heretic is a good example. It chooses randomly between three attacks; one is a simple projectile spray, but the other two are more interesting. It has a charge attack where it both attacks you and changes location at the same time, and ground-crawler attack that causes area denial by creating a long, impassable, slow-moving line of damaging fire. It can be an interesting enemy to fight alone, if the space is right for it. It can be much more interesting to fight a few of them at a time, if the space is right for it. But they also can work as a piece of much bigger fights, particularly since the ground crawler can pass up or down ledges and both attacks somewhat help to break up herding/circling dynamics. Compared to the simpler Cyberdemon, it has advantages and disadvantages; it's nowhere near as useful for infighting as the Cyberdemon, and the Cyberdemon's splash damage also creates interesting spatial considerations that the Maulotaur doesn't have. Everything has pros and cons.

 

The Heresiarch individually is too weak to be anything more than a flavor boss, but you could imagine that its big projectile sprays, bouncing homing fireballs, and summoning could be interesting in the context of a larger fight. It's also hard to kill, so a situation where the mapper wants to keep it around for awhile as a key component of a longer endurance battle, and the player gradually whittles down its health while fighting other stuff, makes more sense. A teleporting, summoning D'Sparil could also be interesting as a piece of a bigger battle if it weren't for the fact that it kills all enemies in the map when it dies (this can be interesting too, you're just limited to only using it in the last fight of any map).

 

I don't think I've seen a lot of people mentioning the Arch-Vile here, but it is Doom's most complex monster and one of the best monster designs I've ever encountered. It's not that hard individually, but it can be dangerous if you're not prepared for it, and it adds a lot of complexity to any fight that combines it with any other monsters.

 

If you go much more boss-tier (i.e., more challenging) than that, you're probably working against yourself (if you're trying to use it as a recurring encounter that combines with other monsters). A really powerful boss enemy will quickly wreck every monster in the arena and will become the player's entire focus, or else you'll have to give them so much space that they can basically avoid it. There are ways around that too (resurrection, summoning, advanced homing attacks maybe), but the more individually deadly you make it, the less nicely it's going to play with any other fight dynamics.

Edited May 27 by Not Jabba

[idbeholdME]

19 hours ago, blueyosh43 said:

My goal with the blue baron fire ball was to try to counter circle strafing. 

Sounds like giving the player permanent Partial Invisibility could be the solution to all your problems :P

[Sneezy McGlassFace]

It's funny that the most memorable enemies in doom to me are revenants and archviles. Because even though i do love the simple individual pieces the game is composed of, these two are a big step up in terms of mechanical complexity compared to the rest of the bestiary. So i can imagine a mod that would add just one more little mechanic to each monster. To bump up the overall encounter complexity just a tad. I can't overemphasize how delicate of a balancing act that would be, though. I would be very careful not to create another overdesigned nonsense monster like the afrit.

Simplicity is key part of fun doom, in my opinion. Making interesting and complex scenarios using simple building blocks. Times have changed and adding a little more nuance to the regular cast could be very interesting. 

[RataUnderground]

Has anyone tried to bring Eternal's marauder into Doom II, so we can all see what a bad idea it is?

[kalensar]

6 minutes ago, RataUnderground said:

Has anyone tried to bring Eternal's marauder into Doom II, so we can all see what a bad idea it is?

 

Yeah there is one at R667 but I'm not sure how accurate it is. Just what I read through it seemed like it did okay.

On another note there are a few different versions of Doom 2016 monsters imported, my own versions included. Mostly it just boils down to the weapon/player aim of the custom monsters whether they are balanced toward vanilla weapons or not. Most cases monster packs dont scale well with vanilla weapons, with the main caveat being monster health values being the main key value breaking or maintaining the balance rather than monster abilities..

[pantheon]

On 5/26/2024 at 11:02 PM, St. Mildly Annoyed said:

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.

 

Vigor is a very engaging Scythe-like WAD with some encounters like what you've described. Red marines go the fastest.

[WASFDDDDD]

Cyberdemons are very threatening enemies, due to their ability to instakill an unarmored player. And the splash damage gets really tense when you're knocked down to 17% or something, and you know your dodging is gonna have to be on-point or you'll lose this battle. You can put a cyberdemon in an arena where the player has a moderate amount of cover but not a ton of space to move around, and only give them a plasma rifle (or SSG if you wanna be really brutal) to deal with it, and what you get is a desperate dance with death, where one wrong move means certain death. It's exactly the kind of duel-like feeling you're describing, and it's already possible in vanilla Doom!

 

You see, that's why classic Doom doesn't have enemies as complex as other games do -- it doesn't need to. With what you have, you can just do everything you described and then some

 

 

I will agree with you on one thing though: The kind of monsters you see in so many mods are really disappointing. They're often just regular Doom II enemies with slightly more or less health. Very boring, and doesn't really open up any new possibilities. With a mod, you can afford to try things that probably won't work, because if your players don't like it they'll just disable the mod

[St. Mildly Annoyed]

3 hours ago, WASFDDDDD said:

Cyberdemons are very threatening enemies, due to their ability to instakill an unarmored player. And the splash damage gets really tense when you're knocked down to 17% or something, and you know your dodging is gonna have to be on-point or you'll lose this battle. You can put a cyberdemon in an arena where the player has a moderate amount of cover but not a ton of space to move around, and only give them a plasma rifle (or SSG if you wanna be really brutal) to deal with it, and what you get is a desperate dance with death, where one wrong move means certain death. It's exactly the kind of duel-like feeling you're describing, and it's already possible in vanilla Doom!

well, if someone has a ton of space in a level, circle strafing could still come in handy. I feel there isn't any enemy who really prevents the player from literally running circles around them, or just running a single simple pattern. If they do, then the enemy is hitscan, which leads to either a bumrush if the enemy's slow or a game of peak-a-boo. 

 

on the topic of other mods, it would be nice if more people took the liberty of making a custom monster and created something that provides a fresh battle that requires a better knowledge and usage of complex attack patterns. well cyberdemons can be heavy threats in situations like you described, there's not much stopping a skilled enough player from cruising around with whatever weapon ( that isn't a pistol) and mowing down his health. There isn't any switch of strafing patterns, or attacks which can make the player want cover even IF they're focused.

[roadworx]

while i do see where you're coming from, i feel like what you're talking about doesn't work as well in doom as it does in other games. the fact that the player's biggest strength lies in their agility means that, no matter what enemy you throw at them, they're likely gonna find them to be fairly easy to fight one-on-one when the surroundings aren't heavily influencing the fight. the only way that i can see an enemy like that working is if it's so complex in its attack patterns that it's relegated to a really small niche that doesn't work elsewhere.

 

i feel like this can be seen pretty much whenever an enemy like that is used in a wad. nearly every single time they end up not working very well; i think that the sole example of a lone boss enemy being really great in doom is eviternity 2's final boss, but that had a specially designed arena that would change its geometry in accordance with the boss's stages and attacks, thus falling into the "relegated to a really small niche" category.