Types of encounters

With the changes to monster density, and constant discussions on things like "combo" gameplay versus single button attacks, I would like to talk about the different TYPES of combat that different builds can have.

My feeling is that the issue with gameplay that both makes it feel too "spammy" but also makes combo gameplay feel too awkward actually comes from a lack of clarity on what kind of tools can be used in combat. Some skills fill too many roles, some don't fill a role that is presented by the game.

So I want to start first by talking about normal monsters, "white" monsters.

Right now, white monsters are broken down into a number of categories, each with different levels of effectiveness. So you have some things like Hulks or Burrowers who have a lot of health, mechanics that are designed to be avoided, and take a lot of the budget for a pack, and on the other hand you have things like little monkeys that are meant to be swarmy, have simple low damage attacks, and tiny health pools and generally no mechanics. Then you have the guys in the middle who are meant to come in numbers, but generally end up pretty standard, something like a Decrepit Mercenary, a basic attack, with the occasional telegraphed charged attack.

First off, white monsters are where balance should begin. Damage output from white monsters is the baseline, magic and rares don't deal more base damage than white monsters, except due to specific affixes. And generally players want to be able to kill a white pack of monsters in only a couple of attacks. Early on, it feels OK to kill the white monsters in a pack in 2-3 hits, later on, you expect to kill them in 1, though giant monsters taking 2-3 can still be OK.

So then I want to talk about the behavior of those enemies. The first distinction between enemies is whether they are ranged attackers or melee. This potentially opens up two different types of play. Generally, ranged attackers are open to attacks that hit at a distance and rely on enemies standing still, things like ranged attacks, things like grenades, but they're less appealing targets for melee. So for example, a skill like Sunder, a skill like Explosive Grenades, skills that fire a barrage, fire OVER enemies, leap into enemies, are good at dealing with ranged attackers.

For defending against ranged attacks, movement, barriers like shield wall, or crowd control that can travel over enemies is beneficial, something like leap slam.

On the other hand you have melee enemies, and now the risk is that they are coming into melee range, here is where things like shotgun type skills, cleave type skills, knockbacks, slows and melee range stuns can be the solution. Kiting, stunning, and physical defense here are your best defenses.

Then you still have some of the big guys, the elephants, the hulks, the "elites". For these guys, this is where your "combo" gameplay can work. You're taking a few hits to kill these guys, give it a couple of hits to prime the big damage, and execute them.


Now consider how the packs are built. You might have a big hulk who comes with 4-5 standard melee units. Here the goal might be to do something to CC the standard melee, maybe you freeze them or stun them, then maybe you shatter them or boneshatter to combo onto the big hulk.

Another might be a mix of ranged and melee. Maybe for them you lob grenades at the ranged attackers, and use permafrost bolts on the melee. Now, technically permafrost bolts are part of a "combo" in that freezing can be shattered by fragmentation rounds. But the time you might want to use that combo would more be when you're with the elite and the melee characters.

With something like an elite and ranged might do something instead like a combo between grenades and explosive shot.


My point here is that right now, especially with high density, there's just a generic "swarm" of monsters, that you want very generalized attacks to kill, so something like lightning arrow, which just kind of does high damage to multiple targets at range ends up being the best type of solution. Even though it doesnt (without electrocute) do anything like make it easy to target ranged protected by melee, it doesn't crowd control, or really ramp up damage on it's own.

What I think I'd like in dynamic combat is a way to plan to deal with certain kinds of attackers, ranged projectiles, melee, strong individual units. To have these decisions be made relatively quickly, but have them feel powerful individually.

Like if there's a ranged caster elite in the middle of their ranged footmen, I want to be able to throw a grenade in the middle of them all, shoot an explosive shot, and see all of them explode.

On the other hand, if I've got a bunch of melee attackers swarming me, and I throw the grenades, they'll just keep running to me and out of the range of the grenades. In that case maybe I want to use permafrost bolts, or glacial bolt and fragmentation rounds.


This works in situations where the combat is one puzzle that needs one solution. When density and pack size gets too high, then multiple encounter groups start to blend into each other. When too many encounter groups blend into each other, specialized solutions stop being meaningful. The solution becomes again "whatever the best damage that hits the most targets" becomes the solution. When you can't CC the threat, when chilling and freezing the melee enemies is meaningless because 15 monsters are firing arrows at you, and stunning the 5 over there just means the 10 on the other side of the screen keep attacking, this means the only thing that people care about is killing ASAP, as killing is the only universally reliable crowd control regardless of monster type.

I'm not suggesting specific gameplay strategy, but an overall concept of combat. I want things to continue to be fast paced, but it would be cool to have a situation where you see a type of encounter, and a couple of specific attacks solves the encounter powerfully, while a "generic" approach, or an incorrect approach could leave you struggling. Where each build plans around these contingencies (a different approach to melee attackers vs. range, a different approach to ground effects versus projectiles, a different approach to swarming enemies versus elites) and chooses those solutions based on the context.

But for this to be fun, it requires the combat to not merge into a blurry mess filling the screen. This doesn't mean the game ends up being slow, but also not so frenetic that it begins to degenerate.

It's like spices in a meal. You can have an enjoyable experience with a few combinations of spices, but if every bite is every spice in the cupboard at once, it stops being a series of interesting experiences, and it just becomes a slog to get through.