Slower, engaging combat

See ... the problem is .... slower is not more engaging.
it the same engaging .... just slower .....

making things take 10x longer does not make them better.
Please stop asking for slower ...

When the map could be crossed in 30 seconds
But it takes 300 is it better ?

When it takes you 3 minutes to backtrack to the branching path ..
was it better ?

ditch the word slow.
focus on meaningful.

Now lets backtrack ...
Exactly how many meaningful mobs can you fight at once...
I mean 1 yeah , 2 , 3 ...

So screens of slow moving groups of at most 3 mobs.
is that the goal ?

One thing I think could really help is giving players more options to customize content within maps. Stuff that equalizes how rewarding/efficient maps are to run across different builds and playstyles.

eg, There's an allflame in poe1 that modifies maps so monster packs are replaced with 1 larger more threatening monster. This could let players that enjoy slower combat/single target builds be competetive with screen clearing zoomers that want to make large packs of weaklings explode.


Bosses should not be customizable to such a degree imo, but I agree there's no benefit to choosing slower, more methodical tactics over "nuke it dead before it moves."

Not sure if this would actually be better but perhaps replace some high dmg punishers with; stacking debuffs, enemy regains life, additional enemies spawn, fps reduced to single digits, boss arena degrades, immunity phase lore dump + bullet hell?

Still an action based game though so faster destruction of enemies will always be the goal.

"

AssaultUnit#6080 wrote:

"

default_mp3#9394 wrote:

There is a game for you. It's called No Rest For The Wicked.

There is a game for you. It's called PoE1.

Spot on!

There used to be a game where your health just went up every time you updated it.

It wasn't very popular, though.