Has there ever, ever been a game that avoids this type of scenario though? It's why I hardly ever bother with max difficulty on games - you're inevitably funneled down to a few effective builds, and while discovering those builds might be fun, once they're discovered it's all a bit pointless.
What you want from combat is a sweet spot where it goes on long enough for there to be some ebb and flow, some possibility of losing that you just keep at bay, and for you to be able to experience all the tricks the enemy has to offer, and to try out some of your own toys - but not so long as to drag on and on.
Very difficult to design, I should think, and frankly, most designers seem to fail at it most of the time. It might actually be the very kernel, the very nub of good game design, that very few people have a nose for.
People usually think of it in terms of "good encounter design," but that's only a part of it - it's like that model type of "good encounter" requires the whole game, all the numerical values of things, the aesthetics, everything, even the sense of progression, to be centered on that ideal experience.
You can totally get this experience with a variety of different builds on Dominating however. Perhaps it's because I like to theorycraft "suboptimal" builds around a certain theme, but I'm frequently facing these exact kind of fights.
Why? Why should a perfectly normal build (i.e. not one abusing the game's mechanics, which is not what we're talking about here) avoid the game's mechanics? Or rather, why is this good design in your opinion?
Because you're conflating avoiding damage, with avoiding the game's mechanics.
Let's look at Death Stalkers for example. If I'm playing a tank build and I get tagged by Death Stalker venom, I couldn't run away even if I wanted to. I'm going to throw some flares and look for the filthy bug (when they sting you they touch down within a reasonable radius) to deal as much damage as I can before I'm stunned. Then, after I wake up from the stun, I'll try to kill it the following turn before it stings me and disappears again. This is the encounter playing out one way. If I'm playing a glass cannon build and get stung, I know that as soon as that stun hits, I'm going to get fucked. This means I need to gain significant distance between myself and the now disappeared crawler. I need to pop into stasis, I need to throw down some quick bear traps and caltrops to slow the crawler from approaching me once I'm stunned. I need to plop down a force field or an electromagnetic imprint to hopefully stun the crawler as it moves in for the kill. If you run too far away, combat ends and you can heal, but now you don't know where the Crawler is, and you're back to throwing flares and trying to find the damnable beast before it finds you and you're forced to flee for your life again.
What about Burrowers? If I'm playing a tank build and I'm facing some burrowers, I pop on my energy shield and close the distance to them, using CC to keep them from doing hit and run tactics, and managing my poison stacks so I don't get stacked out from bio damage. All the while I need to pathfind around the annoying spawn which can force me to waste precious AP points moving around them, or precious AP points killing them to clear a path to the burrowers. If I'm playing a glass cannon build, not only do I need to kill the Burrowers as fast as possible before they stack to much poison, I need to worry about the eggs that they're laying. I might have an energy shield, but there is no energy shield in the game that will stop Burrower spawn from shredding you. This makes it so sometimes you want to prioritize killing the spawn first instead of the Burrowers, as they pose a significantly greater threat.
These are just two quick examples. Don't you see how this offense versus defense, glass cannon versus tank dichotomy is what makes the games mechanics shine?
Because enemies cannot. I can clear an entire room of them without them getting a chance to offer any resistance.
That's because your build is built to do this...if you didn't clear a room of enemies without them getting a chance to offer resistance, you're going to die the next turn most likely. And, you can't always do this, as if there are too many enemies for you to clear, or if they're too spread out to reach them all, you need to flee, break LoS, etc, so that you can survive another turn and win the fight. If you play a tankier build, while you trade in not being able to deal as much damage, you get being able to survive attacks and the chance to comfortably deal with the enemies the next turn. It's just about what kind of playstyle you prefer.
I don't see how it does. Your best defense against my criticism so far seems to be "play a lesser build"
If two builds can beat an encounter, how do you determine which one is lesser? If you made the two builds fight, the glass cannon would be able to out dps the tanks armor, while the tank would be able to easily nuke the fragile glass cannon. It's just two different play styles; I don't know how you can say which one is better or worse. If you're playing a glass cannon build, you're still playing around the mechanics, you're just playing around them differently than a tank would.
Let me also point out, there are many hybrid builds. In the game, there are some encounters that are a nightmare to do as a glass cannon, and there are some encounters that are a nightmare to do as a tank. An example that stands out to me is the Protectorate Warehouse Mission. Have fun doing that fight as a glass cannon (TM is mega gay btw, I avoid it a lot as stasis is big cheese. Try playing some glass cannon builds without TM and see how much difficulty you have). Hybrid builds are great because they dabble in both sides of these two play styles. There are some encounters where you can nuke everything, and indeed have to because you're facing glass cannon enemies. There are some encounters where the enemies are very tanky, and you have to actually resort to tanking and going through these long, drawn out fights to win. There are just so many different builds you haven't tried yet, so when you make these sweeping claims about combat being this or that off of one build, you just haven't experienced all of what the game has to offer.
As a glass cannon build, there isn't. As a tank there is.
Which is why I am constantly making the disclaimer I am making - but the point is, that even *with* that disclaimer, it just means that the build path I've chosen is uninteresting. So your best response so far is, if I understand your argument: "Yes, you are correct, the combat has the problems you are describing with good high damage builds. However if you play a build that deals less damage, you will not have these problems, and you will experience combats lasting more turns and having more mechanical interaction."
If that is true then that's good, but it doesn't negate the criticism of this aspect of the game's combat, it just means it's not valid for the entirety of the combat system.
Also, I imagine we'll come back to this discussion once I've played a tank build. Because even such a build, I imagine, will have trouble with a lot of the combat mechanics that can make it suffer from these issues. In fact I get the strong feeling that this is exactly why the community seems to favour these high damage, CON 3 builds: that the lethality is simply so high that even tanky builds can be very, very short-lived if hit a couple of times.
Again though, I am obviously reserving judgment of this aspect!
I misspoke when I said as a glass cannon build there isn't a gradual exchange of mechanics, as I just went into detail above about how this gradual exchange of mechanics works. My argument is this,
"Good high damage builds primary means of mechanical interaction focus on circumventing the enemies offense by breaking LoS, constant retreats, CC, and a variety of other methods to avoid taking as much damage as possible while simultaneously dealing enough damage to eliminate the enemy before they can close the distance/outlast your CC so that they can kill you.
Good tank builds primary means of mechanical interaction focuses on circumventing the enemies offense by having powerful armor to lower enemy damage, different armor to target the various different types of enemy damage, a wide array of feats and stats to minimize the damage that gets through the armor and increase survivability, and using drugs to further enhance defensive options, all while dealing enough damage to the enemy.
Both of these are forms of mechanical interaction, and different tank/glass cannon builds have different nuances when it comes to how they go about all of this. It's up to you choose which one you like."
And I'll tell you right now, some builds are better than others, and some builds do negate certain mechanical aspects of the games combat. That doesn't mean you can make a blanket statement regarding the combat as a whole, nor is that a flaw in the combat system, as this ununiformity is what makes all the builds so unique and fun. Not everyone is going to enjoy the same thing, and it is these imbalances which gives everyone a chance to find a style that they like. Also, I will say, pistol builds are pretty uninteresting IMO, so if you're enjoying the game now, just wait till you get to try some of the more enjoyable builds, at least according to me.
Oh, and are you playing on Oddity or Classic? Because classic overlevels you a lot and makes the game a lot easier. Another thing to note.
