Icewind Dale What is "trash" and non-"trash" combat?

[JarlFrank]

A non-trash encounter is one that challenges a typical party played by a typical player who is going "all-out" on consumables and abilities. In a D&D-style game it's an encounter that is still challenging a fully rested party.

KotC2 is best at delivering non-trash encounters. Most of them are challenging for a fully rested party... but you have to go through half a dozen of them without resting in-between!

 

[Glop_dweller]

Trash combat: when you face six orcs, then face another six orcs, and then another six orcs, and so on, instead of different encounters or a big fight against an army of orcs.
The former is the Gateway to the Savage Frontier school of encounter design, the latter is the far superior Pool of Radiance way.

I was about to post a similar example; about a PnP D&D session I attended, where the DM had a dozen small rooms at the start of the map... each one had a zombie and a kobold in it.

"You see a doorway leading into the ground. Do you want to go inside? You see a zombie and a kobold" [combat ensues].
"You see a doorway leading to the East. Do you want to go inside? You see a zombie and a kobold". [combat ensues]
"You see a doorway leading North. Do you want to go inside? You see a zombie and a kobold". [combat ensues]
... ... ... ...
... ... ...
...

We all packed our books and left after 10 minutes.

 

[Shadenuat]

It is just one consequence of RPGs being made by schizophrenics for schizophrenics. If you are not learning something new, or making actions that force game design gears at least twitch a bit and aknowledge your presence, you are most likely engaged into a formulaic pointless content. This can take other forms but combat. Like farming points for your favorite faction. Why? Well because all choices have been made, and finishing their quest line would produce you an ending. Or doing companion quests because, why? Because if you don't do them, companion is going to eat a bullet in a cutscene in the end, even if these events have no connection to each other - and most dialogue in between doesn't actually matter. And you give 5 gifts for +20 points each and search markets and chests in dungeons for such gifts because that is how people usually hook up. Recently it seems like RPG design began to in particular like Formula, as you can see in such very interesting challenges like kingdom making in PKM, or camp n crafting in Expeditions (which you have to busy yourself with regardless if you are an adventurer of new lands, a chieftain or roman conquerer), etc.
Designers love their formulas and would bath in them and court them and polish this repetitive content because it is easier to implement than design that would excite and make player learn new things all the time. But truth is, formula is the worst way of making a traditional adventure or fantasy because the point of those are the excitement, seeing new things, mysteries of magic, whirlwind of events getting out of protags control and all the suitable drama.
Which is why a custom crafted content usually stands out for people the most in RPGs, like intricate secret dialogue interactions in PST, itemization in IE, level design like DS or Gothics, or narrative design like AoD (even if it also ends up railroady).

Through years your tolerance to developers trying to bullshit themselves out of effort and make you engage into cycle of repeating actions because there is some nonexistant carrot supposed to be out there lowers. Mine is now at a point where I can stomach max of 1 game a year, preferably something that can at least be played through quickly as well.

If RPG has nothing new and interesting to say (like play some new role but a murderhobo) in terms of narrative; and no interesting game design, it's a waste of time.

 

[Jigby]

I think at the very least there are 3 kinds of combat.

The easy trashcombat: Doesn't require any thought, no technique, no calculation. You're just mowing down some orcs and goblins in hopefully what amounts to combat with good kinaesthetics.

The mid-difficult to difficult trashcombat: Doesn't require precise calculation, but it does require precise technique. An example might be if you're playing Heroes3 online competitively. You're mostly engaging in trash combat, conquering mines and taking artifacts. What do you do in combat? You're not doing precise calculation, but you're using "good technique" concepts. Using the wait function correctly. Creating a block in the upper left corner to protect the the ranged unit. Abusing retaliation to maximize/minimize damage. In other games you're using line of sight to your advantage. Making a killhole. Creating a formation with good structure etc... you get the drill. (Other games might be King's Bounty on impossible or Field of Glory)

Difficult carefully designed encounters (i.e. not trashcombat): This could be something like BG2 with Improved Anvil installed. You get all these customized AI scripts created by modders to create these uber difficult encounters where you have to make precise steps to get through. Good technique is no longer cutting it. You can make a good formation, but because of all the BG2 cheese it doesn't matter much. You simply have to bruteforce calculate all the different varations. Technique at the end of the day is just a layer of abstraction created on top of precise calculation. If some sequence of moves invalidates it, then you cannot really use the technique. And BG2 is full of cheese that invalidates "sound" concepts.

I think the first kind is fine if the kinaesthetics are good, the combat is fast and swift, doesn't take too long. It's popamole, so the non-popamole game parts obviously have to come from something other than combat. My favorite is a combination of 2 and 3, not at parity though. Probably 70% in favor of 2. If the technique in 2 is not rich enough, deep enough, to me that's not a justification to create more designer puzzle encounters of the 3rd kind. Adjust the game mechanics so that it's richer.

 

[Jvegi]

Trash combat is whatever I'm doing in NWN OC Act 1 right now.

 

[Butter]

Trash combat: when you face six orcs, then face another six orcs, and then another six orcs, and so on, instead of different encounters or a big fight against an army of orcs.
The former is the Gateway to the Savage Frontier school of encounter design, the latter is the far superior Pool of Radiance way.

There are a lot of words to describe PoR's endless fights against 50+ of the same enemy, but each one of them begins with T and rhymes with crash.

 

[DeepOcean]

Trash fights = the state of the player doesnt change after the fight; he didnt learn anything/the resources he has available didnt change or changed on a way he can easily recover after the fight.

On my opinion, the trash fights dont have any other purpose than to be filler and make the game feel longer than it really is. People talk about attrition of resources that would justify "trash fights" but on those cases, those arent trash fights because they still have a purpose, drain you of resources and think how to solve those fights with the least amount of resources. Unfortunately to make things more confusing, many RPGs include resource management just to neutralize that mechanic with other mechanics aimed at accessibility like infinite resting or showing the player with resources.;

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Any of you play Search for Magdarr or Dungeons of Magdarr?

Spoiler

99 spiders drop from the ceiling! Surprising you!

They look even more primitive than this.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

Anything made by Larian or Owlcat = Trash combat.

KotC1+2 = Non-trash combat

 

[MadMaxHellfire]

any combat which doesn't pose any challenge beside having you to trade some numbers around. when all you're doing is mindlessly repeat some basic sequence. it doesn't need to be easy on you, it can even be quite brutal. the point is being actively engaged into it, if you're not, that's trash.

 

[Sharpedge]

Really good combat in RPGs is combat that forces you to adapt and use a diverse array of tactics, as opposed to having one set of tactics that solves every encounter. Unfortunately for most RPGs this is not the case and one shoe fits all encounters. Ideally, if the AI was good enough, in a single encounter you could be forced to come up with different solutions depending on how the enemy adapts, but I cannot think of any games that have combat with adaptive AI, we are just not there yet.

 

[gurugeorge]

2. Encounters made solely for the purpose of padding the game time (e.g. NWN2, IWDs, PF:K, PF:WoTR)

Agree with much of your post but it strikes me that one man's, "padding the game time" is another man's, "oh good, more of what I'm enjoying."

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

Trash combat is whatever I'm doing in NWN OC Act 1 right now.

It's what you'll be doing at least up to Act III, which is where I am. The only threatening things in the game thus far have been Water Elementals with random save vs. death spells and retarded party A.I. which often just stands there diddling itself refusing to tank. I finally understand the travails of Mage Life. Good help is so hard to find these days.

 

[dacencora]

Trash combat is whatever I'm doing in NWN OC Act 1 right now.

It's what you'll be doing at least up to Act III, which is where I am. The only threatening things in the game thus far have been Water Elementals with random save vs. death spells and retarded party A.I. which often just stands there diddling itself refusing to tank. I finally understand the travails of Mage Life. Good help is so hard to find these days.

It gets better, peaks, and then is just as bad as Act 1 again, sadly. Lmao.

The

Spoiler

lizard fights

are an exercise in masochism.

 

[Pocgels]

The fight where you don't think and don't learn.

Therefore, letting the player vaporize 30 goblins with a new high-level spell is OK in moderation. If you want to see a game packed to the brim with trash fights, Dragon age origin is a good example.

 

[KateMicucci]

The fight where you don't think and don't learn.

Therefore, letting the player vaporize 30 goblins with a new high-level spell is OK in moderation. If you want to see a game packed to the brim with trash fights, Dragon age origin is a good example.

I don't agree. Many of the fights in DAO were fairly difficult. I didn't feel like there were tons of trash fights.

 

[deuxhero]

Would the plot be impacted by its removal? (even if it's merely to match a description like something being guarded)
Is the fight/its solution non-unique? (If a fight is intended to demonstrate a new mechanic, like a type of enemies being vulnerable to a new weapon you acquired, it's unique from actual encounters based on that mechanic.
Is the player (assuming intended power level) not at serious risk of losing or being forced to expend resources to resolve the encounter?

If the answer to two of those is yes, it's likely a trash combat.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

Trash combat is unrewarding combat.

If a battle doesn't progress the game and/or your party, it's trash.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

A non-trash encounter is one that challenges a typical party played by a typical player who is going "all-out" on consumables and abilities. In a D&D-style game it's an encounter that is still challenging a fully rested party.

This is the only attempt at a definition that I like so far.

 

[El Presidente]

What is "trash" and non-"trash" combat?

Another way or saying meaningful and meaningless combat. Meaningful combat should be challenging and require at least some planning/resources management. It should feel more interesting, and preferably be inserted in an interesting situation that's bigger than a random stumble. As such placement should matter as well.

Most importantly, you shouldn't be able to zone out in a meaningful encounter, that's the mark of trash combat.

 

[Maxwell's Demon]

I don't buy that attrition is a good excuse for combat that requires no input from the player. Playing a video game should not feel like working an assembly line. There are plenty of other options for attrition that don't waste the player's time, like traps and environmental hazards that a designer can use instead of trash mobs.

With that firmly in mind, Let's be a little more practical in creating an operational definition of trash combat:

Any combat encounter where you can reliably win through a standard autoattack function* is trash combat.
*For anyone who is not aware, this is a function that automates choosing the basic attack for all party members and attacking the first enemy or a random enemy, usually by pressing and holding a button.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I was curious as to what everyone else's definition was. I think my own would be something along the lines of(mainly with RTwP in mind):

If I can use cheatengine to speedhack past this fight with no/minimal player input, it's a trash fight.

With that firmly in mind, Let's be a little more practical in creating an operational definition of trash combat:

Any combat encounter where you can reliably win through a standard autoattack function* is trash combat.

Which is similar to this, I suppose.

 

[EldarEldrad]

To qualify for trash combat the encounter should contains most of these features:
- non-unique enemies/circumstances
- low risk, low reward
- highly predictable and easily optimizable to win through
- can be easily repeated again
- shallow combat system
- long or unskippable animations

 

[Bastardchops]

Any of you play Search for Magdarr or Dungeons of Magdarr?

Spoiler

99 spiders drop from the ceiling! Surprising you!

They look even more primitive than this.

AHH! I'm not usually for them but post a trigger warning before putting up something like this. You're going to give someone a heart attack.

 

[octavius]

If you get the same results using Auto/Quick Combat then it's trash combat.