Nine Inch Heels

I mean, if you're playing MBL, you can probably opt to play Sakura, and use her familiars to deal with stuff beneath you to make it a good bit less stressful. It might still feel a bit awkward, but being able to fire in basically every direction makes the whole stage a bit more comfortable perhaps? Personally I prefer Follet or Windia though, you can pull some nice cheese in the volcano with both of them.

Yeah, I think a lot of people dislike it because of how it scrolls vertically and how the terrain is kinda restrictive here and there, it's not as hard the "gorge" though. Usually, when I go for a run, I play that stage ASAP to get it out the way early, and to increase my item counter for the purpose of scoring, the stage is excellent for that, because of how you can "milk" the rocks that come flying in from the sides here and there. Easy score extends, for very little effort, if you got it routed well.

You mean the volcano?

I watched the VOD for like a good half hour or so, and even though I have my share of subjective criticism in regards to how the map plays, I have to say that I very much enjoyed the custom monsters that have been added, as well as the changes to existing ones. One may argue that some monsters may be somewhat redundant in their functions, but the map overall seems far from bloated in terms of custom enemies. The change to the barons is one I consider to be actually pretty reasonable, because it turns these bullet sponges into something you're actually gonna have to pay some attention to. Not saying I'm not okay with you having your opinion, but since custom monsters don't often get discussed, I felt like perhaps I should give my 2 cents as well.

Alright, first of... I would very much prefer if you guys didn't use the "@username" feature all the time when all you really want is to get somebody's name into your posts. That feature is for when there's something important that requires attention, and restating that I said something about anything a while back (which I know I said, for the record) just isn't. Second of, and that's why I mentioned the "@username" thing first, I am not willing to participate in any and all discussions regarding this project from now on, therefore I'd much rather not get notfied all the time when something happens around here. From my point of view, discussing things in greater detail just doesn't go anywhere at the moment. Third of, I've already stated why designing a map entirely out of corridors is not a good idea (It objectively isn't, and no WAD that has ever been deemed "good" does this. id's originals sure didn't, for that matter), and spd7693 opted to add yet another corridor to a map that already consists mostly of corridors. People can build whatever they so desire, but if whatever feedback there may be gets shoved aside immidiately, then these maps might as well get developed in a vacuum. I know that comes across harsh, but at this point I simply lack the means and the will to get the message across in a more "comforting" way. At this point, the odds of you finding someone experienced to polish your maps for you is pretty much zero. If you want for people to be interested in working together with you on the maps you provide, you're gonna need to raise the bar a good deal. As far as I am concerned, your best bet is to play some WADs that are actually good, look at those in an editor, and understand the basic concepts of what makes these maps as good as they are. Aside of "field research" there are plenty articles and essays written on mapping, all of which you can find using the search function.

Sorry, but you're doing it again, and you're doing it wrong. There is no such thing as unnecessarily difficult. Get that schtick out of your head already. There's different skill levels among players here, some of us require for maps to have a more difficult baseline to feel like we're up against a challenge. If you play any of these maps, then you shouldn't play on UV. And you shouldn't expect for UV to be tailored towards your level of skill either. You're not entitled in any way shape or form to get a UV setting that you're okay with from other mappers. And no, a map does not retain its difficulty when you remove high threat monsters like archviles or cyberdemons etc. It becomes easier. It clearly does. How could it not? UV is not supposed to be what you think it should be when you're looking at somebody else's maps, it's what the other mapper thinks UV needs to be for the maps he makes. You're just trying to force your ideal of how difficult a map should be on others instead of facing the cold reality that I mentioned earlier: People have gotten better at the game. Unfortunately, you're the one who seems to be stuck somewhere in the 90s, where things seemed a lot more difficult than they were in reality. Simply put: This community at large is well past the point of considering OG Doom II a difficult WAD to beat on UV. If you think something is too difficult, you best learn to swallow your pride and dial down to Hurt Me Plenty or lower. The earlier you accept that the baseline of skill is a good bit higher around here, the better off you'll be in the long run. Your alternatives to dialing down are getting better at doom, or straight up cheating. God help you if you ever stumble across a ribbiks map... That's why when you're faced with too difficult maps you can dial down the difficulty. Besides, both Erik Alm, and Yonathan Donner state in their readme files that the maps are harder than most other stuff at the time IIRC. In case of Erik Alm he clearly states that the difficulty ramps up a good deal eventually in Scythe II. So, matter of fact is, you have been given a warning that you just didn't care to read. Besides, Scythe (2) and Hell revealed aren't slaughter WADs.

Check the wiki and look at each individual map entry.

To me personally it seems like a lot of times monsters are put in places for the purpose of atmosphere, rather than the purpose of killing or even inflicting damage. If you are on a tight bridge, and you have something in front of you and to your sides show up to ruin your day, that creates some tension, even though the fight in and of itself might be fluff, doubly so when the player retreats to a more advantageous location, you're still being pressured into making a call (even if one is an "easy out"). I think that's part of what makes 90s wads feel 90s... Making people "retreat" to a more favourable position is interesting, psychologically speaking. I don't think we don't get to enjoy the privilege of making a call like that a lot nowadays a lot, in many cases there's either the lock-in, or it's obvious that a retreat is what's required to do. On the other hand I think we also get more interesting fights in return.

There are still plenty mappers who build stuff that doesn't turn into adrenaline fueled murderfests. YukiRaven is one of them, and she recently released a map that I played and wrote a review for. https://www.doomworld.com/files/file/19093-umbra-of-fate/ That being said, these maps are still being made. You can't keep people from speedrunning your maps if they feel inspired to do so. Rest assured, most people don't care about speedrunning anyway, but what people do care about is getting to play something that they deem worth their time for one reason or another. Speedrunners are always in the single digit vicinity of the total amount of players anyway. That said, most people are like you, and would never consider speedrunning anything. Even people who like to play or create hard maps aren't necessarily speedrunners, but it sure is nice to be able to build something for myself when I need the workout, not that I'm much of a speedrunner to begin with, though. That is entirely wrong. Most of "us" aren't pros or speedrunners. You need to realize, though, that everybody here who spent a good deal of time with this game, has some "advanced" (relative to what iWADs require) expertise to begin with. And since we don't want to derail this thread ad infinitum: The reason these maps are in secret slots is because most people at the time would consider those to be too hard to be part of the main progression.

How else is a map difficult, if it doesn't test a player's skill? And what good is a map that doesn't put you on the edge of your seat here and there? I don't like playing things that aren't difficult in some way. It makes me feel like I spent my time on something that didn't really manage to hold my attention. Besides, all video games are a test of skill. Literally all of them. It's just that some games are easier/harder than others. Every map does that. All of them. Exceptions merely confirm the rule. If nothing tests your skills, then "beating it" is meaningless. Because plutonia is meant to be more difficult than OG Doom. That's why. No... One cyberdemon means nothing these days, unless you're stuck with it in a very tight space where it's hard to evade his rockets. A single cyberdemon in the wilds is nothing people get "excited" about. This isn't the 90s anymore. People have moved on, and they became better at the game. You should play some custom WADs like "Valiant" or "ancient aliens" to see what the "popular baseline" for gameplay is these days... Rest assured, it's nothing like the iWADs. Video below shows me playing a map that isn't even difficult in terms of slaughter. Virtually anybody on these forums who plays regularly will be able to beat it eventually without much of an issue. Most maps I enjoy playing are significantly more difficult. And there's others like me.

It depends on what you mean by layout. If you mean the "macro layout", as in which room goes where, then that doesn't necessarily impact the individual fights. But if by layout you mean "room layout", then that obviously and clearly determines how the room itself plays, because it determins how things can move, and from where they come..

It would appear this is a not too uncommon issue when approaching slaughtermaps though. Ammo in inconvenient locations (behind enemy lines, for example), or a strong emphasis on infighting for the purpose of ammo conservation are usually par for the course. That said, more often than not it's probably a good idea to, for example, just IDDQD the map, have a good look around to see what's where, and then formulating a strategy or route through the map that is the most likely to yield a favourable outcome.

So, loosing 20 minutes of your life by looking at textures that don't even try to kill you is better logic then? It turns out that a lot of people enjoy beating a difficult map much more than beating a map that doesn't even put up a fight. Besides, "go 2 it" doesn't even qualify as "hard" by today's standards anymore. By the same virtue, most (if not all) of OG Doom's maps qualify as "fluff" these days. Please stop playing the victim card as you do from day one. And I don't care about your personal failed history with that metal band you were in, for that matter. So now that the formalities are out of the way, let me tell you one thing that apparently you didn't learn yet: Disagreement and disrespect are not the same thing. Just because I disagree with your opnions, your design choices, the way you perceive the quality of your maps it doesn't mean I am an unkind nasty bitch looking to insult you at all times. Perhaps it's time you grew up already.

Ignoring the fact that this claim is begging for a citation, It's not the monstercount that made "go 2 it" as hard as it was at the time, it was actually the placement of these monsters that made it stand out. Anybody who makes slaughtermaps these days doesn't just flood fill maps with enemies without rhyme or reason, unless of course it's supposed to be something like a parody, or a grindfest, or the mapper doesn't know what to do, basically. That depends on who you ask. Some people are completionists who want their 100% kills, -secrets, and even -items. Kill first, look at textures later. The idea that somewhere a door opens and players suddenly get attacked isn't what made habitat bad. It's that the map consists almost entirely out of corridors that makes habitat one of the worst iWAD maps of all time, if not the worst of them all. No, they're not. What a map needs is subject to the eye of the beholder. I like platforming, most people hate it. C'est la vie...

Wrong question. Plutonia is not a slaughter WAD, it's just a secret map that qualifies as slaughter, and maybe some bits and pieces here and there. Plutonia as a whole is not slaughter. The actual question is why non-slaughterWADs have secret maps in them which are meant to be slaughter, and the simple answer is because those maps were the most difficult at the time for most people, and they didn't fit with the rest of the megawad in terms of gameplay for the most part, therefore they have been put behind a wall of secrets to keep them away from the normal progression. And that's all there is to it. It's not uncommon for video games of any kind to have the most difficult stuff in secrets. Some large maps even put significantly harder fights into areas which are optional. The concept is good, because nobody's forced to play those sections unless they really want to. No, they're not. Most of the maps have very little to do with what slaughter has been perceived as at the time. It's the good handful of maps at the end which lend themselves towards "quantity based slaughter", yet most of it is rather dull and low-key, IMO. No, it's not.

None of them. The slot 32 maps are all different in some way shape or form. Just because it's the same genre it doesn't mean the maps are exactly same in terms of concept. Would you rather the slaughtermaps be in slot 11? And why is that trend "stupid" to begin with? You say you have plenty of reason for asking these questions, yet you don't explain any of it. Because you're not good at playing them.

Here's the thing, if all you do is starting your layouts with corridors as the "main feature", then all you'll end up with is a map that mostly consists of corridors. And I daresay corridors don't allow for much variety. It's like you didn't actually plan anything, but rather threw down some rectangles in loose fashion, which now make up +40% of your map. The shape of the rooms you build determines how the room "behaves" overall, if you always have roughly the same shape, regardless of size, you will also always end up with a similar behaviour more or less. That's why the common consensus is that corridors are mostly a "necessary evil", and using them as the main feature is therefore one of the least best ideas more often than not. Unless you are able to bring something to the table that isn't another array of corridors, it might perhaps be a good idea to keep this map short, wrap it up, and move on to the next instead. Had you planned where the important rooms are supposed to be going at the beginning, along with how the player is supposed to progress through the map, you wouldn't have had these issues to begin with. I feel like "does its job" is just a euphemism for "don't wanna do more than is absolutely necessary". If your intention is to create a tribute to the original Doom, "does its job" isn't the baseline you should be going for. "Does its job" isn't the standard id had in mind, even though some of the things they created might belong into that category. What id had in mind at the time was to amaze people, and create one of the best games ever, and certainly they created one of the top titles of that era. Ambitions beyond "does its job" was what kept them going and made them successful.

An oddly specific number. :P Maybe I need to try something else, too. Perhaps there is a catch... I wonder what will happen if I block the teleport destination with plasma instead. To the best of my knowledge, projectiles have actual hitboxes, so maybe that's another issue that may or may not occur.... Gimme a moment, I'll check real quick. EDIT: OK, seems projectiles don't block him. EDIT2: Found another bug. Got stuck in this here section. Switch pressed, all things dead, can't proceed (Found this while rushing for the cybie, had to IDCLIP/IDDQD because platforms didn't raise, and I couldn get back out either, because the bars didn't lower):

You can save yourslf the effort of messing with the first fight to figure out what happens, I already did that, and I can successfully reproduce it, too. The way this fight glitches out is that when you don't stand directly on the teleport destination, but just close enough so that the cyberdemon doesn't fit anymore, you neither get telefragged, nor will the cybie enter the arena. As it would appear it's the thing that gives off the teleport animation that kills the player, and not the cybie's actual hitbox.

I am certain that I had this happen with 4 minions spawning prior, so if that blocked spawn was the reason it happened to Arlene, then it would seem there is something else that may also malfunction in rare cases.... Gotta admit, I never really paid much attention whether or not the boss even has a pain chance, but if it does, would there be a slight chance the boss does not cycle properly when the next cycle tries to start during a pain-state?

Here's the thing though, it's possible to kill him before he even nerfs player damage (which would basically be his "invul phase"), at least on UV it is, nightmare I'm not so sure if the damage can be tanked good enough on the player's end because there's a little more risk involved on NM, but it miiiiight be doable in practice. If you get this outcome, the fight is basically over within a matter of seconds. That actually surprised me quite a bit, because I personally thought the fight was more difficult (and therefore more fun) when he spawned stuff at least once or twice, or in other words I felt it rewarded agression a bit more than I expected it would, since "bumrushing" the boss seems a lot easier than dealing with the pyros, at least to me it does. Granted, rushing him requires having the resources available to begin with, but it surprised me nonetheless. I think what the others here are referring to, though, and I've seen it happen as well, is that for some reason the boss seems to get stuck in his "invul phase" without spawning anything ever again. I had it happen once within, like, 6 fights or so, and I've also seen it happen once during Arlene's stream of the map as well. And I wonder why that is. In Arlene's case, the script ceased to cycle to the next phase after she used a resurrect command in the console (which I'm not sure if that's why it happened to her, but I'd suppose the scripts don't just stop working entirely when the player dies? I dunno...), and for me it happened quite literally out of the blue once (Played with GZDoom3.3.2). At first I thought that, maybe somehow I did something that the script didn't expect to happen, so I tried to reproduce it, but have failed to do so, unfortunately. I only ever used BFG on minions when they spawned during the time the platform was down in the lava to quickly reserve some personal space to keep it less risky, basically. But overall rockets for minions seems ideal. I'm not sure if it's possible to accumulate enough cells on UV to get through the map smoothly, and have enough cells to spam both the boss and the minions, however.

I would think a simple explanation in terms of what is supposed to happen might suffice already. To be fair, it's possible to kill him even when player damage is nerfed to all hell with just good old fashioned point blank BFG play, it just takes a good while because ammo respawns are required, but it circumvents any and all phases and therefore kinda qualifies as "cheese" perhaps? I also killed him within a few seconds once, with a few BFG trick shots (basically getting several projectiles to "pop" at almost the exact same time, and flash frying the boss with the tracers) , but I'm somewhat sure that it's not the intended way of doing things.

Fixed

The way I remember it, E4M1 was mostly a scan-fest with very little health pickups and such. Playing it slow and safe should carry just about anybody through rather well. Perfect hatred had some actually interesting gameplay to it that is not as easy to trivialize, therefore I think E4M2 is the "harder" map.

No