Argh, i hate traps. I don't think the main issue about traps are the damages, but the interactions between traps and the shields. In most rooms with only traps, you can just use the shields, take the loot and go away, it's clearly a problem.
Ok, I agree with "trap interactions with shields" being closer to the "main issue" than the actual damages and that it should take priority.
However, I'm either really disagreeing with or severely misinterpreting much of what comes afterwards.
But i don't think making the traps bypass the shields may be a solution, because in situations where you have both traps and enemies, i often end up running into traps because i'm too focused on dodging bullets.
Why is that a problem? Isn't that kind of the point mixing of trap-filled environments and combat?
Is dying to a trap somehow inherently "worse" than dying to enemy fire?
Alternatively, is the problem really that taking more damage (trap or enemy) might increase the difficulty in an undesirable way?
Taking some damages from something you had to see is frustrating enough, and making traps more deadly will just make trap-maze more frustrating.
Ok I'm really not understanding this one because "damage from things you had to see" strikes me as the least frustrating category of damage provided you can do something about it (which in this case seems to be a given thus far).
Are there cases where you cannot reasonably take action to prevent the damage?
Alternatively, is the problem here more about "trap-mazes"?
I was suggesting to make the shields only be filled when you kill the last enemy of a room,
I guess technically this works, but it kind of strikes me less intuitive than treating traps as a different damage type (which is something that already exists often enough).
That said it's not too far out there, I've certainly played action games with weirder.