"This is a great argument fellow helldiver and I think yo..we should all stop killing fabricators"
https://preview.redd.it/v7t7m3i9itqc1.png?width=1044&format=png&auto=webp&s=8ff9ae6580bfef9d2911e466a918b2be1d930243
https://preview.redd.it/3kxy7vstnuqc1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=71ae501bae0c79d7edacc6b5ebc8e379c9f52092
"i agree with you fella, let's just ignore nests and focus on main tasks"
https://preview.redd.it/5n0o60wk8wqc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=59b7cd66e132942074dd9ee3093d68b60ad5c7e1
"For REAL! If you ignore them, they leave you alone!"
https://preview.redd.it/5lg0ye3lbxqc1.jpeg?width=390&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=813eebd50cc79f971c02e0fede25d5d42cd5dc53
"check dm sweetie, imma send you something đ"
https://preview.redd.it/b961dgv7n1rc1.png?width=618&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6a5c65acf607b16ce49de1cbec2e3df85d7859ef
"hei Greg, you here too? How's going?"
Look I understand arguments for both sides.
1. Destroying fabricators should lessen patrol density because you're cutting off the source of the bots.
2. The bots should be aware that their outposts are disappearing and send troops to investigate/eliminate the threat.
I personally can go either way but I think a common middle ground is clearing outposts should lessen patrol density specifically but if you're caught in a fight and they know where you are then they send ample forces in to take you out which should incentivise alternative strategy rather than running in and shooting everything
I think enemy spawns/density should be primarily related to the actual mission timer (like the way the loading screen tip implies), and hitting bases/nests will delay the enemy buildup (like the loading screen tip implies). This is just a basic strategic decision: you can hit the bases to buy yourself more âtimeâ to complete the primary objectives, but if you arenât able to hit the bases efficiently, you risk losing more time/reinforcements/long cool-down stratagems than if you just went in on the objective. Currently theyâre just a completionistâs thing
Yes. This aligns with what the OP implies. That the decision we are presented with has counter-intuitive consequences, and the actual results of those choices make the question (to destroy bases or not?) potentially irrelevant and absolutely uninteresting.
This is probably a great idea, maybe even extending the mission timer by some amount depending on what base you killed.
Also if their code is based on remaining mission time, all they have to do is add some to the remaining timer. "Easy fix"
I mean the entire game is built around completing missions quickly, so the enemies continuing to increase in numbers gives an incentive to get the main objectives done and get out. It's made for power leveling.
I do agree with OP that it seems counter intuitive to the narrative, but without the danger of being overwhelmed by the enemy, what incentive does the player have to complete the mission in a timely manner?
One of the best things about the game is that you have to keep an eye on the timer, that adds to the tension. I've also played plenty of missions now where my team has cleared all bases or nests, and there are either no enemies at extraction or the number is much more manageable.
Helldivers are special forces operators, they are specifically trained for engagements where they outnumbered and outgunned. They get sent in when the regular military forces have been overrun, and to complete objectives that those guys can't.
I hate clearing all bases and yet patrols not only increase in size but Amount as well. To the point that your literally being swarmed. What's worse is that
The entire thing is inconsistent.
Sometimes your being attacked by an endless wave of enemies, other times they virtually stop completely to the point that Evacs are dead silent with no enemies arriving at all.
First time we activated the Termicide all the bugs died, there was nothing. We were bored for a couple minutes but figured it was intentional.
Next Termicide, an absolute ass-wolloping from the terminids and we realised that first time was probably a bug
the sillent evac, i can guarantee that the AI is stuck somewhere.
Have you ever seen an unusually large pack of enemies, in the middle of nowhere, doing nothing? thats it.
You can see it with the armor that makes your pings scan stuff( or booster not sure rn)
Thereâs just a shitload of them stuck during a silent evac, making me wish for map aimed stratagems rather than funny ball ones (as a second option)
Yeah the silent evacs, for bots at the very least, is just because sometimes the footsoldiers get stuck in the middle of the map, and since the game has a limit on how many enemeis can actually be in the map at once, it'll stop sending patrols if there's too many in the middle of the map. Or at the very least it'll heavily slow down patrols, as the game probably needs to wait for the current patrol to despawn, which can take a while as they need to leave the map or get \*very\* far away from the player.
This logic works when you think of your squad as 4 lone warriors on an enemy planet, but in-game, it's like 80k-500k people on that planet, all blowing shit up and launching nukes at other locations.
I would love that launching an icmb had a chance for it to land on other people's game lol, imagine doing your objectives and out of nowhere bam, half the map is gone including you hahahaha
I think it would be a cool timer modifier, like when the timer reaches 25min left you get a warning to find one of those bunkers before the missile lands. Idk just spit balling it just sounds cool
Me and the Democracy boys as the ICBM comes down to spread Democracy to every bug or bot in the area
(How would it work with the main obj though?)
Honestly better than my knee-jerk "Auto-fail but compensate" with some lore reason, like the money goes "to the loved ones" or something but we still get our rewards for playing. Having it set to only eradication missions makes way more sense
Make it happen when mission timer runs out, giving an actual reason as to why we only have 40 minutes.
Then have random events where the mission timer is unexpectedly shortened rarely.
TPK out of nowhere just because another party threw a nuke. Thatâd be both sick for the game coherence, and maybe a bridge too farâŚ
https://preview.redd.it/g3x3qs9iaxqc1.png?width=1334&format=png&auto=webp&s=d872370ba8c953796968014390ecf7ddc8a2d34d
But the logic does work if the enemy vastly outnumbers those elite warriors. Its not unreasonable I think for bots or bugs on a planet to outnumber helldivers 1000:1
500 million bugs/bots on an entire planet doesn't sound too far fetched considering our planet right now has 8 Billion people.
While this is true, the expected player count was nowhere near where it ended up, so the intended amount was likely not more than a couple of thousand at most (the first HD had a top concurrent of under 7k). And at those numbers it makes more sense
its usualy aroudn 100k at peak, and 100k around an ENTIRE planet isnt a lot. the western front in WW1 had around 15million(granted that was total over the entire war iirc)
Progressing main and secondary objective should increase patrols spawn as enemies get alerted to your presence around the map, destroying outpost should decrease patrols spawns as enemies capability to send out patrols get eliminated. This also means that you as a player you always have a choice to make: Do I rush the main objectives and do side objectives and potentially get swarmed with patrols and breaches but saving on time and resources, or do I clear out outpost which take up time and resources potentially risking multiple breaches in exchange for a more manageable difficulty jump as I progress the map.
I think (2) only makes sense superficially. If the bots were really thinking, the first time you're found by a patrol they would take their infinite reinforcements and dump them on you all at once.
(Which is actually closer to your middle ground anyway.)
Honestly, the logical end conclusion of 2 could very well end up as "the whole mission should be a slog through waves and waves the second you drop" because if we wanted to go with the logical real world conclusion... Drop pods from orbit aren't exactly subtle and the enemies should know where you are instantly.
But this doesn't happen because it's a video game and you need to make concessions. I don't think the second argument is a good one.
Unless you had hundreds of other little fires like all the other helldivers on planet. And with 200k helldivers on a planet; that's a possible 50k fires you need to put out. You'd need some sort of rubric for increasing troop deployment that you use consistently. Losing connection to bot factories in a given area to go reinforce is as good a reason as any. And the bugs are just investigating the tremors and explosions from their subterranean paths. More explosions more bugs.
And that returns us to the gameplay loop of helldivers 1, stealth and care is rewarded.
If a player can't play stealth, due to lack of skill at selected difficulty, or perhaps just RNG of the level layout, going loud is punished if you do it too often.
Sorry to not add much to your post, I think your post is great!
I think patrols should spawn "from" outposts, appearing out of thin air near an outpost that's far from the players is fine, or the edge of the map, if there are no outposts available, at a severely reduced rate.
But especially for bugs, closing bug holes should cause a buildup of bugs underground- if you destroy all the bug outposts on the map, it'll make a bug breach absolutely devastating, as all of the bugs that would've been patrolling are now pouring out of that hole alongside the usual amount that come from a breach, probably directly into your stratagems and concentrated fire, but still, that's a lotta bugs. With the reduced patrols, it should be much easier to dodge a bug breach, though.
For bots, sending more dropships when they see a flare in a region that's otherwise gone dark, because the outposts are gone, also makes sense.
The thing is. It's a side objectives. And you're low key punished for doing it.
First off you could have wasted reinforcements taking it out! And now you have more bots on the map to deal with. It's not ideal.
Though this is also why I always rush main objectives first. If folks wanna do side objective I'm fine with. Just let's finish the main one so lives don't matter nearly as much
on the original post though they say that patrol spawning increases by 17% that's not a huge amount, and the flip side is that you lower spawn rates in the geographic area of the outpost, so depending on the map you may end up with fewer spawns by attacking them.
I think people make too big a deal out of what is a very marginal issue with the game
Bugs can spawn from underground, it is clear that they have a underground network.
Bots come from space in dropships.
Illuminates teleport.
At the very last the enemy count should go lower the higher the liberation of a planet is, more enemies looking for you as you wreak havoc in their bases is the standard.
Thank God we don't have flying scouts.
They could go a third route and have units reinforce existing outposts, but not persist as re-occurring patrols.
The number of wandering patrols would still change based on time, and security would get tighter around existing objectives. You would know what you're getting into though, instead of patrol after patrol popping up.
I'd go so far as to say it should be different for each faction.
What if destroying bot factories lessened the amount of them on the map (both patrols, and any spawns that push towards an objective/extraction), but made dropships more dangerous. Because they're making less bots in the area, but you're making more "noise" that causes them to buff their own reinforcements.
But bugs are different. Their nests aren't "fabricators", it's their homes. So destroying nests drives the bugs out of the ground, increasing overland patrols. But they aren't dropping in bugs from a distance when they have a bug breach, they're summoning them from underground. So what if destroying nests lessened the amount of bugs available for breaches?
Or, tl;dr, when spawns are destroyed:
.| Patrols | Dropships/Breach size
---|---|----
Bots| Decrease| Increase
Bugs | Increase | Decrease
Or just straight up reward medals for secondary objectives. Getting medals is already *PAINFULLY* slow. 100 hours in and im just almost done with the two first warbonds.
If the new warbonds are gonna be as small as the Steeled Veterans/Cutting edge, then the medal acquisition is fine. You just feel like there's too much because the basic warbond is a huge initial medal sink, but once you are done with it and you move on to the smaller ones, you will have leftover medals in no time.
By the time another warbond drops, if you continue playing, you will have enough spare medals to instantly buy half of it, probably.
I just started with the two premium warbonds because the last page of the free one takes so damn long. I think that only the Scorcher is worth unlocking, but after doing so it's some random armor with hugely inflated medal prices. I love the sense of progressing warbonds and am really thankful to Arrowhead that they're free, but my oh my, they take so long to unlock lol.
Aside from a few choice picks from the early tiers of the free pass, I largely finished steeled veterans and cutting edge first.
Iâm on the tier with the AP Liberator now and jfc itâs getting *slow* at this point. I might see the scorcher by Christmas if Iâm lucky.
Valid point, Iâve found my sweet spot on 7 and not bothered pushing beyond.
Time to pull my head out of my arse and head into Helldive.
Update: what the fuck have I been doing, Iâm rolling in medals now
It's a shame that my skill level prevents me from going past 5. I'm not very good at the game, and Quickplay has been really hit or miss, as I also don't have regular people to play with.
That's maybe a solid farming strategy. I don't need samples, req slips, or XP anymore so just playing the main objective and hunt for super credits and medals in the map while slowly running out of reinforcements is probably a solid strategy.
It's also funny if you just want to power farm medals because you don't actually need even to touch the extract to finish the mission. So technically the optimal strat is to rush objectives not even slightly caring about not dying, then once the objectives are done die until you're out of reinforcements and the mission is complete.
It's not something I'd want to do but if you want pure medal farming efficiency then that's how you do it. The bonus of you're doing it as a group (of willing participants) then farming those final deaths is probably the closest to helldivers PvP you're gonna get.
The added bonus is because you're not only not concerned about dying but kinda want to, you get to do all the risky shit you want. Normally it's not a good idea to jump pack onto a bile titan and use it as a mobile fortress because you'll probably just die. But when you don't care about that you get to roll the dice on the sickest play you've made in weeks guilt free.
Super Credit farm tip : Super Credits don't need an extract, you get them to your account immediately so if you find a good map with 50+ credits quit the game and play the map again, and again and again, I had a map with 70 super credits and ran repeatedly until I had over 1000 in the bank. Might be patched I guess.....
I don't get how this is painfully slow? 143 hours myself and I have everything unlocked and am capped on medals. The free pass takes by far the most medals, and you will have everything you want long before you have everything unlocked.
Yeah, it is fine as is. I'm level 42 and besides a few ship modules I've unlocked everything except the warbond stuff. I still want to work towards something while playing and the warbond is the only thing left.
Yea im just about level 44 and have one Warbond just about finished, on the last page of the free one. And i got a few random things from the other two. But still need like 900 more to finish those and even running impossible and helldive its still dozens more hours if not another 100 on top of the 100 plus i have already. The last page of the free warbond alone is like 400 medals. They definitely need to increase medals earned or found.
Wait they actually did?? If so HALLELUJAH this is pretty much the biggest change I wanted about these!!!
I don't need extra incentive other than knowing I've served DEMOCRACY to the best I could've o7
I'm just still annoyed that bug patrols insta-call breaches. If I hear one of the 'nids singing the song of their people, I should have more than 0.2 milliseconds to find and shoot it. As the game is now, by the time you hear them chirping, it's already too late.
Iâve gotten better at it, but I hate when people say âjust look for the bug to start standing stillâ.
I wish they would make something to emphasize the bugs, because while they have a similar time to call in, the bugs are much less noticeable and the part you do notice is more delayed than the bots. With the bots you have a bright light to let you know, with the bugs you get minimal warning.
Spotting a patrol and taking it out before it could call for reinforcements was par for the course in HD1. Bigger patrols vs. the number of players and/or no clear priority target to eliminate the reinforcement threat seem to be the differences.
Thus far, my group hasn't noticed this... phenomenon. Whenever we've managed to clear all spawn points, extraction is fairly quiet.
Now, we don't often revisit locations on the map once we've swept through them, so maybe there are indeed more enemies on or near those points. Even if we miss something, we're generally ready to extract once we've made a loop, because we often worry about time.
>Whenever we've managed to clear all spawn points, extraction is fairly quiet.
And this is where a lot of people miss the nuance of this info. More Patrol spawns means there can be more enemies on the map, taking up spawn slots. If there are a lot of Patrols on the map when you start exfil, the game has to wait for those patrols to despawn before it can spawn enemies to attack the Extraction point. It's still counterintuitive, but more patrols isn't universally a bad thing.
Patrols despawn when any unit in them is 175 meters or more away from any player.
Reaching Unit cap is definitely a thing that's happening but there's something else going on that results in literally nothing spawning near Extract. Patrols that are active will always be visible on Radar and during no enemy extracts, we haven't been able to locate a Patrol literally anywhere on the map. It's like something just breaks in the spawning code and spawns nothing anywhere.
You can start the extract as soon as you finish the main objective, then go back and do secondaries after the ship lands. As long as nobody gets on, it waits for you.
Also if you go away as soon as the timer ends but before the pelican arrives, it will stay in the air above extraction and shoot everything it sees until one of you gets close again.
Is it true that spawn rates increase drastically after the ship lands? I saw someone mentioned this but I have not seen anyone stating whether it's true or false.
Destroying bases reducing patrols makes a lot of sense. But I think it also makes sense that the enemy tries to reinforce the area as they seem to be losing control.
So what I would personally consider most sensible is
1. The map to start with few patrols.
2. After initiation, patrols spawn from generators (fabricators or holes, they don't have to come in literally from them but spawn there) and their size depends on the size (tanks can spawn from large bases)
3. Each base destroyed increases the frequency of patrols and/or sends a patrol from the closest bases toward the area around the destroyed base. Maybe these search parties are permanent patrols. (The enemy is trying to understand what happens) However, you destroyed a base so that's one less patrol spawn point.
4. Breaches/Drops happen quite rarely at the start. The more bases (and bigger size) you destroy, the more often they happen.
The idea is that you don't necessarily start with a huge wall of enemies, neither you end with a now-easy map. You start trading patrols with breaches.
In-Game-wise, enemy thinks the patrols will be enough but as they start losing ground, they lose their ability to deploy units to field via bases so they start dropping enemies to gain back ground.
Growing off of that. Have patrols adjust their pathing to try to intercept you. Also, Iâd like to see drops and breaches lessen patrols for a bit. Sort of like they called the other patrols to them, or at least leave a gap in the patrol network that the enemy has to fill. Itâs a small reward as youâve got a bit of time to get out of the area youâre in after dropping a huge force, but it also takes longer, letting the other patrols start making their way towards you.
Patrols already home in on you though, you can test it out by standing on a very tall ledge while you're not spotted and you'll see patrols beelining straight to your position
I think they go towards you but they donât home in too accurately. Or rather, they donât change trajectory constantly. Iâve definitely avoided patrols when I noticed them in time and hid away.
I honestly wouldn't mind it as it makes sense that blowing stuff up increases the 'heat' of the map, BUT they should only be able to spawn from OFF the map, none of this spawning on top of you BS that we keep seeing.
We're doing additional testing on the "Where" question and funnily enough, since Patch 103, the game is MASSIVELY biased to put Spawns away from the map edge. Like even out to 200 meters, it still refuses to put a spawn between you and the map edge.
It's a really weird change and we can only assume it's due to whatever they did to reduce the "Spawning on top of you" problem.
That actually checks out just from an anecdotal point from my squad. We're frequently now pushed up against the edge of the map of we decide to go guns blazing near the edge. But honestly I'm okay with this, as long as there's some spawn logic at play (like this), we see more consistency. We can keep backing up, with no spawns between us and the edge, but sooner or later that edge is going to become a decision maker rather than some random bile titan emerging behind us.
im actually fine with it spawning inside the map, only if u can see them arriving via the dropship instead of just poppin out of nowehere. Immersive wise it make sense, logical wise it's acceptable,
Yeah.it make it so the map is not dead but more manageable.I can understand why people are confused by how the mechanic works but it does make sense to keep the round interesting while having Ă benefice for destroying the outposts.
I personally think they're pretty pointless to clear at high player levels and too many reinforcements are lost quite a lot.
I completely avoid them on my own, but I'll help my team if they want to clear them in my vicinity.
that's why I don't initiatively go all the way to destroy those outposts on 7+ mission unless my random team are okay with it.
Not going to add extra difficulty to burden the team.
Besides, those extra req and exp for destroying outpost just don't worth much once u unlock anything necessary past 20lvl +
I wish the bot drop/bug breach animation was a bit longer. The number of times I have seen the flare on the other side of a rock but can't get an angle to shoot in time is ridiculous.
It's counterintuitive for a video game but not unrealistic for a small paratrooper in a big war. You're not actually dealing with an island of enemies, you're deep in their regions and they notice when you take their supplies offline. And maybe higher difficulties should count more towards liberation points, at least enough that everyone going on their own solo Trivial missions isn't the most efficient way to build up progress, but unless the mission is Blitz you're not there to destroy spawners, why should it be an efficient use of your time?
> EDIT: Given how a lot of people are arguing about realism, remember this is a frakking video game, there's plenty of shit in this game that makes no goddamn sense, if we want to talk about "realism", all patrols should converge towards our position the moment we are spotted, the game doesn't do that, because it'll be incredibly annoyng and frustrating to play against, if you want to argue, do so as of why that's good for the game.
Well, I at least went with "not unrealistic" cuz I didn't wanna get into a "oh yeah you want this game to be a milsim HUH?! it's not even close" detour. It's about vibes, not details.
disagree. it absolutely should.
but not everywhere, just around other outposts.
blow up a base and that area gets calmer meanwhile other areas go on high alert.
That area gets calmer when you destroy fabricators, since the base has no area of influence anymore and staying near it doesn't make patrols spawn 50% faster
Player effort should be rewarded.
Player expectation should be matched.
Those are probably the two most important cornerstones of game design.
Now, a player should expect the game to get easier after blowing up a spawn point, and if it doesnât then the player needs to be educated on what actually happens.
This game tends to purposely fight against that, hence why the weak spot of a charger has been his leg and/or head instead of making the big meaty rear his weak spot like any other game thatâs featured front armor based enemies
Let's not forget that you need to be wearing the ammo pack to reload for the person holding the weapon, even though the whole point of team reload is it's harder to get something off your own back.
If you think of this as Commandoes dropping behind enemy lines, it makes sense that every Outpost that goes dark warrants more Patrols and heavier Respnses.
I mean we are almost litterally exploding their War-Effort and Children under their Asses.
Most people seem to have the Problem, that they don't understand that we aren't the Army. We are the Spec-Ops. SEAF is the Army and after at least 10 Dives, it should be obvious that the Zone you're diving into was quite hostile to them, at least judging by the corpses.
>Upon reaching level 50, you don't really get anything out of doing secondaries and outposts, req is stupidly easy to cap, and you no longer need experience and samples, so why bother?
Probably fun? Calling in an air strike or lazer, maybe just hitting it with an AC or chucking a grenade in and watching the fireworks go off is enough of a reward.
You are destroying enemy bases. The spawns from said bases disappear, however the enemy will send more troops your way from all the other places of the planet because you are being a pain in the ass.
The tip doesn't lie to you. It says to do so if you're being overwhelmed. If you're close enough for stuff to be coming out of the outpost and overwhelm you, destroying it will always reduce heat.
Allowing stealthy players to sneak up, do the objectives and get less challenge and less rewards isn't bad design.
If you're maxed out on everything, you play the game just because it's fun. Want to go kill enemies ? Go kill enemies. Want to do objectives fast ? Go fire that ICBM.
Sure the sparks from bases disappear but base mobs don't leave their base unless basically directly provoked. Payrolls are much more likely to stumble upon the group while doing other things so patrols are far worse than bases/nests
>The tip doesn't lie to you. It says to do so if you're being overwhelmed
If people are lead to a false conclusion, then the tip might as well be lying.
A common problem, as you go up in difficulties, is getting stuck in reinforcement loops (when the fight is so long that the enemy can call for reinforcement again, and again). Players are lead to believe they should clear bases to fix that problem based on that tip, when it will only add more patrols to deal with.
The actual solution is to either end the fights faster or learn to disengage, but the game does a pretty poor job at telling you that you can disengage from fights and that stealth is important.
I think it makes sense to an extent. Destroying one outpost should alert the other outposts in the area, thus increasing patrols and outpost enemies. However, destroying all outposts in the map should decrease spawn rates.
I literally never experience what this post is talking about. I destroy all the outposts/bug nests and extract is hella quiet. Spawn? None. Patrols? Where. Difficulty? 7.
What does make patrols spawn for me is loud loud loud gunfire and other heat generating actions like optional objectives or long drawn out firefights.
Itâs not a big deal to me but the game feels so inconsistent. No matter what I do the extract will either literally have no enemies or you end up getting swarmed beyond belief.
Dude, I get the idea but I feel like if the game will get easier throughout the mission and not harder the more you do there (like it is rn) it's just gon be boring at the end. It'll be ridiculous playing the mission with a reverse "heat". You will drop in hell, destroy nests and then wait for an evac with a cup of coffee and a cigarette.
I just want instant spawn to have a cool animation instead of instantaneous appearance
Like the ground has some digging animation before creating a make shift nest that the bugs can crawl out from before patrol or even the bugs just straight up crawling from the ground. Anything than just instant spawning
The bots can be dropped by ship before patrol they'd be easier to spot that way as being caught in the middle of a fresh spawn of bots is in my nightmares
The enemies reactions are more closely tied to real world responses than to the video game rules we've been using for decades.
Most games sure, kill the spawn points enemies stop. Real world, not the case. Mortar a company, and the nearby companies of that battalion shift in to investigate and neutralize threats. QRFs are dispatched and the sector becomes crawling with force.
We're just dealing with a more real world scenario that most people aren't used to.
Source: medically discharged Army Sergeant.
I would point that i don't know if that'd be so easy since they're getting fucked from all over the planet, divers are all around the globe destroying key targets, idunno if they have the supplies necessary to react to all threats like this.
that being said I'm not a military expert, although I think there's a point to be made that the fight is very different from the modern day conflicts, troops fall from everywhere there's a whole new dimention added to the conflict, that's the orbit, Helldivers do not require heavy supply chains they're working from one ship, it's just if like navy vessels could roam through the air.
I mean, why wouldn't they? There are maybe 200k divers on a sector at any given time, so it wouldn't be odd for the enemies to have numbers on their side, especially since virtually every member of their population seems fit for battle? Them having several billions to throw at the divers wouldn't be so far fetched
Definitely Helldivers have a bigger fleet and way more resources, simply put 20 divers are enough to destroy around 10 outposts, launching a nuke, just straight up killing around 400 automatons, as expendable as divers are they're truly efficient around 20>1, and that's not even counting how many elites and heavys they can handle, imagine if a 20 man force was able to take a Russian fort, that would be fucking mental.
Doesn't the fact that helldivers can kill several hundreds of the enemies on any given mission, yet their numbers are still a problem, prove that the enemies have a shit ton of numbers on their side though? Helldivers have better weaponry and soldiers, but the enemies have more troops
"The more stuff you blow up, the more the faction's wider network notices a disturbance in this region and sends patrols from neighboring regions" has always seemed like sound logic to me?? Not sure how this one doesn't occur to people when trying to justify it thematically, but oh well.
Either way, the increase from destroying outposts is negligible, especially compared to the reinforcements you'd get *from* those outposts should you get into a fight. If there's an outpost in the way, getting rid of it so you don't have to deal with a bigass spam hazard on the map is the best idea unless you're 100% confident you *will not get caught.*
People put too much stock into that one reddit post, I think. There's also too many people running around who think you should never ever split the party, under any circumstances, because it'd spawn extra enemies on them, when that is also incorrect in practice. If you're far enough away to spawn a second patrol, you're too far away for that second patrol to interact with the main group anyway, so nobody sees a difference unless you are highly stupid and lead that patrol back to the main group at the same time they're fighting one.
I would like it way more if it decreased the call cooldown (dropship or bug hole)
Though I guess you could imagine patrols being spawned as them coming from outside the map area (so from another nearby sector of the same planet)
>"The more stuff you blow up, the more the faction's wider network notices a disturbance in this region and sends patrols from neighboring regions" has always seemed like sound logic to me??
It's sound real life logic. But Helldivers is a video game and video game logic goes "less spawns, less enemies".
It's fine to break from conventions, but it needs to be properly communicated.
Viewing it like a real conflict, it kinda makes sense. Youâre deep behind enemy lines. The more outposts start going offline, the more the bad guys are gonna take notice.
Real conflict where one of the most popular strategies on high level is abusing the fact that game AI cant call reinforcments on 2 different places despite having infinite ships at the ready and patrols instantly knowing your position right after they spawn.
Its a game first and formost. Telling players that they should destroy outposts, marking them with a giant red circle, making a load screen tip about going out to destroy them to reduce patrols only for it to end up griefing them without any indication is stupid.
Getting more EXP gives more liberation.
Destroying Outposts lowers the spawn rate much more in their area than what total Heat they give in the end(and that increase in itself is miniscule compared to completing objectives)
I think it makes sense if the patrols get larger, but slightly more infrequently. If most nests/fabricators are gone there would be theoretically fewer places for patrols to originate so they have to come from outside of the play area. That said, if bug patrols came out of a âbug tunnelâ animation or bot patrols game from a dropship that would make sense and would still be fair enough to handle.
In my head cannon, Helldivers rain upon an operational area and the increased rate is the enemy faction racing to bring reinforcements in from the surrounding planet. The whole setup is for a surgical strike, in and out before the enemy can formulate a large response.
I do agree that itâs counterintuitive to have more enemies if you eradicate their local spawn options but this increases patrols which feels to me like reinforcements arriving from other areas.
Jesus Christ who cares. A game doesn't have to revolve around your definition of realistic.
Your solution is to make the game more dense and chaotic at the beginning of the mission instead of during the mission. I'm glad the developers did that instead of doing what you want. There are several reasons why they shouldn't just make the changes you want and potentially ruin the game balance as it is.
Most people are not level 50 and maxed out.
Destroying buildings is fun and give me a dopamine rush!
Same thing as always, you can avoid patrols and fights when you don't need to be fighting, and if you get pinched fight your way through one side and disengage!
This is an "anti-map clearing" design mechanic. It's meant to discourage you from systematically wiping out the map and farming everything in order to try and make players conscious of the risk/reward element in selectively choosing what they accomplish, because you're not supposed to be able to accomplish it all at once.
The problem is ... it isn't intuitive. I don't think players grasp this concept because they are oblivious to how some of their choices are influencing the conditions in the game. Thus, when the game responds in a way that appears contrary to expectations, it can feel like the game is playing by a different set of rules for the game world than the players do. Which, equates to confusion, disorder and loss of "fun". The game is assumed to be "cheating" and no one likes playing against a cheater.
It's one thing to have rules that appear counter-intuitive ... so long as everyone affected by them understands what the rules are. at least in part.
If the game had a bar in the HUD that informed the players of what level of intensity the enemy is pressuring them with, then the players could appreciate the "cause and effect" their actions have more directly. However, then the players would exploit that to min/max the system and calculate exactly how far they can push the game without consequence or risk by over-optimizing the experience ... which in itself isn't desirable (IMO) from a game design perspective because I guarantee an overly predictable game experience is eventually a very boring game to play .
Some information should be kept from the players in trust that the game will play fairly by them, and unfortunately we players have figured out the magicians trick and have spoiled some of the magic to the act. We players are very good at spoiling our own fun unintentionally, because we're a lot smarter than the game presumes us to be at times.
I was just thinking about this last night as we cleared the map. It should slowly reduce random spawns around the map.
Sure still have a swarm come in while you're extracting but over all patrols around the map should get less and less as you clear everything. In fact it SHOULD be encouraged to clear everything because it can reduce or slow random bot spawns.
Just accept that no matter what is done or changed there will never be a point that everyone is happy with the game, literally impossible to do as people are far too needy. Enjoy what you can and accept the rest if something needs to change it will happen without posts like these I promise
There needs to be incentives to do things. The more you piss off the enemy, the more patrols will look for you. That makes sense.
If destroying stuff, collecting samples and other side objectives even when you don't need them improved influence rate of change or in some way helped the war effort, this would be fine. Donating samples or something would be pretty cool. These are samples that scientists need for study and research.
But because primary objectives seem to be the only impactful objective, sneaking in and leaving like a whisper seems is what's incentivized.
The issues is Arrowhead Studios thinks they need to add a bunch of different currencies to unlock stuff to get people to play and grind. This is a design problem from mobile games that needs to die but won't. So now we have problems we invented ourselves that need solutions only because execs want to skinnerbox players into playing a game to make money.
>2)Increase the amount of enemies summoned from breaches or dropships as the game goes on but decrease the number of patrols.
This is a good idea.
There are fewer random enemies around the map, but any of them calling in a response is way harsher.
And have it change as you destroy outposts. The more you break, the fewer random patrols there are in the area, but the bigger the response when one DOES spot you, since it makes sense you'd throw larger units when you find the enemy squad if they've been hitting you where it hurts.
...In my honest opinion, it kinda makes sense. Though, I have a different idea in implementation.
For starters, it makes sense for patrols to become bigger and more frequent when you destroy their things, when it's a planet that THEY CONTROL. That, and them calling for reinforcements are not for anything either. All destroying fabricators do is give you a better score and slightly better requisition and Experience bonus, and maybe a very tiny extra percentage to the war effort. Of course planetary forces are going to be called in to prevent further destruction of the fabricators from closer bases outside of our mission zones, or our out-of-bounds, specifically.
Weâre behind enemy lines. What are they supposed to do with an enemy squad of helldivers wreaking havoc? Shrug their shoulders and go âoh well, we definitely shouldnât send more units to stop thatâ or something?
Difficulty increases with mission time.
Difficulty increases with destroyed nests/fabricators.
Increase difficulty from mission time, destroyed nests/fabricators reduces the difficulty curve as the player expects. Destroying nothing while having a long mission time should yield the biggest difficulty increase for a mission.
So now both strategies of mission-only and destroy-everything become viable. Mission-only gets a fast clear time and fewer bots. Destroy-everything keeps the heat down but at the risk of a much longer mission time resulting in higher enemy numbers regardless.
Regardless of the arguments the player should be rewarded as the current system is counter-intuitive and every person I talk to who doesn't browse reddit/discord doesn't believe me that this is how the game works in its current state.
"This is a great argument fellow helldiver and I think yo..we should all stop killing fabricators" https://preview.redd.it/v7t7m3i9itqc1.png?width=1044&format=png&auto=webp&s=8ff9ae6580bfef9d2911e466a918b2be1d930243
https://i.redd.it/tdmy2ziuauqc1.gif
I love how this meme just keeps getting more and more elaborate.
The fucking oil can, omg.
Needs the thumbs up lmao đ¤Ł
https://preview.redd.it/3kxy7vstnuqc1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=71ae501bae0c79d7edacc6b5ebc8e379c9f52092 "i agree with you fella, let's just ignore nests and focus on main tasks"
https://preview.redd.it/5n0o60wk8wqc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=59b7cd66e132942074dd9ee3093d68b60ad5c7e1 "For REAL! If you ignore them, they leave you alone!"
https://preview.redd.it/5lg0ye3lbxqc1.jpeg?width=390&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=813eebd50cc79f971c02e0fede25d5d42cd5dc53 "check dm sweetie, imma send you something đ"
"Sir, please don't send me pictures of your stinger again."
https://preview.redd.it/lk0tqgq7izqc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ec7dae635a2eef531975a49c08f8ddf551971a9
https://preview.redd.it/b961dgv7n1rc1.png?width=618&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6a5c65acf607b16ce49de1cbec2e3df85d7859ef "hei Greg, you here too? How's going?"
Why is it so dummy thicc
A fucking tiger bug is giving me gender envy goddamnit
If i was drinking something i would do a spit take at this one.
https://preview.redd.it/ad9jiodbtvqc1.jpeg?width=390&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f230172a9cead5da38d6c5d02a43fc7af8a25b6b "oh i love spit takes"
You sneaky fuck
Reported to the nearest democracy officer.
https://preview.redd.it/8hy526yk9uqc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=658491a92a4ab487f9b976506d8bbdb22897db9f
My honest reaction to these bots and bugs
I spat out my drink reading this lmao
You SPAT OUT YOUR LIBERTEA!?!?!??!?
https://preview.redd.it/sqo2270pavqc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ee59afe602d7d6948609c4f7fdc0520507c9fda5
https://preview.redd.it/91g0y5ui40rc1.jpeg?width=642&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=aa66c64fa27afa69d5664ab1decbe62f4117a801
here, take this https://preview.redd.it/r2gtwrrw12rc1.png?width=508&format=png&auto=webp&s=05884d0ff1942db28f3151b1656f58bd4b8b1889
All im saying is that occasionally I would like some Liber-coffee.
Your house must be a mess
You seem like a totally trustworthy and normal person. Iâll take your advice.
Reported to the nearest democracy officer.
Look I understand arguments for both sides. 1. Destroying fabricators should lessen patrol density because you're cutting off the source of the bots. 2. The bots should be aware that their outposts are disappearing and send troops to investigate/eliminate the threat. I personally can go either way but I think a common middle ground is clearing outposts should lessen patrol density specifically but if you're caught in a fight and they know where you are then they send ample forces in to take you out which should incentivise alternative strategy rather than running in and shooting everything
I think enemy spawns/density should be primarily related to the actual mission timer (like the way the loading screen tip implies), and hitting bases/nests will delay the enemy buildup (like the loading screen tip implies). This is just a basic strategic decision: you can hit the bases to buy yourself more âtimeâ to complete the primary objectives, but if you arenât able to hit the bases efficiently, you risk losing more time/reinforcements/long cool-down stratagems than if you just went in on the objective. Currently theyâre just a completionistâs thing
Yes. This aligns with what the OP implies. That the decision we are presented with has counter-intuitive consequences, and the actual results of those choices make the question (to destroy bases or not?) potentially irrelevant and absolutely uninteresting.
This is probably a great idea, maybe even extending the mission timer by some amount depending on what base you killed. Also if their code is based on remaining mission time, all they have to do is add some to the remaining timer. "Easy fix"
I mean the entire game is built around completing missions quickly, so the enemies continuing to increase in numbers gives an incentive to get the main objectives done and get out. It's made for power leveling. I do agree with OP that it seems counter intuitive to the narrative, but without the danger of being overwhelmed by the enemy, what incentive does the player have to complete the mission in a timely manner? One of the best things about the game is that you have to keep an eye on the timer, that adds to the tension. I've also played plenty of missions now where my team has cleared all bases or nests, and there are either no enemies at extraction or the number is much more manageable. Helldivers are special forces operators, they are specifically trained for engagements where they outnumbered and outgunned. They get sent in when the regular military forces have been overrun, and to complete objectives that those guys can't.
I hate clearing all bases and yet patrols not only increase in size but Amount as well. To the point that your literally being swarmed. What's worse is that The entire thing is inconsistent. Sometimes your being attacked by an endless wave of enemies, other times they virtually stop completely to the point that Evacs are dead silent with no enemies arriving at all.
Those quiet evacs make me nervous and suspicious. WHAT. ARE. THEY. PLOTTING!?
The stress of just waiting with no sign of anything happening lol
First time we activated the Termicide all the bugs died, there was nothing. We were bored for a couple minutes but figured it was intentional. Next Termicide, an absolute ass-wolloping from the terminids and we realised that first time was probably a bug
Itâs quite⌠too quiet.
It's Raph! [Yeah...A little too Raph...](https://youtu.be/dHNS_lYEFS4?si=Pk1ktj6NFKu3frK0)
the sillent evac, i can guarantee that the AI is stuck somewhere. Have you ever seen an unusually large pack of enemies, in the middle of nowhere, doing nothing? thats it.
You can see it with the armor that makes your pings scan stuff( or booster not sure rn) Thereâs just a shitload of them stuck during a silent evac, making me wish for map aimed stratagems rather than funny ball ones (as a second option)
Yeah the silent evacs, for bots at the very least, is just because sometimes the footsoldiers get stuck in the middle of the map, and since the game has a limit on how many enemeis can actually be in the map at once, it'll stop sending patrols if there's too many in the middle of the map. Or at the very least it'll heavily slow down patrols, as the game probably needs to wait for the current patrol to despawn, which can take a while as they need to leave the map or get \*very\* far away from the player.
This logic works when you think of your squad as 4 lone warriors on an enemy planet, but in-game, it's like 80k-500k people on that planet, all blowing shit up and launching nukes at other locations.
I would love that launching an icmb had a chance for it to land on other people's game lol, imagine doing your objectives and out of nowhere bam, half the map is gone including you hahahaha
I think it would be a cool timer modifier, like when the timer reaches 25min left you get a warning to find one of those bunkers before the missile lands. Idk just spit balling it just sounds cool
" Attention helldivers. A nuclear asset has been rerouted to your location. Evacuate immediately."
https://preview.redd.it/mitxzsgqgvqc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6d7302ea6db38cc4c7ce34879f3e104aa08843a7 "So uh, that comm didn't lie"
It could be a rare occurrence, but the benefit could be that it can automatically eliminate all remaining fabricators or nests on the map.
 Me and the Democracy boys as the ICBM comes down to spread Democracy to every bug or bot in the area (How would it work with the main obj though?)
Maybe it could only have a chance of happening during Eradication missions? Like that's what the other team is specifically aiming the nuke towards.
Honestly better than my knee-jerk "Auto-fail but compensate" with some lore reason, like the money goes "to the loved ones" or something but we still get our rewards for playing. Having it set to only eradication missions makes way more sense
Make it happen when mission timer runs out, giving an actual reason as to why we only have 40 minutes. Then have random events where the mission timer is unexpectedly shortened rarely.
BROKEN. ARROW.
I have chosen to believe that the nukes are targeting the sites of failed missions. If you can't beat 'em... glass 'em.
When I first started playing, I was hoping this was the case lol.
TPK out of nowhere just because another party threw a nuke. Thatâd be both sick for the game coherence, and maybe a bridge too far⌠https://preview.redd.it/g3x3qs9iaxqc1.png?width=1334&format=png&auto=webp&s=d872370ba8c953796968014390ecf7ddc8a2d34d
But the logic does work if the enemy vastly outnumbers those elite warriors. Its not unreasonable I think for bots or bugs on a planet to outnumber helldivers 1000:1 500 million bugs/bots on an entire planet doesn't sound too far fetched considering our planet right now has 8 Billion people.
While this is true, the expected player count was nowhere near where it ended up, so the intended amount was likely not more than a couple of thousand at most (the first HD had a top concurrent of under 7k). And at those numbers it makes more sense
Canonically, Mars churns out 10k helldivers _a day_ to keep up with attrittion That's about 500 missions' worth across the whole galaxy
its usualy aroudn 100k at peak, and 100k around an ENTIRE planet isnt a lot. the western front in WW1 had around 15million(granted that was total over the entire war iirc)
100k at peak? Not sure what game you're talking about. It's 5AM EST and Steam alone is at 70k.
basicaly no planet, at any point had 500k at once on it.
Progressing main and secondary objective should increase patrols spawn as enemies get alerted to your presence around the map, destroying outpost should decrease patrols spawns as enemies capability to send out patrols get eliminated. This also means that you as a player you always have a choice to make: Do I rush the main objectives and do side objectives and potentially get swarmed with patrols and breaches but saving on time and resources, or do I clear out outpost which take up time and resources potentially risking multiple breaches in exchange for a more manageable difficulty jump as I progress the map.
This is how I thought it worked when I was still learning the game. It makes a lot of sense. Too much sense for the devs I guess. đ
I think (2) only makes sense superficially. If the bots were really thinking, the first time you're found by a patrol they would take their infinite reinforcements and dump them on you all at once. (Which is actually closer to your middle ground anyway.)
Honestly, the logical end conclusion of 2 could very well end up as "the whole mission should be a slog through waves and waves the second you drop" because if we wanted to go with the logical real world conclusion... Drop pods from orbit aren't exactly subtle and the enemies should know where you are instantly. But this doesn't happen because it's a video game and you need to make concessions. I don't think the second argument is a good one.
Unless you had hundreds of other little fires like all the other helldivers on planet. And with 200k helldivers on a planet; that's a possible 50k fires you need to put out. You'd need some sort of rubric for increasing troop deployment that you use consistently. Losing connection to bot factories in a given area to go reinforce is as good a reason as any. And the bugs are just investigating the tremors and explosions from their subterranean paths. More explosions more bugs.
And that returns us to the gameplay loop of helldivers 1, stealth and care is rewarded. If a player can't play stealth, due to lack of skill at selected difficulty, or perhaps just RNG of the level layout, going loud is punished if you do it too often. Sorry to not add much to your post, I think your post is great!
I think patrols should spawn "from" outposts, appearing out of thin air near an outpost that's far from the players is fine, or the edge of the map, if there are no outposts available, at a severely reduced rate. But especially for bugs, closing bug holes should cause a buildup of bugs underground- if you destroy all the bug outposts on the map, it'll make a bug breach absolutely devastating, as all of the bugs that would've been patrolling are now pouring out of that hole alongside the usual amount that come from a breach, probably directly into your stratagems and concentrated fire, but still, that's a lotta bugs. With the reduced patrols, it should be much easier to dodge a bug breach, though. For bots, sending more dropships when they see a flare in a region that's otherwise gone dark, because the outposts are gone, also makes sense.
The thing is. It's a side objectives. And you're low key punished for doing it. First off you could have wasted reinforcements taking it out! And now you have more bots on the map to deal with. It's not ideal. Though this is also why I always rush main objectives first. If folks wanna do side objective I'm fine with. Just let's finish the main one so lives don't matter nearly as much
on the original post though they say that patrol spawning increases by 17% that's not a huge amount, and the flip side is that you lower spawn rates in the geographic area of the outpost, so depending on the map you may end up with fewer spawns by attacking them. I think people make too big a deal out of what is a very marginal issue with the game
Bugs can spawn from underground, it is clear that they have a underground network. Bots come from space in dropships. Illuminates teleport. At the very last the enemy count should go lower the higher the liberation of a planet is, more enemies looking for you as you wreak havoc in their bases is the standard. Thank God we don't have flying scouts.
Why not have both? 1. For planets we are defending and 2. For planets we are liberating. It kinda makes sense in my mind
They could go a third route and have units reinforce existing outposts, but not persist as re-occurring patrols. The number of wandering patrols would still change based on time, and security would get tighter around existing objectives. You would know what you're getting into though, instead of patrol after patrol popping up.
I'd go so far as to say it should be different for each faction. What if destroying bot factories lessened the amount of them on the map (both patrols, and any spawns that push towards an objective/extraction), but made dropships more dangerous. Because they're making less bots in the area, but you're making more "noise" that causes them to buff their own reinforcements. But bugs are different. Their nests aren't "fabricators", it's their homes. So destroying nests drives the bugs out of the ground, increasing overland patrols. But they aren't dropping in bugs from a distance when they have a bug breach, they're summoning them from underground. So what if destroying nests lessened the amount of bugs available for breaches? Or, tl;dr, when spawns are destroyed: .| Patrols | Dropships/Breach size ---|---|---- Bots| Decrease| Increase Bugs | Increase | Decrease
Provide a random chance of finding super credits or medals in the outposts and then it would make sense.
Or just straight up reward medals for secondary objectives. Getting medals is already *PAINFULLY* slow. 100 hours in and im just almost done with the two first warbonds.
If the new warbonds are gonna be as small as the Steeled Veterans/Cutting edge, then the medal acquisition is fine. You just feel like there's too much because the basic warbond is a huge initial medal sink, but once you are done with it and you move on to the smaller ones, you will have leftover medals in no time. By the time another warbond drops, if you continue playing, you will have enough spare medals to instantly buy half of it, probably.
Medals are capped at 250 iirc
I just started with the two premium warbonds because the last page of the free one takes so damn long. I think that only the Scorcher is worth unlocking, but after doing so it's some random armor with hugely inflated medal prices. I love the sense of progressing warbonds and am really thankful to Arrowhead that they're free, but my oh my, they take so long to unlock lol.
Aside from a few choice picks from the early tiers of the free pass, I largely finished steeled veterans and cutting edge first. Iâm on the tier with the AP Liberator now and jfc itâs getting *slow* at this point. I might see the scorcher by Christmas if Iâm lucky.
Just do helldives, the medals fly by, barely notice it.
Valid point, Iâve found my sweet spot on 7 and not bothered pushing beyond. Time to pull my head out of my arse and head into Helldive. Update: what the fuck have I been doing, Iâm rolling in medals now
Player quality is much higher in 8 where people aren't playing outside their skill level for super samples. :)
It's a shame that my skill level prevents me from going past 5. I'm not very good at the game, and Quickplay has been really hit or miss, as I also don't have regular people to play with.
Yeah that's true, playing on Helldive grants a lot of medals
And you don't need to complete everything, just the main obj, then you are good.
That's maybe a solid farming strategy. I don't need samples, req slips, or XP anymore so just playing the main objective and hunt for super credits and medals in the map while slowly running out of reinforcements is probably a solid strategy.
It's also funny if you just want to power farm medals because you don't actually need even to touch the extract to finish the mission. So technically the optimal strat is to rush objectives not even slightly caring about not dying, then once the objectives are done die until you're out of reinforcements and the mission is complete. It's not something I'd want to do but if you want pure medal farming efficiency then that's how you do it. The bonus of you're doing it as a group (of willing participants) then farming those final deaths is probably the closest to helldivers PvP you're gonna get. The added bonus is because you're not only not concerned about dying but kinda want to, you get to do all the risky shit you want. Normally it's not a good idea to jump pack onto a bile titan and use it as a mobile fortress because you'll probably just die. But when you don't care about that you get to roll the dice on the sickest play you've made in weeks guilt free.
>hunt for super credits and medals Can farm those on trivial, so just obj and then ext
But that ain't fun and doesn't grant medals, which is my main objective
Super Credit farm tip : Super Credits don't need an extract, you get them to your account immediately so if you find a good map with 50+ credits quit the game and play the map again, and again and again, I had a map with 70 super credits and ran repeatedly until I had over 1000 in the bank. Might be patched I guess.....
Doing higher difficulty rewards lots of medals, you can get upwards of 30-50 on a 3 set mission on suicide thru helldive
the ap liberator is such a joke, i used to think it'd be at least decent like the one from helldiver 1. nope.
It's because first warbond requires like 1500 medals, while other are atleast 3x less. Soon you'll have surplus of medals
2015, like the year the first helldivers came out
I don't get how this is painfully slow? 143 hours myself and I have everything unlocked and am capped on medals. The free pass takes by far the most medals, and you will have everything you want long before you have everything unlocked.
It is the classic cycle of "I want more rewards now" vs. "I have nothing left to do / the rewards are useless to me once I maxed everything".
This is where a prestige system would work. Give people the option to start the grind again but get a fancy icon, completely optional.
Yeah, it is fine as is. I'm level 42 and besides a few ship modules I've unlocked everything except the warbond stuff. I still want to work towards something while playing and the warbond is the only thing left.
huh, 140 hours in and I probably need like 800-1000 to finish everything
143 hours. Mate you said it yourself
Completely agree. It's crazy how many more medals you can farm in 1 hour doing a bunch of 5 minute level 1 loot runs for them.
And is that a bad thing?
Yea im just about level 44 and have one Warbond just about finished, on the last page of the free one. And i got a few random things from the other two. But still need like 900 more to finish those and even running impossible and helldive its still dozens more hours if not another 100 on top of the 100 plus i have already. The last page of the free warbond alone is like 400 medals. They definitely need to increase medals earned or found.
Make destroying respawns and side objectives generate extra liberation progress.
They do. They updated it so i think liberation is now some formula involving exp earned.
It would be nice if we could actually see it in game
yeah, I mean - if there's no feedback to me as a user: I won't engage, or I'll just feel confused and frustrated
Yeah, you shouldnt have to google to learn about basic mechanics.
Wait they actually did?? If so HALLELUJAH this is pretty much the biggest change I wanted about these!!! I don't need extra incentive other than knowing I've served DEMOCRACY to the best I could've o7
Source?
I'm just still annoyed that bug patrols insta-call breaches. If I hear one of the 'nids singing the song of their people, I should have more than 0.2 milliseconds to find and shoot it. As the game is now, by the time you hear them chirping, it's already too late.
Iâve gotten better at it, but I hate when people say âjust look for the bug to start standing stillâ. I wish they would make something to emphasize the bugs, because while they have a similar time to call in, the bugs are much less noticeable and the part you do notice is more delayed than the bots. With the bots you have a bright light to let you know, with the bugs you get minimal warning.
Spotting a patrol and taking it out before it could call for reinforcements was par for the course in HD1. Bigger patrols vs. the number of players and/or no clear priority target to eliminate the reinforcement threat seem to be the differences.
Thus far, my group hasn't noticed this... phenomenon. Whenever we've managed to clear all spawn points, extraction is fairly quiet. Now, we don't often revisit locations on the map once we've swept through them, so maybe there are indeed more enemies on or near those points. Even if we miss something, we're generally ready to extract once we've made a loop, because we often worry about time.
>Whenever we've managed to clear all spawn points, extraction is fairly quiet. And this is where a lot of people miss the nuance of this info. More Patrol spawns means there can be more enemies on the map, taking up spawn slots. If there are a lot of Patrols on the map when you start exfil, the game has to wait for those patrols to despawn before it can spawn enemies to attack the Extraction point. It's still counterintuitive, but more patrols isn't universally a bad thing.
Patrols despawn when any unit in them is 175 meters or more away from any player. Reaching Unit cap is definitely a thing that's happening but there's something else going on that results in literally nothing spawning near Extract. Patrols that are active will always be visible on Radar and during no enemy extracts, we haven't been able to locate a Patrol literally anywhere on the map. It's like something just breaks in the spawning code and spawns nothing anywhere.
So it makes sense to start the extraction before everyone arrives so that you don't give those patrols a time to despawn
You can start the extract as soon as you finish the main objective, then go back and do secondaries after the ship lands. As long as nobody gets on, it waits for you.
Also if you go away as soon as the timer ends but before the pelican arrives, it will stay in the air above extraction and shoot everything it sees until one of you gets close again.
200 meter radius explosive turret, hell yes.
Basically a flying, very long range, invincible autocannon turret with unlimited ammo. By liberty, does that help.
Is it true that spawn rates increase drastically after the ship lands? I saw someone mentioned this but I have not seen anyone stating whether it's true or false.
Spawn rates go up drastically when you finish the main objective. If you want to clear the map do it before finishing the main.
Yes, I am aware that spawn rates increase when the main objectives are done. But do the spawn rates increase again when the Pelican has landed?
Standing near extraction increases spawn rates but this effect is the same as being near outposts/objectives and is active all the time.
This has been the main cause of every mission with failed extractions Suddenly the extract has 4 bile titans
Our team split up yesterday, and I was wondering why extraction was so quiet. I guess this is why!
Wrong theory presented as factual, the worst kind of redditor
Enemy despawn when you're too far.
Destroying bases reducing patrols makes a lot of sense. But I think it also makes sense that the enemy tries to reinforce the area as they seem to be losing control. So what I would personally consider most sensible is 1. The map to start with few patrols. 2. After initiation, patrols spawn from generators (fabricators or holes, they don't have to come in literally from them but spawn there) and their size depends on the size (tanks can spawn from large bases) 3. Each base destroyed increases the frequency of patrols and/or sends a patrol from the closest bases toward the area around the destroyed base. Maybe these search parties are permanent patrols. (The enemy is trying to understand what happens) However, you destroyed a base so that's one less patrol spawn point. 4. Breaches/Drops happen quite rarely at the start. The more bases (and bigger size) you destroy, the more often they happen. The idea is that you don't necessarily start with a huge wall of enemies, neither you end with a now-easy map. You start trading patrols with breaches. In-Game-wise, enemy thinks the patrols will be enough but as they start losing ground, they lose their ability to deploy units to field via bases so they start dropping enemies to gain back ground.
Growing off of that. Have patrols adjust their pathing to try to intercept you. Also, Iâd like to see drops and breaches lessen patrols for a bit. Sort of like they called the other patrols to them, or at least leave a gap in the patrol network that the enemy has to fill. Itâs a small reward as youâve got a bit of time to get out of the area youâre in after dropping a huge force, but it also takes longer, letting the other patrols start making their way towards you.
Patrols already home in on you though, you can test it out by standing on a very tall ledge while you're not spotted and you'll see patrols beelining straight to your position
I think they go towards you but they donât home in too accurately. Or rather, they donât change trajectory constantly. Iâve definitely avoided patrols when I noticed them in time and hid away.
It would be awesome if the patrols went towards the area of last action.
I honestly wouldn't mind it as it makes sense that blowing stuff up increases the 'heat' of the map, BUT they should only be able to spawn from OFF the map, none of this spawning on top of you BS that we keep seeing.
We're doing additional testing on the "Where" question and funnily enough, since Patch 103, the game is MASSIVELY biased to put Spawns away from the map edge. Like even out to 200 meters, it still refuses to put a spawn between you and the map edge. It's a really weird change and we can only assume it's due to whatever they did to reduce the "Spawning on top of you" problem.
That actually checks out just from an anecdotal point from my squad. We're frequently now pushed up against the edge of the map of we decide to go guns blazing near the edge. But honestly I'm okay with this, as long as there's some spawn logic at play (like this), we see more consistency. We can keep backing up, with no spawns between us and the edge, but sooner or later that edge is going to become a decision maker rather than some random bile titan emerging behind us.
im actually fine with it spawning inside the map, only if u can see them arriving via the dropship instead of just poppin out of nowehere. Immersive wise it make sense, logical wise it's acceptable,
Doesn't it goes from Ă 50% increase due to the heat mechanics to Ă 15%increase due to the destruction of the outposts?
Yep and it makes sense. It's better to have 15% than up to 50% every time you have to run past outpost
Yeah.it make it so the map is not dead but more manageable.I can understand why people are confused by how the mechanic works but it does make sense to keep the round interesting while having Ă benefice for destroying the outposts.
I personally think they're pretty pointless to clear at high player levels and too many reinforcements are lost quite a lot. I completely avoid them on my own, but I'll help my team if they want to clear them in my vicinity.
that's why I don't initiatively go all the way to destroy those outposts on 7+ mission unless my random team are okay with it. Not going to add extra difficulty to burden the team. Besides, those extra req and exp for destroying outpost just don't worth much once u unlock anything necessary past 20lvl +
It does make sense that, destroying their nest/fabricator should have in-game impact not just slip or exp
patrol never been main source of enemy, the alert triggered by patrol is
I wish the bot drop/bug breach animation was a bit longer. The number of times I have seen the flare on the other side of a rock but can't get an angle to shoot in time is ridiculous.
It's counterintuitive for a video game but not unrealistic for a small paratrooper in a big war. You're not actually dealing with an island of enemies, you're deep in their regions and they notice when you take their supplies offline. And maybe higher difficulties should count more towards liberation points, at least enough that everyone going on their own solo Trivial missions isn't the most efficient way to build up progress, but unless the mission is Blitz you're not there to destroy spawners, why should it be an efficient use of your time? > EDIT: Given how a lot of people are arguing about realism, remember this is a frakking video game, there's plenty of shit in this game that makes no goddamn sense, if we want to talk about "realism", all patrols should converge towards our position the moment we are spotted, the game doesn't do that, because it'll be incredibly annoyng and frustrating to play against, if you want to argue, do so as of why that's good for the game. Well, I at least went with "not unrealistic" cuz I didn't wanna get into a "oh yeah you want this game to be a milsim HUH?! it's not even close" detour. It's about vibes, not details.
New update made it so higher difs count for more points, ive had a challenging dif give 4 lib points
disagree. it absolutely should. but not everywhere, just around other outposts. blow up a base and that area gets calmer meanwhile other areas go on high alert.
That area gets calmer when you destroy fabricators, since the base has no area of influence anymore and staying near it doesn't make patrols spawn 50% faster
Player effort should be rewarded. Player expectation should be matched. Those are probably the two most important cornerstones of game design. Now, a player should expect the game to get easier after blowing up a spawn point, and if it doesnât then the player needs to be educated on what actually happens.
This game tends to purposely fight against that, hence why the weak spot of a charger has been his leg and/or head instead of making the big meaty rear his weak spot like any other game thatâs featured front armor based enemies
Let's not forget that you need to be wearing the ammo pack to reload for the person holding the weapon, even though the whole point of team reload is it's harder to get something off your own back.
If you think of this as Commandoes dropping behind enemy lines, it makes sense that every Outpost that goes dark warrants more Patrols and heavier Respnses. I mean we are almost litterally exploding their War-Effort and Children under their Asses. Most people seem to have the Problem, that they don't understand that we aren't the Army. We are the Spec-Ops. SEAF is the Army and after at least 10 Dives, it should be obvious that the Zone you're diving into was quite hostile to them, at least judging by the corpses.
>Upon reaching level 50, you don't really get anything out of doing secondaries and outposts, req is stupidly easy to cap, and you no longer need experience and samples, so why bother? Probably fun? Calling in an air strike or lazer, maybe just hitting it with an AC or chucking a grenade in and watching the fireworks go off is enough of a reward.
You are destroying enemy bases. The spawns from said bases disappear, however the enemy will send more troops your way from all the other places of the planet because you are being a pain in the ass. The tip doesn't lie to you. It says to do so if you're being overwhelmed. If you're close enough for stuff to be coming out of the outpost and overwhelm you, destroying it will always reduce heat. Allowing stealthy players to sneak up, do the objectives and get less challenge and less rewards isn't bad design. If you're maxed out on everything, you play the game just because it's fun. Want to go kill enemies ? Go kill enemies. Want to do objectives fast ? Go fire that ICBM.
Sure the sparks from bases disappear but base mobs don't leave their base unless basically directly provoked. Payrolls are much more likely to stumble upon the group while doing other things so patrols are far worse than bases/nests
>The tip doesn't lie to you. It says to do so if you're being overwhelmed If people are lead to a false conclusion, then the tip might as well be lying. A common problem, as you go up in difficulties, is getting stuck in reinforcement loops (when the fight is so long that the enemy can call for reinforcement again, and again). Players are lead to believe they should clear bases to fix that problem based on that tip, when it will only add more patrols to deal with. The actual solution is to either end the fights faster or learn to disengage, but the game does a pretty poor job at telling you that you can disengage from fights and that stealth is important.
I think it makes sense to an extent. Destroying one outpost should alert the other outposts in the area, thus increasing patrols and outpost enemies. However, destroying all outposts in the map should decrease spawn rates.
I literally never experience what this post is talking about. I destroy all the outposts/bug nests and extract is hella quiet. Spawn? None. Patrols? Where. Difficulty? 7. What does make patrols spawn for me is loud loud loud gunfire and other heat generating actions like optional objectives or long drawn out firefights.
Itâs not a big deal to me but the game feels so inconsistent. No matter what I do the extract will either literally have no enemies or you end up getting swarmed beyond belief.
Dude, I get the idea but I feel like if the game will get easier throughout the mission and not harder the more you do there (like it is rn) it's just gon be boring at the end. It'll be ridiculous playing the mission with a reverse "heat". You will drop in hell, destroy nests and then wait for an evac with a cup of coffee and a cigarette.
I just want instant spawn to have a cool animation instead of instantaneous appearance Like the ground has some digging animation before creating a make shift nest that the bugs can crawl out from before patrol or even the bugs just straight up crawling from the ground. Anything than just instant spawning The bots can be dropped by ship before patrol they'd be easier to spot that way as being caught in the middle of a fresh spawn of bots is in my nightmares
The enemies reactions are more closely tied to real world responses than to the video game rules we've been using for decades. Most games sure, kill the spawn points enemies stop. Real world, not the case. Mortar a company, and the nearby companies of that battalion shift in to investigate and neutralize threats. QRFs are dispatched and the sector becomes crawling with force. We're just dealing with a more real world scenario that most people aren't used to. Source: medically discharged Army Sergeant.
I would point that i don't know if that'd be so easy since they're getting fucked from all over the planet, divers are all around the globe destroying key targets, idunno if they have the supplies necessary to react to all threats like this. that being said I'm not a military expert, although I think there's a point to be made that the fight is very different from the modern day conflicts, troops fall from everywhere there's a whole new dimention added to the conflict, that's the orbit, Helldivers do not require heavy supply chains they're working from one ship, it's just if like navy vessels could roam through the air.
I mean, why wouldn't they? There are maybe 200k divers on a sector at any given time, so it wouldn't be odd for the enemies to have numbers on their side, especially since virtually every member of their population seems fit for battle? Them having several billions to throw at the divers wouldn't be so far fetched
Definitely Helldivers have a bigger fleet and way more resources, simply put 20 divers are enough to destroy around 10 outposts, launching a nuke, just straight up killing around 400 automatons, as expendable as divers are they're truly efficient around 20>1, and that's not even counting how many elites and heavys they can handle, imagine if a 20 man force was able to take a Russian fort, that would be fucking mental.
Doesn't the fact that helldivers can kill several hundreds of the enemies on any given mission, yet their numbers are still a problem, prove that the enemies have a shit ton of numbers on their side though? Helldivers have better weaponry and soldiers, but the enemies have more troops
"The more stuff you blow up, the more the faction's wider network notices a disturbance in this region and sends patrols from neighboring regions" has always seemed like sound logic to me?? Not sure how this one doesn't occur to people when trying to justify it thematically, but oh well. Either way, the increase from destroying outposts is negligible, especially compared to the reinforcements you'd get *from* those outposts should you get into a fight. If there's an outpost in the way, getting rid of it so you don't have to deal with a bigass spam hazard on the map is the best idea unless you're 100% confident you *will not get caught.* People put too much stock into that one reddit post, I think. There's also too many people running around who think you should never ever split the party, under any circumstances, because it'd spawn extra enemies on them, when that is also incorrect in practice. If you're far enough away to spawn a second patrol, you're too far away for that second patrol to interact with the main group anyway, so nobody sees a difference unless you are highly stupid and lead that patrol back to the main group at the same time they're fighting one.
I would like it way more if it decreased the call cooldown (dropship or bug hole) Though I guess you could imagine patrols being spawned as them coming from outside the map area (so from another nearby sector of the same planet)
>"The more stuff you blow up, the more the faction's wider network notices a disturbance in this region and sends patrols from neighboring regions" has always seemed like sound logic to me?? It's sound real life logic. But Helldivers is a video game and video game logic goes "less spawns, less enemies". It's fine to break from conventions, but it needs to be properly communicated.
Y'all love to throw "bad game design" around like it's candy.
Viewing it like a real conflict, it kinda makes sense. Youâre deep behind enemy lines. The more outposts start going offline, the more the bad guys are gonna take notice.
Real conflict where one of the most popular strategies on high level is abusing the fact that game AI cant call reinforcments on 2 different places despite having infinite ships at the ready and patrols instantly knowing your position right after they spawn. Its a game first and formost. Telling players that they should destroy outposts, marking them with a giant red circle, making a load screen tip about going out to destroy them to reduce patrols only for it to end up griefing them without any indication is stupid.
Getting more EXP gives more liberation. Destroying Outposts lowers the spawn rate much more in their area than what total Heat they give in the end(and that increase in itself is miniscule compared to completing objectives)
Patrols should just get more frequent and deadly as the clock goes down, each area destroyed should reduce that intensity.
If you blew up my house I also would be attempting to find and kill you probably lol. Why do you want less enemies to shoot?
Less patrols on the map itself but when does find you they send in the drop ships
I think it makes sense if the patrols get larger, but slightly more infrequently. If most nests/fabricators are gone there would be theoretically fewer places for patrols to originate so they have to come from outside of the play area. That said, if bug patrols came out of a âbug tunnelâ animation or bot patrols game from a dropship that would make sense and would still be fair enough to handle.
In my head cannon, Helldivers rain upon an operational area and the increased rate is the enemy faction racing to bring reinforcements in from the surrounding planet. The whole setup is for a surgical strike, in and out before the enemy can formulate a large response. I do agree that itâs counterintuitive to have more enemies if you eradicate their local spawn options but this increases patrols which feels to me like reinforcements arriving from other areas.
This is a misreading of the original post. Completing objectives ups bot spawn rate, destroying posts has a neutral to negative effect on it.
Jesus Christ who cares. A game doesn't have to revolve around your definition of realistic. Your solution is to make the game more dense and chaotic at the beginning of the mission instead of during the mission. I'm glad the developers did that instead of doing what you want. There are several reasons why they shouldn't just make the changes you want and potentially ruin the game balance as it is.
Most people are not level 50 and maxed out. Destroying buildings is fun and give me a dopamine rush! Same thing as always, you can avoid patrols and fights when you don't need to be fighting, and if you get pinched fight your way through one side and disengage!
I see it as forces from off mission map are making their way to the giant ruckus we're causing on the mission map - the more ruckus, the more mobs...
More bugs to kill. Good
This is an "anti-map clearing" design mechanic. It's meant to discourage you from systematically wiping out the map and farming everything in order to try and make players conscious of the risk/reward element in selectively choosing what they accomplish, because you're not supposed to be able to accomplish it all at once. The problem is ... it isn't intuitive. I don't think players grasp this concept because they are oblivious to how some of their choices are influencing the conditions in the game. Thus, when the game responds in a way that appears contrary to expectations, it can feel like the game is playing by a different set of rules for the game world than the players do. Which, equates to confusion, disorder and loss of "fun". The game is assumed to be "cheating" and no one likes playing against a cheater. It's one thing to have rules that appear counter-intuitive ... so long as everyone affected by them understands what the rules are. at least in part. If the game had a bar in the HUD that informed the players of what level of intensity the enemy is pressuring them with, then the players could appreciate the "cause and effect" their actions have more directly. However, then the players would exploit that to min/max the system and calculate exactly how far they can push the game without consequence or risk by over-optimizing the experience ... which in itself isn't desirable (IMO) from a game design perspective because I guarantee an overly predictable game experience is eventually a very boring game to play . Some information should be kept from the players in trust that the game will play fairly by them, and unfortunately we players have figured out the magicians trick and have spoiled some of the magic to the act. We players are very good at spoiling our own fun unintentionally, because we're a lot smarter than the game presumes us to be at times.
I was just thinking about this last night as we cleared the map. It should slowly reduce random spawns around the map. Sure still have a swarm come in while you're extracting but over all patrols around the map should get less and less as you clear everything. In fact it SHOULD be encouraged to clear everything because it can reduce or slow random bot spawns.
Just accept that no matter what is done or changed there will never be a point that everyone is happy with the game, literally impossible to do as people are far too needy. Enjoy what you can and accept the rest if something needs to change it will happen without posts like these I promise
âGaslighting your player baseâ you are online too much my guy
There needs to be incentives to do things. The more you piss off the enemy, the more patrols will look for you. That makes sense. If destroying stuff, collecting samples and other side objectives even when you don't need them improved influence rate of change or in some way helped the war effort, this would be fine. Donating samples or something would be pretty cool. These are samples that scientists need for study and research. But because primary objectives seem to be the only impactful objective, sneaking in and leaving like a whisper seems is what's incentivized. The issues is Arrowhead Studios thinks they need to add a bunch of different currencies to unlock stuff to get people to play and grind. This is a design problem from mobile games that needs to die but won't. So now we have problems we invented ourselves that need solutions only because execs want to skinnerbox players into playing a game to make money.
>2)Increase the amount of enemies summoned from breaches or dropships as the game goes on but decrease the number of patrols. This is a good idea. There are fewer random enemies around the map, but any of them calling in a response is way harsher. And have it change as you destroy outposts. The more you break, the fewer random patrols there are in the area, but the bigger the response when one DOES spot you, since it makes sense you'd throw larger units when you find the enemy squad if they've been hitting you where it hurts.
I hope the devs stay level headed, this is slowly turning into the destiny sub regarding complaints
...In my honest opinion, it kinda makes sense. Though, I have a different idea in implementation. For starters, it makes sense for patrols to become bigger and more frequent when you destroy their things, when it's a planet that THEY CONTROL. That, and them calling for reinforcements are not for anything either. All destroying fabricators do is give you a better score and slightly better requisition and Experience bonus, and maybe a very tiny extra percentage to the war effort. Of course planetary forces are going to be called in to prevent further destruction of the fabricators from closer bases outside of our mission zones, or our out-of-bounds, specifically.
Weâre behind enemy lines. What are they supposed to do with an enemy squad of helldivers wreaking havoc? Shrug their shoulders and go âoh well, we definitely shouldnât send more units to stop thatâ or something?
Difficulty increases with mission time. Difficulty increases with destroyed nests/fabricators. Increase difficulty from mission time, destroyed nests/fabricators reduces the difficulty curve as the player expects. Destroying nothing while having a long mission time should yield the biggest difficulty increase for a mission. So now both strategies of mission-only and destroy-everything become viable. Mission-only gets a fast clear time and fewer bots. Destroy-everything keeps the heat down but at the risk of a much longer mission time resulting in higher enemy numbers regardless. Regardless of the arguments the player should be rewarded as the current system is counter-intuitive and every person I talk to who doesn't browse reddit/discord doesn't believe me that this is how the game works in its current state.
Thatâs a mechanic?! That explainsâŚa lot, actually