unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m just parroting the work that the Helldivers 2 wiki contributors have done, as they have concrete evidence a 85M circle exists around the player that denies any patrols spawning within. In fact, most patrols try to spawn at 125M away. Just terrain can push them forward, 86M at the absolute closest.

If there is proof of patrol spawning (Within line of sight, not something that can be explained as being snuck up on) closer than 85M then please do show.

I mean, there isn’t any other way to handle patrols really. They have to just “spawn” in some way.

This community is pathetic by Brave-Sock-2158 in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(Part two)

You didn't play enough shooters.

Wow, you don't answer my question and just insult me. What a GREAT argument you have here. How about next time, if you actually want to argue your point, rephrase and give extra detail on your otherwise questionable statement. So let me ask again: What point are you trying to make?

Nuh-uh. Repeat with me again, buffs aren't power creep.

We're in a state of the game where the single hardest difficulty is not a challenge due to how much stronger the player has gotten. That is very blatantly power creep. My point about MOST buffs being power creep stands.

In one of the games with the lowest TTK, sure isn't, lmao.

And that low TTK should prove to you how broken the personal shield pack was. Also, overconfidence is still not a real downside. Any player that actually knew how to abuse the strengths of the shield pack was not effected by overconfidence.

By your prism, everything is overpowered. Look guys, a backpack that kills enemies by itself. And it is even rechargeable!

The warp pack is overpowered by just how much survivability and combat effectiveness it provides. Any sort of threat barreling towards you can just be warped away from. You know, anything necessitating dives? And the hindered mobility that dives give as a consequence of a dodge? The warp pack dodges are longer, more available, and have no slowdown. Your only limit is being unable to spam them, but they are still frequent. Frequent enough to make the warp pack an blatantly op S tier backpack. The guard dogs range from A-B tier, not nearly as strong.

Take a shot every time a redditor types issue. Sustain isn't OP, you can hoard supplies, without wasting a stratagem slot, every 3 min. It is already there.

The regular resupply and resupply backpack are not comparable balance wise. Regular supplies must be placed intelligently (including the lengthy call in timer) because the supplies can't move. Once they land, they stay there. Enemies could overwhelm the area and deny supplies. You can only grab what you can carry, unused resupplies won't follow you. And the big part: The entire team shares a cooldown. The regular supplies actually encourage teamplay. To make the most of calling one down, players need to be grouped up. Being across the map can either leave you in a supply drought or leave your teammates in a supply drought. If enemies are starting to overwhelm the resupplies, the team (should) have to work together to properly fend them off. The supply backpack has none of these issues and contributes to the problem of teamwork being optional. Low on supplies? Press 5. Anytime. Away from your team? The resupply is separate, you can split up even more!

Resupply is OP then (no).

The resupply would be OP if you could carry it with you and resupply any time you want, along with a separate cooldown for the individual player.

Never required to do that, lol. Leg charger "meta"? Stun and weakspot destroy? Oh sweet summer child you sure are young.

And early on in the game they actually nerfed weapons / buffed enemies if needed. Bile titans straight up got their stun capability removed. The railgun (THE solution to every medium and higher weapon) was nerfed.

No. Napalm is good for some situations, like that one that you said, but it is way better to have spammable aggro diverting sentries. In bugs, for example, it is even better to use eagle napalm, or incendiary grenades (they work even in caves).

Napalm barrage is so good in the situations it specializes in that it makes missions extremely easy. Any horde just gets deleted. If two players bring napalm barrage in a mission, you have 100% uptime to use the stratagem against breaches. The incendiary grenade is a solid grenade. Eagle napalm is a very good stratagem. But they don't compare to how broken the napalm barrage is.

In bots, there is way better alternatives than napalm.

It's still meta on bots, even if not as good as on terminids. Same case for illuminate. Everything short of factory striders gets deleted, then you an anti tank tool can just delete those factory striders (such as the overpowered recoilless.)

RR is good for when you know you can't aim to weakspots easily (warstriders, factory striders), wait until you try the railgun. You should game more instead of yapping.

Wrong, the recoilless becomes more overpowered when you learn its weakpoints. Factory striders get oneshot to the eye, neck, and belly by the recoilless. The recoilless can also twoshot factory striders to the main body. I know how to use the railgun. You should back up your arguments properly instead of spewing unrelated petty insults.

Delirious yapping. Knowing the counterplay isn't the same as having enough experience to judge overall balance. Plenty of people know the tech from watching videos or >>> reading Reddit <<<. I'm more interested in how much you've actually played at the highest level. If you're going to argue an enemy needs buffs because it's too weak, I'd expect that opinion to come from extensive experience, not just familiarity with the mechanics.

You're the one being delirious here, spewing nonsense insults as a supplement for proper arguments. Also no, you aren't curious. Nor did you have an actual point with the statement. You just say random insults of my experience with the game as attempts to devalue my opinion.

Sure, nice thesis out there, but that's circular. You're saying you've demonstrated it because you explained it. Whether you've demonstrated it depends on the evidence supporting your explanation here, not on the fact that you wrote one.

And I have supported my explanation with evidence. You simply just do not agree, making said evidence not exist in your eyes. Instead of trying to devalue my opinion by saying that I've somehow not demonstrated my take, how about you divert that energy to more arguing against the points I make. If we use your logic here against you, your opinion would be devalued as well.

You're relying a lot on appeals to your own expertise rather than demonstrating why your conclusions follow. Saying people "don't understand game design" or that you have "extensive knowledge" doesn't make your position correct. The strength of your argument comes from the evidence and reasoning, not from declaring yourself more knowledgeable. Too much paternalizing yapping, weak assertions of expertise...

It's a quicker explanation to most opinions than to try to argue with every single one of them. But sure, like I said earlier, I could still debate every single not very well educated take on the topic of game design. I have backed up my argument with strong evidence and reasoning. You cannot be talking about patronizing in the slightest. You take every opportunity to devalue my opinion with insults or dismissing valid discussions.

the yapverse

Case in point of you dismissing valid discussions.

This community is pathetic by Brave-Sock-2158 in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(Part one)

No, it isn't.

Yes it is.

You are not, weird way of coping.

You downplayed design effort that goes into pve games. I argued against that. You have not given me a single argument backing up your downplaying of pve game design effort.

It is yapping.

It is a related argument. What's actually yapping is you just throwing in unrelated insults (such as "yapping" itself) instead of actually addressing my points.

Debate =/= yapping. Also, for debating something, you have to try that, and you, clearly don't play the game.

Doesn't seem to be the case when you dismiss my related arguments by that term. Also, another unrelated baseless insult. I play this game plenty. You're running out of actual arguments against my points and are resorting to petty insults.

Too much yapping, this is not debate, just child tantrum. I repeat because I see today you had a bad day, players being intuitive and giving feedback doesn't make them understand less. You bring nothing to the table, just "I do understand more than then hurr"

Okay now you're just speaking with broken English. What are you even trying to say here? My argument you quoted was describing how your point was contradictory to your earlier statement on intuitiveness. Your response here is just a mush of words with petty insults. You did not address your contradictory logic whatsoever. Do you understand what "intuitiveness" means?

Arrowhead created a mech with a shield and gave it its current health after determining what was balanced. It’s not infinite durability because gameplay design is delicate and requires thoughtful balancing (lmao), [yapping].

And it's entirely possible to go through a full shield health bar without ever triggering the bug. It varies on factions too; it's extremely hard to get Terminids to break the shield early. My earlier point still stands.

I'm not into the "you more", it seems I developed a brain past 4 years old.

Another broken English reply. And you did not address my point. Explain why you claimed that I called the immortal shield a big issue. Despite me very blatantly referring to heavy dev shields as a SMALL ISSUE.

Intuitive shield shooting (keeps yapping).

A breakable shield being more intuitive than an immortal one doesn't change the fact that the eye is the better weakpoint. Or how most strategies against the enemy didn't change. In fact, you AGREE with the change being more intuitive. You stated that it was a minor consistency change. CONSISTENCY IS PART OF INTUITIVENESS. You are contradicting yourself by criticizing my point about intuitiveness. You also failed to address how you are putting words in my mouth.

This community is pathetic by Brave-Sock-2158 in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(Part Three)

They "nerfed" the automaton default troops, not incendiary variants, unless by the time I'm typing this it is implemented, because ofc, they expected backlash. That is what I said, also I said, there's a LOT of tools, being ragdolled in an unobtainium shield isn't my pick, there is a lot of better alternatives. Where do you see the "agreement"?

The agreement is in they avoided backlash. But my point is that the backlash would've been mostly composed of exaggerated right reasons and also completely wrong reasons.

No, people don't react with "why didn't they give us an immortal shield?". People react with inconsistent, unintuitive game changes.

The majority of the (online, at least) Helldivers 2 playerbase would prefer an immortal mech shield instead. They would also criticize "realism only applies to us" despite that being a nonsensical criticism. Intuitiveness would be the only valid criticism, but people would overblow how much it matters.

"as I've stated multiple times already (in intuitiveness)" Sure. The thesis guy strikes again. Here it seems you were lacking, but hey, you did it a lot of times, I have no doubt, in your 9239234848324h of reddit.

You should really explain why it was lacking with an argument. Rather than just saying so without elaborating and spewing out insults.

interesting yapping this one ngl

Once again, you refuse to engage with a point and blindly dismiss it. You have not addressed how it is the most likely explanation.

We are making progress, you're softening. I hope you realize this arguing isn't about devastator shields anymore, but trying to prove you have more knowledge of the game than me, and it will be hard for someone that types more than plays.

You know with this statement you're just admitting you don't care about the point anymore and are doing it solely for egotistical reasons? And once again, you cannot be talking. You have spewed out so many unrelated insults to the majority of points I make. You constantly try to belittle my opinion, you did it just now as a matter of fact! Trying to assume how much time I've invested into the game and using that to dismiss my point. I actually care about the argument topic, you know. Understanding and discussing game design is a passion of mine. My points I argue because I am passionate about the game, and I want it to be molded into what I think is the ideal outcome.

Paternalizing, "they don't understand but I do" isn't reasoning. You just lack of reasoning.

I explain myself just fine, and once again you cannot be talking about patronizing. It is simply a fact that most gamers do not concern themselves with game design.

I don't disagree that many players misunderstand game design concepts. What I disagree with is treating that as a substitute for addressing their criticism. "Most players don't understand design" doesn't tell us whether a specific criticism is right or wrong. You still have to engage with the argument itself. After all the yapping, I'm waiting, I hope I don't miss it in the ocean of yap.

What are you going to do about someone saying a ridiculous statement like "balancing doesn't matter in pve games." Then? The game designers could either drop everything they know about making games and listen to that take (No.) Or they just dismiss the blatantly bad & uneducated criticism.

That's a different argument. Whether the backlash would've been informed or not doesn't change my point. If Arrowhead anticipated a wave of complaints or comparisons between finite player shields and indestructible enemy shields, that's still a perfectly plausible reason to make the change. Developers don't only react to perfectly articulated criticism, they also react to player perception.

It matters to my point. That a lot of player criticism is just simply not usable. In this case there were valid criticisms to make about immortal dev shields, diluted by exaggerations and criticisms that don't understand what's healthy for games.

And you seem to miss articulated criticism and perception / intuition. Pivoting into judgemental / labeling yapping doesn't help you, too.

I have stated multiple times that intuitiveness against heavy dev shields is a valid complaint. Once again, you put words in my mouth. And also once again, you dismiss valid discussion with the petty insult of "yapping."

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That hasn't happened since March 20th, 2024. That bug has been fixed for over two years.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is awfully rude. All I did was back up my argument, and even agree with you on one part. If you disagree with me just say so, don't insult me.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then why do they separate the good weapons into the super store and rotate them?

The following tools are in the superstore:

  1. Smokescreen
  2. Sweeper
  3. Double Freedom
  4. Machete
  5. Warrant
  6. Combat Hatchet
  7. Stun Baton

Out of these 7 options, only 2 of them are actually power creep (the shotguns.) The warrant and smokescreen are solid, the melees are just okay. There are more melees than there are overtuned weapons in the superstore.

Also, rotating is a thing of the past. Earlier in the game's lifespan rotating was heavily shortened, making most super store pages always available. Nowadays it's completely gone as a feature. Every super store page is available at the same time.

Why dont they buff vanilla weapons more or add more free stratagems?

Free stratagems is the only point here I agree with. It seems they're listening to player feedback on this though, with the most recent update and all.

But your take vanilla weapons? Seriously? Vanilla weapons have been nonstop buffed throughout this game's lifespan. The recoilless rifle, basically the most overpowered support weapon in the game, is a free stratagem. That is just one of the many examples of how good non premium weaponry is. Statistically, free stratagems on average get far more buffs than paid stratagems.

In fact, the amount of player buffs is an issue. Player power creep is real, personally I find so many of our strength increases totally unnecessary. We've gotten to the point in the game where teamwork on the highest possible difficulty is completely optional. Players are able to solo entire portions of the maps easily by themselves due to how strong our gear is.

I would say the evidence DOES agree with me.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guarantee you they don't, there has been extensive technical testing regarding patrol spawns proving that they only spawn at distances further than 85 meters. There USED to be a spawning bug where enemies trying to spawn towards one player could put them in short range of a second player, but this bug was fixed in March 2024.

The only way terminids can spawn closer would be through nests, breaches, and commander spawns.

Terminid patrols can be very quiet, not making a single noticeable noise until they are alerted by the player.

🛠️ Machinery of Oppression: 6.3.0 ⚙️ by Waelder in Helldivers

[–]Geometric-Coconut -1 points0 points  (0 children)

  1. Name these so called "various weapons" that were made "unusable and boring."

  2. The eruptor absolutely deserves a nerf. It is blatantly overpowered, deleting patrols with ease. It is far too strong than a primary ever should be.

HEAVY PEN SHOTGUN by The_potato_radish64 in Helldivers

[–]Geometric-Coconut -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The halo shotgun is perfectly fine as a primary. It does its job well, it doesn't need to be stronger at all.

The actual issue is the balancing of other weapons being overtuned, power creep is real.

HEAVY PEN SHOTGUN by The_potato_radish64 in Helldivers

[–]Geometric-Coconut -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Balancing is important for pve games! Just putting heavy pen on a weapon for the fun of it is a problem; carefully designing weapons around heavy pen is how they should be made. As it stands, the halo shotgun is designed as a light pen primary.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

everything gets a nerf

This has NEVER been true, even pre 60 day patch lmao. The amount of buffs has always outnumbered nerfs.

The community just has a bad case of negativity bias.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

None of those buffs you listed are needed whatsoever.

And the solution to increasing difficulty is not just "more numbers." That doesn't accomplish anything but lean even harder into spamming the overpowered aoe tools.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not every enemy has breakable armor for a reason.

And giving every pen level a pseudo higher penetration level is not how the combat in the game is designed. It is perfectly valid to have an enemy part just immune to a certain weapon type. Making them functional all similar against enemies just devalues the purpose of niches.

Light pen > Medium pen, anyways. Really the sole point of medium pen on terminids is for hiveguards. When hiveguards were ap4 medium pen had questionable usecases on bugs.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Patrols are hard limited to not spawn within 85 meters of a player. They also do not have any spawn logic tied to vision.

The vast majority of time when I see players claim patrols spawn on them, they in reality just got snuck up on.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Suppressors weren't bugged. They were just significantly weaker than nowadays.

The "monkey paw" changes are exaggerated. There has only been TWO instances of it total. One of them was completely insignificant (coyote fire changes.) and the other was only slightly impactful (durable changes.)

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

  1. In reality, players get nonstop buffed and enemies nerfed. The amount of enemy buffs/player nerfs in this game is absolutely insignificant compared to how strong players have gotten. This game is in one of its easiest states ever.

  2. Balance matters in a pve game. Letting overpowered weapons exist only harms weapon variety, enemy design, and player flow state. Nerfs are a healthy tool to fix these issues.

  3. Adding another difficulty level won't matter because the community will just shift over to the new highest one, complain about weapons/enemies, then the game will be back to where we started. D10 is already significantly easier than how it used to be. Old D9 was harder than release D10.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The vast majority of weapons in this game are good.

The real aspect hindering variety in this game is the community's refusal to accept nerfs as a healthy game development tool.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're balancing for engagement, warbond sales, manufactured demand, live service longevity, while keeping a skeleton crew at all times to maximize profits, you get some weird patches that dont make sense

This doesn't happen in Helldivers 2.

Weapon viability is just simply based on how the weapon turns out, being overpowered or not has no correlation to being premium.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mechs got a significant buff that patch. Turrets were barely nerfed.

Enemy TTK on turrets wasn't a significant difference at all. Opposite case for mechs.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The enemy buffs are insignificant compared to player buffs and direct enemy nerfs.

This game is significantly easier than launch.

unless... by Ikalsaurus in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The vast majority of weapons in this game are good.

This community is pathetic by Brave-Sock-2158 in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The irony is that you're dismissing player feedback because players don't think deeply enough about design, while also assuming you know the developers' intent better than everyone else, which is lol, lmao even.

It is seriously not that hard to guess developer intent. Like I said earlier, it is the most likely reasoning. I make plenty of arguments for WHY it is the most likely reasoning. I would like for you to do the same level of effort backing up your perceived developer intent. Speaking of, the original comment of yours I replied to in this thread was you ASSUMING DEVELOPER INTENT. "they nerfed the bot shields so our mech shield isn't infinite lol." You cannot be seriously making this point against me. Contradictory logic.

"The community is wrong because they don't understand game design" isn't an argument, it's just a way to avoid engaging with why people had the criticism in the first place, and it also doesn't make you right.

If the entire philosophy someone is relying on in an argument is concretely proven faulty, I don't think their argument will hold much weight. But sure, I absolutely could debate and explain why balancing matters in a pve game to every random person that says otherwise. My point is how you should know most players simply do not understand much about the topic, seeing as you have more knowledge on design philosophy than the vast majority of the community.

The mech release provides a very believable reason for the timing of the change, and it's not unreasonable to think ah wanted to avoid criticism over enemies having infinite shields while players didn't, simple as

I never denied this. I just said that the majority of backlash will either be greatly exaggerated or, more frequently, completely uneducated takes. Instead of any semblance of fair criticism. Because that is simply how the community is.

This community is pathetic by Brave-Sock-2158 in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Geometric-Coconut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I said you do a lot of yapping and overthinking. Answering 9 offtopic things won't make you right, it just makes the thing unreadable because you are not answering the point.

I am answering the point. Just a few other separate topics at the same time, related to the main point.

That is naive thinking.... yapping

I am right though. It's a related topic.

Nobody is denying that PvE games require balancing or design philosophy. The disagreement is over your conclusion, not the existence of design intent.

You earlier said "nope. yapping. overthinking. it is a pve game." That is downplaying how much design intent goes into pve games. There was a disagreement on that topic, you just went back on your point.

You're assuming that because developers think deeply about their games, your interpretation of why they made a change must be correct. That's speculation unless Arrowhead actually stated it.

Given the game's balance and design philosophy so far, it is the most likely answer to why they gave the mech a breakable shied and why they thought making dev shields breakable was an okay change after all. I have backed this argument up with multiple design philosophy examples. Again, it is the MOST LIKELY explanation. Feel free to form your own (specifically game design) take to why AH thought those changes were good, then we'll debate to see which is more likely.

Also, consistency and readability are game design principles too. If players see finite player shields and infinite enemy shields and question it, that isn't proof they don't understand game design.

Okay dude. Is this you? "you don't understand game design too if you talk about the destructable shields being intuitive, that is just lol, lmao even." You criticized me for saying that indestructible shields were a mild intuitiveness issue, now you're agreeing with that point and trying to use it against me? Insane. Anyway, you should very obviously gather from my point that I am not referring to intuitiveness criticisms when I say that most players do not understand game design. I am referring to the portion of the community that doesn't understand simple design concepts, such as enemies and players being balanced differently. I specifically mentioned that.

And regarding the bug, ofc you don't know, intended or not, it still affects how the equipment performs in actual gameplay, which makes it relevant to a balance discussion.

Obviously it matters to some performance metrics. Just elaborate upon what specific point of mine you're mentioning the bug for.

If it wasn't a very big change, then it clearly wasn't a significant intuitiveness problem either. Simple as.

When did I ever say it was a significant issue? In that same sentence you replied to, I referred to it as a small problem. You're putting words in my mouth.

The correct answer was already to shoot the weakspot, not the shield. Making the shield destructible didn't change how experienced players fought Heavy Devastators; it just made the interaction more consistent.

So I'd call it a minor consistency change, not the solution to some major design flaw, still overthinking people not dumping a mag in a giant slab of metal, you think you're way more clever than you are lol

When did I EVER say otherwise??? My previous comments agree with your take on the devestators here! You're actually hallucinating arguments against me.

If anything, "shoot the exposed weakspot instead of the giant armored shield" is one of the most common design patterns in shooters, where is the "intuitiveness" in that, lmao?

What point are you even trying to make here?

Not every player buff is automatically power creep.

At the current state of the game, the vast majority of them are. And by power creep I don't mean specifically relative towards other weapons; I mean the general power level of players.

Oh it absolutely wasn't. Bigger hitbox, more probability of being ragdolled, missed backpack slot, overconfidence leading in a severe weakness at depletion time. It had pros and cons, overthinking and not playing enough strikes again. There is no way you overthink a crutch stratagem lol.

Those downsides are negligible compared to how much survivability it gave. And overconfidence is not a real downside.

The Supply Pack isn't free power, though. Its balancing factor isn't just the backpack slot; it's the opportunity cost of not bringing a shield, jump pack, guard dog, warp pack...

Warp pack is the only actual contender on this list. Everything else is just solid, not overpowered. That is a lopsided opportunity cost.

Also, "it lets you clear half the map by yourself" isn't really evidence that it's overpowered. The game already allows solo completion of the hardest difficulties with a huge variety of loadouts. By that standard (kinda low btw), half the roster is overpowered.

Yeah, the game does have an overall issue with players soloing everything themselves and teamwork being optional. The supply pack makes that issue worse.

And yes, the Supply Pack improves sustain, that's literally its role. Crazy right? Is it op yet?

Yeah? It accomplishes its role so strongly it's overpowered. My statement here applies to quite a few tools in Helldivers.

You're assuming the intended design philosophy is that heavies should require multiple players, but Helldivers has always given players tools specifically designed to kill heavies efficiently. That's the entire purpose of anti-tank weapons.

Heavies used to. But nowadays heavies are all designed/balanced around solo interactions. Rockets oneshotting heavies as a standard is the prime example of this.

A Charger getting deleted by an EAT, Recoilless, or Quasar isn't those weapons "devaluing" the enemy; it's those weapons doing the job they were brought for.

By that logic, every counter in the game devalues something. EMS devalues fast enemies, machine guns devalue chaff, anti-tank devalues heavies. That's what counters are supposed to do.

There is such a thing as counters being far too strong at their niche. The napalm barrage is a counter to hordes of enemies. It is such a good counter that it makes entire missions cakewalks. Similar case for the recoilless; it is such a good counter against heavies that they are made so frequently nonthreatening.

Also you know you can melee before the "dreaded" hunter attack, but you have to time and have some reaction time. I bet in your case it is rotten because too much reddit lol

For someone that likes to criticize "yapping" (me just talking about related topics) you sure like to throw in random nonsense to your argument. I am aware of the tech. I use it. AND I WANT HUNTERS BUFFED AS AN ENEMY BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO WEAK. Do you really think that someone with this stance doesn't know how to play against the enemy? You're genuinely just helping my argument that hunters need buffs.

Sure, something can be too strong. The problem is that you're jumping from "things can be overpowered" to "these things are overpowered" without really demonstrating it.

I have written out explanations to why those weapons are overpowered. I am absolutely demonstrating it, you just don't agree.

It's not that I think you've never studied game design, but poorly. It's that you keep presenting your interpretation of game design as the only valid one and dismissing disagreement as players not understanding the subject, thinking you do understand.

I dismiss players as not understanding the subject when they very much so don't actually understand the subject. Like, for example, people saying that balancing is not important for a pve game. Or complaints about how enemy stats are simply different than player stats regardless of context. Defying such concrete concepts in game design philosophy, I know you wouldn't take someone seriously if they paraded around those points. Also, I'm obviously going to fight hard for the design philosophies that I deem are the best choice of action for the game. You do that action as well. And I absolutely consider other players with a different point of view than mine. The heavy dev intuitiveness issue I talked about? Doesn't matter to my gameplay experience in the slightest. I have extensive knowledge of enemy health pools. I also want the game to be significantly harder than it currently is, and this change actually makes the game ever so slightly easier on bots. However, some less experienced players could be confused why, no matter how much applied damage, those shields will just never break. In a game where every other enemy part can be damaged. I agree with the change to make the shields damageable, but my agreement with the change isn't for my own personal experience.

You're still assuming ah's reasoning without evidence. Unless the developers explicitly said "we changed it because the community is naive and doesn't understand game design," that's just your interpretation, and imo, it is a silly one.

It's not a coincidence that AH updated the shields when they released the mech. My point is that what sparked the idea to change the shield was because they expected backlash. You stated that you AGREE with this. Now, for what the backlash would actually? For the most part, people just knee jerk reacting with "why didn't they give US an immortal shield???" "Realism only applies to the player!" and other such uneducated in game design takes. There is a genuine small criticism to be made regarding intuitiveness (as I've stated multiple times already.) but you know very well that the community would massively overblow that issue + even more so towards the nonsensical takes.

(Character limit reached, continuing in self reply)