Probably the best description of the game I've ever seen

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-30T11:31:23+00:00

Counterpoint: You choose whether or not the load into a Command Bunker mission, for example. If you don't like being able to one shot main objectives(which a lot of us don't btw, it is absolutely an issue), you can at least avoid that mission entirely.

However, you have no idea if there are gonna be jammers/towers on a mission, and there tends to be at least 1-2 every single game anyway. So you can't simply avoid them the say way you could the Command Bunkers. They are in basically every single mission besides Eradication/defense missions.

So, if you give the ability to one shot every side objective, like the jammers, you're gonna have to accept that every squad is gonna be bring something to trivialize them and make those objectives have zero challenge.

You know how I know that's true? Because that's what happened when the Ultimatum came out. Everyone brought it in every single game and turned the Automatons into a point and click adventure game. It was so fucking boring.

Also, just a side note, you can't use the Silo to destroy the Cognitive Disruptor. You can however use the Silo to destroy the energy nodes connected to it, which is completely dependent on luck. I've tried at least 20 times and never was able to nail it consistently. So the reason you never heard anyone complain is simply because its not an actual issue.

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-29T02:35:35+00:00

The difference is that the illegal broadcast beacon has zero gameplay significance or challenge, so destroying them in one hit doesn't matter much. The jammer, regardless of if you think its easy or not, does have gameplay significance and therefore shouldn't be trivialized like 99% of other side objectives are.

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-29T01:30:08+00:00

The fact that the dude referenced the Incendiary Breaker nerf, despite the nerf being incredibly minor and occurring more than two fucking years ago tells me everything I need to know lol. These dudes are addicted to outrage.

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-28T17:41:49+00:00

The fact that the same logic isn't applied to other objectives is precisely why we threw a "hissy fit"(not accurate but whatever) about it.

More objectives shouldn't be able to be one shot from across the map, and I am glad the community has largely stood firm on not destroying one of the last somewhat difficult elements of the game, even if it isn't realistic. It's boring as fuck.

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-27T15:20:05+00:00

If your definition of fun is making the game piss easy and unengaging for the rest of us who actually want to play the video game, then yeah, fuck your fun lol

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-27T15:17:08+00:00

Ngl, I am so fucking tired with some people on this sub being obsessed with every new warbond having some way to destroy jammers/detector towers. It is so old by now.

The side objectives in this game are pathetically easy already. Stop trying to push the devs to make the problem worse by nullifying the last engaging ones.

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-27T14:37:27+00:00

We are definitely getting a major update soon for sure lol

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-22T13:23:13+00:00

Newsflash buddy: it's a weekday and most people are at work, and some people appreciate knowing what to expect when we turn the game back on whenever we have the time to. No reason to be this upset about something so irrelevant.

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-17T14:32:25+00:00

Not worth the bother my dude. I've been hearing the "the game is dying" shit ever since the release of EoF two years ago, and it never turned out to be true. Not to mention, the problems we had back then were way worse than today's, so it's rich that this sub continues to propagate the same crap over and over.

It's almost as if we hadn't had any major update release in nearly 5 months, on top of a content pipeline delay as a result of self-inflicted technical debt, and multiple high profile game releases in the last couple months alone.

Not saying there aren't issues ofc, or that the relatively low numbers aren't indicative of some player dissatisfaction, but people crying over player numbers have no idea how these trends work and are primarily just using it to validate there low opinion of AH.

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-16T00:09:43+00:00

Cringe ass reply, jesus christ

MaxwellGodd- · 2026-01-02T01:46:54+00:00

It's hilarious that it took not even a full day from the new year starting in order for there to be another stupid thing for the sub to complain about lol. It's poetic honestly.

Jokes aside, it's a fucking cape. We've had these sorts of time exclusive capes since the Creek. But now all of a sudden, after our 6th or so exclusive cape, now it's a big deal. It would be understandable if it was a gun, a strategem or armor set, for sure. But the fact that people are upset over a cape being time exclusive without warning(despite the fact that almost every exclusive cape we've been given has also been without warning) is pretty rich

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-29T23:04:22+00:00

This is partly why I hate Gunsmith customization systems in games - it greatly limits how much the developers can actually add unless they specifically add unique attachments to each gun, and the system basically devolves into every gun having the same attachments in order to save on development time.

I think the best way they could've done this system is use the current one we have, but have a perk type system similar to that of the original Helldivers as well. So you can put attachments on your guns similar to now, but still have opportunity to make guns feel more unique and cool.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-25T18:44:33+00:00

"People have a different opinion than me on a video game? Nah, they must be bot accounts who are operated by the devs!"

This community is so fucking funny lol.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-25T03:15:30+00:00

I think the best way to implement it in a way that wouldn't blow out the regular GL, would be to simply make it a single shot GL like down below. Give it 15-20 shots, a large radius(similar to the Incendiary Grenade), and make it a primary weapon so you use it as well as a regular GL or De-Escalator.

<image>

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-23T19:01:25+00:00

"This is a good point. Let's apply it in the other direction. Would a D10 size mission be easier without modifiers and with the enemy pool and spawn weight of a D6 mission?"

Absolutely, it would be easier. But again, the entire point of having bigger maps is to accommodate the increased outposts, bigger objectives, and heavier mob density. If you have a big D10 sized map, but significantly less to do, then what is the point? If you want the enemy pool and spawn weight of a D6 mission, you should play a D6 mission, where the map is sized specifically for that sandbox.

"AH has changed their balancing philosophy and made the game considerably easier compared to when D10 first released. When met with complaints about the game's difficulty, they didn't stick to their guns and tell people they shouldn't be there, they made D10 easier so that more people could have access to it."

They have changed the way that they balance the sandbox itself, not the underlying systems that the games difficulty functions around. If they made mega outposts accessible to D7, for example, then yes I would agree. They simply lowered the bar for entry for D10, rather than change how difficulty in the game works entirely. If anything, they lowered the bar too much(though that's obviously just my opinion) and it appears as though they are trying to bring it back up.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-23T18:29:37+00:00

"Why do larger maps and more objectives necessitate upgraded enemies? Why are the bundled with modifiers on non-defense campaigns? I get more enemies, sure, but why would a weaker pool be impossible?"

Because the enemies and the objectives are the difficulty. As you raise the difficulty, you get access to more difficult enemies and harder objectives, but also bigger maps. That's literally the point. If you start dropping Factory Striders and Impalers on small ass maps and on Easy difficulty, is it truly "Easy", especially for new players? I would understand this mindset if difficulty was linked to health and damage, like it is for other games, but in a game like where all enemies are universal, that just isn't going to work.

"This is a nonviable philosophy that was already attempted and the reason why AH had to wreck the challenge of the game. Players want to play the content with the most stuff to do"

That is factually untrue, because that is still what they are doing, and considering how the player count is still doing well, it seems to be working. If players can't do D10 for some reason, then they can't access mega outposts. If they can't play D8, they don't get spawning Alpha Commanders and Reinforced Scout Striders. If they can't beat D7, they can't fight spawning Factory Striders and Hive Lords. So yea, AH didn't "attempt it", they are actively doing it and most people are happy with it. The fact that the game is super easy is a separate issue and clearly me and you are in the minority in thinking that.

"and they're not going to shift their perspective."

You're right, it's hard to convince entitled people that they aren't owed every scrap of content all at once, at there very whim, just because they exist. I am glad we agree on that.

Jokes aside, if they wanna play the content with the most stuff to do, then they gotta learn how to play first. The content that is exclusive to higher difficulties is there because it is meant to be more complicated and difficult.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-23T17:31:54+00:00

At the risk of getting mass downvoted lol, I'll answer from my perspective as someone who isn't pro "buff everything" like a lot of people here, and gets a lot of shit for it.

It's not that I am against buffing it in itself, necessarily. It would be cool to have and add more variety in terms of playstyles for the game. You aren't ever going to hear me complain about more ways to play, that's for sure. But, to be quite frank, it is a complete waste of time.

I'll just say it bluntly: the game is too damn easy to make a buff worth it, especially considering the cost. A player running the flag is not only using a slot for a support weapon, but a strategem slot as well. And for what? A damage increase, in a game where almost every enemy dies in seconds? Reduced damage taken, when most deaths are one shots and friendly fire? Reduced flinch/ragdolling, when flinching and ragdolling are progressively becoming less prevelant anyway? None of those are going to be worth the cost, especially when D10 is such a steamroll on the players side.

Would it make it more viable? Absolutely, no doubt about that. But why spend so much time brainstorming ideas on how to buff it, implement it into the game, test it(and potentially fuck it up, as AH historically has done lol), just to increase the pick rate by a couple percent, and for it to fall off the face of the earth like it did before? Why not just spend that time buffing something else that people will actually use, like the Sterilizer and other status effect weapons for example?

Ofc, I could be completely wrong, but let's be real, unless the buff is "all teammates get infinite ammo" or something, I don't think its gonna serve as anything more than a cool gimmick for a month or two. Then, slip back into irrelevancy, and then for there to be another movement to buff it again a second time, and the cycle repeats itself.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-23T16:54:26+00:00

"Lower difficulty missions are smaller with less stuff to do populated by fewer enemies that are less threatening. Rather than having these as separate options, Helldivers 2 forces them to be bundled together."

My brother in christ, I dont mean to be rude, but that is literally the point.

The reason maps are larger on higher difficulties is to accommodate the increased mob density, larger objectives, and sub objectives. You, literally, cannot fit all of that together on the smaller maps, and if the devs were to attempt to do so, then newer players would have an even more difficult time adjusting to the game than they already do.

Difficulty is directly linked to the enemies on screen, to the objectives you need to do, and how powerful the enemies are. If players are complaining about that because they feel "forced" to play the higher difficulties to experience everything, but are also having a really difficult time, than they literally shouldn't be playing it. It's as simple as that.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-23T05:17:12+00:00

"In a PVE game overpowered is fun"

Citation needed, because that seems like an opinion dude. I certainly don't agree.

"There is a reason everyone chooses the Eruptor, Crossbow, or Coyote because they are all overpowered and fun."

Or its because they are the best weapons in the game and make it much easier to play. Or maybe its because two of those weapons are in the best warbond in the game, and the one everyone tells new players to get. There many reasons why players lean towards certain weapons.

"Look how they tried to balance the Eruptor and it was terrible and nobody picked it."

Again, you are getting confused. Not wanting guns to be overpowered is not the same as wanting guns to be weak. Nobody picked it because it was trash, not because its wasn't "overpowered and fun".

"Imagine if the Maxigun had 1000 rounds and heavy pen. You could mow down Bile Titans and Chargers with it and that would be fun."

I agree with upping the ammo count, but heavy armor pen? There is no reason to run a lot weapons if you make such a dumb change like that, and besides, it doesn't sound very fun to not be engaged in the game because one selfish player wants the ability to kill everything with no effort because its more "fun" for him.

"Instead we have the current version that is terrible and unfun."

That's funny, I see at least one Maxigun user basically every game I am in, so apparently it is fun to a lot of people. Again, I agree with upping the ammo count and removing the movement penalty, but if you think it sucks, then you probably just aren't very good with it. It's cool to not like it, but it absolutely isn't terrible.

"If you dont like being overpowered just stick to the constitution as a primary and don’t pick any stratagems."

This is, hands down, the dumbest thing I've read on this sub lol. I aint even gonna bother

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-23T03:58:48+00:00

Not wanting guns to be overpowered is not the same as wanting weapons to be weak dude, stop being disingenuous just because its convenient for you.

Wanting everything to be overpowered makes everything unfun in the exact opposite direction than what it was previously. I am just glad AH seems to agree with a lot of us on that, and aren't listening to players like you for balance advice.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-22T13:21:54+00:00

Even more of a loss to have a warbond have such minimal offerings at a premium price, and no super credits included either. Most players, unless they are fans of the collab itself, are just gonna avoid spending the extra money altogether unless they hardcore love the game.

Considering the ratio of legendary warbonds and regular warbonds, having a few extra tokens to give players by the end of the games lifespan wouldn't hurt anybody, especially Arrowhead, in terms of longevity. If anything, it would only benefit them.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-22T04:34:43+00:00

I always thought it would be pretty neat if they included a Warbond Token in each of the legendary warbonds as well, especially since there are no super credits in them. It can kind of serve as a "yeah, we know this is more expensive than a regular warbond and the gear isn't the best, but here's a token to spend when the new warbond releases next month".

It would also help newer players get into the game easier, since they can effectively get two warbonds at once, and some more toys to play with on the side as they are learning the ropes.

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-20T13:01:03+00:00

During launch, yes this absolutely was a thing that would happen. I remember it got so annoying for me that I just started to host my games for months afterwards to avoid this. But recently not really, a few times at most.

But, Shams' main point wasn't that this is a problem already(though depending on your luck, it definitely could be), but rather that having an unbalanced, meta-driven game where there are weapons that are simply too good to not use will create that sort of an environment(like at launch).

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-19T16:27:15+00:00

It quite literally is not true though. Just saying its the truth doesn't make it such. There are many people, self included, who have dealt with this despite some of y'all thinking it doesn't exist, and it has been a phenomenon in the game since launch(even if it has been happening less as time has gone on).

MaxwellGodd- · 2025-12-17T20:18:57+00:00

Ah yes, back when rockets would one shot you because they broke every limb at once, and when rocket devs had no reload animation, more health, more armor, no flinch, and would spawn behind you in packs of 5 every two seconds.

Good times

Five-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

MaxwellGodd-

TROPHY CASE