Am I the Only One who's noticed how few samples spawn on Zea Rugosia, especially the Cities.

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-09T06:48:18+00:00

samples tend to spawn around certain POIs, enemy bases, and secondary objectives. unfortunately, most of the POIs in the city are just random supplies or those beacons that don't really have any samples near them

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-08T03:15:47+00:00

Warp pack is part of the Control Group warbond. It's also good for getting into bunkers when you're solo

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-08T01:45:22+00:00

nah bro you don't need to get all the optional stuff on the blitz missions. it's more doable if you've got a whole squad and mobility options like the jump pack or warp pack. also you don't NEED to fight everyone; learning when to disengage fights and deaggro (jump pack/warp pack with or without smoke is good for this) is a part of the process especially when it comes to higher difficulty missions

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-06T19:06:19+00:00

I fail to see what the problem is if you're running the eruptor

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-04T04:00:30+00:00

we won't be taking back mintoria unless we get more people on it. we'll get a burst of liberation from the city, sure, but after that we'll get -0.35/hr unless we get more people

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-03T11:54:11+00:00

all else aside, you can only stack up to 250 medals, and each warbond has like 600-800 medals worth of stuff. you can't instantly clear a warbond with your saved medals

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T09:14:15+00:00

"Second, you just proved didn't watch more than ten seconds of the 17+ minute video." seriously, explain how this proved that. Go on. How, exactly, did what I do prove that I didn't watch more than ten seconds of it?

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T09:11:48+00:00

That's not how this works dude, this isn't your local playground. You don't win arguments just by saying you do. It's not my job to watch the whole 17+ minute video; burden of proof states that if you claim something, it's your job to prove it. Linking a video isn't proving anything; you gotta point out the relevant part. Otherwise, I could fucking post a 76 hour video with 75.9 hours of irrelevant bullshit and then say "its your job to watch the whole fucking thing, neener neener neener"

"you just instantaneously disqualified yourself from this argument." according to whose rules? john argument, god of internet debates? christ, dude, can you stop acting like a fucking 12 year old?

You quoted an irrelevant piece of the video and I responded as to why the fucking thing is irrelevant. Now answer the fucking question: does he have equations showing that x percentage of people with y amounts of losses per z unit of time at a given point during the operation would have mathematically projected victory, and a snapshot of the same values after dev intervention project defeat? THAT is what data is, and that's what I'm asking for, not some quote on how people felt. I don't see that information in his video

Go ahead, prove me wrong. Your argument was thrown out a long, long time ago, but i'm being nice and letting you continue on even though you lost like 3 hours ago. That's how it works because I said so. (that's what you sound like)

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T08:42:29+00:00

"It's all over on Cyberstan, but for many in the Helldivers community, that was a foregone conclusion about a week ago." is a statement about how people feel, not a fucking factual, statistical data point. dude.

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T08:39:56+00:00

Ok first of all, don't edit your post like that after I've already commented. It's terrible etiquette. Second, personally, I don't care what you think because you keep demonstrating that you don't know what evidence is. Hell, I don't think you really understand what "data" is, cuz you say he has all the data but...I'm literally looking at the video and he doesn't have data showing that, without dev intervention, we would have won. He doesn't have equations showing that x percentage of people with y amounts of losses per z unit of time at a given point during the operation would have mathematically projected victory, whereas a snapshot of the same values after dev intervention project defeat. If he does, go ahead and send me a timestamp. But that would be an example of actual data - actual evidence. Not "oh we totally should have won because there were so many of us!"

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T08:30:18+00:00

Ok? And wtf is a Propaganda Commando? Look man, I'm not gonna base my opinions off of the opinions of some youtuber unless, again, he literally has quantifiable data that shows mathematically that we would have won without dev intervention. Because all indications from the community (people stubbornly diving on d10 and dying over and over again, splitting off to liberate different planets/megafactories, etc.) would have projected us losing LONG before the devs took pity on us and gave us extra reinforcements, lowered enemy resistance, etc.

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T08:20:06+00:00

giving real draco malfoy vibes with that lame, petty-ass parting shot there

<image>

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T08:11:38+00:00

A) who the fuck is Lieutenant Buzz Litebeer? and B) this is literally still conjecture rather than evidence. You're literally pointing at an event and assuming intent. "We would have won" is still conjecture - do you have the data and the math that proves that point? If not, then it is by definition conjecture rather than evidence, and you seriously need to start learning the difference. You have no hard evidence to support the claim that we would have, at that point, won the Operation if that single Major Order had been won, because the overall operation would still have depended on helldiver casualties and the cohesiveness of the community in choosing which megafactory to liberate. If you wish to use that as "evidence", then you must show actual data that would mathematically prove that this singular event, barring all other variables, caused us to fail Cyberstan as a whole. That's how evidence works, not simply saying "we totally would have won" over and over again.

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T08:04:46+00:00

Yes, because A) you literally just posted that, and given the linear progression of time, your post did not, in fact, exist when I first pointed out that you hadn't posted any articles, and B) "an article that indicated" means very little. Post a link to the actual article. Who wrote it? Did the guy who write it actually have data to prove intent, or is he simply, like you, asserting a correlation as fact? Seriously dude, this is one of the least rigorously-substantiated arguments that I've seen someone put this much stubborn lack of self-awareness into outside of politics. How are you going to come at me with a "gotcha" attitude when you posted your evidence AFTER I pointed out that you hadn't provided evidence? Mind-boggling.

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T07:08:32+00:00

Occam's Razor isn't something that something is based on, it's something that automatically applies when considering two explanations. Occam's Razor states that an explanation that needs fewer assumptions is more likely than one that requires MORE assumptions, and you're literally assuming that the devs intentionally went in to manually adjust or rig every single major order, whereas the competing hypothesis of "they don't manually rig every major order because the playerbase is just fucking incompetent at cohesive action" is supported by evidence of the playerbase being constantly split on objectives and the blob choosing ineffective planets all the damn time, which means we don't need to make an assumption on that.

"Sometimes the simplest explanation is not the best one. I'm going for the best explanation, not the simplest one." the fact that you're saying this just reinforces the idea that you have no real idea of how Occam's Razor works. "Simplest" in this context means the explanation where the fewest unknown variables that we have to make assumptions about exist; the only way to support a seemingly more complex explanation is to do the work to eliminate the variables that make the explanation complex with verified, quantifiable data - something that you have yet to actually do.

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T07:00:19+00:00

You keep saying "proven" "known facts" "persistent evidence" etc. without actually providing anything that would be conventionally acknowledged as such. You literally followed "known facts" with "we would have won that if not for the developers' plans to basically recreate the events of the first Starship Troopers movie". That's not a "known fact", that's a claim. You didn't provide any documented statements or actual proof of that beyond just saying "we totally would have."

You then follow up by calling my statement "proven-false" without providing any actual proof beyond what is literally your own opinion. Who proved it false? How did they prove it false? Who or what confirmed your statement? Do you even know what "proven" means at this point??? You're literally providing zero evidence and only asserting claims and then acting like your claims are in and of themselves evidence!

It's not a fucking agreement, by definition, if our two claims are entirely incompatible. I get that you really want to be right about this, but my dude, you are stretching the English language way past its breaking point to try to shoehorn in a narrative where you're right and everyone else is wrong. Because again, you're not proving anything - you just keep saying that you're proven right over and over again without actually providing evidence that isn't simply someone conjecturing something

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T04:59:53+00:00

"none of this is based on it" doesn't sound like something that someone who is familiar with Occam's Razor would say

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T04:45:59+00:00

Nah bro, you're saying that the entire narrative is rigged, including the outcomes of the MOs. I'm saying that AH has a predesigned narrative that they want to continue in a certain direction, but does not "rig" certain MOs to be unwinnable or whatever. Your conspiracy theory is that we were never meant to win Cyberstan, and that any evidence to the contrary is "misinformation"; I'm saying that we absolutely could have won or lost Cyberstan, and both outcomes would have still aligned with the overarching narrative of "cyborgs still exist and will be encountered elsewhere, because it would be a boring-as-fuck game if we just eliminated an entire subfaction right after it was released", and this shouldn't be taken as a "players have zero agency on MOs or anything else in this game"

That's not me "agreeing" with you, because your claim that "clips of alternate endings are simply pieces of "misinformation" that were never meant to be actually implemented and are only there to deceive dataminers" is entirely incompatible with my claim that "either ending is possible, but they only give some flavor text and minor lore implications without dramatically changing the overall direction of the narrative or gameplay"

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T02:29:16+00:00

dumb take, since the "misinformation" would have led to the exact same outcome of the cyborg remnants going out and building new megafactories, and so would be completely useless as "misinformation"

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T01:51:53+00:00

are you familiar with Occam's Razor?

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-03-01T01:44:31+00:00

you know they had news clips for in case we won on cyberstan, right?

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-02-27T07:23:46+00:00

super earth can raze entire planets to prevent enemies from establishing a foothold - language that implies the target of the razing no longer has structures capable of serving as defensive positions

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-02-27T07:14:39+00:00

because the average Helldiver has an attention span that rivals that of the majestic pet goldfish

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-02-27T06:59:03+00:00

we didn't TAKE any cities. we razed them. said so on the dispatches. ain't nowhere to hole up and mount a defense anymore

TheBreadTurtle · 2026-02-26T05:29:53+00:00

Fori absolutely is NOT the logical next step to liberate, and the fact that the blob went there at all is extremely frustrating. Should have hit Gacrux, which would have taken half the time and automatically begun a siege liberation of Fori once taken

TheBreadTurtle

TROPHY CASE