As Helldivers 2 players digest the game’s first balance patch, developer Arrowhead has discussed the thinking behind changes to weapons and stratagems, calling on players to give them a chance.
How about instead of nerfing the items that are absolutely needed for higher level play and instead fix the rest of the shit weapons?! Making everything equally garbage does not solve the problem.
If you were only in high levels of play because of the viability of the items nerfed, you never should have been at that level to begin with. Railgun was zero risk all the rewards and could kill elites at twice the distance a stratagem can be thrown with armor enhancing their throw distance. From the front, through their armor. This is obviously not intended or we’d be able to toss stragems 100m and things like the AMR and AC would also have pierced these armor parts. We can’t, they don’t, and if you can’t play at the same difficulty level you were at prenerf then you are exactly the people the nerf was targetted at. Helldiver is supposed to be the best of the best and being able to kill everything you see is clearly not the intention, players are supposed to pick their battles carefully and conserve ammo for when they need it. Railgun sidestepped both of those being twice as ammo efficient than the recoiless, not even needing a backpack or teamreload to work, and just encouraged lonewolf play that a coop game absolutely should not encourage letting a single player elminate elite enemies on the highest difficulty with two easy to aim shots.
Patch notes have 3 weapons/stratagems getting nerfed vs 5 weapons/stratagems getting buffed. I don’t own the game but it sounds like they’re already hitting it from both sides? If they do nothing but buffs there’s a huge risk of just powercreeping everything.
The people commenting here do own the game and have hundreds of hours into it, including myself.
The nerfs here described have a much higher impact (railgun shots literally bounce off enemies now) than the buffs to the weapons that were an absolute joke already and still are ineffective.
We did read all the patch notes, we did try all of the changes described, and then we came and expressed our opinion on it. Don’t assume what others have/have not done.
Well I think you meant to reply to the other commenter, but in any case what you said included:
instead fix the rest of the shit weapons?! Making everything equally garbage does not solve the problem.
And it sounds like they’re already trying to do this with the buffs (though again: I don’t own the game). It’s the first balance patch - I assume (and hope) that the situation will continue to improve with further updates similar to Helldivers 1 and its many patches.
Starcraft is a symmetrical PvP game. Helldivers 2 is an asymmetrical PvE game. It’s harder to adapt when your opponent isn’t effected by the same changes.
You’re still missing the point, the players don’t play in the environment of a specific faction, they play in the space of all factions and their interactions.
Many changes caused even pro players to change what faction they mained. I’ll concede some pro players managed to win matches in environments where it was considered a terrible match up for them. They’re also pro players.
I do think there’s a tendency to be over dramatic about the changes but the comparison with Starcraft is a bad one. Nerfs can remove all solutions to a given situation, and no adapting can solve that.
They nerfed the strongest options (most of which I completely agree with) and then buffed 4 things that were either completely unusable (breaker spray and pray) or borderline unusable (Laser cannon, 120mm barrage and 380mm barrage). All of those are now usable but effectively useless in higher difficulty. The only weapon that got buffed that is useful in higher difficulty is the flamethrower, and my take is that it’s going to be the new “meta” weapon that they will eventually nerf because I think that is now stronger than the pre-nerf railgun. As for the nerfs, they primarily targeted gear people used to complete higher difficulties.
On paper it seems like they hit it from both sides, but in practice they made higher difficulties harder. And if you play with randos most of them struggled without even getting close to the highest difficulty, so natually people are annoyed.
Everyone knew railgun was getting nerfed. How in the world do you justify a weapon more viable than equipment that needs two people to peak perform or calldowns with literal minutes between uses?
People are mad cause they thought they were good at the game playing on the highest difficulties and taking down elite enemies without a scratch, only to be informed no, they weren’t as good as they thought and were just exploiting a severely unbalanced item that sidestepped the intended difficulties of dealinf with those enemies.
Agreed. Breaker was the only weapon that felt…“normal” as far as normal goes in other similar games. The rest feel like ineffective peashooters. To hear that its been nerfed is a bit disappointing, ngl.
Breaker nerd is non-existent, it just has more recoil and slightly less ammo that you’re barely going to notice if you use it as intended. You just can’t spray a group of enemies at 40m and expect headshots on all of them anymore, but closer than about 20m it’s stupidly lethal still.
Not “too hard” as much as “needlessly frustrating and less fun”.
Like I’m going to win either way, but winning a game with guns that don’t feel good to use is less fun than also winning but with guns that do feel good to use.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
How about instead of nerfing the items that are absolutely needed for higher level play and instead fix the rest of the shit weapons?! Making everything equally garbage does not solve the problem.
Congrats on being part of the problem.
If you were only in high levels of play because of the viability of the items nerfed, you never should have been at that level to begin with. Railgun was zero risk all the rewards and could kill elites at twice the distance a stratagem can be thrown with armor enhancing their throw distance. From the front, through their armor. This is obviously not intended or we’d be able to toss stragems 100m and things like the AMR and AC would also have pierced these armor parts. We can’t, they don’t, and if you can’t play at the same difficulty level you were at prenerf then you are exactly the people the nerf was targetted at. Helldiver is supposed to be the best of the best and being able to kill everything you see is clearly not the intention, players are supposed to pick their battles carefully and conserve ammo for when they need it. Railgun sidestepped both of those being twice as ammo efficient than the recoiless, not even needing a backpack or teamreload to work, and just encouraged lonewolf play that a coop game absolutely should not encourage letting a single player elminate elite enemies on the highest difficulty with two easy to aim shots.
Patch notes have 3 weapons/stratagems getting nerfed vs 5 weapons/stratagems getting buffed. I don’t own the game but it sounds like they’re already hitting it from both sides? If they do nothing but buffs there’s a huge risk of just powercreeping everything.
The people commenting here do own the game and have hundreds of hours into it, including myself.
The nerfs here described have a much higher impact (railgun shots literally bounce off enemies now) than the buffs to the weapons that were an absolute joke already and still are ineffective.
We did read all the patch notes, we did try all of the changes described, and then we came and expressed our opinion on it. Don’t assume what others have/have not done.
Well I think you meant to reply to the other commenter, but in any case what you said included:
And it sounds like they’re already trying to do this with the buffs (though again: I don’t own the game). It’s the first balance patch - I assume (and hope) that the situation will continue to improve with further updates similar to Helldivers 1 and its many patches.
deleted by creator
Starcraft is a symmetrical PvP game. Helldivers 2 is an asymmetrical PvE game. It’s harder to adapt when your opponent isn’t effected by the same changes.
deleted by creator
You’re still missing the point, the players don’t play in the environment of a specific faction, they play in the space of all factions and their interactions.
Many changes caused even pro players to change what faction they mained. I’ll concede some pro players managed to win matches in environments where it was considered a terrible match up for them. They’re also pro players.
I do think there’s a tendency to be over dramatic about the changes but the comparison with Starcraft is a bad one. Nerfs can remove all solutions to a given situation, and no adapting can solve that.
deleted by creator
They nerfed the strongest options (most of which I completely agree with) and then buffed 4 things that were either completely unusable (breaker spray and pray) or borderline unusable (Laser cannon, 120mm barrage and 380mm barrage). All of those are now usable but effectively useless in higher difficulty. The only weapon that got buffed that is useful in higher difficulty is the flamethrower, and my take is that it’s going to be the new “meta” weapon that they will eventually nerf because I think that is now stronger than the pre-nerf railgun. As for the nerfs, they primarily targeted gear people used to complete higher difficulties.
On paper it seems like they hit it from both sides, but in practice they made higher difficulties harder. And if you play with randos most of them struggled without even getting close to the highest difficulty, so natually people are annoyed.
I don’t think everybody reads all the patch notes, they just read “nerf” and begin the kneejerk
Everyone knew railgun was getting nerfed. How in the world do you justify a weapon more viable than equipment that needs two people to peak perform or calldowns with literal minutes between uses?
People are mad cause they thought they were good at the game playing on the highest difficulties and taking down elite enemies without a scratch, only to be informed no, they weren’t as good as they thought and were just exploiting a severely unbalanced item that sidestepped the intended difficulties of dealinf with those enemies.
Agreed. Breaker was the only weapon that felt…“normal” as far as normal goes in other similar games. The rest feel like ineffective peashooters. To hear that its been nerfed is a bit disappointing, ngl.
Breaker nerd is non-existent, it just has more recoil and slightly less ammo that you’re barely going to notice if you use it as intended. You just can’t spray a group of enemies at 40m and expect headshots on all of them anymore, but closer than about 20m it’s stupidly lethal still.
The recoil is fine, at least with a mouse. I am feeling the reduced ammo a lot though and it’s made the gun decidedly less fun to use.
What I read is “boohoo the game is too hard for me”
Not “too hard” as much as “needlessly frustrating and less fun”.
Like I’m going to win either way, but winning a game with guns that don’t feel good to use is less fun than also winning but with guns that do feel good to use.
And you define “satisfying” as “that one shot anything and trivialise everything”?
Uh no, I’d define satisfying as “Having a little bit more oomph than an airsoft gun against an NFL linebacker”
I think the game is supposed to feel difficult