haz 5+ opinions

[Spoo2234]

haven't played in 6 months, what's the opinion on haz 5+?

[babuk.fracal]

Anyone correct me if I am wrong but so far the general consensus is something like this :

Haz 5+ is not made to be balanced as it is a custom difficulty letting you choose how hard it is and not an arbitrary haz 6

More enemies and aggressive enemies are the most liked of the modificators

Tough enemies is usually disliked not because its really hard but more because it kills build variety and just make the game boring

Player vulnerability is overtuned and don't really leave room for any mistakes as low damage become medium damage, medium damage become high damage and high damage become lethal damage.
Also it increase stuff like friendly fire

Haz 5a (when all modificators are activated to the max) can be interesting but doesn't really increase the difficulty where it should for some mission types.

Also its kind of hell with pubs since people who didn't complete the assignement to unlock haz 5a can still join haz 5a
So don't be surprised if any new player join despite being the highest vanilla difficulty.


Even if this might not be everybody opinion
It's my opinion as somebody who completed all the mission types on haz 5a

[The hacker fox]

Hazard 5 is very chaotic and for me unplayable as the pc i play on can barely run hazard 5

[Dr. Sinclair]

Originally posted by The hacker fox:

Hazard 5 is very chaotic and for me unplayable as the pc i play on can barely run hazard 5

they are asking about hazard 5+ not hazard 5, tho.

[Chibbity]

Hazard 5+ is basically a custom mode for pre-made groups wanting to push the limits, not really something you play with randoms, and the dev's don't and won't do much to balance it; since the entire idea is that it's "harder than the game should be."

[kestrel]

something that everybody has a lot of opinions about without actually playing it

tldr turn on more enemies & aggressive enemies, ignore tough enemies & player vulnerability

[Blargo]

More enemies:
Aggressive enemies:
Tough enemies:
Player vulnerability: eh.

[^9[DSS]Dahaka]

Aside from the more bugs modifier, the rest is simply unbearable and annoying to me. It really depends on how great you are at the game I guess, and how much you wanna challenge yourself. If haz 5 bores you, then just keep making it harder. Try it for yourself, nobody can really tell you how it feels,

[Iluszachane]

With everyone knocking Tough Enemies (which is to be expected), I feel compelled to point out that it's a perfect, much-welcomed modifier for 2 specific circumstances:

• you think there is generally too much Nitra in missions, and you crave that feeling of barely scraping by to the finish line, and/or
  
• you think Dreadnoughts are generally too squishy; you prefer a longer fight against a tougher opponent (in this case, you can combine Toughness 2 with Aggression 2 for the ultimate Dreadnought battle). Again, you're just the type of player who enjoys being pushed to the limit and barely finishing your missions with the last few bullets in your arsenal.

The initial discourse around the Toughness modifier was, as someone mentioned, that it breaks a lot of builds and makes the game boring. If that's how you feel though, you should feel the same way about More Enemies, because mathematically it's the same thing: more total HP shared among all the enemies, resulting in the same pressure forces on any build's ammo economy.

You just have... twice as many enemies with half the health, instead of half as many enemies with twice the health. Call that "Survivor-like vs Souls-like", or "Zerg vs Protoss" if you want. There's no reason to hate on Toughness w/o hating on More Enemies, if your reason is ammo economy.

[Dr. Sinclair]

Originally posted by Iluszachane:

Snip

To be fair, more enemies has an argument to be made when it comes to explosives.
A grenade that strips 50% health off 5 enemies is worse than a grenade that outright kills 10 enemies.
You can apply this to any AoE capable tool or weapon in the game.
Thus, no, it's not really the same thing.

[Blargo]

Originally posted by Iluszachane:

With everyone knocking Tough Enemies (which is to be expected), I feel compelled to point out that it's a perfect, much-welcomed modifier for 2 specific circumstances:

• you think there is generally too much Nitra in missions, and you crave that feeling of barely scraping by to the finish line, and/or
  
• you think Dreadnoughts are generally too squishy; you prefer a longer fight against a tougher opponent (in this case, you can combine Toughness 2 with Aggression 2 for the ultimate Dreadnought battle). Again, you're just the type of player who enjoys being pushed to the limit and barely finishing your missions with the last few bullets in your arsenal.

The initial discourse around the Toughness modifier was, as someone mentioned, that it breaks a lot of builds and makes the game boring. If that's how you feel though, you should feel the same way about More Enemies, because mathematically it's the same thing: more total HP shared among all the enemies, resulting in the same pressure forces on any build's ammo economy.

You just have... twice as many enemies with half the health, instead of half as many enemies with twice the health. Call that "Survivor-like vs Souls-like", or "Zerg vs Protoss" if you want. There's no reason to hate on Toughness w/o hating on More Enemies, if your reason is ammo economy.

Personally, I just don't like Tough Enemies for game-feel reasons, and that goes for any game. When fighting enemies, there's a fine line between "this enemy feels tough" & "my weapons feel weak/ineffective".

Big/boss enemies make sense - they're supposed to be tough & able to withstand a lot of punishment. But when general cannon fodder enemies feel like they can withstand more-than-expected-amounts punishment, then it just starts feeling like my tools are not suitable for the job. Like I'm trying to hammer a nail with a screwdriver.

Terraria's "Master Mode" is probably the best example I can think of. You can progress to the point of early-hardmode, and yet Slimes - the literal first enemies you encounter - can still tank a hit from early-hardmode swords, where they could normally be one-shot by weapons obtained way earlier. Slimes aren't even a real threat at this point in the game - they barely do any damage to you. But the fact that you're supposed to be wielding these mystical, powerful weapons and still can't kill a Slime in one-hit just feels wrong.

[Iluszachane]

Originally posted by Blargo:

Terraria's "Master Mode" is probably the best example I can think of. You can progress to the point of early-hardmode, and yet Slimes - the literal first enemies you encounter - can still tank a hit from early-hardmode swords, where they could normally be one-shot by weapons obtained way earlier. Slimes aren't even a real threat at this point in the game - they barely do any damage to you. But the fact that you're supposed to be wielding these mystical, powerful weapons and still can't kill a Slime in one-hit just feels wrong.

I agree Master Mode is a good example of tankiness taken too far, and I agree that it's straight-up not fun (assuming that's what you're saying here, more or less). DRG feels different though, because DRG has plenty of individual/team build options that can absolutely NUKE dreadnoughts, therefore lending some value to the idea of beefing up their HP pools. Terraria doesn't really have that; everything is a strict numbers game, with very little nuance beyond pure DPS (against bosses, specifically). I love Terraria, don't get me wrong, but at a certain point it's like Cookie Clicker lol.

Originally posted by Dr. Sinclair:

Thus, no, it's not really the same thing.

I also agree with this if we're going to really zoom into the details. Of course, having ONE 100HP enemy that deals 10 damage attacking you, is different from having TWO 50HP enemies that deal 10 damage attacking you, because you are taking double DPS for a time, even if the total time required to kill said enemies is the same across both scenarios. They are, however, the same scenario as far as "ammo economy" is concerned, at the very least.

[Hellhounfd3223]

The biggest problem with DRG is that the game's mechanics are balanced around hazard 5. The main offender as to why is how the nitra and supply drop system works. What you experience in hazard 5+ is what everyone who runs difficulty mods experiences. It is very challenging to balance even with countless supplemental mods to adjust gameplay.

That said, it can and is done properly it just takes testing. Hazard 5+ is basically what you get on your first few attempts of upping the sliders in swarm control without any thought or testing. It's noobish. The developers are nooby modders.

My favourite modded game by far is hazard 6 with 1.08 speed and max bite speed. This makes it so grunts can chase you down unless you r sprinting 'straight' away from them. And when they do they BITE BITE BITE with 10x less delay so even a single grunt is now a threat. You'll notice none of these are modifiers in haz5+. You can actually lower the enemy count when you do this....making the game skill based and not a 'spam to win infinite ammo' thing u endup with most mods. Pair it with a changed enemy pool that spawns more bosses and minibosses...and u got a real challenge.

Changing base hazard 5 so there's like 2x enemies isn't fun....it's just boring and stale feeling.
Upping the damage isn't fun either....you get shot and bitten in this game, that's just a reality...dying in 1 hit doesn't work. Dying in 10 hits like the base game....ya it works, giving the player an opportunity after the first strike to move/do-something....also works even with a small window to do so.

Originally posted by Blargo:

More enemies:
Aggressive enemies:
Tough enemies:
Player vulnerability: eh.

Most people get it for once. I run the most ammo efficient build imaginable on gunner, and tough enemies is just asking for ammo problems.

[kestrel]

i remember when elites were added in U34 and the community exploded in rage, calling them bullet sponges that weren't fun to fight and reduced interactivity. such complaints weren't without merit, to be fair, but now we have H5+ tough enemies and the community consensus is "it's not meant to be balanced!! you wanted a le harder game didn't u tryhards??? XDDD"

could it be that the vast majority of people defending H5+'s balance discrepancies, who are suddenly OK with praetorians having +%75 more HP, are people who don't actually play H5+? hmm, most curious

[Chibbity]

Originally posted by kestrel:

i remember when elites were added in U34 and the community exploded in rage, calling them bullet sponges that weren't fun to fight and reduced interactivity. such complaints weren't without merit, to be fair, but now we have H5+ tough enemies and the community consensus is "it's not meant to be balanced!! you wanted a le harder game didn't u tryhards??? XDDD"

I'm not sure that's a totally fair comparison, since Elites at the time showed up in every mission, for all players; Haz5+ is something you have to willingly opt into.

[Spoo2234]

Originally posted by Chibbity:

Hazard 5+ is basically a custom mode for pre-made groups wanting to push the limits, not really something you play with randoms, and the dev's don't and won't do much to balance it; since the entire idea is that it's "harder than the game should be."

i get that tbh but it sucks that you'll be missing out on xp most of the time