We’re probably going to lose Super Earth

[SaltyCracker]

And I’m going to be shoving HellDiver D!cks up Illuminate ass until I run out of corpses to mutilate.

For Super Earth!

[Xarko]

Doubt it. Just like every hero fighting the main villain, we are losing now, getting punched left and right, just to magically get a second wind and heroically win in the end.

[retroquark]

In Helldivers 1, Super Earth fell about once a month. It was possible to actually beat the factions back - but it was not intended to be easily accomplished. I don't know who was part of the decision to change how that worked in HD2. But they gave away very early on that neither the bots or the bugs would actually attack or invade Super Earth. The progression on the map was also changed to a point where even very large groups (1000+) of players cooperating could simply not "liberate" planets, even if they were lightly defended. It was the same with the black hole on Meridia - the progress on that map was adjusted multiple times on the fly, where a second outcome or anything else was not going to happen. The mop-up missions for the fog were also set up in a way that would not be possible to win. So that the Illuminates would likely also just run on a rail given by a non-relevant metric is not really a very tall claim. Because it's been like this with all of the smaller missions as well - even the ones that we actually pulled off. They were just insane slogs, even though winning it was not really supposed to be a big deal, or have any major impact. It's just that the dynamics of the logistics and the map progress is not used - and haven't been for the entire time the game has been deployed.

The worst part, I think, is that it's clearly not intended to be that way. And it's not as complicated as to require people to see the reinforcement lines, or anything like that. So exactly why the overworld game is set up so that nothing anyone does has any impact, even just very small impact, is kind of difficult to understand.

But if you know that the dynamic changes to the universe maps have been replaced with static tweaks. Where the "Joel" changes that were intended to be small changes made to give the illusion that the enemies were smarter than they were - have started to be the majority of the changes made to the maps. And that any changes happening over time basically stem from individual hard-tweaks of static variables added to maps, down to the spawn-groups and the specific size and make-up of the reinforcements -- then the lack of updates and use of the dynamic map system makes sense, doesn't it.

edit: for example - imagine that the last city that will no doubt stand forever, because no one wants to upset people or something, was not actually determined in advance, but determined on where the reinforcements actually would come from.

Like the entire overworld map suggests is the case. Right? That would have affected how people deploy, and you could make people believe they were involved in some way rather than just reducing you to a 0,00000001% change to a number that is going to deplete anyway.

But not at Sony! Oh, no. They have the entire setup in the game. It was a success with the first game. It has been explained to work in this way by the developers. It has been advertised as that even in Sony's own channels.

And in the end it's been replaced with something else. It's just tragic.

[Ninja_Boy5554]

Originally posted by retroquark:

In Helldivers 1, Super Earth fell about once a month. It was possible to actually beat the factions back - but it was not intended to be easily accomplished. I don't know who was part of the decision to change how that worked in HD2. But they gave away very early on that neither the bots or the bugs would actually attack or invade Super Earth. The progression on the map was also changed to a point where even very large groups (1000+) of players cooperating could simply not "liberate" planets, even if they were lightly defended. It was the same with the black hole on Meridia - the progress on that map was adjusted multiple times on the fly, where a second outcome or anything else was not going to happen. The mop-up missions for the fog were also set up in a way that would not be possible to win. So that the Illuminates would likely also just run on a rail given by a non-relevant metric is not really a very tall claim. Because it's been like this with all of the smaller missions as well - even the ones that we actually pulled off. They were just insane slogs, even though winning it was not really supposed to be a big deal, or have any major impact. It's just that the dynamics of the logistics and the map progress is not used - and haven't been for the entire time the game has been deployed.

The worst part, I think, is that it's clearly not intended to be that way. And it's not as complicated as to require people to see the reinforcement lines, or anything like that. So exactly why the overworld game is set up so that nothing anyone does has any impact, even just very small impact, is kind of difficult to understand.

But if you know that the dynamic changes to the universe maps have been replaced with static tweaks. Where the "Joel" changes that were intended to be small changes made to give the illusion that the enemies were smarter than they were - have started to be the majority of the changes made to the maps. And that any changes happening over time basically stem from individual hard-tweaks of static variables added to maps, down to the spawn-groups and the specific size and make-up of the reinforcements -- then the lack of updates and use of the dynamic map system makes sense, doesn't it.

edit: for example - imagine that the last city that will no doubt stand forever, because no one wants to upset people or something, was not actually determined in advance, but determined on where the reinforcements actually would come from.

Like the entire overworld map suggests is the case. Right? That would have affected how people deploy, and you could make people believe they were involved in some way rather than just reducing you to a 0,00000001% change to a number that is going to deplete anyway.

But not at Sony! Oh, no. They have the entire setup in the game. It was a success with the first game. It has been explained to work in this way by the developers. It has been advertised as that even in Sony's own channels.

And in the end it's been replaced with something else. It's just tragic.

Its not tragic that they changed the game from helldivers 1 to helldivers 2. If anything they made it more realistic because loosing a key point in a war has devastating effects. Most humans live on super earth especially the ones in charge of resources, advancements in technology, military strategy, and the literal government. The reasons why there is a person in charge of governing the enemy factions is because it's alot easier to have human beings thinking of a strategy(because we literally evolved to do so) than an ai which would need to be hyper specific and take a lot of time/ recorces to get a result even close to as effective as a human being.

[Tetriandoch]

No we're not. The bug MO will deal the finishing blow and that's projected to be won in around 6 hours. Even super sweden still has 12 hours or so before it falls, EoS has like 5 days.
It's over, we have already won.

[Inardesco]

Who cares?

[Katitoff]

Originally posted by Xarko:

Doubt it. Just like every hero fighting the main villain, we are losing now, getting punched left and right, just to magically get a second wind and heroically win in the end.

Plus with just 2 cities standing and DSS, it is trivial to hold ground, yesterday Sea city was about to fall, today its firmly held.

[HELLO Thwaco]

not a word will come form your mouth again.
Super Earth stands and it will stand WITHOUT people like you, people who say "Super Earth will fall".
I will report u to the Ministry of Unity and have u EXECUTED, no illuminate supporter will live to see the sun rise.

DON'T believe the traitors, get your new from the one trusted source, its called the Ministry of TRUTH for a reason!!!