Helldivers 2 Modifiers Encourage Meta

Helldivers 2 Modifiers Encourage Meta
Ekko Vision Code: ohdoughplays10 ekkovision.com/?ref=ohdough
Creator Code: ohdough (for epic games store)
(ad)
Paypal: paypal.me/OhDough
►Twitch: / ohdough
►Discord - / discord
►Tiktok - / ohdoughplays

[@ShadowofProvidence]

Difficulty modifers like "chargers spawn in pairs", "200% hunter pack size", "Factory striders have tank escorts", "roaming patrols of gunships" etc would be way more fun than -1 stratgem and scatter. Great suggestion

[@K-tw4wb]

You lost me with the hunter packs😭

[@fourtii8707]

Hilarious but very true

[@monsieurduquack5440]

Hunter pack size 😮

[@jarebare510]

Or even “orbital stratagem priority” faster orbital rearms, but slower eagle ones. Just to get people to try something else

[@ThatsOk83]

there’s already enough hunters tbh

[@mawnkey]

Arrowhead: You need to use more strategems at the higher difficulties! Also Arrowhead: We gut strategems in _every_ higher difficulty mission.

[@brianle2147]

Players: using optimal gear and support weapons to compensate Arrowhead: nerfs said gear and support weapons

[@YipeekayHarasho]

AH: STOP USING META! also AH: (reduce every viable options that the players possibly have, thus forcing them to use the most optimized loadout) everything they say always contradicted with everything they do. Which always baffles me

[@constablemittens]

@@YipeekayHarasho Blizzard used to use the same shitty balancing strategy of waiting to see what toys people played with so they could take those toys away and honestly I feel like Arrowhead might be using the same method

[@TheBreck1974]

@@constablemittens Division did the same thing

[@SPACE_BOOOOOST]

Added benefits for putting up with modifiers is absolutely necessary, and that includes the planet specific ones. Hellmire and the other similar systems are being avoided like the plague regardless of difficulty level because you can just go to a cold planet instead, not get BBQ'd and run for a minute straight. Give us some incentive, damn it.

[@George_M_]

Yeah if any planet deserves the Alderaan treatment it's Hellmire. And every fire tornado planet.

[@BackwardsPancake]

On the topic of running, this also links into another related problem: The booster design philosophy kind of sucks. Instead of offering interesting options to strategize, the best ones just remove some extremely annoying artificial drawbacks instead, and are basically an "idiot check", while the rest barely do anything at all. So we have: Stamina booster - No-brainer pick. Always useful, but especially mandatory on hot planets and bug planets Muscle booster - Must have on any planet with snow or excessive mud/water, still nice to have otherwise Vitality booster - Free extra survivability. Nice to have Hellpod space - Removes an annoyance from respawning. Nice to have and UAV booster - Kind of irrelevant most of the time. Could potentially be useful if you're doing some very specific stealth shenanigans. Extra reinforcements - Bonus is very small, and frankly, if you reach the point where you need this, you are doing something fundamentally wrong and would probably benefit more from one of the main 4 boosters to increase your survivability. Reinforcement cooldown - Same as above Shorter extract timer - Total joke. The reduction is laughably small, and it only helps you with an optional objective at the very end of the mission. Not to mention, it can actually work against you if you're trying to make the mission-timeout extract from far away. Localization confusion - Either does literally nothing, or does so little that it might as well be doing nothing. (And even if it worked, it makes very little sense to have this in the game. If someone wants to make their missions easier, they could just turn down the difficulty)

[@SPACE_BOOOOOST]

@@BackwardsPancake Localization Confusion does actually help, especially now with the solo spawn increases. It basically extends the time between possible bug breaches/bot drops. There's a whole breakdown of this somewhere on Reddit but the one number I can recall is that apparently on Helldive it adds roughly 50 extra seconds, so you won't have as many instances where one breach just goes into another one because you can't deal with the first one fast enough. The rest is spot on, though. At the very least, they should buff their effectiveness. The faster extraction timer's bonus should be doubled for sure, same with the reinforcement recharge one. These do nothing for like 30-35 minutes (and sometimes at all), so when they activate it has to be impactful.

[@BackwardsPancake]

@@SPACE_BOOOOOST Frankly, I wouldn't bother with the extract timer reduction even if it was doubled. I would consider it very situational even if it literally made the extraction instant, since as noted, it does nothing for 99% of the round and does not help in any way with actually winning the mission. It's an odd design decision from the ground up (like all of them, really). It's good to hear that they fixed the Localization booster, but as noted, I do not understand why it needs to exist. What's the point in a booster that downgrades the difficulty of enemy encounters - When the game has freely selectable difficulty levels in the first place?

[@SPACE_BOOOOOST]

@@BackwardsPancake I'd consider the extraction booster on very high level missions with a full squad if it was percentage based, and even then only to counter one specific modifier: the one that makes call-in times 50% longer, which results in a 3-minute extract timer. A reduction of, let's say, 40-50% could be worth it, Helldive extractions can get out of hand real fast. As for the Localization Confusion, it makes things easier while maintaining the rewards from the tier you're on, so it's not the same as lowering the difficulty. I usually play on Suicide Mission, going down to Extreme would mean I couldn't get any super samples. It's a solid pick for me, just not as much of a no-brainer as Stamina or Vitality.

[@HenryDorsettCase]

I liked the idea of there being objectives on the map that create these modifiers, where completing those objectives removes the modifier, making you "more powerful" as the mission progresses.

[@anstorner]

Pretty much what automaton specific side objectives do, but for bugs and remove modifiers. Now thats great

[@poobs2361]

they already kind of have that with the AA guns which completely disables eagles. Would be really cool for them to just expand on that.

[@goonafresh184]

ngl idk how tf this isnt in the game already

[@shemsuhor8763]

@@goonafresh184 the entire system of "i kill enemy bases and complete objectives but then they send MORE random patrols from the ether" makes no sense. It's completely ass backwards.

[@Jnd_0247]

@@shemsuhor8763 not really, think about it. A base or outpost gets hit. 9/10 times it’s gonna stir the hornets nest. More enemy’s patrolling trying to find the cause of the attack? I mean it makes since in that sense

[@JoMama42069]

agreed that the modifiers need to be reworked. The balancing and game flow they are trying to enforce clashes in so many ways that it makes so many things hypocritical. 100% agree with your stance on how this is all mixed signal by AH where they say they dont want 'meta' yet you are forced to do so...

[@BackwardsPancake]

It kinda happens with other parts of the design too. Like how the top third of difficulty tends to spam you with special enemies which simply can't be dealt with using normal weapons (reasonably, or _at all_), so every loadout has to be anchored around countering them efficiently within the 4 stratagems you have. It's why the machineguns, the grenade launcher, the airburst and the railgun are semi-permanently pigeonholed as bad, and why overspecialized call-ins like the orbital railcannon and eagle rockets pods lose out to more universal and flexible stuff on shorter cooldowns, like the precision strike and the 500kg. Or the whole thing they have accomplished with the constant changes to patrols and enemy numbers. When it comes to most classic (non-defense oriented) mission types, the game is currently in a state where you will be forced into combat again within ~a minute even if you clear the enemies, no matter how efficient you are, so the optimal play is to just keep running instead. Take care of anything that could actually catch or stop you, and then just use terrain to evade and kite around everything else. So the average mission feels like a constant fighting withdrawal where you accidentally accomplish your objectives along the way. You could say that this is the intended experience - You are a spec ops team behind enemy lines after all - But in gameplay terms it over-emphasizes certain stratagems (e.g. The shield, which protects you from slows and knockdowns) and makes heavier armor kind of terrible by default, even with the latest changes.

[@jollygrapefruit786]

A modifier should be like shrieker nests, stalker nests, mortar emplacement, etc. We should KNOW if these will be present in a mission, amd thus be able to decide our build based on what we'd be facing.

[@BackwardsPancake]

@@jollygrapefruit786 Indeed. This links into what I was saying too: If you never know what enemy composition or set of side objectives you'll be facing, your main incentive is to resort to boring metagaming where you bring only the most powerful/flexible loadouts that can handle the worst case scenario, every time.

[@crackededge9351]

⁠@@BackwardsPancakeHeavy armor is really good against bots but there is no reason to bring it to a bug mission. Same goes for the railgun. It is the best Anti-Hulk and Devastator in the game, but is terrible against the majority of bugs.

[@BackwardsPancake]

@@crackededge9351 Heavy armor is better vs bots, but I would disagree in regards to the railgun. I'd say it's in the same approximate place against both factions: It can deal with certain annoying enemies pretty well (Spewers, Brood Commanders, Chargers (sort of) / Hulks, Devastators), but is extremely inefficient against other major threats (Bile Titans / Tanks, Cannon Turrets, Gunships). ...and this makes it sort of bad overall, since you do not get advance warning about which enemies you'll be facing, so you'd be better off bringing something more universal.

[@pcap8810]

Ideally modifiers would be lateral moves, like saying no massive enemies in patrols/breaches/drops but double medium and small. That makes suboptimal weapons situationally excellent and it actually adds variety

[@hunter-tm2kl]

yeah that would make the game so much more fun

[@jooot_6850]

I would love that change. Hunter spam would never not be annoying, but at least it would be much more manageable without 2 chargers trying to touch your no-no zone and a Bile Titan 27 shots deep puking on everything

[@jooot_6850]

And on the other hand a 5 Charger bug breach would be a lot easier without nearly as many Hunters licking you

[@kibble9101]

Yap sesh: 10/10, we absolutely need more variety and interactivity regarding mission type and especially modifiers. Imo, the best course of action for modifiers is to give the player some kind of benefit alongside the negative. For example, instead of just removing 1 stratagem slot, AA defenses could remove the option for eagle stratagems, however as a bonus, orbital (or perhaps all other) stratagems cooldown twice as fast.

[@MrSamthefan]

I've been saying this for a while. -1 Stratagems also means that you can't take stratagems that work well together, but don't work as well outside of specific combos. Say something like: HMG Emplacement + Shield Relay. When you're already having to bring a support weapon and also running on -1 stratagems you cannot bring the combination I mentioned beforehand because it would mean not being able to bring any airstrikes or utility stratagems besides that.

[@marcusorta714]

Exactly right. I was so upset when I first came across the -1 modifier for that very same reason

[@IRMentat]

fully agree. at minimum you NEED 1 support weapon and 1 eagle-strike/500/rocket or the precision orbital system in 99% of maps. after that you double-down on what your primary/grenade doesn't cover and have one flex-slot for utility. Those first 2 aren't even META, it's functionally impossible to win without a support weapon or a way to take out a spawner(hole/factory) or a disadvantageous-turret from range/bad-angles. this would be less of an issue if the spear worked (vs bots at least)

[@TheDalto24]

That's what team mates and team work is for you're supposed to be a squad

[@undertaker2766]

That's wrong, you need to be able to deal with most ennemies on your own. If you can't deal with chaff mediums and heavys in your build, you're dead weight for your team. Sure there is gonna be some things your build is better at than other things, but if everyone you come across say a charger you need a teammate to come kill it, or when you get swarmed you need someone with a stalwart to deal with it, the efficiency of your team sinks. ​@@TheDalto24

[@MrSamthefan]

@@TheDalto24 So now, rather than having two people bringing stratagems that work in all situations, you have to dedicate one slot of two party members to a niche combo that only works against certain enemies. That's making it even worse. Neither of these players will be able to bring backpacks either cus they both need a support weapon and an airstrike.

[@philipackermann9844]

Constant insanely dense fog is also insufferable without any real way to deal with it. Especially when AI seems unaffected by it

[@after_midnight9592]

Yep, bots shoot and follow you through fog no problem.

[@jooot_6850]

@@after_midnight9592its fine for the bugs to do that because they can smell and hear really well (also because it's probably their own spores causing it) but the bots rely almost entirely on sight. Definitely needs to be changed

[@futakisser]

Ohdough continues to be the basepilled pillar of the community

[@benjaminyang8476]

Too many people completely ignore the fact that the immersion is part of the gameplay. So when most of the weather only affects the players or modifiers only affect the players when status affects only affect the players, you have people just saying get good like theres ranked matches. Its supposed to be an immersive game not a sweat lords passion game.

[@_Hal9000]

Indeed... getting sniped in the deep fog by a rocket... is shit

[@benjaminyang8476]

@_Hal9000 exactly the fog should affect them just as Much as it does us.

[@D.Ku_03]

@@benjaminyang8476 it actually does affect enemies! When enemy line of sight is broken, they shoot blindly at the last position they saw you, and that also works for smoke (but you can still get unlucky and blown up), and I'm also pretty sure that enemies don't notice you that well with a blizzard going on

[@benjaminyang8476]

@D.Ku_03 I won't deny that but the natural fog doesn't seem to do that at all in the games that I play in. I like playing against bots and on planets that do have fog it's hard for me to see yet I can see the eye scanners of the bots or hear them as usual from the same distance as if there was no fog at all. Not to mention destroyed tanks and factory striders smoke should also cause a smoke screen. On defense missions you can't see anything behind the destroyed factory striders because of the smoke off their corpses yet bots have full vision of you. Maybe your right and it does work but if that's the case then it's so inconsistent that it's never happened to me and yes i know wearing heavy armor should factor into being detected but even with the natural fog I'm still being detected at like 20 to 25 meters which is like the normal max distance of being detected. Also I don't wear heavy armor to get into fights I where heavy armor to survive fights we have to fight.

[@D.Ku_03]

@@benjaminyang8476 (it's late where I live, so I won't reply to the whole comment) What cuts you vision also cuts theirs, but they'll keep shooting through the smoke until they see you again, or some time passes, an then they'll check out the smoke. Maybe you find it inconsistent, because... it is. Sometimes you can get unlucky and eat a rocket through the smoke, and sometimes you can run away in a straight line without smoke and not get hit a single time.

[@Rakushio]

Negative modifiers should provide 5% or 10% flat increase in Exp so there is incentive and reward to fight through the disadvantage. Alternatively, have objectives on-map that allow you to clear or reduce the effects of said negative modifier. For example, maybe completing the Radar Tower (or some new objective) allows you to recalibrate the super-destroyer targetting to counteract the Orbital Scattering Mod so that your Orbitals become accurate again. Also, hard agree that enemy type modifiers should be visible. Just put a mod notification that there is a Surge or Outbreak for that enemy unit, and again offer some kind of reward like increased Exp or higher sample spawns. More instances of missions trategems is very welcome as well. That time we all got given Eagle rocket pods was so nice. On that note, i reckon the stock Orbital Precision should be a permanent mission strategem given its basically the "base level" first time/default one provided.

[@qrangejuice8225]

The big problem with the "modifiers" is that they aren't modifiers at all, they're just damaging or disabling our tools.

[@alexthehopeless3778]

modify means change, alter, and this is just worsening, yeah

[@telapoopy]

I have wanted for a long time a way to get some idea of what enemy is predominant in a mission, as not knowing means you can't tailor your loadout to account for it. I just stick with my build that can handle all possible enemies for that faction to a certain extent. As far as modifiers themselves, they definitely need to switch to ones that encourage a change in playstyle. They would take more effort to implement to do them right, for sure, though. One example could be that for the automatons, there is an orbital cannon in the area that severely restricts the initial time that the Super Destroyer can stay in low orbit, to maybe, like 5 minutes. But, its presence is very obvious from seeing its projectiles, giving you a clear first task - to take it out as soon as possible. And maybe the tradeoff effect of the modifier is that taking it out leads to a friendly orbital battleship entering low orbit, whose objectives in bombarding the area had been put on hold due to the orbital cannon. With its mission resuming, it will lend you its assistance in the form of a bonus orbital barrage stratagem that all players can call in independently for some barrage-stacking carnage. Another idea for a modifier for automatons is something like "Rushed production", where enemy spawn rates are increased dramatically, but their armour ratings are reduced by 1 across the board, potentially opening up new optimal builds that don't focus as much on armour penetration and more on crowd control.

[@jjprs3062]

GIVE THIS MAN A MEDAL

[@jooot_6850]

That would be SO COOL! "Ground-to-space cannon destroyed. Friendly Destroyer has entered the squadron to give extra fire support."

[@TheIvanMilky]

The modifiers could be really good with like 10% more creativity put into them. Every time I get the 3 strat limit I think is this all you could come up with

[@Hamppdur]

This is one of the main reasons I don’t enjoy fighting against the bots. Like dough says, there’s no counter play with it. Hope they can add some fun or goofy ones.

[@CreamIc7]

​@@Hamppdursadly the only counter play is look for an operation without it

[@eddwould9521]

My squad joins each others ships until we find a mission without this mod, all the others I don’t mind, this one is the same as playing as a three man.

[@CreamIc7]

@@eddwould9521 it's unplayable for solo especially after the big patch

[@goose886]

Would be cool if 3 stratagems came with a plus. Like the planetary temperature modifiers. Something like 3 stratagems but significantly reduced cooldown

[@rolanalcantara5430]

There has to be a tangible reward for beating the modifiers or taking out the 'cause' of the modifier effect. For AA modifiers, instead of just taking a way 1 strategem slot, how about still allowing 4 strategems to be equipped but only the first 3 are usable until you take out the AA guns, then once the AA guns are taken out: you'll not only free up the 4th strategem that was previously unusable, but you get a free random eagle strike strategem for use for the rest of the mission. For Oribtal Fluctuations, this could now spawn a side objective on the map where you have to make a weather station operational and doing so allows the super destroy to relocate so that upon completion of this side obj, instead of the 50% increased cooldown on strategems, we now get 10% decrease in strategem cooldowns. If there was a way to fix/get rid of mission modifiers while you're on the planet and at the same time get rewarded for completing a side obj tied to the mission modifier then this could actually feel more exciting rather than just straight up making the mission arbitrarily.

[@jooot_6850]

This! They could make the already existent Automaton AA encampment just apply its effect to the whole map. Modifier could be changed as such: AA defenses. Cannot use Eagle stratagem until anti-aircraft guns are destroyed. Imo it doesn't make sense to me that a modifier called "Anti-_Aircraft_ Defenses" stops you from taking a fourth Orbital or Supply strat. It should only stop you from using eagles

[@shadowwolf2608]

So there are two takeaways from the current modifiers situation: there needs to be more in general and there needs to be ones that positively impact something. Perhaps a airborne drone modifier that makes barrage more affective by increasing chance to hit a unit or building, or an aircraft carrier modifier that lets you get your eagle strats back quicker or have more on hand at a given time.

[@BackwardsPancake]

I would say, in general, the modifiers should actually MODIFY the way you approach the game - Give you some sort of new set of interesting challenges and opportunities that you have to solve. That doesn't really happen with things like "-1 stratagems" - People will just pick the strongest, most flexible meta stuff, which they tend towards anyway. "Extended cooldowns" and "Inaccurate orbitals" are unfun, but they do at least incentivize people to switch things up by bringing stuff with a shorter base cooldown and more eagle strikes respectively. An ideal modifier would probably have some give-and-take going on - The "Inaccurate orbitals" mod would be more fun if it reduced their cooldown to compensate, or something, for example.

[@falseblackbear3553]

I've always hated modifiers because it only makes the game harder but doesn't reward you for it. I could understand if you would choose certain modifiers, or choose a planet with certain modifiers that made the game more difficult, but then you reap more rewards. Whether that be getting more super samples, or XP or credits. Unfortunately, it just makes the game harder with no benefit. If they're going to keep these negative modifiers, they need to add positive ones too. Maybe have modifiers where the players move 10% faster, or a 20% reduction in cool downtime, or allowing us to pick a fifth stratagem. playing on levels 7+ can already be extremely difficult. Taking things away from the players makes it not fun. When a game is not fun, people don't stick around. When people don't stick around, your game is dead. Some of my friends give me crap because many times I play on lower levels, 4-6. But the reason I play on lower levels is because I can have more diversity in strategy. I can practice different builds, I can play with different items without worrying that I'm gonna get overwhelmed. higher levels, you're essentially stuck choosing between the same items over and over again.

[@davids.2884]

They could also add positive effects to the already existing modifiers. So where intense heat increases weapons overheating by 20%, fire damage could be increased by 15%. Or ion storms? Arc weapons jump to an additional target and EMS stuns longer. Stuff like that would make the modifiers better.

[@after_midnight9592]

4 is perfect for bots. No annoying gunships, but still fun to play with different loadouts.

[@jooot_6850]

@@davids.2884Yeah, would be nice if fire and maybe even laser weapons got increased damage. Would make them a not useless pick. Yes, your gun would overheat quicker, but it would also fry the already overheated bugs as well. Something to give you benefits and drawbacks

[@lulluf6392]

Sadly you're right. The minus 1 stratagem modifier is especially egregious, whenever I have that one I ALWAYS take the orbital laser and 500kg. No exceptions.

[@LaputanMachad]

100%. I'd honestly rather deal with fire tornados and extreme heat than 1 less stratagem for 7 and up Bots.

[@robpom5501]

Any negative mod that effects what you can run should be destroyable in game like towers or bug hives that spawn different units or alt types, you take out the buildings and it removes the negative mod and can give you an extra stack or 2X faster cooldown. One way to keep removing a stratagem slot should be called something like "Quick and messy logistics" -1 stratagem, +50% call in speed, -50% cooldown.

[@jooot_6850]

Don't you mean -50% cooldown? I like that idea. Limit how many stratagem you get, but greatly buff the ones you have. Realistically, with 3 slots, most players would pick 1 support weapon, and 2 offensive stratagems. So being able to just spam eagles and barrages, now that's democracy

[@JohnGrahamDoe]

Perfectly said Dough. Negative modifiers need to have either a positive twist, or some kind of bonus reward at the very least. A positive twist would be much better, as XP/Credits etc. lose meaning the longer you play. For example, for the Orbitals Miss modifier: make it so that it says "Orbitals miss, but ALL orbitals have XX% reduced cooldown and XX% reduced call-in time! If they aren't going to be accurate, let us spam them at least! And add some straight up positive modifiers into the mix. Three easy add ins could be a reduced cooldown for all red stratagems, one for all blue stratagems, and one for all green stratagems. This would encourage building loadouts that are centered around a different category than what you usually run by adding an INCENTIVE to use them instead of a negative reason to NOT use things. That is how you encourage variety, by making things feel BETTER to use, not worse! As for the straight up longer cooldown and longer call in time modifiers - add something positive to balance it out. ANYTHING. Just having to wait longer for things is not fun or interactive. I love the idea Dough proposed, which is that you could have the modifier spawn a side objective on the map that could be taken out in order to eliminate the modifier. EDIT: Another modifier I think could be fun would be a "Cannon Fodder" modifier, which doubles the rate of enemy bot drops/bug breaches (or make it like the extract personnel defense mission and have ongoing breaches the whole match), BUT there are NO heavies! This would encourage use of non-anti-tank options at higher difficulties to give much needed variety! Tesla towers would be able to not get one-shot by chargers! Gatling and Machine gun sentries would be goated! Gatling barrage, napalm, airburst orbital, and gas strike would get some major use! These off meta strats at high level could finally see some action! Also just got to the part where Dough said this himself lol EDIT EDIT: Ship Module Idea for Command Deck section or whatever its called: Advanced Intel - show what enemy types are present on the mission, as well as what side objectives are present (not where they are or how many, but just let us know its there so I know whether to expect gunships or shriekers or stalkers). I hope the devs listen to you Dough!

[@jooot_6850]

Atmospheric Interference: Orbital stratagems' accuracy is reduced. In response to this, the cannon loading crew's methamphetamine rations have been quadrupled. Decreased Orbital cooldowns. The added stimulants have no recorded affect on gunnery crew's accuracy (Proven by extensive PharmaTec research)

[@alissonntereca7318]

Man, modifiers such as cold or hot weather are great in a planet, and I greatly enjoy the enviroment hazards, but that goddamn -1 strat just... goddamn, lately every bot planet seems to have it when I'm playing and it just frustrates me to no end. Usually, I don't really agree with all you're saying, but this one you're entirely right... every time I have to fight with -1 I tend to use the same damn strats cuz I don't have the flexibility to do anything else. Sure, I can do the mission with only 3 strats, and I can even do it with whatever strat I want, but it becomes frustrating to do so... a game so fun becomes so irritating.

[@pcap8810]

"take less of the thing that makes the game fun"... cool, good call AH

[@harleyx7332]

The video we've all been playing for. I don't even play diff 9 as much because most of the time my team is sitting there dreading picking one mission with one less stratagem or one with 25% longer cooldowns

[@tktxlegend4540]

About the whole "Have modifiers tied to destroyable side objectives" thing, I actually made that exact argument shortly after launch. I literally had a whole paragraph talking about that in a reddit post about how they can make the gameplay more interactive and varied, which would have a side effect of making the game less meta driven. There are side objectives in the game that, to my knowledge, don't have any impact on the gameplay at all (propaganda towers and escape pods) that would be perfect for this idea. Make those side objectives "modifier objectives" that, once completed, get rid of the modifier/modifers.

[@itriyum]

That is the reason why I don't play on 8-9 difficulty. You will always get a modifier no matter what you do. But on difficulty 7 you have a chance of not getting any stratagem modifier, you will get spores on the map but that's it. And if a whole planet on difficulty 7 has bad modifiers I'll just switch planets or restart the game until I get a mission with no modifier.

[@Fadastalk]

I like the idea of each modifier having an upside and downside like maybe you only get 3 stratagems but -25% to your cooldowns on your other 3, or anti air defences mean you can’t take any eagles, but you get 2 uses of each orbital before you have to recharge it - the possibilities are endless

[@cultovcrows8142]

this is a great time for arrowhead to take notes from ghost ship. DRG has some very interesting modifiers that could be worked into helldivers 2. maybe an invincible charger that's always present but slower than normal, like haunted caves? or a flame hulk for automatons. could be what they need.

[@Gerwhal]

I mean that and O2 are the top least favorite of the modifiers in DRG so maybeee not that one lol

[@Pan_Handler]

No. Drg players hate O2 and Haunted cove modifiers. And avoid them like the plague. The thing drg does well is by making these mission specific and optional

[@tylerschofield]

We already have a hulk with flamethrower though……

[@bennypearson754]

drg does mutators really great. and they also give extra xp and credits

[@cultovcrows8142]

@@tylerschofield what I mean is instead of a charger it's a flame hulk for automaton missions

[@ShadowOfMachines]

Having the missions of an operation contain the negative modifiers would be really cool. AA Defense going on? Remove it during your ICBM mission. If you get that side objective done then that modifier is gone for the next two. Maybe they could add more side objectives that could give you modifiers too, maybe something like "liberate supply depot" and completing it would give you one extra charge for all your stratagems for the rest of the operation or maybe just grant you a random extra stratagem. I would really like it if there were effects the community could unlock on a planet. Something like getting a planet to 30% liberation would unlock a cool down reduction for all stratagems as you've established a foothold and have supply lines set up now.

[@jooot_6850]

Yeah it would be nice if liberating the planet actually did something in-game. If you're at like 90% liberated, you should realistically have access to multiple SEAF artillery units, and the skies would be held down by friendly ground to air missile defense. You would also have the benefits of a radar station off spawn. In return, maybe the higher the liberation level, the harder the remaining enemies fight to keep the planet? They could do this by generally increasing the enemy's level. For example, maybe the Automatons were holding out on deploying all their hulks and tanks, but now that they're about to lose the planet, they're sending out everything they have at you

[@DocDictator]

From watching content and listening to people talk bout the game there are 3 main ways i hear folks play helldivers 2: A- People choose a build and use that same build on everything to master and overcome whatever mission with it; B- People try new things in order to find offmeta combos with unique qualities and properties; C- People take the safest option to minimize fail rate at the cost of taking longer to win; With this balance ideals from ArrowHead the folks in A are at the mercy of having their one reason to play the game ruined if it gets too popular, folks from B can hardly find reason to attempt most tools since they are useless beyond hopes and dreams and folks in C are forced to constantly update themselves to learn what is the safest option now to play for fun without having to sweat 24/7 in a PvE game, meanwhile, community manages from the Devs are getting slammed in every open field of communication they have. This scorched earth 'Nobody Wins' balance philosophy they have needs to change for yesterday...

[@KsnypsAdventures]

My ideas for modifiers that would actually modify the game in an interesting way: -permanent ion storm: a modifier that you rarely encounter on planets with ion storms. It disables stratagems, but prevents the enemy from calling reinforcements, limiting the enemy encounters to patrols and guards only, possibly preventing bile titans or factory striders from ever spawning on that mission. -enemy air support: automaton bombs or terminid bile blobs get dropped by massive orbital planes or bugs respectively. Pretty inaccurate, so can work in the player’s favor. -enemy fortifications: traps and ambushes are found on the planet, along with more fortified (not more units, i’m talking concrete walls, metal gates and organic barricades of spikes) main objectives or enemy bases. Due to their positions being harder to raid, enemy count is lowered. -Heavy unit spawner: lowers the number of light/medium enemies, instead focusing on one specific heavy enemy. This could mean more chargers or tanks, but less hunters and rocket devvies. -ongoing space battle: a fight between super earth and the enemy faction is happening above the mission area. Stray plasma shots will occasionally pummel the ground and debris from both allied and opposing aircraft will fall down. Players can scavenge the fallen materials for samples, ammo, or even unique automaton/terminid weaponry

[@jooot_6850]

Permanent ion storm would be pretty brutal. No support weapons at all and no resupplies would be rough. That being said, it would actually encourage stealth play, moving around heavier targets to strike their weakpoint while they haven't seen you, that sort of thing. To balance it they would have to only spawn chaff enemies and not much else, really. But that's usually already the case for guard outposts, and you can always avoid roving patrols

[@jooot_6850]

I really like some of these ideas, though. Especially the space battle, that is really cool! Maybe your destroyer would sometimes be damaged, requiring repairs, meaning you can't use certain stratagems for a while. On the other hand bots could occasionally have their Dropship facilities be destroyed, removing their ability to call reinforcements. It would make it feel more like a large battle, with factors stretching far outside your control either inhibiting or greatly enhancing your ability to fight on the ground.

[@jargamund]

Agreed, there's a vast difference between difficult and fun, and difficult and annoying. Like old FPS games where bad guys would literally spawn 3 feet behind you after you cleared an area. Does that make it harder? Yes. In a fun way? No. I don't mind the slower call in and slower recharge times ones no that they halved the penalties, but I actively avoid the ones where I lose an entire stratagem.

[@alexlowe2054]

Honestly, positive modifiers would be pretty awesome. Something like reduced cooldowns on orbitals, is basic, but you could get more fancy, like being able to call down 2 backpacks at the start. That would definitely change how I played, because suddenly I could start coordinating with other players by sharing backpacks. And as you said, maps already have modifiers. But you can't possibly know what equipment to bring for maps with huge populations of specific enemies. I've basically settled on a single loadout against bugs, because if I can't handle all the map variants with all the different enemy spreads, then I'm just a dead weight with my team. Whatever I bring has to be able to deal with the maps that have swarms of dozens of hunters, the maps with 4 Bile titans, or the one with 6 chargers, or the worst ones with bile titans and bile spitters. I can't tailor my loadout against a specific type of bug, because I don't know what I'm dropping into. I stopping bringing my favorite loadout of the grenade launcher and ammo backpack, because it doesn't deal with constant Bile titans or chargers and it's useless against shriekers. It's a super fun loadout, but I have to rely on my team being able to kill the heavy enemies, which really limits when I can use that loadout. If I knew we were on a map with mostly spitters, it's incredible, but it's rare enough that I don't want to risk bringing it in and ending up fighting nothing but hunters and chargers. Knowing the existing map modifiers and enemy populations would be a huge win to allow more flexibility when picking stratagems and equipment. If I knew there weren't going to be an insane number of hunters, I might be able to bring something different. But if there's increased cooldowns, I'm probably just bringing Quasar and a backpack, because that deals with all the bugs without needing to worry about orbital cooldowns ruining my day.

[@lukemehalick370]

I always thought: first mission of the mission set has secondary objectives that when completed will get rid of the -1 stratagem, or scatter, or cd increases for the rest of this mission and the other missions in this mission set. You pick 4 stratagems, last one is grayed out until you destroy whatever building or gun turret. So ok, first half of first mission it's a slog, with the crappy modifiers, but if you can blow up this place and hack this terminal they can both go away, same way stalkers and gunships work. There is a problem, but are able to solve it and improve the experience by doing a little extra work.

[@Nitecookie]

i commend you for actually speaking out against this game. other youtubers just pussy out and call it a "masterpiece" and "the best co-op game in forever" without acknowledging ANY of its flaws.

[@MateusMachina]

Totally agree. Some of the other environmental factors are dumb as well. Fire tornadoes don’t feel challenging, just incredibly frustrating as it causes so many cheap deaths. Whenever I’m hosting, I completely avoid those planets. Yet another design that encourages a meta is how only certain special weapons can penetrate heavy armor, not to mention you can only carry one special weapon at a time. So the one you bring must handle heavy units. Otherwise, when a titan comes along, you’re screwed. I love machine guns but this is why I never take them. Sure, if your teammates bring a quasar cannon then you can probably get away with a machine gun, but you have to stay close to your team at all times and rely on them completely to take out titans.

[@jooot_6850]

Yeah for solo players you will almost never take a support weapon for crowd clearing. You need that anti-armor. That's why I personally think the Railgun should be a primary weapon. Then you could run a Stalwart or something similar and have that railgun to kill (albeit slowly) stuff like Bile Titans

[@judjementine]

My groups solution to AA(the most egregious in our opinion) was to make it mean there is an AA camp on the map that you have to destroy to gain access to your 4th stratagem. Or make it be a mission objective.

[@kevincatania8795]

I am 100% with you on this topic. Modifiers are a big part of a lot of games, and many times they are fun and create diversity in the game. But i'm sticking on lower difficulties in helldivers 2 'cause of those orribles modifiers. One game that uses modifers in a good way is Deep Rock Galactic: there are (like ravenswatch) positive and negative modifiers, but ALSO the negative ones gives you a bonus on xp, gold and materials, and some of them bonuses are crazy high in percentage (like 50% more xp, gold and materials for only ONE big negative modifier). In this case i can enjoy play with those modifiers 'cause it's rewarding and it become a fun challenge. I guess that the reward increase in helldivers is in the difficulty itself, but it's not the point. The difference is that in DRG for instance you can find those modifiers in all difficulties. The modifier it's not bounded to the difficulty, but it's a thing completely separated. I hope that Arrowhead (after finding a solution for the SonyCrapProblem) has the time to watch this video and make some meaningful changes to the game.

[@beanie7965]

I'd love to be able to see what kind of enemies were in the mission beforehand so I can pick accordingly, some bug missions are full of spewers, other full of chargers and Titans. If we knew what to expect it would encourage different loadouts for most missions.

[@CarrionMaw]

Make a Requisition sink, since it's way too easy to hit the cap - spend requisition to add beneficial modifiers on a per mission basis. -5% Strat cooldown. -5% chance for enemies to spot you (stacks with Light/Scout armour, encourages different playstyles). +1 reserve mag for all primary weapons for the mission. Small changes, all of which cost Requisition. If it gets too broken, limit the number of benefits per mission - maybe players can vote for up to two from a randomly selected list of 3, and the cost of the benefit is split 4 ways, deducted from each player.

[@Legendary_Honey]

I'm glad to see you returning to this. It was nice to see them rework the most egregious modifiers after this topic first blew up, but the issue was never really that the modifiers were overtuned - it's that they exist at all in the first place. I'm not against modifiers. They just need to be done right. For example, I actually like the bug modifier where you can't really see the map. It's fun to have to avoid enemies as you see or hear them, instead of being able to check the map and completely circumvent them. We need more modifiers like that, that change up the gameplay in some way instead of simply limiting the player's power (that seems to be Arrowhead's kink).

[@Legendary_Honey]

I've got a friend that I frequently dive with, and he often goes into missions with no support weapon, and mostly meme strategems. That's a fun way to limit yourself. Basically, leave it to the players to put modifiers on themselves.

[@jjprs3062]

Whenever I try to run diff 8 or 9 solo its always with a generalist build. "I need to carry grenade pistol for the striders" "I need to carry recoiless for the hulks and gunships" "I need to carry counter sniper for the devastators and chaff" Having modifiers that increase the numbers of specific enemies allow for more specialized and fun builds that you normally wouldn't see. It'll make the game more engaging and fun to play instead of the same old generalist build every single time.

[@TheReykjavik]

Imagine if the modifier that took away a strategem slot, but cut strategem call in times in half. You have less variety, but to make up for it you can make it rain with what you can bring. That would change the game up, I'd be giving out eagles like candy, or try having a rail cannon strike up for every fight.

[@MeisterKleisterHeisstEr]

Modifier ideas: - heavy rain / humidity: weakens fire, strengthens electric - stronger sentries/orbitals/barrages BUT you get weaker orbitals/barragges/sentries (in any permutation) - each player gets a random weapon bonus, powerful enough to encourag them to try it

[@user-xo2iw6lz2n]

this is on point. when i see bile spewers, i just quit, cause i know i'll have significantly less fun playing that mission. it forces you to bring a weapon that's amazing at dealing with bile spewers asap and at a distance, but i can't be bothered playing the same boring shit every bug-planet mission i play, just because there's a decent chance of bile spewers on helldive difficulty. it's gotten so tedious and boring the last few days that i found myself just not having a good reason to even start up the game anymore, and i now realize why i've been playing Deep Rock Galactic for thousands of hours. I played something wildly different every mission. The classes are wildly different. The builds within those classes bring incredible variety and it's layered variety down to your weapon overclocks and mods (basically making it completely different weapons). there are missions where certain builds are definitely more advantageous, but you know what the mission brings, before you start it. In Helldivers 2, for me it's just "oh, didn't bring one of the 2 clearly most effective loadouts against handling bile spewers specifically? guess you won't have any fun this round."

[@TheCosmicAstro-]

There are so many cool and interesting things they could do with modifiers to change up gameplay to make it different and interesting that isnt just adding more enemies or increasing cooldowns/outright removing a strategem. Shit like heavily armored enemies armor is reduced by 1 tier but they spawn more. Upside + Downside + Creates a different way you can play the game. But regardless. At the end of the day, being able to opt-in/out of these modifiers at high difficulties should be an option. If you wanna mess around with goofy different stuff? Go for it, have fun. You wanna just play vanilla regular helldivers? Also go for it! Have fun. Options are always good and right now we have so few that actually feel good to interact with. Especially on the bugs front.

[@sturniboy]

"You awake up. You go to sleep; shocking development." Chortled at that.

[@ketsuekikumori9145]

I agree with this sentiment. There should definitely be positives tied to the negatives. For example, fire tornado planets would increase fire damage making not only the flamethrower more effective, but napalm strike more viable. We already do have "modifiers" that reward us in the form of secondary objectives. When dealt with, we remove certain enemy types, regain certain stratagems back, or give us mission specific benefits. Like AA emplacements preventing eagle strats until destroyed, or SAM launchers shooting down dropships. I didn't realize this until recently, but the radar station automatically marks all POIs when completed. A secondary objective that seems like it only rewards xp/req (if you aren't paying attention) rewards you further by marking all notable locations for medals/credits/samples. It would be interesting to see planetary modifiers be more intractable with players. For example, jungle planets have more foliage than other planet types. What if you set that on fire? It makes traversing it with fire weapons more risky, but rewards you for tactical thinking by making fires burn for longer, locking down an area. Ice planets would make fire burn for shorter times and with less intensity because the fire's energy is spent melting ice and/or warming up an enemy before they catch fire. Deserts would make it easier to catch on fire, but the scarcity of brush means you can't do area denial like you would on in a jungle, and living desert plants are full of water (because they are very good at retaining water) so you can't set them alight as easily. Or the spore mushrooms could be treated as a potential dust explosion. You trigger some to disappear and the mobs come to investigate, only to have an explosion in their face. There is one idea where negative only modifiers would work imo. People have thought up the "behind enemy lines" mission type and I think it would work really well there. My logic here is these missions would be treated as challenge runs, similar to other games' deathless, hitless, 100%, etc. runs. And the whole point of challenge runs are SELF-IMPOSED limitations to make the game harder. So modifiers like no reinforcements (aka deathless), heavy patrols (even more so than whatever difficulty setting, like maybe 1 difficulty higher?), limited destroyer support (hard limits to the normally limitless strats), etc. would work here. That last one would encourage ammo/weapon scavenging behavior, or use energy weapons they wouldn't normally use, and force players to stop using "disposable" strats like the EATs. Sidenote - Speaking of flamethrower, I think it's too strong right now. The reason I'm saying this is because of a current bug build that I have. Called the fire support build, it consists of the arc blitzer shotgun, machine/grenade pistol, and impact/stun grenades. Strats include rover backpack, flamethrower, cluster strike, and EATs. Those familiar with these weapons should understand my logic with the build nvm the naming convention. I haven't done so myself, but I can see it be a solid solo build. I often go around the map by myself while the rest of the team does other things. My complaint here is that flamethrower should not be able to kill chargers so easily. Instead I think it needs to weaken/melt armor to get at the meaty goodness inside and if applied to the thermite grenade, it would buff it too. A lot of new players probably missed out on the old info of the charger's original weakspot since the railgun nerf. And since we aim at the front legs to kill it fastest with the flamethrower anyways, it would encourage that old behavior. Even the autocannon still benefits from this despite it not stripping armor, but I often see newer players aim for its ass and using way more bullets then necessary. I can't tell if it's the explosion or it piercing, but as long as it doesn't deflect and you don't miss, it seems to take about 5ish shots with AC to the legs. With this in mind, it would be interesting to see various players tackle chargers differently. Flamethrowers not only help with swarms but also are able to support the team or if necessary deal with it themselves while nerfing the fire support build I mentioned. Thermite users can use a different swarming weapon like the arc thrower or machine guns while having a charger option. And I think everyone agrees that AT weapons are in a good spot since they have the hardest time hitting legs and giving them the 1 headshot was a solid change.

[@Damocles1337]

I agree, the negatives should have up sides too when they make sense, and for the ones that have an objective description, they should be negated once that objective is destroyed

[@MurkyShallows]

The difficuties are also encouraging meta: the lower difficulties, where the game actually feels fun to play, lack variation; while the higher difficulties make the game sweaty and frustrating

[@alvaryoru5441]

Hades also has a very nice method of implementing challenges with the pacts and you benefit by gaining weapon enhancing resources PER weapon clear with those challenges, it's very fun and you are never forced to used them the story continues even if you just keep repeating the same difficulty.

[@guillermoae7038]

Agreed, i always bring something that can kill gunships/stalkers/spewers/shriekers just in case there are those on the map, so i have to get primary and secondaryand grenades, based on being able to fight all the rest, so i have one all-around build for Terminids and another for Automatons.

[@Spite9]

If we are diving in from a SuperDestroyer in orbit, it would make sense that we would have some kind of reconnaissance data, e.g. more hunters that usual. Might be nice to have some kind of readout about the mission so we can adapt, like you say.

[@Smaxx]

I agree, mostly. Would be nice to typically have one per-planet environmental modifier (extreme cold, extreme heat, jungle with fog, or whatever) and one or two regional mission specific modifiers. Positive side effects would definitely be nice, but they don't always have to be there. Just a bit more variety even on the same planet would be great. They already do a kind of good job in these regards with the extreme heat/cold modifiers and a few others, since they can influence how you equip etc. Stuff like the -1 strategem is really boring and I usually avoid them, especially how bad those feel on bot planets (are they always on bot planets? feels like that), especially previously where you often could consider the shield backpack as akind of necessity, i.e. making those planets -2 stratagems.

[@Kenny-yu6gc]

I agree completely that we should be told whether we'll enounter nursing spewers or bile spewers, more brood commanders or more hunters. You don't always encounter bile spewers along with their even more annoying spitballer scavengers, but when you do, you'll be cursing the whole time when no one brought impact grenades, a grenade launcher, heavy machine gun, autocannon, or an arc thrower. They're just too much of a pain in the a^s more so than chargers or bile titans with the numbers they can come in.

[@paulovictor9158]

It could just be: Orbital Hijacking "the automatons have partially hijacked our orbital systems, orbitals are 50% more inconsistent" and this be together with a Aerial Task Force "Our best eagle pilots will be by your side at this mission Helldiver, 1 extra bomb deployment per eagle stratagem (exceptions like the 500kg)". So for every negative there's a positive like an actual general actively trying to compensate for the negative the automatons did.

[@morgan3392]

I think the modifiers they currently have don't work too well, but the planetary ones feel much better. Fire tornadoes may hunt you down, but they feel dangerous yet avoidable. Ion storms are dangerous and less avoidable but still feel logical in-universe. Tremors, especially with the newly-added ambiance, feel cool. The list goes on. All of these feel cool, immersive, dangerous, yet at the same time, you can play around them. I hope they add more modifiers like these, but actually enemy faction-specific. One good example I can think of is the terminid's spore obfuscation, whatever it's called; the one that hides the minimap. It makes things harder and reduces your toolkit, but it doesn't encourage a meta, nor does it feel unfair: you're still shown objectives and everything. Some ideas I had for modifiers: Terminids could have muddy ground, or shallow tunnel networks, which leads to large patches of rough terrain to be avoided. Automatons could have overclocked fabricators, which produce new bots much faster. Not new patrols; just the bots it produces. Destroy the fabs and that modifier becomes pointless.

[@Fauix]

I want to see some oddly specific positive modifiers, things "Supply Excess: X strategem has its cooldown reduced by 50%" and make only the statistically underused strategems show up there, or "Orbital Weapon Logistics Doctrine: If you are the only one in your squad with (each) specific orbital barrage, double the barrage" (basically the weapons on one of your squadmate's destroyers firing at the same time)

[@doodvibin5232]

Reworking current modifiers to be more "neutral" -Complex Stratagem Plotting (increased windup to stratagems) -> Supercharged ship (windup to ORBITAL stratagems increased, damage of orbitals increased) -Orbital Fluctuations (increased stratagem cooldown) -> Overtime mission (increased stratagem cooldown BUT increased exp/medals) -AA defenses (3 stratagems) -> Focused budget (only 3 stratagems BUT stratagem cooldown reduced) -atmospheric spores (map obscured) -> Spore forest (many Spore spewer side objectives + map obscured BUT destroying spewers unobscures region of map) -Atmospheric Interference (orbital scatter) -> Tracer rounds (all orbitals home in on in range targets INCLUDING HELLDIVERS)

[@psython2160]

I've been mentioning same thing to my fellow helldivers. Deep Rock Galactic is a good example of modifiers to diversify gameplay. I suggested possibly negative gravity, increased gravity, and heavy armor only ... etc. I like the suggestions you brought up in this video.

[@Low_commotion]

Just want to say you have fantastic wit & delivery with your humor. The part about how waking up and going to sleep is "repetitive" made me almost spit out what I was drinking.

[@charlie2105]

I like the way fatshark does modifiers. It's optional and give extra rewards. So like more samples or credits.

[@wyn9693]

My favourite aspect of the game is that mixing in stratagems into active combat is heavily rewarded with the ability to kill creatively and efficiently in a way that suits you, but if you make a mistake you lose a lot of time or get blown up. modifiers turn it back into a gun game since you can't play into the stratagem system. I like guns, but I want something more

[@roiledred]

I agree with pretty much everything you've been saying on this.👍 I've felt similar. For me, I play seven because it's where the Enemy variety to number of enemies ratio is just right for me to feel the need for more coverage in my loadouts, strategems, and strategies to win. That's a good engaging challenge. Then, either to unfortunate chance circumstances or timing, three patrols find me and a big bot drop/bug breach happens just as I approach a big objective. Now it's impossible and the only tactic left is tactical retreat. Then there's the extraction rush, where god forbid I want to take my time and do as much in the mission as I can, and I run out of time. Now I have no destroyer access, so no lives, and double the patrols after the primary objectives have been completed. Why no consistency or ability to set expectations? It's just unfun and stressful at that point, needlessly! The bugginess alone hurts player's expectations for consistent gameplay already! If they're afraid of solo helldivers getting bored by lack of difficulty climb, I get it. I like difficulty climb too. But some few are just cracked out there. Just add more levels with more and deadlier enemies or objectives. The first game had 15 levels and the last one was called The Inner Circle of Hell!

[@Cyanstripes_]

The point you were making at 4:30 reminded me something I saw when the cyberstan invasion was happening. There were a multiple bot planets open and literally the only planets that had a significant players present were the ones that had all 4 stratagem slots. So many of my friends just hate fighting bot planets because you lose 25% of your kit. There should be some kind of catch to those modifiers. They have the AA bases on maps that block eagle stratagems already. They should just have that expanded put to the other types. Hell, if I lose a stratagem let the others have cooldowns reduced by a percentage.

[@temtempo13]

Trying to think of what a fun modifier would look like. It does seem like mixing upsides and downsides could work. Like, "Bile Spewers have more health, but all enemies take extra damage from electricity." Something where you can try to adapt your loadout to the modifier: with Bile Spewers having more health, maybe you pick a loadout that can better handle them at a distance.

[@AntiAntagonist]

In terms of optional mission modifiers, I'd love to see "dares" or challenges. "Don't use your primary weapon" "Sarcastically salute a Bile Titan while it's spewing", etc If you want the dares/challenges to be more interesting then have squadmates choose them. "Bet you can't stick a thermite grenade onto a walker"

[@lukearr928]

same here, I agree with your points. it's like you're reading my mind. sometimes I even drop down in difficulty because I just don't want to deal with those BS modifiers.

[@thedog5k]

I feel like having something on the map that is modifying units could be interesting. Like… the modifier is that there is a hive causing chargers to have horns and impale you when you get hit that gets removed when you destroy it. Or maybe scavengers blow up like banelings until you kill a baneling nest. That could be cool.

[@g80gzt]

The only modifier with counterplay was Electronic Countermeasures, where you knew what was in your hand, and you could use a simple code to get those complex codes done easy, and it only ever mixed up your loadout stratagems and not reinforce, resupply, mission criticals, hellbombs, etc. And it was removed by people thinking it was a bug. Or people who think operation modifiers are planet effects...

[@CrypticBlight]

I like how they’ve been done in Deep Rock Galactic. They add some interesting new things that you need to work around or good upsides that you want to do and either way you gain more credits and xp for doing negative modifiers.

[@monkeysspade]

i always avoid the -1 stratagem slot modifer whenever i can because its so annoying. i would like to see more of the modiefiers have trade offs and could at least push you to use different stratagems in every mission, not just whether its bugs or bots. a couple of ideas might be like. 1) -1 statgem slot but cooldowns reduced by 25 or 50% something like that.(i have no idea if these number should be the exact ones to use but im just using them to show what i mean) 2) orbital stratagem scatter inscreased, but cooldown reduced. 3) eagle stratagem call-in time increased by 50%, but orbital staragem cooldowns reduced by 25%. 4)maybe some cool extra planet modifiers like cold plants fire doesnt stay on the ground as long, and fire planets fire stays on the ground longer. now these may not be the exact thing they should impliment but hopefully this type of concept where certain mission will give you trade offs, while making 1 type of stratagem worse another one better, or reduce our opiton of startagems but call them more often. if anyone has any neat modifer ideas im curious as to what? p.s. also i think they need to just have the weapon experimentaion modifier on more especially for stratagems that rarely see use.

[@lhynn51]

I agree. The game's difficult as it is to make it randomly harder in an unfair way. Plus, as rightfully pointed out most modifiers actively work against the devs' own vision of gameplay. Some could have an easy fix though: - you have one less stratagem, but your other stratagems cool down 30% faster - orbital strikes miss, but you can have 2 at disposal before rearm, etc. Give is damn bonuses to outweigh the negatives and make modifiers fun and actually impactful - in a positive way - on missions as they will change your way of approaching objectives.

[@Keithslawinski]

I think it would be better to lean into their weather systems a bit more than just "harder to see and slower to move", and focus on more granular effects with negative and positive bonus's. The heat system is one of the few that works well in dissuading you from taking laser weapons, while cold planets encourage them by slowing RoF of bolt-action weapons. A low gravity plant could affect how grenades fly, increase ALL explosion radius. An acid planet could corrode ALL armor, both enemy and friendly when in a storm. Ion storms could be more localized so you can leave them. Maybe they only affect strategems with targeting systems like turrets, drones, and the spear. Some planets could have gas pockets of low gas could explode making flame weapons potentially awesome or team killing. SO many cool potential ideas

[@shoelace5977]

i mean if were talking about good modifier systems, im instantly pitching Deep Rock Galactic, which has modifiers like: -an invincible suicide bomber is chasing you through the entire mission -the concentration of O2 in the area is low, not replenishing it by standing close to specific stuff will cause you to suffocate -every enemy you kill violently explodes, for better and worse -you speak like you breathe helium -not in the game yet, but a new one they pitch increases enemey spawn rate for enemies that shoots projectiles -not in game yet, but you will constantly lose HP while in the mission, and dead enemies drop HP pickups -a specific enemy is more present in the area, which includes a fortification made by said faction its very much up to AH if they wanna take it that far, but the fact the only meta-strategem i can think of that is affected negativley by modifiers is the orbital laser is wild. they should definetly also add modifiers that disencourage the following based on mission (added possible modifiers for the fun of it): -stealth (more traps, or garrisoned gards activley move), those atmospheric spores) -going in guns blazing/standing your ground (or reinforcements might get a follow up wave after enough time has passed) -eagle usage (rearm-time is longer, or airstrikes that go in a line might be off intended angle by a max of 15-30 degrees, idk math is hard) -sentry usage (hellpod strategems are imprecise) -strategem spam (patrols are more often encouraged to investigate strategems) -wasting time (reduce time given before super destroyer leaves low orbit) - fuck it a modifier that straight up BANS a specific type of strategem, it would be hilarious to raid outposts with just a ton of mortars because you cant use air-strikes, orbitals, etc. playing devils advocate for some modifiers though: -reducing strategem slots ideally forces players either to pick weaker options to continue to be able to do everything, or lean into a specific role, like the focusing on corwd-clear or tankbusting or structure destruction, etc. -longer strategem cooldowns encourages use of stuff with either low cooldown or infinite ammo, or to play more aggressively so they get more time to wait on strategem cooldown (if you'd prefer that) -disabling the radar with atmospheric spores encourages more "panic-button" like strategems because youre more likely to get caught im fine with strategems being soley negative, on paper thats just more challenge, AH makes it clear you get X ammount of modifiers based on the chosen difficulty, and heck the ones in game sound promising, but the counterplay is so simple its tragic, literally being to "do nothing about it" is just sad. especially since i cant think of too many modifiers that change a player running a meta loadout.

[@Tracker947]

What really kills me is that the concept of this game was literally perfect. Life service/live support helldivers (loved Helldivers 1), but with flashy graphics and intense combat... AND A DUNGEON MASTER TO PROVIDE INFINITE CONTEXT AND FACILITATE PLAYER AGENCY AND STORY? Like, the framework for the perfect live service is here. The Game Master could be dynamically making these modifiers in all sorts of creative ways to engage with the community. Instead, it feels like the devs are in competition against us. Like, why? A Game Master's job isn't to be the players' opponent. It's to engage with them to create a good story.

[@frickmrpill1835]

What one if my favorite games that does modifiers very well and feels fair is deep rock galactic. Random missions can have random modifiers and there’s good ones and bad ones. Double xp and low gravity are beneficial, they make the mission more rewarding and fun to play. Mactera swarm and rival presence throw you up against a specific set of enemies that you don’t see a lot of as many of and it doesn’t feel bad because you learn to adapt to fighting those specific enemies. I wish helldivers did something like that

[@GingerNinja__]

Knowing the unit comp before diving would be huge

[@Spectacular_Insanity]

Devs: “jUsT uSe StRaTaGeMs, BrO!” Me, with 1 Stratagem removed: 😬

[@firecloud42]

they need to add buff modifiers like "HG does 10% more damage", "Turret's have 50% more HP", "Fire Damage does 15% more damage", Etc. giving buffs to stratagems or damage types (Kinetic, explosive, fire, arc, etc.) encourages certain stratagems/weapons with out removing other stratagems/weapons as an option that modifiers that nerf them like the orbital strikes miss

[@Phalanx167]

Couldn't agree more. I find many of the modifiers funnels mew towards the obvious choices since they limit me in a game that can already be unforgiving for not rounding out your loadout.

[@Rich-in6ds]

100% agree. The -1 strategem is the worst offender of all. Increased call-down isn't *too* bad, just forces you to think ahead. One less strategem is just literally less fun.

[@Andyisgodcky]

The modifiers 1: Need to add complexity to the missions 2: Need to be interactive or removable through mission objectives 3: Can't artificially cripple the player's power expression. 4: Ideally reward the players for completing the modifier beyond removing its penalty FOR INSTANCE "A Stratagem Jammer network hub is in this mission zone. Stratagem call in times are increased by X for each remaining jammer, and there are Y additional Jammers on the map. Once all Jammers are destroyed, gain access to (random offensive orbital stratagem)" OR "An exceptional amount of Spore Spewers infest the mission area, heaving reducing visibility and obscuring the map. Additional Expendable Anti-Tank launchers have been allocated to assist in destroying them." OR "A munitions factory has been taken over by the automatons and is producing footsoldiers at much higher rates. Each dropship wave has an additional ship loaded with footsoldier bots. Destroying the factory will increase the time between bot drops as dropships must travel further to reinforce the automatons as well as eliminate the additional ship from drops. If you instead capture the facility for Super Earth, Resupply's cooldown will be halved for the remainder of the mission."

[@trotty2681]

I think the modifiers in deep rock galactic are really cool and well made, they don't force meta but for example the modifier that makes a lot of tiny bugs spawn does encourage taking AOE upgrades for your weapons

[@bonshfff]

Dough talking about modifiers detracting from the game is giving me Dauntless flashbacks lmao, listen to this man, he's been through it before

[@TheGreatChrisB]

- Heavy rainfall - Arc weapons deal 1.5x damage and range increased by 50% - This planet is hot af - fire lasts twice as long on the ground - You're roided out, you deal triple melee damage - Only the best divers available - you reload twice as fast - We're testing new explosives - grenades and launcher blast radius 1.5x - Moon shoes deployed - jump twice as high and run 50% faster - Moonlight blocked - Planet is darker so stealth is twice as strong - Bull Rider - You can jump on Chargers and they'll run into the smaller bugs - Behind enemy lines - you deploy with extra ammo for your mission, grenades, stims, mags increased 1.5x - Black tipped rounds - You're deployed with armor penetration rounds, headshots deal double damage, body shots deal 25% damage. Or all weapons move up one armor pen level, making the Knight actually decent - Dear John - you found out your gf cheated while you're deployed, you regen health automatically because you don't need to woman - I gotchu bro - your bro is in the ship so Orbital strategem cooldowns decreased 30% - Carte Blanche - just get the job done at any cost, sentry cooldown cut in half

[@PRC533]

I think part of the problem is that they only gave themselves one lever to pull for increasing difficulty: quantity of enemies. Since enemy hp, armor, damage, etc stays the same regardless of level they really only can go so far. I think they were trying to create artificial difficulty with these really punishing modifiers but instead they just removed gameplay. Sure it makes things harder, but not in a way that players feel accomplished for overcoming. As you say, they need to get more granular with their modifiers and create ones that are actually interesting like the increased spawn of certain enemies. What about a modifier that increases shrieker nest spawns. Imagine a map with 4 of them. You would want to bring recoilless to get them before you were swarmed. Even a modifier that increases enemy armor or hp or something would be more interesting.

[@biggreen8025]

Damn this Ravenswatch looks so good, gonna get it i love the art style and ui looks

[@gabeperras3711]

I feel like they need to add a couple positive modifiers to make missions more interesting. Like what if you could take the same stratagem twice or give a +1 random stratagem or something crazy every now and then

[@Badmagix23]

You nailed it here, I'd love to know what enemy types I'm likely to see on the planet, because if I'm going to fight spewers for days, I regret my weapon choice every time If i picked wrong, where if I counter spewers but get hunters, it really really sucks, but not as much IMO than the other way around, and so I'm kinda stuck with 3 weapons since of their attrocious balance. the strategem nerfs are horrible like you said, and since you can skip right past the screen that tells you about the planet sometimes I miss the fact that i have the scatter penalty. this creates bad feelings for no reason. Your solution sounds awesome since you can crank up the difficulty past level 9

[@ZephyrKitten742]

I really wish that the modifiers would be tied entirely to the planet, with the more basic ones (hot/cold/fog) being present in lower difficulty missions and then crazier ones (fire tornadoes, blizzards, etc) coming into play on higher difficulties. Then when you would go to a big stronghold planet you could MAYBE get hit by stuff like AA interference or bug spores. It would still be obnoxious, but it would be rarer and actually make sense since you're attacking an important planet. Because at the moment I pretty much aim for 25% extra cooldown since 50% slower call-down just feels miserable and -1 stratagem is just a no-go. But even then, with the increased spawns even the cooldown debuff is starting to feel worse and worse because I NEED those stratagems to deal with all the extra BS.

[@inqufox1750]

Helldivers wasnt known for giving its players information it was for like lore and roleplaying reasons so...yeah they arent going to suddenly change the game to give us enough information to play the game the way we want to or use different strats...THAT WOULD BE NICE but they'd have to completely switch things up and give us ALL the information just as it stands right now so we can see whats going on right now before dumbing the ability to also modify the game in such a way. This was a 10/10 yap sesh i agreed with pretty much everything in it its just smell drivers doesnt even give us damage of strat weapons or how much armour pen they do let alone what enemies will be spawning or even hinting at what we might think to bring...

[@jollygrapefruit786]

A modifier should be like shrieker nests, stalker nests, mortar emplacement, etc. We should KNOW if these will be present in a mission, and thus be able to decide our build based on what we'd be facing.

[@luwinkre2371]

Arrowhead: You need to use more strategems Also Arrowhead: ION STORMMMMM

[@Crimnox_Cinder]

Honestly, what would make this game perfect for me, is let me flat out choose what enemies I fight on a mission. The enemies are selected from the pool that would be available for your given level (like bile titans being selectable on level 6+ missions) you can whatever combo of them you want, OR you could have a single mission with only ONE enemy type. Wanna do an oops all chargers? Oops all brood commandos? What about....all hunters, or warriors or even the damn automatons basic raider! And depending on the amount or the "difficulty" said unit brings, would bring an xp modifier. If you doo all heavy units you get an x125 xp, if you do only scavengers, you have a x25 modifier. Just this mechanic alone would have me playing non stop for years to come. The gunplay is fantastic but sometimes I WANT to be swarmed by the little guys so I can use add clear build and not be forced to take anti tank because we can't just say I don't want to fight them. And yes I COULD just play level 3 missions, but there's not enough enemies on that level for me to enjoy my time, I want to leave a mission with over 1000 kills damn it! Sometimes I just don't wanna bother with heavy units, they can get really annoying.

[@Greycobalt]

Slightly off topic, but I've started using Orbital Gas Strike since watching you and I'm loving the War-Crime combo of Gas/Napalm/Stun Grenades.

[@shutheexiledwolf5002]

i do agree a heads up would be nice for missions on enemy types becuase i hate landing not knowing if its gonna be a hunter or bile spewer planet and then i have the wrong loadout and i suffer from being useless on the team

[@_saltysage_37]

10/10 yap. I hope AH gets ahold of some of your content man! Agree totally

[@ramomendeo3121]

I would be fine if the modifiers also came with a buff like if you have the 1 less stratagem you counter that with less cool down for them or something else.

[@Lunaspecter69420]

modifiers should be linked to enemy structures ie: atmospheric interference, for automatons its linked to a structure similar to the jammer but its a scrambler. for bug it should be linked to spore spewers. 1st modifier is when a bug or bot calls for reinforcements depending on difficulty the bots get +1/+2 extra drop ship from one flare similar to bugs one bug spraying its pheromones can get +1/+2 new bug holes 2nd modifier would be constant enemy reinforcements until the you take out the structure for it. for bots it would be a spy satellite and you would need to upload a virus to the satellite from its control station. by doing so the virus sets the satellite offline and set a course to crash into the planet. for bugs its more of a plant that has its vines spread out through the planet and you have to destroy the plant to stop the constant bug breaches. the plant acts similar to the spy satellite where its vines can detect the vibrations of your drop pods and helldivers foot prints and is able to track your movements that way. 3rd modifier would be less grunt type mobs and more heavy/elite units.

[@Damglador]

I love snow planets, and cold planets overall. Blizzards makes it harder to see not only for you, but also for enemies, they practically become blind. Cold environment makes your aim worse, but your heat based guns chill faster. Also ice is cool, it can be annoying, but on the other hand when you dive you slide a little bit further, so it provides more linear mobility. Fire tornados are fun, they cook not only you, but enemies as well. Meteors are fun, you have to actually dodge them, but they actually as deadly for enemies as for you, or even deadlier. Meteorite storm can straight up destroy a random bot base or bug nest on the map, also it kills large amounts of bugs pretty well. Hot environment on the other hand is just a hot garbage. You dont get anything from it, except that now your existence is just miserable, you cant run, you can't use heat based weapons and you can't see because sand storms, enemies however can see you perfectly. Tremors isn't very noticeable, so I have nothing to say about them.

[@Damglador]

Arrowhead knows how to design and make good games, they just have to try a bit harder and take their time do do this.