as much as i would have preordered the game had i known about it , and as much as i would love that armor, i don't want them to add it now, they can add a lot different ones in the future, i do hope they add "sponsored" armors though, as in corporation in lore ones. or irl ones

I had the armor on thinking it was a normal armor anyone could get. People kept asking me where I got it until finally someone told me it's because I pre-ordered. Now it's the only one I use....

Me too but I never actually wear it. I prefer the blue Cavalier of Democracy armor with the democracy protects passive.

@@TinyTusk 100% on the "sponsored" thing, would love to see more. About 70% of why I use it is because of how funny it is to know there are frogurt representatives running around a battlefield with a high casualty rate.

@@lord-of-monkeys5258 that's my thought exactly

I mean, it's not called a "dairy allergy." So I guess there's a few "Lactose Intolerant" divers in our midst?

genuinely 😭

Cue in flashbacks to horrible childhoods memories of the protagonist with sad music.

That’s already in the game it literally explains what’s happening what we need to do and shows and tells you what planets and sectors need attention. You mean you want a button that you can hit that takes you straight to a planet huh?

Not just a button though. Right now the major order is to defend 10 different planets. We are more likely to defend each planet if we focus on one at a time. I think he is asking for a system to help coordinate priority when there are multiple planets that are part of the major order.

@@wadablewads Agreed!

Just an in game chat system, if you ask ten people to defend a planet to protect certain supply lines then maybe 5 or 6 of them will help defend. The others will just go on and play the game their own way. While we can’t have every single person help, just a few because of an in game chat service would help significantly.

​​@@wadablewads I mean, that'd just be functionally railroading if it were high command (the GMs) who picked what the planets should be focused, and if they really wanted to do that, they wouldn't make a "Defend X planets" mission, they'd use a "Hold control until MO expires" order. And if it were controlled by the players, it would just mirror the helldivers on planet count.

More arbitrary goals like killing X number of bugs, or objectives, across the whole front.

There are still PS5 preorder keys floating around for sale but they are expensive

or they could even do a small change as the split be by front, like the split on bots isn't influenced by the insects front. It would already help a little.

I disagree. Knocking out a faction in Helldivers meant weeks, potentially months of reduced enemy variety. Not to mention, the factions people actually liked fighting would be knocked out first. What this usually meant is that wars would drag on forever fighting nothing but Cyborgs, whom people didn't like on average. I was afraid this would happen when we wiped out the Automatons in Helldivers 2. Glad that wasn't the case, because we already don't have that much in the way of enemy variety.

I agree, was super annoyed that the bots came back so fast after we defeated them and immediately fell into a mindset of ignoring general orders and just doing whatever I wanted after realizing that this would just be a continuing cycle and we wouldn’t get victories like HD1

@@Malidictus There are pros and cons to both systems. Like the other reply said it really sucked that we defeated the bots just for them to come back basically hours later. However I also do remember in HD1 "Oh good, just the illuminates left..." It's a pick your poison situation but I'd rather our progress meant something but I can see how people could prefer a forever war. I was hoping the bots being gone would lead to the Illuminate invasion and the bots could reemerge a week or so later once the shininess of the new faction wore off.

​@@MalidictusThen what's the point of having the galactic war system? If we know no matter what we do nobody will get wiped then what's the point, it removes stakes and reduces immersion.

@@patchesgaming9139 There were never stakes to begin with. Helldivers is not a strategy game. It's an arcadey third-person shooter. I can't find the post right now, but that came from one of the developers or community reps. The Galactic War is a framing device to give context to the core gameplay. I'm not opposed to having it nor caring about it. What I'm opposed to is negatively impacting the actual core gameplay for the sake of the campaign. Imagine for a second that the Automatons attacked our ammunition supply lines, so for the next three weeks we could only ever use energy weapons and non-ballistic Strategems. Removing the Automatons is - in my opinion - on the same level as that. And more to the point - looking for immersion in Helldivers is barking up the wrong tree, in my opinion. Helldivers is sci-fi Magicka. That is to say, it takes itself just seriously enough to not be an outright parody, but not seriously enough that dumb shit doesn't still happen. The new Terminid Containment system was supposed to stop the bugs. Instead, it made them more aggressive and introduced flying bugs. Wiping out the Automatons was supposed to remove them from the board. Except they came back even stronger. It's the plot to Heavy Weapon: Atomic Tank. Long story short: the setting supports a perpetual war where none of our victories are decisive, removing factions from the map makes the core game significantly less fun to play. I don't see that as a particularly controversial take.

A true helldiver! FOR DEMOCRACY!

i track the objective and where the general flow of helldivers go to, but since i don't got friends i quickplay all day and try to help people with their missions.

@PhantomPh1re yeah I generally do that too, I have about 3 friends I made from playing and 1 guy I work with but if they arnt on then it's just helping random people, it's really the best way to play

I pick planets based on how irritating the planet conditions are. I never fight on the planets that give you one less Strategem slots, for example.

@@TheMTSilver im pretty sure thats on a per-operation basis, and not on a planet wide basis.

At the risk of not sounding democratic, i cannot be arsed to die for a fire tornado ridden hellhole like that!

Flavour text?

@@Hengilore probably AI generated comment. if you check the profile it leads to a website that is currently down, but the actual URL indicates some form of scam/data harvesting scheme

@@lucasaldjah5784 Also the obviously provocative channel image most bots have.

I really wanted that blue armor, I'd be willing to buy DLC for it since its the ONLY blue armor in the game, and I feel like it's cool to have your squads have identifiable colors, but Pre-order is just... well you wouldn't KNOW it's going to be worth it, you could very well be spending 60$ on skyrim horse armor, or be getting Deep-rock levels of bang for your buck. Separate random gripe, that account linking could've been handled way better, maybe a free warbond if you linked an account, or just 500 super credits or something, some incentive TOO good to pass up, forcing it made ALOT of people mad.

Yes, that's what I thought would happen when we defeated the robots

This is exactly how campaigns in Helldivers 1 worked pretty much. I think the rewards were one time things for finishing/participating in any campaigns though.

I wear the blue Cavalier of democracy armor with the FS-11 executioner helmet and the basic black cape. Perfect drip imo.

This! Especially when their first Helldivers game only had what, 7000 players total at most from I've been told?

They do. It was confirmed by the devs through Spitz that Liberation works based on XP gains. The more XP you gain the more Liberation you contribute. A full team of four clearing the map on a level 7 completing all objectives, destroying all enemy camps, and a full extraction plus difficulty multipliers will give enough XP on a single mission to match a solo player spamming 5 level 1 missions. And if those missions are done in a set, there's a cumulative bonus to liberation meaning the third level 7 in a set is equal to 8+ level 1 missions. In short, the more damage you do and the more people you bring home actually matters.

@graveyardshift6691 Sweet. Thanks for the info buddy!

We also helped blow the game up from word of mouth

Have u tried this game. Totally okay if u don’t like it but give it a shot whenever u can

​@@kahtanalobaidi1550 haven't yet, and it looks cool, but I'm not looking to dive into a new game right now.

You should switch over to HD2 man, Arrowhead actually cares for their fans unlike Blizzard.

The _one_ thing that isn't good about that system is that people who want to play lower difficulties will probably be flamed for not contributing enough.

@@HasekuraIsuna or maybe have a system of percentage of liberation based on specific missions like for the defence mission of the high values assets the missle silos , that might be better that way players wouldn’t be looked at that way . There’s good and bad to these therretical ideas though without testing it’s hard to say if it’ll work

That has to do with Decay rate. Every hour the percentage of a contested planet will be affected by a set decay rate to simulate the enemies fighting back to retain control of the planet. The bugs are typically set at 1% while the bots are set to .5%. So the bugs will claw back 1% per hour of a contested planet while the bots will claw back .5%. What did you think the enemy was going to lie back and take it while we pounded on them? These decay rates can be manually adjusted by Joel to simulate narrative events. IE during Swift Disassembly III, the decay rate for the bots was set to 1.5% which made liberation virtually impossible without 150-200k players on a planet. But since Defense Campaigns are not affected by Decay rate it was much easier for us to defend which is what SD Phase III was all about. After we succeeded on Phase III, the bots 'ran out of steam' and the decay rate was set to 0.0%. This made the final push ridiculously easy.

@@graveyardshift6691 I know it has to do with the decay rate. It doesn't change the fact it makes it feel bad. Again, makes it pointless to fight anywhere but in where the collective decided to park. Don't take me wrong, it's still fun, and I'm glad they give us the option to go fight where we want. It's just unrewarding. Personally makes me just want to ignore the galactic liberation.

@@medmelancholy I suppose that's the point of the personal order but once you've got the warbonds that kind of loses it's meaning since that's something you can do on a personal level but it's not really narrative changing. In some ways, that's just the hard limitation of a cooperative live service game. Once your personal progression is maxed out there's not to do but wait until the next warbond.

I was in a group 3 months ago and for some reason we had an impact score of 12 and still haven’t been able to recreate that score does anyone know why that happened

@@trinityprentice8221 What was the difficulty? If you were on Helldive, you probably 5 starred each mission. That's what I've been told will give you 12, but usually on 1 of the missions, someone doesnt evac so we usually only get 6

@@IcyLabors it was helldive difficulty

supply pack

Supply pack as shoyahaaruni says and press 5

It can, but the way the defence or liberation works, if there are only like 8000 people on one planet, they won’t get enough combined liberation %age to counteract the bots/bugs fighting back

It's because you never went to the bots front that needed reinforcement by the way !

@@Althea034 on the contrary I was one of the people losing my mind because no one reinforced us at martale, I’ve just started following the crowd because I got sick of having 0 impact