Reply to original OP I’m not sure if the game is as balanced as claimed
Look at all of these
1 Like
I bet a few million slaves and servants under the rule of singular kings, emperors and pharaos would disagree on that.
sure, there’s always an entourage feeding on the spoils that drop from the main table, but take out the leader and the imperium crumbles.
time and again since the dawn of men.
we remember great leaders, not the dude that lifted the block to the top of the pyramid.
the luxury of civility is something very brittle and come the next plague or crisis, you’ll protect yourself and your family and put your neighbor on a spit roast if that’s what it takes to survive 
3 Likes
Well you miss my point, there’s value in good leadership, but the achievement of civilisation is impossible without the work of the people.
Also no, maybe individual civilisations crumbled, but civilisation as a whole never did, it just adapted to new conditions, one king died, one kingdom faded away, another took its place with often many of the same people. Society itself didn’t crumble permanently just because leaders died.
Maybe you are fixated just on the great leaders, but again that’s narrow and doesn’t tell the whole story. You do not see the parts of the whole, just the specific part you are biased for.
In a crisis the best solution was always to join a collective to get through the hard times, some individual with airs of grandeur would usually end up abandoned or forgotten. If societal collapse hits you won’t pick up a gun and become a one-man army, I can guarantee you that.
You might have game skills but you need better team skills.
1 Like
the point, to end the off topic, is people don’t cooperate voluntarily.
they either do out of fear or greed. free an individual of both needs and he won’t bother with the needs of others, maybe within his “group of affection”/family.
yes, societies are build by millions… of workers or slaves.
neither would lift a hand if they didn’t have to.
take the chains of the slave, he won’t lift your blocks, give a worker a couple million in his bank account and he’s off to a private island, away from “people”
as for semi on-topic, ingame you cooperate as far as the perks of another player give you any benefit or outlook for success.
the moment you can solo the encounter (and plenty loadouts do so easily on auric maelstrom) the “need” for other players ceases to exist and people play at their own leisure.
havoc forces people staying together due to emperors fading light, take that away and you’ll see havoc speed runs the same way maelstroms are done.
depends on the term “pick up” as I would have stocked up in a prepper bunker long since 
water, ammo, food and seal the lid.
2 Likes
So 2 unbalanced games, make another game balanced?
Your logic fails.
3 Likes
The game is a disaster.
No actual events, no new maps, no new weapons / updates for some classes, and a large etc.
Is a good game, with bad manteniance.
If you see Vermintide 2, it gets A LOT of things… even naval battle map…
Darktide 2 mostly is, same modifiers, in different combinations.
I am tired…
1 Like
You played that game too? I have 700 hours in it as a survivor main. That game was so fun. I wouldnt be surprised if we unknowingly played together at some point because of how small the playerbase was
2 Likes
Im glad people bring up issues with specific gripes and bugs on the forums, it can help make the game better by pointing out things the devs missed.
I mainly play Auric, been playing the event on Damnation and had a blast so far, just wish there was a Aquila reward 
1 Like
Too much blast for my taste
1 Like
They literally did this in Darktide too though. Rippergun ammo comes to mind. Nerfed, buffed to the same spot, oh okay
2 Likes
Did it to the bolter too
Hear, hear, OP!
The very first time I tried the DS and was suddenly able to solo monsters, I thought, “Overall, the balance is fine.”
When Rumbler got buffed I couldn’t simply close my eyes and mindlessly blast everything. I had to keep my eyes open and mindlessly blast everything. Overall, the balance was fine.
The Arbites came along, and players could let the dog play for them. But not every game for the next month had 4 Arbites steamrolling everything. Not every game. And while I could long-range counter-snipe with my shotgun while being whaled-on by a horde, overall the balance was fine.
Then - along with a lot of other balance issues that almost never went away, but just got added to - SG got buffed. Again. And now when I play I roll my eyes a bit at the Outcast Engineer, and the Battle Wizard is still the Battle Wizard. But overall, the balance is fine.
1 Like
I think I’d take balance discussions a bit more seriously if people were clear about what they were balancing for. For example
“OK, let’s imagine a random group of moderately competent players (e.g. they understand shoving and dodging, but are not scouring every patch note to theory craft the new meta). I think they should be able to win Heresy 80% of the time, Damnation 70%, Auric 60%, Auric Maelstrom 50%, and then Havoc should basically become increasingly impossible. Currently the ability to crowd control is too strong, so we should look at rebalancing that; there are too many Crushers, but individually they are too weak so buff and reduce them; Boom Bringer is too strong, so it needs to be changed somehow while still maintaining a distinct niche, etc. ”
I may or may not agree with the position or proposals, but at least it would be clear what they think Darktide should look like and how they think it should get there. As it is, I’m left with the impression that the forum generally thinks that unless 90% of players get curbstomped in Malice the game is far too easy. And while I suppose every view has some merit, I am a little confused as to how a game is supposed to be supported if there’s only 12 people playing it.
For myself, I’m pretty open to the argument that some things need nerfing and others buffing because of X and Y. And I certainly don’t think it unreasonable to moan a bit about the bugginess or whatever. But I swear 90% of this forum is “OMG, DT is broken pay2win garbage; all you have to do is play perfectly and never make any mistakes and you can solo Auric – don’t FS know I will never become the God I am meant to be unless I beat Videogames? There are people playing it and..sorry I might throw up…having. Fun. Disgusting sickos. Unless you devote every second to becoming The John Darktide then what is the point?” etc. etc. for 500 pages.
5 Likes
So you basically agree with me?
Some combinations of weapons/talents/blessings, while “viable”, definitely take inordinately more (or more unfun) effort to achieve the same or similar results as some of the outlier combinations.
The way I feel about balance is that there are certain things I can’t play in pubs because I will be most likely negatively impacting the experience of my teammates. Right now I want to play Hive Scum(or psyker) and use one of his main abilities and the class exclusive weapons but if I do that I will more or less griefing my team. But I don’t want to play bad on purpose or pick a bad talent tree (different than trying off-meta) or whatever. I’m relegated to stuff I don’t necessarily want to use to be pro-social and it would just be better if the game addressed this in some capacity, namely via balance changes.
Much of the game’s difficulty, to me, was designed around Darktide 1.0 reject power levels and none of the attempts to reconcile the power increase from the addition of talent trees (and itemization rework to a lesser extent) have been satisfactory. However, the idea that they’ll completely overhaul things seems incredibly unlikely and I’d think we’d see a new Tide game before that. So in the meantime, just let me run Desperado and Dual Uzis without the power level that lets me outdamage the rest of the lobby.
3 Likes
Spawns were increased because devs accidentally pushed a big red button at the office, no balance changes or fundamentaly wrong deccisions were made. Unfortunately devs can’t find that big red button anymore to undo spawn changes.
1 Like
Being hugely tongue-in-cheek, if you were to consider “bad weapons” as -1, “well balanced” weapons as 0, “strong” as 1 and “outliers” as a 2 or 3, it probably averages out to around 0, which makes the title of the thread literally correct, the worst kind of correct.
7 Likes
Considering MOST things are both useable and fun on auric difficulty, I would agree with this post
1 Like
