Last 6 moths across all DOW 1 and DOW 2 games average was DOW 1: 1124 DOW 2: 1046 this average seems to be consistent most months before last stand update. Thus it has more players but I would not say it was clearly more DOW 1 fans.
As for DOW 3 I also agree 1v1 is an issue the other modes seem fine
Dawn of war 2 came out in 2009, Dawn of war 1 Came out in 2004, with expansions following. This clearly proves that DoW1 has more fans than DoWII. Game is older and has had far larger expansions, which are only created by demand.
People asking "What is the point of the power core game mode?" - My impression was that, along with the timed phases of refunds on dead units, this is to stop people getting stomped too quickly and at the same time to stop people hiding buildings all over the map to prolong a lost game. And it manages to do both those things.
I would definitely like to see alternative game modes for MP though.
Last 6 moths across all DOW 1 and DOW 2 games average was DOW 1: 1124 DOW 2: 1046 this average seems to be consistent most months before last stand update. Thus it has more players but I would not say it was clearly more DOW 1 fans.
As for DOW 3 I also agree 1v1 is an issue the other modes seem fine
Dawn of war 2 came out in 2009, Dawn of war 1 Came out in 2004, with expansions following. This clearly proves that DoW1 has more fans than DoWII. Game is older and has had far larger expansions, which are only created by demand.
Also don't lots of people play DoW 1 outside of Steam? So... Steam won't record those people in its stats.
Beta soon ends and managed to play few more matches. Ppl got pretty good with races already. I met players with not so good micro only on first day. Now either player is better than me or equal. Gotta say again, race balance is seriously broken. It is very obvious in 1v1 match and not so much in team games. Probably that's the reason Relic didn't address it, but since those issues are pretty obvious, I'm not sure why they pushed beta like this. It surely can turn off a lot of players (potential customers). It could be luck, but when during Beta days I win normally vs SM, and I can see where I messed up when I lose. With Eldar or Orks it is disaster. In some matches I managed to stomp them real hard early game by gaining far superior map control and killing up to 3 their squads, but even after that they manage to crush me. With SM it never happened. If I manage to win early game, it always gauged to my advantage as it goes further. I'm sure many ppl experience the same thing. Really curious to see how things gonna be on release day, but knowing Relic I don't hold much hope in this regard...
@motiv said:
Why compare Dow 1 and 2. They are different games. 1 is not better than the other as both have their niche.
I prefer the 1v1 to team games. Team games seem to involve turtling to the extreme.
You see, they are different yes, but we can compare quality and how fun it is to play both. There are also many other things like balance and support of the game, technical side and etc. People always did and still do compare StarCraft to DOW, those games are pretty different too, but see nothing wrong with comparing them.
Have been reading this whole conversation for some time and I have to say I completely agree with everything Stoner have said. At the current moment DoW 3 seems unpolished and with no attention to the details that characterize great competitive RTS games.
Also DoW was more popular than DoW 2 and what is actuall fact about this is sold number of copies. Over 9 000 000 copies of DoW have been sold worldwide (over 7 milions until 2013) ... just to compare Starcraft: Brood War sold over 10 milions copies before 2007, Starcraft 2 sold over 3 milions copies in first month.
But if You really want to read about difference beetwen DoW & DoW 2 check 1d4chan.org (love this site)
How 1d4chan.org comment on multiplayer of both games:
DoW multi:
Dawn of War was a brilliant game at launch - and one that saw the game suffer worse and worse as time went on.
DoW 2 multi:
Whilst Dawn of War 2's myriad Single-Player campaigns and Last Stand mode are generally-beloved by the playerbase, for their plot and characterization, and Last Stand's raw fun-factor, the same cannot be said of Dawn of War 2's multiplayer, which is horribly reviled by much of the playerbase for being both counter-intuitive, non-interactive, and poorly-designed. Boasting a general setup virtually identical to Relic's World War II RTS Company of Heroes, Dawn of War II's multiplayer starts off strong - multiple heroes, and some (apparent) real tactical choices for each faction - and quickly slides downhill.
I wouldn't say it was a mess. There were issues, true, but WA made serious QoL changes that improved game in many aspects, later addons also broke much, but they fixed most of it and in the end of DC and SS game was rather polished.
Since DoW II was never fixed, it's my main fear and issue with DoW III. There is no guarantee that Relic will jump on fixing issues with the game instead of pushing some DLCs with cosmetic stuff instead. It's a big trend in modern game industry. Many developers of AAA titles don't care about technical issues, bugs or balance, but more about stuff they can sell.
I always keep "lacks content" "lacks content" than they compare DoW 3 to DoW 1 & 2 that had years to pump out content. They didn't start with all their factions in from the get-go. Also, how are people complaining about balance over a 4 day beta that has locked content?
Furthermore, I disagree with sluggish response time as I've had no issue with it and that includes switching my boyz between melee and ranged.
@GenuineProdigy said:
I always keep "lacks content" "lacks content" than they compare DoW 3 to DoW 1 & 2 that had years to pump out content. They didn't start with all their factions in from the get-go. Also, how are people complaining about balance over a 4 day beta that has locked content?
Furthermore, I disagree with sluggish response time as I've had no issue with it and that includes switching my boyz between melee and ranged.
Both prev games started with at least 4 races and more maps than this one will. Plus things like line units, army painter, wide options menu and etc. Strangely almost everyone noticed this...
Some balance issues are too obvious. It really easy to spot it if you have played several matches. That goes without saying how many people are pointing out the same thing and pretty much agreeing on it.
Check support forums. You might be in some very lucky spot where it does have good response time, or you just simply don't see the difference.
@GenuineProdigy said:
I always keep "lacks content" "lacks content" than they compare DoW 3 to DoW 1 & 2 that had years to pump out content. They didn't start with all their factions in from the get-go. Also, how are people complaining about balance over a 4 day beta that has locked content?
Furthermore, I disagree with sluggish response time as I've had no issue with it and that includes switching my boyz between melee and ranged.
Both prev games started with at least 4 races and more maps than this one will. Plus things like line units, army painter, wide options menu and etc. Strangely almost everyone noticed this...
Some balance issues are too obvious. It really easy to spot it if you have played several matches. That goes without saying how many people are pointing out the same thing and pretty much agreeing on it.
Check support forums. You might be in some very lucky spot where it does have good response time, or you just simply don't see the difference.
Personally, I don't see how 3 instead of 4 suddenly means there is a "lack of content" has anyone ever considered why they decided to start with 3 instead of 4? Time, resources, manpower, balance, mechanics, etc? It takes time to design 9 elites, units, buildings, animations, voices, etc. I find it perfectly understandable if they wanted to start with 3 as a base and work from there, since again, it takes time to design an entire faction.
I've played several matches, however, I've never sat there and said something was clearly broken. I managed to always find a way to counter. Furthermore, if I did just get stomped by another player I always record my matches and watch them in the event of a loss to understand what happened for the future. Either way, I still stand by my opinion of it being silly to judge balance over a 4 day beta with locked content.
@Stoner said:
Nope, there were few individuals who prefered DOW 2 over 1, but it's such a minority that doesn't even worth mentioning. Check player dropout and life cycle of both games, it should give you an idea. Funny thing is, right now balance wise DOW III has far less issues than vanilla DOW II with latest patch.
That is such a personally engorged assumption... DoW has the zerg, DoWII has the S in RTS IMHO...
Also DoW was more popular than DoW 2 and what is actuall fact about this is sold number of copies. Over 9 000 000 copies of DoW have been sold worldwide (over 7 milions until 2013) ... just to compare Starcraft: Brood War sold over 10 milions copies before 2007, Starcraft 2 sold over 3 milions copies in first month.
These numbers are close to the current steam owners who have the game on steam. (Note:DOW2 and DOW1 before Retribution may not have the game on steam and not counted as a owner.) https://steamspy.com/search.php?s=dawn+of+war
Overall it seems DOW 2 has sold roughly 8 million copies. I was never able to find good sources of data for DOW1.
Another interesing side note DOW 2 still have more unique players compare to DOW1. However DOW1 user's play for a lot longer each time they play which sugguest that the DOW1 players are more "hardcore" while the DOW2 players are more "casual".
I believe in DOW3 is a mixure of the 2 trying not to be to hardcore / E sports however it seems to not focus so much on balance. This has been picked up by a few people for example: (video set at the 4:01)
Overall I prefer the return to a more DOW1 style game however I am still unsure base on comments that the devs have made in the past if they are aiming for a strong balance game like DOW1 and are instead aiming for a more "casual" audience. Hopfully if tourments do happen they will ban certain elites or Doc that people find OP.
No knows sheet about the balance as of yet. 2 days and elaborate balance assumptions? Please.. People get outplayed all the time, they blame balance.
If devs changed balance from 2 days observations, this game would be a clusteryuck. Already asking devs how to balance the game, before game is not even launch. This is hilarious. Maybe get FULL game first, there are additional elites and doctrines. I really hate people who pretend to know about balance after 2 WHOLE days of playing the game. They are similar people who write reviews about games after playing for 30 minutes (e.g. steam reviews).
DoW1 and Dow2 were both great in their own way. It took time to get "into" the game, understand its' specifics to really appreciate them. Again, people who played DoW 2 single player and none of multiplayer shout the loudest how dow 2 was terrible. If they have played and understood all the not so obvious mechanics behind DoW 2, they would be surprised. Same goes for DoW1.
@Stoner said:
1. Both prev games started with at least 4 races and more maps than this one will. Plus things like line units, army painter, wide options menu and etc. Strangely almost everyone noticed this...
DoW II started with 5 maps, which is even less. Not saying 8 maps is good, but you're wrong saying there's a downgrade here.
Also, the 4 races didn't have as much content, army painter is in the game, and I fail to see what are the wide option menus you're talking about as there are quite a lot of options already, could you be more specific?
Some balance issues are too obvious. It really easy to spot it if you have played several matches.
I really don't think you can spot "obvious balance problems" in a few games. Ranger spam is countered, people got used to elite's lethality and now factor it in skirmishes... Do you have specific examples, again?
That goes without saying how many people are pointing out the same thing and pretty much agreeing on it.
Just because they're numerous doesn't mean they're right.
Check support forums. You might be in some very lucky spot where it does have good response time, or you just simply don't see the difference.
People don't go onto the support forums if everything is right on their end. You don't know for how many people it works just fine.
Incoherent hatered towards dow2 aside, i agree with most of the points raised by the OP.
So in a summary:
Cons:
extremely snowbally (the power core mode even makes it more so compared to straight up anihilation because it gives free resources to the winning player that destroys the generators)
balance is all over the place and knowing Relic patching practicies is unlikely to be fixed in a timely manner
vehicles vs infantry mechanics is mostly gone due to hero units being the "new" vehicles and also easily killing the regular vehicles themselves
combat is blob on blob action in the middle of the map with hero units and ultimates ocassionaly decimating half the opponents army
investing more into technology or economy at the expense of more units is pointless cause the game is not balanced with these possibilities being viable in mind
spreading out the blob to several fronts and harassing is usually pointless
DoW II certainly wasn't an example of content packed game, but 4 races vs 3 is still big and please, count line units, building and maps in DOW I. You sound like it only takes time to design it for DOW III, but previously it somehow fell on their heads. In DOW III you can see a lot of recycled ideas from previous games, and making game from zero, in case of DoW I, which was really packed with content on release, indicates HUGE decline in this department for new Dawn of War.
On wider options, me, and many other users have commented about this many times already. If things like missing graphic options, must have control options for any PC RTS game or even trivial mouse sensitivity options is fine, than it is something miraculous. It is called blind fanboysm when you don't see obvious issues with product you buy for $60. Plus, if game doesn't have certain issue, it usually not raised multiple times in support forums. People don't tend to massively imagine same things you know...
Regarding balance. Rangers spam isn't countered, judging by two games in comparison to multitude of different experience all over isn't an indicator, and tbh ranger spam is very small issue in comparison to others this game has, like Power Core mode in 1v1. Just imagine if there wouldn't be cheap way to hide behind turrets with long ranged units, which I've personally done with SM Snipers and Whirlwinds? You could push and punish your enemy, but now you can't and have to drag on matches absolutely for no reason. But I'm curious, are you saying that balance is perfectly fine?
On popularity. Yes, we all know that advertisement was pretty good and many ppl got into DOW II with hopes that game will be decent after Relics great success with DOW I and COH 1, but sold copies isn't a thing here, thing is player dropoff and unexpectedly quick death of a game. It usually doesn't happen with really good, high quality projects fyi. That's the main indicator of popularity and quality both.
MY EXPERIENCE:
Gameplay is very nice, graphics are good, high resolution textures, well balanced (for an open-beta game). I found myself addicted to it, spent the whole weekend playing it. Jain Zar is awesome, long have I awaited to see a phoenix lord potraited in a game. Could as well add the rest of them, right Relic? Eldar players would fall in love with the game.
Some points that need improvement:
Couldn't select the squad that was taking damage because of all the fuzz going on around it, only by trying to click on the squad symbol was i able to micro.
Input-lag too high, reducing graphics to low improved (even though i have an extreme AMP! overclocked 970 GTX), but there is still room for improvement (maybe add a ping-o-meter beside every player that joins the match, so we can see if its going to be a laggy game) the input lag could also be caused by the own game being heavy, i don't know much about optimizing games so not gonna point fingers here
Couldn't click on the "unlock" button after matches where i unlocked things by leveling up elites
Eldar vehicles, please, they are a joke right now, specially fire prisms. Thanks
Thats about it, I'm looking forward to play the game once more! Thanks for making DOW3, Relic!
extremely snowbally (the power core mode even makes it more so compared to straight up anihilation because it gives free resources to the winning player that destroys the generators)
This is to compensate the attacking player for a costly battle of a key objective. Also as an additional way to make someone come out of turret protection and fight.
balance is all over the place and knowing Relic patching practicies is unlikely to be fixed in a timely manner
It's beta, no RTS was even close to balanced within the first 3 months after release.
vehicles vs infantry mechanics is mostly gone due to hero units being the "new" vehicles and also easily killing the regular vehicles themselves
Try to kill a dreadnaught with tacticals, or dire avengers, or boyz. There most certainly is the normal vs. heavy armor dynamic with an additional layer of Elite unit interaction to the damage mix.
combat is blob on blob action in the middle of the map with hero units and ultimates ocassionaly decimating half the opponents army
Players are new. It is highly advantageous to peel off a small hit squad to harass points, or use units designed to do such, like skimmers.
investing more into technology or economy at the expense of more units is pointless cause the game is not balanced with these possibilities being viable in mind
If I understand correctly, you are referring to something like a fast expand (nexus first), and a technology play like lurker/nydus?
It wasn't really a possibility in DOW2, in my experience. Only played competitive multiplayer before Chaos Rising.
spreading out the blob to several fronts and harassing is usually pointless
I tend to view the map as one front. The line between all my stuff and all my opponents. Moving a high value group to attack a position is a good way to setup a decisive battle position for yourself if your opponent chooses to respond to your harassment. (feint/envelopment)
low number of different units
I feel like it's a fairly high number of units. Roughly the same as DOW1, DOW2 and Starcraft/Broodwar if you include the Elites as a unique unit. The way doctrines interact with units to make them better at certain roles helps with diversity. Tacticals with grenades and slow flamers are a very different beast to fight than regular tacticals.
basebuilding is extremely basic
It's just as 'advanced' as DOW1 and this is a huge PRO. If I have to build another depot, plyon or house or in my gaming life time, I'm done with RTS.
no cover/retreat/morale/defenses
There is cover. Heavy bubble and stealth. Both are awesome, they are abstract, but there IS cover. Retreat is manual. Morale may not exist, but there are more status effects, which makes it a bit more complex. Defenses would be considered the massive turrets that protect your base.
requires more APM than dow1 or dow2
Multiplayer may be more challenging because a faster player can do more than a slower player in this title. However, if there is a large disparity it would be felt just as much in either previous title.
looks like a cartoon, not a w40k game
I 100% thought so too, until I played on my own PC. With a high resolution and maximum graphics, it looks very good. Warcraft looks like a cartoon, this does not.
Pros:
Ehm. Supposedly MOBA players should like it?
I detest MOBAs, and I think this a pretty special title.
DoW 3 IS NOT A MOBA. and this is really important. There is no asinine fighting auto-spawn creeps, looking for magic items, and leveling your Panda bear.
@Templar1118 said:
Again, not directed at you, and I'm sorry I used your post as a template, but I don't think I could disagree more.
There's still low ground / high ground vision, ramps, and chasms -- Skimmers tend to ignore a good portion of things.
Blobbing, in this game, in any way shape or form will get you wiped out by a competent opponent or you will be caught in a disadvantageous position in one way or another. The reason people blob is due to their lack of skill and understanding of the game. Ironically, this also makes Elites shine way more because people are skillessly blobbing up and then dying to AoE and crowd control. Then comes the complaint that elites are all overtuned and they cause army wipes so easily. And somehow, the perception from that is that your troops are also now throwaways because most players at his skill level seem to not be able to take advantage of a 2k+ deficit.
You really should call him out harder on the MOBA reference; it's thoughtless, a memetic shortcut devoid of mental complexity and effort.
@Stoner said:
DoW II certainly wasn't an example of content packed game, but 4 races vs 3 is still big and please, count line units, building and maps in DOW I.
Do you count generators (and if not, why not)?
Also, why don't the elite units count?
What about mechanics instead of units? Because I can clearly see that one of the Space Marine building of DoW I has no purpose at all in DoW III (Orbital Relay).
I clearly don't feel like there is less content.
You sound like it only takes time to design it for DOW III, but previously it somehow fell on their heads. In DOW III you can see a lot of recycled ideas from previous games, and making game from zero, in case of DoW I, which was really packed with content on release, indicates HUGE decline in this department for new Dawn of War.
You seem to think "recycled ideas" don't take coding time, modeling for high-polygon-count models take the same time as for low-poly, and new things (like doctrines and racial mechanics) don't count.
If things like missing graphic options
I've seen this thrown around a few times but I never saw anyone tell which ones are missing, could you please tell me? Because the graphic options seemed to be like very other RTS game. What did I miss?
must have control options for any PC RTS game or even trivial mouse sensitivity options is fine, than it is something miraculous. It is called blind fanboysm when you don't see obvious issues with product you buy for $60. Plus, if game doesn't have certain issue, it usually not raised multiple times in support forums. People don't tend to massively imagine same things you know...
I wouldn't say that. There's also a lot of bandwagoning, people claiming things that are just plain false, people complaining about assumed features, about balancing (while everyone is still discovering the game), etc.
Regarding balance. Rangers spam isn't countered, judging by two games in comparison to multitude of different experience all over isn't an indicator
In competitive games it is. Look at Starcraft. Terrans were considered weak before Boxer made them work, and people copied him.
[...] But I'm curious, are you saying that balance is perfectly fine?
Of course not. No game ever reached perfect balance. But it is not as dramatic as people think. At low level, the game is pretty balanced; at high level, it seems like Marines have a slight advantage. All of this will probably change a lot with the new doctrines and elites anyway.
Regarding balance. Rangers spam isn't countered, judging by two games in comparison to multitude of different experience all over isn't an indicator
In competitive games it is. Look at Starcraft. Terrans were considered weak before Boxer made them work, and people copied him.
I hear Terrans are 1 & 2 in the world for SC atm. God knows I suck at SC so I won't comment on them further.
What I will say though is that this ranger spam whinge fest is getting old. Marines are perfectly capable of beating everyone to death if their tools are used correctly. Eldar Shadow Spectres and some Ork Dreds were far more... interesting (rather than strictly problematic) to deal with than rangers.
@Silk
Excuse me, what generators? What's so special about them? Can it solely be compared to missing faction or units? Elite is a single model with few skills, designing this vs entire faction doesn't really compare. Also we've seen only few so far, no idea how well other done. Orbital Strike was very useful in team matches, just the way it is in DOW III, you won't see Orbital Strikes in any skilled player 1v1 matches, does it make them useless? Interesting logic. Me, and majority of people not feel but see how LESS content DOW III bring to the table, it's painfully obvious.
If Relic considered game unfinished, they should have took more time. Elites and doctrines are very iffy right now, we can view them only as templates for now because some feel like far superior choice than others. It will change a lot, I'm sure and no guarantee they all will be well balanced in the end. I don't see how can it be achieved.
Check Performance Thread, or better yet launch DOW I or II and check options available, please, no need to play dumb.
So people just imagining things and game has no issues. Assuming so many people making up things is interesting logic...
Judging by 1 single match from Beta? It cannot be considered truly competitive, as your own argument, not enough time to judge, but by clear analysis it indicates there's and issue that might need fixing. On release more will be revealed, just wait.
If balance isn't there, than it's broken and needs fixing, that's my whole point all this time.
Have to add, something that I think will be good addition mainly for SM:
Making Tactical Marines - tactical, by letting us use rocket launchers with ability to re-buy (not free) upgraded weapons, in case I want to swap plasma squad for rockets/flamers etc. No idea why this isn't the case yet.
Letting Deathwatch equip plasma and re-equip upgrades (for resources would be fine)
Making pods and other deployables on the field be able to destroy scrap and generally improve surface landing availability. That might not be only SM issue.
Introduce auto-reinforce function, like it was in both previous games.
Add transport for reinforcement. We should have a choice between forward base and mobile transport.
All heavy anti-infantry weapons to have suppression effect kick in after certain period of time under the fire. Damage didn't feel to impressive for me and having this for melee but not HBD was pretty strange to say the least.
More opinions on additions for any race are welcome.
@Stoner said:
Excuse me, what generators? What's so special about them?
Nothing, that's the point, they're now fused with the ressource system, so complaining they are not a building is just plain stupid.
Can it solely be compared to missing faction or units?
Isn't it a missing building?
Elite is a single model with few skills, designing this vs entire faction doesn't really compare.
Saying "there's less content" and purposefuly ignoring a huge chunk of the content is complete fallacy.
Also we've seen only few so far, no idea how well other done.
We've seen all elite units. 9 per faction. Those which weren't in the beta nor on the site have been shown on Relic's stream.
Orbital Strike was very useful in team matches, just the way it is in DOW III, you won't see Orbital Strikes in any skilled player 1v1 matches, does it make them useless? Interesting logic.
Me, and majority of people not feel but see how LESS content DOW III bring to the table, it's painfully obvious.
When you're product is good, people tell to one person on average. When they're not satisfied with your product however, they'll tell to 10. You will always see more people complaining than cheering on the internet, that's part of the human psyche. People are used to good things, so they don't go everywhere saying how good it is - which is one the reason why there isn't a hundred threads on the support section saying "good job Relic, the game works fine on my rig!" (the other main reason being it's pretty ++heresy++ useless feedback, contrary to "this bug exists").
Also, I don't really feel your majority in this thread.
If Relic considered game unfinished, they should have took more time.
Nobody said Relic considered the game unfinished - and they shouldn't in my opinion.
Also; that's just not how it works at all. You can't postpone a game for years and hope to make a profit. You will never be able to reach perfection on your game, so you need to stop adding features at some point, and put it on the market. And, as incredible as that might be to you, Relic employees also have to pay bills.
Elites and doctrines are very iffy right now, we can view them only as templates for now because some feel like far superior choice than others.
Oh, so you're an expert on balance. Better yet: you know what options are better than others without a single number to compare them. You must be a genius.
It will change a lot, I'm sure and no guarantee they all will be well balanced in the end. I don't see how can it be achieved.
Perfect balance can never be achieved (as I already said in this thread). It took years for Starcraft to be at the stade it is now, and even now it is not perfect.
Wanting for the game to reach perfection instantly is more than entitlement.
Check Performance Thread, or better yet launch DOW I or II and check options available, please, no need to play dumb.
Are you talking SLI support?
If not: link please. I checked 3 performances threads and not a single thing on those missing available options. Or did you just try to change the goalpost? Or make me lose my time?
So people just imagining things and game has no issues. Assuming so many people making up things is interesting logic...
Where did I say they make things up? Nice strawman argument there.
They're not making things up, they're overexagerating because they're mad, because they had bad à-priori on the game, because they assumed something would be there that had no chance to be in the game, etc. Also, as said earlier, I'm pretty confident they're not the majority.
Judging by 1 single match from Beta? It cannot be considered truly competitive, as your own argument, not enough time to judge, but by clear analysis it indicates there's and issue that might need fixing. On release more will be revealed, just wait.
You can't tell it's OP if there is proof you can win against it. And yes, this single match can change the "meta" - because people will watch and learn, and this single match can become many really fast.
I agree that there is a lot more options to come anyway, for every faction, and that balance will change a lot.
Menu
Comments
kric1991
Dawn of war 2 came out in 2009, Dawn of war 1 Came out in 2004, with expansions following. This clearly proves that DoW1 has more fans than DoWII. Game is older and has had far larger expansions, which are only created by demand.
LowTone
People asking "What is the point of the power core game mode?" - My impression was that, along with the timed phases of refunds on dead units, this is to stop people getting stomped too quickly and at the same time to stop people hiding buildings all over the map to prolong a lost game. And it manages to do both those things.
I would definitely like to see alternative game modes for MP though.
LowTone
Also don't lots of people play DoW 1 outside of Steam? So... Steam won't record those people in its stats.
Stoner
Beta soon ends and managed to play few more matches. Ppl got pretty good with races already. I met players with not so good micro only on first day. Now either player is better than me or equal. Gotta say again, race balance is seriously broken. It is very obvious in 1v1 match and not so much in team games. Probably that's the reason Relic didn't address it, but since those issues are pretty obvious, I'm not sure why they pushed beta like this. It surely can turn off a lot of players (potential customers). It could be luck, but when during Beta days I win normally vs SM, and I can see where I messed up when I lose. With Eldar or Orks it is disaster. In some matches I managed to stomp them real hard early game by gaining far superior map control and killing up to 3 their squads, but even after that they manage to crush me. With SM it never happened. If I manage to win early game, it always gauged to my advantage as it goes further. I'm sure many ppl experience the same thing. Really curious to see how things gonna be on release day, but knowing Relic I don't hold much hope in this regard...
You see, they are different yes, but we can compare quality and how fun it is to play both. There are also many other things like balance and support of the game, technical side and etc. People always did and still do compare StarCraft to DOW, those games are pretty different too, but see nothing wrong with comparing them.
Pulsar
Have been reading this whole conversation for some time and I have to say I completely agree with everything Stoner have said. At the current moment DoW 3 seems unpolished and with no attention to the details that characterize great competitive RTS games.
Also DoW was more popular than DoW 2 and what is actuall fact about this is sold number of copies. Over 9 000 000 copies of DoW have been sold worldwide (over 7 milions until 2013) ... just to compare Starcraft: Brood War sold over 10 milions copies before 2007, Starcraft 2 sold over 3 milions copies in first month.
But if You really want to read about difference beetwen DoW & DoW 2 check 1d4chan.org (love this site)
How 1d4chan.org comment on multiplayer of both games:
DoW multi:
DoW 2 multi:
Krupp
Dawn of War was an imbalanced mess at launch, as is tradition. I think they only fixed most issues with WA and then came new ones
Stoner
I wouldn't say it was a mess. There were issues, true, but WA made serious QoL changes that improved game in many aspects, later addons also broke much, but they fixed most of it and in the end of DC and SS game was rather polished.
Since DoW II was never fixed, it's my main fear and issue with DoW III. There is no guarantee that Relic will jump on fixing issues with the game instead of pushing some DLCs with cosmetic stuff instead. It's a big trend in modern game industry. Many developers of AAA titles don't care about technical issues, bugs or balance, but more about stuff they can sell.
GenuineProdigy
I always keep "lacks content" "lacks content" than they compare DoW 3 to DoW 1 & 2 that had years to pump out content. They didn't start with all their factions in from the get-go. Also, how are people complaining about balance over a 4 day beta that has locked content?
Furthermore, I disagree with sluggish response time as I've had no issue with it and that includes switching my boyz between melee and ranged.
Stoner
GenuineProdigy
Personally, I don't see how 3 instead of 4 suddenly means there is a "lack of content" has anyone ever considered why they decided to start with 3 instead of 4? Time, resources, manpower, balance, mechanics, etc? It takes time to design 9 elites, units, buildings, animations, voices, etc. I find it perfectly understandable if they wanted to start with 3 as a base and work from there, since again, it takes time to design an entire faction.
I've played several matches, however, I've never sat there and said something was clearly broken. I managed to always find a way to counter. Furthermore, if I did just get stomped by another player I always record my matches and watch them in the event of a loss to understand what happened for the future. Either way, I still stand by my opinion of it being silly to judge balance over a 4 day beta with locked content.
Carnage
That is such a personally engorged assumption... DoW has the zerg, DoWII has the S in RTS IMHO...
Sybarite
when the game spy servers died they all got moved across to steam (CD keys aswell).
Would love a link or info on this as I have been looking for soild numbers from DoW1 for a long time (doing data analytics of a lot games for a project). As for Dow 2 it sold very well as reported by game media at the time.
http://www.vg247.com/2009/03/05/dawn-of-war-ii-debuts-at-top-of-global-pc-charts/
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:l7dHc-sDul0J:kotaku.com/5165265/dawn-of-war-ii-tops-global-pc-sales+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au
Form THQ reports it seems Dawn of war 2 and Dawn of war 2:Chaos rising sold at least 6 million https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/945727-warhammer-40000-dawn-of-war-ii/56393531
These numbers are close to the current steam owners who have the game on steam. (Note:DOW2 and DOW1 before Retribution may not have the game on steam and not counted as a owner.) https://steamspy.com/search.php?s=dawn+of+war
Sybarite
Overall it seems DOW 2 has sold roughly 8 million copies. I was never able to find good sources of data for DOW1.
Another interesing side note DOW 2 still have more unique players compare to DOW1. However DOW1 user's play for a lot longer each time they play which sugguest that the DOW1 players are more "hardcore" while the DOW2 players are more "casual".
I believe in DOW3 is a mixure of the 2 trying not to be to hardcore / E sports however it seems to not focus so much on balance. This has been picked up by a few people for example: (video set at the 4:01)
Overall I prefer the return to a more DOW1 style game however I am still unsure base on comments that the devs have made in the past if they are aiming for a strong balance game like DOW1 and are instead aiming for a more "casual" audience. Hopfully if tourments do happen they will ban certain elites or Doc that people find OP.
Nemesis
No knows sheet about the balance as of yet. 2 days and elaborate balance assumptions? Please.. People get outplayed all the time, they blame balance.
If devs changed balance from 2 days observations, this game would be a clusteryuck. Already asking devs how to balance the game, before game is not even launch. This is hilarious. Maybe get FULL game first, there are additional elites and doctrines. I really hate people who pretend to know about balance after 2 WHOLE days of playing the game. They are similar people who write reviews about games after playing for 30 minutes (e.g. steam reviews).
DoW1 and Dow2 were both great in their own way. It took time to get "into" the game, understand its' specifics to really appreciate them. Again, people who played DoW 2 single player and none of multiplayer shout the loudest how dow 2 was terrible. If they have played and understood all the not so obvious mechanics behind DoW 2, they would be surprised. Same goes for DoW1.
Silk
DoW II started with 5 maps, which is even less. Not saying 8 maps is good, but you're wrong saying there's a downgrade here.
Also, the 4 races didn't have as much content, army painter is in the game, and I fail to see what are the wide option menus you're talking about as there are quite a lot of options already, could you be more specific?
I really don't think you can spot "obvious balance problems" in a few games. Ranger spam is countered, people got used to elite's lethality and now factor it in skirmishes... Do you have specific examples, again?
Just because they're numerous doesn't mean they're right.
People don't go onto the support forums if everything is right on their end. You don't know for how many people it works just fine.
Bersercker
Incoherent hatered towards dow2 aside, i agree with most of the points raised by the OP.
So in a summary:
Cons:
Pros:
Stoner
DoW II certainly wasn't an example of content packed game, but 4 races vs 3 is still big and please, count line units, building and maps in DOW I. You sound like it only takes time to design it for DOW III, but previously it somehow fell on their heads. In DOW III you can see a lot of recycled ideas from previous games, and making game from zero, in case of DoW I, which was really packed with content on release, indicates HUGE decline in this department for new Dawn of War.
On wider options, me, and many other users have commented about this many times already. If things like missing graphic options, must have control options for any PC RTS game or even trivial mouse sensitivity options is fine, than it is something miraculous. It is called blind fanboysm when you don't see obvious issues with product you buy for $60. Plus, if game doesn't have certain issue, it usually not raised multiple times in support forums. People don't tend to massively imagine same things you know...
Regarding balance. Rangers spam isn't countered, judging by two games in comparison to multitude of different experience all over isn't an indicator, and tbh ranger spam is very small issue in comparison to others this game has, like Power Core mode in 1v1. Just imagine if there wouldn't be cheap way to hide behind turrets with long ranged units, which I've personally done with SM Snipers and Whirlwinds? You could push and punish your enemy, but now you can't and have to drag on matches absolutely for no reason. But I'm curious, are you saying that balance is perfectly fine?
On popularity. Yes, we all know that advertisement was pretty good and many ppl got into DOW II with hopes that game will be decent after Relics great success with DOW I and COH 1, but sold copies isn't a thing here, thing is player dropoff and unexpectedly quick death of a game. It usually doesn't happen with really good, high quality projects fyi. That's the main indicator of popularity and quality both.
Delara
MY EXPERIENCE:
Eldar players would fall in love with the game.
Gameplay is very nice, graphics are good, high resolution textures, well balanced (for an open-beta game). I found myself addicted to it, spent the whole weekend playing it. Jain Zar is awesome, long have I awaited to see a phoenix lord potraited in a game. Could as well add the rest of them, right Relic?
Some points that need improvement:
Thats about it, I'm looking forward to play the game once more! Thanks for making DOW3, Relic!
Templar1118
(1/2)
I truly don't mean to pick on you, but I see this post as an excellent opportunity to voice a very different opinion.
This is to compensate the attacking player for a costly battle of a key objective. Also as an additional way to make someone come out of turret protection and fight.
It's beta, no RTS was even close to balanced within the first 3 months after release.
Try to kill a dreadnaught with tacticals, or dire avengers, or boyz. There most certainly is the normal vs. heavy armor dynamic with an additional layer of Elite unit interaction to the damage mix.
Players are new. It is highly advantageous to peel off a small hit squad to harass points, or use units designed to do such, like skimmers.
If I understand correctly, you are referring to something like a fast expand (nexus first), and a technology play like lurker/nydus?
It wasn't really a possibility in DOW2, in my experience. Only played competitive multiplayer before Chaos Rising.
Templar1118
I tend to view the map as one front. The line between all my stuff and all my opponents. Moving a high value group to attack a position is a good way to setup a decisive battle position for yourself if your opponent chooses to respond to your harassment. (feint/envelopment)
I feel like it's a fairly high number of units. Roughly the same as DOW1, DOW2 and Starcraft/Broodwar if you include the Elites as a unique unit. The way doctrines interact with units to make them better at certain roles helps with diversity. Tacticals with grenades and slow flamers are a very different beast to fight than regular tacticals.
It's just as 'advanced' as DOW1 and this is a huge PRO. If I have to build another depot, plyon or house or in my gaming life time, I'm done with RTS.
There is cover. Heavy bubble and stealth. Both are awesome, they are abstract, but there IS cover. Retreat is manual. Morale may not exist, but there are more status effects, which makes it a bit more complex. Defenses would be considered the massive turrets that protect your base.
Multiplayer may be more challenging because a faster player can do more than a slower player in this title. However, if there is a large disparity it would be felt just as much in either previous title.
I 100% thought so too, until I played on my own PC. With a high resolution and maximum graphics, it looks very good. Warcraft looks like a cartoon, this does not.
I detest MOBAs, and I think this a pretty special title.
DoW 3 IS NOT A MOBA. and this is really important. There is no asinine fighting auto-spawn creeps, looking for magic items, and leveling your Panda bear.
Templar1118
Again, not directed at you, and I'm sorry I used your post as a template, but I don't think I could disagree more.
steinernein
There's still low ground / high ground vision, ramps, and chasms -- Skimmers tend to ignore a good portion of things.
Blobbing, in this game, in any way shape or form will get you wiped out by a competent opponent or you will be caught in a disadvantageous position in one way or another. The reason people blob is due to their lack of skill and understanding of the game. Ironically, this also makes Elites shine way more because people are skillessly blobbing up and then dying to AoE and crowd control. Then comes the complaint that elites are all overtuned and they cause army wipes so easily. And somehow, the perception from that is that your troops are also now throwaways because most players at his skill level seem to not be able to take advantage of a 2k+ deficit.
You really should call him out harder on the MOBA reference; it's thoughtless, a memetic shortcut devoid of mental complexity and effort.
Silk
Do you count generators (and if not, why not)?
Also, why don't the elite units count?
What about mechanics instead of units? Because I can clearly see that one of the Space Marine building of DoW I has no purpose at all in DoW III (Orbital Relay).
I clearly don't feel like there is less content.
You seem to think "recycled ideas" don't take coding time, modeling for high-polygon-count models take the same time as for low-poly, and new things (like doctrines and racial mechanics) don't count.
I've seen this thrown around a few times but I never saw anyone tell which ones are missing, could you please tell me? Because the graphic options seemed to be like very other RTS game. What did I miss?
Silk
I wouldn't say that. There's also a lot of bandwagoning, people claiming things that are just plain false, people complaining about assumed features, about balancing (while everyone is still discovering the game), etc.
In competitive games it is. Look at Starcraft. Terrans were considered weak before Boxer made them work, and people copied him.
Of course not. No game ever reached perfect balance. But it is not as dramatic as people think. At low level, the game is pretty balanced; at high level, it seems like Marines have a slight advantage. All of this will probably change a lot with the new doctrines and elites anyway.
Darth_Bacon
I hear Terrans are 1 & 2 in the world for SC atm. God knows I suck at SC so I won't comment on them further.
What I will say though is that this ranger spam whinge fest is getting old. Marines are perfectly capable of beating everyone to death if their tools are used correctly. Eldar Shadow Spectres and some Ork Dreds were far more... interesting (rather than strictly problematic) to deal with than rangers.
Stoner
@Silk
Excuse me, what generators? What's so special about them? Can it solely be compared to missing faction or units? Elite is a single model with few skills, designing this vs entire faction doesn't really compare. Also we've seen only few so far, no idea how well other done. Orbital Strike was very useful in team matches, just the way it is in DOW III, you won't see Orbital Strikes in any skilled player 1v1 matches, does it make them useless? Interesting logic. Me, and majority of people not feel but see how LESS content DOW III bring to the table, it's painfully obvious.
If Relic considered game unfinished, they should have took more time. Elites and doctrines are very iffy right now, we can view them only as templates for now because some feel like far superior choice than others. It will change a lot, I'm sure and no guarantee they all will be well balanced in the end. I don't see how can it be achieved.
Check Performance Thread, or better yet launch DOW I or II and check options available, please, no need to play dumb.
So people just imagining things and game has no issues. Assuming so many people making up things is interesting logic...
Judging by 1 single match from Beta? It cannot be considered truly competitive, as your own argument, not enough time to judge, but by clear analysis it indicates there's and issue that might need fixing. On release more will be revealed, just wait.
If balance isn't there, than it's broken and needs fixing, that's my whole point all this time.
Stoner
Have to add, something that I think will be good addition mainly for SM:
More opinions on additions for any race are welcome.
Silk
Nothing, that's the point, they're now fused with the ressource system, so complaining they are not a building is just plain stupid.
Isn't it a missing building?
Saying "there's less content" and purposefuly ignoring a huge chunk of the content is complete fallacy.
We've seen all elite units. 9 per faction. Those which weren't in the beta nor on the site have been shown on Relic's stream.
I have no clue what you're talking about.
Silk
When you're product is good, people tell to one person on average. When they're not satisfied with your product however, they'll tell to 10. You will always see more people complaining than cheering on the internet, that's part of the human psyche. People are used to good things, so they don't go everywhere saying how good it is - which is one the reason why there isn't a hundred threads on the support section saying "good job Relic, the game works fine on my rig!" (the other main reason being it's pretty ++heresy++ useless feedback, contrary to "this bug exists").
Also, I don't really feel your majority in this thread.
Nobody said Relic considered the game unfinished - and they shouldn't in my opinion.
Also; that's just not how it works at all. You can't postpone a game for years and hope to make a profit. You will never be able to reach perfection on your game, so you need to stop adding features at some point, and put it on the market. And, as incredible as that might be to you, Relic employees also have to pay bills.
Oh, so you're an expert on balance. Better yet: you know what options are better than others without a single number to compare them. You must be a genius.
Perfect balance can never be achieved (as I already said in this thread). It took years for Starcraft to be at the stade it is now, and even now it is not perfect.
Wanting for the game to reach perfection instantly is more than entitlement.
Silk
Are you talking SLI support?
If not: link please. I checked 3 performances threads and not a single thing on those missing available options. Or did you just try to change the goalpost? Or make me lose my time?
Where did I say they make things up? Nice strawman argument there.
They're not making things up, they're overexagerating because they're mad, because they had bad à-priori on the game, because they assumed something would be there that had no chance to be in the game, etc. Also, as said earlier, I'm pretty confident they're not the majority.
You can't tell it's OP if there is proof you can win against it. And yes, this single match can change the "meta" - because people will watch and learn, and this single match can become many really fast.
I agree that there is a lot more options to come anyway, for every faction, and that balance will change a lot.