Menu
Replay from top players showing how unbalanced the ork vs eldar match up is
Koof
Please watch this replay https://www.gamereplays.org/dawnofwar3/replays.php?game=95&show=details&id=320547....
Showcases how unwinnable the match up is... Things to keep in mind:
- The insane early game pressure and map control dire avengers put out, forcing me to turtle on 2 base and allowing him to turret up and put resource nodes on the entire map. Doesn't have to upgrade them, doesn't have to spend any power whatsoever, allowing him to get super early falcon...
- Striking scorpion crit damage is insane... He backdoors me faster with 1 striking scorpion squad then 2 ork boyz, trukk, and stormboyz...
- Striking scorpion + unupgraded dire avengers can hold off full on ork assault with trukks, stormboyz and weirdboy... Again he has yet to spend any power in his entire army yet he is still keeping me contained and not allowing me to damage him, again due to the turret count...
- Falcons are ridiculously strong... He can get them at 9-10 minutes, meaning I can't get killa kans out... I get 3 tankbustas out in time, but they get absolutely hard countered by falcons cause u cant even hit them due to their insane shield, and the fact that they kill all infantry in 2 seconds....
- Combining all of these things together, he survives with a 2 point hero till he gets kyre who shits on everything i can possibly put out....
To sum it up, striking scorpions and dire avengers are insanely OP. They offer way too much strength and presence, and it means that eldar don't even have to spend power on any units until they get a 250 power ++heresy redacted++ your army machine... Compare this to ork, who needs upgrades, trukks, and waagh towers... I did the math in a different thread, but ork needs 1000 power before he can efficiently put out killa kans, and eldar needs 500 power to efficiently put out a falcon... Webway tier 1 means you cant effectively harass eldar or put any early game pressure on them, which is compounded by the insane dire avenger doctrines... Falcons then force you to go tankbustas, which they still counter due to their ridiculously OP doctrine.... All in all, unless the eldar is a much worse player than the ork player, they should never lose ever... it is the definition of a unwinnable match up, and its because of clear balance changes that need to be made asap
Comments
Larkis
And there is no one of the other 100 posts talking about exactly this where you could have put this in?
Gorb
I think this is the replay (it might not be the right one), the URL had some trailing characters that gave an invalid replay ID:
https://www.gamereplays.org/dawnofwar3/replays.php?game=95&show=details&id=320547
Silveran
I mean look Koof, if you want to complain super hard and rage anytime you get wrecked that is fine, but at least provide accurate analysis of the replay instead of a bunch of biased garbage of how unwinnable the game is. Instead you make posts on reddit and here that are totally biased. Do orkz seem to be having a hard time vs eldar? Yes. Does your constant complaints along posting replays where you made clear mistakes help anyone? No
YbuBaKa
@Koof, I could agree with you partially. Yes, eldar are imba against Orks. And yes, Ork needs to be better player to defeat Eldar. But this does not mean Eldar are OP. For me, that means what Orks deserve serious buff. Because Space Marines are even harder for Ork, than Eldar. If whole Eldar race will be nerfed, they will turn into dummies for Space Marines.
For example, Falcon isn't OP at all: it is very expensive and you still could counter it even with the Shield doctrine. Compare them with land speeders, and you will see where True Power is! Take note too: Sky Portal+Falcon are expensive enough, to not allow Eldar build wraithguards for long time. He has no counter to your nobs due to this. Use his weakness.
Mafiale
I agree with you KOOF. Eldar are too strog atm.
And we can complain as much as we want. It is a forum after all and the more people raise their voice against eldar the likelier it will get heard by the developers.
wongtp
in the spirit of coh2.org
playercard pls.
better for highly skilled players to complain than to let the game die due to eldar nonsense. he provided a replay, what more do you need? i doubt many can play better than him too as orks.
Silveran
Have you seen the replay and then read his comments he posted ON THE REPLAY that don't line up with the replay at all make all his complaints perfectly valid? I'll post what I said on reddit:
So wait let me get this straight. Your comments and the actual game don't line up at all. Lets not even consider you not stopping the eldar cap with a grot early on since you predicted this ++heresy redacted++. Going over your exact comments:
Here is Ork getting on 2 base without damage
-you know the eldar being on 3/4 nodes for most of the game with 2 of those being triple points while the ork is turtling on 2 regular nodes and while doing so loses a tower, an LP, both shield gens, multiple boyz, and a trukk at 9 minutes while the eldar player has lost only a few dire avenger models, 1 webway, 1 shield gen
trading generators
-this can be a few things, if its shield gens the eldar player got both the orkz, ork only got 1 assuming its node generators the 9 minute generator trade of 1 mid node for another while the eldar has 2 triple nodes and 1 normal node vs the ork having 1 normal node is clearly super favorable for the ork. Let alone while taking out the left mid point the ork loses a ton of boyz to the falcon that comes over
wiping 5 squads of dire avengers within 3 seconds
-Yep zapp killed all 5 that were clumped from tele + Q. The ork has lost as much Req of stuff by this point while being down multiple nodes, also at this point (I think it was around 10 min mark) power is way more important then Req.
accurately predicting unit comp and countering it
I assume you mean those 2 tank busta units that seem to show up after the falcon wrecks a ton of boyz while attacking the left mid? seemed super predicted
Kyre then came down and just wrecked the tank bustas while the falcons cleaned up. Seems like a game where the Ork was behind at every turn and then made a post on reddit stating the opposite.
Arixar
Eldar doesn't need energy in the early game, only for a webgate. With triple DA doctrine Eldar is able to just do fine in the early with kiting. DA is the most efficient unit in the game, its quite insane. SM&Ork both have to spend quite some energy in the early game, but Eldar just doesn't. Thats obviously a problem. I agree. Its a combination of different things that makes Eldar so strong in the early.
Obviously not all 4 of them should be nerfed AT ONCE, as it would leave Eldar a dead race, but some things have to get changed.
Larkis
I think they could remove the grenades from the DA, remove the true damage from Scorpions and make Bonesingers a teleportcasttime von maybe 5 seconds with a visible element and the target point.
vindicarex
Eldar are indeed way too strong and overperforming since all Eldar players are abusing OP Wraithlord Doctrine and OP striking scorpions to close-out 99% of games before the 10 minute mark.
Very apparent in 1v1s (all Eldar basically using the SAME EXACT "STRATEGY" EVERY GAME) - literally only thought in their mind is:
1. build 4-6 DA
2. teleport T1 webway gate across the map for instant, on-demand FoF access
3. Dominate all contested points with said webway gate.
4. pressure with striking scorpions
5. win game.
There's almost no counterplay to this since the majority of this power comes from uncounterable webway gates and Scorpions that can nuke a shield generator (or any building for that matter) in a matter of seconds. Not only easy to use and very powerful, but also extremely punishing (which is exactly why games end vs. Eldar so early).
HohesHaus
Sooo why didn't you build Deffguns or even shooters? They shred through DA like a hot knife through butter. They can't even get near your deffguns to throw a nade (if you have 2 of them). You keeped spamming trucks and boys (you didn't even reinforced your boys), nor did you tried to take the left natural node back, you just ignored it.
You could have won the game in the beginning, where you chased away the 2 DAs back to the hill and saw that a LP is being build. They were out of FOF so you could have killed them easily or at least denied the LP with a slugga. You retreated that was a mistake
Yes Scorpions were a trouble since true damage. And Kyre was a problem to.
You had 2 middle scraps in the bottom, I would scrap KillaKans to counter Falcons.
Nautiloidor
I think DAs are ok, as they are only really OP if have both doctrines and are in range of a webway gate. I agree with you about SS though, the true damage can be a bit too much, especially with the critical. I think putting a small cast time on bonesingers could be a good idea, not sure about the visible end point bit unless it is quite subtle.
PS - I played a 3v3 vs someone with your namesake last night
PrimaGoosa
I see a lot of skirmishing against the Eldar's highly mobile forces, knowing they are highly mobile, not really around any objectives. A single squad of Sluggas was left behind to defend the shield gen which got destroyed. Stormboyz were seemingly ignored for a while. The economy was so incredibly unbalanced in favor of the Eldar, at the 8-ish minute mark the Eldar were at something like 488/122 while the Orks were at 314/38. First squad of Sluggas didn't go defend/cap your natural 3-gen point, allowing the Eldar to plant an LP and fully gen it out.
What exactly do you think should have happened in this game?
Nyx
While Eldar vs Ork is currently very unbalanced, you didn't deserve to win the game you posted either...
"Striking scorpion crit damage is insane... He backdoors me faster with 1 striking scorpion squad then 2 ork boyz, trukk, and stormboyz..."
Also this is super wrong. You're not a very good Ork player if you don't know that waaagh affects abilities. Aka - Ork currently have the fastest shield gen busting time of all 3 races.
Kharneth
Everyone keeps throwing the same word around.... "deserves." What does it mean to deserve to win? Can you ever lose, despite deserving to win? Can you ever win, despite deserving to lose?
TOGgledShot
Removing Grenade from DA takes away the only thing basic Eldar units have of breaking up the other teams units. Outside of that grenade, Eldar only have Elites and Fire Prisms to break up the enemy team.
Don't take them away, just make them an upgrade?<---Being an Eldar player, I hate this idea, but I'm open to other suggestions.
TOGgledShot
Ork are underpowered and are normally easily countered. This goes for SM and Eldar alike. IMO.
Kharneth
I really do not want to see Eldar nerfed before Orks are buffed.
Eldar have some cheeky stuff and I'd agree with those who claim they're the most powerful army, but Orks are simply underpowered and should be addressed first. Who knows how the tables will shift if Orks are given some buffs. Eldar had some bugs that needed to be fixed, but right now their most overpowered things are scorpions and wraithguard. Wraithguard aren't overpowered at all, just very useful. The vehicles could stand to be improved a little bit. Scorpions would probably not be useful if they didn't deal true damage and as far as I can tell their only true usefulness lies in their ability to kill generators early in the game. But they are an elite, and I think it's perfectly reasonable for them to deal true damage.
When ASM power sword is brought to T2, scorpions will be the only thing that can drop generators quickly in T1 and they aren't even that fast when doing it alone, so it's really the scorpions plus the rest of the Eldar army that people are unhappy with, but I don't consider them to be too powerful.
Nyx
People are expressing the sentiment that this is a type of game that attempts for balanced competition. In example, we believe the player who played better deserves to win. Since the game is not currently very balanced - you get situations where Player A can have played much better than Player B but still lost to Player B. In such a situation it might be said that Player A deserved the win. Aka the system that hands out wins and losses is malfunctioning due to imbalance.
Kharneth
Every type of game attempts for balanced competition. That's the fundamental design for a game.
So, whether or not someone "deserves" to win is merely a subjective opinion of those who consider themselves capable of accurately judging the skill of others, thats it? If the game was perfectly balanced, everyone who deserved to win would win and everyone who deserved to lose would lose?
Nyx
If the game was perfectly balanced, everyone who deserved to win would win and everyone who deserved to lose would lose?
Yes.
That's literally what people are expressing. Because the game is not perfectly balanced there are times when one player deserves to win but doesn't because of imbalance. Lets take an extreme example. You fire up a game and player B - by a glitch - gets 3000 starting req and power. Despite this player A pulls the game into a close match by objectively playing much better, but he still loses. At this point people generally feel that despite not being awarded the win, player A deserved the win.
PrimaGoosa
Except the act of labeling one person as "deserving" is an incredibly subjective and often biased process. Why is someone "deserving"? What constitutes playing better? More micro? Better eco management? Better harass?
If you "yadda yadda yadda" past all the details and say someone objectively played better, then you've landed right back into Subjectivity Land, where you have to explain what was better about their play. The kicker is that you have to do it without any bias towards the strategy used by the winner, which is what usually happens. "It takes no skill, loser micro'd better, loser deserved to win" is about as much analysis as I ever see, personally.
PrimaGoosa
No, I haven't answered anything. What if one person seems to micro better, but another person harasses better? What if one handles his eco better, but suffers in micro? Are they evenly weighted? What if one person is playing a race that just has more micro available in the form of unit abilities, but the other player still utilizes positioning?
It's going to come down to what each individual values more as "skill", and it's going to be subjective every time.
I see labeling someone as "deserving" as an excuse to not get better at the game. You're just going to fall into a trap where you think you deserve to win if you see one of a few different things, and you'll ignore any ways you could have improved your own play. Seems like a huge waste of time to me.
steinernein
The act of labeling someone who deserves to win is not 'incredibly' subjective, but it does become more prone to being subjective the closer the balance becomes. An example is taking balance out to the extremes where all mutations of the state still leads to a loss despite being the most optimal for that faction under every condition.
Kharneth
@PrimaGoosa I wrote a big whole thing explaining my (our) point and it was washed away awaiting approval... idk why, I've stopped using heresy-words. I agree with you. I think you're right.
In summary, what is often misunderstood is the idea that skill = skill. Skill =/= skill. Two equally skilled players are not fighting a fair fight even if both armies are identical or perfectly balanced. This is because of strategy. Two equally valid strategies will wax and wane in effectiveness based on their context. This is why adaptation is so important in RTSs. If strategy A and B are equally useful in terms of general/average battles one will still have advantages in situation A while others have advantages in situation B. A lot of it is the luck of the draw mixed with the speed one can adapt. You can have 4 equally skilled opponents all reliably beating another. A beats B who beats C who beats D who beats A, consistently. Even though they are all evenly skilled and perfectly balanced, say like Chess.