I personally preferred to Dire Avengers damage buffed but yours to nerf Tacticals damage isn't a bad idea either. But question is won't cause that SM players will start spam Assaults again just like was at release? Just giving a possibility of that change's consequence.
DAs are only 20% cheaper then Tacts but have 60% EHP less, that makes them inefficient in combat, because you're always at disadvantage.
To be fair here on release Tac's were massively outclassed in damage by their squishier counterparts at first. Tac damage was buffed with little consideration to anything else except making Tac's compete with ASM spam. imo ASM were the unit that needed the nerf more than anything.
Dire Avengers are also cheaper on requisition too which is another factor.
Well, we don't have release balance right now, do we?
Sorry, but it couldn't matter less what happened on previous balance patches, because they no longer exist and hold any argument value.
And I've mentioned that DAs are cheaper, but its not a problem.
Problem is, tacts are 20% more expensive and 60% more durable with exact same DPS.
If you could very rapidly disengage and regen shields, it would be somewhat OK, but you can't, can't in early game and DAs become obsolete in late game, contrary to tacts who scale well thanks to their initial huge hp poll.
My point is that Tac's were balanced in relation to Dire Avengers at one point, but people whined and it got changed. I recall saying at the time that giving Tac's the same DPS as Dire Avengers was a stupid idea because of the exact argument you're making now: they have way more hitpoints. Tacs were released in a balanced state in relation to Dire Avengers and Shootas.
I would fix it by reducing the damage again, personally. Otherwise we're going to start buffing damage on Dire Avengers and start leading to power creep.
I see your point now and yes, I fully agree with it.
DAs were very fragile with decent DPS and range advantage, were meant to be micro heavy and to be able to bleed opponents.
Then they were overnerfed and removed from the game while tacs were buffed, after that a tiny rebuff of additional range went for DAs however they still underperform greatly, especially now after HP increase and their DPS staying as it was with dreadful cooldown.
I personally preferred to Dire Avengers damage buffed but yours to nerf Tacticals damage isn't a bad idea either. But question is won't cause that SM players will start spam Assaults again just like was at release? Just giving a possibility of that change's consequence.
Assault marines will always be broken until they lose double jump imo. It was added into DoW2 because of how powerful suppression and knockdown (back when units like Banshees could trigger special attacks) and carried over into DoW3 despite both special attacks and suppression being removed.
Can't flocking believe there are people advocating Rangers spam.
There is a grade to what should be considered overpowered, to my mind. Plain Rangers spam is advantageous, by no mean, but what really makes it OP is supplementing it with advantageous Ronah's Longshot, OP Vigor and OP by itself mines of WS.
Seriously, here is 2 matches that speak for themselves:
There are a bunch of Eldar players playing "courteous", avoiding abusing Longshot and\or Vigor and WS at the same time, or even Rangers spam at all.
Still, it appears, people are so fixated upon the fact of losing the match, so they blame everything on the first thing they see - Rangers themselves or the whole category of Snipers.
Sorry, @Darkstirling , but SM Snipers aren't anywhere OP. Unlike Rangers, you can see them = deliver devastating AoE in a super convient way, be it KT drop, Suicide Bomma or simply teleporting Weirboy to them, because it is the sure hit; they don't have Shields = receive immidiate casualities in skirmishes and can't run\pursue without improved speed and stealth.
I haven't yet to seen anyone in 1v1 producing more than 3 Snipers at once, because you're losing the whole blob under a single timed attack.
If you have, like, 4 snipers, at 6 minute hiding behind 4 TM squad, then, welp, either teamwork on your side is gianly suck, either you're playing against set team, which can simply win by steamrolling you with a forward barrack really quick, to begin with, because they got a major advantage upon random compositioned teams.
Separating SM Snipers and Rangers case, the last one could be fixed in the easiest way - reverting energy cost values on tech\unit to 15\25. Because, yep, they are too efficient by themselves: they can't be attacked without preparation due to stealth, can dodge most of the AoE with their improved speed, runaway from any inf and pursue any of this kind with shield multiplying previous effects. Basically, it's your grenade-equipped TM, darely overpowered with Vigor.
I've seen people saying that they don't think that Rangers/Snipers must be nerfed. Than Relic should make a limit to how many Sniper/Ranger units can be produced. Limit of 2 squads of Snipers/Rangers should be enough.
@Sirael said:
I've seen people saying that they don't think that Rangers/Snipers must be nerfed. Than Relic should make a limit to how many Sniper/Ranger units can be produced. Limit of 2 squads of Snipers/Rangers should be enough.
I don't like fighting against tactical blobs, can we get 2 squad cap on tacts too while we're at it?
Oh and these pesky tank bustas are killing all my skimmers, lets cap them at 2 too so I don't need to care anymore.
I think caps are the lamest thing. If I want to spam a million snipers for the lols I should be allowed to, just it should be possible to easily wreck me because of it.
Yes they are OP, but i for one, kind of like it! Yes they are OP, so as they are dark reapers and even Wraithguard, esp comparing them to SMs.
But this is how it is in the TT top. ATM in the 8th edition Dark Reapers pawn all, cost effectively!
Relic only has a skeleton crew atm, even at their glory days they always kinda sucked at balancing, atm every unit is a strong as it is in the TT,
but whats different than before, esp comparing it to the DOW2 situation, is that we now have the tactical options to adapt and overcome!
Yes in a RTS with such effective kill time, a stealth blob install killing yr units is such a frustrating experience, but not think that's easy to pull of, it needs dedication, it needs investment and the truly good players now that they cannot rely on it and once they find someone to counter it, they must already have an answer too.
To notice here, I mostly play 3vs3, because I like big epic battlegrounds that go before tactical decisions and evolve strategicals too. In 3 vs 3 there are plenty options to counter such spams and quick tier 2 is much much easier.
@Ololo111 said:
Can't flocking believe there are people advocating Rangers spam.
There is a grade to what should be considered overpowered, to my mind. Plain Rangers spam is advantageous, by no mean, but what really makes it OP is supplementing it with advantageous Ronah's Longshot, OP Vigor and OP by itself mines of WS.
Seriously, here is 2 matches that speak for themselves:
There are a bunch of Eldar players playing "courteous", avoiding abusing Longshot and\or Vigor and WS at the same time, or even Rangers spam at all.
Still, it appears, people are so fixated upon the fact of losing the match, so they blame everything on the first thing they see - Rangers themselves or the whole category of Snipers.
I'm definitely going to watch thse games because last time I played (around august or so) snipers and especially rangers were incredibly risky to use because they were expensive and made of paper. It was very easy for an opponent to get them with a nuker ability that essentially one shot them. Ronahn has always been excellent though, but I also found he actually overlapped too much with Rangers and it was better to either use Ronahn _+ other units or to use Scorpions/Macha and use Rangers.
imo the counter to ranger spam is obviously Landspeeders/Vypers/Deffkoptas but I haven't figured out the new October economy yet so I'm not sure how feasible that actually is.
@Thunderhost said: @Dullahan It's feasible enough, problem is that enough Rangers will pluck your LS/Vyper/Deffcopta right out of the sky with the right doctrine(s).
What makes you believe a single one should be enough to do the job?
Doc stacked land speeder is likely all you need, but from other factions(or non doc stacked LS), you need multiple.
Its not DoW2, where 1 vehicle counters all non AV squads.
@Bigamo said:
lol, look the game i just posted.... lol rangers erase 2 LS at same time...
STFU until you begin to actually play this crap game, ok?
I did.
Now some stuff for you:
When Vigor is being used, move out of range.
If you did with the first LS, then it should take a moment to evaluate you were actually firing only 3 out of 12 seconds, while LS danced and rangers vigor focused it - that's horrible micro mistake and you should have pulled away the moment he used vigor to make him waste cd and to wait for 2nd LS.
Later on then you had a pair you started engagement well, but then went balls deep and were completely oblivious not only to yet again vigor focus fire, but to WWG shield, you also got hit by Rohnan Q.
You've suicided willingly all 3 LS.
Yes, even a unit that is supposed to counter another will get killed if you can't use it properly, which was the dictionary case of there.
No idea if you made another attempt, because the first two told me all the story and I just ended the rep.
@Bigamo, that's suprising that you turned from Dow3's fan into a Dow3's hater, since you calling it fun as cancer.
I understand, that you start to dislike this game, but people here also have a own right to support this game by showing evidences of their opinions or even facts. Of course sometimes I have problems with beating AI, that I sometimes quit the game, but unlike you I don't and I wouldn't ever blame the game for that, but rather myself for what I done wrong. And when I return to this game, I'm trying again until I win, only start another game. The game is fine to me with AI, but its gets tricky in team games. Multi I wouldn't try because I might be easily beated but to be honest I playing multi in Multiplayer Online games.
Still, If Sniper and Ranger spam does really have a own weaknesses, then that means that isn't actually invicible, but you just don't try to utilise that weakness to your advantage. Good player has a ability to adapt to any situation, but what's more, he also accepts a defeat pridefully and doesn't blame the game design for that. There is always a way to improve its skills.
So if you strugle against a some tactic, then Bigamo, ask for advice, rather than complain.
@Bigamo said:
lol, look the game i just posted.... lol rangers erase 2 LS at same time...
STFU until you begin to actually play this crap game, ok?
I did.
Now some stuff for you:
When Vigor is being used, move out of range.
If you did with the first LS, then it should take a moment to evaluate you were actually firing only 3 out of 12 seconds, while LS danced and rangers vigor focused it - that's horrible micro mistake and you should have pulled away the moment he used vigor to make him waste cd and to wait for 2nd LS.
Later on then you had a pair you started engagement well, but then went balls deep and were completely oblivious not only to yet again vigor focus fire, but to WWG shield, you also got hit by Rohnan Q.
You've suicided willingly all 3 LS.
Yes, even a unit that is supposed to counter another will get killed if you can't use it properly, which was the dictionary case of there.
No idea if you made another attempt, because the first two told me all the story and I just ended the rep.
Right, but even an early double landspeeder rush doesn't counter a good ranger player.
You know why ? Because good ranger play know that they fall behind tech so they don't even bother going T2 before the 15-20 minute mark. Instead they can easily have 2-3 spectre squads out as soon as those double landspeeders arrive. And you know another trick ? If you fly with those spectre around the landspeeder in a circle then those LS deal less damage ^^
Anyway a good ranger build goes for soulshrine with damage upgrade first, then shieldupgrade and then spectre research. Also not pure ranger mass because you need CC from DA nades to counter elite like diomedes who keeps autoattacking on buildings to heal up and tank damage. Pure ranger mass without DA and Spectre means you autolose to a good opponent. Thats what i think.
I don't see a problem with early game sniper spam when you can just do stuff like constantly harass their lines so that they cannot set-up (with units like Tactical Marines), deploy Kill Team Ironmaw on top of them (with a flamer) to whittle down their model count with ease and use Chaplain Diomedes (along with his abilities) or Assault Marines to clear them out of any bubble cover.
Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions can also be used to easily ambush (enriched if hidden in stealth cover) complacent players who resort to spamming snipers during early game.
Placing heavy weapons teams in bubble cover (in a key areas) can also limit the manoeuvrability of sniper blobs during early game.
During mid/late game snipers largely become obsolete as well.
@Draconix said: @Bigamo, that's suprising that you turned from Dow3's fan into a Dow3's hater, since you calling it fun as cancer.
I understand, that you start to dislike this game, but people here also have a own right to support this game by showing evidences of their opinions or even facts. Of course sometimes I have problems with beating AI, that I sometimes quit the game, but unlike you I don't and I wouldn't ever blame the game for that, but rather myself for what I done wrong. And when I return to this game, I'm trying again until I win, only start another game. The game is fine to me with AI, but its gets tricky in team games. Multi I wouldn't try because I might be easily beated but to be honest I playing multi in Multiplayer Online games.
Still, If Sniper and Ranger spam does really have a own weaknesses, then that means that isn't actually invicible, but you just don't try to utilise that weakness to your advantage. Good player has a ability to adapt to any situation, but what's more, he also accepts a defeat pridefully and doesn't blame the game design for that. There is always a way to improve its skills.
So if you strugle against a some tactic, then Bigamo, ask for advice, rather than complain.
play some multiplayer and you will see how its like. make like 8 tacticals with full doctrines and brag about how good you are. Just spam, spam, spam and aggression. REALLY hard to defend, and now with new meta of added offensive turrets to make it worst.
And maybe you should practice with AI?
To be honest at first I used to spam certain units, especially vehicles, but now I making what I need at the moment. Though in multi I see, there will be spam of units. Besides I watched some matches made by streamers as well. However multi in RTS is not in my taste, I tried to play Coh2 and Dow2 multis but I kept losing that I quitted it in favor of skirmish with AI. Well comparing to players in Dow3, AI doesn't spam to much.
DAs are only 20% cheaper then Tacts but have 60% EHP less, that makes them inefficient in combat, because you're always at disadvantage.
To be fair here on release Tac's were massively outclassed in damage by their squishier counterparts at first. Tac damage was buffed with little consideration to anything else except making Tac's compete with ASM spam. imo ASM were the unit that needed the nerf more than anything.
Dire Avengers are also cheaper on requisition too which is another factor.
Well, we don't have release balance right now, do we?
Sorry, but it couldn't matter less what happened on previous balance patches, because they no longer exist and hold any argument value.
And I've mentioned that DAs are cheaper, but its not a problem.
Problem is, tacts are 20% more expensive and 60% more durable with exact same DPS.
If you could very rapidly disengage and regen shields, it would be somewhat OK, but you can't, can't in early game and DAs become obsolete in late game, contrary to tacts who scale well thanks to their initial huge hp poll.
My point is that Tac's were balanced in relation to Dire Avengers at one point, but people whined and it got changed. I recall saying at the time that giving Tac's the same DPS as Dire Avengers was a stupid idea because of the exact argument you're making now: they have way more hitpoints. Tacs were released in a balanced state in relation to Dire Avengers and Shootas.
I would fix it by reducing the damage again, personally. Otherwise we're going to start buffing damage on Dire Avengers and start leading to power creep.
While this is true, people are looking at flat stats and discounting other important stats like the lack of bleed suffered by DA's, as well as a free-of-cost grenade, and the increased movement speed and range.
If they nerf tacticals, they're going to be severely outclassed. If you have Eldar players trying to trade directly with Tactical Marines against Dire Avengers they SHOULD lose, as you should be seeking more to deal bleed damage, using battle focus to widdle the enemy down until you can overwhelm them in one fell swoop. Eldar's mechanics are completely built around this strategy.
On paper when you look at the two stats mentioned by @Katitof they do seem significantly better, but you're forgetting some of the important differentiating factors that are more apparent in-game than they are on paper.
DAs are only 20% cheaper then Tacts but have 60% EHP less, that makes them inefficient in combat, because you're always at disadvantage.
To be fair here on release Tac's were massively outclassed in damage by their squishier counterparts at first. Tac damage was buffed with little consideration to anything else except making Tac's compete with ASM spam. imo ASM were the unit that needed the nerf more than anything.
Dire Avengers are also cheaper on requisition too which is another factor.
Well, we don't have release balance right now, do we?
Sorry, but it couldn't matter less what happened on previous balance patches, because they no longer exist and hold any argument value.
And I've mentioned that DAs are cheaper, but its not a problem.
Problem is, tacts are 20% more expensive and 60% more durable with exact same DPS.
If you could very rapidly disengage and regen shields, it would be somewhat OK, but you can't, can't in early game and DAs become obsolete in late game, contrary to tacts who scale well thanks to their initial huge hp poll.
My point is that Tac's were balanced in relation to Dire Avengers at one point, but people whined and it got changed. I recall saying at the time that giving Tac's the same DPS as Dire Avengers was a stupid idea because of the exact argument you're making now: they have way more hitpoints. Tacs were released in a balanced state in relation to Dire Avengers and Shootas.
I would fix it by reducing the damage again, personally. Otherwise we're going to start buffing damage on Dire Avengers and start leading to power creep.
While this is true, people are looking at flat stats and discounting other important stats like the lack of bleed suffered by DA's, as well as a free-of-cost grenade, and the increased movement speed and range.
If they nerf tacticals, they're going to be severely outclassed. If you have Eldar players trying to trade directly with Tactical Marines against Dire Avengers they SHOULD lose, as you should be seeking more to deal bleed damage, using battle focus to widdle the enemy down until you can overwhelm them in one fell swoop. Eldar's mechanics are completely built around this strategy.
On paper when you look at the two stats mentioned by @Katitof they do seem significantly better, but you're forgetting some of the important differentiating factors that are more apparent in-game than they are on paper.
On the flip side, I think people often ignore Tactical Weapon upgrades because their base damage was buffed too much. They often won out just fine vs Dire Avengers at the original DPS value and completely obliterate them with flamers or plasma. I get what you're saying, but I think Tac' damage was haphazardly buffed that lead to them being used as a blobby attack move unit. Both Dire Avengers and Shootas require much more care to use effectively due to their fragility.
I agree Dire Avengers aren't meant to A-move Tac marines or anything like that, but I still think Tacs were overbuffed when the real issue was always that ASM's cost marginally more (100/15) and are far more versatile.
But DA and Shootas both get amazing speed buffs that indirectly buff their ability to survive.
Tacts were legit useless before their damage buff @Dullahan - idk wtf you're talking about. Tact spam is OP not because tacticals themselves are that good (in fact, they still don't sclae that well and even in the early game are still certainly counterable if you play meta), but certain meta game implications that make that style of play OP (which is why Shoota and DA/DR blobs are so good - probably better than tact blobs). These implications include forward bases (meaning there is little downtime from taking damage), large HQ requisition income, Shield Generator Reward (meaning if you kill it you will likely snowball), small map design (meaning its very easy to immediately start to apply lots of pressure with forward base), Early game Elites (basically Free units to press your early rush), and the high lethality you can utilize to quickly murder your opponent and immediately start pressing his objectives to snowball.
As it stands, DoW3 is a game about front-loading as much damage as possible as fast as possible (usually in the form of chaining endless amounts of abilities) - this is why Elites and CC units are King and units like devestators not so good. This meta is why you see shoota blolbs + Tons o Bombs (or later Killa Kans) non-stop, and why melee units get severely outclassed late game. Any unit that relies on sustained DPS is generally bad (i.e. most SM units) whereas units who can frontload damage off immediately are really good. This is the same principle as the Protoss deathball in SC2 - a force that can simply annihilate anything it touches in a second vs. a more traditional DoW feel of slower-paced battles with units relying on sustained basic attacks to win the day.
Menu
Comments
Draconix
Hmm. Interesting sugestion @Dullahan .
I personally preferred to Dire Avengers damage buffed but yours to nerf Tacticals damage isn't a bad idea either. But question is won't cause that SM players will start spam Assaults again just like was at release? Just giving a possibility of that change's consequence.
Katitof
I see your point now and yes, I fully agree with it.
DAs were very fragile with decent DPS and range advantage, were meant to be micro heavy and to be able to bleed opponents.
Then they were overnerfed and removed from the game while tacs were buffed, after that a tiny rebuff of additional range went for DAs however they still underperform greatly, especially now after HP increase and their DPS staying as it was with dreadful cooldown.
Dullahan
Assault marines will always be broken until they lose double jump imo. It was added into DoW2 because of how powerful suppression and knockdown (back when units like Banshees could trigger special attacks) and carried over into DoW3 despite both special attacks and suppression being removed.
Ololo111
Can't flocking believe there are people advocating Rangers spam.
There is a grade to what should be considered overpowered, to my mind. Plain Rangers spam is advantageous, by no mean, but what really makes it OP is supplementing it with advantageous Ronah's Longshot, OP Vigor and OP by itself mines of WS.
Seriously, here is 2 matches that speak for themselves:
https://www.gamereplays.org/dawnofwar3/replays.php?game=95&show=details&id=327087
https://www.gamereplays.org/dawnofwar3/replays.php?game=95&show=details&id=327088
There are a bunch of Eldar players playing "courteous", avoiding abusing Longshot and\or Vigor and WS at the same time, or even Rangers spam at all.
Still, it appears, people are so fixated upon the fact of losing the match, so they blame everything on the first thing they see - Rangers themselves or the whole category of Snipers.
Sorry, @Darkstirling , but SM Snipers aren't anywhere OP. Unlike Rangers, you can see them = deliver devastating AoE in a super convient way, be it KT drop, Suicide Bomma or simply teleporting Weirboy to them, because it is the sure hit; they don't have Shields = receive immidiate casualities in skirmishes and can't run\pursue without improved speed and stealth.
I haven't yet to seen anyone in 1v1 producing more than 3 Snipers at once, because you're losing the whole blob under a single timed attack.
If you have, like, 4 snipers, at 6 minute hiding behind 4 TM squad, then, welp, either teamwork on your side is gianly suck, either you're playing against set team, which can simply win by steamrolling you with a forward barrack really quick, to begin with, because they got a major advantage upon random compositioned teams.
Separating SM Snipers and Rangers case, the last one could be fixed in the easiest way - reverting energy cost values on tech\unit to 15\25. Because, yep, they are too efficient by themselves: they can't be attacked without preparation due to stealth, can dodge most of the AoE with their improved speed, runaway from any inf and pursue any of this kind with shield multiplying previous effects. Basically, it's your grenade-equipped TM, darely overpowered with Vigor.
Sirael
I've seen people saying that they don't think that Rangers/Snipers must be nerfed. Than Relic should make a limit to how many Sniper/Ranger units can be produced. Limit of 2 squads of Snipers/Rangers should be enough.
Katitof
I don't like fighting against tactical blobs, can we get 2 squad cap on tacts too while we're at it?
Oh and these pesky tank bustas are killing all my skimmers, lets cap them at 2 too so I don't need to care anymore.
Martin
I think caps are the lamest thing. If I want to spam a million snipers for the lols I should be allowed to, just it should be possible to easily wreck me because of it.
Iatros
Yes they are OP, but i for one, kind of like it! Yes they are OP, so as they are dark reapers and even Wraithguard, esp comparing them to SMs.
But this is how it is in the TT top. ATM in the 8th edition Dark Reapers pawn all, cost effectively!
Relic only has a skeleton crew atm, even at their glory days they always kinda sucked at balancing, atm every unit is a strong as it is in the TT,
but whats different than before, esp comparing it to the DOW2 situation, is that we now have the tactical options to adapt and overcome!
Yes in a RTS with such effective kill time, a stealth blob install killing yr units is such a frustrating experience, but not think that's easy to pull of, it needs dedication, it needs investment and the truly good players now that they cannot rely on it and once they find someone to counter it, they must already have an answer too.
To notice here, I mostly play 3vs3, because I like big epic battlegrounds that go before tactical decisions and evolve strategicals too. In 3 vs 3 there are plenty options to counter such spams and quick tier 2 is much much easier.
Dullahan
I'm definitely going to watch thse games because last time I played (around august or so) snipers and especially rangers were incredibly risky to use because they were expensive and made of paper. It was very easy for an opponent to get them with a nuker ability that essentially one shot them. Ronahn has always been excellent though, but I also found he actually overlapped too much with Rangers and it was better to either use Ronahn _+ other units or to use Scorpions/Macha and use Rangers.
imo the counter to ranger spam is obviously Landspeeders/Vypers/Deffkoptas but I haven't figured out the new October economy yet so I'm not sure how feasible that actually is.
Thunderhost
@Dullahan It's feasible enough, problem is that enough Rangers will pluck your LS/Vyper/Deffcopta right out of the sky with the right doctrine(s).
Katitof
What makes you believe a single one should be enough to do the job?
Doc stacked land speeder is likely all you need, but from other factions(or non doc stacked LS), you need multiple.
Its not DoW2, where 1 vehicle counters all non AV squads.
Katitof
I did.
Now some stuff for you:
When Vigor is being used, move out of range.
If you did with the first LS, then it should take a moment to evaluate you were actually firing only 3 out of 12 seconds, while LS danced and rangers vigor focused it - that's horrible micro mistake and you should have pulled away the moment he used vigor to make him waste cd and to wait for 2nd LS.
Later on then you had a pair you started engagement well, but then went balls deep and were completely oblivious not only to yet again vigor focus fire, but to WWG shield, you also got hit by Rohnan Q.
You've suicided willingly all 3 LS.
Yes, even a unit that is supposed to counter another will get killed if you can't use it properly, which was the dictionary case of there.
No idea if you made another attempt, because the first two told me all the story and I just ended the rep.
Dullahan
Whirlwind would also counter well. Maybe even better.
Draconix
@Bigamo, that's suprising that you turned from Dow3's fan into a Dow3's hater, since you calling it fun as cancer.
I understand, that you start to dislike this game, but people here also have a own right to support this game by showing evidences of their opinions or even facts. Of course sometimes I have problems with beating AI, that I sometimes quit the game, but unlike you I don't and I wouldn't ever blame the game for that, but rather myself for what I done wrong. And when I return to this game, I'm trying again until I win, only start another game. The game is fine to me with AI, but its gets tricky in team games. Multi I wouldn't try because I might be easily beated but to be honest I playing multi in Multiplayer Online games.
Still, If Sniper and Ranger spam does really have a own weaknesses, then that means that isn't actually invicible, but you just don't try to utilise that weakness to your advantage. Good player has a ability to adapt to any situation, but what's more, he also accepts a defeat pridefully and doesn't blame the game design for that. There is always a way to improve its skills.
So if you strugle against a some tactic, then Bigamo, ask for advice, rather than complain.
S4ngetsu
Right, but even an early double landspeeder rush doesn't counter a good ranger player.
You know why ? Because good ranger play know that they fall behind tech so they don't even bother going T2 before the 15-20 minute mark. Instead they can easily have 2-3 spectre squads out as soon as those double landspeeders arrive. And you know another trick ? If you fly with those spectre around the landspeeder in a circle then those LS deal less damage ^^
Anyway a good ranger build goes for soulshrine with damage upgrade first, then shieldupgrade and then spectre research. Also not pure ranger mass because you need CC from DA nades to counter elite like diomedes who keeps autoattacking on buildings to heal up and tank damage. Pure ranger mass without DA and Spectre means you autolose to a good opponent. Thats what i think.
Sunnyurr
My answer for rangers; zappnoggin. 1 accurate fist from stealth, then TP in close and zap em.
ReubenUK
I don't see a problem with early game sniper spam when you can just do stuff like constantly harass their lines so that they cannot set-up (with units like Tactical Marines), deploy Kill Team Ironmaw on top of them (with a flamer) to whittle down their model count with ease and use Chaplain Diomedes (along with his abilities) or Assault Marines to clear them out of any bubble cover.
Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions can also be used to easily ambush (enriched if hidden in stealth cover) complacent players who resort to spamming snipers during early game.
Placing heavy weapons teams in bubble cover (in a key areas) can also limit the manoeuvrability of sniper blobs during early game.
During mid/late game snipers largely become obsolete as well.
Draconix
And maybe you should practice with AI?
To be honest at first I used to spam certain units, especially vehicles, but now I making what I need at the moment. Though in multi I see, there will be spam of units. Besides I watched some matches made by streamers as well. However multi in RTS is not in my taste, I tried to play Coh2 and Dow2 multis but I kept losing that I quitted it in favor of skirmish with AI. Well comparing to players in Dow3, AI doesn't spam to much.
WreakingHavoc17
While this is true, people are looking at flat stats and discounting other important stats like the lack of bleed suffered by DA's, as well as a free-of-cost grenade, and the increased movement speed and range.
If they nerf tacticals, they're going to be severely outclassed. If you have Eldar players trying to trade directly with Tactical Marines against Dire Avengers they SHOULD lose, as you should be seeking more to deal bleed damage, using battle focus to widdle the enemy down until you can overwhelm them in one fell swoop. Eldar's mechanics are completely built around this strategy.
On paper when you look at the two stats mentioned by @Katitof they do seem significantly better, but you're forgetting some of the important differentiating factors that are more apparent in-game than they are on paper.
Dullahan
On the flip side, I think people often ignore Tactical Weapon upgrades because their base damage was buffed too much. They often won out just fine vs Dire Avengers at the original DPS value and completely obliterate them with flamers or plasma. I get what you're saying, but I think Tac' damage was haphazardly buffed that lead to them being used as a blobby attack move unit. Both Dire Avengers and Shootas require much more care to use effectively due to their fragility.
I agree Dire Avengers aren't meant to A-move Tac marines or anything like that, but I still think Tacs were overbuffed when the real issue was always that ASM's cost marginally more (100/15) and are far more versatile.
vindicarex
But DA and Shootas both get amazing speed buffs that indirectly buff their ability to survive.
Tacts were legit useless before their damage buff @Dullahan - idk wtf you're talking about. Tact spam is OP not because tacticals themselves are that good (in fact, they still don't sclae that well and even in the early game are still certainly counterable if you play meta), but certain meta game implications that make that style of play OP (which is why Shoota and DA/DR blobs are so good - probably better than tact blobs). These implications include forward bases (meaning there is little downtime from taking damage), large HQ requisition income, Shield Generator Reward (meaning if you kill it you will likely snowball), small map design (meaning its very easy to immediately start to apply lots of pressure with forward base), Early game Elites (basically Free units to press your early rush), and the high lethality you can utilize to quickly murder your opponent and immediately start pressing his objectives to snowball.
As it stands, DoW3 is a game about front-loading as much damage as possible as fast as possible (usually in the form of chaining endless amounts of abilities) - this is why Elites and CC units are King and units like devestators not so good. This meta is why you see shoota blolbs + Tons o Bombs (or later Killa Kans) non-stop, and why melee units get severely outclassed late game. Any unit that relies on sustained DPS is generally bad (i.e. most SM units) whereas units who can frontload damage off immediately are really good. This is the same principle as the Protoss deathball in SC2 - a force that can simply annihilate anything it touches in a second vs. a more traditional DoW feel of slower-paced battles with units relying on sustained basic attacks to win the day.