@Bigamo said:
just to ilustrate my point that ALL this ++heresy redacted++ doctrines should be removed from this game forever, the game feels like abandonware already...
I think good players are biased because of their own skill. They ignore the fact that it takes little to no effort to be effective with rangers and it takes a lot of it to counter them, not a big deal for the pros, but anyone below that skill level has to just suck it up it appears.
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
@Amoc said:
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
Not really, I have played exclusively Eldar in my 200 hours of online play, and I think rangers are OP as hell
Wouldn't a way of making any kind of spam harder be, by making economy cost incremental, upkeepwise. This would perhapshelp with a more rounded out army composition? E.g first 2-3 tactical/ranger squads cost the same upkeep, then a steep incline - say 100%. You can still spam, but it'll cost you on the economic front. Shouldn't be too hard to implement either.
Wouldn't a way of making any kind of spam harder be, by making economy cost incremental, upkeepwise. This would perhapshelp with a more rounded out army composition? E.g first 2-3 tactical/ranger squads cost the same upkeep, then a steep incline - say 100%. You can still spam, but it'll cost you on the economic front. Shouldn't be too hard to implement either.
@Amoc said:
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
Not really, I have played exclusively Eldar in my 200 hours of online play, and I think rangers are OP as hell
Against who?
Because, ironically, the only faction in game which does not have an actual ranger counter are Eldar themselves.
@Darkstirling said:
Not really, I have played exclusively Eldar in my 200 hours of online play, and I think rangers are OP as hell
You're one person, and so that tells us little. The point is that players video gamers often provide biased feedback. That's why statistics and data are better indicators of balance, though you can't completely ignore feedback from players.
@Amoc said:
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
I'm afraid, there is no "Eldar\SM\Ork" players at all. There are players who is ready to evaluate\brace the game as whole and those poor souls defeated by their own imagination of it.
@Amoc said:
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
Not really, I have played exclusively Eldar in my 200 hours of online play, and I think rangers are OP as hell
Against who?
Because, ironically, the only faction in game which does not have an actual ranger counter are Eldar themselves.
YOU don't even play the game and is biased as fuvk, No one have counters to rangers.
If say that by the prism of how you use them(the counters), I'm actually surprised you're capable of countering anything in this game.
@Amoc said:
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
Not really, I have played exclusively Eldar in my 200 hours of online play, and I think rangers are OP as hell
Against who?
Because, ironically, the only faction in game which does not have an actual ranger counter are Eldar themselves.
YOU don't even play the game and is biased as fuvk, No one have counters to rangers.
If say that by the prism of how you use them(the counters), I'm actually surprised you're capable of countering anything in this game.
At least i play the game, don't spend the whole day in the internets defending everything about a game that i don't play.
If people don't have to play actively to criticise the game, then people don't have to play the game actively to defend the game. Less of this snark, from all posters here, @Katitof.
@Amoc said:
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
Not really, I have played exclusively Eldar in my 200 hours of online play, and I think rangers are OP as hell
Against who?
Because, ironically, the only faction in game which does not have an actual ranger counter are Eldar themselves.
YOU don't even play the game and is biased as fuvk, No one have counters to rangers.
If say that by the prism of how you use them(the counters), I'm actually surprised you're capable of countering anything in this game.
At least i play the game, don't spend the whole day in the internets defending everything about a game that i don't play.
If people don't have to play actively to criticise the game, then people don't have to play the game actively to defend the game. Less of this snark, from all posters here, @Katitof.
Moderator Post
Not sure if it was to @Katitof , or rather to @Bigamo , but yeah, what you say makes sense to me.
@Amoc said:
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
Not really, I have played exclusively Eldar in my 200 hours of online play, and I think rangers are OP as hell
Against who?
Because, ironically, the only faction in game which does not have an actual ranger counter are Eldar themselves.
What do you consider to be a "ranger counter" anyways?
IMHO, I can tell that originally sniper units did not have the same LOS as they do range (as there are tooltips in the game stating things like "units such as heavy weapons teams or snipers have higher range than they do LOS, use other units to spot etc..."). I think it would make sense for them to at least go back to that model as a "nerf" where it'd require map vision and scouting (things that effective sniper teams have and do).
@Gorb said:
Both (and anybody else who fancies trying that kind of attack)
Ah okay. Still, I just came to think that @Katitof maybe does play the game, but rarely or he just prefers mostly custom games and/or comp stomps over multi. If so the latter, then that's interesting, since I'm turn the not only one on this forum who loves compstomps over multi in RTS games.
@Gorb said:
Both (and anybody else who fancies trying that kind of attack)
Ah okay. Still, I just came to think that @Katitof maybe does play the game, but rarely or he just prefers mostly custom games and/or comp stomps over multi. If so the latter, then that's interesting, since I'm turn the not only one on this forum who loves compstomps over multi in RTS games.
I have to disappoint you here as I'm not a comp stomp fan, that being said, I'm not going 24/7 with single game either, coh2 being best example for me here, where I play rarely and still keep myself around top 100 with all factions.
@vindicarex said:
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.
Agree with all of this. I understand that everyone has their biases, but, especially in the early game, unit speed is a MASSIVELY influential stat. A large part of the reason people stop spamming ASM's is not only because of the Tac buff, but because they nerfed the charge speed and duration of ASMs. The inability to lock the snipers down EVEN when you catch them with jump units, or melee units, once the charge is up (2-4 seconds) their shields are plenty enough to help them slip away and incur no bleed (economically). Not to mention any half decent player will turn the tables once they have run far enough out of range to evade any real threat, and deal significant bleed damage to the units that tried to catch them in the first place.
It's a total lose-lose situation to even try to engage Rangers until you have some strong lockdown like Devs with Terminator presence, some trukks with boys/nobs, etc etc.
@Gorb said:
Both (and anybody else who fancies trying that kind of attack)
Ah okay. Still, I just came to think that @Katitof maybe does play the game, but rarely or he just prefers mostly custom games and/or comp stomps over multi. If so the latter, then that's interesting, since I'm turn the not only one on this forum who loves compstomps over multi in RTS games.
I have to disappoint you here as I'm not a comp stomp fan, that being said, I'm not going 24/7 with single game either, coh2 being best example for me here, where I play rarely and still keep myself around top 100 with all factions.
Ah, pity. Still that's impresive that in Coh2 you're around Top 100 with all factions, despite not playing actively.
To be honest I too don't play as much per day, but I play almost everyday since when I have a fancy to play, I play it. Also at some time I watch other people playing Dow3 multi, mostly popular streamers like @2Sk3TCHY , Pshyc and @FoxClaw . Heh even sometimes, when I played Coh2, I used to watch other people's matches via Observer mode, and I liked to see long matches most.
Still I wish to see Observer mode to be added into Dow3, so I don't have to rely solely on watching streamer playing Dow3. If I would like to play this game, then for compstomps of course.
@Bigamo said:
just to ilustrate my point that ALL this ++heresy redacted++ doctrines should be removed from this game forever, the game feels like abandonware already...
I don't wanna comment on doctrine balance based on this game because there are a few things about the game that puzzle me:
Why in the world are you not spreading your units? it seems like one of the most basic things you learn in this game and I even told you before. Seeing 2 heavy bolters directly on top of one another is just like a huge sign that says "I am a newbie that dont know how to play this game" yet you are one of the people who have the most hours in the game it does not make sense. Surely you know heavy bolters are straight forward to spread out once on the move.
How is this strategy supposed to work even on a theoretical level? You are only holding on to one point so he easily beats your economy with his map control. If you are going to have so few income you need to also deny him map control even if you cannot afford to hold the points. I do see you try to push him in the middle though given your defensive playstyle it should be obvious he will have bigger army and you are unlikely to win a direct engagement under his forward barracks on top( actually I did see him invest in listening posts at some point also so maybe you did stand a chance but I don't recall exactly, and it also depends on how good his economy was at the time). Your army composition seemed questionable also, his tacts were much better suited for a headon engagement that early on while you had more specialized units like asm and scouts. Maybe you could have gotten a better engagement with him if your heavy bolters were properly spaced and the scouts/asm's crowd control was better used to protect them but it is hard to say since I only view once. Honestly I was surprised you got a heavy bolter as early as you did, they are a unit that need lots of support so usually one would want to open up with 3 tacs or something to back them up first. Heavy bolters lack the mobility of tacs and asm also so they are bad at quickly moving around different locations be it to defend or deny map control so I do have my doubts about them though I would not write them off completely yet.
No builders up front spotting the rangers so basically your asm can jump them only for them to go invisible right after. Even if the rangers focus the builders they seem like a good idea because then they are not focused your troop and they let themselves get detect by shooting. Also there is of course the detect ability which I am pretty sure will work even if a servitor is shot dead.
For some reason you are utterly obsessed with killing his warrior portal which is not worth it at all since it's heavy armor takes forever to kill, costs 200 req and can be easily replaced, not to mention I saw his teleport off cooldown so he could just have teleported out but who would want to do that when you go out and expose yourself like that, better play along and start repairing it :P
You should have build LP on the double power outside your base so you could tech up faster and you had both resources and time to do so, I saw you at 700 req float when I noticed you had not build it which means you could have started building it even earlier than that.
When you get out your landspeeder you go way deeper than you need to with it increasing the time it needs to get out and even turn its back towards the ranger letting them deal 50% bonus damage. By the 2nd landspeeder I was not paying too much attention but it should have been kept constantly on the move so Ronahn cannot stun and deal 50% damage or something with his piercing shot. As long as it gets out alive you can repair it and the repair time will be relatively short since a landspeeder does not have that much health, kinda like battle focus for space marine :P
I have no idea why you would want to build a heavy bolter versus ranger spam, he only seemed to have like 1-2 dire avenger at the time from what I recall, but I guess you really wanted to kill that warrior portal though an ASM with their high single target damage, tankyness, and mobility would probably have done a better job at that anyway.
Deathstorm makes zero sense versus ranger spam since they outrange it and ronahn can deal big damage to it with his piercing shot.
Overall you just lost too many units so when you landspeeder got out it had no support at all, I don't have any direct advice on unit preservation right now but certainly addressing the above would leave you with a couple more units. Maybe you are trying a bit too hard to kill the rangers early on? remember the goal is mainly just to keep him at bay and away from your economy so you can tech up like described in vindi's post:
@vindicarex said:
Basically, you want to turtle and tech. Macro your points up and try to rush out Land Speeders ASAP. As soon as you get them out, the rangers will get murdered and you should be able to take the entire map.
make sure you have decent map control before you go on the defensive - playing well early game and taking these points while he spends his 1st resources on rangers will be a key point in the game as you try to hold as many power generators for as long as possible.
Rangers are not good at killing buildings, so you can stall quite a bit by falling back to shield, cover, and listening posts. LPs on everything he sees if you can.
Sometimes, you will have to push out a bit - even if you take losses without killing him, that's OK. Just make sure it's in defense of your economy and try to hold the contested points if you can (at least, deny it to him).
The ranger spam is often an entire ball of an army moving together - this makes it easy for you to send harassing ASM or Scout squads to corners of the map to take out and capture strategic points (and this goes hand-in-hand with trying to develop as much power generators as you can as quickly as you can).
Usually, by the time he hits "crit mass" and starts putting the pressure on, you should be looking at your 1st land speeder.
Alternatively, you can try ASM spam and overwhelm him... but the fleet of fit and invis makes this somewhat difficult.
@Bigamo said:
All eldar lovers telling you how bad you are and how easy is to beat ranger spam, still NO ONE provides a replay beating ranger spam
Saya played ranger spam with ronahn and double ranger doctrine against bbb. And when i say spam i mean the REAL spam, like 8x rangers.
She tried about 3 times, didn't win a single time against his SM.
Tho i think she did mistakes and one of those games were winable, but still Saya played very well and lost with it. It's not unbeatable in 1v1, it's just annoying to play against and kinda hard to play against because you can't play too defensive and you can't fight a ranger blob too offensive. Split push and sneak attacks + improved LP's to buy time for higher tier units are the way to go. Well Vindicare explained in his post how to do it...
Anyway ranger spam in 1v1 is not op. In 3v3 it is op.
I have an old replay of me beating ranger spam but it is hard to get replays of fighting SKILLED ranger spam, this guy I could just run down with dire avengers, I could have played way better especially now that I found that comment by vindicare explaining what to do. I am not saying ranger spam is not OP but you are making obvious mistakes/misplays in your replay that make your replay pretty useless for judging it.
Menu
Comments
Katitof
Does it feature more of you suiciding blindly units, like in the eldar one?
Thunderhost
@Katitof I do believe I wrote "enough Rangers"
Thunderhost
@Katitof Apologies, I thought you were referring to me and not Dullahan.
Achernar
I think good players are biased because of their own skill. They ignore the fact that it takes little to no effort to be effective with rangers and it takes a lot of it to counter them, not a big deal for the pros, but anyone below that skill level has to just suck it up it appears.
Amoc
Players are biased - period. SM players say, "Eldar OP, nerf rangers" and the Eldar players say "Rangers are fine - L2P". It's like this with every game.
Darkstirling
Not really, I have played exclusively Eldar in my 200 hours of online play, and I think rangers are OP as hell
Thunderhost
Wouldn't a way of making any kind of spam harder be, by making economy cost incremental, upkeepwise. This would perhapshelp with a more rounded out army composition? E.g first 2-3 tactical/ranger squads cost the same upkeep, then a steep incline - say 100%. You can still spam, but it'll cost you on the economic front. Shouldn't be too hard to implement either.
Thunderhost
Wouldn't a way of making any kind of spam harder be, by making economy cost incremental, upkeepwise. This would perhapshelp with a more rounded out army composition? E.g first 2-3 tactical/ranger squads cost the same upkeep, then a steep incline - say 100%. You can still spam, but it'll cost you on the economic front. Shouldn't be too hard to implement either.
Katitof
Against who?
Because, ironically, the only faction in game which does not have an actual ranger counter are Eldar themselves.
Amoc
You're one person, and so that tells us little. The point is that players video gamers often provide biased feedback. That's why statistics and data are better indicators of balance, though you can't completely ignore feedback from players.
Ololo111
I'm afraid, there is no "Eldar\SM\Ork" players at all. There are players who is ready to evaluate\brace the game as whole and those poor souls defeated by their own imagination of it.
Katitof
If say that by the prism of how you use them(the counters), I'm actually surprised you're capable of countering anything in this game.
Gorb
If people don't have to play actively to criticise the game, then people don't have to play the game actively to defend the game. Less of this snark, from all posters here, @Katitof.
Moderator Post
Draconix
Not sure if it was to @Katitof , or rather to @Bigamo , but yeah, what you say makes sense to me.
Gorb
Both (and anybody else who fancies trying that kind of attack)
WreakingHavoc17
What do you consider to be a "ranger counter" anyways?
IMHO, I can tell that originally sniper units did not have the same LOS as they do range (as there are tooltips in the game stating things like "units such as heavy weapons teams or snipers have higher range than they do LOS, use other units to spot etc..."). I think it would make sense for them to at least go back to that model as a "nerf" where it'd require map vision and scouting (things that effective sniper teams have and do).
Draconix
Ah okay. Still, I just came to think that @Katitof maybe does play the game, but rarely or he just prefers mostly custom games and/or comp stomps over multi. If so the latter, then that's interesting, since I'm turn the not only one on this forum who loves compstomps over multi in RTS games.
Katitof
I have to disappoint you here as I'm not a comp stomp fan, that being said, I'm not going 24/7 with single game either, coh2 being best example for me here, where I play rarely and still keep myself around top 100 with all factions.
WreakingHavoc17
Agree with all of this. I understand that everyone has their biases, but, especially in the early game, unit speed is a MASSIVELY influential stat. A large part of the reason people stop spamming ASM's is not only because of the Tac buff, but because they nerfed the charge speed and duration of ASMs. The inability to lock the snipers down EVEN when you catch them with jump units, or melee units, once the charge is up (2-4 seconds) their shields are plenty enough to help them slip away and incur no bleed (economically). Not to mention any half decent player will turn the tables once they have run far enough out of range to evade any real threat, and deal significant bleed damage to the units that tried to catch them in the first place.
It's a total lose-lose situation to even try to engage Rangers until you have some strong lockdown like Devs with Terminator presence, some trukks with boys/nobs, etc etc.
Draconix
Ah, pity.
Still that's impresive that in Coh2 you're around Top 100 with all factions, despite not playing actively. 
To be honest I too don't play as much per day, but I play almost everyday since when I have a fancy to play, I play it. Also at some time I watch other people playing Dow3 multi, mostly popular streamers like @2Sk3TCHY , Pshyc and @FoxClaw . Heh even sometimes, when I played Coh2, I used to watch other people's matches via Observer mode, and I liked to see long matches most.
Still I wish to see Observer mode to be added into Dow3, so I don't have to rely solely on watching streamer playing Dow3. If I would like to play this game, then for compstomps of course.
Thunderhost
Bye now, the craftworlds will miss you
Martin
I don't wanna comment on doctrine balance based on this game because there are a few things about the game that puzzle me:
Why in the world are you not spreading your units? it seems like one of the most basic things you learn in this game and I even told you before. Seeing 2 heavy bolters directly on top of one another is just like a huge sign that says "I am a newbie that dont know how to play this game" yet you are one of the people who have the most hours in the game it does not make sense. Surely you know heavy bolters are straight forward to spread out once on the move.
How is this strategy supposed to work even on a theoretical level? You are only holding on to one point so he easily beats your economy with his map control. If you are going to have so few income you need to also deny him map control even if you cannot afford to hold the points. I do see you try to push him in the middle though given your defensive playstyle it should be obvious he will have bigger army and you are unlikely to win a direct engagement under his forward barracks on top( actually I did see him invest in listening posts at some point also so maybe you did stand a chance but I don't recall exactly, and it also depends on how good his economy was at the time). Your army composition seemed questionable also, his tacts were much better suited for a headon engagement that early on while you had more specialized units like asm and scouts. Maybe you could have gotten a better engagement with him if your heavy bolters were properly spaced and the scouts/asm's crowd control was better used to protect them but it is hard to say since I only view once. Honestly I was surprised you got a heavy bolter as early as you did, they are a unit that need lots of support so usually one would want to open up with 3 tacs or something to back them up first. Heavy bolters lack the mobility of tacs and asm also so they are bad at quickly moving around different locations be it to defend or deny map control so I do have my doubts about them though I would not write them off completely yet.
Martin
No builders up front spotting the rangers so basically your asm can jump them only for them to go invisible right after. Even if the rangers focus the builders they seem like a good idea because then they are not focused your troop and they let themselves get detect by shooting. Also there is of course the detect ability which I am pretty sure will work even if a servitor is shot dead.
For some reason you are utterly obsessed with killing his warrior portal which is not worth it at all since it's heavy armor takes forever to kill, costs 200 req and can be easily replaced, not to mention I saw his teleport off cooldown so he could just have teleported out but who would want to do that when you go out and expose yourself like that, better play along and start repairing it :P
You should have build LP on the double power outside your base so you could tech up faster and you had both resources and time to do so, I saw you at 700 req float when I noticed you had not build it which means you could have started building it even earlier than that.
When you get out your landspeeder you go way deeper than you need to with it increasing the time it needs to get out and even turn its back towards the ranger letting them deal 50% bonus damage. By the 2nd landspeeder I was not paying too much attention but it should have been kept constantly on the move so Ronahn cannot stun and deal 50% damage or something with his piercing shot. As long as it gets out alive you can repair it and the repair time will be relatively short since a landspeeder does not have that much health, kinda like battle focus for space marine :P
I have no idea why you would want to build a heavy bolter versus ranger spam, he only seemed to have like 1-2 dire avenger at the time from what I recall, but I guess you really wanted to kill that warrior portal though an ASM with their high single target damage, tankyness, and mobility would probably have done a better job at that anyway.
Deathstorm makes zero sense versus ranger spam since they outrange it and ronahn can deal big damage to it with his piercing shot.
Overall you just lost too many units so when you landspeeder got out it had no support at all, I don't have any direct advice on unit preservation right now but certainly addressing the above would leave you with a couple more units. Maybe you are trying a bit too hard to kill the rangers early on? remember the goal is mainly just to keep him at bay and away from your economy so you can tech up like described in vindi's post:
S4ngetsu
Saya played ranger spam with ronahn and double ranger doctrine against bbb. And when i say spam i mean the REAL spam, like 8x rangers.
She tried about 3 times, didn't win a single time against his SM.
Tho i think she did mistakes and one of those games were winable, but still Saya played very well and lost with it. It's not unbeatable in 1v1, it's just annoying to play against and kinda hard to play against because you can't play too defensive and you can't fight a ranger blob too offensive. Split push and sneak attacks + improved LP's to buy time for higher tier units are the way to go. Well Vindicare explained in his post how to do it...
Anyway ranger spam in 1v1 is not op. In 3v3 it is op.
Martin
I have an old replay of me beating ranger spam but it is hard to get replays of fighting SKILLED ranger spam, this guy I could just run down with dire avengers, I could have played way better especially now that I found that comment by vindicare explaining what to do. I am not saying ranger spam is not OP but you are making obvious mistakes/misplays in your replay that make your replay pretty useless for judging it.