2.4 D-cannons

[Thibix Magnus]

D-cannons had a considerable change in 2.4: damage divided by two, but dealing the remaining half over time (though I can't figure out if there was a change in area of effect) - By the way, the warp tear is a very nice visual gift for the unit

My understanding is that the change was designed to allow for some reactive play from targeted range units (typically Space Marines, of any faction) in prolonged ranged fights. People complained that they could do nothing about suffering losses without warning.

When it happened, at first I didn't fully agree with the narrative, it felt a bit as a 3v3 issue where people stack insane fire power, in other games flanks and jumps are easier, if you don't have immediate counter-initiation the D-cannon just can't escape alive upgraded jump troops, if they land before retreat (no melee resistance...). However it was cleverly designed, and reacting to the warp tear still consumes concentration from the opposing player (the new sound is also very explicit).

The main problem I see is that while addressing this specific situation, giving a chance to range HI with medium health, the change has heavy consequences for other roles of the D-cannon, roles where afaik there where no complaints, particularly in 1v1. Basically, the change was really a damage halving for any unit which is already supposed to be moving, where it doesn't increase the counter-play effort. Termies, Nobz, walkers, even battle tanks.

The D-cannon, while not designed to counter these threats by itself, was still useful in synergy with other Eldar weapons to deplete a bit the huge health pool of SHI, or threaten the tanks, while the Singularity helped to deny areas or punish risky blobs. The D-cannon was a well deserved, affordable multi-purpose purchase that allowed you to jump back into the game if you were losing map and units, lost gens, but managed to reach T3 a bit later than your opponent. While still doing its job at range superiority, it could give a hand against SHI, or threaten a moving tank/walker, like any other T2 artillery. These units also have much more time to react as they won't suffer immediate losses

I believe this purpose has been really hurt with a 50% damage reduction (!!), while I'm not sure it was the original goal. If I am a bit right, a partial solution could be to revert to the previous damage to SHI and vehicles, but make them immune to the warp tear, it would also feel coherent, infantry being more agile against direct blasts, but more vulnerable to side-effects. For Nobz... I don't know.

Happy to hear thoughts -particularly "pro" eldar players- or stand corrected. Thanks as always to Caeltos and the modders for the truly amazing efforts.

[Asmon]

D-cannons were a bit too strong before, now they are a tiny bit too weak. I'd increase their firing rate and keep the current damage patern.

[DarthMoose]

D-cannons were a bit too strong before, now they are a tiny bit too weak. I'd increase their firing rate and keep the current damage patern.

This, I can support. 9 seconds between shots is an awfully long time.

[Dalakh]

Although I personally think the current D-cannon could stand a slight increase in on-hit damage (from 50/50 to 60/40 or something along those lines) that is absolutely not the main problem.

The main problem is that where the 2.3 D-cannon worked perfectly and always landed it's hit the 2.4 d-cannon after the modifications is now somehow utterly broken. It hits cover all the time and is affected by terrain which it NEVER did before.
I don't know how the transition from the old one to the new was done but turning the d-cannon into something as unreliable as the other artillery units is unacceptable. The current d-cannon is, as a result, a piece of garbage not because of the reduced damage but because of it's broken behavior.

[Asmon]

Any replay of this? I haven't experienced such a deception yet.

[DarthMoose]

Dalakah, Really? D-cannons clip through terrain for me. Replays would definitely be appreciated. Side note, are you using attack ground or just letting it auto target, Because sometimes if you just tell it to target a squad it'll target models further away and not the center of the squad (Could be why it smashes the cover but leaves its target unscathed.).

[Dalakh]

I'm absolutely positive I saw d-cannon shots hit cover (not the ground per say) more than once on it's trajectory. I'll try to test it and send you a replay.

[Tex]

I have never seen a D-cannon miss as far as I can recall.

I don't think they are weak at all in their current state. Singularity is what you use to deny elite melee troops entry into combat. The fact that the regular shot does fantastic supplementary long range AV and doesn't miss is more than enough to keep the D-cannon relevant.

The damage to ranged troops was unfairly high and instantaneous. It remains instantaneous but now you at least have a chance to move out of half the damage.

I see no problems here.

[Kvn]

Can confirm on the D-Cannons missing. They've done that since retail, and it's often confused me that people seem to think that they don't. While I didn't use them all that frequently, I did see them missing fairly regularly. Not as often as something like Plasma Devs mind, and obviously not as visibly, but they did miss their mark more than people gave them credit for. Many a vehicle managed to escape one hit away from death because my Cannons shot to the right or left of them.

Since their change I see them do it a lot more often. Not sure if that's an actual change to accuracy, or if it's just more noticeable since their singularity-esq effect destroys cover and sticks around for a sec after the initial shot.

[Dark Riku]

D-cannons definitely did not miss ever in retail.

D-cannons seem to hit terrain some times like other artillery pieces now though.

[Adeptus Noobus]

The damage was not nerfed at all. The way it was dealt was changed though. I agree with Tex, that the damage to infantry units was too high.
The D-Cannon now deals less up-front damage, but in addition also deals damage over time in the area where it hit. The amount of damage over time + the initial damage amount to the same damage the D-Cannon did before changing it. It requires the enemy to notice that his unit was hit and at least gives him the chance to save what is left of the squad.

[Asmon]

It is merely stupid to say that the damage wasn't nerfed. It has been lowered, unless your opponent is afk. Which is also irrelevant to this thread as it's not the main topic and everyone before agreed on the new damage patern. We're discussing the fact that now D-cannons seem to miss.

They miss vehicles often, but that's because vehicles move, and most of them faster than speed 5. They did and if they still do it's alright. They definitively never missed common infantry even on the move, nor hit terrain before. Hence our concern if they do now. Videos are expected.

[Lichtbringer]

D-Cannons in Retail missed Infantry before the patch, and they miss now. Never understood why people said they always hit.

[Asmon]

We're not speaking about the occasional miss which does happen, especially on the first shot and if the target is moving in and out of FoW. Some players have mentioned terrain hits and many misses. I've definitively never seen this before.

[Myrdal]

D-cannons will miss by up to 10 m in Elite just as in retail but since 2.4 the projectiles are affected by terrain. We need to fix this so consider it a bug. I'd like to hear more thoughts on the issue brought up by OP about the 50% nerf to the front-loaded damage in regards to moving units.

[Broodwich]

I think the new ones would be a ok if they didn't, as you say, hit terrain. When they actually hit where they are supposed to they are still quite nasty, and are pretty much the same against static targets as they were before. This is primarily what I get them for

[Thibix Magnus]

Just to give one (last) comment, as OP... thanks for your inputs, I also noticed the D-cannon new inaccuracy sometimes and it seems it is indeed the biggest problem.

Still... that awkward moment when almost no one addresses your question

Of course I can be fully wrong, it might have been too long, poorly written, bad inglich or whatever, yet I believe I made clear I understand the new pattern and kind of approve it for ranged HI. My concern was that the change is a damage halving for melee SHI and vehicles that are supposed to be moving, and had already enough health to react to the first shot in the previous version.

Picking one answer:

I don't think they are weak at all in their current state. Singularity is what you use to deny elite melee troops entry into combat. The fact that the regular shot does fantastic supplementary long range AV and doesn't miss is more than enough to keep the D-cannon relevant.

Keeping in mind that you are one of the most experienced out there, I don't fully understand. Of course singularity is really great at what it does, but won't affect walkers, won't deplete SHI health pool, the area denial duration is the same as before, I still have the same issue with the actual damage reduction.

You might be right saying that the D-cannon is still fine overall. But I find it is a frustrating way to change a unit which can be used in different styles. It was a good and subtle nerf against ranged infantry, but a big 50% nerf for targets that move by design, a less common but not illegitimate use of the D-cannon - as you said, we speak of supplementary damage here, not direct counter... still an important part of the game in practice, when things are messy, not two armies perfectly deployed. You say “it is still ok for that role”, as if it was an acceptable collateral rather than an intended move. What if for whatever reason, a tweak to the plasma cannon kept its damage to range units but halved it to a charging deaf dread ? Would we say it is fine as it is not its main use ? Sometimes balance consensus based on meta can oversee uncommon uses.

Now if you explain me why exactly, within the Eldar composition, taking in account their other weaknesses and the overall game balance and complexity, the supplementary AV / anti-SHI utility from the D-cannon was too high and plainly deserved to be halved for moving targets, I will blindly agree, meanwhile I keep thinking it was not the goal. Not that I care thaaat much for this particular issue, it's a question of method, from my humble point of view.

(edit, remark: I just focused on your answer as you specifically replied to the moving target issue - with Hakon's remark - so I take the occasion to develop my view a bit more, but it is addressed to any one)

[Dark Riku]

Personally, I like how the d-cannon is right now and how it functions, it make it unique in the artillery department and not as stupidly frustrating as before.
It has also been buffed versus stationary targets as it does more damage in total now on the impact spot.
(By quite a substantial amount since it's AoE and that 120 damage can affect multiple models. Correct me if I'm wrong here.)

Also punishes people that do not or can't pay attention and walk into the AoE Come T3 with a full pop army the micro strain can be real.
Which is just fine and is not an argument from my part, just sharing a thought.

I don't find that it under performs versus all the "moving squads". It's also not the role of artillery to deal with those kind of squads.
However, combine it with certain abilities and it certainly can, on top of it's already existing charge stopping singularity.

[Crewfinity]

You might be right saying that the D-cannon is still fine overall. But I find it is a frustrating way to change a unit which can be used in different styles. It was a good and subtle nerf against ranged infantry, but a big 50% nerf for targets that move by design, a less common but not illegitimate use of the D-cannon - as you said, we speak of supplementary damage here, not direct counter... still an important part of the game in practice, when things are messy, not two armies perfectly deployed. You say “it is still ok for that role”, as if it was an acceptable collateral rather than an intended move. What if for whatever reason, a tweak to the plasma cannon kept its damage to range units but halved it to a charging deaf dread ? Would we say it is fine as it is not its main use ? Sometimes balance consensus based on meta can oversee uncommon uses.

Coming from the opposite side of the battlefield, D-cannons used to be infuriating to fight not only because of their damage to infantry, but also to SHI and vehicles, especially when spammed. the instantaneous damage along with their massive range made them really too good at sniping vehicles with few options for counter play. Plasma cannon, on the other hand, is way easier to dodge simply due to travel time of the projectile, same as the blastmaster or weirdboy attack.

with the damage reduction D-cannons still fufill their artillery role, and even still damage vehicles instantly (still amazing), but they aren't quite as punishing or impossible to play around, it was just a little bit too much burst dps before.

Now if you explain me why exactly, within the Eldar composition, taking in account their other weaknesses and the overall game balance and complexity, the supplementary AV / anti-SHI utility from the D-cannon was too high and plainly deserved to be halved for moving targets, I will blindly agree, meanwhile I keep thinking it was not the goal. Not that I care thaaat much for this particular issue, it's a question of method, from my humble point of view.

(edit, remark: I just focused on your answer as you specifically replied to the moving target issue - with Hakon's remark - so I take the occasion to develop my view a bit more, but it is addressed to any one)

like I elaborated a little bit above, artillery units are meant to be best against relatively stationary targets, meaning that the counterplay is to stay mobile, microing your units around to reduce the hits and AOE damage of those units. if they're able to instantly hit and deal large damage to any unit in their massive range, where's the opportunity for counterplay like with P-devs or something? the other thing to think about is that once you have one D-cannon out, more D-cannons afterwards can make it even more effective, such that you could instantly snipe vehicles that strayed into their firing arcs if you had a couple set up pre-nerf. now there's a bit of time to react and save your high-value units.

[Kvn]

Riku and the others raise a good point in saying that the D-Cannon is meant more for hammering a defensive line then they are for being an anti-all artillery unit. The Fire Prism pretty much acts as the counterpart insomuch as it has big instant aoe hits on moving targets, plus disruption, in exchange for lesser damage output. While the changes do cut down Eldar late game av a bit since they no longer punch through tanks as effectively, I think that they still fulfill their major roles in punishing static play, and are perfectly capable of putting the hurt on big super-heavies that physically can't get out of the damaging space.

For what my personal opinion is worth, I believe the only major issue with them right now is their inaccuracy. I think that further balance judgments might benefit from being put on hold until after that issue is resolved as the unreliability could be the main thing that's holding them back right now.

[Bahamut]

just FYI, eldar late game AV has no problems whatsoever. WG, FD, ES(eldritch storm), WSs, D-Cannon, Falcon, FP... even banshees do provide a measure of soft AV. Everybody knows you just CAN'T get big vehicles against eldar and there's a reason for it