Dawn of War Codex

I don't want to say remove the shields because, even if it was the perfect solution, it'd be a ridiculously drastic one. Problem is, it's the best free-cost entrenching tool in the game given to the faction centered on mobility and picking your engagements carefully. The other faction able to deploy some manner of cover has the ability to do so become useless most of the time, not because of it not performing adequately but because you're better off doing other things in the meantime due to the time it requires for diminishing gain due to models not wanting to get into cover either. The energy shield is 500hp deployed in 5 seconds flat, tripled if you go 3xDA or even sextupled if you want to go that far with your energy usage. Nonupled at level 4 if you feel like out-IGing IG in the fortification department.

As Ordie said, when the ranged DPS gets high enough, they go down easily, but you should at that point have a considerable amount pf DPS to throw enough damage in that short time span. Early game, though, 500hp is immense, and just for 15 power you can throw down 2 of those if you feel like grenades and fleet isn't a priority till energy regenerates for them to be used. DA have tac DPS, just barely the model count to get all models behind that shield, and at a cheap cost too, not taking into account the possible buffs, and all of this for a squad which you can triple by building two more for a total of 570 requisition, since you get a free one at the start of the game.

The DPS in a vacuum isn't a problem. The problem is that the supposed weaknesses to counter said DPS get more than covered for a 15 power cost investment, and you're getting tac dps for a bit over half the cost of the tacs themselves, and when shields stop being effective you still have fleet and grenade to keep the investment worth it, and both synergize incredibly well since you're left with a 8.5 speed unit that suffers no damage penalty to its grenades while fleet is active.

This occurs at the same time banshees get a 350 cost and 35 reinforce while more prone to bleeding due to being a melee squad. My memory is hazy, so don't quote me on this, but I seem to recall DA cost being reduced also to have the req income line up with an earlier banshee purchase after the first DA finishes building. If that was part of the reasoning, I'd sooner increase DA cost again and reduce banshee cost and reinforce to match. What to do with the energy shield, I have no idea; it just conflicts so much with the idea of Eldar being mobility-centered.

But I don't play Eldar so I could be speaking bullshit.

Grenades do less damage when FoF is active.

Dark Riku wrote:Grenades do less damage when FoF is active.

They do? Damn, I never noticed.

Guess I was speaking bullshit after all.

Proposed solution: Move the exarch back to t2 with the same cost and move the detection functionality to the Battle equipment upgrade with an increased cost (85 req / 25 power).

BE at 25 power lulz. Detection could come with a separated upgrade though.

Still warlock leader in T1 is nice, I'd rather nerf its T1 stats and let them be rise in T2.

Allow me to apologize for any poor communication on my part. Reading the responses to my post, I worry I was not clear enough.

I propose leaving the req cost of DA at 270, and leave the Exarch alone. Without the shield, DAs bleed pretty hard as is, and since the Exarch isn't a die last model, you run a risk fielding him.

To allow for a greater degree of counter-play; I propose altering the Energy Shield mechanic so that weapons that normally bypass cover entirely (Grenades, Grenade Launchers, Flamers, Noise Marines, Spore Mines, Barbed Stranglers, Sniper, perhaps others) deal damage at a reduced rate to units behind an energy shield, rather than blanket immunity, similar to how Manticores deal 70% of their damage to units behind an energy shield as of the latest patch.

Again, apologies if I was unclear, and apologies if I was clear and I am being redundant.

how about get rid of that retarted leap he gets

Personally I'd prefer removing the leap, and toning down the exarch's stats in t1 then raising them come t2 a la the shoota nob. People playing against them really seem to hate having them at 270 req, but I consider the exarch more of a problem than the reinforce cost. Others disagree.

I think the removal of the Exarch from T1 warrants a rework of Rangers as well since that is what Caeltos intended if I remember correctly. To add soft-detection apart from Rangers in T1. Wouldn't it be possible to just lower the power cost of Rangers, nerf them and simply increase the Aspects cost to compensate? If you guys have another idea how to rework Rangers, I am all ears.

Adeptus Noobus wrote:I think the removal of the Exarch from T1 warrants a rework of Rangers as well since that is what Caeltos intended if I remember correctly. To add soft-detection apart from Rangers in T1. Wouldn't it be possible to just lower the power cost of Rangers, nerf them and simply increase the Aspects cost to compensate? If you guys have another idea how to rework Rangers, I am all ears.

Poor eldar don't want to buy rangers for detection and are given free detection on a starting unit. Its not like IG have to buy an equally mediocre unit for the same thing. I mean how will poor eldar adapt?

How is 15 power for radius 15 detection free? It is the same as a Sentinel which is *drumroll* power-free Do you actually know what this thread is trying to achieve? We are discussing Dire Avenger nerfs + a potential Ranger rework here. Also Catachans are far from mediocre...
Also, try to keep it constructive.

Eldar have a very high skill ceiling to play well, and if you don't believe me just try playing x3 DA.

The main drawback to DA, I have found, is their lack of utility post-T1 when piercing damage doesn't mean shit. That, combined with their total lack of meaningful AV upgrades means they suffer a huge drop in effectiveness. x3 tics with grenade launchers deals with x3 DA just fine most of the time, for cheaper.

Please try playing eldar before you bash one of their viable builds. Banshees have fallen out of favor after getting hit repeatedly with the nerf bat, and nerfing DA would make eldar highly noncompetitive in my view.

Like I said, the skill required to use x3 DA well is very high, and rewards very skilled micro more than other races, but punishes it even more. Give it a try and see how well you do before you cry OP.

I think you'll find that most of us who are arguing for a rebalancing of the unit are fairly experienced players with Eldar. In fact, triple DA has become one of the more common builds for Eldar in team games. I personally play triple DA as Eldar these days unless I have an extremely compelling reason not to. And I'm one of the people arguing for a rebalance. Please don't assume that we are speaking from ignorance on the matter.

The concern with the Dire Avenger x3 build was well highlighted by Aetherion. Yes, they fall in utility in later tiers, but they allow you to get such a huge tech advantage that their later utility is not part of the question at hand.

Laplace's Demon wrote:The main drawback to DA, I have found, is their lack of utility post-T1 when piercing damage doesn't mean shit.

Good thing that's not the only thing they do then. They give perfect cover, cheap grenades, detect, repair. No utility ... LOL.

Laplace's Demon wrote:That, combined with their total lack of meaningful AV upgrades means they suffer a huge drop in effectiveness.

Have you seen what haywire and 3 grenades do to vehicles? It's plain retarded that grenades damage vehicles so much right now.

Laplace's Demon wrote:Banshees have fallen out of favor after getting hit repeatedly with the nerf bat

Nerfbatted banshees? °_O Do we see the same notes?!

Laplace's Demon wrote:and nerfing DA would make eldar highly noncompetitive in my view.

Laplace's Demon wrote:post-T1 when piercing damage doesn't mean shit

wait what?

Laplace's Demon wrote:The main drawback to DA, I have found, is their lack of utility post-T1 when piercing damage doesn't mean shit.

They have short-range detection, deployable perfect cover, grenades (now with 100% extra AV), repair, as well as FOF and Embolden. They seem like one of the most versatile T1 units in the game (maybe catachans with upgrades could give them a run for their money). Also, piercing damage should still be your staple anti-infantry damage for most of the game.

Dark Riku wrote:

Laplace's Demon wrote:The main drawback to DA, I have found, is their lack of utility post-T1 when piercing damage doesn't mean shit.

Good thing that's not the only thing they do then. They give perfect cover, cheap grenades, detect, repair. No utility ... LOL.

Perfect cover: helps mitigate very low health and poor armor.

Grenades, fleet, shield: 65/15
Scout Sergeant (250 hp), grenades, detect (range 30): 75/25 and more upgrade options besides that remain relevant post t-1. plus repair, and invisi nade option... all on a cheaper squad.

Dark Riku wrote:

Laplace's Demon wrote:That, combined with their total lack of meaningful AV upgrades means they suffer a huge drop in effectiveness.

Have you seen what haywire and 3 grenades do to vehicles? It's plain retarded that grenades damage vehicles so much right now.

If your vehicles get killed by triple nades you deserve to lose your vehicle.

Dark Riku wrote:

Laplace's Demon wrote:Banshees have fallen out of favor after getting hit repeatedly with the nerf bat

Nerfbatted banshees? °_O Do we see the same notes?!

Do we see banshees being used much anymore?

Laplace's Demon wrote:post-T1 when piercing damage doesn't mean shit

Laplace's Demon wrote:poor armor

If the primary damage type used to counter infantry armor doesn't mean shit, how exactly is it poor again?

Laplace's Demon wrote:Perfect cover: helps mitigate very low health and poor armor.

And what do any others similar units have? Oh yeah, nothing.

Laplace's Demon wrote:Grenades, fleet, shield: 65/15
Scout Sergeant (250 hp), grenades, detect (range 30): 75/25 and more upgrade options besides that remain relevant post t-1. plus repair, and invisi nade option... all on a cheaper squad.

FIrstly, what does this have to do with scouts? Secondly, scouts do half the dps of DA... DA only cost 60req more... An Eldar gets 270 req free at the start, a SM player 210.
The hell is the point in this? °_O

Laplace's Demon wrote:If your vehicles get killed by triple nades you deserve to lose your vehicle.

Yeah, cuz you can totally avoid the haywire and move your vehicles afterwards... Oh wait.

Laplace's Demon wrote:Do we see banshees being used much anymore?

Yes.
Do you play this game?

This is a very good example of why I am posting less these days.

I agree with basically everything Riku has said.

Aguxyz wrote:

Laplace's Demon wrote:post-T1 when piercing damage doesn't mean shit

Laplace's Demon wrote:poor armor

If the primary damage type used to counter infantry armor doesn't mean shit, how exactly is it poor again?

Infinite recursion - brain melting

There is consensus here that Dire Avengers are too cost effective based on how many different utilities and strengths they have.

We could increase the cost of the DA Exarch OR we could move DA Exarch to t2 instead of changing the cost, but that means Eldar detection would depend upon rangers or the Farseer. (I know rangers are a touchy issue for some people.)

The squad itself could have cost increased to 300, but that's high for a starting/basic squad; also how would that effect reinforcement cost?

That said, deployable perfect cover also has too little counterplay; it could have it's energy cost increased or be mechanically redesigned to perform more like heavy/building cover, but that would be more time consuming and intensive of a solution for Caeltos to handle.

If Dire Avengers are too cost effective, at what point in the game are they most problematic? How can we target a nerf at that specific problem without effecting other parts of the game where the squad is balanced?

I really liked xerrol's post, well done.

Moving DA perfect cover to heavy cover would be fine imo. It removes a lot of complications with it, although I think it might make grenades fully effective on units in them again? I don't know if that is something to really consider.

I like idea of getting rid of perfect cover.

Reducing the cover of deployable shields from perfect to heavy is a tricky decision.

It comes down to, Is placing and staying behind a shield worth the sacrifice of mobility?
With perfect cover, the answer is yes; and it allows normally fragile eldar units to temporarily behave like other races in holding a position.
Also having that trade (mobility for survivability) creates an option for eldar players to use.

If the benefit of the shield itself is not worth the loss of mobility (regardless of its cost, energy or otherwise) then it simply won't be used at all.
Not being used is not the same is creating counterplay, so we have to be careful to reduce the impact without removing the tool all together.

I would be more interested in seeing an additional resource added to deployable shields without reducing mechanical strength,
like making them cost some power or requisition (like turrets would).

When I watch tournament games with eldar players, I don't think I've seen deployable shields being used in the last 6 months.

xerrol nanoha wrote:It comes down to, Is placing and staying behind a shield worth the sacrifice of mobility?
With perfect cover, the answer is yes; and it allows normally fragile eldar units to temporarily behave like other races in holding a position.
Also having that trade (mobility for survivability) creates an option for eldar players to use.

The problem is you're giving the best entrenchment tool to the faction centered on mobility and picking your fights.

It's perfect cover, nothing can get through (not even what you'd imagine are cover-counters like flamers or grenades), can't be suppressed, is built in an instant, is just big enough for DAs to get behind fully due to the game engine's unreliable way it decides if units go into cover or not, and synergizes not only with the triple DA opening but also with grenades if anyone decides to get close, not to mention other possible uses like slapping a setup team behind it.

I am aware that giving players choices is a good thing, but this is giving the faction that's supposed to be mobile the best tool at not being mobile. Even at tier 3 they get a set-up team that can go up to a theoretical 100+ range with farseer's guide, and I'll leave it at that because this thread is about DAs.

Sorcerer wrote:this is giving the faction that's supposed to be mobile the best tool at not being mobile.

Is "the faction that's supposed to be mobile" meant to be read as "the faction that's supposed to be bad at anything that isn't mobility", and therefore giving them access to an entrenchment tool is inappropriate? We're arguing here, for and against removing energy shield from guardians?

When I think of pure mobility as a play style, I'm more likely to associate that with Orcs or with Tyranids than with Eldar. Eldar have their share of slow moving and setup units, where mobility is split between backcapping or harassing with light infantry and using mobility to get into places and setup before their opponent arrives.

I'm also not convinced that mobility is a good enough reason to deny deployable shields to Eldar. Eldar units have above average damage and mobility in trade for below average durability. Deployable shields is one ways in which an Eldar player can mitigate this weakness under certain circumstances.

I don't know if many of these things are still fully true since so many new units and tactics have been added in Elite mod; with these new units it's possible that the old paradigms of the Eldar faction are no longer relevant, in spite of Dire Avengers being overtuned.

That said, almost every faction will have general advantages and disadvantages, and they will also have ways of temporarily mitigating their weaknesses. Deployable shields don't enhance Eldar mobility, nor does it improve survivability while using mobility. It only strengthens them at their weakest action, rather than improving them at their strongest. This is the reason why you wouldn't see Space Marines having deployable shields for example, because in many cases that mechanic wouldn't be a meaningful one next to slower moving units with heavy armor that are already highly resilient while in cover.

Any number of tweaks and changes could be made to deployable cover to nerf specific details of it's use without rendering it generally bad; which I warned against in my summary post early. You can increase or add resource types to the cost, delay access by making the ability require a higher tier, nerf the stats of the shield itself (reduce its health, make it take longer to build, and so on).

There are lots of things we should try; but I get the feeling certain people here would be happy for deployable shields to just go away.

I have been facing a lot of DA exarch leader purchases in T1 lately and it just seems broken. The unit was not originally designed to be that durable in T1 without using the shields to cover their arse. It is frustrating to play against and easy to play with.

I'd like to amend my previous proposition and suggest the following:

1. DA exarch is moved back to T2
2. Battle Equipment is reverted to back when it provided a small health buff.
3. To solve the "I have to buy rangers for detection" issue, a separate T1 upgrade option is provided to DAs:

Placeholder name : Reconnaissance training
Price: To be determined (50/15 is my starting suggestion)
What it does: upgrades the DAs sight to 55 and detection radius to 30. This is on par with scout detection. So you get good detection but not quite as good as rangers can provide.

I'd be willing to help code this or any other reasonable change. Let me know.

-Kickin

Deuce Bigalow wrote:Placeholder name : Reconnaissance training
Price: To be determined (50/15 is my starting suggestion)
What it does: upgrades the DAs sight to 55 and detection radius to 30. This is on par with scout detection. So you get good detection but not quite as good as rangers can provide.

I love you.

On a more serious note, that might not be the way to go. As mostly useless as Rangers are currently, and as much as I'd like to see Eldar get a better source of detection, a standard-range detection aura on DA would probably be pretty overpowered. In matchups against stealth units, it would pretty much render stealth play either obscenely difficult, or impossible, since you usually have 2-3 DA at a time as Eldar. Since they can move pretty quick, it wouldn't be too difficult for them to act as a mobile screen against any would-be sneaky shenanigans. That, or it would be a dead upgrade in non-stealth matchups.

I agree with moving the Exarch back to T2 as it was initially designed though. It's not like his 15 range detection countered much in t1 besides IEDs anyway, which, admittedly, is a pretty nice thing to counter in the IG/Eldar games.

DA Exarch in T1 is a red herring (something, especially a clue, that is or is intended to be misleading or distracting.) I for one rarely get the upgrade before T2 (when it's powers kick in), as it goes against the strength of this squad: disproportionately high stats for cost in it's vanilla form.

The problem that I have with DA is that their straight out of the box stats are better then any other T1 ranged unit for cost. This happened over the course of multiple small upgrades to them that were alright individually, but culminated in an over powered unit. Compare their un-upgraded stats to other ranged squads, and you'll see they are straight up better in nearly every way. DA's do the highest damage, while also having above average speed, high health and repair. This would all be almost ok, except that their upgrades are also both awesome, and scale well into T2.

IMO their base stats need to be reduced. Since I like the hit and run Eldar archetype, I'd say reduce health from 120 to 100 and call it a day. MAYBE give the health boost back to battle equipment, but I don't think it's necessary. Their base damage could go down too, and maybe give the Exarch Embolden in T1 to compensate with investment. I'd prefer health though - DA should bleed if you don't rely on their speed/battle equipment to win firefights. As they exist now, they outshoot every ranged squad except tacs/csm (which they will do a number to in pairs and/or in cover) and then have strong upgrades on top.

In short: As a former Eldar player, I think DA base stats are too high for cost. If DA Exarch moved to T2, it would not effect my play in a meaningful way, nor would it make DA any more reasonable for their cost.