Dawn of War Codex

Cheah18 wrote:I'm glad people liked my thread

Lol.

Oohkay... Now I have a feeling I have said this before but I suppose it's only like 30 times in different threads but please refrain from throwing insults at each other. Veiled or not. And sticking to the topic would also be advisable.

ill admit when I am wrong , very well scouts are fine .

What are peoples thoughts on the GK rhino having rear armor vulnerability despite having similar hp values as the sentinel?

Seems ridiculously easy to kill this unit

I don't think scouts are fine just because rangers make better snipers.

The problem with scouts isn't that they're so wow, amazing totally OP as a unit with their snipers, instead the problem lies in how cheaply they can transition from being dirt-cheap super-fast capping units, while ALSO being able to transition into an anti-melee unit.

First, unlike rangers you start off with a scout. Secondly scouts are cheaper to buy and typically having two of them is no detriment to you due to how good they are as a capping unit. Thirdly they're a nuisance because if the foe goes for ranged t1.5 units you can get snipers, whereas if they go for melee you can get shotguns, so you're covered either way.

Eldar on the other hand have to invest in a particular t1.5 unit of their own in order to get access to snipers - the ranger squad. That can be exploited and you can drop gens early on and work on hero upgrades so as to not play into the game of the rangers, vs SM however they just notice this and get ASM as their t1.5, queue up a flamer on their tacs and get at lest one shotgun and burn your gens. Eldar can't do that.

Then there's also the fact that SM don't really NEED snipers like eldar do since eldar lack a t1 jump unit whereas SM get the best jump unit in the game - ASM.

I didn't agree with the sniper buff to reduce their cost to 30 power and I think they're pretty OP.

Rhinos seem fine to me

Sent from my GT-S5830i using Tapatalk 2

That Torpid Gamer wrote:I don't think scouts are fine just because rangers make better snipers.

The problem with scouts isn't that they're so wow, amazing totally OP as a unit with their snipers, instead the problem lies in how cheaply they can transition from being dirt-cheap super-fast capping units, while ALSO being able to transition into an anti-melee unit.

Adaptability is the theme of the Space Marines in this game.

It is, but in this case I think it's too strong, much like when tacs could build a flamer for 15 power in seconds it was too strong.

*Vindicare Assassin pops in, one shots a bloodletter*

*pops out*

Vindicare Assassin

Rangers

Scouts

Let's all agree that all snipers are annoying, then.

actually, i dont think snipers are op.

true, they bleed a lot and also true that a vanilla scout is very chaep in every way.
but 1st a vanilla scout squad does not add anything but "scouting" and capping to your army.
so actually you need to invest something in the scouts if you want them to be more than that.
rangers are different. they provide a lot even without the upgrade. (long range damage, big sight radius and big detect radius)

the 10 power upgrade makes them kind of both scout variants, means you get the kb on demand from the high powered shot and the damage, anti garrison, high range, high sight radius, detection ...
you just lagging the grenade, which comes also for less power with your basic squad.

imagine a scout squad that can do all that what rangers can costs 70 power
then you get a nade but no KB and no skill which can be used on your arme/teammates (like the infil field)

imho rangers really provide the same utility like fully upgradet scouts do, but for much less cost.

i would not say scouts are bad, but rangers are not worse, so is the vindicare.

edit:
on Topic:

i would really love to see the UI done to have not only more GK heroes but also the Tau <3
a new race would be the most exiting thing for me but i know its also the biggest thread ...

Those are really good points, Skazi!

I feel like that response was a non-sequitur. I never said scout snipers perform the sniper role better than rangers, they don't. What makes scout snipers so good is the fact that the foe can have default scouts out waiting to respond to what you get very quickly without any real repercussions. The eldar can't sit around with 1 GU and 1 banshee for very long waiting for you to make a t1.5 purchase before they decide whether or not to get rangers because they're going to get overwhelmed pretty darn fast.

Default scouts are nowhere near as powerful as rangers but they cost nowhere as much and are faster too. Who buys default scouts to counter enemy set-up teams? I bet that's done very very rarely, often you would just upgrade an existing one.

You go for a big ranged blob with lots of mobility and charge down the potential snipers and devs + snipers destroy you. You go for a big melee blob to quickly force off the potential snipers and gets none and just gets shotguns and devs or ASM instead, either way you're bleeding disproportionately now and have an army that doesn't scale very well.

yes thats the way SM plays out torpid.
they have just many well transitioning stuff.
eldar doesnt, but therefor Eldar has much more damage, whipe and combo potential, more mobility overall and and and ...

its just the point where it needs to be sayed that you cant compare rangers and scouts ... me neither ...

just to say again:
scout snipers are very powerfull - especially 2 of them, bot they really cost a lot.
other snipers are not worse. and fulfill different roles than scouts do.
a sniper scout is most probably no longer a cap-squad.

well it depends , you technically don't have to get everything on a scout for him to fulfill the sniper role.

really just the sniper rifle. infact in sniper duels vs eldar i have actually stopped getting the sarge and some times even the stealth upgrade in favor of getting an asm .

As long the scouts can bleed guardians without getting shot by rangers the other two upgrades just are not needed. admittedly vs good eldar players the stealth tends to be mandatory

And this is true vs other races , if you can keep the scouts out of harms way you can save a butt-ton by not buying all their upgrades.

sk4zi wrote:the 10 power upgrade makes them kind of both scout variants, means you get the kb on demand from the high powered shot and the damage, anti garrison, high range, high sight radius, detection ...

They have the shotgunblast across the map without the upgrade...

saltychipmunk wrote:As long the scouts can bleed guardians without getting shot by rangers the other two upgrades just are not needed. admittedly vs good eldar players the stealth tends to be mandatory

Buying snipers versus Eldar is just the same as throwing resources to their face. And you want to upgrade them even more?
Rangers detect your scouts you know...

That Torpid Gamer wrote:Default scouts are nowhere near as powerful as rangers but they cost nowhere as much and are faster too. Who buys default scouts to counter enemy set-up teams? I bet that's done very very rarely, often you would just upgrade an existing one.

Comparing default scouts to rangers °_O mkay... Upgraded scouts cost more than rangers and only do about half the dps and have nowhere near as much utility as the rangers have. Shotgunblast across the map. And their upgrade makes them able to infiltrate allies. Just, mind being blown here.



SM's so gud, that's why nobody ever wins with them....
The transition you are talking about is just plain BS Torpid. It really doesn't matter one bit.

You have to keep in mind that while snipers can one shot any Eldar unit in T1 except the actual HWT platform and hero, rangers usually take 2 shots to kill a fully upgraded scout due to various factors. In other words SM can always retreat the squad without actually taking any losses or suffering a scout loss in the worst while Eldar bleed from every shot.

take 2 shots to kill a fully upgraded scout due to various factors.

Why lie though?

The only time this happens is when you hit the sarge, and the rangers target the sarge only if it's the closer model and no one else is in range, and that almost never happens, unless you Attack move, but in that case you are most likely to hit something different from scouts.

Part of my brain just died.

Ace of Swords wrote:the rangers target the sarge only if it's the closer model and no one else is in range

What now? From what I've seen if you issue an attack order on a squad the game randomly selects a model in range to shoot at. I don't think there's any targeting rule that avoids squad leaders as a valid target. I've seen ranger shots hit the sarge all the time, and catachans in particular are notorious for their squad leaders happily eating sniper bullets and never losing a model.

Regardless, I think rangers dominate scouts pretty hard, and it's certainly not a good strategy to get the sarge and pray that the rangers target him first, which is at best a 25% chance that improves with each costly model you lose.

Also, why accuse him of lying? Why insult people? Why do SM players have to crank the drama to 11?

Arbit wrote:Also, why accuse him of lying? Why insult people? Why do SM players have to crank the drama to 11?

This. So much truth.

On Topic
Will the Psyker, Conscripts, and Eversor be implemented in future builds? Cause they seem interesting and we've not heard from them despite their models being already created.

On Snipers (Considering both are fully upgraded)

In terms of utility, Rangers beat Scout Snipers.

In terms of damage, Rangers beat Scout Snipers (I get more squad leader kills using Rangers)

In terms of range, Ranger has longer detection, sight and firing range.

In terms of durability, Scout Sniper wins. Rangers have 650? Scouts probably more?

Seems pwetty clear here whose the better Sniper unless of course the Loldar player drops their Micro.

Sent from my GT-S5830i using Tapatalk 2

Ace of Swords wrote:

take 2 shots to kill a fully upgraded scout due to various factors.

Why lie though?

The only time this happens is when you hit the sarge, and the rangers target the sarge only if it's the closer model and no one else is in range, and that almost never happens, unless you Attack move, but in that case you are most likely to hit something different from scouts.

Having scouts infiltrated is one factor due to 'partially revealed' damage reduction. Then there's damage reduction granted by the squad leader. Also two types of cover. And a chance of hitting the sergeant or not hitting the target at all.

I'm not saying Rangers don't beat sniper Scouts 1v1. But the fact that SM outbleeds Eldar in a sniper/ranger fight in the context of an entire army is evident.

Also I don't lie. If I don't tell the truth because I'm not aware of it, then sorry.

Rangers have a much larger sight range than scouts and eldar can deploy energy shields to make themselves bullet proof. Meanwhile rangers slaughter scouts 1v1. There's not much debate to be had as to whether rangers or scouts are the better sniper unit.

Of course, because rangers or scouts are superior to one another doesn't mean that the one that is inferior is automatically UP. Banshees are the best T1 melee squad and they got buffed recently without too much of an uproar, so people as a whole (despite how frustrating they sometimes find banshees) surely think they are alright balance wise. Contrastingly hormagaunts do much less in T1 and even in the later tiers, so hormagaunts must be UP? No, obviously not...

I checked the codex and squad leader damage reduction may not be the case with scouts. Not sure though.

I also found that if scouts are a level ahead of rangers it should always take them two shots to bring a model down.

Other than that I agree with Torpid.

PS: Shees have approximately 16 more HP in total than before, so there's practically no buff once the aspect is bought. Just to clarify if needed.

The early game is massively influential and one engagement in the early game that initially seems uneventful (no significant bleed incurred on either side and certainly no squad/hero losses) can turn the whole game on its head. The change means that banshees become a lot more relevant a lot sooner. It's a pretty huge buff to banshees in 1v1 and a bit unwarranted too IMO.

Arbit wrote:Also, why accuse him of lying? Why insult people? Why do SM players have to crank the drama to 11?

Firts of all, the truth is not an insult. Since when is Ace a "SM-player" Can everyone stop calling anyone who even tries to argue about SM's a SM-fanboi? It's getting really old. Is everyone scared that SM might actually get a chance of being competitive?

David-CZ wrote:Having scouts infiltrated is one factor due to 'partially revealed' damage reduction. Then there's damage reduction granted by the squad leader. Also two types of cover. And a chance of hitting the sergeant or not hitting the target at all.

...

Also I don't lie. If I don't tell the truth because I'm not aware of it, then sorry.

Partially revealed damage won't be in play because the rangers DETECT!
There is no such thing as damage reduction for squad leaders!
Cover doesn't do anything versus snipers! They are snipers! (Only shields stop sniper shots.)
Snipers hit all the time! 100% accuracy!
Sigh...

So in your book if people think it's true it's not a lie?
"I think the earth is flat people! I really do! Hey i'm not lying you know! I think it is the truth!
See how that doesn't work?

Let's calm down a bit shall we?

Dark Riku wrote:Partially revealed damage won't be in play because the rangers DETECT!
There is no such thing as damage reduction for squad leaders!
Cover doesn't do anything versus snipers! They are snipers! (Only shields stop sniper shots.)
Snipers hit all the time! 100% accuracy!
Sigh...

Rangers have detect radius of 40 and weapon range of 55 if I'm not mistaken. So partial detection is in play during some situations.

I already corrected my mistake with the squad leader.

Regarding the cover and accuracy I based it on the fact that I've seen more than once snipers shooting at the target dealing no damage. I suppose it must have been something with 'die last' members. Sorry about this then.

Finally I forgot to mention the FOF 80% outgoing damage reduction. This one is in the hands of the player though.

Dark Riku wrote:So in your book if people think it's true it's not a lie?
"I think the earth is flat people! I really do! Hey i'm not lying you know! I think it is the truth!
See how that doesn't work?

The way I see it, lying is an intentional act of not telling the truth or twisting it. So no, the quote is not a lie.

Lying is intentionally not telling the truth. If you are blissfully ignorant of the truth and sincere in your false claims then you aren't lying, you're just ignorant, which is obviously much easier remedied.

Why do you even care? By arguing which is best you don't change anything, no one will suddenly nerf Rangers because it is now exposed they might just beat Scouts. I understand you all want to "inform", for want of a more insulting word, but this thread is about what next, not Scouts and Rangers.

On the topic of what next, The Conscripts would be an interesting addition, at least for me being a PC player, I just have more squishy models to slay with my wealth of DoT and AoE. The Psyker could also be a fun unit to try out for IG, might stop every every IG from rushing Ogryns when they see they have a much more interesting option.