Dawn of War Codex

I am quite glad people agree on my very simple idea of halving the repurchase to Tactical Marine's wargear, makes me a little fuzzy inside (not really).

To give some more perspective on SG, i am going to tell y'all when i purchase them to see if anyone seem to do the same.

Purchasing SG is very rare for me to do. I am probably going to get libby more often than SG. The only time i really do is when I am against low health infantry squads, and i am having trouble keeping up with them, then ill get SG to help knock off some units. However. I dont get them for the following reasons.

Tactical Marines already have a weapon upgrade. Or they are already leveled. With that level comes a plus 1 to their melee skill. Their sergeant has a special attack and increased dps by quite a bit. As Codex has said, increased capping speed. All these are the reasons i do not get SG unless I have too.

To make me want SG more than usual. (imma get yelled at probs) Make their Kraken Blots like Tacs Kraken Blots. Since Tactical Marines seem to do more dps when their KB are activated than SG when they have their KB equipped. OR increase vengance round range. But dont change anything else since it does decent damage to almost everything in the game. If its any more than increased range to say 32 or 34 would make it OP. But this is my opinion on SG.

Indrid if you are reading this, could you maybe make a vid with these two units squaring off? I would LOVE to see ,by how much, are SG superior to Tacs. I like those vids yoz, really do.

Nurland:

Essentially, although I think the comparison to MoT CSM may have become a little deceptive. In my opinion, part of what makes MoT CSM what they are is their relation to, and interaction with, other chaos units (including other MoT CSM squads). For example, consider the difference between one and two MoT CSM squads in a group, or a MoT CSM squad being infiltrated by Tzeentch worshiping heretics. How the rest of a Chaos army functions informs how the MoT CSM squads function.

Because the SM faction itself is so different from the Chaos faction, the Sternguard I'm imagining would inevitably function differently than MoT CSM. The similarities between the two start and end with "power armored, ranged, dedicated anti-infantry unit."

I think it'd be interesting to see the Sternguard fill that role for the Tier 2 SM army.

On a different note Nurland, I really do appreciate you taking the time to discuss this stuff with me. It's always interesting getting someone else's perspective, and you've clearly spent some time reading my posts and responding to them. Even if we disagree, that still strikes me as a pretty cool thing for you to do. That goes for all the other ELITE players on here who have responded to my posts as well.


Codex:

Your post makes good sense to me. If you're only ever using a single Tactical Marine squad which is ear-marked for a utility role, and my theoretical Sternguard were to become a reality (through some twist of fate), then you might not want to pick up a squad of Sternguard in every game. Especially if you have a pre-planned build which takes into account all your population and you can't spare any of it for a second Tac. squad.

However, your post seems to implicitly suggest one of the very things that motivated my "theoretical Sternguard" post in the first place. When you do use Sternguard, your post suggests that you use them to fill the EXACT SAME role as your tactical marines. I think it's kind of sad that they fill the exact same role. Considering their cost and their unique ammo mechanic, I feel that Sternguard deserve to fill their own niche in the SM army. I think it might even help diversify SM play styles and inspire new and interesting builds for players to experiment with. At the very least it would make Sternguard more than just a vehicle for Hellfire rounds.


All Readers:

My "theoretical" Sternguard post is a pretty dramatic departure from how Sternguard currently function in ELITE, and I knew when I made it that it wasn't a serious option. I never thought my "theoretical" Sterngaurd would come about, and I hope it won't distract from the three main issues that I really care about in ELITE: Vengeance range and reload, Tac special/heavy weapon pricing on repurchase, and loss of Tac levels with Sternguard upgrade.

wa1243agh wrote: Indrid if you are reading this, could you maybe make a vid with these two units squaring off? I would LOVE to see ,by how much, are SG superior to Tacs. I like those vids yoz, really do.

^ What he said. That would make for an interesting vid!

I haven't done any test, but plasma tacts are cleary superior to sterns.

wa1243agh wrote:
To make me want SG more than usual. (imma get yelled at probs) Make their Kraken Blots like Tacs Kraken Blots.

Their Kraken Bolts do less damage than the Tactical ones?
Whow, what a bummer. Where's the logic behind that... : /

Orkfaeller wrote:

wa1243agh wrote:
To make me want SG more than usual. (imma get yelled at probs) Make their Kraken Blots like Tacs Kraken Blots.

Their Kraken Bolts do less damage than the Tactical ones?
Whow, what a bummer. Where's the logic behind that... : /

But they are permanent, so you can have them activated all the time

To Magus Magi:

Yes yes. Most of my arguments have been against Bahamut's posts and as I stated previosly, I am not opposed to giving discounts for weapon repurchases or SG AV ammo range increase. The leveling thing I'm not so sure about.

And regarding the comparison between Tcsm and the modified SG. They would both have quite similar hp pools, high damage to HI/SHI and the damage output would be spread evenly among the squad members, while SG would have in addition TSKNF, anti garrison/ building options and specialized anti-infantry rounds. So yes. As units that SG would be cheaper and more versatile version of Tcsm. And yes I do know that the two factions work quite differently as they are the two factions I have spent most of my time with. I do also know that in general it is usually pointless to compare units from other factions due to synergies with different units, globals etc.

Anyway I am opposed to giving SM earlier access to tanky, very high dps units as the inspiration, commander wargear and durability kinda make up for the lower base dps.
Ofc losing the AV and faster capping speed would be quite severe nerfs for their utility and makes them less desirable as Codex pointed out.

Regarding Plasma Tacts vs SG:

As anti HI/SHI, yes. I believe Ptacts do around 70dps to HI while SG do 60dps if the Kraken Round stats are correct. Also Ptacts have the Plasma Gun (which does over 50% of the damage) transfer to the next model while SG damage output is evenly distributed and losing a model means 25% reduction in damage output. Also that means that Ptacts are generally better at taking out models fast as over half of their damage is automatically focused on a single model.

SG do 50% more damage to HI than regular Tacs though so they should beat them quite handily. Even with Kraken Bolts active they would do 48 dps while SG would do 60dps without any time limits

Ace of Swords wrote:I haven't done any test, but plasma tacts are cleary superior to sterns.

Against SHI 4/4 Sternguard Veterans with Vengeance Rounds are better than 4/4 TSM, but as models drop the difference shades off.

Against HI TSM shall always be superior to SV unless only the Sergeant is alive.

Nurland your values assume target's size is 1, which is rarely the case (they are still relevant ofc).

Well vengeance rounds also have less range so you have to take into account the damage you take while getting closer while doing none.

But again, it's fine as it is, tacts are meant to specilize to deal with something and in case switch again to deal with something else, I think the fact that sterns cover that anti inf dps that sm was missing is already good enough.

Didn't Vengeance Rounds get nerfed so that Kraken Rounds are actually better against HI/SHI?

http://dawnofwar.info/elite/weapon.php?wpn=sm_bolter_sternguard_vengeance
http://dawnofwar.info/elite/weapon.php?wpn=sm_bolter_sternguard_kraken

But if all you are going to use the SG for are anti infantry... why bother having the many ammo types if really only one is particularly note worthy?

I would hope all the ammo types would be good, especially since unlike std tacs you MUST buy the sarge to get SG which is ,depending on the situation, not a particularly enticing prospect .

I almost never buy the sarge for my tacs ( that 5 pop is my libby pop) So for someone like me , it would take something at-least somewhat special for me to commit the extra pop and power for the sterns over the resource efficiency of not getting the sarge.

Frankly that criteria is just not being met, Nothing about the sterns except maybe the anti infantry rounds scream "buy me" like many of the other units and upgrades in the sm arsenal do.

its not like the chaos tcsm upgrade which has a very noticeable punch when upgraded. Though that maybe an unfair comparison since the tcsm are dedicated anti heavy infanty/infanty.

Sterns are better vs heroes/infantry than TCSM, but TCSM are better vs HI/SHI, they both provide some light AV but the sterns one can also be kind of a threat vs unupgraded transports.

Pretty much sterns are very useful vs orks/eldar, but I rarely purchase them outside these 2 MUs.

Ace of Swords wrote:Sterns are better vs heroes/infantry than TCSM, but TCSM are better vs HI/SHI, they both provide some light AV but the sterns one can also be kind of a threat vs unupgraded transports.

I would really love it if someone with a better understanding of the underlying math could provide a breakdown of the difference in damage between a fully upgraded CSM squad and SG against heroes and light infantry.

I CAN'T STOP TALKING ABOUT TACS N' STERNGUARD:

I have to agree with Mr. Chipmunk, I don't think Hellfire rounds should be the primary selling point for Sternguard. Personally, I think Sternguard should outperform Tactical Marines when using their appropriate ammo type against the corresponding armor type.

Furthermore, as long as we're going down this road, I think the original choice to envision SG as a Tactical Marine squad that is able to switch their specialization at will in exchange for the power of picking a single specialization, was a mistake. I don't think that role is unique enough to really add to SM play. I believe that the best units in DoW2 fill a unique and valuable role within their army.

Everybody knows what they're getting when they purchase: a pred. tank, a nob squad, a termagant squad, a MoT CSM squad, howling banshees, an aspiring champion for heretics, crushing claws for the HT, or a Tactical Marine squad.

The units in the space marine roster that fail to appear impactful in games don't really have a valuable role to fill in their army and at their given tier. The whirlwind, vanguard veterans, sternguard veterans, and the librarian are all in competition with more traditional units that consistently give more bang for your buck.

(1) Why get Sternguard in tier 2 if it means paying to lose my Tactical Marines? Are Sternguard really the solution to a problem that I can't just use Tactical Marines to solve?
(2) Why get Vanguard in tier 3 when I just got access to terminators and my opponents just got access to their tier three units? Do I really want to fill up on 20 population of level one melee troops in tier 3?
(3) Why get a Libby (in Tier 2) if I can get a dreadnought? Why get a Libby in Tier 3 to support terminators when that 10 population could go towards more Tier 3 units?
(4) And why get a Whirlwind when I can get a plasma dev?

I know that someone out there may be tempted to list unique situations where they might employ one of the units above, but that's not really the point. Tactical marines, dreadnoughts, terminators, and devastators bring something valuable and unique to the field at the exact moment when it's needed. They're consistently good, and you always know what problem you're purchasing them to solve. The Painboy, for example, is one of the new ELITE units that really found a unique and valuable role to fill for it's army.

Magus Magi wrote:
I have to agree with Mr. Chipmunk, I don't think Hellfire rounds should be the primary selling point for Sternguard. Personally, I think Sternguard should outperform Tactical Marines when using their appropriate ammo type against the corresponding armor type.

that's my point of view as well too

Bahamut wrote:

Magus Magi wrote:
I have to agree with Mr. Chipmunk, I don't think Hellfire rounds should be the primary selling point for Sternguard. Personally, I think Sternguard should outperform Tactical Marines when using their appropriate ammo type against the corresponding armor type.

that's my point of view as well too

Why should a single 100/30 upgrade make a squad always outperform another squad that has to pay power to switch between its counters?

Do that, and no one will ever use plasma gun when they can just get kraken sterns and switch to hellfire when no HI are around.

As for sterns only being good vs orks and eldar, I played a matchup against IG where sterns helped me come back from a 350+ VP deficit. They bleed catachans like no other, and force off even plasma guardsmen as long as you keep them in cover.

Idk man, why 100/30 to counter HI if the plasma gun is plain better?. That question works both ways. Nurland asked the same question, and my answer was "because i can't upgrade my second tac squad to sternguard"

Ace of swords was referring to the only ammo being superior to regular tacs is the infantry ammo, so they're only worthwhile against infantry armor races (he said orkz and eldar, probably just forgot to add IG as well)

Why assault storm troopers instead of karskins?

Vs IG the bleed they cause is not worth the cost, the same applied to nids (unless 3v3, there they will do a decent job bleed/price wise), also having a missile launcher or plasma helps alot to deal with specific threats from these 2 faction.

You guys just don't understand the power of Sternguard Veterans vs commander armor.

Magus Magi wrote:I have to agree with Mr. Chipmunk, I don't think Hellfire rounds should be the primary selling point for Sternguard. Personally, I think Sternguard should outperform Tactical Marines when using their appropriate ammo type against the corresponding armor type.

This is plain absurd. Why would anyone leave his TSM unupgraded then?

It's actually the complete opposite...

Sternguards are generalist.

Tacticals with upgrades are specialists.

If each ammo made them into specialist, it is indeed like Asmon is saying - why would you ever bother with def. tactical weapon ornaments when you can access Sternguard?

Magus Magi wrote:Personally, I think Sternguard should outperform Tactical Marines when using their appropriate ammo type against the corresponding armor type.

Magus Magi wrote:I think the original choice to envision SG as a Tactical Marine squad that is able to switch their specialization at will in exchange for the power of picking a single specialization, was a mistake

Magus Magi wrote:(1) Why get Sternguard in tier 2 if it means paying to lose my Tactical Marines? Are Sternguard really the solution to a problem that I can't just use Tactical Marines to solve?
(2) Why get Vanguard in tier 3 when I just got access to terminators and my opponents just got access to their tier three units? Do I really want to fill up on 20 population of level one melee troops in tier 3?
(3) Why get a Libby (in Tier 2) if I can get a dreadnought? Why get a Libby in Tier 3 to support terminators when that 10 population could go towards more Tier 3 units?
(4) And why get a Whirlwind when I can get a plasma dev?

Mr Magi I am fairly certain your wishes for change are a loredriven desire to see SG become just a dominant, ass-kicking-everything unit. Some of these comments, to my mind at least, indicate that you are not either not an experienced player or you have not got the best grasp on balance mechanics or (most likely) you just aren't considering balance and just want your zomg superduper sternguard.

I think tacs and SG are both actually in a really good spot atm.

i think the main reason to net get SG is allreadey leveled SM squads.
maybe in some situations also a flamer allready purchased.

De leveling and overly nerfed vengeance rounds are the major issues here... As people have stated, sterns do not compare well to many tier 2 and tier 3 units. In the vast majority of situations you're far better off taking a specific weapon for tacs and saving the resources you would have wasted on something more viable.

Stern's don't even have an hp advantage anymore... Infact I'd say it's an hp loss due to de level.

Asmon wrote:You guys just don't understand the power of Sternguard Veterans vs commander armor.

Magus Magi wrote:I have to agree with Mr. Chipmunk, I don't think Hellfire rounds should be the primary selling point for Sternguard. Personally, I think Sternguard should outperform Tactical Marines when using their appropriate ammo type against the corresponding armor type.

This is plain absurd. Why would anyone leave his TSM unupgraded then?

that is a good question the answer i came too a while ago , like in vanilla there are plenty of builds that do not focus on the tacs and instead relegate them to a supporting roll.

tac have the unique advantage of having the heavy weapon on one model , i regularly employ 10 pop 2 model missle tacs to save on population , power and upkeep. This affords me all the av all the anti gen and most of the anti heavy infantry potential the tacs can offer at no less than half the pop .

not to mention thats 175 req and 25 power i don't have to use on reinforce or upgrades.

You cant do that with sterns since their dps is spread to all the models.

Even if we buff the sterns there will still be many situations and many viable builds that wont need them.

much like how you dont need to upgrade to sterns vs orks and eldar when you can easily do an asm/ commander wargear focused build.

Another thing to consider is if there are any economic changes to the librarian there will be even more incentive to not over invest into sterns and to keep the tacs a support unit in favor fof the synergy between asm /commander and the libbys movement abilities , which is extremely strong synergy that even right now can sometimes justify the libbys price point.

Holy shit, Caeltos commented on this thread! That's so boss.

Panda:
I can't speak to my comparative experience. I've only clocked 740 hours on DoW2 (all but the first 30 or so on various mods, and most of them on ELITE). I don't play competitive games publicly, and I spend a lot of time looking for, and watching, replays of other player's games. I'm sure you are better at playing the game than I am, but I still felt comfortable sharing my concerns here.

As to your lore concerns. I DO love the 40k lore. There is no doubt there. That said, I promise you that my concerns are not lore driven. I just don't think that Sternguard are in a good place right now. I keep using them in games, and seeing them used in games, where they put on Hellfire rounds for 90% of the game and perform a little fire support before getting quickly tied up. I don't think they stack up all that well in tier 2. I've said why in my previous posts.

On another note, I appreciate your efforts to be polite while disagreeing with my point of view. It hasn't gone unnoticed.

Asmon:
Again I agree with that saltiest of chipmunks. I can think of many instances when refraining from upgrading a tactical squad would make a lot of sense. Especially if (1)Sternguard couldn't damage vehicles and (2) if they didn't cap 50% faster. I'm talking about making Sternguard fill a valuable niche.

No jump troops on the field? Buy a devastator and upgrade to Sternguard! Otherwise stick with Tacs! Know that the other guy favors a shooty army? Go for two tacs and make one SG! Know that the other guy rushes for a tier 2 walker? Keep your tacs and get a missile launcher! Really like that 50% cap increase speed, but your opponent is going for lots of heavy inf? Keep your tacs and upgrade them with a plasma gun!

I like options. You can only get one Sternguard squad. I don't think my idea is that absurd. Besides, I know you'd just tie the SG up with your awesome warlock skyllz.

Caeltos:

Your mod is boss-hog. Sternguard being a generalist unit is the main problem I have with them. I don't think the SM army needed a universal soft counter in tier 2. Frankly I think they have plenty of that (assault marine melta bombs, vengeance rounds for devs, tactical marines with a missile launcher and sergeant (melee special attack, a little over 3 bolters worth of piercing damage, and anti-vehicle damage), the hunter-killer missile on the whirwind).

I really believe that the Space Marines are missing specialized firepower in tier 2. Especially anti-infantry firepower, at range, delivered by an infantry squad. Because the player can only get a single Sternguard squad, I believe that they could fill that gap without making the SM faction overpowered.

You're the boss. I mean, you literally are. So, if you don't like my idea than obviously I can't do much to argue with your authority. But, if there is any, miniscule, part of you that is even slightly intrigued by what a more powerful Sternguard squad would look like, I really hope you and your team give it a test for me. It would certainly mean a lot.

Oops...I'm guessing my little TOTALLYNOTMAGUSMAGI joke wasn't all that well received. Apologies, no harm was intended.

I love lore too, it was probably the only reason I came back to 40k and started painting again - probably why I am even here.

Challenging to get it LIKE the lore into the game however. Particularly in RTS.

Space hulk did a VERY good job because its almost a straight copy from the original board game (a few tiny things changed) But the Dice rolls are pretty much like it is! Boom boom Assault Cannons

A few questions are outstanding when considering outright buffs to units:

Q: How will this buff affect each and every matchup? What are the likely imbalances that might occur in these matchups as a direct result of the buff?
A: Buffing Kraken Rounds would get them close to being on a par with TCSM against HI, which totally defeats the purpose of SG. Buffing Vengeance Rounds makes them possibly more tempting that rocket tacs for hunting vehicles, as well as all their other benefits. Buffing DoT rounds will further impact the SM-Ork MU in particular which was already the most affected MU by the introduction of Sternguard, not to mention it would just be death to support, low-hp commanders. Buffing anti-cover rounds would make them better than a tac squad with a flamer (dedicated anti-cover weapon + genbasher) at engaging units in cover. At long range too.

Q: Is it absolutely necessary this unit receives a direct buff? Does it clearly and consistently fail to do its job for the cost? If so, is a cost alteration a better alternative?
A: You have spoken of the bleed of tacs/SG and lack of scalability into the lategame. These two alone seem to possibly indicate your misconceptions of how SM is meant to transition through the tiers, and how its playstyle to a large extent revolves around not bleeding, like at all. SG scale so well with levels, especially hp-wise. And I am not convinced either unit fails to do its job at any stage, since they should have easily picked up levels by the lategame, which is where it appears you find issue with their performance.

I hope you find this useful, I'm just trying to help

Panda, your post makes pretty good sense to me. I'm not sure I totally agree. But I definitely appreciate your engaging with me on this topic.

I think my vision of the Sternguard is reflected better in my previous post directed to Asmon.

Magus Magi wrote:Asmon:
Again I agree with that saltiest of chipmunks. I can think of many instances when refraining from upgrading a tactical squad would make a lot of sense. Especially if (1)Sternguard couldn't damage vehicles and (2) if they didn't cap 50% faster. I'm talking about making Sternguard fill a valuable niche.

Your (1) and (2) make little sense since Sternguard Veterans do such things and this is not going to change. Anyway.

Sternguard Veterans do fill a specific niche, thanks to Hellfire Bolts. They are the only good response to a tanky melee commander which SM most struggle with. They are an excellent counter to Painboy, Weirdboy and Autarch. They bleed infantry like crazy. And on top of all of this, they remain effective vs any other target.

The question is not: Does it make sense not to upgrade my TSM into Sternguard Veterans? The question is: Is there any scenario that makes the Sternguard Veterans a better choice? And the answer is yes, plenty.

+1 to what Asmon said. Sternguard outperforming tacs when tacs have their specialist weapons would be dumb.

Compare to vanguard. They have slightly more health than ASM, and power melee with better all-around dps, but they lack melta bombs and thus suffer vs vehicles.

They are not a straight up upgrade, esp if your ASM already have a few levels.