Dawn of War Codex

Sub_Zero wrote:

Buying Sternguards once your Tacs or ASM are Lvl3+ is stupid as hell.

They are not bad, they are just situational. But having more options is always good, isn't it?

I think he means the fact that you waste the experience of the squad when changing it to veteran. I'm surprised that it's not possible to duplicate the mark upgrades for CSM on these unites (i.e. khorne, tzeench, etc) which as far as i know do not reset squad level despite changing weapons and models etc.

*facepalm*

Almost every time some one mentions the Veterans upgrade (either one) them losing their exp is mentioned. Getting annoyed by it since EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS!

Whether you think the upgrade is worth it or not i don't care about any more. You can keep your reasons since almost everyone shares them.

xerrol nanoha wrote: I'm surprised that it's not possible to duplicate the mark upgrades for CSM on these unites (i.e. khorne, tzeench, etc) which as far as i know do not reset squad level despite changing weapons and models etc.

This has already been mentioned as a why to fix it.

it keeps getting brought up because it is counter intuative to how everything else in the game works. that's not necessarily a bad thing, balance wise, but it is unique and negatively so for the SM player.

I really feel like Nuclear Arbitor just hit the nail on the head.

I do not wish to extend this conversation overly, but I do want to support his statement.

Wouldn't be possible to let tacs transform to sternguards automaticly when reacing a certain level of veterancy? just to throw it out there.

No, because they are a different unit, if i had a missile tac, i wouldn't want it to become a sternguard later.

Guys, despite what happens in the lore, you do realise sternguards aren't a straight up buff right? And there is a reason why they aren't - they aren't meant to be, tacs don't need a buff, they need better ALI (anti light infantry) and versatility from one upgrade, the vanguards aren't a straight up buff either they lose AV potential for more anti-melee/HI potential.

It's not a fucking bug/issue that sternguards lose their levels upon upgraded it's intentional so that they aren't completely broken! Both squads perform very well as it is and to allow them to keep their levels would require them to have serious damage reductions and price increases which in reality is only going to make the squads even more rarely seen. They're a situational upgrade - something which fits in with the general SM way of getting done, they represent the on-field flexibility that the race offers and allow SM to deal with new things in a different way.

That Torpid Gamer wrote:Guys, despite what happens in the lore, you do realise sternguards aren't a straight up buff right? And there is a reason why they aren't - they aren't meant to be, tacs don't need a buff, they need better ALI (anti light infantry) and versatility from one upgrade, the vanguards aren't a straight up buff either they lose AV potential for more anti-melee/HI potential.

It's not a fucking bug/issue that sternguards lose their levels upon upgraded it's intentional so that they aren't completely broken! Both squads perform very well as it is and to allow them to keep their levels would require them to have serious damage reductions and price increases which in reality is only going to make the squads even more rarely seen. They're a situational upgrade - something which fits in with the general SM way of getting done, they represent the on-field flexibility that the race offers and allow SM to deal with new things in a different way.

+1

Sternguard are not meant to be a straight up upgrade like MoT is to vanilla CSM.

They're a one time investment that allows:
-no more power bleed from the sergeant dying (I shouldn't have to explain how awesome that is)
-tactical flexibility in the midst of battles that requires a bit of micro

They ARE NOT meant to outperform a tactical squad with a specialized weapon upgrade. Missile launcher tacs> vengeance rounds, flamer tacs>dragonfire, plasma gun tacs>kraken bolts

The only direct advantage they get is anti-infantry and anti-commander in the form of hellfire rounds.

If SG really aren't an "upgrade" then precedent suggests that I should be able to switch to SG without level loss in the same way that I can switch to the plasma gun, or the missile launcher.

If SG are an entirely new unit, then precedent suggests that I shouldn't have to sacrifice a Tac squad, and the exp they've gained, in order to purchase an unleveled tier 2 SG squad with a combined cost nearly equal to a tier 3 terminator squad.

If SG are an upgrade to a Tac squad, then precedent suggests that they should get to keep their levels.

Also...I'm only allowed a single SG squad, as if they're a super unit or sub commander.


There's a great deal that's incongruous about how SG and VG function currently. Also...I do not believe that the numerical differences between a leveled Tac squad and a leveled SG squad is not so marked as to justify the use of "completely broken" as a descriptor.

A level 2 Sternguard squad has only 200 more total health than a level 2 Tac. Which means clicking the SG upgrade would result in a net increase of 200 health for the SM player. It would also mean access to the SG special ammunition types, but would prevent access to the flamer (gen bashing), the plasma gun (higher anti-HI damage), the missile launcher (burst AV), and the better melee capabilities of a Tac sergeant. I cannot believe that the result would be completely broken.

Trust me, when there were multiple SG squads present, it was a huge issue due to the underlying abilities they have at their disposal. It was a bug back then, and it's not presented as a viable option anytime soon in their existing state.

as far as SG goes, I'm fine with how they work out at the moment. Alot of what Torpid said is pretty much what I've gone along with their design and how they're going to play out.

Sternguards is mostly just not doable/viable as a 2x potential unit, due to their nature design of their abilities. The DoT has to be significant to be of any use, but whereas if you have the option to have 2x stacks of them, it goes from fine to overwhelmingly silly strong.

Even at that, you would have the option for the potential 2x Vengeance Rounds, which isn't completely shabby at dealing with lighter vehicles, and can pressure some heavier ones. But once you've got 2x of them, fielding light vehicle or heavier vehicles is almost out of the question. This would lead to a potential 2x Tac > T2 with 2x SG option into razorback support to be ridiciously difficult to deal with for alot of matchups, and at the end of it all - it would just be downright silly to balance without takin away the strengths of the SG has to make them a viable purchase.

Vanguards, a fairly similiar principal. Alas, it's less likely to field numerous ASMs, but the occurance is more rare then fielding 2x Tacticals and getting pay-offs from it. You wouldn't want to deal with a potential 2x VG's / Terminator combinations that can jump/teleport with heavy_melee all over the place

Alas, the cost effiency is also important to consider. I'm not sure anyone would even bother with a 2x Vanguard option even if it was available, due to economical dumps and what-have-you.

I can see what you're saying. Two times the vengeance and two times the hellfire (especially) would make for a very different game.

The levels thing is sort of a different matter. I'd be really interested to see what SG that keep levels looks like. My suspicion is that they'd fit into the existing game without compromising balance, and in a more intuitive and rewarding way.

I really appreciate your weighing in on this stuff. You're the man with the plan, so it's always interesting to hear you describe the state of the game.

Damage is the issue with them leveling, not hp, to the point where if they retained their levels they would only be viable as an upgrade when they had levels, which makes them even more niche than they are right now.

That Torpid Gamer wrote:Damage is the issue with them leveling, not hp, to the point where if they retained their levels they would only be viable as an upgrade when they had levels, which makes them even more niche than they are right now.

sorry but the ranged damage difference from lvl 1 to lvl 4 is just 5%/10%/16%. Throwing the blame for them keeping their levels for that meager dps increase is just lame

Melee DPS is the one that scales the highest (33% at lvl 4) but no one is (or should be) complaining about MoK letting CSM keep their levels

That Torpid Gamer wrote:Damage is the issue with them leveling, not hp, to the point where if they retained their levels they would only be viable as an upgrade when they had levels, which makes them even more niche than they are right now.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever; Sternguard veterans' damage do not scale well as they level at all. The main issue here is the loss of HP to me. A Lvl 3 tac squad with a Sergeant has more HP, better melee and comparable DPS to a SGV squad - what is the point in upgrading here? You get flexibility in the form of special ammo? No thanks, half of those ammo don't work well enough (Dragonfire and Vengeance too weak against cover and vehicles respectively), are too much of a pain in the ass to micro, and suck ass when engaged in close combat. Yes, supposedly I *could* lose the sergeant, but 9 out of 10 cases a tack squad loses its Sergeant last, due to its better HP and the squad's nice spread in balancing incoming ranged fire.

Sorry, the SG upgrade (and the VG upgrade) make no sense at all. They are pretty useless as is, except if you are floating lots of req in T2 and lost gen farms or somethingand can't afford a Dreadnought, so you get a 2nd/3rd tac into sergeant into sg.. in which case, why are you not getting a Plasma Cannon and Razorback anyway?

Sorry, no reason why you'd ever get them.

EDIT: Veterans and Librarian are the three units that SM roster really needs fixed.. There's a reason why these units rarely feature in high level games, and suck pretty bad when they do.

Not sure what high level games your playing.

Ultimately the ~10% buff to hellfire damage on top of all the other SM damage buffs becomes rather amazing. Hellfire is just great.

That Torpid Gamer wrote:Not sure what high level games your playing.

Ultimately the ~10% buff to hellfire damage on top of all the other SM damage buffs becomes rather amazing. Hellfire is just great.

Excuse me but a 2nd Level tac squad already has 4% damage bonus. Give it a Plasmagun and you have that same 10% against infantry and even more against heavy infantry. That's without even considering the Sergeant's awesome DPS by himself.

Give it a SG upgrade and you lose your level bonuses to melee damage, HP and sergeant, all at once. To gain what? 10% damage in Hellfire rounds that you have to micromanage?

I really don't understand where you come from. Like, at all.

Regarding seeing SG in high level games I think I've seen Noisy get them quite often recently. SG are a niche upgrade and fills its role pretty nicely. They are far from being a crappy unit.

Anyway SG are way superior against infantry and commander armor, garrisons and vehicles compared to plasma tacs. The only thing they do worse is countering HI but they still do that pretty nicely (they actually do more damage than plasma tacs against SHI).

Not to be rude. But i.dont get people who whine about sg and have obviously nvr played a top tier player using them.they are meant as un upgrade in a situational position and do that job well. Personally if ur a mid to lower tier player ur balance opinion tk me is worthless. Any unit is only as good as the person using them. Simple if ur not that good dont whine about balace because u cant use a unit efficiently

Every person should be able to talk about balance. It's all a matter of expressing your opinions carefully, with well chosen words, and humility.

Which is not Eldar best trait you weak creatures =)

[TLV]Soul_Drinkers wrote:Not to be rude. But i.dont get people who whine about sg and have obviously nvr played a top tier player using them.they are meant as un upgrade in a situational position and do that job well. Personally if ur a mid to lower tier player ur balance opinion tk me is worthless. Any unit is only as good as the person using them. Simple if ur not that good dont whine about balace because u cant use a unit efficiently

And for that reason you shouldn't be able to vote on how to manage fiscal/monetary policy without a degree in economics. Seriously.

democracy is not about making good decisions; it's about making one's that as many people as possible accept and preventing exploitation.

"(1) Only the opinions of a good player are valid for determining unit balance.
(2) A unit is as good as the player that controls it.
(3) Therefore, a good player will use units effectively.
(4) So, if you feel unable to use a unit effectively, you're not a good player and your opinion is invalid."

^ This is an extremely counterproductive argument when it comes to unit balance. It essentially boils down to "if you complain, then your complaints don't matter." I just hope that no player input is dismissed as a result of fallacious logic.

That said, I know that I pay a great deal of extra attention to what skilled players on here say. Particularly those who play the specific faction being discussed (for issues of SG balance that means dedicated or experienced SM players). The opinions of Dark Riku, Max Power, Toilailee, etc. (apologies to all those not listed) all mean a great deal to me as indicators of current SM balance.

Of course, I'm also keenly aware of anything Caeltos posts, since he's the one steering the ship.

I can't believe I just read this whole thread. What is it even about again?... I have totally forgotten.

Anyway, in short form, tactical marines get the job done nicely and I wouldn't change a thing about them. (I mean yes, I hate that they have this super powerful 15 power flamer, but other races have some slightly OTT stuff too so...)

And about sternguards, I can't believe my eyes tbh. I can see a bunch of people saying that sternguards should keep levels and that sternguards are weak?!?!?!?!

WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sternguards are not supposed to be a linear ugprade. That would be such an outrageous buff to a unit that is present in probably 97% of SM matches. I mean seriously think about that! That would be a MASSIVE across the board buff.

Sternguards are an excellent unit and fit perfectly into the SM way of doing things: adapting your on-field forces to get the job done. What Sternguards lack in burst damage against vehicles and heavy infantry, they gain in ridiculous levels of control against commanders and light infantry. And by the way, guess what SM struggles the most against?...

Sternguard damage can get buffed by lots of stuff and the TM is no slouch at supporting them either. They seriously combo so well with just about anything that I think this thread is largely baseless.

Anyway, just my two cents

My concern was never about sternguards, except for the fact that there are problems with level retention and such when you build them.

My only concern was that in games I saw from B8 and B9 of 2.2, many players were delaying or skipping tactical marines in favor of large numbers of scout squads. I had thought that the changes I considered in the OP would encourage players to build tacticals in all stages of the game (in particular to the early game where they compete with scouts). And I also intended for these changes to have no significant effect on current balance, as this was never an issue of racial balance, but only balance within the space marine faction itself.

I'll repeat that because it's important: Tactical marines are balanced, I never meant to say otherwise. I simply meant to say that I wish tacticals were DIFFERENT then the way the are, so that they would be slightly more unique to their own specific features (and therefore more appealing I hope).

That is all, and happy new year btw.

Tacts are already appealing, they are present in every match, sure someone does 3 scouts, but tacts + 2 scouts or 3 scouts + tacts is still what the majority plays, as far as getting more than 1 of them, in t1 it's highly dependant, sometimes I do that vs tanky melee heroes under exceptional circumnstaces where for some reasons I have alot of req or in t2 vs nids, but as far as doing an exclusive double tact build in T1 that just isn't going to happen, they cost too much both to purchase directly and to mantain.