Dawn of War Codex

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 1:26 pm**

OK, I'm aware of this:

Caeltos wrote:No new factions, gotta fix what we've got so far.

but as an early "throw it out there" - everybody talks about Tau or Dark Eldar as a new faction, but... why not Adeptus Mechanicus (anybody else proposed this already)?

Skitarii units in T1, Legio Cybernetica in T2, and for a T3 superunit one of the smaller Titans?

It seems it would be easier to balance (since the "theme" of the Mechanicus doesn't impose the kind of gameplay requirement that e.g. Tau has ("long range shooty" - so, what, Broadsides would be able to shoot into enemy base from your own base?). "Mechanical" theme can allow for more flexibility in terms of tweaking units for game balance? (I mean, what's the point of a short range fire warrior?).

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 1:39 pm**

What the point to talk about new factions while it's almost impossible to introduce such?

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 2:17 pm**

it's fun to talk about going to Mars even though NASA can't afford it now, either....

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 3:02 pm**

Actually NASA is planning to go to Mars quite soon, and programs have already begun.

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 3:35 pm**

Asmon wrote:Actually NASA is planning to go to Mars quite soon, and programs have already begun.

Well it's been nice to talk about it for 45 year since the moonflight for sure. :twisted:

As for new faction I'd like tau, not for the fishpeople since I hate those guys, but just for the kroot. I played a lot of tau in dow1 by using just the kroot, or as much of them as was viable in some cases

. And in dow2 melee units, particularly the early game ones, are far more usable and have a much clearer role.

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 5:17 pm**

Let`s get two more heroes for GK first).

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 6:01 pm**

Toilailee wrote:
As for new faction I'd like tau, not for the fishpeople since I hate those guys, but just for the kroot. I played a lot of tau in dow1 by using just the kroot, or as much of them as was viable in some cases . And in dow2 melee units, particularly the early game ones, are far more usable and have a much clearer role.

Vespid=best jump troops evar!

Seriously though if this were even feasible at the moment I'd rather it be a xeno faction since we already have three Imperial factions, regardless of how cool the Mechanicum is. So either Tau or Dark Eldar.

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 6:50 pm**

Asmon wrote:Actually NASA is planning to go to Mars quite soon, and programs have already begun.

are you talking about the robotic missions (of which there've been a few already)?

I can understand the "rationality" of unmanned exploration, but it's like, I'm one of those who can't help but feel it doesn't really count unless you land someone there. And there's no manned mission on the table (primarily because robotic missions make much more sense haha), is there? If there was one it'd be all over the news surely

Toilailee wrote:
As for new faction I'd like tau, not for the fishpeople since I hate those guys, but just for the kroot. I played a lot of tau in dow1 by using just the kroot, or as much of them as was viable in some cases . And in dow2 melee units, particularly the early game ones, are far more usable and have a much clearer role.

I agree Kroot would be fun but to "borrow" from Dow1, how would the "eat DNA" mechanism be implemented though? One reason I was thinking "Mechanicum" is that I'm thinking there'll be an advantage re: ease of implementation and balance since practically every stat/aspect for Mechanicum forces should be "on the table"; like, it would seem wierd for IG Guardsmen to be "heavy infantry" armour, for example. But for Mechanicum units there'd be a pretty free hand to specify unit stats per whatever the game needs require.

This would not be the case for Tau since there are certain things "expected" of the Tau, specifically, "long range shooty".

The scale of the DoW2 maps doesn't seem to me to be appropriate for the crazy range that Tau weapons are supposed to have, and if you take that off the table (i.e. what I was trying to say earlier re: short range fire warriors), well, are they really Tau then? What would be the point?

Interdiction wrote:
Vespid=best jump troops evar!

Seriously though if this were even feasible at the moment I'd rather it be a xeno faction since we already have three Imperial factions, regardless of how cool the Mechanicum is. So either Tau or Dark Eldar.

That's a good point ("humans... always so many humans"). Well... how about... as a single fourth hero for IG?

Or even... Dark Mechanicum? As a fourth hero for Chaos.

I will say the "key element" of implementing the Mechanicus for me is that I think it'd be awesome for there to be a Titan superunit haha. Something like a "mechanical" GUO with ranged weapons and maybe the ability to crush infantry like a Battlewagon (It'd have to be pretty slow infantry though, or snared/player-distracted).

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 6:59 pm**

Have you even seen the Martian? We've been on Mars already.

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 7:18 pm**

Or even... Dark Mechanicum? As a fourth hero for Chaos.

This guy:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Dark_Mechanicum

I got no issues with GK being the "fourth" SM hero (as opposed to trying to come up with another 2 heroes). Leaving aside complaints re: balance/whatnot, I don't see why it can't continue indefinitely as a "fourth" SM faction (since that's technically what they are), even most of their units are different.

Likewise, I think it would be workable to have the Mechanicus represented by a different hero and have guys like these in the game:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Skitarii

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 8:04 pm**

Tsototar wrote:I agree Kroot would be fun but to "borrow" from Dow1, how would the "eat DNA" mechanism be implemented though?

This would not be the case for Tau since there are certain things "expected" of the Tau, specifically, "long range shooty".

The scale of the DoW2 maps doesn't seem to me to be appropriate for the crazy range that Tau weapons are supposed to have, and if you take that off the table (i.e. what I was trying to say earlier re: short range fire warriors), well, are they really Tau then? What would be the point?

I frankly don't rly care about the eat DNA mechanism.

In tabletop firewarrios only had range 30 compared to the 24 in most other rapid fire weapons. I don't see 1/5 longer range being a problem in dow2, especially if they can't fire on the move like in dow1. As for the battlesuit lasers and hammerheads and stuff they can have the range of lascanon and it'll fine. Other "super" long range stuff can work like prisms or d-canons.

No need to make things sound more difficult than they need to be.

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 8:59 pm**

Tsototar wrote:
Asmon wrote:Actually NASA is planning to go to Mars quite soon, and programs have already begun.
I can understand the "rationality" of unmanned exploration, but it's like, I'm one of those who can't help but feel it doesn't really count unless you land someone there. And there's no manned mission on the table (primarily because robotic missions make much more sense haha), is there? If there was one it'd be all over the news surely

They're developing the technology now, and hope to have people on Mars by the 2030s. Source: https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasas-journey-to-mars

Tsototar wrote:The scale of the DoW2 maps doesn't seem to me to be appropriate for the crazy range that Tau weapons are supposed to have, and if you take that off the table (i.e. what I was trying to say earlier re: short range fire warriors), well, are they really Tau then? What would be the point?

The scale of Orbital Bombardment isn't really to scale either, is it? You'd think it would cover more area than the size of a small building. And literally disintegrate everything

Concessions can be made for game design and balance. And like Toil said, some could have longer range to fit with the race as long as it worked in a balanced way. Besides, it seems it's more the composition and mech-y, ranged, socialist "themes" of the faction that makes it what it is. Not the maximum range of their weapons.

Posted: **Sun 08 Nov, 2015 10:02 pm**

The Kroot aren't really seen as melee units any more I thought? The last Tau codex I paid attention too they were best as cheap sniper-ish infantry with barely passable melee. Not sure about these days since they just got a new book.

Posted: **Mon 09 Nov, 2015 12:15 pm**

Indrid wrote:The Kroot aren't really seen as melee units any more I thought? The last Tau codex I paid attention too they were best as cheap sniper-ish infantry with barely passable melee. Not sure about these days since they just got a new book.

Last tau codex I had is probably from like 2007 or something.

Posted: **Mon 09 Nov, 2015 2:34 pm**

Wise Windu wrote:They're developing the technology now, and hope to have people on Mars by the 2030s. Source: https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasas-journey-to-mars

... I have bad news - this is the kind of PR fluff they put out to not sound completely directionless/missionless. For a mission to get to Mars in the 2030s quite a lot of billions of dollars would already have to have been appropriated by Congress, which is not going to happen since they're all too busy trying to stop Hillary. If the money isn't there it's not going to happen.

Wise Windu wrote:The scale of Orbital Bombardment isn't really to scale either, is it? You'd think it would cover more area than the size of a small building. And literally disintegrate everything ... Besides, it seems it's more the composition and mech-y, ranged, socialist "themes" of the faction that makes it what it is. Not the maximum range of their weapons.

I don't think this is a valid comparison because - are orbital bombardments "quintessential elements" of the Space Marines? They're not Imperial Navy. Orbital Bombardment is there because they need some kind of nuke. It's a small element in the SM faction as opposed to how "shootiness" is one of the main elements of the Tau (how are you going to implement the "socialist theme" of the faction gameplay-wise? Long range shootiness is going to have a more direct effect on "gameplay".

Toilailee wrote: frankly don't rly care about the eat DNA mechanism.... In tabletop firewarrios only had range 30 compared to the 24 in most other rapid fire weapons.

(a) well ok, but that seems to me to be throwing away a lot of what makes Kroot "Kroot". Without that they're just a generic melee (apparently depending on which codex, but hey since DoW1 they're melee...) unit with a different skin.
(b) that's 36" with an accelerator drone, at which point they have same range as Eldar Rangers on tabletop. Can you imagine the outcry if there was an upgrade that gave Guardians/Dire Avengers the same range as an Eldar Ranger? and that's just their fire warriors, look at the ranges of their other shooty units!

Gnaerold Ghostwolf wrote:We going to mars 2025.
http://www.mars-one.com

This is definitely, 100% not going to happen, and it's important you read this:

Mars One Finalist Explains Exactly How It‘s Ripping Off Supporters
https://medium.com/matter/mars-one-insi ... fef95217d3

Posted: **Tue 10 Nov, 2015 12:50 am**

Tsototar wrote:... I have bad news - this is the kind of PR fluff they put out to not sound completely directionless/missionless. For a mission to get to Mars in the 2030s quite a lot of billions of dollars would already have to have been appropriated by Congress, which is not going to happen since they're all too busy trying to stop Hillary. If the money isn't there it's not going to happen.

I know. I never said it would definitely happen by then, although it would be great if it could. I was just pointing out that there is a plan for a manned mission, vague as it is. That's all you were asking for. Also, "trying to stop Hillary" won't stop Congress from giving money to NASA or not. The two aren't even related, at least not at the moment. It isn't a campaign issue, and won't be made into one unless one of the candidates brings it up for some reason. But again, those aren't really the issues the race is focused on.

And NASA's budget for this year was ~18 billion dollars, higher than it was last year, and they've requested half a billion more for next fiscal year. Budgets are outlined here: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/file ... imates.pdf

Aside from that, they're not the only ones footing the bill to get people to Mars. They're working with other governments and companies, like SpaceX, to figure out how to make it happen. Again, not saying it will definitely happen by the 2030s, but NASA isn't the only entity doing this, and they are getting a lot of money (not compared to the military :cry:

) to do it. It's a smaller amount than it was in 2010, but it's still around what it's been for ~15 years, and it's 1 billion under their overall average budget since NASA was founded (19 billion in 2014 dollars). Although, it is a smaller percentage of the government's total budget.

Also, the goals on that site are based on a three year budget from 2010, but the budget they've been receiving since that budget agreement have actually been higher than the previously agreed-on budget, and increasing. So that's something I guess.

Tsototar wrote:I don't think this is a valid comparison because - are orbital bombardments "quintessential elements" of the Space Marines? They're not Imperial Navy. Orbital Bombardment is there because they need some kind of nuke. It's a small element in the SM faction as opposed to how "shootiness" is one of the main elements of the Tau (how are you going to implement the "socialist theme" of the faction gameplay-wise? Long range shootiness is going to have a more direct effect on "gameplay".

No, but neither is greater-than-DoW2-appropriate-distance weapon range to the Tau. Having somewhat longer range would probably suffice when combined with a heavily ranged mech-y composition. The other themes of the Tau race could probably be integrated into the game just as the themes of other races are: through the implementation of their abilities and upgrades in a way that matches what their race is about. IG have entrenchment abilities, support and superior repair (buildings, artillery, etc), Eldar have mobility and tricks, Space Marines have adaptability and staying power.

Posted: **Tue 10 Nov, 2015 1:31 am**

Wise Windu wrote: Also, "trying to stop Hillary" won't stop Congress from giving money to NASA or not. The two aren't even related, at least not at the moment.

Posted: **Tue 10 Nov, 2015 11:25 am**

Wise Windu wrote:That's all you were asking for. Also, "trying to stop Hillary" won't stop Congress from giving money to NASA or not. The two aren't even related, at least not at the moment. It isn't a campaign issue, and won't be made into one unless one of the candidates brings it up for some reason. But again, those aren't really the issues the race is focused on.

And NASA's budget for this year was ~18 billion dollars, higher than it was last year, and they've requested half a billion more for next fiscal year. Budgets are outlined here: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/file ... imates.pdf

(a) Congress is repeatedly taking things to the brink w.r.t. the debt ceiling and don't even want to keep the Federal govt funded and you think there can be appropriations for a mission to Mars? Even Boehner couldn't take it and bailed, and it's just being deferred a couple of months. They are completely related.

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/25 ... re-at-nasa
"Too many times in recent years, NASA's had no idea when it would actually get an appropriation, when it would actually be reauthorized, whether that appropriation would be for more than a few months or whether they may even have to suspend their work due to government shutdown."

(b) why do you think just because an organisation is getting $X, any of it is going to a particular purpose? This is especially because for a manned Mars mission there is exactly zero dollars budgeted - read this from just a few weeks ago:

"Despite its grand vision, however, NASA's Mars opus is missing two critical things: dollar signs and deadlines."
http://www.techinsider.io/nasa-journey- ... an-2015-10
"cutting $440 million from NASA's Mars program"

Wise Windu wrote:No, but neither is greater-than-DoW2-appropriate-distance weapon range to the Tau. Having somewhat longer range would probably suffice when combined with a heavily ranged mech-y composition.

so, they would then end up as "a different kind of Eldar"? For people who want to play a "high tech alien" faction but don't want to play Eldar?

Forestradio wrote:

hahaha omg so true

Anyways, back on topic:

Dark Mechanicus hero for Chaos -

abilities? fusion of Chaotic powers + tech, logically. Hrm... a... beacon for Chaos?? :-P

(T2, just as I think TM beacon should be T2). This needs expansion.

T1:

Skitarii units would have a "sensible" upgrade path as the units replace more of their biological parts with mechanical parts (increase health, increase weaponry/damage/accuracy/whatever). Maybe a T1 unit that has upgrade options in all three tiers. I think it would be fun.

.

Heretics should have a presence too, though they'd be more "machine" heretics than just Chaos slaves? (though then again if they've spent so long in the Warp...)

Weapons servitors (taking the role of the setup teams)

Or all of them could be different kinds of Skitarii, since Skitarii roles would just be determined by the augments grafted on to their bodies.

A basic unit that can be upgraded into different roles based on requirements (i.e. you always build Skitarii, then you make it melee, or ranged, or etc. etc.).

T2:

Possessed vehicles? (corrupted IG sentinels?)

Legio Cybernetica walkers (would have to be Dark Mechanicum units that date from the Heresy)

Mobile armed platforms

T3:

well, the usual tanks, plus maybe additional Mechanicum variants

(an entirely mechanised T3? Well they are the Mechanicus)

and maybe one of these guys: http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Chaos_Warhound_Titan

(image links from all over, found via Google image searches)

Posted: **Tue 10 Nov, 2015 3:51 pm**

Tsototar wrote:Congress is repeatedly taking things to the brink w.r.t. the debt ceiling and don't even want to keep the Federal govt funded and you think there can be appropriations for a mission to Mars? Even Boehner couldn't take it and bailed, and it's just being deferred a couple of months. They are completely related.

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/25 ... re-at-nasa
"Too many times in recent years, NASA's had no idea when it would actually get an appropriation, when it would actually be reauthorized, whether that appropriation would be for more than a few months or whether they may even have to suspend their work due to government shutdown."

Again, I never said they would definitely be able to receive the funding to make a manned Mars mission happen. All I'm saying is that the current presidential campaign would have nothing to do with it. It may very well be that their funding is decreased in the near future, but it won't be because the Republicans don't want Hillary to be in office, it will be because they ideologically or fiscally disagree with the direction NASA is going; smaller government, goals, etc. Also, that article is saying pretty much the opposite, that it would be Obama cutting deep space funding rather than the Republicans (although maybe they'd just be reallocating funds in one direction and decreasing funding overall? Probably). The shutting down of government is a tangential relationship only, not a direct result of the Republican party wanting to partially defund NASA.

Even in this article from the same site: http://thehill.com/policy/technology/23 ... sa-funding

It says "On one side are Republicans who accuse the Obama administration of taking its eye off the ball by funneling too much money into research about the planet Earth, rather than focusing on distant worlds and stars." Which is interesting. And Democrats are pushing for more near-Earth projects, like the ISS. But again, of course, it doesn't really talk about overall funding, which I'd imagine Republicans might cut.

Tsototar wrote:(b) why do you think just because an organisation is getting $X, any of it is going to a particular purpose? This is especially because for a manned Mars mission there is exactly zero dollars budgeted

I never said the money was going directly to Mars. But a chunk of the money is going toward projects that will advance the technology that will make it possible to get there at some point. I linked the budget, so of course I read through some of the possible budgeting numbers. And of course it all goes to different places, which are decided by the government to some extent. But an increase in funding (at least for now) is an increase in funding, whether it goes directly to Mars or not.

Tsototar wrote:so, they would then end up as "a different kind of Eldar"? For people who want to play a "high tech alien" faction but don't want to play Eldar?

No. Did you read the second part of what I said? Their abilities, upgrades, compositions and, therefore, tactics would be different. That isn't just a "different kind of Eldar". By that logic, you could draw a comparison from Tyranids to Orks. T1 swarmy squads, 1 melee squad, ranged squad, and jump squad in T1, T2 cheap walker, supportive single-entity, tanky hero, mobility hero, stealthy hero, dedicated out-of-the-gate AV squad, T3 stealth unit, multiple on-field reinforcement options. Wow, they're like the same race, huh?

And that's taking into account more than their weapon range. The races are heavily differentiated by their compositions, abilities, tactics, and upgrades.

Posted: **Tue 10 Nov, 2015 4:03 pm**

Posted: **Tue 10 Nov, 2015 5:05 pm**

I would really suggest taking this Mars Mission discussion to another thread in RS as it seems to be dominating this one. This coming from a guy who literally dedicated his life to physics,engineering and all of that good stuff.

Posted: **Sat 14 Nov, 2015 5:26 pm**

NO.

No. No. No. No. No.

No more Imperial factions, they are done to death on tabletop we need to expand from them. Let's sort the balance out first, then let's natter.

Also, don't link so many pictures in one post it's messy.

Posted: **Sat 14 Nov, 2015 6:43 pm**

I honestly, over time I realized something, one of them, ask new factions is wrong, because it is always a question of balance.
I think the real problem is propio is that it would take a campaign and a menu suited to introduce this, so when you can you will think.
Please note that the team is doing a good job, and I apologize for asking more and sometimes forcefully introduce new factions.

Posted: **Sun 15 Nov, 2015 4:36 pm**

The game is pushing it with 7 races. Remember the dark days of DOWI + expansions.... with every race you add the balancing becomes exponentially more difficult.

Posted: **Sun 15 Nov, 2015 8:05 pm**

Ahh, just be realistic and make Dark Eldar- Cough! I mean, easyer to do. You have all the skelatons you need in Eldar already. Their game style was fitting for DoW2 in DoW1. Correction : They would be a good faction as far as I can see from their gameplay in DoW1 but it didn't work in DoW1. We already have enough Imperial Factions, Necrons are hard to balance and Tau basicially sucks even I know that they are a good race, don't call me ignorant but they are boring.

Lets have Dark Eldar.

Ah, and new ideas? Make Chaos Deamons faction then. I know it won't happen so easy to thow it out here

Posted: **Sun 15 Nov, 2015 8:22 pm**

firatwithin wrote:Ah, and new ideas? Make Chaos Deamons faction then. I know it won't happen so easy to thow it out here

I'm just being figurative with the video of course... I'm not that animated on this subject.

Posted: **Tue 17 Nov, 2015 12:05 am**

Ya Dark Eldar seem like a win to me. Got all the eldar basic models already, and it would be easy to add as a fourth hero.

Question is, which hero would it be? Archon seems obvious, but what about haemonculous? Succubus? I lean towards Archon myself, mostly because the clone armor upgrade could be cool to see in-game. Maybe split the archon into 3 archons (2 holograms) to distribute damage. Wouldn't even need to do more damage, just an extra 2 archon holograms running beside the real one would be sweeeeeeeet.

Posted: **Tue 17 Nov, 2015 1:11 pm**

Just made Succubus as add-on to Archon as his guard (simply make it as it was in Soulstorm). haemonculous would be nice as subcommander.
I totaly agree, Dark Eldars can be made on the base of Eldar models. Probobly vehicles would be a problem becasue they are totaly different but still Dark Eldars are mostly the easiet race to make from what he already have.

But...lets focus on the balance now

Posted: **Sat 28 Nov, 2015 10:14 pm**

I don't want any new Imperial Faction. It's the same as playing on the tabletop, with Imperial factions filling over half the players and I am bored having to fight who are supposed to be my allies (or have friendly practice with them) with my Eldar and Grey Knights alliance.

Tau or Dark Eldar or Necron. Or no new faction at all.

Whichever the case, the Grey Knights need to be finished first with at least 2 heroes and no more stupid Inquisitorial Operatives (these guys are not even in the Codex). Why can't we just change Stormtroopers into Warriors and Inquisitorial Operatives into some other guys, like Flagellant using Banshee model?

Posted: **Sat 28 Nov, 2015 11:23 pm**

I would like to see Eldar in this game

Dawn of War Codex

New Faction

New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction

Re: New Faction