Painboy

[SquadBroken]

Could i get some advice on how to deal with the Painboy?

I've tried many things, but when the Painboy comes my way with a few sluggas and a warboss, my devestators, tac marines, scouts and FC can't stop them.

What do i have to do to deal with this durable bastard?

Thanks.



"~ SQUAD BROKEN!"

[Torpid]

He's pretty hellish to deal with at the moment, it's quite a joke really. Other than sitting down on the floor and crying (which is usually the preferred strategy that I adopt, because I'm a pussy), is to get suppression/knockback. Thing is suppression vs WB is always very risky since stormboys with UYC will kill devs in 2 strikes. So 6 strikes to wipe the squad from a 5 man jump unit...

Double shotguns + power sword/MCB (for apo or TM) is my preferred method, just FF down the PB, use asm to keep the shootas busy, and hopefully keep the sluggas away from you rest of your army so you can use scouts/tacs to deal with the WB/PB which is usually the most annoying combo. It's not easy though I tell you, the painboy has made orks very favorable in a MU that before hand was probably one of the most balanced match ups.

[Caeltos]

Get Snipers.

I'll try to simplify the reasonings behind it, as I'm abit tired right now.

The Painboy heal mitigates sustained damage, so there's two approaches two this;

- Prolong the fight to reduce the increase sustain from the Painboy heal , gives the Ork room for manuvering around, catching you off-positions. Which is bad.

- Direct-damage (Snipers) completely bypasses the Painboy heal functionality that is sustain increase in fights. You should utilize Snipers with Devastators to maximize their profit.

Snipers instead of shotguns will probably end up being abit more profitable Vs any Painboy incorporated builds. Due to cost effiency.

We'll assume, they go with the "typical" build;

2x Shootas (2x BS/Arbitary Nob Leader) - > (There's a possible force-purchase if you get the cheaper invis upgrade for your scouts as well) Painboy

Honestly tho, I have a hard time how people can't just go with a even potential 2x Devastators build against this, even if he throws in a Stormboy to counter the devastator. The Ork player is looking at downright silly amounts of power invested into his tier 1.

We can throw in some figures for comparisons sake. (Disregarding some things, again- for simplicity sake) // Power only

Big Shootas (20 + 20) +25) (+25 is the Nob Leader)
Painboy (+30)
Stormboy (+40) <-- preference incorporation

It's a total grand sum cost of 60 (Big Shootas only + Painboy) 85 with Nob Leader
Or it's even 100/125 if you go for all the listed units and whatnot to ensure the most dominant prescence.

Let's picture a counter-build scenario here;

Tac, scout, dev, dev
- Devastor, 30 + 30 (2x is the "total ensurance counter")
- 2x Snipers (or 1 Shotgun/1 Sniper) - 30/30/20 cost

You're looking at a grand cost of approximately; 100ish power. (again, preference and how you want to deal with it, and and how you plan ahead)

Innovate, try new build orders (Like REALLY different ones for a change) break the mold. Find new capping routines, just because it doesn't work the first time, doesn't it mean it can be perfected.

[Codex]

Heh, I had been theory crafting a response because I've been thinking that my ASM approach is just wrong. Thanks for spilling the beans though Cael.

[SquadBroken]

Thanks for the responses guys, will try playing with the friend who legit managed to turn a game around with a painboy later today and see if the tac + scout + dev + dev strategy works.

[Kvek]

Not sure if a good idea, but i would get sternguard in t2. And use the Hellfire bolts against painboy/sluggs

[caralimon]

Not trying to nitpick here, but don't Sniper Scouts still cost 35 power?

On a personal side-note, I always found them to be a bit overpriced, power wise, for what they bring to the game, specially compared to "the other snipers", Rangers. Sure, Scouts are quite faster, cap 50% faster, and are in general more versatile than Rangers, but 35 power with such a slower sniper firing rate? (170 damage every 12 seconds versus 160 damage every 7,5 seconds, roughly speaking)

I'm the last one wanting a sniper fest game, but I'm a little baffled Sniper Scouts only received a 10 req buff from Retail to Elite. Would they really be a cost efficient counter to Painboy-Sluggas/Stormboyz builds? Just asking.

[Caeltos]

Considering the Painboy is 350/30 and incorporated after a 2x Shoota builds (or something along those lines), the further investment by the SM should make a perfectly feasible build.

Or if it's as a 2x Shoota , Painboy , Stormboy (Quite heavy T1 Ork) then it's absolutely possible and should be done if you ask me. Unless you can fast-tech out of it, but it's more of a risk I suppose, and depends heavily on the scenario.

Keeping in mind with what's down the road, the BS upgrade is getting slight nerfs in it's performance, meaning that even prolonged fighters will be more eased out and less in the orks favor. It's not a big reduction from what we've got now, but every ounce of reduction to sustained fights will help out.

[Ace of Swords]

Not trying to nitpick here, but don't Sniper Scouts still cost 35 power?

On a personal side-note, I always found them to be a bit overpriced, power wise, for what they bring to the game, specially compared to "the other snipers", Rangers. Sure, Scouts are quite faster, cap 50% faster, and are in general more versatile than Rangers, but 35 power with such a slower sniper firing rate? (170 damage every 12 seconds versus 160 damage every 7,5 seconds, roughly speaking)

I'm the last one wanting a sniper fest game, but I'm a little baffled Sniper Scouts only received a 10 req buff from Retail to Elite. Would they really be a cost efficient counter to Painboy-Sluggas/Stormboyz builds? Just asking.

wooo, slow there, rangers have much more utility than scouts, and no scouts do not cap 50% faster, that's only tacts.

- Direct-damage (Snipers) completely bypasses the Painboy heal functionality that is sustain increase in fights. You should utilize Snipers with Devastators to maximize their profit.

There is the usual problem , 2 of 3 heroes auto counter devastators, the other can be easily be the spearhead easily absorbing all the damage with the painboy heal and angry bitz (and codex saw the other day how just angry bitz is enough to run into an havoc without trouble), and if needed, even ard boys.

If the ork is always the one on the offensive there is no way to stop it.

The Ork player is looking at downright silly amounts of power invested into his tier 1

.
You have 2 dev thats 60 power, + 1 sniper and that's 95, the ork skips big shootas and goes straight for the painboy that's 30 power, then gets storms thats 35 power as of now it's a total of 65, let's say he wants to get big shootas on both squads that's +40 to a total of 105 power vs 90 BUT the orks get 3 gens and possibly more faster than, SM, the orks has an amazing capping power and mobile force the SM is blocked in a single place.

Nope, that's ain't gonna work throwing in all of this, if the sm also wants bashing power (which the ork already has with every squad on the field , big shootas,storms,sluggas.) the sm has to invest another 15 power making it a 110vs105 but still not mobile at all, with low capping power.

Also what are you gonna do in t2 without ASM when the inevitable uber cheap vehicles comes out? or the weirdboy? (3 commanders on the field rofl.) This whole 'strategy' crumbles on itself.

[Caeltos]

There is the usual problem , 2 of 3 heroes auto counter devastators, the other can be easily be the spearhead easily absorbing all the damage with the painboy heal and angry bitz (and codex saw the other day how just angry bitz is enough to run into an havoc without trouble), and if needed, even ard boys.

Kommando Nob is not a direct-counter, Warboss is semi-soft counter at best, since it's an automatically investment requirement (Meaning he needs to invest 100/20 to get the potential chance once in a while to head-butt on)

Eventho, you should again look not commit to the fight, but otherwise move around. If he doesn't get BS, he can't pressure or win in a sustained fight. Similiar principals should be applied to any abilitiy/effect that has "I will in the long run if we stay here", you need to relocate and make the ability less effective.

For example, (alas it might be a poor one) let's take Global Abilities (Direct-High-Damage), you either completely back off to ensure safety, or you back away from the target area. The Ability centers around direct-damage, high risk & high reward.

If we were, to make a change to Eldritch Storm, reducing it's damage, but extends it's duration by a sum. It would be a "sustained" damage ability itself, that thrives on units getting missplaced, or simply be "Zone-Control". It's functionality & design changes vastly. The Painboy heal on T1 units, thrives on excellerating their sustain potentiality. So you need to find a working method/strategy that mitigates those implications.

What we're looking at is two important factors to consider for finding a working strategy;

- Disengage potential
- Direct-damage potential

By the definition of disengage, we're looking at both strategical use of units, as well as abilities. Assault Marines can provide a certain type of disengage, by jumping on incoming units, then simply allowing the rest of your units to back away. It's not neccasarily a tool for initating a fight, it's also good for just the more seconds of preperation you can get for the upcoming fights ahead. Positioning is afterall very important. If they do get into abit of a thick of trouble, it's better not to be reckless, and just back away as soon as the jump is done. Just be sure you've got enough time to reposition yourself.

Another tool is of course Shotguns, the Explosive Shot can stop Warboss/Sluggas/Painboy dead-on in their tracks. Or allow your Devastators to reposition themselves if they get flanked. Assuming there's no Big Shootas available either, means there's more room to inflict punishment on the flank before losing models as well, so the scouts/devastators/tacs thrives in this enviroment, hench the Big Shootas is almost a mandatory upgrade for the Orks, there's seldom there's an ork that will go 2x Shootas and bypass that upgrade, since it's so worth it for the ... well, the most part. So we're going to simply just have to calculate the extra +40 power.

Tacticals on the other hand, don't have the best time in this, since they're a sustained-fighter, and Painboy mitigates sustained dps in the T1. Food for thought is to possibly even go for 2x scouts(3x possibly) since you have the better end of the bargain with that build since you can reduce the potency of the combinations more better, the downside is the Big Shootas gets left to do their own thing for the most part)

Also what are you gonna do in t2 without ASM when the inevitable uber cheap vehicles comes out? or the weirdboy? (3 commanders on the field rofl.) This whole 'strategy' crumbles on itself.

All things considered, the 2x Devastators should not have that big of an issue to transition from their T1 to their T2 useage. It depends if you want to go with more soft-counter measures, like Advanced Targeting (and what commander you've got available), Melta Gun TM // Orb + Soft-counters combinations with Advanced Targeting, or you can start utilizing the Tacticals to greater extend with a Missile Launcher. Weirdboy, you can get a Razorback. Possibly even Razorback spam, that gets people riled up good, since it enforces Tankbusta purchase, esp if he already commited to Trukk/Weirdboy, + Tankbusta purchase, means you're looking at a rough 20 minute~ T2 play. Ork overcommiting in their T2 can ultimately be their downfall. They want to get out of it as fast as they can, but at the same time acquire what they need. So the bleed-factor from Snipers is going to help out on keeping him in place.

ASMs are good, but they're definately not a "no-brainer" unit vs Orks. A player should always try to find a strategy that ultimately plays in their favor, ASMs are heavily dependant on agression, and Painboy with it's power to ultimately commit to these "sustained" fights that ASMs want to commit to, onfortunately goes against their own design. So if you're going ASMs, you'll probably want to keep them more defensive-oriented.

power making it a 110vs105 but still not mobile at all, with low capping power.

We're assuming that every single unit is present for the occasion on the fight, but that's not a probable scenario either. The SM Commander isn't a neccassity for the fight against the Painboy engagements. If it's one thing I've learned from my prime-time back in DoW2, was that my Commander was mostly occupied with capping the map. They're genuially the strongest cappers in the early game (Genuially it would depend on your upgrades as well, MCB for Apo/TM) does wonders - (MCB for TM) is also an indirect + snipe functionality that can also again, help mitigate the sustained dps of the Painboy oriented army compositions.

Force Commander should just focus on map control is my best suggestion. At best he can control some of the faulty-missplays you might have with Battle Cry, but he's a very sustained-oriented fighter, he'll scale better on towards mid-late game.

The Painboy + Angry Bitz is something we fiddled with a while back, we might have not reached the sweet spot in terms of utility, but I'm fairly comfortable with the overall utility in an essence the Painboy provides. It's abit agonizing watching people try the same strategy, same capping routine and expect a different result vs something they're struggling against. I can stress enough that encouraging different builds // routines in general, might just be what's needed.

I'm the last one wanting a sniper fest game, but I'm a little baffled Sniper Scouts only received a 10 req buff from Retail to Elite.

They actually had a 20 req buff a while back, it wasn't recieved very positively, but now that's +20, it seems that nobody seems to care for them anymore. I don't quite understand how some people work sometime.

[Lag]

Theorycrafting is a bitch, because it is easy to skip an important element and base your argument on it.
The problem with what you just suggested Cael is that SM is investing a lot of power in 3-men squads which need to setup, and which, when setup, cannot be so easily and quickly adjusted to some new conditions (like the guy attacking a different part of the map), and can be easily wiped when caught out of position. With Ork - you just move around. It is so easy to disengage and move to a more favorable position, to bash power and quickly move to a safer position etc.
You can't just ignore something like that, and you can't just ignore how some people like to play. For example, I hate doing the setup team pushes and I love both CoH and DoW as they enable players to do their own thing. When you force a player to do a very specific thing because of one unit... Bleh. Just remember the Bren Carrier in CoH.

[Caeltos]

The problem with what you just suggested Cael is that SM is investing a lot of power in 3-men squads which need to setup, and which, when setup, cannot be so easily and quickly adjusted to some new conditions (like the guy attacking a different part of the map), and can be easily wiped when caught out of position.

The tear-down is not so bad, the sniper is a good added bonus to continously deny pressure if they're content with map control. At least it's better then a regular scout bolter. But overall the lack of manuverability has to be mitigated by good positioning // micro, but that's not really a balance concern.

Much like getting caught off-position, is not a balance concern. It's more of a lack of players lack of awareness. I can't really adjust to that :/

You can't just ignore something like that, and you can't just ignore how some people like to play. For example, I hate doing the setup team pushes and I love both CoH and DoW as they enable players to do their own thing.

Of course there's a fine-balance between it all. Maps themselves play a vital role in how you approach something. Some maps present better options of different playstyles, so it's best to identify what works best with you under these given circumstances.

If anything, I'd say that DOW struggled with letting people do their own thing. If there's one thing I've learned is that going unorthodox builds usually came biting you in the ass. As we're still discussing 2x Shootas, it's pretty clear that it's still a very linear build path for the Orks in how they play. But I find it more that people have a hard time breaking old habbits. Which is super duper important in order to evolve and shape up the "metagame" so to say.

I remember back in, what was it- pre Chaos Rising. When builds were so random & fun in high level play. Eldar went 3x Guardians vs SMs and what-have you, and a good countermeasure act would be to go 2x Tacs/1tac/1asm + 2x Razorbacks, or Razorback/Dreadnought and things just got craazy from there. There was alot of room for innovation and people of high calibre really experimented alot and found working strategies. It was like the Renaissance Era of DoW2. I feel we're getting a wee-bit closer to finding that for this particular community, strictly time-wise, I'm thinking it's roughly about time, when people started doing new stuff, instead of old stuff. And people have have to get abit innovative if they want to stay in the game.

Don't missinterpret it tho, I'm not saying people are bad. I'm just saying people might want to just experiment abit, give it a week or so of pure just innovative play and crazy strategies against something you're struggling against. Maybe you can bump into the unknown and find the "next op" stuff.

Oh, and Bren Carrier gives me nightmares. Partially why I'm not touching CoH1, COH2 way better.

[Torpid]

Caeltos now you're just being ridiculous. You're calling for innovation now, years into the game. The players have been fiddling with this game for years, all the possible innovation that could be attempted has been attempted. Melee builds don't work because melee sucks in this game as there are so many ways to deal with it and it causes way more bleed than ranged fighting. People use the builds they use because time and time again they've tried other builds and they haven't been successful. I mean it's basically operant conditioning. Devastator/sniper heavy builds suck because they lack mobility and leave you in position where you end up getting flanked, yeah sure, if you have fantastic awareness this isn't as big a issue, but why put yourself in that non-optimal situation in the first place...

Non-orthodox builds = non-optimal builds.

The only time a non-optimal build works is when your opponent is so unfamiliar with it they get shocked by it and don't realise how to counter it.

Also do you seriously think players like myself are going to come on the forums and complain about balance WITHOUT spending extensive amounts of time to try and understand the situation as best as possible. I have spend hours on end trying to combat this and nothing works well enough to be deemed balanced. Furthermore I've also turned around and gone and played orks for a week endlessly against various SM players and I don't really have trouble with any SM builds. Theory crafting is great an all, but only when complemented by the experience and I don't know whether or not you have that here.

[Lag]

Sorry Torpid but I'm gonna have to agree with Cael here on trying out new stuff.

[Torpid]

Bah, I concur, I am yet to try snipers + devs, but that is because it just makes no sense in my head at all. As soon as I get the time to do so I promise I shall innovate. I will play as many games of orks vs sm as I can from both sides and just see what's going on. Of course I'll need help with that, so if anyone would want to help me with it that would be great. I'll come back in maybe a weeks time to see if I feel differently.

[caralimon]

I'm the last one wanting a sniper fest game, but I'm a little baffled Sniper Scouts only received a 10 req buff from Retail to Elite.

They actually had a 20 req buff a while back, it wasn't recieved very positively, but now that's +20, it seems that nobody seems to care for them anymore. I don't quite understand how some people work sometime.

Didn't express myself well enough, I was wondering more about a Power price reduction than a Req one. I'd be much more inclined to get Sniper Scouts at 120/30 than at the current 100/35 price. Was something like this ever considered/tried out?

I hate to do the cross-faction Squad comparison, but since Rangers are the closest thing to Sniper Scouts in the game... Is the fact that Scouts are the starting squad for SM that relevant to warrant a 35 power cost for Snipers, even with their much lower rate of fire compared to Rangers?

As far as I know and my experience goes, it's generally considered an inefficient upgrade (which I kinda agree with), mainly because of the hefty power investment, except for very late game power excess scenarios.
I kinda expected them to have a rate of fire (cooldown+reload) closer to the Rangers one if they were to stay that expensive.

I'm really not asking for buffs or anything, but I feel I'm missing a part of the picture as to why they're so (power) expensive. All I can think of is the SMvsChaos MU and snipers 2 shotting CSM models, but still... I had never thought Sniper Scouts were relevant in that matchup.

P.S: Sorry for the disgression.

[Asmon]

Sniper scouts are relevant in every match-up but vs nids. They are super fast and have a high sight radius. They simply cannot be caught in a bad position if you are micro-ing properly, unless they are attacked by infiltrated enemies. But then you can buy sergeant.

[Codex]

Melee builds don't work because melee sucks in this game as there are so many ways to deal with it and it causes way more bleed than ranged fighting.

Tell that to Ronin Ryuichi, who constantly proved to me melee heavy builds work. He hasn't been playing as much since he graduated, but he was very impressive with how he could make 3 melee builds work even at high level.

[Ace of Swords]

Melee builds don't work because melee sucks in this game as there are so many ways to deal with it and it causes way more bleed than ranged fighting.

Tell that to Ronin Ryuichi, who constantly proved to me melee heavy builds work. He hasn't been playing as much since he graduated, but he was very impressive with how he could make 3 melee builds work even at high level.

I always tought that heavy melee/only melee builds are very high risk and high reward, but I personally think that people do not feel comfortable with that (myself included) since you could have a very easy game and basically steamroll over your opponent or not beign able to do anything, like, if you lose your initiative once it's going to be very hard if not possible to regain it.

[Torpid]

And that's another reason why dawn of war war isn't played competitively. An optimal build needs to be reliably the best. Melee heavy builds can work, HT w/ triple horms is interesting to say the least. Say what you will about all the counters, but on some maps that stuff just does work. Or alternatively is suicidal. It's silly really. It's kind of like snipers. They work great or they do terribly, heck even vehicles work in the same way, albeit to a lesser degree - if their pathing gets messed up, or they get a sync-kill at the wrong time then boom, fail, alternatively they might just get constant special attacks vs heavy melee squads meaning they win with ease. For the game to be balanced I believe any aspects of randomness or unpredictability should be toned down or removed, or at the very least not encouraged.

[Lag]

DoW isn't played competitively because not many people play it - hence no interest for sponsors.
It isn't played due to some mistakes in balancing, online experience and, most importantly - complete lack of marketing.

[Dark Riku]

Kommando Nob is not a direct-counter,

How is his stun bomb not a direct counter?
Or sneaking up on the dev as long as there isn't a detector?

Sole melee builds can work, but you need to keep almost constant pressure on your opponent. It is also MU and map dependent.
You almost always want some sort of melee in your builds though.

+1 to Lag on the Competitive part.
I personally LOVE the way DoW2 works.
Sadly people prefer SC2, LoL, etc due to hype, marketing and personal preference.


About Snipers link.

[Codex]

For the game to be balanced I believe any aspects of randomness or unpredictability should be toned down or removed, or at the very least not encouraged.

Then say goodbye to melee skill, special attacks and sync kills.

SC2 clone plx.

Re: melee heavy builds

Ranged heavy builds are heavily in the meta because they are easier to use than melee heavy builds, and less risky because you will wipe less often. However, it also has higher rewards when you pull them off. Melee orientated builds requires excellent positioning and using maneuver warfare tactics rather than brute force, making use of flanking, terrain and choke points etc.

Melee builds are great. It's just that no one uses them because everyone copies the meta NOW.

[Cyris]

Melee centered builds end up being heavily reliant on the RNG of special attacks. That, combined with all the things you called out Codex (easier, less wipe potential, less map dependent) are the reasons I use them infrequently. I find it a little offensive, whether intended or not, when people say things like "just meta copiers". I play ranged mostly because I don't want 1 special, for or against me, to be the deciding factor in a battle that then wipes a squad and could then determine the game. I want the game to be about positioning, awareness, planning, build orders etc. more then RNG. I play Blood Bowl when I want big RNG swings A little RNG is fine (ranged attack miss chances are just fine) but the intense swing that 1 special cause in a fight dwarf this. I'd be so happy if specials were just aoe damage, or increased damage with the same cool animationson a single target, or only knocked down 1 target etc. Watching a strike squad halve a hormagaunt squads health with 1 special and lay them all out on the ground 15 meters apart gets goofy fast, especially if next fight they never drop a special.

In short, I feel that ranged vs ranged allows for the better player to win more often then melee vs melee, where the lucky player tends has a bigger edge.

That said, I've found the Painboy to be fine, both as him and against. Though I think it's crazy talk to suggest devs against WB with storms and a Painboy. You will bleed dev models at mach 5 as torpid pointed out early. 6 swings = dead squad is no joke, and god help you if they get a special before you hit retreat because you were playing "smart" and waiting for them to hit once so you skip teardown time. Snipers though do a real number on orks, I'm a big fan. The tacs are just there as spotters and ranged damage sponges while the snipers pick away.

[Codex]

Well, Cyris, I was making a generalisation. Generalisations tend not to apply to everyone. Of course I understand there are people who go for Ranged builds for other reasons, but at the same time I've seen DOW2 through many iterations, and what Caeltos has said is true: people tend not to want to innovate. Sorry for any offence caused, it was not intended.

That said, Ronin has always been called a noob for using melee heavy builds, but they've worked time and again and show that there are different ways to look at this game rather than just what has been established. And this is something that Torpid has claimed since the time for innovation is past according to him.

At the same time, I don't think melee-based play is really that random. It's probabilistic and hence the behaviour averages out over time. Part of the skill of this game is to create favourable situations and not have to take coinflips i.e. you reduce the role of randomness in the game. Consider poker: I want to put my money in when I'm good and I would prefer not to take 50:50 hands. For example in Texas Hold'Em the classic overcards vs pocket pair situations are very close to 50:50 pre-flop, yet the better players avoid shoving all-in (i.e. committing) preflop in tournament play because it's risky and they want to find situations where they can find an edge. Similarly, when I send a melee squad in I try to put them in the best position possible to win their engagement, not commit to a close fight and hope they come out on top.

If you're up against strikes, you don't have to engage them in unfavourable situations where "RNG" could screw you over. Vanilla hormagaunts can't take on vanilla strikes? Oh okay, well you could a) outmaneuvre them and out-map control them or b) overwhelm them with numbers or c) get upgrades till you're on a par. Adrenal horms fare pretty well against strikes and if you have synapse? Honestly the strikes really suffer.

Same with sluggas. In T1 you can use them as counterinitiation in order to shore up the line rather than use them as linebreakers, or use them to cap/harass isolated ranged squads. In T2 you get the slugga nob, which makes them very respectable dedicated melee with low upkeep/reinforcement and overall cost. In the end, if you are really afraid of RNG, get some stormz and be assured they will tear the Strikes up.

[JuhwannX]

The thing is, Sync kills and all of that really ruin the ability to balance stuff out. Randomly your low health dreadnaught wants to sync kill the wraithlord he just defeated, right infront of a brightlance, that will see to his death for the betterment of the Craftworld. I mean come on. You can't honestly agree that the whole Sync killing and all of that is legitimately fair. Also the fact that it's so freaking random. It can happen with the first kill of the squad, the second, the third, the fourth, there's no determining it. And it's just ridiculous. It should happen at a squad wipe. And ONLY if the squad would have legitimately been wiped from that last hit. If not, then don't have it. I remember times I've had FC's wipe a NM squad, when the NM's had 300 health, and just sync killed them. But I know for a fact, he wouldn't have killed them that fast.

Things like RNG make the game interesting. But too based on luck. Say what we will about starcraft, at least it's based on legitimate numbers, and not random luck. It's one of the many reasons CoH 1 and DoW 2 weren't competitive games. Nobody wants to be super unlucky and just lose 2 squads, cause the RNG decided to fuck them over, for no reason other than it being RNG.

Also on the topic of the bren carrier. It's just the facts that the brits were ridiculously OP in CoH 1, and everyone who's played CoH 1 for a semi-decent time, and reads the ability's and functions, and stats of the units (I.E. Myself) knows it. So I wouldn't even say it's cause CoH 1 was super unbalanced. I'd say that it's because Relic pulled one of their many numbers, and stopped support in 2011 for no reason whatsoever, other than they wanted to start working on CoH 2.

On relation of the topic, I'd say that the painboy is ridiculous, considering you can have both him AND the Weirdboy on the field, at the same time. Anti blob/ranged, with anti-melee, that can help initiate OR counter initiate with ease. It's slightly retarded, if I'm honest. the Painboy, even while under ranged fire, AND being attacked by a chaos lord, will still beat the Chaos Lord, and the CSM. This is a vanilla painboy, in T1, against a vanilla CL and Vanilla CSM, in T1. It just seems odd that he gets melee DoT, and I think 40 power melee. Not too sure on his melee skill however. But anyway, that's my 2 cents on the painboy. If you get him, the Weirdboy should be locked. Also saying that people should get devs and snipers against WB, PB, Storms, and the like, is just ridiculous. You're basically making the Space Marines extremely slow moving. Even slower than they move already, in terms of actual map control/in terms of expansion.

[Codex]

Randomly your low health dreadnaught wants to sync kill the wraithlord he just defeated, right infront of a brightlance, that will see to his death for the betterment of the Craftworld. I mean come on.

But sync kills like these tend to be a double edged sword. The fact that unit in sync kill animation take 90% less damage and cannot die while in this animation gives you MORE time, not less, to tie up the brightlance before helping the wraithlord escape. You can even use a scout/ heretic to tie up the brightlance no problem.

On the other hand, if he had not sync killed, the Wraithlord would definitely take more damage from the Brightlance kiting away than if you had tied up the brightlance straight after a sync kill finished.

If anything, sync kills are disadvantageous for chasing, and advantageous for avoiding the damage of AV weapons, targeted abilities, or keeping something alive.

Nobody wants to be super unlucky and just lose 2 squads, cause the RNG decided to fuck them over, for no reason other than it being RNG.

Well I'm sorry you made a mistake BEFORE the losing of the two squads. DOW2 is not like that, it rarely "randomly" punishes you without a preceding mistake.

[Wurgl]

Melee builds don't work because melee sucks in this game as there are so many ways to deal with it and it causes way more bleed than ranged fighting.

Tell that to Ronin Ryuichi, who constantly proved to me melee heavy builds work. He hasn't been playing as much since he graduated, but he was very impressive with how he could make 3 melee builds work even at high level.

who?

[dance commander]

Melee builds don't work because melee sucks in this game as there are so many ways to deal with it and it causes way more bleed than ranged fighting.

Tell that to Ronin Ryuichi, who constantly proved to me melee heavy builds work. He hasn't been playing as much since he graduated, but he was very impressive with how he could make 3 melee builds work even at high level.

who?

Apparently some masterless samurai that likes to play DoW with melee builds.