Question about DoWII

[Gillyfish]

I've recently bought a new computer and I'm considering buying Dawn of War II and Chaos Rising as the game looks quite fun. However, I read on Amazon that the game does not include a skirmish mode, so if you want to try out races other than the marines you have no choice but to play online.

 

Is that actually true, or has it been fixed by subsequent patches/expansions?

 

More generally, would you recommend the game?

[Valtonis]

that is just BS.

only the Single Player campaign is Space Marines only.

there is an offline skirmish mode, although to play the game offline you need to have an offline Games for windows life account and pit steam on offline mode

 

if you are interested in RTS then the game is highly recommended, the learning curve is abit steep though i have to say and playing the SP doesn't teach you how to play the MP

 

i have played it since the pre-release beta and it is my favourite RTS, Starcraft 2 doesn't even come close to it in terms of gameplay

[KhorneHunter57x]

As mentioned by Valtonis, yes, the game does have a skirmish mode. You can play single-player non-campaign regardless of whether or not you are connected to the internet.

 

And yes, I would recommend the game. It is very fun, and I agree with Valtonis, as it is my favorite RTS also.

 

Also, if you are a fan of FPS games, you might be interested in the upcoming Space Marine game:

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=144538

[Octavulg]

Remember the whole Steam/GFWL thing. It may not be a dealbreaker for everyone, but I certainly held off and bought it used at a vast discount.

[Gillyfish]

Thank you all for the responses.

 

I already have Steam because I have a Total War habit that needs feeding! :ph34r: So buying a copy and registering online is not so much of a big deal for me, provided I don't have to always be connected in order to play (using the off-line feature, basically).

 

I am more of a strategy than FPS fan, so it sound like it may be worth investing in.

 

Thanks again!

[The Normish]

Thank you all for the responses.

 

I already have Steam because I have a Total War habit that needs feeding! :D So buying a copy and registering online is not so much of a big deal for me, provided I don't have to always be connected in order to play (using the off-line feature, basically).

 

I am more of a strategy than FPS fan, so it sound like it may be worth investing in.

 

Thanks again!

Same as me, I got on Steam because of Total War.

Yes, you can play it offline, but note that The Last Stand game mode can only be played online.

[Brother Valerius]

Speaking to your question if I generally recommend the game, I do not. The small army size is ridiculous, some of the best units aren't in the game (like Land Raiders), and the whole thing is too focused on micromanaging where your units stand. Not to mention that Space Marines, at least when I played the beta, weren't well done. The tactical squad, which should be the backbone of our army, was completely useless, and would lose in shooting to an Ork shoota boyz squad. Think about that one for a second and realize how ridiculous that is.

 

Dawn of War 2 is not at all worth your time. If you want a Warhammer 40k RTS, get the original Dawn of War (and its expansions), which I still maintain is the best RTS of all time.

[The Normish]

Speaking to your question if I generally recommend the game, I do not. The small army size is ridiculous, some of the best units aren't in the game (like Land Raiders), and the whole thing is too focused on micromanaging where your units stand. Not to mention that Space Marines, at least when I played the beta, weren't well done. The tactical squad, which should be the backbone of our army, was completely useless, and would lose in shooting to an Ork shoota boyz squad. Think about that one for a second and realize how ridiculous that is.

 

Dawn of War 2 is not at all worth your time. If you want a Warhammer 40k RTS, get the original Dawn of War (and its expansions), which I still maintain is the best RTS of all time.

Then it probably is the beta.

When I play it, Space Marines can definitely stand their ground in a fight, and win.

As for the smaller army size, it sort of shows that they tried to do skirmishes as opposed to huge pitched battles, which you may or may not like. Land Raiders and other assets are absent, true, but the ones that remain are better. Dreadnoughts pack a huge punch, and Predators are just fun.

The original Dawn of War had a different feel to this one, but both are good, I think. Plus the updates are constantly bringing more balance and appropriateness. Lastly, in Dawn of War 2, the Campaign is far more epic.

 

Now, Brother Valerius makes some good points, and it is definitely not just a remake of the first Dawn of War, which was excellent, but I'd say it is worth buying.

[Valtonis]

Speaking to your question if I generally recommend the game, I do not. The small army size is ridiculous, some of the best units aren't in the game (like Land Raiders), and the whole thing is too focused on micromanaging where your units stand. Not to mention that Space Marines, at least when I played the beta, weren't well done. The tactical squad, which should be the backbone of our army, was completely useless, and would lose in shooting to an Ork shoota boyz squad. Think about that one for a second and realize how ridiculous that is.

 

Dawn of War 2 is not at all worth your time. If you want a Warhammer 40k RTS, get the original Dawn of War (and its expansions), which I still maintain is the best RTS of all time.

 

you last played in the beta, which was what?

One and a half to two years ago?

of which there is already an expansion and numerous patches.

the game now is totally different from the beta, which i was also a part of.

and obviously you weren't around when the Tactical squad was the most OP unit in the game where just 3 units of plasma tact with/or a missile tact can win you the game.

 

and DoW1 as fun as it was, is just another exercise in spamming.

 

DoW2 requires alot more tactics and on the fly decisions, although the game is alot more balanced now it has come at the cost of the races losing alot of their "feel".

 

the main problem with DoW2 is the online MP. the matchmaking is just a whole lot of fail because it uses M$ GFWL TS system which is just crap

 

 

and on the topic of The Space Marines shooter game, i think it is a third person shooter and not an FPS

[Brother Valerius]

No it isn't. I can say this because I recently picked up a copy of the game, having heard that it improved a lot through patches. I found it to be the same game I hated back when it was in beta: armies that had maybe 20 men in them, gameplay which is nothing more than stupid positional micromanagement, all that. It hasn't changed at all, not on a fundamental level.

 

Dawn of War 2 is, and will probably always be, in my mind the textbook example of how to ruin a game sequel. It has nothing in common with the first game apart from the 40K license. The developers should be ashamed of how they ruined the greatest RTS of all time to be CoH in space (except even less fun than CoH, which was at least still good). I lost all faith in Relic after they put out that game.

[Reyner]

No it isn't. I can say this because I recently picked up a copy of the game, having heard that it improved a lot through patches. I found it to be the same game I hated back when it was in beta: armies that had maybe 20 men in them, gameplay which is nothing more than stupid positional micromanagement, all that. It hasn't changed at all, not on a fundamental level.

 

Dawn of War 2 is, and will probably always be, in my mind the textbook example of how to ruin a game sequel. It has nothing in common with the first game apart from the 40K license. The developers should be ashamed of how they ruined the greatest RTS of all time to be CoH in space (except even less fun than CoH, which was at least still good). I lost all faith in Relic after they put out that game.

It still has sync kills B)

[NExOBLIVISCARIS]

It does have sync kills just very few of them and not as good. I thought it was a great game in my personal opinion.

[Reyner]

Force commander versus Carnifex is nice but yeah they are a bit naff (especially Ork Sluggas).

[The Emperor's Champion]

Dawn Of War II is an excellent game. Certainly manages to give a better sense of how important each Marine in a Chapter really is than DoW1's constant meatgrinder spam-fest.

 

I love me some Dawn Of War 1 with all its expansions (actually, Soulstorm kinda sucked because the flyers were retarded, but the SoB and DE were cool), but it was really just a regular generic RTS with a 40k skin. Aside from doing away with the retarded resource gathering units and having cooler fluff, it wasn't really any better than Starcraft or Starcraft II (which are the same goddamn game).

Dawn Of War II, on the other hand, actually does a good job of being a 40k RTS. The terrain is a lot more interactive, the acting is decent, tactics and maneuvering matter, there;s fluffy bits all over the place, every Marine makes a difference to the fight, no one walks out onto the battlefield and starts building a town....

 

My only real complaint would be that I find it lacking a bit in the variation department since I got so very used to Soulstorm and Dark Crusade having everything but Tyranids available, but everything is portrayed a lot more accurately, and the RPG style Squad leveling and equipment is pretty damn cool.

 

Also, Last Stand is REALLY fun, tho I do wish there was more than just the one map, the one set of enemies and the 3 characters....

Right now I can play it for a few days at a time before I have to go play something else, but give me like 3 more maps (each with different enemy waves), make the Techmarine, Apothecary, the other 2 Ork leaders, the other 2 Eldar leaders, the Tyrant, the Lictor, and the Warrior Alpha all playable, and then I'll just sit there playing Last Stand for like a month straight. Damn...that'd be a lot like a 40k style League Of Legends....

 

 

There's no telling what Chaos Rising added to the game. I didn't follow that at all. For all I know Last Stand could be massively expanded, and there might be a Tyranid campaign now. That would rock, but I'm really just making wild guesses.

[KhorneHunter57x]

There's no telling what Chaos Rising added to the game. I didn't follow that at all. For all I know Last Stand could be massively expanded, and there might be a Tyranid campaign now. That would rock, but I'm really just making wild guesses.

CR added the Chaos Marines as a playable race in non-campaign, added a 'Nid and a Chaos character to Last Stand, and includes a new campaign where you can import your DoW II upgrades and wargear into it and start right off as being awesome, as well as including a corruption mechanism in the campaign where it shows how easy it is to turn to Chaos (and how much you must be mindful of your actions if you want to stay in the Emperor's light).

 

TEC: You really need to get Chaos Rising.

[Valtonis]

No it isn't. I can say this because I recently picked up a copy of the game, having heard that it improved a lot through patches. I found it to be the same game I hated back when it was in beta: armies that had maybe 20 men in them, gameplay which is nothing more than stupid positional micromanagement, all that. It hasn't changed at all, not on a fundamental level.

 

Dawn of War 2 is, and will probably always be, in my mind the textbook example of how to ruin a game sequel. It has nothing in common with the first game apart from the 40K license. The developers should be ashamed of how they ruined the greatest RTS of all time to be CoH in space (except even less fun than CoH, which was at least still good). I lost all faith in Relic after they put out that game.

 

you are definitely in the minority.

i loved DoW1 and DoW2 is a total upgrade and improvement from it.

there are some cosmetic things that DoW1 has that i missed in DoW2 but the gameplay is miles better.

 

it has changed from being a macro spam fest to an intense micro metagame which requires more thinking and reacting on the fly than DoW1.

i do not just want a sequel to be the same but with better graphics like Starcraft 2.

which is good but nowhere as great as it has been hyped.

 

DoW2 evolved, it has innovation and new ideas on how to do an RTS.

if you want DoW1 with better graphics just stick with DoW1.

 

of course they are not gonna put all those tons of units in the game which just made everything unbalanced.

conscious decisions were made as to what units were to be added and what should be left out.

they didn't dump everything in just because they were there to be dumped in.

 

they took a page from Blizzard's book with Warcraft 3 and basically made the concept better and gameplay better.

the Singleplayer campaign which despite suffering from a lack of diversity in types of missions is still one of the best if not the best SP campaign in RTS history and the SP in Chaos Rising expansion even improved upon it.

[Brother Valerius]

You guys are mistaken. SC2 being the same as SC1 isn't a bad thing, it's the entire point. A game cannot legitimately be called a sequel if it is not closely related to the original. They didn't have to be quite as faithful to SC1 as they were, but they certainly did the right thing by giving their fans more of what they loved so much. DoW2 shouldn't even have the DoW name on it, because it has nothing to do with DoW (apart from being 40k). It's a disgrace, and it is as much a "sequel" to DoW as the Space Marine game is. And not even a fun disgrace, at that, because micromanagement is one of the worst curses of the RTS genre, which DoW1 freed us from (and then Relic decided, for some ungodly reason, to bring back in spades for DoW2).

 

And no, Valtonis, I can't just play DoW1 to get what I want. Because then I would have DoW with the same graphics, not DoW with improved graphics (which, as you correctly said, is what I want). Not to mention the fact that as the game gets older and older, there will be no one to play with online any more.

[The Emperor's Champion]

Dude.... no. Starcraft 2 is retarded.

Why the hell would you wait for 11 years to play the exact same game again?

 

Other than making the same game again in 3D and selling it as if it were the greatest thing since sliced bread, do you know what else makes for a stupid game? Adding too much random unnecessary junk.

 

Games can only go so far by tacking random stuff onto the original game. Eventually they HAVE TO change and evolve to new gameplay or else it just becomes a mess.

• They tried that with DoW1 and tacked on feature after feature until they just ended up making a mess of things with Soulstorm. They quite rightly decided it was time to go a new direction and make a new/more focused game.
  
• The Age Of series kept adding and adding features and got really great around Age Of Empires II:Conquerors and Age Of Mythology, but then they messed the whole thing up with Age Of Mythology:Titans and Age Of Empires III.
  
• The Megaman X games are some of the best sidescrollers ever. They started out awesome and just go better and better up until X4 (which is one of the best games ever) and then they quickly screwed the whole thing up and X5,6,7 and 8 were all retarded.
  

[Juztikar]

Dude.... no. Starcraft 2 is retarded.

 

QFT! I am a longtime RTS player, played the hell out of Warcraft 2 and Starcraft and most RTS's since. I have never played a tabletop Warhammer game, but Dawn of War 1 got me interested in the universe.

 

DOW1 was innovative in a lot of ways, I loved it, played the hell out of it, still play it sometimes.

 

DOW2 is a lot different game, it took me some getting used to. But it is DOW2, not an expansion pack for DOW1, it is a different game. If they would have acted like blizzard and gave us DOW1 with pretty new engine, but exactly the same gameplay, we would have been bitching they didn't innovate enough and change enough. To say DOW2 stinks simply because it isn't DOW1.5 is unfair.

 

DOW2 is very innovative and has pushed along the genre as a whole. Now one thing I do miss are large maps and large battles, loved Supreme Commander. To me the most perfect RTS would be a mesh of DOW 1 and 2:

 

DOW2 engine (cover, destructable environments, Commander Updrades and Variety, the explosions, epicness of assault warriors slamming down)

+

DOW1(all the factions, basebuilding, vehicles, the unit speech).

+

Make the different chapters or each play and feel a little different, instead of just changing their coloring.

 

Then it would be perfect! But for now, it is just good.

[Heru]

DoW 2 is more RTT (like the Myth series) than RTS, it's a game about Space Marines being Space Marines, and not unlimited "spam".

[Brother Valerius]

Dude.... no. Starcraft 2 is retarded.

Why the hell would you wait for 11 years to play the exact same game again?

 

No, SC2 is a perfect sequel... and I say that as someone who didn't like SC1, and thus (by extension), don't have an interest in SC2. A sequel is only a good sequel if it does not deviate far from the original game. If a developer feels they can't take it any further, then don't make a sequel. It's very simple, in my eyes. If the fans liked the original game, they want more of that, not a completely different game (which DoW 2 is, remember. It isn't just changing up DoW 1 a little, it is nothing at all like it).

 

• They tried that with DoW1 and tacked on feature after feature until they just ended up making a mess of things with Soulstorm. They quite rightly decided it was time to go a new direction and make a new/more focused game.
  
• The Age Of series kept adding and adding features and got really great around Age Of Empires II:Conquerors and Age Of Mythology, but then they messed the whole thing up with Age Of Mythology:Titans and Age Of Empires III.
  
• The Megaman X games are some of the best sidescrollers ever. They started out awesome and just go better and better up until X4 (which is one of the best games ever) and then they quickly screwed the whole thing up and X5,6,7 and 8 were all retarded.
  

 

Dude, Soulstorm was great. As was AoE 3, which is the best game in the AoE series (and not just because of my stance that a sequel shouldn't really stray far. It's legitimately amazing).

 

And I do dispute the earlier claim that I'm in the minority on my position with DoW2. When I played the beta, there was a fairly significant amount of outcry on the forums because they gutted the game. I recall many, many people saying that they were done with the game because Relic had ruined it. While I don't doubt that there are many players that enjoy DoW2 (who also enjoyed DoW1), there are just as many who had a game that they loved wrecked. Yes, we can all go back to DoW1 (and I do), but it's not pleasant to have your hopes raised high, and then dashed upon the rocks. Hard. That's the part that bugs me, not just the fact that DoW2 isn't to my liking.

 

Juztikar, I like your idea for what DoW2 should have been. That might have pleased me. I do have to disagree that we would be bitching if DoW2 was what I wanted. SC2 is a good example of what I would want (if I were a fan of SC1), and it has been released to massive critical and player acclaim. People love the hell out of it (and for good reason, Blizzard has really done right by their fan base). The same would have happened, in my opinion, if DoW2 was a proper sequel to DoW, rather than "We're gonna make a completely different game... eh, let's call it DoW2 to cash in on our fan base."

[The Emperor's Champion]

Actually, Starcraft 2 is already starting to suffer the same fate as Modern Warfare 2 (massive sales but falling opinion), and to me that's pretty funny.

 

Both games were released to MASSIVE enthusiasm and high scores and everyone going "this is what we wanted"! But then reality set in and people started giving honest opinions.

 

Many MW2 players realized they actually liked MW1 better and that there were a lot of issues with MW2 that we're initially glazed over in the super hype leading up to the release. To its credit, it took everyone a couple months to really realize this stuff.

 

Starcraft 2 has ALL of the uber hype because Starcraft 1 was basically the uber RTS for a really long time and was only ever really challenged by Dawn Of War 1. The REASON SC1 was actually partially dethroned by DoW1 was because DoW1 actually innovated and did things quite differently from Starcraft and everyone was happy for the change. Of course people don't seem to pay much attention to what happens and why, so Starcraft 2 has sold MASSIVELY quick based on the reputation of the first game and Blizzard's reputation. But now, barely more than a week later, the critics are starting to cite how the game basically is just a pretty Starcraft 1 and the only thing the game really has going for it is an atypically strong story for the single-player mode. Many people are starting to draw the conclusion that while, yes, parts of Starcraft 2 are as good as the first game and the single player has a better story, THAT isn't exactly good enough to offset the lack of innovation, the lack of LAN support, and the lack of anything but a easy Terran campaign...and it really wasn't worth waiting for 11 years.

 

 

The thing I find extra hilarious about this complete lack of innovation for Starcraft 2 is that people knew about it ahead of time and actually ASKED for Blizzard to change it up a bit and make it interesting....and they didn't...all the while the Diablo department at Blizzard is fighting the fans of Diablo 1 and 2 for some patience in allowing them to shake up the game mechanics quite a bit.

One team at Blizzard ignores the fans' pleas for innovation, while another team had to try and get the fans to accept innovation.

 

 

Luckily for Activision and Blizzard, the reviewers gave their games super high scores before the hype machine fell apart and reality set in. And since I've never seen a reviewer actually go back and change scores to reflect hindsight, these games are pretty much in the clear.

[Brother Valerius]

I'm not sure where you heard that people are starting to find SC2 bland, but I have yet to see any evidence to reflect that (everywhere I turn, people are still in love with SC2, and with MW2 for that matter). I'm also not sure why you think they're shaking up the game mechanics "quite a bit" for Diablo 3, because I can assure you that (as of last year's Blizzcon at least) they are not shaking up the mechanics much at all. They are adding a couple of tweaks, but that's within what I would say is expected for a sequel. Evolution, not revolution. The change from DoW to DoW2 is more like if Diablo 3 all of a sudden turned into a clone of Baldur's Gate. Instead, D3 has the same gameplay, but with some changes that fit well within the established framework.

 

I'm not necessarily opposed to change, but I am opposed to fundamental, drastic change in a sequel. DoW2 is so far removed from DoW that it can hardly be said to be in the same genre any more, which is way the hell too much change.

 

Ironically, one of your examples (MW2) is ragged on because it changed too much from the formula in its predecessor, not because it didn't change enough. Many people like it, but those who don't are generally complaining about things like the kill streaks being too powerful, or the death streak rewards existing at all, or that certain weapons are too powerful compared to how they should be, etc.

[The Emperor's Champion]

I tend to spend a LOT of (actually too much) time embedded in the news flow and the behind the scenes discussions of the video games industry. If you only witness the standard output of reviews and game scores you'll probably not notice this stuff for a while. :unsure:

Diablo 3 has actually changed quite a bit more than Blizzard has made immediately obvious.

 

 

MW2 is getting flak not for changing too much per se, but rather for blowing existing mechanics/ideas from CoD4:MW completely out of proportion and very much missing the point of the perfect balance the first game had struck.

[Gillyfish]

Guys, with my Mod hat on here, I should say that we're drifting into the realms of off-board discussion here. I certainly appreciate the opinions that have been expressed and I'm (very!) grateful for the feedback on the game BUT the conversation is drifting away from 40K and into the realms of non-board related games.

 

So, if the thread is to continue, can we steer the conversation back to Dawn of War and 40k, please?

 

It's fine to mention other games as examples of different/similar approaches, but the focus of discussion has to be on Dawn of War!

 

Now, another question. In Dawn of War 2, is it true tactics that will win the day (positioning, outflanking, etc.) or special abilities. I guess what I'm trying to figure out is whether the game experience is about thoughtful use of your forces or frantic button clicking!