Talk:Dawn of Eldar

This is an obvious vanity article. All edits and all comments in the discussion page defending it have been made by a single person. This is a wiki, Jaimas. Not a blog. If you can't find a single real person to support your viewpoint, there is no reason for this wiki page to exist. You say "check the statistics" but there are no statistics remaining online. You say "look at the discussion on other forums" but there is no discussion anywhere else on the internet. A google search for "dawn of war"+"eldar overpowered" returns a mere 132 results, only ONE of which is from an actual discussion about Dawn of War 1 (and links to a forum thread dating to 2005.) So enough with your fabricated community consensus. Go and find that community and bring them here. According to all available historical records, you are the ONLY person in the past ten years to make the claim that Eldar are overpowered in Dawn of War.

Speaking on behalf of the Dawn of War community, we considered Orks to be the most powerful faction back when there was significant online play (the period between Dark Crusade's release up until a few months before Soulstorm.) This was because the Orks tended to win most matches among high-level players. Eldar were primarily a nuisance at low-level play because of losing players' tendency to hide their webway gates. The Eldar's best assets were their MBT and relic unit, which rarely came into play before the match was over.

Another common theme in this article that reflects a poor understanding of the game mechanics is the notion that the Tau were a competitive faction. The community widely acknowledged that the Tau were improperly designed from the ground up, as their forked tech tree eliminated access to most high-tier units and left their max-cap army with too little HP to survive any serious DPS. They lurked at the bottom of the rankings for the entirety of Dark Crusade's era (we're talking statistics exclusive to Dark Crusade, not cumulative DoW rankings.) They didn't just lose a lot, they lost with statistically anomalous frequency. They were as weak as the Space Marines were popular.

Interestingly, the cheese of the Eldar seems to be less noticeable when you run with the No Limit mod on. Perhaps it's just that, for the amount of guys you're given, the Eldar just have vastly overpowered forces, but en masse they can be countered? I dunno about you guys, but I kinda like my 30 Ethereals giving me 12800 HP / unit Firewarrior squads, or solid lines of Heavy Weapons Squads, and the only thing that I question if it's better than even the Tau is mass numbers of Flash Gitz.

Man, everything becomes irrelevant with the No Limit mod on. In competitive DOW, it's rare a game gets to Tier 3, let alone Tier 4, but even then, Eldar dominate all damned game long. - Jaimas

I wonder if the fact that the hard counter system was removed was part of what made the Eldar ridiculously overpowered. As the Eldar worked almost entirely on the hard counters, it seems that they instead pulled up the other damage of the Eldar weapons so that they weren't so specialized, thus making them do rather stupid amounts of damage overall. On top of that, several of the other facts, like their high HP on some units, were originally meant to be countered by other units, but again, with the removal of the counters, there was nothing to actually counter the Eldar with, while they still had comparatively strong counters.

That's part of it. When Winter Assault hit, Relic staffers (specifically one of the developers, Johnny Ebbert) had wanted to remove the hard counter system of Vanilla Dawn of War in spite of the fact that it was reasonably balanced and well-liked - there was a few reasons for it, but the biggest was that they wanted to make the game more appealing to casuals (which this change, ironically, did not do). Once the change hit, it was argued (very successfully) by Eldar players that the Eldar needed buffs to make up for the fact that their formerly-specialized units were now rather statistically lopsided. As 70-80% of the pro playerbase used Eldar, this gave them disproportionately huge representation in balance patches - which means that ridiculous broken things like the Avatar Pop Bonus, Platform Spam, Dark Reapers and Banshees in general, and Hunt the Webway Gate got overlooked and the Eldar got buffed in patch-after-patch. By the time Dark Crusade hit, they were easily the strongest race, putting both the Necrons and Tau to shame - one hell of an accomplishment. - Jaimas

Cheese or not. Cheese definetly!

Well, looking at the History it seems that the entire page is based on subjective view, filled with general idea to represent all the cheese available, not taking lots of annoying and simply useless things.

By the way, some places are mistakes in total. Embolden, for instance never restored morale, and when used by a broken unit it stays broken. Seer council gives only 15% bonus to recharge rates, not 50, as stated here. Everyone loves farseer and seer council for their knockback. Except for the eldar players, who HATE it with passion. Why is that? Because AoE attacks always have ridiculously small damage. 20-30 damage is dealt to imperial guardsmen by the farseer using her I stand for five seconds getting raped without possibility to break and run just to puff all around for no damage and get out of melee (what means she gets raped by ranged even better) Still the farseer is blind to see an invisible monolith or a pack of stinky grots. Farseer abilities? Mindwar that cannot kill a hero, eldritch storm that simply knocks things from the screen, dealing around 300 damage to infantry and around 800 to buildings, being unable to bring down even those cardboard generators or nanoturrets. Eldar antitech is able to shoot only at point-blank, so even FoF can't possibly save them from melee rapetime. Eldar artillery? Never heard of it? You're right, hay can't blow your base to pieces without showing themselves, although that is the greatest cheesyness possible.

Banshee are zergs, literally. Why? Because they're almost useless in the very beginning, before the graid to call of war. Whine about eldar aircraft is funny, surely enough. Mostly because they're useless against anything but LPs and lowest tier infantry. Fire prisms? Boy, the're almost useless, because the time they get out the game is already at the end and they are rarely able to scale the balance. Spam of wraithlords? Well, cool-sounding, yet completely useless because of them being melee-oriented. Yep, lances can sometimes hurt a great deal of damage, but they tend to miss (the laser shots the target, but deals 0 damage) Platform spam? After they got nerfed completely they can't even be added to those guardian squads. Fluff rage Reaper spam? Used to be worth the cost in times long past, but now this tactics get raped by fast melee troops or by using solar storm if you're necron. Vyper spam? Sounds cool, yet again their primary weapon tends to hit the target...not even exploading. Harley Quinns? Pretty maidens get killed even by guardsmen grenade-launcher spam. And their death kiss is useless against commanders, although it should be used against them.

Whine about the best-armed transport is funny as hell...Due to falcon not being a transport in first place. Alright, relics never gave a shit about fluff, that's true. Still having a decent transport and a lousy "tank" is not such a good idea.

Khaine? The same problem as farseer: he cannot duel single units for sole reason of his love towards AoEs that knock everything back, make him lose melee modifiers, regen rates and deal rediculous damage (around 40 with 360' roar, around 70 with 270' swing) So a god of War gets raped by filthy dinosaurs or winged pieces of meat.

Conclusion: Jaimas knows little of the way it's meant to be played, never tried to understand mechanics, never looked at the numbers and seems to have a phantom butthurt due to (assumption, might not be the sole reason) him getting raped by the eldar player when he first came to DoW after reading books of all-raping Mehreeens

...about that

So you say Dawn of Eldar ('blatant favoritism') made Eldar one of /tg/'s most hated races?

Not really true, since most people on /tg/ didn't even play multiplayer competitively like the people on DoWSanc or RN. That type of hate is restricted to those places only, pretty much. Every thread I saw on /tg/ relating to DoW1/2 was always about singleplayer, and 'good' or 'competitive' DoW1/2 players are a rare bunch in /tg/ anyway. Outside of that, Eldar have RARELY, if ever received this so-called 'blatant favoritism'.

The closest examples I can think of are 2nd ed Eldar, but that wasn't even all that bad and the Eldar race as a whole was more interesting in general anyway.

Oz 06:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit war Oct 2012

I've got no dog in this race -- never played Dawn of War -- so I'm not going to make a judgement on this article's basis in fact, or lack thereof. That said, the point of discussion pages is to discuss issues with the article without having to fight in the actual content. Whatever the problem is, talk it out -- this is a fine place for it, as would the 1d4chan chat room for a more real-time discussion (see the main page for the link). --AssistantWikifag 03:34, 2 October 2012 (BST)

Kommando says: Ok then. So, this is a Wiki. It's about community knowledge, not any bizarre vendettas unsupported by fact. Don't get my wrong, a bizarre vendetta unsupported by fact is pretty core fa/tg/uy behavior, right up there with the various xenophobia, gynophobia, and whatever the fuck you'd call making -fag a title for everything (I know it's meant to be self-effacing for the community but it ain't, it's just juvenile).

This has no place here. It's not information, it's just stupid -builder units killing Relic units, for example. Wow. That's wtf on the level of Holocaust Denial. Yeah, CoW-Shees are OP. That's a valid point. Emphasis on "A" as in "singular and solitary." Anyone that mad about Vipers or Guardians or Reapers has no clue about how to play the game.

Shit, anyone who holds up a single I.G. Infantryman as being any positive benchmark of durability or damage output pretty much admits to knowing fucking nothing at all. Hey Jaimas: there's a reason they're 20pts each and come in huge piles (Spoiler! it's because they suck).

I get that the rest of the US is really big into swapping choosing a position for choosing facts, but this is /tg/. We've got international posters. The Brits and the Kiwis should bring the level up a little.

We all should be a little better. And this is being said in "our" name. This is what /tg/ thinks, because it's on /tg/'s wiki.

I feel the same way about Rape of An Eldar, but hey that's merely creepy and tasteless. Again, not out of line for elements of the community, but if /tg/-related porn is wiki-worthy I've got better examples that could be archived. In sum: please kill this dead. It's not funny, it's not clever, it's not insightful, it's not Getting Shit Done. It's just someone's pud-tugging Eldar Waifu hate-chubby polluting the name of /traditional games/ for reasons undefendable even on the Internet. Thank you. 20:41, 2/10/12, PST.

PS: so I guess Jaimas contributes all kinds of useful things, and now I feel bad. Shame this article-turd was my introduction to his wiki contributions.

In your defense, I'm entirely capable of being as stupid as anyone else on this platform. That said, I take no offense. -- User Talk:Jaimas - May 3, 2015, 12:46 PM

Kommando says: Not much discussion going on here. 'sup, oh Assistantwikifag? What's next?

Yay, It's fixed! What ebullience, what dashing prose! Huzzah!

And what splendid attempts at ban evasion!--Newerfag 05:54, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

(Disclaimer: I don't play Dawn of War. I don't know anyone who plays Dawn of War.)

I see here an allegation that a video game is broken (in particular, that one particular faction is over-powered), and somebody who thinks that deleting a page counts as winning the argument. I'd feel better about this page if it had some third-party source to back it up, and I'd feel justified in deleting it if it were refuted, but my hopes for either outcome are not high (though you can start with the archived Relic community wiki, which has statistics for each of the units). I find Kommando's assertions regarding the quality of this page to be unfounded; I see no claim that Bonesingers are capable of destroying relic units, for example, and while there is plenty of rage at the game, I see none directed at the Eldar per se.

At the end of the day, I'm not wild about having an article about a subject where objectivity is scarce (I wouldn't lose sleep if it disappeared), but I'm not convinced enough to delete it. --AssistantWikifag 22:27, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Unsure of wiki protocol, apologies

Notable error in the page: The Avatar of Khaine provides 4 Squad Cap while using 5, not 10 and 5. This is still pretty bullshit when combined with the +10 Support Cap and so on, especially compared against the Bloodthirster using 5 Squad Cap vs effectively using 1 on the Avatar, but the Avatar is a net loss on Squad Cap. Of course, it just gives you an excuse to fill the last Squad Cap with a Harlequin...

Not only that but it omits or misrepresents several other facts, some of which contribute to the Eldar being even better than the page indicates.

Bonesingers don't spend 33% less than other builders on repairs: they spend half as much. Only Tortured Slaves and the Big Mek match this. The article compares them to Techpriests, which is actually wrong: Techpriests spend normally on repair, but repair twice as fast as any other builder, the trade-off being they cannot stack repairing where normal builders stack to 3 guys, and thus can repair 50% faster than Techpriests via teamwork. Furthermore, the Bonesinger is inexplicably the cheapest builder unit in the game, unless you count Builder Scarabs, particularly notable when considering that only the Bonesinger, Builder Scarab, and Gretchin deviate from the cost of 75 Requisition. Why do Eldar have cheap builders, exactly? The fact that they teleport is also inexplicable since Eldar have jumping transports. Setting up Webway Gates past cliffs/rivers/etc doesn't require teleporting builders when you have jumping transports! Why have them teleport at all?

Listening Shrines are the cheapest Listening Post to build. Not by much, especially since half the cost is refunded upon completion, but again, WHY do the Eldar have them cheaper? What reason could there be?

A subtle tech point is that the Eldar cannot be removed from Tier 3 per se. It's minor since losing your HQ is typically impossible to come back from anyway, but they are literally the only group in the game who cannot lose access to a given tier, outside of the "Tier 4' stuff.

Aspect Warriors don't require anything in particular to attach squad leaders. In fact, until quite late in the patching timeline Guardian squads can attach Warlocks with no pre-requisite. Every other squad in the game with squad leaders requires something external to enable squad leader access, even if in some cases the requirement is trivial. (Ogryns and Kasrkin require their respective Quarters, which you need to build them in the first place)

Eldar Plasma Generators are low-cost.

Embolden has never restored morale and in fact only raises maximum morale and morale regen, raising current morale in percent terms: Embolden at half morale and you still have half morale, but your higher max correlates to a higher current.

I doubt the Howling Banshee insta-broke squads, let alone Terminators who have more than 800 morale and suffer halved morale damage, where the scream does a pretty trivial amount in the first place. Is the article assuming huge blobs of Banshees or something? But I can't say this is wrong for sure, so if nobody feels that should be touched whatever.

I am puzzled why Fire Dragons are said to have "well over 800 morale per unit" given they have exactly 800 per squad.

It would be nice if the article pointed out that the Avatar's HP clocking in at 15000 is not only high, but higher than the Bloodthirster. Cause why shouldn't the Avatar do everything the Bloodthirster does (except fly), then throw in pop cap, build speed, and local morale immunity, and then also beat it out at the one thing it does? It never made sense to me that rots-out-of-combat dude who lives only for battle and has literally no secondary uses was lower HP than the dude who does a zillion other things.

Vypers can stunlock Commanders, never giving them a chance to fight or use abilities. It's way dumber than simply stunlocking some Khorne Berserkers, which is what the current framing suggests.

Also worth noting the Eldar don't have to wait for Tier 3 to research Farseer Hero, where every other Commander Hero upgrade does, improving the Farseer's damage, durability, and worst of all ability recharge rate, all earlier than other factions.

Webway infiltrating nearby buildings is all kinds of dumb once Dark Crusade hits, since you can make invisible, unshootable gunlines and Listening Shrines that require detectors to touch. And they can teleport these invisible gunlines. It's also aggravatingly possible to miss that a Strategic Point has a Shrine on it if it's being cloaked by a Gate, since all you'll see is an Eldar flag flying over a Strategic Point. If you get distracted, you might lose units to what looks like a simple decapping operation because the invisible Shrine is shooting them while they sit there doing nothing.

Speaking of turrets, D-Cannon have massive splash. They don't have knockback, to be entirely fair, but my experience is they are vastly better both at pretty much everything except stunlocking Commanders.

A few...inconsistiencies

I notice that quite often, all of these things tell how broken the eldar are, after they've gotten every single possible upgrade. which makes me wonder why the hell you can't just rush them.

The Farseer makes sure you can't just hero-rush them from the start of the game so easily. Though using ranged-heavy armies like the Tau do tend to even the odds (Hidden Fire Warrior gunlines are hilarious at putting down Eldar.)

Re Farseer as OP commander: The Farseer is beaten by the Big Mek, either SM champion, the Archon, and the Cannoness as she has one of the lowest dps and hp totals. She does disrupt frequently and does the highest morale damage (the Big Mek is #2), but neither saves her from getting shot or chopped to death. She also has an epic, world shaking, ass-busting _7_ dps shooting attack and while Mind War is a nice shot of ~370 to a commander it's got a 110 second cooldown that actually works out to 3.36 more ranged dps and a less than 2 second 25% slow effect. She's also the most expensive, assuming power and requisition weight equally, at 220/80. The Command Squad could easily cost more but that's it own mess. So she's a mostly defensive high mobility tank that loses to any T1 unit at range and disrupts ~10 second, knocking enemies out of her own preferential melee range, compelling her to rush around trying to stay in the face of whatever would otherwise be facerolling her forces. Oh, and I can source that info: http://web.archive.org/web/20120915174116/http://wiki.reliccommunity.com/index.php?title=Farseer

who wrote this garbage?

With the exception of the Bonesinger, Eldar are strong but not nearly as GGWTFOP this thread makes it out to be.

Seconded. The adage "Dawn of Eldar" is out there and is fun, but high level play was biased toward Ork the last I was playing. And, for DoW2 part, who the hell talks about balance regarding a single player campaign. I was expecting a Warp Spider spam whine or something.

Eldar dominated community tournaments for pretty much the entirety of Dark Crusade and Soulstorm's pre-Steam lifetime. This in no way impugns your statements - Orks seem to be the favored flavor of /tg/ after all - but is worth noting because when the game's playerbase was at its Nadir. The problem was well-documented when forum-users started to note that Relic's QA team primarily consisted of top-level players - most of whom, fittingly, were Eldar.

We play it now and Dawn of Eldar jokes would seem almost quaint and out-of-date, were it not for the more obvious bits of horse-shit. -- User Talk:Jaimas - May 3, 2015, 12:46 PM

Why are the Support Platforms not mentioned?

They take less space than other turrets (greater fire concentration), have superior build time, 27s vs 40s (which is very important early game and very useful overall because eldar have ubiquitous builders and webway gates to create "hardpoints", and also cloaking and relocation matrix) where no other race can.

D-cannons have huge alpha-strike and splash (several land speeders or reavers can be one-shot easily). But the greatest cut of cheese is not even there. Combined with eldar OP webway opportunities, some turrets can be built at the enemy base early on to suppress with AP fire at first (no other race can build turrets just anywhere on the map) and then decimate whatever stands in their firing range with D-cannons upgrade.

Summarily, eldar turrets are not that OP on their own (they are also relatively fragile in comparison). But combined with their superior builders, and, the worst part, webway gates, they are no less overpowered than everything listed here, giving eldar an unprecedentedly powerful tool of map control (like anything else these fuckers have got isn't enough).

Thus, FTGJ, I demand the Support Platform to be honored a noble mention on this glorious list of FUCKNG CHEESE.

Word Replacement

If there's a cogent reason beyond tumblr-esque "I don't like the phrasing" to edit out every instance of the word "rape" in the page, by all means, let's have it. --Boss Ballkrusha (talk) 03:15, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Since you ask, and since I've seen this jumping up and down my watchlist for the last few days, accuracy comes to mind. Units lost in the game are killed or destroyed (well, I guess we could speculate about what violations are perpetrated on those taken by the forces of Chaos or the Dark Eldar). --AssistantWikifag (talk) 05:22, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Given that we have rape to explain exactly what context is meant by the slang term as used on /tg/, it's pretty clear. "Getting "raped" in the non-sexual sense, is being utterly dominated by the opposition with no hope of relief." Which, if the representation of Eldar cheese is true to the game, would be accurate. --Boss Ballkrusha (talk) 05:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC

The most likely explanation is that either the editor believes that the slang term is overused and trite, or that it's somehow offensive because of its associations with sexual violence. If it's the first, they should stop getting so worked up over semantics. If it's the second, they shouldn't even be on this site because we don't exactly care about people's feelings or traumas or what have you over here. And although I do sympathize with the former case, it's no reason to start an edit war over nothing. (Might I suggest things like "owned" (or "pwned" if you're one of the few people who still uses leetspeak), dominated, slaughtered, or something else along those lines? The "Rape" article is being unnecessarily piped to, but that's an issue for a different talk page.)--Newerfag (talk) 06:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Some Statistical Bullshit and Myriad Flimflammery

Just a heads-up, some various things regarding the Eldar units' durability in Soulstorm:

• As a general rule, Eldar units are both more durable, have higher morale, and higher damage throughout the entire tech-tree. This is very apparent via the damage charts and HP scaling, but to elaborate:
  • Guardians are, after all upgrades and with a Warlock, the second-most durable Tier-1 infantry after Chaos Marines with upgrades, and Chaos Marines essentially scale into a T-3 unit. The combination of Embolden, Conceal, and Grenades means that despite mediocre damage output they consistently can beat other units for cost.
  • The worst offender in the durability department, by far, is the Fire Dragon squad, which has an unusual armor type that means it takes much less damage for a unit of its tier - meaning that despite being a very specific unit role-wise, between its massive HP and armor type, seeing 2 fully-kitted-out squads of DE Scourges or Heavy Bolter Sisters take over a minute and a half of sustained exchanged fire to kill one squad that's reinforcing isn't unheard of.
  • Howling Banshees are the single most-common unit used for Eldar rushing, and with good reason - they're ridiculously durable, and they have high damage output. In fact, Banshees are the equal of any T-2/3 melee unit, because their damage generally matches that of other races and the biggest reason other forces beat them one-on-one in close-combat is due to Fearless or Abilities.
  • Seer's council is legendary for durability, and is the single most durable infantry unit in the game with the Farseer attached. It has commander armor (strongest armor type overall), massive HP, and all the abilities of Warlocks (including Conceal). Pair with the farseer's own aura, this means that an entire squad with the best damage type also takes about 25% of the damage it would be taking normally.

• This is not restricted to infantry. Eldar vehicles have notoriously high HP as well:
  • Fire Prisms are notorious for having over 6100 HP worth of medium Vehicle armor. This is almost double the HP of the Tau Hammerhead, and gives it massive staying power. In about as close as we're going to get in balance as the Fire Prism comes, it's actually not expressly good at Tank-hunting due to relying on a blast weapon, and thus it loses firefights with the Leman Russ, Ravager (Assuming all Darklance loadout) and Hammerhead. The Looted Russ, Predator, and Chaos Predator generally can beat it but can lose easily if things go sour. The Sisters of Battle and Kauyon Path Tau have no tank per se, but the Krootox gets absolutely destroyed by the Fire Prism, and though the Penitent Engine will obliterate the Fire Prism, it has to get close, which the Fire Prism needs never oblige the Engine on. The Fire Prism beats Immolators handily.
  • Other Eldar vehicles trend to have higher HP and better armor types than other races' vehicles. The Vyper's armor type is a much better vehicle armor than the Sentinel, for example, and it has more HP as well. In practice this means it's significantly tougher.
  • Falcons share the same armor type as Chimeras, but are about 1000 HP more durable.
  • Wraithlords can actually keep pace with higher-tier melee heavies due to their HP, which is over 3900. To contrast, the Defiler floats around 3800, the Tomb Spyder about 3000, the pre-upgrade Talos 3800 (it's 4500 post), the Killa Kan 3300 (But has heavier armor type, which means it's quite a bit tougher), and Dreadnought 4780. What this means is that the cheaper Wraithlord (100/250) is perfectly capable of taking on almost any other heavy melee unit.

All of this data's largely accurate and is maintained on the old Dawn of War Wiki site. Some of it's inaccurate and out-of-date but the bulk of it is spot on and you can look up the veracity of any of this data for yourselves: http://warhammer-game.narod.ru/wiki/

Seriously, take a close look at the statistical advantages they have throughout the tech tree some time. I won't argue that the article isn't biased against Eldar - that was expressly the fricking point. They're the most flagrantly overpowered race in Dawn of War and pretty much every high-level player openly acknowledges it. Whilst every faction has some cheese it can do of some kind, it doesn't take a scientist or an MLG-worthy cache of mountain dew to know that a race with units religiously better for cost than the other factions, more durable, with supreme mobility and damage-output that either meets or beats every other race might be a problem. And with that in mind, I apologize for any inconvenience this little bit of snapgaggery caused. -- User Talk:Jaimas - May 3, 2015, 12:46 PM (EST)

Hilarious, your link is broken. Also, in the events that the Eldar are OP as fuck as you so claim, why does the DoW
Competitive community soundly disagree, and think that the best factions are tau/orks/cronz, sometimes even IG
before even mentioning the Eldar. Even when the topic of "Are Eldar OP?" is brought up, they are always thought of as
not being OP. People usually only mention how losing players will teleport their webway gates around and hide, and 
that is it. Back up your claims or GTFO. -21/5/2015

Random fagggot here,here is the fixed link,very nice site http://warhammer-game.narod.ru/wiki/Dawn_of_War_Players_Guide.html

To whomever is causing or going to cause massive unwarranted deletions on this page or the main page...

Suck it up. This is a discussion page, if somebody has written something you don't agree with then you argue against it. You do not delete massive portions of the page just because you don't like what they've said as that causes people to view you as a child throwing a tantrum at absolute best, and a troll at worst who will sooner or later get blocked from the site. If you disagree with something on the main page then back it up in the summary or this page (preferably with links) instead of outright deleting it as it's a pretty biased article to begin with, and adding your own bias with nothing to back it up will only make it worse. -- Triacom (talk) 04:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Given that the whole thing was biased since day one, perhaps it's best that it really is deleted. No sufficiently convinving evidence was ever provided for any of the claims originally made on the page, and in retrospect it would have been surprising for it not to have become fodder for edit wars. IMO, keeping it here is just more trouble than it's worth. --Newerfag (talk) 05:11, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

• I'm not so sure it deserves deletion as much as a re-write, there are mathematic ways to compare each unit (dmg output, squad numbers, overall HP, types of armour) but if it really is too much trouble then I won't miss it. -- Triacom (talk) 14:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
• The website that was originally used to compare all that info (which was also the main source of DOW unit information in general) seems to have gone offline a few days ago, so if anyone does want to make those comparisons they'll have to sift through the game code and collect all the data themselves- and for the full analysis that this page would need to prove its claims, that would take weeks if not months. I'm not sure if it would be worth the time and effort to do all of that just to preserve this page.--Newerfag (talk) 15:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Found out that the website is still there, and to save other people the trouble I Will be doing a re-write of the main page in a much more dignified manner rather than yelling "OP SHENANIGANS!" For every single fucking unit. Give me some time to compare the units mathematically compare the relevant units so I can demonstrate how they fared against others of their type rather than in alter the page in a biased way. -- Triacom (talk) 04:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Decided instead to re-write the page in a way to mitigate author bias as much as possible while keeping it relevant and showing counter arguments as not everything is cheese. All sources can be checked here: http://warhammer-game.narod.ru/wiki/Dawn_of_War_Players_Guide.html -- Triacom (talk) 09:06, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

A Motion to delete the DOW2 content

It seems mostly bitching about how DOW 2 Eldar boss squads are boss squads. Single Player mode balance is a tangent to this article. I would be fine if we made a separate weird single player DOW 1 and 2 facts page. (where we contain such things as for example, the fact that daemon prince upgrade in both the Risk Style DOW expansions suck ass). IF nothing else, it will make this page a more focused -- Anon Around 8:00 AM PLT 5/27/2015 •Edited last line for clarity. Seems like that the motion was seconded and implemented by the last main page editor. - the same anon around 9:00 AM 5/28 same year and often as before

The DOW 2 content is a important part of this wiki,and I'd hate to see it go. It's what brought me here from the wastes of /tg/ originally.

Whoever added all the caveats to this article is a total sperg

Originally this article was hyperbolic and comedic specifically because of the hyperbole. Eldar have a lot of broken abilities in Dawn of War, but everyone's mileage would vary depending on skill levels. Of course the Eldar can be beaten - if nobody lost while playing as them the devs would have to have been retarded. But for some stupid reason, the article reads like this now:

• Point: Eldar are broken because their dicks measure two inches longer than a Space Marine's going from base to tip, and they won't shut their damn faces about it.
  • Counterpoint: Achtuably, some Eldar have much smaller penises, or peni as it's known in the Latin plural, and occasionally Space Marine have larger peni.

Does the the sperg who added all the "ahctuably" caveats to the article realize the joke has flown totally over their heads, and they've made the entire thing less amusing by being this pedantic? If you want to have a realistic discussion, adding bullet points like, "This unit was only OP for the first five minutes it was available, and then it was countered by Terminators" is also kind of stupid because a unit that has no counter for five minutes may as well be OP for the entire game in an RTS. None of these tacked on "helper" points are funny, and a lot of them sound like an Eldar player trying to excuse various aspects of the faction with varying sprinkles of debatable information. -- 24 June 2016

• If you're really so stupid that you are unable to read the talk page and learn from there that the article was changed because nearly every topic here is made by users who point out the page was factually wrong, then there's no helping you. I guess I'll try anyway though, on top of the discussion page the main page had several editwars because the information presented on it was wrong and overly bitchy, usually when there was no reason for it to be, and the page ended up getting changed like that because people were considering just outright deleting it if it wasn't changed since it's not worth the time or effort when all anyone can do is argue about how wrong the page is. If you really hate it this much, feel free to try and change it, but don't be surprised if/when your edits are shot down as bad ideas too. -- Triacom (talk) 21:24, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
  • It's supposed to be a bitchy string of balance whine. It's called "Dawn of Eldar" because it is explicitly a rant about how the Eldar are too strong in Dawn of War. This wasn't originally intended to be a factual article nor was it supposed to have an objective look at balance. It was a comedic rant. It's not stupid to have enjoyed it as a comedic rant. It is stupid to think the article is better now that every rant has an "ahcutably" tagged on there to make sure everybody knows the reality of the game's balance situation. -- 8 July 2016
    • And that rant wasn't something the majority of people liked, even when it wasn't flat out wrong about what it was saying. If something is a comedic rant, then it should be funny, and it shouldn't lie about what it's talking about and even if you think it is much worse thanks to the changes, a lot of other people seem to be happy with them because the changes stopped the editwars that were happening on the main page. -- Triacom (talk) 21:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Rage --Nicol bolas (talk) 04:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

It would be nice if their solution to every other thing wasn't just "massed fire" as if it wouldn't work against just about anything else in the game. 50.205.133.141 14:39, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

While massed fire does work against nearly everything, I'd like to see you try to bring massed fire against the entire enemy invading force. You're not going to be able to do it since even if you're Imperial Guard you simply won't have enough troops to deal with everything being thrown at you. The massed fire is mentioned just because there should be a mention of how to deal with individual units, but maybe that can be moved to the top as a general point while the individual mentions are deleted. -- Triacom (talk) 18:42, 28 September 2018 (UTC)