Somebody Tell Me About DoW2 Retail!

[Stark]

I know you crazy folks were in the beta as unpaid minions, but I'm curious about the state of the game now that it's gone retail. In particular I'm interested in the issues raised by BCG re cover and combat dynamics. I'm surprised there's a thread on SDN about goddamn FAIL 2 but not DoW2, since DoW2 is pretty much the only notable RTS release of the year (except a re-release of goddamn starcraft of course).

I KNOW a bunch of you guys have it. So cough up the skinny! I'm interested in how much of the bullshit from DoW is gone (BCG suggested 'not much') and how many of the good features they stole from CoH and WiC (BCG suggested 'not enough'). Nobody cares about stupid singleplayer modes or 'moving' 'emotional' storylines - is it a fun bash multiplayer? Concerned parents must know!

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

I've only been playing the singleplayer thus far (which is actually fairly decent). I'll check out the multiplay in a bit and post some findings.

[Stark]

Is the balance different between sp and mp? I'm interested in any impressions; I'm so bored I played Sins yesterday building nothing but capital ships and not researching anything.

PS, I won. Stupid game.

[Vympel]

Never got into the original DoW- boring. Should I bother with the sequel?

[Stark]

That, my friend, is the very question. DoW1 was a rushtastic constantly rebalanced hp-based grindfest and I didn't like it, but CoH was neat. BCG must inform us!

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

Yeah the balance is a bit different in singleplayer. It really does seem to borrow a bit from squad tacticals (Chaos Gate being the most obvious point of comparison, although there is little mechanical similarity). I was pleasantly surprised by the RPG-lite elements, as I went in not expecting much from them and a generally trash singleplayer campaign. My main gripe though - don't play it above the "sergeant" difficulty rating. I'm playing it on "captain" and it destroys much of the appeal, at least for me - my dudes can't seem to fight one shitty little 'gaunt in hand-to-hand without me babysitting them the whole way.

The wargear customization is pretty cool, as is the unit levelling and such. Honestly, that kind of thing is more fun for me than the actual missions themselves, which are pretty repetitive over the same 4 or 5 maps. To its credit, though, at least those maps are consistent and persistent - you capture strategic doo-dads which help you on other missions and you'll see them there whenever you fight on that particular map in the future.

In summary: neat single-player stuff, higher difficulty is retarded, nothing jaw-droppingly amazing.

I'll have more tomorrow after I make myself less tired.

[Stark]

I've heard suggestions the loot thing is like Diablo-lite (or like that Euro game that did it last year). Is it enough to unbalance the game? Is it present in MP as well?

[Shinova]

Oh nuggets! Today's the release date?!

Lessee if I can go buy it tomorrow.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I got the game and played a little of the campaign. It's essentially CoH in space. No more huge battles for kicks anymore.

But the irritating part is the need to update the game just to play it. Irritating.

[Acidburns]

The single player campaign has a strong Diablo or Warcraft 3 influence. Without bases and unit production it's much more like progressing through a dungeon. It's a pleasant change, and the gear and experience upgrades keep things fun. The production values are high, with plenty of dialogue and short cutscenes between missions. It can be played cooperatively, which is a nice bonus. I'm playing it with a friend on Primarch (Hardest) difficulty and we are having a good challenge. We're 13 missions in and have only had failed twice so far, I recommend a higher difficulty unless you want to breeze through it. As is common, playing co-op is much more fun, so do that if you can also.

I've heard suggestions the loot thing is like Diablo-lite (or like that Euro game that did it last year). Is it enough to unbalance the game? Is it present in MP as well?

Wargear is present in multiplayer, but it's really just an upgrade system for your hero, not an item drop system. Most heroes have a choice between 3 weapon upgrades, 3 armour upgrades and 3 utility upgrades. They cost resources, and some require you to have reached a certain tech level to purchase them. You can only pick 1 option per category, and they do let you tweak your heroes role slightly. For example the apothocary starts with a bolt pistol and chainsword, and you can upgrade him to a vampiric chainsword and grenades and go mix it up on the frontline and still provide some healing; alternatively you could buy him a bolter and healing aura gear so you can stand behind your lines and use him in a supporting role.

I've certainly not encountered any multiplayer balance issues with wargear. Heroes bring a lot to your army; they can influence your playstyle but don't overshadow your troops. Being able to revive allied heroes for free is a nice touch. In fact the whole multiplayer experience felt very balanced to me. It's very different to DoW 1, and it is also suitably different from CoH (for the better at least balance-wise, but maybe the metagame hasn't kicked off yet). While it's a shame you can't cut off resource points like you can in CoH, the unit and tech balance feel much more finely tuned. It feels to me that there is a greater variety in useful units and tactics because of the tighter unit selection; the early units comprise the majority of your forces throughout the game, and none of them are superseded by high tech level superunits. The transition into middle-game and the introduction of vehicles feels a bit smoother than in CoH too.

I really didn't like the multiplayer in Dawn of War 1, and I think I prefer Dawn of War 2 in comparison with Company of Heroes, at least in it's opposing front state. While it has lost some complexity in comparison with CoH (can't cut off enemy resource nodes, cover provide a bonus but plays a less important role) it has gained some from the heroes and power nodes. All the armies in DoW 2 can compete equally well in all stages of the game, and they still feel quite different.

[Acidburns]

Can we no longer edit in G&C?

Anyway, it has just occurred to me that most of what I said above was influenced by the beta, and while I multiplayer doesn't feel considerably different from beta, I've not played enough games to see what different. Once the metagame takes off and we get some patches god knows what the balance will be like. CoH went through all sorts of crazy phases, from late game tank spam, to mass infantry blobs to medic bunker spamming throughout it's time. For now, it feels to me more stable and balanced than CoH has been.

In short, I'd say if you liked CoH it's worth a look, but it is more than just CoH with a sci-fi skinning, for better and for worse. My major problem is the very, very, very, VERY small map selection. Relic have said that they will add new maps once they get player feedback, but they better do it quick. 7 maps is bullshit.

[Stark]

SP isn't really an RTS at all; it's just Dungeon Siege. That's not necessarily bad, but it gets boring pretty fast.

[SylasGaunt]

One thing I liked about the single player was the artifact weapons. While usually that sort of thing doesn't much belong in sci-fi it is something we've seen come up in 40K. Some of them even have little history blurbs to go with them.

That and I like the way the singleplayer makes the Space Marines feel. Instead of throwing hordes of marines against hordes of orks/chaos/eldar like in DOW1 it's small strike forces of marines striking out at high value objectives be it assassinating a hive tyrant, retaking a generator, or fighting off an assault on a strategically important facility.

[Stark]

Badguys with near-zero AI. The SP is just too easy (stupid boss horseshit excepted). It's Freedom Force 40k with levelled ie useless loot. It was fun but unless it becomes dramatically more interesting its no more succesful a hybrid than Spellforce.

[Serafina]

Well, there are very few games with good single-player today.
If you are a good player, you can not really expect a challenge - if its difficult enough for you, its too hard for most customers.

But DOW2 fulfills a more important thing than difficulty: Feeling.

I really, really like the way Marines play during the campaign. Sure, its no real challenge once you figure out how to play - but the gameplay fits the stories about Space Marines.

If i want a challenge, i play multiplayer - after all, an AI is not nearly as adaptable as even a medicore human player.

[Stark]

You mean the multiplayer that's basically an entirely different game? LOL. Saying sp should only aim to entertain idiots is bizarre in the extreme; it's not MY fault Relic made the mobs so retarded and passive. Just like in REAL 40K.

I'm glad the stories about space marines spent do much time on 'and yea did the battle brothers run in circles so that the ubber boss could harm them not and the micro was fun amen'.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Side question: I installed the game on my laptop and PC but on the laptop on the same network, I'm having trouble downloading my live profile. Is there a work around available?

[Stark]

A work around fir what - achievements or savegames? Windows live has been fast and seamless for achievements (it's obvious the process is slow and annoying on 360 simply to discourage it) but I think it doesn't move your saves too. Maybe there's some copy protect elements preventing you using the same profile/key combo on two machines?

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

A work around fir what - achievements or savegames? Windows live has been fast and seamless for achievements (it's obvious the process is slow and annoying on 360 simply to discourage it) but I think it doesn't move your saves too. Maybe there's some copy protect elements preventing you using the same profile/key combo on two machines?

Save games really. I'm trying to play this on another machine (simply because my graphic card has an annoying habit of overheating.) but for some reason or another, I can't connect to Live for that game on another machine.

There might be copy protection issues. I won't put it past them for doing that. Will be a first for a game that is forced to run on Steam and use Live at the same time.

[Shinova]

Steam is required to activate your game only the first time, then you can run it in offline mode.

Live of course is needed to do the whole matchmaking thing.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Steam is required to activate your game only the first time, then you can run it in offline mode.

Live of course is needed to do the whole matchmaking thing.

Can you run it offline by setting the update to "Do not automatically update game"?

[Stark]

Honestly you don't even have to activate it; like all DRM it's crackable. The Live-based multiplayer still requires a unique (semi-unique anyway) key, so it doesn't help, but for people who are wary of using steam it's not 100% necessary. Cracks for that activation existed before the game was even released.

[Mr. Coffee]

Anyone tried the co-op campaign yet?

[Shinova]

Honestly you don't even have to activate it; like all DRM it's crackable. The Live-based multiplayer still requires a unique (semi-unique anyway) key, so it doesn't help, but for people who are wary of using steam it's not 100% necessary. Cracks for that activation existed before the game was even released.

And then on Relicnews you have people who cancel their orders going, "Relic's not getting my money if they're forcing me to play this through Steam." MWahaahahahaha, oh the joys of having been children one day long ago. Oh wait, these are likely 20-somethings.

[Zablorg]

Honestly you don't even have to activate it; like all DRM it's crackable. The Live-based multiplayer still requires a unique (semi-unique anyway) key, so it doesn't help, but for people who are wary of using steam it's not 100% necessary. Cracks for that activation existed before the game was even released.

And then on Relicnews you have people who cancel their orders going, "Relic's not getting my money if they're forcing me to play this through Steam." MWahaahahahaha, oh the joys of having been children one day long ago. Oh wait, these are likely 20-somethings.

Uhh, shut up. Not wanting to use Steam is a perfectly valid reason not to buy the game. Steam is pretty invasive so far as it goes, and there are plenty of people who don't like the idea of having their gametime and hardware recorded automatically. Wanting to keep your details of any sort private isn't childlike behaviour by any standards.