Talk:Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War – Soulstorm

Podcast about the release

Also a few screenshots

http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/2007/09/26/a-new-game-announcement-with-podcast-4/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theshrike (talk • contribs) 11:56, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Tyranids as second race

Tyranids are not in the game.

Adepta Sororitas

(*ahem*) Well, guess the Tyranids have been scrapped in favor of the Sisters of Battle (they had it coming all along anyways). So, how do you think they're going to turn out? (I hope Relic throw in the Incarcerator for good measure - it makes for a good convoy scenario and multiplayer fragfest) - Frostmourne 16 06:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

The game's structure will be similar to DC, so I doubt there will be such a race-specific scenario, even more since it's not developed by Relic itself (and that will negatively impact gameplay originality imho). Anyway, I would have really loved nids but it was long known that they wouldn't put them in DoW (it was either SoB or WH), they said that they would likely use them in DoW2 (with a new engine ofc): what I hope to see in DoW2 is an army edit mode (point based?) offline that allows you to field custom units in online games, that's the only way nids' variability could be rightfully represented. For now we'll have to stick with Living Saints... Oh well! 84.221.68.252 12:22, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Ooh... Let's see: the devs will OBVIOUSLY throw in the Canonness as the SoB's main Commander unit. The Immolator and the Exorcist are also going to be in there as well. But what will really take the cake is that if they bring the Penitent Engine in for the Sisterhood. The sight of a half-naked zealot strapped in front of walking, limb-tearing, flamethrowing metallic beast of war is going to make seasoned veterans of both the tabletop game and Dawn of War alike cry with glee (at least in my opinion xD). - Frostmourne 16 08:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

They will most likely introduce it, since most races have walker units (even though I'm more fond of Defilers or Wraithlords), and they need to put in as many unique SoB units as they can to prevent too much similarities with IG and SM. Probably they will get another assassin, either Culexus or Eversor. 84.221.68.252 16:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey guys, I'm excited for Soulstorm too, but this isn't the place for this discussion. WP:TALK – "Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal." Please find an internet forum if you want to discuss the game. Infernal Inferno 18:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of which, someone should put up some images on the Dark Eldar and the SoBs. A bunch of them are already on Gamespot. Go check it out. - Frostmourne 16 03:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on Wikipedia image policy, but I'm pretty sure the watermarking (the grey Gamespot logo that appears at the bottom right of the images) makes those images unsuitable for use on Wikipedia, even under a claim of fair use. Infernal Inferno 21:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Moreover there is no need to put screenshots here, it's much better to link the Gamespot page or some other site that contains updated media. 84.221.68.252 22:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I think we should wait until more information on Soulstorm comes up (in particular the Sisterhood's Faith system), then we'll find ways on improving the article. For now, this is about as good as it gets. - Frostmourne 16 15:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

About this... on the Relicnews forum (which is the forum for relicnews.com), there was an image posted for Seraphim. The rest of the units I mentioned are in other officially released screenshots. The gamespot videos show all the units except for the Seraphim. The Seraphim themselves, along with a turret, listening posts, two exorcists, and what the forum-goers believe is a Death Cult Assassin, are shown in a thread by Buggo, a relic employee, in the Relicnews Forums. Not sure if I should actually post a direct link, however, so here's the forums. http://forums.relicnews.com/

Also, I should bring notice to this particular image. This is cropped from one of the official screenshots released on gamespot: http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a28/melissiablackheart/Screenshot/SoBFighter.png That aircraft uses the same colors as the Sisters of Battle (who use the Order of Our Martyred Ladies colors due to it being first alphabetically). It has been identified as an Aeronautica Imperialis Lightning, Fighter Craft variant. A model is for sale on Forgeworld for comparison.

finally... Adepta Sororitas, not Adeptus. It's an all-female organization. --Melissia (talk) 13:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, haven't gotten word of that. Also, it's the Order of Our Matyred Lady. But that's a pretty good photo of the Lightning. And nobody really did mention Seraphim in the trailers, but I did find something on buggo's blog: http://www.relicrank.com/bloggo/ Check one of the more recent post about Soulstorm's Dark Eldar Warp Beast pictures. It's kind of a bit revealing. - Frostmourne 16 05:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

A slight snippet here: I think they'll be sure to release the Seraphim in the finished product. If the screenshot proves they'll come out, they'll come out. Relic aren't the kind of people who like to disappoint people. Also, given the slight similiarities between the Adepta Sororitas and the Adeptus Astartes, I think it's fair to say that the Seraphim are bound to fly straight into the midst of Soulstorm's battlefields. - Frostmourne 16 06:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

It is a mostly-female order. The only men are the penitent engines, repentant heretics put inside a fragile dreadnought-like walker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bioform 1234 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 10:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

List of units in the Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War series

I'm creating an article at List of units in the Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War series. If anyone feels like they have some time, feel free to come by and help out in creating it. I'm aiming to make it as comprehensive as the List of units in the Age of Mythology series, which I'm using as a guideline. Anyway, I look forward to seeing anyone there! Cheers. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 00:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

New units

Could we please post up the new units we know are going to be added? You can go to a website called RelicNews forums which has some information about the new units. Nemesis646 (talk) 09:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy that the Sisters of Battle are included...and the Living Saint will probably be a great special character for their unit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.25.217 (talk) 02:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Necron Essence?

i note that 76.215.131.52 has added a bit onto the 'new units' that states necrons will be gaining a resource called 'Essence', i believe not unakin to Dark Eldar Souls. at the very least this needs a citation, its probably in the wrong place, and deserves a place beside the other two unique resources, if it can be proven. have added {{Fact}} to it. also, he states that attack scarabs will be able to fly, but previously verified sources stated that the necrons hadn't been confirmed any flying units. suggestions? 3rdTriangle (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Campaign for Soulstorm

I have submitted the info about planets from a RELIABLE SOURCE. Please STOP undoing what I'm doing. Nemesis646 (talk) 09:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

A reliable source should be cited. I'm not trying to personally snipe you, but information such as that, that isn't released anywhere else should be cited. Inside scoops, regardless of reliability, are not encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrel (talk • contribs) 14:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Release Date

I cant find where the release date is confirmed. Can someone provide an external link to this information? all I see is "first half of 2008."--Ryudo (talk) 03:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

release date

hi heres the release date sry i didnt post it under the original topic but for some reason i couldnt edit

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer40000dawnofwarsoulstorm/index.html?tag=result;title;0 Robwar (talk) 21:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

It released on the 4th?!

According to Gamestop: http://www.gamestop.com/product.asp?product%5Fid=647247 , and Gamespy: http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/warhammer-40000-dawn-of-war-soulstorm/ , DoW: Soulstorm released today, the 4th!!!!

Who the hell wrote the 5th on this article? Where's their source? Paladin Hammer (talk) 20:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Really? Because GameStop and Walmart didn't have it.--Can Not (talk) 22:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, after talking to the guys at Gamestop (in Liberty, MO) and Wal-Mart across the street, March 4th is the ship-date. I apologize for the mistake, but I think its a little mis-leading for gamespy and gamestop.com to say that March 4th (see the links I have) was the release date. Thats what it says on both sites, "release date", not "shipping date". I went ahead and reverted it. Paladin Hammer (talk) 22:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

For the most part, game stores will usually say it's "out" on a certian day, usually a Tuesday. That's when it leaves their warehouses and heads to the game stores themselves. It's available on the following day.

I read that it's out in June. Bioform 1234 (talk) 20:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Release locations

Why is there a U.S. and British flag on the release dates? I read that the releases were for NORTH AMERICA and EUROPE not UNITED STATES and UNITED KINGDOM.

Sorry if i'm coming off a little pissanty but there are other countries out there and as an encyclopedic article it should be emphasized rather than generalized "North America revolves around the US and Europe revolves around the UK" is not the way to go... not in an enecyclopedia anyways. Bretonnia (talk) 02:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Who said that the US flag and the UK flag stood for North America and Europe? The US and the UK are two of the bigger markets for a Warhammer game, for obvious reasons. If you look at the history of the page, it had a single release date, someone added the UK date, and then clarified the two by adding flags. That's all. Where are you getting your "North America revolves around the US and Europe revolves around the UK" rant from? Do you want to sit and hunt down every flag for every country it comes out in and tag them all in there? If so, go nuts. I think you're making a much bigger deal out of it than it is. Wrel (talk)

any word on steam release date?

I am "ranting" because i'd like to see more recognition for other countries getting the release of this game on the same dates, can't we just say North America and Europe instead of US and UK? Sure they are the biggest markets but I know that wikipedia is prone to American generalization. I got nothing against the US but I would just like more details. Say I lived in Canada (which I do) and saw this page for the first time yesterday (which I did) I actually postponed reserving a copy of the game at my local store because I believed the dates given were only for those 2 countries, not Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Germany, France, etc. Also, it would be a big deal if say a game like.... Naruto: Rise of a Ninja was given a release date under a Canadian flag because the company who published it happened to be Canadian (Which a US flag was put under the release date regardless). On a final note, please sign your posts when you finish adding a comment, it's common courtesy. Bretonnia (talk) 16:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

What you are failing to notice is that this page, like most others on Wikipedia is a work in progress. Things get added and removed constantly. As I explained earlier, for a long while, all the page said was "March 5th, 2008." That isn't American generalization, March 5th is when most countries release the game. Someone decided to add the UK release date, which was the 7th, and they then added two flags to clarify which date was which. That's really all that happened. Your story about you not reserving a copy doesn't help the argument; check the game store for an up-to-date release date for a game, not Wikipedia. As far as a flag for a Naruto game? Again, I tried to tell you that release dates were not placed on this with a "America first, to hell with the rest!" mindset. No one was ever saying games didn't deserve to be listed with any country but the USA. To avoid this whole thing, you could have simply added a Canadian flag and a release date. The majority of the Wikipedia users are here to make the site better, not to undermine you because you live in Canada. Wrel (talk)

Thank you for being civilized about this and I do see your point. I have added a Canadian flag to the article to signal this to other Canadian users and if I come across any other countries getting this release as I browse the web i'll put them up as well. And it was not really an argument with my failure to reserve a copy, it was merely an example of how people can be confused. If I shouldn't be checking wikipedia for a game release then why even have a date listed? And why do I always see people requesting release dates on the talk pages of almost all major games pending release. Bretonnia (talk) 17:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I want to add some critism of the game to the page, but I'm not sure how to go about it.

Alright, I bought the game today, and quite frankly it fails in almost every area compared to Dark Crusade. I've written extensively about it on the Gamespy forums. Should I wait for the reviewers of some kind (Gamespy, X-Play, etc etc) to write up their reviews before adding whatever critism I (and other gameres) have? 153.91.137.61 (talk) 06:29, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we would need more than one day and one person's opinions on a game before we had an article about it's 'failures.' Critism is welcomed, but it should hopefully be legit and cited, or else all it's going to become is "The new Eldar unit sucks too." "Yeah and I didn't like the voice acting." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrel (talk • contribs) 16:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Verifiability, yes, you must. --Falcorian ^(talk) 18:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

It is a let down that you do not get to keep structures when you're on defense. I thought that was a strength of DC. If the enemy wanted your territory back they had to deal with whatever defenses you had. Real bad call on this change. But you know it follows the time honored tradition of conquest. Immediately after the Allies successful landings at Normandy they took all of their supplies and threw them into the ocean. - FormUnknown

I believe once some reviews do come out though, we can address the two serious issues the game had shipping- the Sisters of Battle listening post upgrade bug and the Dark Eldar Observer bug.--MercZ (talk) 05:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The remover of persistant bases was the counter the tactic of people letting a couple of enemy units run around after defeating their main force and building dozens of defense structures all across the map.--AdventC (talk) 03:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Specifically capturing all of the strategic points on the map, and then building fully upgraded listening posts on them, made it almost impossible for the AI to retake a map. While there is a certain realism to it, it means you end up fighting a bunch of 3 minute battles, where all you do is train up a small force and wander over to the AI base (the only dark patch on the map) and then wipe them out, all the while collecting ridiculous amounts of requisition because you basically control the map from the word go.

It is preferable to ending up spending an hour grinding your way through a map in a war of attrition only to have the AI strike that province during their turn and having to do it all over again. I've had to fight to control a province 3 times in one turn, but, the reason was to control abuse.(StarkeRealm (talk) 17:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)) (I swear, there WILL be a day when I remember to log in before I post.)

Structures built with the Forward Base (ability from the SoB HQ remain after you conquer the territory, so at least that's something. You can also spend Planetary Requisition (which you seem to get A LOT more of in SS vs. DC) to station garrison troops in a territory, and then just rush the enemy base with them when they attack. I don't recall if Deep Strike (the Spess Mehreen ability) units can be used for defending, or if so, whether or not they get added to garrison troops, but that's something else to maybe look into. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.141.3.1 (talk) 11:14, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Passage on Reception

"The general feeling being that the game is rushed and an effort to flog a dying cash-cow for it's last few spasms of life...but the opperunity to fold in many other victory conditions seems to have been ignored, contributing to the feeling that the game was not well finished."

Can somebody please find a reference or two for this please? Especially as the passage seems to imply a semi-consensus with "general feeling". I've corrected the spelling and grammar mistakes, but, to be honest, I think this entire paragraph should be deleted and rewritten. Thoughts? Metaphysically (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

• This feeling is constantly cited on Relic's own RelicNews forums and DOWSanctuary alike. As of May 20th, 2008, there is no patch for the game's game-breaking bugs, which were found within 18 hours of the game's release back in early March. The thread in which the now-notorious SOB exploit is here. Other problems brought up are that the game suffers from memory leaks in the single-player campaign (causing RAM used to jump to over a Gig or more on some systems and causing horrendous lag when loading/unloading maps), severe connectivity issues (DOW's legendary Kickbug is alive and well), and perhaps most-tellingly, a message that reads: "This is stand-in news, replace with real news." is displayed in the game's online lobby - three months after release. There are a lot more cases and you can find most on RelicNews or DOWSanctuary themselves, as well as dozens if not hundreds of individual blogs and online reviews. -- Jaimas 11:15, 20 May 2008 (EST)

Feel free to do so. I suggest that you use the Dark Crusade reception or other games as a reference to how to write a reception section and cite somethings from a review. ATM I agree, it seems more of a rambling than an actual critical consensus. --MercZ (talk) 21:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Why is Dawn of War: Soulstorm credited with a Game of the Year from Computer Gaming World? I can assume maybe this was another Dawn of War title, but as far as I know, the year still has 9+ months go to. I removed that particular award, but if somehow it can be cited feel free to revert. Wrel (talk)

I put that award there. I have bought Soulstorm and on the folder where the box folds open, it has a list of awards and that was one of them. It could be they meant it to be for Dark Crusade. I was surprised myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flynn M Taggart (talk • contribs) 03:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. I'll have to check it out when I get in. My first guess would be that it said something along the lines of "Expansion Pack to the Game of the Year" but as I said, that's total assumption. If it is refering to Soulstorm itself though, feel free to throw it back up there. Wrel (talk)

Did you say game of the year? SoulStorm is an expansion.--Can Not (talk) 03:20, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Technically, Soulstorm is a separate game altogether. It can become an expansion if you have the CD keys.--Flynn M Taggart (talk) 15:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Gameplay clarification

One of the original Warhammer video game titles that I played featured turn based gameplay. There is a mention in the "Game" section that this title is the same as previous titles, but the outline suggests Real Time Strategy genre which is not exactly "turn based". Could somebody clear up in the article whether this is in fact turn based or real time in the game format? Cheers - Mark Vincent - Andmark (talk) 01:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

This game is Real-time. I believe the 'previous titles' they are referencing is the original Dawn of War and the 2 prior expansions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrel (talk • contribs) 13:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

What my plans are

I have planned to revamp all the DOW games with the intro, races, and new units based on the game manual. If that is a problem, please tell me before I go through all this work. If somebody would help me it's cool. So far I got Soulstorm done. If anybody could help me with the DOW and Winter Assault one, because I am letting someone borrow the Gold Edition where it comes with both games and manuals. I can do Dark Crusade.
I am also making a list of all the units, builings, and abilities based off the manuals. Same as before, If someone could add the DOW and WA units, buitldings, and abilities for the races please do so. The link is in the Soulstorm page below the new units.--Flynn M Taggart (talk) 03:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Only comment I have on that is sometimes list get out of hand and encroach the 'game guide' status that Wikipedia isn't about. So long as the descriptions are concise, I don't see too much of a problem. Too much detail such as unit costs and available upgrades aren't reccommended. Also, would you be creating that list here? Or as a seperate page of it's own? Wrel (talk)

Ok thanks. It's just what the manual has in it. No unit costs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flynn M Taggart (talk • contribs) 16:46, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh sorry, forgot to say it's on another page. Dawn of War Units, Buildings, Upgrades, and Abilities.--Flynn M Taggart (talk) 03:01, 22

March 2008 (UTC)

Changing of Voices/ Frequent mentions of complaints

Should this be included in the article? I mean everyone knows that Gorgutz's voice got horribly changed, also their were frequent complaints of the multiplayer being broken/ needs to be fixed as of current. Zethus (talk) 07:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Info Bar Sub-Branching Categorization

I have seen with other pages with very good information bars such as the one on: Epigenetics I think that kind of information bar would be appropriate to this game, and to many Video Game projects. Of course, this isn't about genetics, so it should look a little bit different. The main reason I am bringing this up is because this page is just a relative sub-branch of the rather large game tree, but at a glance, it isn't easy to navigate the tree, as it is on the page I linked to. Thanks for considering the idea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.176.33 (talk) 23:06, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Not on the same timeline as Dawn of War 2?

I feel that I have reasons to believe that Soulstorm is not on the same timeline as Dawn of War 2. Rather, I think that it splits off after the Dark Crusade.

In Soulstorm, if the Blood Ravens win, it states in the ending cutscene that the Blood Ravens "acquitted themselves." This implies that they were guilty of something before but redeemed themselves. Now, we also know that if the Blood Ravens win in Dark Crusade, the Segmentum Command accuses the chapter of heresy, but the Inquisition drops the charges. We also know that if the Kronus Liberators level the Space Marine headquarters, Lucas Alexander finds evidence that the Blood Ravens are somehow connected to Chaos. (Indeed, Eliphas hints at similar things at times, too)

With that knowledge, we can conclude that the narration in Soulstorm implies that the 1st Kronus Liberators won, and thus Thule died. However, we also know that in Dawn of War 2, Thule is the guy who gives you orders. That means that he must have won the Dark Crusade.

So, my conclusion is that Soulstorm and Dawn of War 2 Do not follow the same storyline. Rather, the two are a sort of fork in the road following the Dark Crusade. Fusion7 (talk) 18:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Soulstorm and Dawn of war 2 follow the same storyline. Cyrus the scout himself said that the Blood Ravens made a huge mistake in sending half the chapter into the kaurava conflict as almost all the assault force died and Boreale died. That's also the reason why the Blood Ravens was so weakened at the start of the campaign in DOW2 as they were aggressively recruiting when the Tyranids came hence the reason for their shortage of numbers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.138.162.6 (talk) 00:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Canonical Ending

Are there any reliable sources which confirm IG victory in Caurava сampaign?--92.225.61.205 (talk) 17:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)