Switch Theme:

Tyranids Taking Over - May GTs  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Huge Hierodule




Mexico

Make ravener's deathspitters cost 5 ppm and devourers/spinefists 3ppm, that should be more than enough.

Naked Raveners are fine at 30ppm, specially as they have gak LD and thus need some expensive synapse babysitter.
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




 Tyran wrote:
Make ravener's deathspitters cost 5 ppm and devourers/spinefists 3ppm, that should be more than enough.

Naked Raveners are fine at 30ppm, specially as they have gak LD and thus need some expensive synapse babysitter.




Raveners compare very similarly to penitent engines (worse melee, better mobility, native deepstrike, similar durability, isn't locked out of army rules, isn't locked out of actions) but are 25pts cheaper. The leadership issue is significant, but not 25pts significant. There's no way a 5pt increase would be enough to stop seeing 18 of them in every Nid list. They'd have to go up to at least 40.

edited for heavy flamers being pretty decent.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/19 20:22:20


2500pts
2500
3000


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





ERJAK wrote:
 Tyran wrote:
Make ravener's deathspitters cost 5 ppm and devourers/spinefists 3ppm, that should be more than enough.

Naked Raveners are fine at 30ppm, specially as they have gak LD and thus need some expensive synapse babysitter.




Raveners compare very similarly to penitent engines (worse melee, way better shooting, better mobility, native deepstrike, similar durability, isn't locked out of army rules, isn't locked out of actions) but are 25pts cheaper. The leadership issue is significant, but not 25pts significant. There's no way a 5pt increase would be enough to stop seeing 18 of them in every Nid list. They'd have to go up to at least 40.


Duuude.

Penitents have an extra wound, 5+++, full rerolls to hit in melee, advance and charge, a 5" pile-in, and 5 S8 D2 rather than 5 S6 D1.

   
Made in us
Ultramarine Master with Gauntlets of Macragge





Upstate, New York

ERJAK wrote:
 Tyran wrote:
Make ravener's deathspitters cost 5 ppm and devourers/spinefists 3ppm, that should be more than enough.

Naked Raveners are fine at 30ppm, specially as they have gak LD and thus need some expensive synapse babysitter.




Raveners compare very similarly to penitent engines (worse melee, way better shooting, better mobility, native deepstrike, similar durability, isn't locked out of army rules, isn't locked out of actions) but are 25pts cheaper. The leadership issue is significant, but not 25pts significant. There's no way a 5pt increase would be enough to stop seeing 18 of them in every Nid list. They'd have to go up to at least 40.


Way better shooting then a pengine? They still come with paired heavy flamers? I’d take that over the gun options on the raveners. And pay for it.

   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yea I think you guys are going a little far in your comparisons. Ogryns are useless next to Bullgryn, but Skorpekhs, Paragons, and Spawn all fit in the band.

Paragons are now 70 - not 80. They have a 2+, AOC, -1D, a HB, two SBs, and a MC powersword.
Skorpekhs have one less wound, 3+, D2, resurrect, heal, and RR1s.

Maybe make the Ravener guns cost a few points and call it a day.


Paragons are 80. If you run them without the Multimelta, you already can't be helped.

And yes, Paragons are stretching that comparison a bit, but a Paragon costs almost as much as THREE raveners and does less damage in melee, can only match their shooting output against multi-wound models, and would be hard pressed to survive anything that could kill three T5, 4W models.

Raveners are extremely pushed for their statlines (though not quite as much as warriors imho) and some other similar units are extremely bad for theirs.

Fortunately, Raveners are so cheap that they can go up and other units can come down and they'd all probably end up at roughly the same place on the powercurve.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Nevelon wrote:
ERJAK wrote:
 Tyran wrote:
Make ravener's deathspitters cost 5 ppm and devourers/spinefists 3ppm, that should be more than enough.

Naked Raveners are fine at 30ppm, specially as they have gak LD and thus need some expensive synapse babysitter.




Raveners compare very similarly to penitent engines (worse melee, way better shooting, better mobility, native deepstrike, similar durability, isn't locked out of army rules, isn't locked out of actions) but are 25pts cheaper. The leadership issue is significant, but not 25pts significant. There's no way a 5pt increase would be enough to stop seeing 18 of them in every Nid list. They'd have to go up to at least 40.


Way better shooting then a pengine? They still come with paired heavy flamers? I’d take that over the gun options on the raveners. And pay for it.


1. Raveners can shoot 24" with their deathspitters, so while their gun isn't necessarily as good, it's going to get to fire far more frequently. 2. Penitent engines have run and charge but not run and shoot. In a lot of games, penitent engines don't end up shooting at all.

That said, yeah, it's hyperbole when comparing against the heavy flamer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
ERJAK wrote:
 Tyran wrote:
Make ravener's deathspitters cost 5 ppm and devourers/spinefists 3ppm, that should be more than enough.

Naked Raveners are fine at 30ppm, specially as they have gak LD and thus need some expensive synapse babysitter.




Raveners compare very similarly to penitent engines (worse melee, way better shooting, better mobility, native deepstrike, similar durability, isn't locked out of army rules, isn't locked out of actions) but are 25pts cheaper. The leadership issue is significant, but not 25pts significant. There's no way a 5pt increase would be enough to stop seeing 18 of them in every Nid list. They'd have to go up to at least 40.


Duuude.

Penitents have an extra wound, 5+++, full rerolls to hit in melee, advance and charge, a 5" pile-in, and 5 S8 D2 rather than 5 S6 D1.


They also don't get access to ANY of the army's special rules, can't do actions, are vehicles, can't advance and shoot, don't get -1 to hit in melee, AND don't get deepstrike.

Also, one of these units is SPAMMED in the absolute best army in the game, the OTHER gets left at home in an upper-mid tier army.

Clearly there's a disparity there and clearly it's in Ravener's favor.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/05/19 20:27:47


2500pts
2500
3000


 
   
Made in us
Huge Hierodule




Mexico

ERJAK wrote:
 Tyran wrote:
Make ravener's deathspitters cost 5 ppm and devourers/spinefists 3ppm, that should be more than enough.

Naked Raveners are fine at 30ppm, specially as they have gak LD and thus need some expensive synapse babysitter.




Raveners compare very similarly to penitent engines (worse melee, better mobility, native deepstrike, similar durability, isn't locked out of army rules, isn't locked out of actions) but are 25pts cheaper. The leadership issue is significant, but not 25pts significant. There's no way a 5pt increase would be enough to stop seeing 18 of them in every Nid list. They'd have to go up to at least 40.

edited for heavy flamers being pretty decent.


Except even now we are not seeing 18 of them in every list (at least not in the lists that are winning tournaments).

They are rarely present in Leviathan lists (which prefer Warriors as the benefit from Leviathan while Raveners do not). Now they are a very strong unit in Kraken lists, but even then I don't think we are seeing 18 of them in every Kraken list.

   
Made in de
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter




For Bullgryns to really be "worth their points" you have to pair them with a Priest, and keep that priest alive. Also, who has difficulty blasting 3-5 Gravis equivalents off the board these days? T5, 3W, with a 2+? Yeah, Say hello to my Melta guns and Heavy Bolters.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






I have also liked raveners for a long time, it's a dam shame they have finally become good in an edition I don't enjoy playing.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in de
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity






Germany

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
For Bullgryns to really be "worth their points" you have to pair them with a Priest, and keep that priest alive. Also, who has difficulty blasting 3-5 Gravis equivalents off the board these days? T5, 3W, with a 2+? Yeah, Say hello to my Melta guns and Heavy Bolters.


2+ ? Place some of them in light cover, use take cover stratagem, manifest psychic barrier on them, and they get +3 to their saving throw, which means they ignore AP-3, and still have that 2+.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







 p5freak wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
For Bullgryns to really be "worth their points" you have to pair them with a Priest, and keep that priest alive. Also, who has difficulty blasting 3-5 Gravis equivalents off the board these days? T5, 3W, with a 2+? Yeah, Say hello to my Melta guns and Heavy Bolters.


2+ ? Place some of them in light cover, use take cover stratagem, manifest psychic barrier on them, and they get +3 to their saving throw, which means they ignore AP-3, and still have that 2+.


And then people just shoot the rest of the Guard army that is actually capable of doing damage.

Unless 9-12 autocannon shots with a range of 0" is scary.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/20 11:31:13


 
   
Made in ro
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter




Yeah, not gonna lie, Bullgryns need a lot of support to be really valuable, and by then it's not worth the cost. Less points just throw a Russ on the field, or a Chimera, or a Taurox. At least those can possibly kill something before being destroyed.

Nope, Bullgryns and Ogryns both suck in the current version. If you made their Gauntlets Assault 4 16" S5 AP1 D2 Blast, then they'd be kinda worth it, but until then they are an over costed bully unit that is too easy to take off the field.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Yeah, not gonna lie, Bullgryns need a lot of support to be really valuable, and by then it's not worth the cost. Less points just throw a Russ on the field, or a Chimera, or a Taurox. At least those can possibly kill something before being destroyed.

Nope, Bullgryns and Ogryns both suck in the current version. If you made their Gauntlets Assault 4 16" S5 AP1 D2 Blast, then they'd be kinda worth it, but until then they are an over costed bully unit that is too easy to take off the field.


The game isn't as much about killing as it is about control. It can be a lot harder to remove Bullgryns and slightly dangerous to do so depending on their support. You could put all leman russes and manticores on the table, but that won't mean you'll have an easier time winning.

   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Clearly Bullgryns can be seen claiming victories for Guard, due to how useful they are.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Daedalus81 wrote:


The game isn't as much about killing as it is about control. It can be a lot harder to remove Bullgryns and slightly dangerous to do so depending on their support. You could put all leman russes and manticores on the table, but that won't mean you'll have an easier time winning.


killing is a form of control. if someone has to allocate double the points to an objectives, because of how efficient at killing your army list is, then it works just great. 9 voids, pre nerf double venom tyrants etc were not exactly run just for their ability to perform actions and score objectives.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Karol wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


The game isn't as much about killing as it is about control. It can be a lot harder to remove Bullgryns and slightly dangerous to do so depending on their support. You could put all leman russes and manticores on the table, but that won't mean you'll have an easier time winning.


killing is a form of control. if someone has to allocate double the points to an objectives, because of how efficient at killing your army list is, then it works just great. 9 voids, pre nerf double venom tyrants etc were not exactly run just for their ability to perform actions and score objectives.


Killing doesn't mean much if you don't control the objective afterwards or if you spent way more resources to do it than would take to degrade your opponent's return fire.

Voidweavers killed everything and got on the objective. Flyrants killed stuff and were un-interactable.


   
Made in ro
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter




 Daedalus81 wrote:
Karol wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


The game isn't as much about killing as it is about control. It can be a lot harder to remove Bullgryns and slightly dangerous to do so depending on their support. You could put all leman russes and manticores on the table, but that won't mean you'll have an easier time winning.


killing is a form of control. if someone has to allocate double the points to an objectives, because of how efficient at killing your army list is, then it works just great. 9 voids, pre nerf double venom tyrants etc were not exactly run just for their ability to perform actions and score objectives.


Killing doesn't mean much if you don't control the objective afterwards or if you spent way more resources to do it than would take to degrade your opponent's return fire.

Voidweavers killed everything and got on the objective. Flyrants killed stuff and were un-interactable.



I have to agree. My Custodes Dreads are hot stuff, but when a squad of boys can lay claim to the objective my Telemon is standing on, it becomes worthless. With the objective game, you have to have Obsec, and ability to kill anything else that has it nearby. Bullgryns do not have it (?? correct?) so it's kinda true. They are worthless in the objective game, and in the killing game. An oddly interesting fix would be to make Ogryns a Troop choice. Bang, Ogryns are viable again. And dare I say it, the best choice of the lot. 225 for a Squad of 9. Or 75 for a squad of 3.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Daedalus81 wrote:


Killing doesn't mean much if you don't control the objective afterwards or if you spent way more resources to do it than would take to degrade your opponent's return fire.

Voidweavers killed everything and got on the objective. Flyrants killed stuff and were un-interactable.



The main characteristic of all good armies in 9th. Was that they were undercosted comparing to all other armies that came out before them. DE were unable to not control objectives, while being super efficient at killing opposing armies, because almost all of their units were undercosted. Same was true for ad mecha, then orks at least till they got hit with nerfs, Custodes, tau, eldar and now nids are exactly the same. Voidweavers were killing other stuff and the eldar player could claim objectives, because they cost 90pts. The tyranid player can kill stuff, and grab objectives, because everything he runs in his army is undercosted The it only kills argument matters only for bad armies or bad lists, but I don't think we are talking here what happens when someone plays with those lists, because then we run in to a loop of everything in w40k being balanced, because there is potentialy always the chance that the opponent maybe , for what ever reason, bring a bad list.

Or to make it really simple. If an eldar army kills all objective takers in a GK army or all NDKs in a single turn, specialy if it is turn 1 or 2, then the game is more or less done by then, because the GK player will not be able to both kill enough eldar stuff to stop them from scoring and do their own primaries and secondaries.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




NE Ohio, USA

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Karol wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


The game isn't as much about killing as it is about control. It can be a lot harder to remove Bullgryns and slightly dangerous to do so depending on their support. You could put all leman russes and manticores on the table, but that won't mean you'll have an easier time winning.


killing is a form of control. if someone has to allocate double the points to an objectives, because of how efficient at killing your army list is, then it works just great. 9 voids, pre nerf double venom tyrants etc were not exactly run just for their ability to perform actions and score objectives.


Killing doesn't mean much if you don't control the objective afterwards or if you spent way more resources to do it than would take to degrade your opponent's return fire.

Voidweavers killed everything and got on the objective. Flyrants killed stuff and were un-interactable.



I have to agree. My Custodes Dreads are hot stuff, but when a squad of boys can lay claim to the objective my Telemon is standing on, it becomes worthless. With the objective game, you have to have Obsec, and ability to kill anything else that has it nearby. Bullgryns do not have it (?? correct?) so it's kinda true. They are worthless in the objective game, and in the killing game. An oddly interesting fix would be to make Ogryns a Troop choice. Bang, Ogryns are viable again. And dare I say it, the best choice of the lot. 225 for a Squad of 9. Or 75 for a squad of 3.


I do not need obsec. Here in 9th most of the lists I've run don't have it on the units I play. I simply kill anything that'd contest an objective I'm aiming to hold. It's worked fairly well for me.

And your ogyn idea? Bad. Ogryns & other abhumans are auxillary forces. That's specifically why they aren't troops. Of course GW could just give ogyns obsec to represent them being hard to shift off a position....
   
Made in fi
5th God of Chaos (O'rly?)





Yea obsec is good but funny enough plenty of non-obsec out there.

2022 painted/bought: 307/419 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





ccs wrote:
Here in 9th most of the lists I've run don't have it on the units I play.


Seems like a precarious strategy in 'Tear Down Their Icons' to have no method for easy bomb removal.

I simply kill anything that'd contest an objective I'm aiming to hold. It's worked fairly well for me.


I guess maybe if you're tyranids or elves.


This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/05/23 14:17:19


   
Made in gb
Mighty Brass Scorpion of Khorne




ccs wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Karol wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


The game isn't as much about killing as it is about control. It can be a lot harder to remove Bullgryns and slightly dangerous to do so depending on their support. You could put all leman russes and manticores on the table, but that won't mean you'll have an easier time winning.


killing is a form of control. if someone has to allocate double the points to an objectives, because of how efficient at killing your army list is, then it works just great. 9 voids, pre nerf double venom tyrants etc were not exactly run just for their ability to perform actions and score objectives.


Killing doesn't mean much if you don't control the objective afterwards or if you spent way more resources to do it than would take to degrade your opponent's return fire.

Voidweavers killed everything and got on the objective. Flyrants killed stuff and were un-interactable.



I have to agree. My Custodes Dreads are hot stuff, but when a squad of boys can lay claim to the objective my Telemon is standing on, it becomes worthless. With the objective game, you have to have Obsec, and ability to kill anything else that has it nearby. Bullgryns do not have it (?? correct?) so it's kinda true. They are worthless in the objective game, and in the killing game. An oddly interesting fix would be to make Ogryns a Troop choice. Bang, Ogryns are viable again. And dare I say it, the best choice of the lot. 225 for a Squad of 9. Or 75 for a squad of 3.


I do not need obsec. Here in 9th most of the lists I've run don't have it on the units I play. I simply kill anything that'd contest an objective I'm aiming to hold. It's worked fairly well for me.


And this is why 9th needs correcting.
   
Made in us
Huge Hierodule




Mexico

It is less an issue of taking objectives, and more of holding your own objectives, as there are a few tactics that are basically throwing cheap bodies at the enemy to deny scoring.

Custodes losing universal obsec was one of the factors that took them out of the broken tier.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/23 14:38:18


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Like a lot of stuff in 40k - and perhaps any game - its about things stacking. You can't make a bad unit good by giving it obsec. But a good unit is a good unit - and giving a good unit obsec for free is a better unit than one without it.

Anyway in terms of the weekend, Tyranids and Harlequins continue to dominate, but the Tyranid win% is down to 61%. (65% for the clowns). CWE up to 56%, while being the most played faction (Tyranids just after) perhaps suggesting there's a growing standardisation/learning.

Sisters rather inexplicably up to a 57% win rate, winning 2 tournaments and getting some further placings. IG, Ad Mech and DG clearly need help.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Considering the immense skew towards 50/50, anything above 55 is a problem. Multiple factions above 60 is a shitshow.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




NE Ohio, USA

 Daedalus81 wrote:
ccs wrote:
Here in 9th most of the lists I've run don't have it on the units I play.


Seems like a precarious strategy in 'Tear Down Their Icons' to have no method for easy bomb removal.


It's not a strategy, just how GW made the stuff I like. I can't do anything about that. And I refuse to not use the stuff I like. I build the forces I like, the way I like (within the rules) & worry about how to deal with any particular mission when we roll it up.
Besides, in the mission you're referring to? All I have to do is roll a 4+

 Daedalus81 wrote:

ccs wrote:
I simply kill anything that'd contest an objective I'm aiming to hold. It's worked fairly well for me.


 Daedalus81 wrote:
I guess maybe if you're tyranids or elves.


Nope.
*3 games with SW
*2 games with SoB
*1 game with technically Tyranids very early in 9th - it was a small concept narrative force that looks & plays nothing like any Nid force you'd imagine. It's not even really able to win a game. But it was fun & furthered the narritive of that campaign....
*???# of games with Necrons of every variety - their my main default 9e force & I've lost track of how many times they've seen the table. 2020/2021 when things were all locked down because of the pandemic sometimes they were on the table up to 4 nights/week.... + 4 Crusades & ??? pick-up games once the shops re-opened. It's just that after 20+ years of playing Necrons & being forced by the FoC to always include warriors I've shifted to very Fast/Heavy/Elites focused lists here in 9th. Because I can. Works well for me.
*13 games with my Drukari Pain engines (all Talos/Cronos + 1 HQ elf in a Venom - no obsec in there. Hell, nearly no actual elves either!).
*16 games so far with my Mechanized Grots (grot tanks, Kans, Gunz....)
*1 game last week using the new Imperial Knights Codex.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/23 18:08:12


 
   
Made in mx
Huge Hierodule




Mexico

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Considering the immense skew towards 50/50, anything above 55 is a problem. Multiple factions above 60 is a shitshow.


The skew to 50/50 is caused by mirror matches.

Considering even Craftworlds and Tyranids only make slightly above 10% of the players each, it is like not that significant (although still present) while irrelevant with Harlequins and Sisters.

Also only 2 factions are above 60% and 2 more above 55%. (Ynnari and Aeldari soup do not count as factions).

Arguably we are at the point balance would benefit more from buffs to low end factions than nerfs to top tier ones (Tyranids and Harlequins still need a few more nerds).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/23 18:20:16


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





A 4+ action that generally ties up a unit for the turn doesn't seem like a great gamble.

I can't for the life of me envision getting easily pushed off objectives unless you were putting a lot more points into doing so, but that's a whole trade up problem that will really depend on who you're facing.

Sometimes I'll have tzaangors or cultists. You push them off? Sure. I don't really care. It wasn't something I was invested in holding, but expecting to push scarabs off while also not having obsec? I don't think that's going to be an easy thing for most armies.


   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




There's issues of faction versus faction winrates - but if a 55% was universal, and a 45% was universal, I'm not sure its that apocalyptic. We play 20 games, you'd expect to win 11, I'd expect to win 9. I'm not sure you'd be able to call any specific game on that basis. You'd have an advantage - but not an overwhelming one.

Even a 60/40 wouldn't be that bad (we play 10 games, you win 6 etc) - the problem is that it isn't universal, and so that "60% win rate faction" inevitably moves up to something like an 80%+ win rate versus the non-good factions. And this often gets further skewed to 90%+ by things like who goes first, what mission you get etc.

For something like MTG I think that's tolerable (just play again with different decks) - but not 40k where it can still take 2-3 hours to play through to the inevitable result.

But with that said, I think the balance is better than it was at the start of 2022.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






 Tyran wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Considering the immense skew towards 50/50, anything above 55 is a problem. Multiple factions above 60 is a shitshow.


The skew to 50/50 is caused by mirror matches.
The skew is caused by nonrandom matchmaking after the first round--stronger armies are progressively more likely to be matched against other strong armies and weaker ones against other weak ones. Actual win rates would have to draw from round 1 matches only.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The skew is caused by nonrandom matchmaking after the first round--stronger armies are progressively more likely to be matched against other strong armies and weaker ones against other weak ones. Actual win rates would have to draw from round 1 matches only.


FLG is implementing a sort of ELO at some point, but I don't recall exactly when. I don't know how they'll implement everything though.

   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: