Switch Theme:

Rank 'em up  [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
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Galas wrote:
We don't need another 50 page thread about how marines were very weak/op in 8th guys.


Who else remembers that insanely long thread about how marines were bad forever because G man got toned down ? That was a great thread.
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

SemperMortis wrote:

Power wise? yeah, I can't remember how long its been since SM's weren't top 5. As mentioned, in 7th when you said they were "average" they were literally one of the top 3 and it was a toss up for who won between Tau Triptide, Eldar Shenanigans and SM Gladius.


SM were one of the most abusive armies in 7th edition, and they had TONS of overpowered stuff (grav, invisibility, the formation that allowed to deep strike and charge, etc...), not just the Gladius. Dark Angels and Space Wolves could bring very competitive (and annoying) lists as well.

SemperMortis wrote:

SoB: I don't understand how they are doing so well but SoB are doing wonderful right now and I for one love it. They also rely a bit on heavy bolters which are at least decent for whittling down hordes as well as killing elite infantry.


They're simply cheap, with answers to any kind of opponent, and full of tricks or very effective special rules. They can go fast, they can bring the bodies, they can be tanky, they can be (very!) shooty or powerful in melee. An average list can spam lots of Meltas and Heavy Bolters without tailoring anything, which is a bonus.

I wouldn't rate as good as SM though.

 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Top 3 armies

-White Scars: Everyone complains about marines, but not all marines are created equal. A lot of things people say are OP in marines are only good in more casual games. White scars utilize what’s actually scary within marines. That being obsec auras, vanguard vets with lightning claws and storm shields, bladeguard vets, and plasma interceptors.

-Harlequins: Speed, damage and durability. They got it all. Anyone who tells you Quins have a low skill floor is lying to make themselves/ their harlequin playing friends feel better. They do have a skill ceiling though if that matters.

-Slaanesh demons: they’re fast and hit extremely hard. They also have more durability than you’d expect. Not much range here, but that doesn’t matter when their charge has the same range as many guns.

Bonus: -Deathguard: New book is pure cheese. Not a ton of speed,’but everybody is tough and hits very hard. Hope you are excited for people to complain about Mortarion non-stop until he gets nerfed.

Worst armies,

Tau; they are not durable or hard hitting at the moment.

Craftworld Eldar: As per normal, they use tricks and gimmicks to win at the moment. However, these gimmicks and tricks are not OP unlike the norm so the army is bad.

-knights (both chaos and imperial) Titan slayer is a dumb secondary that punishes this army hard. Worse, this army is already not the type that does well in 9th.
   
Made in gb
Witch Hunter in the Shadows





SemperMortis wrote:
SoB: I don't understand how they are doing so well but SoB are doing wonderful right now and I for one love it.
Nothing flashy, units that do their job and don't try/pay for anything more alongside rules that are more about being efficient than overkill.
I think they are help by being a newer and less common army - people listbuild to face the dozens of marine opponents they might face for each SoB list - and of course the improvements to their core weapon rules. On the flip side they are limited in options and beholden to shifts in rules and meta they cannot react to.


SemperMortis wrote:
And in 2014, the top army at LVO was 2nd place.
Yes, only pure marine army in the top 20? IIRC despite the LVO running houserules against the worst xenos cheese at the time.
Two stormravens, Khan, a ton of bikes (White Scars and Red Hunters). Rest of the top pack were eldar, tau, and chaos with the odd cron list... and one guard list with nine thudd guns crammed onto a skyshield platform - been a while since i've seen that one.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




SoB benefit from the fact MMs are busted right now and the book has incredible synergies that seemingly will become the norm for 9th, but currently most factions don't have.

I mean for example, Repentia are probably worth their 16 points base. But lets make them Bloody Rose, oh look its 50%+ more damage (depending on whether the extra AP matters). Lets give them +1 to advance or charge with Hand of the Emperor. Throw an Imagifier and Preacher in there if you can for even more "will it blend" fun.

Basically everything is too cheap (compared to the non-top tier books) given the special rules. Its a similar story to Space Marines.
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

Tyel wrote:
SoB benefit from the fact MMs are busted right now and the book has incredible synergies that seemingly will become the norm for 9th, but currently most factions don't have.

I mean for example, Repentia are probably worth their 16 points base. But lets make them Bloody Rose, oh look its 50%+ more damage (depending on whether the extra AP matters). Lets give them +1 to advance or charge with Hand of the Emperor. Throw an Imagifier and Preacher in there if you can for even more "will it blend" fun.

Basically everything is too cheap (compared to the non-top tier books) given the special rules. Its a similar story to Space Marines.


They're nothing similar to SM, they're still a glass cannon army. Most of their units are T3 1W, not gravis dudes. Multimelta and HB buffs helped them but they didn't become much more competitive thanks to that, they basically kept the same rank compared to other factions. Tanks are rhinos equivalents or weaker versions of LRs (T8 12W), and walkers are basically Killa Kanz. Like Harlequins or Orks they do benefit a lot if the opponent has anti elite and anti tank only, or mostly.

Most of the units are not even cheap, it's the combination of some units/order and some tools to enhance them that make them cheap. Take Repentia, they're extremely good with Bloody Rose buffs, but if they were more expensive they'd be trash under any other order. 16ppm for a full melee 4-9 man unit with T3 1W 6++ (that can be buffed to 5++ or 4++ thanks to other characters auras) and 5+++ isn't really cheap. 11ppm for a basic troop sounds fine when 18ppm is the cost of a firstborn with +1T and +1W and there's no AP on bolters or chainswords, ever.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/17 08:00:43


 
   
Made in gb
Screaming Shining Spear





Currently I'd say the top 3 are the best flavours of marines, Harlequins and sisters or custodes. But the stinky elephant in the room is deathguard now. The new disgustingly resilient really hamstrings sisters and custodes who rely on D2 or d3 damage a lot and I think they'll prove a bit too nasty for quin's to get in close to. But we'll see.
Bottom three is tricky, tau are certainties, then it's hard to say but mono imperial and chaos knights are probably the next worst though souping in allies to play the mission helps them a lot.

 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




 Blackie wrote:
Tyel wrote:
SoB benefit from the fact MMs are busted right now and the book has incredible synergies that seemingly will become the norm for 9th, but currently most factions don't have.

I mean for example, Repentia are probably worth their 16 points base. But lets make them Bloody Rose, oh look its 50%+ more damage (depending on whether the extra AP matters). Lets give them +1 to advance or charge with Hand of the Emperor. Throw an Imagifier and Preacher in there if you can for even more "will it blend" fun.

Basically everything is too cheap (compared to the non-top tier books) given the special rules. Its a similar story to Space Marines.


They're nothing similar to SM, they're still a glass cannon army. Most of their units are T3 1W, not gravis dudes. Multimelta and HB buffs helped them but they didn't become much more competitive thanks to that, they basically kept the same rank compared to other factions. Tanks are rhinos equivalents or weaker versions of LRs (T8 12W), and walkers are basically Killa Kanz. Like Harlequins or Orks they do benefit a lot if the opponent has anti elite and anti tank only, or mostly.

Most of the units are not even cheap, it's the combination of some units/order and some tools to enhance them that make them cheap. Take Repentia, they're extremely good with Bloody Rose buffs, but if they were more expensive they'd be trash under any other order. 16ppm for a full melee 4-9 man unit with T3 1W 6++ (that can be buffed to 5++ or 4++ thanks to other characters auras) and 5+++ isn't really cheap. 11ppm for a basic troop sounds fine when 18ppm is the cost of a firstborn with +1T and +1W and there's no AP on bolters or chainswords, ever.


Sisters are a mini-horde army, not glass cannon. Glass cannon implies that your army will quickly die if caught out. Sisters have too many bodies with 3+, 6++, 6+++ saves to die that fast. Also many of these are ignoring -1 and -2 AP, Yes your models will die if you just throw them at your opponent, but with any proper terrain use your stuff will live a long time. A big reason why sisters are good right now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 kingheff wrote:
Currently I'd say the top 3 are the best flavours of marines, Harlequins and sisters or custodes. But the stinky elephant in the room is deathguard now. The new disgustingly resilient really hamstrings sisters and custodes who rely on D2 or d3 damage a lot and I think they'll prove a bit too nasty for quin's to get in close to. But we'll see.
Bottom three is tricky, tau are certainties, then it's hard to say but mono imperial and chaos knights are probably the next worst though souping in allies to play the mission helps them a lot.


Honestly, I think deathguard hurt marines more than sisters and custodes. Sisters run lots of metla, and repentia Can still kill deathguard through pure weight of dice. Custodes get d3 damage on most of their attacks, which average out to do around the same damage to deathguard as the old 5+++. Marines meanwhile have bladeguard, vanguard vets, sang guard, plasma interceptors, ect that all do 2 damage. Previously most marine lists where running 1 or maybe 2 squads of eradicators. Now I think they have to run 3, which hurts their sisters matchup. Also a squad of eradicators cost 135, so 3 squads will cost around 22% of your army.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/18 14:04:21


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Blackie wrote:
They're nothing similar to SM, they're still a glass cannon army. Most of their units are T3 1W, not gravis dudes. Multimelta and HB buffs helped them but they didn't become much more competitive thanks to that, they basically kept the same rank compared to other factions. Tanks are rhinos equivalents or weaker versions of LRs (T8 12W), and walkers are basically Killa Kanz. Like Harlequins or Orks they do benefit a lot if the opponent has anti elite and anti tank only, or mostly.

Most of the units are not even cheap, it's the combination of some units/order and some tools to enhance them that make them cheap. Take Repentia, they're extremely good with Bloody Rose buffs, but if they were more expensive they'd be trash under any other order. 16ppm for a full melee 4-9 man unit with T3 1W 6++ (that can be buffed to 5++ or 4++ thanks to other characters auras) and 5+++ isn't really cheap. 11ppm for a basic troop sounds fine when 18ppm is the cost of a firstborn with +1T and +1W and there's no AP on bolters or chainswords, ever.


Sisters are regularly placing in tournaments and the MM buff was massive.

But what I meant by being like Marines was that you get the basic datasheet for X points and go "okay, seems fair". But then you add a bunch of incredibly powerful (and therefore *valuable*) special rules just because you are Marines/Sisters. In time this will presumably apply to all books, but it isn't the case right now.

Obviously 2.2ish Repentia is a lot easier to kill than a (still undercosted) Bladeguard - but then they can expect to do 100% more damage depending on target and buffing characters. So its a bit of a trade off. You could compare them both to something like an Incubi and hopefully see the gap - but we know they are about to get quite a few buffs.
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Yeah, it was quite entertaining watching Necron's go from OP to worthless the more Xenomancers committed to them as his current army.
This here is called talking out of your ass - which is actually your standard so not surprising. I routinely give Necrons probably more credit than they deserve based on my own experience...Literally trying to convince people that the army I am playing most right now (Necrons) is better than they think. I also never said Necrons was OP. I only ever stated that they are on the same level of marines. Which they are. They actually have an edge in the matchup.


If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in gb
Screaming Shining Spear





Salt donkey wrote:

 kingheff wrote:
Currently I'd say the top 3 are the best flavours of marines, Harlequins and sisters or custodes. But the stinky elephant in the room is deathguard now. The new disgustingly resilient really hamstrings sisters and custodes who rely on D2 or d3 damage a lot and I think they'll prove a bit too nasty for quin's to get in close to. But we'll see.
Bottom three is tricky, tau are certainties, then it's hard to say but mono imperial and chaos knights are probably the next worst though souping in allies to play the mission helps them a lot.


Honestly, I think deathguard hurt marines more than sisters and custodes. Sisters run lots of metla, and repentia Can still kill deathguard through pure weight of dice. Custodes get d3 damage on most of their attacks, which average out to do around the same damage to deathguard as the old 5+++. Marines meanwhile have bladeguard, vanguard vets, sang guard, plasma interceptors, ect that all do 2 damage. Previously most marine lists where running 1 or maybe 2 squads of eradicators. Now I think they have to run 3, which hurts their sisters matchup. Also a squad of eradicators cost 135, so 3 squads will cost around 22% of your army.


But marines have so much more flexibilty than sisters and custodes. I suspect that mid AP, high volume single damage attacks is going to be the way to deal with death guard. So vanguard vets with storm shields and lightning claws, non over charged plasma, tactical doctrine bolters or just being white scars for the +1 damage in melee will all allow marines to cope with the change better. Time will tell but I think the strongest types of marines will find ways to overcome. Silver tide Necrons could also drown death guard in S5 -2 single damage shots too, I think Necrons could well jump in the top 3 during the coming meta but making predictions is hard, especially about the future.


 
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran





 Xenomancers wrote:
 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Yeah, it was quite entertaining watching Necron's go from OP to worthless the more Xenomancers committed to them as his current army.
This here is called talking out of your ass - which is actually your standard so not surprising. I routinely give Necrons probably more credit than they deserve based on my own experience...Literally trying to convince people that the army I am playing most right now (Necrons) is better than they think. I also never said Necrons was OP. I only ever stated that they are on the same level of marines. Which they are. They actually have an edge in the matchup.



I dunno if that’s what your saying this month I haven’t been reading your posts. If I cared enough I’d go through to quote you on the statements you’ve made in direct conflict and contradiction with these claims, but I’ve done that before and you just claimed the first ones were “only joking”. What’s even the point with you?
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 Nitro Zeus wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Nitro Zeus wrote:
Yeah, it was quite entertaining watching Necron's go from OP to worthless the more Xenomancers committed to them as his current army.
This here is called talking out of your ass - which is actually your standard so not surprising. I routinely give Necrons probably more credit than they deserve based on my own experience...Literally trying to convince people that the army I am playing most right now (Necrons) is better than they think. I also never said Necrons was OP. I only ever stated that they are on the same level of marines. Which they are. They actually have an edge in the matchup.



I dunno if that’s what your saying this month I haven’t been reading your posts. If I cared enough I’d go through to quote you on the statements you’ve made in direct conflict and contradiction with these claims, but I’ve done that before and you just claimed the first ones were “only joking”. What’s even the point with you?

You obviously care a lot because you always jump in and start your personal attacks. LOL. You fool no one. Misquoting things people say is really uncool anyways but making any kind of personal attack is the weakest form of argument. Argument can actually be a lot of fun if personal attacks are avoided. You seem incapable though. More than happy to argue about data with you. for example if you look at the last 2 months on 40k stats you see several marine factions below 50% WR yet we have people ranking SM in the top 3. It is nonsense. Even the top marine factions (which other armies like custodies and SOB don't even separate their factions out like marine chapters do in this data) don't Even come close to quins or daemons or SOB. Plus it's only gonna get worse once other armies start getting actual 9th edition rules.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran





I didn’t start any personal attacks. I said it was fun watching you go from calling Necrons OP to underpowered the more you committed to them as your army, in direct response to someone who posted about you immediately after I made a post. You’ve actually just begun the personal attacks in the first line of your response and I chose not to respond in kind. Have a shred of self awareness please.

You don’t understand data. I’ve seen a thousand posts explaining to you why SM’s win rate isn’t representative of SM’s power level, and all you’ve ever responded with is a pause and “.....but the data!” again, in endless loop. No, SM are not a bottom half 50% army. Statistical comprehension is a weak point for this community at the worst of times, but your interpretations are notably absurd and illogical and yet equal measures staunch and unbending in the face of all reason. Just go watch some actual good players at this game with an open mind mate. Your entire perception of this game would be shattered.

   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






Just FYI - Misquoting someone is a personal attack.

Also FYI - pointing out someone is just making things up in attempt to slander another is not a personal attack - it is just stating facts. Anyways. I take no offense to it. I'm actually flattered you take such interest in taking the counter to everything I say. It is fine.

You are correct statistics can be made to misrepresent an idea or be misleading at times. However - a bunch of people saying something doesn't make it true. ESP when there is such an ever present space marine anti bias. "I've read thousands of posts that space marines WR means nothing" - So what...that also means nothing. The stats is all we have and they mean the same thing for every army - space marines aren't in any exclusive category of statistics here - their data is not less meaningful than any other factions data. Not to mention SM data is more numerous - making it far closer to a meaningful significance compared to say something like...GSC. I understand the data very well. You and most others understand it to - just make exceptions when it does agree with your personal biases. Or youll make anecdotal statements like..."in mid 8th marines were at their weakest but they still made tables" uhhh...this is true of literally every army. Every army makes some top tables. Marines in mid 8th before 8.5 were literally the bottom. They aren't bottom now but they aren't top ether. They are probably top 5. Custodes SOB Quins and Daemons (slaneesh) are certainly ahead of them.

I doubt if you ran into any tournament player and asked them "what army do you not want to face" it isn't going to be "OMG not white scars or Ultramarines" I assure you it's going to be "Quinns...pls not quinns" cause the army is utterly absurd with it's PA buffs and points drops. Yet - in this thread we have people stating they only do well against marines...UTTER NONSENSE. If I wanted to pick a counter quinns it would marines...

Nullzone? is pretty much game over for quins.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/01/18 20:01:15


If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Xenomancers wrote:
The top 3 armies right now. Without Question. Are Harlequins/Custodians/Daemons (with lots of different choas soup armies too).

Middle tier is space marines/ eldar/ CSM/Orks/ Necrons. These armies have what it takes to win games but they have much less busted rules.


Ironic isn't it? That both your armies are "Middle Tier". And lets see. Last 3 GT's and Major's those 2 "Middle Tier" armies finished with 4 top 4 placings and 2 top 4 placings. How well did Eldar and Orkz do in comparison, you know, 2 of the other "Middle Tier" factions.

Highest Eldar placing in all 3 tournaments was....37th
Highest Ork placing was a 5th place and an 8th place

Weird, that the two armies you own and consider to be mid tier have 6 total top 4 placings out of 12 possible spots while the other two you don't own are 0 out of 12. But that is to be expected from someone who says this kind of nonsense.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Nah this is assuming there was every an established middle tier. Technically it doesn't matter. If you can't win events consistently or have any control of your matches - you are trash tier. FYI - marines (vanila marines) have been here...more often than than they have been OP. The last time they were decent was 4th edition salamanders. It took till 7.5 eddition to make an actual competitive choice after that. 8.0 they were actually vying for worst army in the game. 8.5 made them top teir no doubt...but time wise it was actually quite breif. As you can see now - Quins Custodes and daemons once they got the same editions updates are at least as good as 8.5 eddition marines were.


I keep forgetting how terrible Space Marines were in 7th..you know, with their constant top placings in MASSIVE tournaments like LVO. Pre 7.5 they finished 2nd btw, but i'm sure that doesn't count because the only metric you actually use is W/L rate even when as pointed out its a useless metric for a host of reasons. Like the fact that in the GTs/Majors i mentioned 1 event had 3 Marines finish in the top 4, but they also finished the entire event with 126 wins and 133 Losses. Well hell that is a 48.6% win rate, that is bad right? Who cares that they clinched 3 of the top 4 placings, they still lost more than 50% of their games!

As far as 8th is concerned...yeah Space Marines were terrible, if you ignore the first 6 months, the last 6 months entirely and you also contact Merriam-Webster and have them change the definition of "Terrible" to mean "above average".

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran





 Xenomancers wrote:
Just FYI - Misquoting someone is a personal attack.

Also FYI - pointing out someone is just making things up in attempt to slander another is not a personal attack - it is just stating facts. Anyways. I take no offense to it. I'm actually flattered you take such interest in taking the counter to everything I say. It is fine.

You are correct statistics can be made to misrepresent an idea or be misleading at times. However - a bunch of people saying something doesn't make it true. ESP when there is such an ever present space marine anti bias. "I've read thousands of posts that space marines WR means nothing" - So what...that also means nothing. The stats is all we have and they mean the same thing for every army - space marines aren't in any exclusive category of statistics here - their data is not less meaningful than any other factions data. Not to mention SM data is more numerous - making it far closer to a meaningful significance compared to say something like...GSC. I understand the data very well. You and most others understand it to - just make exceptions when it does agree with your personal biases. Or youll make anecdotal statements like..."in mid 8th marines were at their weakest but they still made tables" uhhh...this is true of literally every army. Every army makes some top tables. Marines in mid 8th before 8.5 were literally the bottom. They aren't bottom now but they aren't top ether. They are probably top 5. Custodes SOB Quins and Daemons (slaneesh) are certainly ahead of them.

I doubt if you ran into any tournament player and asked them "what army do you not want to face" it isn't going to be "OMG not white scars or Ultramarines" I assure you it's going to be "Quinns...pls not quinns" cause the army is utterly absurd with it's PA buffs and points drops. Yet - in this thread we have people stating they only do well against marines...UTTER NONSENSE. If I wanted to pick a counter quinns it would marines...

Nullzone? is pretty much game over for quins.

The stats isn't actually all we have, by any measure. We have critical thinking and understanding and gameplay is experience. The stats is all YOU have, because you rarely ever actually play this game, and when you do its at an extremely low level of competitiveness. By your own description and admission many times. I didn't say SM is less meaningful than any other factions data. I said YOU misinterpret the data, as you did right here. There's a million reasons your comprehension of the stats is wrong, but here's a good post about it, that was written with you specifically (and other players just like you) in mind. https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/j799yq/this_community_has_a_fundamental_problem_with_the/
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





Top 3 faction right now in competitive are almost impossible to define.

White Scars
Dark Angels
Space Wolves
Blood Angels
Daemons
Sisters
Necrons
Custodes
Harlequins
Admech
Possibly Death Guard


All the previous one have been taking a good share of the events.


On more casual games, marines of all flavors are always the best pick. Easier to play and the (many) trap choices of the SM dex don't get punished so much in those games.

Probably now death guards will give marines a run for their money in the casual area, since they are even easier to use.


Worst 3? Again you need to divide them.
Competitively:

Tau
IK
GSC

They can't play the objective game.

Casual:

Tyranids
Daemons (yes, the internal balance is THAT bad)
GSC

They are bad for a typical frontal rush.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/19 14:14:27


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




40k Stats seems almost meaningless because there are so few games on there.

Unless I've done something wrong, looking at games from 31st October onwards, GSC are actually a top tier faction, with a win rate just behind Harlequins, Sisters and Daemons. Which I suspect is rooted in the 120 Acolyte+friends List being quite good at the mission.

But I am talking about just 39 games and 9 lists. Which could be as low as say 3 people each going to 3 tournaments. So I'm not sure it tells you a lot.

Tau are a bad faction with a low 42% win rate. But this is because of their mighty 35 games, they've lost 20. If they'd won 2-3 more games they'd be up around 50% with many others. Thousand Sons in an even worse but similar boat having only played 30 games and lost 18 of them.
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





Don't look at 40k stats.

Parsing events from Down Under Pairing is already a bit more informative.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I suggest taking a look here to understand where the meta is:

https://downunderpairings.com/Tournament.php?TournamentID=1098

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/19 15:39:49


 
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus




Parsing events from Down Under Pairing is already a bit more informative.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I suggest taking a look here to understand where the meta is:


The Aussie meta is known for being fairly different from, if not completely contradictory to the meta everywhere else though. It's like the "upside-down" of 40k. Has something changed?

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





Tycho wrote:
Parsing events from Down Under Pairing is already a bit more informative.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I suggest taking a look here to understand where the meta is:


The Aussie meta is known for being fairly different from, if not completely contradictory to the meta everywhere else though. It's like the "upside-down" of 40k. Has something changed?


Yes, the fact that it is the ONLY meta right now
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus




Yes, the fact that it is the ONLY meta right now




I mean, that's fair, but it's probably at least worth a mention that the Aussie meta can be fairly different, even in non-covid times. Not saying it isn't valid of course, but this is something to take into consideration imo.

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in us
Drop Trooper with Demo Charge





Based on the newest Metawatch article on the Warhammer community page, here is where the factions currently rank, based on reported win rate percentage.

Spoiler:
1. Harlequins – 60.26%
2. Necrons – 58.07%
3. Adepta Sororitas – 57.73%
4. Slaanesh – 55.84%
5. Adeptus Custodes – 55.65%
6. Chaos Daemons – 54.54%
7. Space Wolves – 54.30%
8. Orks – 52.63%
9. Blood Angels – 52.27%
10. Space Marines – 50.64%
11. Dark Angels – 49.51%
12. Aeldari Soup – 47.77%
13. Deathwatch – 47.69%
14. Death Guard – 47.30%
15. Adeptus Mechanicus – 46.39%
16. Imperial Soup – 45.00%
17. Nurgle – 44.78%
18. Chaos Soup – 44.34%
19. Tyranids – 44.03%
20. Chaos Knights – 43.75%
21. Chaos Space Marines – 43.30%
22. Imperial Knights – 42.45%
23. Craftworlds – 40.24%
24. Drukarhi – 39.46%
25. T’au Empire – 39.33%
26. Astra Militarum – 39.20%
27. Grey Knights – 38.28%
28. Thousand Sons – 37.08%
29. Genestealer Cults – 36.53%

   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




I am sure the GK stats are skewed that bad, because the games were pre FAQ change to last turn and AtW.

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
Drop Trooper with Demo Charge





Karol wrote:
I am sure the GK stats are skewed that bad, because the games were pre FAQ change to last turn and AtW.


Yes. It's important to note that the information collected only goes through January 8th, so it does not reflect the updated FAQ/Errata/MFM, or of course the new Death Guard codex.
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

It's also important to note that the amount of games those armies had makes a significant impact of those data.

Faction Slaanesh for example has a good rate but very few games, it means they could be great just for being underestimated by people who aren't very familiar with them or anti meta. On the contrary SM with "just" 50% could be the consequence of a ton of mirror matches as armies using the SM codex were present in 30% of the total games.

 
   
Made in gb
Witch Hunter in the Shadows





 CommunistNapkin wrote:
Based on the newest Metawatch article on the Warhammer community page, here is where the factions currently rank, based on reported win rate percentage.
It would be interesting to compare that to a unit composition chart that accounts for allied lists - which books are strong alone and which are significantly impacted by allies.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: