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.

Is there a way to see the lists of all the players? At least the top 16? Need to read that renegade list.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Orock wrote:
Oh yeah, I forgot frontline advertises on dakka.

Since you feel your civil rights have been violated. You may find this link useful:

http://www.justice.gov/crt/how-file-complaint

Nope, just because I am bitter with what I feel are unjustafied nerfs when there is so much that should have been nerfed before that, does not mean I want to file a complaint about a website that has nothing to do with it.

First of all, that was the list going into the top 8, not their actual placements as Eldar were first and second.

More so, here's my post from the other thread showing a breakdown of army representation in the top 50, and someone else took it to the top 20 with almost identical percent breakdowns for the top 4 lists with Eldar and Necrons going up a little:

Some more fun statistics now that all lists and standings have been posted:

There were 22 Tau players total, meaning 7% of the field. There were 5 Tau players in the top 50, or 6 if you count the multiple top 50s players making it 6 out of 53, meaning the top 50 was either 10% or 11% Tau, based on which you choose.

There were 44 Marine players, with only 5 or 6 in the top 50/53, meaning they had 10% or 11% of the top 50. Despite having a showing twice as high as Tau, they had less than half as many placing players in the top 50. (Derp: CSM)

There were 42 Eldar players in the event, with 10 or 13 in the top 50, meaning they had 20-26% of the top 50. More than double the Tau representation, with slightly less players than double that of Tau. (Correction: Accidentally counted a DE as Eldar)

Other armies in the top 50 (using the 53 figures):

Necrons (5): 9.4%
Dark Angels (5 out of 11 players): 9.4%
Renegades (5 out of 7 players!): 9.4%
Cult Mech (3): 5.6%
Daemons (3): 5.6%
Tyranids (2): 3.7%
Grey Knights (1): 1.8%
CSM (1): 1.8%
Inquisition (1): 1.8%
SoBs (1): 1.8%
Dark Eldar (1): 1.8%
(Source: http://www.bestcoastpairings.com/r/lvo2016 )

Basically Eldar are way ahead of everyone, then Tau and Space Marines are close, and finally everyone else.

Edit: Updated some errors due to search methods, the new figures show Tau is strictly better than Space Marines in terms of top 50 results.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blacksails wrote:
Is there a way to see the lists of all the players? At least the top 16? Need to read that renegade list.

Nope, turns out they didn't collect the lists, which is really annoying. I even volunteered to type up every single one if they were willing to mail me them, all 296 of them because I think the data is important.

Not a single ork made it :(

So, in the end, there were as many tau as SM in top 32. There were undefeated tau players.
What's the problem?

Posted in wrong topic weird.

So Tau, Necron and Marines are all roughly comparable. Which means the Tau nerfs are a Good Thing. Also, it means Tau doesn't need to be nerfed any more.

The only thing wrong with what the ITC has done is not nerf Eldar hard enough, and Tau players are right to complain about this...just as much as the rest of us.

Once Eldar gets an appropriate nerf, the ITC can now work on buffing the weak armies, and then it will be PERFECT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orock wrote:
Not a single ork made it :(

Kind of surprising, with the ridiculously cheap stompa buff.

I guess 1 cheap stompa doesn't a list make.

They don't need to buff armies. And if you think about it debuffing other sr,ones is pretty much the same thing anyways.

Eldar needs no nerf, instead un-nerf everything else and bring it up to that level.

 Orock wrote:
Once again frontline makes way for more of the same! Their key rulings assured that the status quo would be maintained for another yawn year.

Here are the armies in order of place

first (and to no ones suprise) white scars gladius force.
second eldar (not quite as cheezy as possible)
third demons (probably as optimized as possible at the moment)
fourth eldar + corpsthief, presumably to self nerf because he felt he could.
fifth standard necron decursion
sixth oh hey its eldar
seventh necrons WITH A MONOLITH!
eighth thunderwolves starring the superfriends.

so if we lump marines together, we have marines, eldar, necrons, and demons. See you all next year.

Bonus: link to the actual lists in case you want an unbiased look. Also grats to steve. He was my favorite to take it, seems like everyone was thinking pajamapants was going to win it this year though.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2016/02/07/lvo-40k-championships-day-3-live-blog/

Are we reading the same article? Cause as far as I can tell Eldar V Eldar was the final table and the guy that won played eldar and was named Alex.

X078 wrote:
Eldar needs no nerf, instead un-nerf everything else and bring it up to that level.

Ah yes, all the ork and CSM nerfs that were keeping them down, we just need to remove those

 CrownAxe wrote:

X078 wrote:
Eldar needs no nerf, instead un-nerf everything else and bring it up to that level.

Ah yes, all the ork and CSM nerfs that were keeping them down, we just need to remove those

Yeah those two just need to wait for an updated Codex i'm afraid. This is probably in the pipe but as the GW release cycle works in mysterious ways it might take some time.

Koooaei - There were no undefeated Tau players, I don't know where people keep getting that from. See the final records and standings at this link:

http://www.bestcoastpairings.com/r/lvo2016

The top 5 Tau finishers were: 12, 18, 26, 31, 46

 CrownAxe wrote:

X078 wrote:
Eldar needs no nerf, instead un-nerf everything else and bring it up to that level.

Ah yes, all the ork and CSM nerfs that were keeping them down, we just need to remove those

Well the 37 point looted wagon that consist of 1 gorkanaut would fix the Ork problem but people don't seem keen on letting us use them RAW.

X078 wrote:
Eldar needs no nerf, instead un-nerf everything else and bring it up to that level.

We have that already, it's called base 40k and it was so unbalanced things like the ITC were born.

 Tinkrr wrote:

Nope, turns out they didn't collect the lists, which is really annoying. I even volunteered to type up every single one if they were willing to mail me them, all 296 of them because I think the data is important.

Welp, that's unfortunate.

Base 40K died in 2012 when the 6th edition introduced all the stuff that has led to these totally unbalanced formations and stuff.

I mean, it was far from a paragon of balance before that, but it obviously has got a lot worse since.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Base 40K died in 2012 when the 6th edition introduced all the stuff that has led to these totally unbalanced formations and stuff.

I mean, it was far from a paragon of balance before that, but it obviously has got a lot worse since.

I kindly disagree. 40k has gotten worse not because of 6th, not even because of 7th. It hasn't gotten worse because of Flyers and Formations. It has gotten worse because of power creep to the extreme, and GW handing out cheap GCs and D-weapons.

Formations are fluffy, and require a bit more of an investment other than min/maxing what's best.

Flyers are old news. Every army has them, and they are a part of the game. They are in no ways OP anymore.

GCs and SHWs that roflstomp everything and being so point 'n click have ruined the game. That, combined with general codex imbalance, but to a new degree.

It is the last part that is the cause of things such as the ITC FAQ being created. It also doesn't help when GW doesn't release their own official FAQ.

The formations are part of the power creep.

While formations for the most part are fluffy, the old FoC was equally fluffy and far less restrictive for players with factions outside the usual supported fare.

 Blacksails wrote:
The formations are part of the power creep.

While formations for the most part are fluffy, the old FoC was equally fluffy and far less restrictive for players with factions outside the usual supported fare.

Equally fluffy, when people bring minimum troops just to spam the good stuff? What I remember from my time in 6th was very bland list building, and fighting against equally bland min/maxed lists.

Edit: Not to say that isn't possible now (it will always be possible), but at least I get fluffy benefits to running a bunch of troops, or running a full cult of Destroyers. The simple fact that you have an option of awesome benefits, but you might have to take a unit or two that you don't normally like or use definitely appeals to me.

 krodarklorr wrote:


Equally fluffy, when people bring minimum troops just to spam the good stuff? What I remember from my time in 6th was very bland list building, and fighting against equally bland min/maxed lists.

Which is in no way unfluffy or less fluffy. Min/maxing is not unfluffy. Because you found it bland does not mean everyone else did or preferred their own armies to be a more random hodge podge of units. My mechvet and russ list was bland by your defintion, and definitely min/maxed, but it was incredibly fluffy.

The simple fact that you have an option of awesome benefits, but you might have to take a unit or two that you don't normally like or use definitely appeals to me.

It doesn't appeal to me. I want to take the units I want to take to fit the theme of my army, no more and no less.

 Blacksails wrote:

Which is in no way unfluffy or less fluffy. Min/maxing is not unfluffy. Because you found it bland does not mean everyone else did or preferred their own armies to be a more random hodge podge of units. My mechvet and russ list was bland by your defintion, and definitely min/maxed, but it was incredibly fluffy.

Seeing people running 2x CCBs with nothing but 5-man squads of Warriors in Night Scythes with nothing but Annihilation Barges in Heavy Support. Yes, totally fluffy. Same thing with Tyranids spamming nothing but Flyrants and spores as troops (granted that is still doable and widely seen, but that doesn't help. Plus it's another issue of how bad nids are). Or Tau players bringing nothing but 5+ Riptides. The FoC, and the CAD have too much room for exploits, and people use them.

It doesn't appeal to me. I want to take the units I want to take to fit the theme of my army, no more and no less.

And that's fine. But plenty of people enjoy the formations. In fact, I'm enjoying 40k more than ever because of them. And they are, in fact, optional. If you want to min/max, the world is your oyster.

 krodarklorr wrote:

Seeing people running 2x CCBs with nothing but 5-man squads of Warriors in Night Scythes with nothing but Annihilation Barges in Heavy Support. Yes, totally fluffy. Same thing with Tyranids spamming nothing but Flyrants and spores as troops (granted that is still doable and widely seen, but that doesn't help. Plus it's another issue of how bad nids are). Or Tau players bringing nothing but 5+ Riptides. The FoC, and the CAD have too much room for exploits, and people use them.

All of those examples are perfectly fluffy. Mind explaining why you feel they aren't?

And that's fine. But plenty of people enjoy the formations. In fact, I'm enjoying 40k more than ever because of them. And they are, in fact, optional. If you want to min/max, the world is your oyster.

And I'm enjoying 40k less because of formations and the power creep associated with them. In fact, if you want to min/max, its often in your best interest to use formations, especially the ones that offer the biggest buffs.

LOL I love how the Tau players are complaining they didn't get in the top 8 while SoB and CSM players are just silently sobbing in the corner

 Blacksails wrote:

All of those examples are perfectly fluffy. Mind explaining why you feel they aren't?

What's the point? Apparently our ideas of fluffy are completely different.

And I'm enjoying 40k less because of formations and the power creep associated with them. In fact, if you want to min/max, its often in your best interest to use formations, especially the ones that offer the biggest buffs.

Depending on the formation, you are absolutely correct. Again, Min/maxing will never go away, especially in this game. However, lets say you min/max, say, Canoptek Harvests. Are you taking them in a Decurion? If so, you have to spend a minimum of, what, 479 points on a Reclamation Legion? That's if you really want it bare bones. Then, you're bringing minimum 1 squad of Scarabs per unit of Wraiths, with no option to do otherwise. So, if you want to bring multiple units of Wraiths, you have to bring multiple units of Scarabs. That gets expensive, and quick. Is it an option over just bringing 3 units of Wraiths in a CAD? Yes. Is it an auto-include? Not even close.

Reavas wrote:
LOL I love how the Tau players are complaining they didn't get in the top 8 while SoB and CSM players are just silently sobbing in the corner

FW Chaos had the best 'total player number vs. top 10% finishes' of any army.

Apparently we need to nerf the only thing Chaos has left going for them, if 'who should get nerfed' is based entirely on which army had the most dominating presence in the top rankings!

@X078
i disagree with your statement that everything should be buffed up to eldar. Most of our top tier codecies should be brought down a few levels. if everything is brought up to Eldar levels, you roll for first turn and whoever gets it wins, because every side is so good at doing damage, you get 1/2 your army wiped before moving. That and you can finally play that unit that never makes it past first turn because you opponent focuses it down every game

 krodarklorr wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Base 40K died in 2012 when the 6th edition introduced all the stuff that has led to these totally unbalanced formations and stuff.

I mean, it was far from a paragon of balance before that, but it obviously has got a lot worse since.

I kindly disagree. 40k has gotten worse not because of 6th, not even because of 7th. It hasn't gotten worse because of Flyers and Formations. It has gotten worse because of power creep to the extreme, and GW handing out cheap GCs and D-weapons.

Formations are fluffy, and require a bit more of an investment other than min/maxing what's best.

Flyers are old news. Every army has them, and they are a part of the game. They are in no ways OP anymore.

GCs and SHWs that roflstomp everything and being so point 'n click have ruined the game. That, combined with general codex imbalance, but to a new degree.

It is the last part that is the cause of things such as the ITC FAQ being created. It also doesn't help when GW doesn't release their own official FAQ.

The scatterbike is a troop and is worse for the game than every single thing you listed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pumaman1 wrote:
@X078
i disagree with your statement that everything should be buffed up to eldar. Most of our top tier codecies should be brought down a few levels. if everything is brought up to Eldar levels, you roll for first turn and whoever gets it wins, because every side is so good at doing damage, you get 1/2 your army wiped before moving. That and you can finally play that unit that never makes it past first turn because you opponent focuses it down every game

But they are not going to bring them down. So everyone else MUST go up. Specifically, GW has never brought down Eldar intentionally, only through edition changes, and so Eldar are not getting worse.

 pumaman1 wrote:
@X078
i disagree with your statement that everything should be buffed up to eldar. Most of our top tier codecies should be brought down a few levels. if everything is brought up to Eldar levels, you roll for first turn and whoever gets it wins, because every side is so good at doing damage, you get 1/2 your army wiped before moving. That and you can finally play that unit that never makes it past first turn because you opponent focuses it down every game

Strange.. strange indeed, this never seems to happen when two equal Eldar armies face off against each other. It normally boils down to the best general...

Martel732 wrote:

The scatterbike is a troop and is worse for the game than every single thing you listed.

Yes. But it falls under codex creep and general game imbalance.