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.

and why a demons has a so high chance of win? what kind of list you take into consideration?

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Community on Space Marines players: "Mostly noobs, aren't skilled, that's why they lose."

The various Space Marine armies have a winrate of around 46% last I checked (sometime early yesterday; this may have changed of course as people add more results in), just shy of 50/50. Also, Space Marines placed 2 of the top 3, and 5 of the top 10, of the only major tournament so far, where Orks didn't even make one in the top ten. So arguing Space Marines are weak is kinda silly.

1. I'm not making a statement that marines are weak, just remarking on the great comedy that is dakka dakka community analysis that i've seen. Generic space marines lost most of their quality. Do you play Iron Hands? If so you, you lost *everything.*

2. You can't lump all space marines together. You cannot play 'counts-as' in a tournament to get your white scars as grey knights, or your salamanders as blood angels. They are different armies from a competitive standpoint.

3. That tournament had 38 people, drawing a conclusion based on that data only adds to the silliness of this whole process.

 Marmatag wrote:
2. You can't lump all space marines together.

Already did, and will continue to. I quote myself:

"They're still just marines. These ones are blood-flavored."

There's not really all that much of a difference between the various marine armies at the moment due to the nature of the Index books; as such, combining them for statistical purposes is no different than combining a Guardian-heavy Eldar army and an Aspect-heavy Eldar army, or an Infantry regiment IG force vs an Armored regiment IG force.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Community on Space Marines players: "Mostly noobs, aren't skilled, that's why they lose."

The various Space Marine armies have a winrate of around 46% last I checked (sometime early yesterday; this may have changed of course as people add more results in), just shy of 50/50. Also, Space Marines placed 2 of the top 3, and 5 of the top 10, of the only major tournament so far, where Orks didn't even make one in the top ten. So arguing Space Marines are weak is kinda silly.

1. I'm not making a statement that marines are weak, just remarking on the great comedy that is dakka dakka community analysis that i've seen. Generic space marines lost most of their quality. Do you play Iron Hands? If so you, you lost *everything.*

2. You can't lump all space marines together. You cannot play 'counts-as' in a tournament to get your white scars as grey knights, or your salamanders as blood angels. They are different armies from a competitive standpoint.

3. That tournament had 38 people, drawing a conclusion based on that data only adds to the silliness of this whole process.

As I pointed out, that fragmentation is part of how Space Marines are able to have awesome units, yet a nominally low win rate. An Ultramarine list for example, can use all of the generic Space Marine models plus the Ultramarine exclusives like Reboot Girlyman. But any Ultramarine wins will be filed under Ultramarines, not Space Marines.

Same goes for most other named chapters. Taking a named chapter rarely puts generic models off limits, it only gives you more toys and often more sources of buff auras in particular. This means taking a named chapter is almost universally better than playing generic Space Marines. This is mostly a symptom of just how large a lot of named chapters have grown.

Funnily enough, AdMech has run into a similar problem with the introduction of Cawl. And he's just one model! But playing Mars AdMech is basically universally better than playing as any other Forge World, because Mars can take Cawl plus everything else, so playing non-Mars is only handicapping yourself by removing him as an option.

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
2. You can't lump all space marines together.

Already did, and will continue to. I quote myself:

"They're still just marines. These ones are blood-flavored."

There's not really all that much of a difference between the various marine armies at the moment due to the nature of the Index books; as such, combining them for statistical purposes is no different than combining a Guardian-heavy Eldar army and an Aspect-heavy Eldar army, or an Infantry regiment IG force vs an Armored regiment IG force.

That's your prerogative, but it's not accurate, and is a gross oversimplification. It also doesn't mirror the distinctions created by GW, ITC, present in any tournament, and it also doesn't mirror RAW.

You could also call Harlequins "Eldar," but that wouldn't be accurate either.

The point here is that the Space Marines' balance problems are internal, not external. They're not balanced against themselves, so it's easy to screw yourself over in list-building despite them having some very good options.

 Marmatag wrote:
That's your prerogative, but it's not accurate, and is a gross oversimplification

So is saying all Imperial Guard armies are the same, but you still do it.

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
That's your prerogative, but it's not accurate, and is a gross oversimplification

So is saying all Imperial Guard armies are the same, but you still do it.

Could you quote him? I don't remember him saying Elysian, DKoK, D99, and IG are all the same.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wait D99 got squatted.

In the original post, all guard regiments are combined in to one group, Astra Militaritum. But he does not object to that. He only objects to someone doing the same thing to Space Marines.

 Melissia wrote:
In the original post, all guard regiments are combined in to one group, Astra Militaritum. But he does not object to that. He only objects to someone doing the same thing to Space Marines.

When did it become my job to audit this data?

 Marmatag wrote:
Some of these I've played in, some I've spectated. Personally I have done incredibly well in 8th edition, believe it or not. 4/4!

Blood Angels vs Orks; Blood Angels; BA went first
Grey Knights vs Daemons; Grey Knights; GK went first
Ultramarines vs Blood Angels; Ultramarines; BA went first
Ultramarines vs Daemons; Ultramarines; UM went first
Imperial Guard vs Imperial Guard; Imperial Guard; Winner went first
Imperial Guard vs Orks; Imperial Guard; Guard went first
Necrons vs Genestealers; Necrons; Necrons went first.
Dark Angels vs Harlequins; Dark Angels; Dark Angels went first
Dark Angels vs Orks; Orks; Dark Angels went first
Eldar vs Ultramarines; Eldar; Don't know who went first.
Ministorum vs Ultramarines; Ministorum; Don't know who went first.

I'm sure there are a couple i'm forgetting. I've watched quite a few.

There is a guard player at my shop who is just stomping all over people. I want to catch more of his games.

This one?

EDIT: Nvm misread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But the random naming conventions for tourney results are annoying me slowly. I saw one where a guy was put down as Militarum Tempestus,, which we all know as IG now. There were a couple others which annoyed me as well.

 Marmatag wrote:
When did it become my job to audit this data?

When did it become my job to agree with a Space Marine player claiming Space Marines deserve special treatment?

Because I don't. And I never will.

 Quickjager wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Some of these I've played in, some I've spectated. Personally I have done incredibly well in 8th edition, believe it or not. 4/4!

Blood Angels vs Orks; Blood Angels; BA went first
Grey Knights vs Daemons; Grey Knights; GK went first
Ultramarines vs Blood Angels; Ultramarines; BA went first
Ultramarines vs Daemons; Ultramarines; UM went first
Imperial Guard vs Imperial Guard; Imperial Guard; Winner went first
Imperial Guard vs Orks; Imperial Guard; Guard went first
Necrons vs Genestealers; Necrons; Necrons went first.
Dark Angels vs Harlequins; Dark Angels; Dark Angels went first
Dark Angels vs Orks; Orks; Dark Angels went first
Eldar vs Ultramarines; Eldar; Don't know who went first.
Ministorum vs Ultramarines; Ministorum; Don't know who went first.

I'm sure there are a couple i'm forgetting. I've watched quite a few.

There is a guard player at my shop who is just stomping all over people. I want to catch more of his games.

This one?

EDIT: Nvm misread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But the random naming conventions for tourney results are annoying me slowly. I saw one where a guy was put down as Militarum Tempestus,, which we all know as IG now. There were a couple others which annoyed me as well.

Yeah, last tournament we had a guy play an Ultramarine army, with the only Ultramarine in it being Guilliman. With the ability to include as many as 6-7 different factions in a single army (looking at you Imperium), it's going to be really hard to just call them a single name.

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
When did it become my job to audit this data?

When did it become my job to agree with a Space Marine player claiming Space Marines deserve special treatment?

Because I don't. And I never will.

Melissa has a point - army names are best served either as catch-alls or as build-specifications.

The differences between SM, UM, SW, BA, DA, IF and BT is not as great as some of the build variances you can find in CWE.

Why should they have different categories, when CWE can do the following builds:

1) Wraithhost, using the Vanguard detachment
2) 3-5 Wraithknights, using the Super Heavy detachment
3) Skyrunner list with at least three units of Windriders and a Farseer Skyrunner, using the Outrider detachment
4) Guardian-heavy list, taking 6 units of Guardians in a Battalion detachment
5) Any build, but all the troop choices are Harlequin Troupes
6) Wave Serpent Spam
7) A list with 3 Fire Prisms and an Avatar of Khaine, using a Spearhead Detachment
8) A list with a minimum of three fliers, and no ground-based Heavy Support

None of these are even remotely the same, yet they all fall under "CWE".

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
When did it become my job to audit this data?

When did it become my job to agree with a Space Marine player claiming Space Marines deserve special treatment?

Because I don't. And I never will.

I'm not asking you to agree. I think you're confusing this as a matter of opinion. They are different armies. That's a fact. You choosing to lump them together is a conscious decision that is demonstrably incorrect. As I said before, this is your prerogative.

The "aedeptus astartes" groups, like White Scars, Salamanders, Iron Hands, etc, are all basically equivalent. But when you start adding Grey Knights, BA, SW, etc, that's where it becomes incorrect.

In any case, I did specifically call out that I had seem matches of imperial guard.

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm not asking you to agree. I think you're confusing this as a matter of opinion. They are different armies. That's a fact.

They're just different flavors of Space Marines in the end.

This is a fact. It's not a matter of opinion that red space marines and blue space marines are both just space marines.

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm not asking you to agree. I think you're confusing this as a matter of opinion. They are different armies. That's a fact.

They're just different flavors of Space Marines in the end.

This is a fact. It's not a matter of opinion that red space marines and blue space marines are both just space marines.

Yes, that's true. But it's not a meaningful statement. All space marine armies are Armies of the Imperium. Should we label them as such?

Why not go with the distinctions created for logging tournament results?

If you have an issue with how the forces described in Imperium 2 are being logged, speak up.

I've played 4 games so far in 8th.

Ultramarines 3W/1L

Ive won vs Tau twice and Chaos Space Marines once

Lost against the Tyranids

Orkz v Orkz - Win

 Rismonite wrote:
Orkz v Orkz - Win

Have you used a Wierdboy yet, and if so what are your thoughts?

Well from the looks of things, Space Marine players (and to some extent, GW themselves) seem to have some expectations for Space Marines that are... difficult to meet.

1: Named chapters are generally expected to be defined by advantages over generic Marines, disadvantages to offset these differences are... discouraged.

2: Space Marine players want generic Space Marines to be on the strong end of the power curve. Which would in some ways be understandable, everyone wants to be above average (the mathematics of that aside) except for how it conflicts with #1.

3: Space Marines fight other Space Marines more often than other factions, due to their large share of the player base. While you might expect this to push them toward a 50/50 win rate, this falls apart when you consider #1 and #2: generic Space Marines lose to named Space Marines.

4: Space Marine players are most attached to old, long-standing model lines that form the core identity of the faction. Tactical marines, devastators, terminators, Rhinos, Predators. This would be fine, except...

5: GW wants to constantly crank out new Marine models, and wants people to buy all the latest shiny stuff. So Space Marine power creep tends to be more concentrated in their newest models that the players are reluctant to field. Other factions power creep too, but their power creep is better distributed between old and new models, because new model releases for other factions are relatively rare.

#1-3 together means that generic Space Marine win rates will be suppressed no matter how good Space Marines as a whole become, because they will mostly be fighting either other generic Space Marines, or named Space Marines that are better than them.

#4-5 means that a tournament player willing to go for the newest models, and put victory before faction identity can reliably win tournaments by chasing the latest releases. Meanwhile, the more typical Marine player who is trying to field the archetypical Marine force is left behind as GW introduces new models instead of reworking old models. This results in the Space Marines being a strong faction... unless you play them the way most people expect Space Marines to play.

In a way, they're victims of their own posterboy status.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm not asking you to agree. I think you're confusing this as a matter of opinion. They are different armies. That's a fact.

They're just different flavors of Space Marines in the end.

This is a fact. It's not a matter of opinion that red space marines and blue space marines are both just space marines.

Yes, that's true. But it's not a meaningful statement.

Yes, it is. Because, especially with the index as it is, there's really not that much difference. Or arey ou going to try to make me pass out laughing by saying the difference between blood angels and space wolves is as equally great as the difference between ultramarines and imperial guard?

Actualy, go ahead and try. I could use a good laugh Until then though, the fact remains-- and it is a fact, no matter how much you choose to ignore it-- that the various space marine flavors are, ultimately, just variants of space marines, with at best minor differences between them. Hell, there's a bigger difference between Eldar and Dark Eldar, than any two of the marine factions.

(And before the inevitable happens and someone tries to claim I'm arguing they should be removed, just shut up.)

Derailing the thread: doing it right.

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm not asking you to agree. I think you're confusing this as a matter of opinion. They are different armies. That's a fact.

They're just different flavors of Space Marines in the end.

This is a fact. It's not a matter of opinion that red space marines and blue space marines are both just space marines.

Yes, that's true. But it's not a meaningful statement.

Yes, it is. Because, especially with the index as it is, there's really not that much difference. Or arey ou going to try to make me pass out laughing by saying the difference between blood angels and space wolves is as equally great as the difference between ultramarines and imperial guard?

Actualy, go ahead and try. I could use a good laugh Until then though, the fact remains-- and it is a fact, no matter how much you choose to ignore it-- that the various space marine flavors are, ultimately, just variants of space marines, with at best minor differences between them.

Fact: Various space marine flavors are variants of space marines.
Opinion: At best minor differences between them.

 Marmatag wrote:
I would argue there are major differences between Grey Knights and Space Wolves, for instance.

Compared to the difference between space wolves and imperial guard, or grey knights and Imperial Knights, or either one and Orks, and so on and so forth, your opinion would be quite wrong-- the difference between the two is minuscule at best relative to other armies.

And yes, before you try to claim otherwise, opinions can be wrong.

To interrupt the current conversation to add more on-topic results...

Space Wolves and Imperial Knights vs Death Guard - SW-IK Victory

Imperial Knights vs Grey Knights -IK Victory

I wonder how multiple-army deployments should be recorded?

 Melissia wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I would argue there are major differences between Grey Knights and Space Wolves, for instance.

Compared to the difference between space wolves and imperial guard, or grey knights and Imperial Knights, or either one and Orks, and so on and so forth, your opinion would be quite wrong-- the difference between the two is minuscule at best relative to other armies.

And yes, before you try to claim otherwise, opinions can be wrong.

2 and 1 are the same number because the difference between 1 and 100 is much bigger. #Opinions

Your strawman argument is amusing, but still wrong, much like your opinions.

My argument was such:

 Melissia wrote:
There's not really all that much of a difference between the various marine armies at the moment due to the nature of the Index books; as such, combining them for statistical purposes is no different than combining a Guardian-heavy Eldar army and an Aspect-heavy Eldar army, or an Infantry regiment IG force vs an Armored regiment IG force.

And it still stands. I did not argue that all Space Marines are exactly the same. Just that they're so similar it's okay for the purposes of statistical analysis to combine them in order to measure the winrates of Space Marines overall. That this notion offends you really reflects more on you than me.

My 2c:

If there's a differentiation between Space Wolves and Blood Angels and Ultramarines, then there should be a differentiation between Catachans, Cadians, Elysians, and Krieg.


However, GW and the community has an undying love for genetically enhanced pretty-boys, and must ensure that there are more official differentiations that sum up to a total difference of 2 units and a few named characters to ensure that there are as many variants of Space Marines as there are other, infinitely more interesting and equally diverse in their own right, factions in the game.



But anyway, there are unique units available only to Cadian and Catachan armies, to make no mention of even more unique units available to Elysian or Death Korps armies. But, if the presence of Pask vs. Harker is deemed less significant than the presence of Guilliman vs. Grimnar, then so be it.