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.
Why do people think Deathwatch needs nerfs? Yes, it's 3++ saves, but it's 1-wound models. It's not like trying to remove wraiths or brain bugs.
They cost 20pts for a SS/SB vet with special ammo that costs no CP. A GK strike has no SS, does not have special ammo unless 2 CP are paid for one squad and the ammo is worse then what DW get. the GK strikes cost 20pts, if the squads takes no upgrades. DW should cost more.
Although, we shouldn't base balance off the worst codex in the history of 8th. DW are what GK is supposed to be, only against Xenos. GK are supposed to be this good, against Chaos. Only problem, GK sucks at all phases except when properly buffed facing troops in melee. I don't think DW were in tended to be this good.
That being said, I would love to see SM in general be brought closer to this level, rather than DW being nerfed down to GK levels.
This. DW does not need nerfs, instead other SMs need more love (especially those poor GK!).
Asmodios wrote: So they know that while the castalin list is well over 50% win rate guard without a castalin are sitting at a healthy 50% win rate.
That’s possibly because those competitive IG players who elect not to take a Castellan are generally such poor players that even with the most broken of tools they can only eke out a win half the time?
Considering how well balanced statistically the LVO was not sure why you think the next FAQ won’t improve it. GWs updates this edition are clearly working and Moving armies closer to that magical 50% win rate. Heck after the last command point nerf to knights the castalin list dropped from an almost 80% win rate down to 60%
You must have watched a different LVO to me mate. One where the top 8 wasn’t dominated by Castellan + IG and Ynarri.
I suppose things would seem well balanced to a player of one of the factions in the 56+% win rate huh?
Did you actually take a time to look at the statistical data or are thousands of games worth of data invalidated by what you saw in the top 8?
The statistical data you speak of hasn’t been made public has it. So no, I haven’t looked at it and neither have you. I’ve listened to podcasts though and I’ve heard the dubious recounting of these stats by the Falcon. I’ve heard him immediately make excuses or play down stats that didn’t suit what they wanted to portray (that the game is balanced).
Regardless, there are currently stats from exactly two tournaments uploaded in the 40kstats website that is public. Hardly the greatest of sample sizes. According to the stats Eldar Corsairs are the best faction in the game. That sound legit to you?
We’ll see how the stats shake up over the course of the year.
So every player that didn't take a Castalin is trash...... good to see your contributing to the conversation and backing up your statements with statistics
The data is 100% public knowledge its all on BCP you can break it down however you want. Chapter tactics did a 2 hour breakdown of it and another hour on signals from the front line. Your complaints with the data are laughable
1. They cover that factions like Eldar corsairs have too small of a data set is covered maybe if you actually listen you will pick up on things like this
2. Some of the "excuses" by the falcon were on point to anyone actually listening. For example, how the top 2 ork players ran into the same anti ork flying circus build and both lost out by a single victory point.
Its always amazing that people like you have all the data you need available to you but you wont take the time and energy to break it down and when someone does you discredit it because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions of what the data should have said. Im just glad that GW is looking at actual stats other then people like you who do nothing but cry on dakka and ignore facts tyou dont like
Easy there with the personal attacks tiger.
And au contraire, you clearly haven't been following my posts if you don't think I've looked at the data and analysed it myself. How do you think I came to my conclusions? Did you assume I made them up from a position of no knowledge? Shame on you.
Here's some facts for you, that I have collected myself. Though they're not directly connected to a discussion around the Guard and Castellan problem. E. - guess the faction.
Spoiler:
- 2 players went 5-1. 62 total players went 5-1. Every faction except GK represented.
- 46% win percentage.
- Top placed player finish 16th.
- Mono Space Marines (generally considered an underperforming faction) finished higher and had the same win percentage.
- Mono Tau (generally considered a mid-tier faction) also finished higher and had a higher win percentage.
- The top ITC player going into the event dropped to third after taking this faction and competing in a tournament he won he previous year.
- 5 players in top 100, despite being 8% of the total player base.
Re Guard + Castellan, you'll know, of course, that Infantry were the most taken unit bar none and that Guard and Knight detachments made up 30% of the player base combined at LVO? Do you think people are taking weak lists they believe will have no chance of winning LVO? Do you believe its a pure coincidence that the Castellan and Guard friends (more than the loyal 32 I might add) list performed very well relatively and actually won the event? Your stats prove there is a problem with balance, not the opposite. As I said - a player who's faction is in the upper echelons of win percentages (and has been for an incredibly long time) probably thinks things are really balanced. That is your bias talking, not the stats though I'm afraid.
Either your reading comprehension is terrible or you willfully ignoring parts of my posts.
I said that both yanarri and castalin lists were high too high win%...... but that a vast majority of faction fell into a healthy win percentage. At no point did i make the claim that the game is perfectly balanced or we should throw up our hands and say "well that's close enough". The fact is that other than a couple underperforming and a few over performing lists, most lists fell into a very balanced win%. Also with the number of lists that a castalin and yannari effectively invalidate its not unreasonable to think a small fix to those 2 lists won't bring factions even closer to balance (such as tyranids who anything but gaunt spam is essentially invalidated by the castalin).
Its also laughable that you claim "Do you think people are taking weak lists they believe will have no chance of winning LVO?" meanwhile your excuse for guard lists without a castalin having a balanced 50% win percentage is that those are just weak lists from crap players..... you should try not to contradict yourself with your arguments
First off - enough breaking of rule 1.
Second - please explain to me why a good player who has access to the Castellan and Guard would choose not to take both in a competitive environment? We have known for some time that adding a Castellan to a Guard list makes it stronger (and vice versa, of course).
Third - its not a contradiction in terms - good players (those who want to give themselves the best chance of winning) take a Castellan + Guard for obvious reasons. Those who don't take both, generally speaking, are weaker players (for obvious reasons also) and therefore lose more often. Even with the Guard crutch.
Fourth - didn't mono Guard finish top 8 or top 16?
Technically the list that won was Mono Guard + a Castellan. Sure it had the Castellan but it was a legit guard army, not Loyal 32 and extras. And not pure trash like that douche with the 7 flyers.
Wayniac wrote: Technically the list that won was Mono Guard + a Castellan. Sure it had the Castellan but it was a legit guard army, not Loyal 32 and extras. And not pure trash like that douche with the 7 flyers.
The second there's a Castellan in there, it's soup.
Why do people set some arbitrary standard of % or whatever? Once you have a single damn unit that isn't from your book, you've gone soup.
Asmodios wrote: So they know that while the castalin list is well over 50% win rate guard without a castalin are sitting at a healthy 50% win rate.
That’s possibly because those competitive IG players who elect not to take a Castellan are generally such poor players that even with the most broken of tools they can only eke out a win half the time?
Considering how well balanced statistically the LVO was not sure why you think the next FAQ won’t improve it. GWs updates this edition are clearly working and Moving armies closer to that magical 50% win rate. Heck after the last command point nerf to knights the castalin list dropped from an almost 80% win rate down to 60%
You must have watched a different LVO to me mate. One where the top 8 wasn’t dominated by Castellan + IG and Ynarri.
I suppose things would seem well balanced to a player of one of the factions in the 56+% win rate huh?
Did you actually take a time to look at the statistical data or are thousands of games worth of data invalidated by what you saw in the top 8?
The statistical data you speak of hasn’t been made public has it. So no, I haven’t looked at it and neither have you. I’ve listened to podcasts though and I’ve heard the dubious recounting of these stats by the Falcon. I’ve heard him immediately make excuses or play down stats that didn’t suit what they wanted to portray (that the game is balanced).
Regardless, there are currently stats from exactly two tournaments uploaded in the 40kstats website that is public. Hardly the greatest of sample sizes. According to the stats Eldar Corsairs are the best faction in the game. That sound legit to you?
We’ll see how the stats shake up over the course of the year.
So every player that didn't take a Castalin is trash...... good to see your contributing to the conversation and backing up your statements with statistics
The data is 100% public knowledge its all on BCP you can break it down however you want. Chapter tactics did a 2 hour breakdown of it and another hour on signals from the front line. Your complaints with the data are laughable
1. They cover that factions like Eldar corsairs have too small of a data set is covered maybe if you actually listen you will pick up on things like this
2. Some of the "excuses" by the falcon were on point to anyone actually listening. For example, how the top 2 ork players ran into the same anti ork flying circus build and both lost out by a single victory point.
Its always amazing that people like you have all the data you need available to you but you wont take the time and energy to break it down and when someone does you discredit it because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions of what the data should have said. Im just glad that GW is looking at actual stats other then people like you who do nothing but cry on dakka and ignore facts tyou dont like
Easy there with the personal attacks tiger.
And au contraire, you clearly haven't been following my posts if you don't think I've looked at the data and analysed it myself. How do you think I came to my conclusions? Did you assume I made them up from a position of no knowledge? Shame on you.
Here's some facts for you, that I have collected myself. Though they're not directly connected to a discussion around the Guard and Castellan problem. E. - guess the faction.
Spoiler:
- 2 players went 5-1. 62 total players went 5-1. Every faction except GK represented.
- 46% win percentage.
- Top placed player finish 16th.
- Mono Space Marines (generally considered an underperforming faction) finished higher and had the same win percentage.
- Mono Tau (generally considered a mid-tier faction) also finished higher and had a higher win percentage.
- The top ITC player going into the event dropped to third after taking this faction and competing in a tournament he won he previous year.
- 5 players in top 100, despite being 8% of the total player base.
Re Guard + Castellan, you'll know, of course, that Infantry were the most taken unit bar none and that Guard and Knight detachments made up 30% of the player base combined at LVO? Do you think people are taking weak lists they believe will have no chance of winning LVO? Do you believe its a pure coincidence that the Castellan and Guard friends (more than the loyal 32 I might add) list performed very well relatively and actually won the event? Your stats prove there is a problem with balance, not the opposite. As I said - a player who's faction is in the upper echelons of win percentages (and has been for an incredibly long time) probably thinks things are really balanced. That is your bias talking, not the stats though I'm afraid.
Either your reading comprehension is terrible or you willfully ignoring parts of my posts.
I said that both yanarri and castalin lists were high too high win%...... but that a vast majority of faction fell into a healthy win percentage. At no point did i make the claim that the game is perfectly balanced or we should throw up our hands and say "well that's close enough". The fact is that other than a couple underperforming and a few over performing lists, most lists fell into a very balanced win%. Also with the number of lists that a castalin and yannari effectively invalidate its not unreasonable to think a small fix to those 2 lists won't bring factions even closer to balance (such as tyranids who anything but gaunt spam is essentially invalidated by the castalin).
Its also laughable that you claim "Do you think people are taking weak lists they believe will have no chance of winning LVO?" meanwhile your excuse for guard lists without a castalin having a balanced 50% win percentage is that those are just weak lists from crap players..... you should try not to contradict yourself with your arguments
First off - enough breaking of rule 1.
Second - please explain to me why a good player who has access to the Castellan and Guard would choose not to take both in a competitive environment? We have known for some time that adding a Castellan to a Guard list makes it stronger (and vice versa, of course).
Third - its not a contradiction in terms - good players (those who want to give themselves the best chance of winning) take a Castellan + Guard for obvious reasons. Those who don't take both, generally speaking, are weaker players (for obvious reasons also) and therefore lose more often. Even with the Guard crutch.
Fourth - didn't mono Guard finish top 8 or top 16?
Once again contradicting yourself "why would a good player not bring a castalin"... "nick nanavatti is a good player and he didn't win with ork". A far better player then you will ever be didn't bring a castalin even though he could have brought whatever army in the game. Every person is bringing a list they hope can win including those that didn't bring a castalin. Discounting data because "hurr dur they must just suck" is not only stupid but not how statistics works. Using your logic every player that attended the event without guard castalin was trash as they could have all brought that list.
One mono guard list finished in the top 16 and ran a flying circus with 5 FW planes (not any of the conventional dakka wisdom for how to instantly win with guard). His list was actually the imperium equivalent of the number 2 yannarri list and functioned in the same way.
Why do people think Deathwatch needs nerfs? Yes, it's 3++ saves, but it's 1-wound models. It's not like trying to remove wraiths or brain bugs.
They cost 20pts for a SS/SB vet with special ammo that costs no CP. A GK strike has no SS, does not have special ammo unless 2 CP are paid for one squad and the ammo is worse then what DW get. the GK strikes cost 20pts, if the squads takes no upgrades. DW should cost more.
Although, we shouldn't base balance off the worst codex in the history of 8th. DW are what GK is supposed to be, only against Xenos. GK are supposed to be this good, against Chaos. Only problem, GK sucks at all phases except when properly buffed facing troops in melee. I don't think DW were in tended to be this good.
That being said, I would love to see SM in general be brought closer to this level, rather than DW being nerfed down to GK levels.
This. DW does not need nerfs, instead other SMs need more love (especially those poor GK!).
It is highly frustrating seeing how much better DW are than ordinary marines, and then realizing how much of any WYSIWYG vanilla Marine collection is unusable in DW. It feels like all those other options ought to be balancing the scales, but they just aren't.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/26 18:05:35
Wayniac wrote: Technically the list that won was Mono Guard + a Castellan. Sure it had the Castellan but it was a legit guard army, not Loyal 32 and extras. And not pure trash like that douche with the 7 flyers.
The second there's a Castellan in there, it's soup.
Why do people set some arbitrary standard of % or whatever? Once you have a single damn unit that isn't from your book, you've gone soup.
^
Yeah, it's 100% soup and not "mono guard".... just listen to the Brandon Grant interviews and how much he talks about the castalin and what it allows him to do. I think it was on Forge the Narrative where he even talked about why the shadow sword would have instantly lost his final game but the Castalin gives him a chance to win it
Although it's more wish listing, adding some of the cover rules from urban conquest wouldn't be out of the question.
On the whole, I think GW likes the concept of soup. So I would be surprised (and actually disappointed) to see anything drastic. I think changing the 3 CP battleforged bonus to a monodex bonus and make the Vanguard, Spearhead, and outrider detachments worth 2-3 CP would help considerably while also being simple enough for an FAQ.
Although they are some of the best space marines, Deathwatch vets haven't seemed to break the meta at this point. If they did get changed in the future, I would expect a simple points increase. I'm not sure where this talk of removing storm bolters is coming from. About half of the veterans load out isn't available in the kit so its not like storm bolters are anything special in that regard.
Instead of messing up storm bolters, it would be much better to rework the other DW specific weapons. Stalkers, shotguns, IHBs, and HTH could all do with some rule tweaks.
I really don't think that the Super Aux detachment is going to get nerfed. I think they learned the lesson from Patrol and Aux detachment.
Also I think that there is a huge amount of wishful thinking in Castellan getting points nerfed.
I think there is a big gear up to redo Marines in general. With that oncoming, I don't think that your going to see much change for any of the Marine factions, DA, SW, Ultra, BA, DW, or GK.
I'd love to see:
CP change.
Some help for Mono Faction.
Adding a bunch of stratagem to the universal stratagem pool. Specificaly stuff like Restore a vehicle to top level for a turn, and a character dying can fight/shoot again, and a most importantly...
I'd love to have a stratagem that let you join 2x5 man Marine squads into a single 10 man before the game started. Or 2 3 man into a 6 man. It should cost 1 and on a 4+ you get that CP back, but you can't try to roll for it with Adept or anything.
- Hopefully we wont have to wait this long but they need to clean up the mess that was the GSCFAQ they released yesterday, created more problems than it fixed :-)
What problems were those? Everything seemed in order, besides everyone's bone to pick with MO.
PourSpelur wrote: It's fully within the rules for me to look up your Facebook page, find out your dear Mother Gladys is single, take her on a lovely date, and tell you all the details of our hot, sweaty, animal sex during your psychic phase.
I mean, fifty bucks is on the line.
There's no rule that says I can't.
Second - please explain to me why a good player who has access to the Castellan and Guard would choose not to take both in a competitive environment? We have known for some time that adding a Castellan to a Guard list makes it stronger (and vice versa, of course).
Third - its not a contradiction in terms - good players (those who want to give themselves the best chance of winning) take a Castellan + Guard for obvious reasons. Those who don't take both, generally speaking, are weaker players (for obvious reasons also) and therefore lose more often. Even with the Guard crutch.
Fourth - didn't mono Guard finish top 8 or top 16?
Once again contradicting yourself "why would a good player not bring a castalin"... "nick nanavatti is a good player and he didn't win with ork". A far better player then you will ever be didn't bring a castalin even though he could have brought whatever army in the game. Every person is bringing a list they hope can win including those that didn't bring a castalin. Discounting data because "hurr dur they must just suck" is not only stupid but not how statistics works. Using your logic every player that attended the event without guard castalin was trash as they could have all brought that list.
Now I'm on a computer I can properly edit my posts but I'm leaving the above quotation from me in because there's obviously been a misunderstanding. Apologies I should have been clearer, my fault, I thought you'd understand my meaning given the context of our discussion. I don't mean to say that every player who didn't bring a Castellan + Guard is a noob (I can kinda see how you read it that way). Given the context of our discussion I mean the following - pretty much any decent Guard player who wants to do well at a tournament, would always add a Castellan to their list if they are able. It makes their list better every time. In fact I'd say the Castellan and Infantry squads are two staple units of and Imperial soup list. Including the two of them is almost mandatory because they are so good and this is the definition of an overpowered unit.
One mono guard list finished in the top 16 and ran a flying circus with 5 FW planes (not any of the conventional dakka wisdom for how to instantly win with guard). His list was actually the imperium equivalent of the number 2 yannarri list and functioned in the same way.
How many Infantry squads/mortar teams did it have?
Second - please explain to me why a good player who has access to the Castellan and Guard would choose not to take both in a competitive environment? We have known for some time that adding a Castellan to a Guard list makes it stronger (and vice versa, of course).
Third - its not a contradiction in terms - good players (those who want to give themselves the best chance of winning) take a Castellan + Guard for obvious reasons. Those who don't take both, generally speaking, are weaker players (for obvious reasons also) and therefore lose more often. Even with the Guard crutch.
Fourth - didn't mono Guard finish top 8 or top 16?
Once again contradicting yourself "why would a good player not bring a castalin"... "nick nanavatti is a good player and he didn't win with ork". A far better player then you will ever be didn't bring a castalin even though he could have brought whatever army in the game. Every person is bringing a list they hope can win including those that didn't bring a castalin. Discounting data because "hurr dur they must just suck" is not only stupid but not how statistics works. Using your logic every player that attended the event without guard castalin was trash as they could have all brought that list.
Now I'm on a computer I can properly edit my posts but I'm leaving the above quotation from me in because there's obviously been a misunderstanding. Apologies I should have been clearer, my fault, I thought you'd understand my meaning given the context of our discussion. I don't mean to say that every player who didn't bring a Castellan + Guard is a noob (I can kinda see how you read it that way). Given the context of our discussion I mean the following - pretty much any decent Guard player who wants to do well at a tournament, would always add a Castellan to their list if they are able. It makes their list better every time. In fact I'd say the Castellan and Infantry squads are two staple units of and Imperial soup list. Including the two of them is almost mandatory because they are so good and this is the definition of an overpowered unit.
One mono guard list finished in the top 16 and ran a flying circus with 5 FW planes (not any of the conventional dakka wisdom for how to instantly win with guard). His list was actually the imperium equivalent of the number 2 yannarri list and functioned in the same way.
How many Infantry squads/mortar teams did it have?
I cant seem to find it in my screenshots but I remember being surprised by how few it had
>2 maurader bombers
>3 vendetta gunships
>a couple squads of elesian drop infantry
and some other random stuff. It was in no way a conventional list
Also for the guard castellin conversation the assumption of "why not bring a castelin" falls into a winners fallacy where it is easy to say after the fact that it was the obvious choice but look at some of the weird lists that did incredibly well at the even (thus beat multiple castellin lists to be in that placing). All SM went 6-0 only getting knocked out in ghost round, Flying circus IG 5-1, Demons with 600 points of summoning ect ect ect. There are tons of lists that did well without the "convential thinking" so thinking that it should have been obvious to take a castellin and thus only bad players didnt is a very poor observation
My hope (/not sarcasm) is that they leave or boost any Aeldari faction/soup potential while needing any imperium factions, mono or soup potentials. Guys, we have a really decent GW now, let’s hope they listen to our please. The fall of all codex imperium and rise of all codex Xeno or chaos is necessary!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/26 19:14:58
Asmodios wrote: I cant seem to find it in my screenshots but I remember being surprised by how few it had
>2 maurader bombers
>3 vendetta gunships
>a couple squads of elesian drop infantry
and some other random stuff. It was in no way a conventional list
Interesting. Shame you can't remember the Infantry and Mortar numbers.
Also for the guard castellin conversation the assumption of "why not bring a castelin" falls into a winners fallacy where it is easy to say after the fact that it was the obvious choice but look at some of the weird lists that did incredibly well at the even (thus beat multiple castellin lists to be in that placing). All SM went 6-0 only getting knocked out in ghost round, Flying circus IG 5-1, Demons with 600 points of summoning ect ect ect. There are tons of lists that did well without the "convential thinking" so thinking that it should have been obvious to take a castellin and thus only bad players didnt is a very poor observation
How is it a "winner's fallacy"? It has been proven waaay before this year's LVO time and time and time again. I didn't say "only bad players" either. I said the majority. Which is very likely a fair assessment (particularly given what Brandon Grant said about the Castellan compared to the Shadowsword....). Finally, how many of the top 62 5-1 lists were Imperial soup that contained a Castellan and Infantry? Now count all those Imperium lists in the top without. I think that should prove my point.
let's be careful throwing out the "all-marine list" as a herald for marine success at LVO, there is no way that list gets close to that far without Bobby G. Best to call it an Ultramarine list for clarity as most other SM lists are going to fall far down that scale. There is no question that marine lists are getting help, that's a great thing, but most still souped to get a modicum of success.
Asmodios wrote: I cant seem to find it in my screenshots but I remember being surprised by how few it had
>2 maurader bombers
>3 vendetta gunships
>a couple squads of elesian drop infantry
and some other random stuff. It was in no way a conventional list
Interesting. Shame you can't remember the Infantry and Mortar numbers.
Also for the guard castellin conversation the assumption of "why not bring a castelin" falls into a winners fallacy where it is easy to say after the fact that it was the obvious choice but look at some of the weird lists that did incredibly well at the even (thus beat multiple castellin lists to be in that placing). All SM went 6-0 only getting knocked out in ghost round, Flying circus IG 5-1, Demons with 600 points of summoning ect ect ect. There are tons of lists that did well without the "convential thinking" so thinking that it should have been obvious to take a castellin and thus only bad players didnt is a very poor observation
How is it a "winner's fallacy"? It has been proven waaay before this year's LVO time and time and time again. I didn't say "only bad players" either. I said the majority. Which is very likely a fair assessment (particularly given what Brandon Grant said about the Castellan compared to the Shadowsword....). Finally, how many of the top 62 5-1 lists were Imperial soup that contained a Castellan and Infantry? Now count all those Imperium lists in the top without. I think that should prove my point.
Its a winners fallacy because the event had not occurred yet and you are now looking at it in as it was a given that the castalin list would win. Look at events like the so cal open where blightlord terminators that everyone called trash stole the show. Also, yannari has been the most winning faction this entire edition so theoretically you are trying to build a list that could counter them. In Some of the Brandon Grant interviews, he talks about how on paper that final matchup wasn't good for him (meaning that theoretically another list would have been preferred). Even if someones plan to game the meta does not work out it doesn't mean they are bad or sub-par. Once again look at one of the top Warhammer players in the world nick nanivatti.... he didn't take orks to loose he thinks they could win and he lost to his nightmare list by only 1 VP (same list brandon grant won against coming down to a single dice roll). Or look a Sean Naden who brandon grant said was his hardest opponent and probably the list that scared him the most one that he said he was lucky had a longer time before he had to play it. His list wasnt even close to the same as the "top yanarri" list.... this doesn't make him bad or sub par. Or for example look at the top 16 all guard list that beat out ton and tons and tons of castalins to get that 5-1 record...... does that make that guard player a bad player because he didnt take a castalin?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: let's be careful throwing out the "all-marine list" as a herald for marine success at LVO, there is no way that list gets close to that far without Bobby G. Best to call it an Ultramarine list for clarity as most other SM lists are going to fall far down that scale. There is no question that marine lists are getting help, that's a great thing, but most still souped to get a modicum of success.
Salamanders actually had the highest win % of all SM lists outclassing UM.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/26 19:42:57
Asmodios wrote: I cant seem to find it in my screenshots but I remember being surprised by how few it had
>2 maurader bombers
>3 vendetta gunships
>a couple squads of elesian drop infantry
and some other random stuff. It was in no way a conventional list
Interesting. Shame you can't remember the Infantry and Mortar numbers..
Well...
Shadowsword 3x THB
2x Marauder
3x Vulture TPGC
Elysian CC CC 3x10 Drop Guard
2x Officer of the Fleet
Astropath
Asmodios wrote: I cant seem to find it in my screenshots but I remember being surprised by how few it had
>2 maurader bombers
>3 vendetta gunships
>a couple squads of elesian drop infantry
and some other random stuff. It was in no way a conventional list
Interesting. Shame you can't remember the Infantry and Mortar numbers..
Well...
Shadowsword 3x THB
2x Marauder
3x Vulture TPGC
Elysian CC CC 3x10 Drop Guard
2x Officer of the Fleet
Astropath
glad someone found it not sure what I did with the screenshot but yeah I would call that list very unconventional.... and obviously it performed very well. I think its the first time i saw elesians after the plasma nerf from like a year ago
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/26 19:51:23
Because people are buying GW's line of points are in Chapter Approved, adjustments are in FAQs despite them doing both whenever they feel it's needed.
Didn#t stop them from changing points in previous faq's. And money is reason to change in faq to make new things sell again.
They can and provenly have changed points in faq. No wonder as that's good way to change what sells to make people replace old units with new. Then they later release ca with yet more changes. Just as before
glad someone found it not sure what I did with the screenshot but yeah I would call that list very unconventional.... and obviously it performed very well. I think its the first time i saw elesians after the plasma nerf from like a year ago
It looks like it just aims to BRRRRRRRRRRRT any soft targets off the board ASAP.
Then once they're dead it's all S5+ so the Castellan gets whacked.
And a SB/SS Vet is already 20ppm and die just as fast as a 13ppm Marine to small arms fire.
If GW addresses the "issue" at all it will only be if StormVets start dominating tourney results, which thus far they have not made a significant enough impact.
And if that starts to happen and GW does take action, it will be to outright remove the StormBolter from the DW equipment list. I truly believe this would be GW's answer to the "problem" because the DW kit doesn't actually come with any Stormbolters at all and historically, GW has paired down options when the kit doesn't come with them.
But, again, this will only happen if StormVets start having significant showings AND results at organized events. And right now, they are not. At best, 1 or so list has been making it to the top 10, but that's it.
-
I'd like to point out that this is a bit of a red herring here - sure, the 20 ppmDW Vets would die just as fast as a 13 ppm Marine to small arms fire - but that ignores common context. The 13 ppm Marine will face small arms fire much more readily than the 20 ppmDW Vet who is standing in a squad next to 2-4 wounds of 1+ in cover Terminators purpose built to soak that attrition fire before the Vet is even touched.
And I'd like to point out that it's a mistake to think that GW will only worry about external balance vis a vis the competitive meta here. The change to Veteran costs and the addition of the bolter discipline beta rule completely skewed the Marine story yet again because of DW. For one, it significantly devalued DW Primaris units and the bolter discipline beta rule could not go further for other Astartes as the relationship with SIA multiplies the beneficial effect of any change or boost.
I think that's worth their attention, and I suspect they are discovering the same thing is true as well. But ultimately we're speculating on what might happen and at this point if GW has shown us anything it's that they can still surprise.
Wayniac wrote: Until ITC stops skewing the way they count factions, I don't think their results are going to be valid. They consider balance based on winrate, not composition. They count factions in a weird way so that you can have soup but go down as "Astra Militarum"
They split it down by 1. primary faction 2. secondary factor 3. detachment 4. unit.... its the single most precise data set that has ever been compiled for 40k. I mean have you even bothered to go listen to the breakdowns they have done? Its all 100% volunteer work as well so if you would like to change how the data is organized you are 100% welcome to but honestly the way they are doing it is very good and the guy volunteering to do the work clearly has a background in stats and is doing an amazing job.
If I bring a Castellan, Loyal 32, and a bit of BA...am I soup or Guard?
The answer SHOULD be soup. But no--it apparently is Guard because "the most model count" is Guard.
No that would be dependent on what you fill the rest of the points with.
In the past we've seen two dominant variants of imperial soups:
-IG brigade + raven castellan + smash captains (Guard with splash of meta)
-Super heavy + loyal 32 + smash captains (Knights with splash of CP)
Asmodios wrote: Its a winners fallacy because the event had not occurred yet and you are now looking at it in as it was a given that the castalin list would win.
Not what I said. Read my posts again.
Look at events like the so cal open where blightlord terminators that everyone called trash stole the show. Also, yannari has been the most winning faction this entire edition so theoretically you are trying to build a list that could counter them. In Some of the Brandon Grant interviews, he talks about how on paper that final matchup wasn't good for him (meaning that theoretically another list would have been preferred). Even if someones plan to game the meta does not work out it doesn't mean they are bad or sub-par.
No, if someone tries to game the meta they are not necessarily sub par at all. However this isn't that. THE meta list of Castellan + Guard exists for a reason. It is incredibly well performing and considered one of the "lists to beat" for a reason. It has been this way since the Knight codex dropped. We have literally known it to be amazing since then and it is the reason that Guard are always in the top 3 performing armies, month after month after month. And would you look at that? The stats back it up. If I'm a Guard player and I add a Castellan the odds of me winning increase from 50%(ish) to 60%(ish). This isn't new news. I'll reiterate - we've known this for some time. Now I'll ask again - as an IG player, why am I not taking a Castellan?
Once again look at one of the top Warhammer players in the world nick nanivatti.... he didn't take orks to loose he thinks they could win and he lost to his nightmare list by only 1 VP (same list brandon grant won against coming down to a single dice roll).
But he did lose. It makes no difference if he lost by 1 VP or 20 VP. There were games he had earlier that were close victories. They could have also gone the other way. Either way he dropped from 1st to 16th compared to last year and from 1st to 3rd for the season. I guess that means that even the best players can make mistakes, Nick's was selecting Orks IMO.
Or look a Sean Naden who brandon grant said was his hardest opponent and probably the list that scared him the most one that he said he was lucky had a longer time before he had to play it. His list wasnt even close to the same as the "top yanarri" list.... this doesn't make him bad or sub par. Or for example look at the top 16 all guard list that beat out ton and tons and tons of castalins to get that 5-1 record...... does that make that guard player a bad player because he didnt take a castalin?
The Ynarri flyer list had many of the hallmarks of successful Ynarri lists. Many recurring characters and units. How many Castellans did that Guard list beat out of interest? As I keep saying - one outlier does not prove your point. You need to address the entire data sample. Nor did I ever say "every player that doesn't take a Castellan is poor". I'm saying that not taking a Castellan, in an IG primary detachment, literally makes your chances of winning less all things equal. And if you actively decide to do this you arelikely not a good player. Not definitely. Likely.
I'll ask again as you keep completely ignoring it - count the Imperial soup armies with Infantry squads and Castellans in the top 62 lists, then count those without and let me know the split. There's a few by the way, an AdMech primary list that I don't think took Guard. A Space Marine list we know of. But let's see what the majority of the top lists contained shall we?
E-Format.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/02/26 20:30:24
Kanluwen wrote: If I bring a Castellan, Loyal 32, and a bit of BA...am I soup or Guard?
The answer SHOULD be soup. But no--it apparently is Guard because "the most model count" is Guard.
No that would be dependent on what you fill the rest of the points with.
In the past we've seen two dominant variants of imperial soups:
-IG brigade + raven castellan + smash captains (Guard with splash of meta)
-Super heavy + loyal 32 + smash captains (Knights with splash of CP)
He's arguing in bad faith, we know that the Primary detachment has nothing to do with the "most model count" and is actually the points spend. Which makes absolute sense. Which faction do you spend the most of your finite pre-game resources on? That's the primary faction. In many instances of Imperial soup the majority of points spent are on Guard.
Asmodios wrote: Its a winners fallacy because the event had not occurred yet and you are now looking at it in as it was a given that the castalin list would win.
Not what I said. Read my posts again.
Look at events like the so cal open where blightlord terminators that everyone called trash stole the show. Also, yannari has been the most winning faction this entire edition so theoretically you are trying to build a list that could counter them. In Some of the Brandon Grant interviews, he talks about how on paper that final matchup wasn't good for him (meaning that theoretically another list would have been preferred). Even if someones plan to game the meta does not work out it doesn't mean they are bad or sub-par.
No, if someone tries to game the meta they are not necessarily sub par at all. However this isn't that. THE meta list of Castellan + Guard exists for a reason. It is incredibly well performing and considered one of the "lists to beat" for a reason. It has been this way since the Knight codex dropped. We have literally known it to be amazing since then and it is the reason that Guard are always in the top 3 performing armies, month after month after month. And would you look at that? The stats back it up. If I'm a Guard player and I add a Castellan the odds of me winning increase from 50%(ish) to 60%(ish). This isn't new news. I'll reiterate - we've known this for some time. Now I'll ask again - as an IG player, why am I not taking a Castellan?
Once again look at one of the top Warhammer players in the world nick nanivatti.... he didn't take orks to loose he thinks they could win and he lost to his nightmare list by only 1 VP (same list brandon grant won against coming down to a single dice roll).
But he did lose. It makes no difference if he lost by 1 VP or 20 VP. There were games he had earlier that were close victories. They could have also gone the other way. Either way he dropped from 1st to 16th compared to last year and from 1st to 3rd for the season. I guess that means that even the best players can make mistakes, Nick's was selecting Orks IMO.
Or look a Sean Naden who brandon grant said was his hardest opponent and probably the list that scared him the most one that he said he was lucky had a longer time before he had to play it. His list wasnt even close to the same as the "top yanarri" list.... this doesn't make him bad or sub par. Or for example look at the top 16 all guard list that beat out ton and tons and tons of castalins to get that 5-1 record...... does that make that guard player a bad player because he didnt take a castalin?
The Ynarri flyer list had many of the hallmarks of successful Ynarri lists. Many recurring characters and units. How many Castellans did that Guard list beat out of interest? As I keep saying - one outlier does not prove your point. You need to address the entire data sample. Nor did I ever say "every player that doesn't take a Castellan is poor". I'm saying that not taking a Castellan, in an IG primary detachment, literally makes your chances of winning less all things equal. And if you actively decide to do this you arelikely not a good player. Not definitely. Likely.
I'll ask again as you keep completely ignoring it - count the Imperial soup armies with Infantry squads and Castellans in the top 62 lists, then count those without and let me know the split. There's a few by the way, an AdMech primary list that I don't think took Guard. A Space Marine list we know of. But let's see what the majority of the top lists contained shall we?
E-Format.
this quote here "No, if someone tries to game the meta they are not necessarily sub par at all." is the only part of your response that really matters. Discounting players that did not take a castalin as bad its just a fallacy. Using your logic the best preforming mono IG player and top 16 out of 660 players is "bad" for not taking a castalin.
You also again are looking after the results of a tournament and taking them as a fact. Everyone coming in is scared of the castellan (for obvious reasons) thus everyone is looking to counter it. By not taking it you are probably looking to discredit lists that over prepared for it. You're missing the forest for the trees. Regardless of how many castalins made the top 62 the fact that lists not including the castalin made it show that it's a valid tactic to not take it. Thus the premise that not taking it makes you a subpar player is wrong.
Hopefully address some of the faction rules and unit rules related to deep striking to take account of the "no reserves on the first turn" thing, e.g. the tyranid hive fleet thats basically "meah" as a result of this.
ideally keep the reserves rule but give the factions and units something else
I think the smarter players tried to out fox the Castellan.
The S5 spam guard list beat out DW Vet spam, Castellan & Basilisk, Castellan & Bullgryn, Castellan and 3 TCs, drew vs Grotesques and Skyweavers, and Castellan / Custodes / Gallant .
He played a Castellan 4 out of 6 games. The wins weren't overwhelming, but they were consistent.
If you making it to the top 8 out of a 600+ person tourney any of those guys could have been on the final table. The ones who did make it could most likely play against the other 6 and be 50/50 most days. Trying to pretend X list, or Y play and this guy is clearly better isn't meaningful, if they made it to top 8.
Hive Fleet Hercual - 6760pts
