Psychic Awakening N&R

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.

**Mr Morden**

BrianDavion wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
WhiteDog wrote:
AAE still doesn't get that SW had none of the new rules that permitted "Adeptus Astartes" to become top tier in competitive matches.

Well, the numbers don’t bear that out. Space Wolves have about a 36% win-rate. Far below all Xenos and Chaos factions. Every single one of them.

If you count them as Marines generally, then Marines generally need a major buff to even remotely compete with things like Necrons, Khorne Daemons, whatever.

It‘s kinda weird that the same people insisting that all Marines should be viewed as a single faction then still cherry pick the Iron Hands and Raven Guard numbers to determine how good Marines allegedly are. If you wanna count Marines as a unified block, you got to average their strength and performance from all of them as well to determine how good they are relative to other factions. And that would make Marines still the weakest army in the game, despite the average being lifted a little by including Iron Hands and Raven Guard numbers.

Every single one of them?
Chaos factions?

You sure you want to state that

Codex factions.
there better?

So ALL Marines are one faction for one thing but not others?

**Jidmah**

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Jidmah wrote:

And no, I do not need to weight DW equal to BA if there are an unequal number of players playing. Because it's irrelevant to the thesis whether what chapter you are playing, just like it's irrelevant to the total Tau numbers which Sept you are playing.
What I did statistically is equivalent to replacing all chapters in that list with "Space Marine" and summed them up.
If there are four BA players and one DW player, the average win percentage for "Space Marine" is the sum of all five players' win percentage divided by five. Adding the win percentage of all BA to the win percentage of the DW player and dividing it by two is just incorrect math, no more, no less.

It's not irrelevant for the hypothesis. It is exactly the point. If we had separate stats for different Tau septs, with vastly different win percentages for them, using weighted averages favouring both the most popular and most successful Tau sept would greatly distort the statistics for an argument that "they all are equally good and can be judged by the same metric". For that argument to hold, I need to show that there aren't significant differences between Tau septs irrespective of player numbers.

Same with "Marines". To uphold the claim that they are all equal, they need to perform statistically similar irrespective of player count. Thus weighting them by numbers of players is an irrelevant number (or "statistic") for that test. If they perform dissimilar as sub-factions (irrespective of absolute numbers), treating them as a single faction is a fallacy.

Again, if I want to show that there is no difference in life expectancy between China and Lichtenstein, I cannot weight those numbers by population. If I did, I'd never be able to show that there might be a difference, because the weighting by population would overshadow any difference in life expectancy. To show that there is no difference in life expectancy, I'd need to show that life expectancy in both countries is statistically similar irrespective of their population difference.Inversely, if I find the life expectancy to be fairly different (irrespective of population numbers), I can no longer conclude that the population of Lichtenstein and China would be the same.

That's both 100% wrong and off topic. Feel free to contact me via PM if you want an explanation about why.

**Sunny Side Up**

Jidmah wrote:

That's both 100% wrong and off topic. Feel free to contact me via PM if you want an explanation about why.

It is still 100% correct and relevant, if people continuously falsely claim Space Wolves aren't one of the weakest armies all through 8th by referencing a completely different army.

If you insist on accounting for player numbers instead of approximating through the faction-means, do a small sample t-test or something along those lines between, dunno, Raven Guard and Space Wolves to determine the probability they are "the same army" (reflective of the same population win-%). The statistical basis for considering these factions to be "the same army" is almost astronomically small.

**Jidmah**

Please go back and read all the relevant posts. Your math is wrong and your argument is irrelevant to what I calculated. Please understand what the whole thing was about before posting.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Jidmah wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
go on tell me how OP the Dark Angels are

Dark Angels can give +1S and +1A and leadership to Ragnar. Totally OP

I legit forgot about that Stratagem. Ragnar has 11 attacks on the charge, then, plus that strat giving 2 hits on a 4+. Does anything else even have that many attacks?

Good thing he can't get anywhere.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BaconCatBug wrote:
Ragnar dealing 20 damage is all good, but he still can't kill Ghaz.

Irrelevant because Ghaz is otherwise trash. I'd be looking at who else Ragnar compares to instead.

**Justyn**

Svangir and Ulfgir are officially dead. But it wasn't Ghaz that killed them.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/19/the-saga-of-ragnar-blackmane/

**Sunny Side Up**

Jidmah wrote:
Please go back and read all the relevant posts. Your math is wrong and your argument is irrelevant to what I calculated. Please understand what the whole thing was about before posting.

I did and I do. If you'd take your own advice, you'd see the error in your logic and your math. Feel free to send me a PM if you need a few links to basic statistic primers.

**ikeulhu**

Justyn wrote:
Svangir and Ulfgir are officially dead. But it wasn't Ghaz that killed them.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/19/the-saga-of-ragnar-blackmane/

So that is the token kill(s) they threw the Orks way

**Apple Peel**

ikeulhu wrote:
Justyn wrote:
Svangir and Ulfgir are officially dead. But it wasn't Ghaz that killed them.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/19/the-saga-of-ragnar-blackmane/

So that is the token kill(s) they threw the Orks way

Well, they were characters with models.

**Ragnar69**

Apple Peel wrote:
ikeulhu wrote:
Justyn wrote:
Svangir and Ulfgir are officially dead. But it wasn't Ghaz that killed them.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/19/the-saga-of-ragnar-blackmane/

So that is the token kill(s) they threw the Orks way

Well, they were characters with models.

What Models? Only Russ's wolves had tiny metal models, Ragnar's Not.

**Apple Peel**

Ragnar69 wrote:
Apple Peel wrote:
ikeulhu wrote:
Justyn wrote:
Svangir and Ulfgir are officially dead. But it wasn't Ghaz that killed them.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/19/the-saga-of-ragnar-blackmane/

So that is the token kill(s) they threw the Orks way

Well, they were characters with models.

What Models? Only Russ's wolves had tiny metal models, Ragnar's Not.

What models have people been using then?

**the_scotsman**

Apple Peel wrote:
Ragnar69 wrote:
Apple Peel wrote:
ikeulhu wrote:
Justyn wrote:
Svangir and Ulfgir are officially dead. But it wasn't Ghaz that killed them.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/19/the-saga-of-ragnar-blackmane/

So that is the token kill(s) they threw the Orks way

Well, they were characters with models.

What Models? Only Russ's wolves had tiny metal models, Ragnar's Not.

What models have people been using then?

Probably Fenrisian Wolves from the box of them?

But no model, no rules, baby. Even when it's an adorable pupper, GW's legal department will gladly shoot it in the head just in case some person on the internet decides to make a visually disinct FANGER AND ULFGOR model....even though that would just a model of...two wolves.

**Jidmah**

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
Please go back and read all the relevant posts. Your math is wrong and your argument is irrelevant to what I calculated. Please understand what the whole thing was about before posting.

I did and I do. If you'd take your own advice, you'd see the error in your logic and your math. Feel free to send me a PM if you need a few links to basic statistic primers.

By all means, please do provide me with sources that told you that when we have one player with a 0% win quota and nine players with a 100% quota, the total win quota is 50%

**Daedalus81**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
go on tell me how OP the Dark Angels are

Dark Angels can give +1S and +1A and leadership to Ragnar. Totally OP

I legit forgot about that Stratagem. Ragnar has 11 attacks on the charge, then, plus that strat giving 2 hits on a 4+. Does anything else even have that many attacks?

Good thing he can't get anywhere.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BaconCatBug wrote:
Ragnar dealing 20 damage is all good, but he still can't kill Ghaz.

Irrelevant because Ghaz is otherwise trash. I'd be looking at who else Ragnar compares to instead.

So we're just going to ignore that we need a whole DA detachment to do that?

Don't expect that explode strat to stay at 1 CP, either.

Do people take Smash Captains? What do they use them for? Is a Smash Cap good at killing Primaris? Is Ragnar good at killing knights and tanks?

You'll find your answer there.

**bananathug**

Space wolf deepstrike is limited to w/in 6" of a table edge which makes it really easy to screen against and of much less value than blanket deepstrike.

So far so bad for SW, but like other's have said, it is too early in the release to know. 1-2 strats (make a unit untargetable, deepstrike unit w/in x, 3d6 charge, disembark and charge...) could change the game but it is not looking likely. The chapter tactic didn't get much better, the super doctrine is bad, and still no way to mitigate the impact of TFCs (which still need a major nerf).

Not enough shown to be generally competitive (6-0) but could be enough to move them into the 4-2 realm. Ragnar is a beast, we need a rhino version of the impulsor (more capacity), RG>WS>BA>SW

**Justyn**

Is Ragnar good at killing knights and tanks?

If you feed him a few CP he isn't bad at it. 15ish hits re-rolling wounds (on a 5+) that do 3 damage gets him close. If you beefed his attacks with any of the several ways available it becomes a lot more reliable. Of course how he charges a Knight that moves twice his speed and can kill him in overwatch is another matter entirely.

**Sunny Side Up**

Jidmah wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
Please go back and read all the relevant posts. Your math is wrong and your argument is irrelevant to what I calculated. Please understand what the whole thing was about before posting.

I did and I do. If you'd take your own advice, you'd see the error in your logic and your math. Feel free to send me a PM if you need a few links to basic statistic primers.

By all means, please do provide me with sources that told you that when we have one player with a 0% win quota and nine players with a 100% quota, the total win quota is 50%

Please provide me with sources that told you when you have one sample with a 0% win rate and another sample with a 100% win rate, they should be considered samples from the same population just because sample size differs.

Or how you come to the conclusion that a new players picking up the army of the first single player would have an expected win rate of 90%, just because 9 other players with a different faction in a different sample had a win rate of 100% and you insist that "they are the same army".

The very reason it doesn't work proves that they aren't the same army.

If - for some deluded reason - you think they are the same army, you'd have to ignore the weighted win percentages that you keep citing. If truly Space Wolves = Raven Guard = Ultramarines, etc.. the players and their results between these sub-factions would be fully fungible. Any difference seen in the data would be due simply to random happenstance, not any underlying reasons. It might be 100% win rate of 9 Raven Guard players vs. 0% win rate of 1 Space Wolves players this week, and just the inverse next week, given they are allegedly all the same.

Thus the expected win rate of "Marines" - if they truly were all the same - would be the average win rate of all the sub-factions unweighted for players. The fact that weighting for players and testing whether or not the differences in mean win percentages actually are statistically significant proves that they, in fact, are not the same at all.

**bullyboy**

Jidmah wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
Please go back and read all the relevant posts. Your math is wrong and your argument is irrelevant to what I calculated. Please understand what the whole thing was about before posting.

I did and I do. If you'd take your own advice, you'd see the error in your logic and your math. Feel free to send me a PM if you need a few links to basic statistic primers.

By all means, please do provide me with sources that told you that when we have one player with a 0% win quota and nine players with a 100% quota, the total win quota is 50%

you guys keep talking about taking this conversation to PM....do us all a favour and please do so.

**Justyn**

Can you guys please take that win percentage crap to a private conversation. I get these threads get sidetracked. I even get in on the side conversations quite a bit. But you are just going back and forth saying "nut uh", "yah ha" to each other at this point.

**Jimbobbyish**

bullyboy wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
Please go back and read all the relevant posts. Your math is wrong and your argument is irrelevant to what I calculated. Please understand what the whole thing was about before posting.

I did and I do. If you'd take your own advice, you'd see the error in your logic and your math. Feel free to send me a PM if you need a few links to basic statistic primers.

By all means, please do provide me with sources that told you that when we have one player with a 0% win quota and nine players with a 100% quota, the total win quota is 50%

you guys keep talking about taking this conversation to PM....do us all a favour and please do so.

Justyn wrote:Can you guys please take that win percentage crap to a private conversation. I get these threads get sidetracked. I even get in on the side conversations quite a bit. But you are just going back and forth saying "nut uh", "yah ha" to each other at this point.

Exalted! like they said, take it to PM!

On topic, I really like the TWC strat! It really adds up if they are supported by canis giving the wolves extra attacks.

**mightymconeshot**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
go on tell me how OP the Dark Angels are

Dark Angels can give +1S and +1A and leadership to Ragnar. Totally OP

I legit forgot about that Stratagem. Ragnar has 11 attacks on the charge, then, plus that strat giving 2 hits on a 4+. Does anything else even have that many attacks?

A GSC Twisted Helix Patriarch buffed to the absolute gills comes damn close I think. But requires far more resources and end up with a few less attacks. However his Strength and Toughness are higher.

**Ragnar69**

Apple Peel wrote:
Ragnar69 wrote:
Apple Peel wrote:
ikeulhu wrote:
Justyn wrote:
Svangir and Ulfgir are officially dead. But it wasn't Ghaz that killed them.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/19/the-saga-of-ragnar-blackmane/

So that is the token kill(s) they threw the Orks way

Well, they were characters with models.

What Models? Only Russ's wolves had tiny metal models, Ragnar's Not.

What models have people been using then?

Normal fenrisian wolves

**Sunny Side Up**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
go on tell me how OP the Dark Angels are

Dark Angels can give +1S and +1A and leadership to Ragnar. Totally OP

I legit forgot about that Stratagem. Ragnar has 11 attacks on the charge, then, plus that strat giving 2 hits on a 4+. Does anything else even have that many attacks?

Good thing he can't get anywhere.

Well, the infamous Flawless Host Disco-Lord with FH Warlord trait (and Elixir as the best relic?) is probably still the guy to beat, no?: 5 (6 with Elixir) Attacks on the charge, +5 attacks with Bladed limbs, +2 with Mechadendrils, +1 with TV Injector (14 attacks? .. not sure the TV injector generates new hits though), generating 3 extra attacks for each 4+ with Prescience and his own buff thanks to Death to the Imperfect for around 21 extra attacks on average ... coming in at about 35 attacks usually or, hypothetically, 56 max. If he's fighting Imperium, he gets regular DttfE as well for potentially up to another 14 attacks. Hypothetically, he maxes out at 70 attacks, I think, though I might have missed some limitations.

**puma713**

Jimbobbyish wrote:

On topic, I really like the TWC strat! It really adds up if they are supported by canis giving the wolves extra attacks.

They've always been one of my favorite units, especially when they first hit the scene in 5th Edition and there were no models for them. They were awesome. When I see strats built for them it makes me want to field them again. Not sure that strat is strong enough to do it though.

**Kirasu**

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
go on tell me how OP the Dark Angels are

Dark Angels can give +1S and +1A and leadership to Ragnar. Totally OP

I legit forgot about that Stratagem. Ragnar has 11 attacks on the charge, then, plus that strat giving 2 hits on a 4+. Does anything else even have that many attacks?

Good thing he can't get anywhere.

Well, the infamous Flawless Host Disco-Lord with FH Warlord trait (and Elixir as the best relic?) is probably still the guy to beat, no?: 5 (6 with Elixir) Attacks on the charge, +5 attacks with Bladed limbs, +2 with Mechadendrils, +1 with TV Injector (14 attacks? .. not sure the TV injector generates new hits though), generating 3 extra attacks for each 4+ with Prescience and his own buff thanks to Death to the Imperfect for around 21 extra attacks on average ... coming in at about 35 attacks usually or, hypothetically, 56 max. If he's fighting Imperium, he gets regular DttfE as well for potentially up to another 14 attacks. Hypothetically, he maxes out at 70 attacks, I think, though I might have missed some limitations.

Ragnar has infinitely more attacks because he'll actually survive to get into combat (even if hes slow). Discolords are often just a trap.

**Sunny Side Up**

Kirasu wrote:

Ragnar has infinitely more attacks because he'll actually survive to get into combat (even if hes slow). Discolords are often just a trap.

Sure. And inversely, an 11 Attacks Frozen Star Solitaire or a 9 Attacks Teeth-of-Terra/Imperium Sword Jump Captain are probably better than Ragnar, because they can get into the meaningful combats quicker and more reliable.

Just saying that Disco-Lord is (to my knowledge) probably the current champion of the mathhammer game of "how many attacks can a single model theoretically have".

**AlmightyWalrus**

Discolords can literally run-warptime-charge across the board in turn 1. How on Earth are you getting Ragnar into combat but failing to get a Discolord in??

EDIT: Also, since people were asking, Khârn has (effectively) 15 on the charge.

**WhiteDog**

Kirasu wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Jidmah wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
go on tell me how OP the Dark Angels are

Dark Angels can give +1S and +1A and leadership to Ragnar. Totally OP

I legit forgot about that Stratagem. Ragnar has 11 attacks on the charge, then, plus that strat giving 2 hits on a 4+. Does anything else even have that many attacks?

Good thing he can't get anywhere.

Well, the infamous Flawless Host Disco-Lord with FH Warlord trait (and Elixir as the best relic?) is probably still the guy to beat, no?: 5 (6 with Elixir) Attacks on the charge, +5 attacks with Bladed limbs, +2 with Mechadendrils, +1 with TV Injector (14 attacks? .. not sure the TV injector generates new hits though), generating 3 extra attacks for each 4+ with Prescience and his own buff thanks to Death to the Imperfect for around 21 extra attacks on average ... coming in at about 35 attacks usually or, hypothetically, 56 max. If he's fighting Imperium, he gets regular DttfE as well for potentially up to another 14 attacks. Hypothetically, he maxes out at 70 attacks, I think, though I might have missed some limitations.

Ragnar has infinitely more attacks because he'll actually survive to get into combat (even if hes slow). Discolords are often just a trap.

**Justyn**

Ragnar Wick: All he has left is Revenge!

**BrianDavion**

Justyn wrote:
Ragnar Wick: All he has left is Revenge!

someone skilled at photoshop needs to put Reeves head on Ragnar's body