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.
I mean there are 4 major SM factions, more than a dozen sub chapters, and a "make your own". Not to mention soup.
If I recall my statistics lessons, in order to find the true performance of a given faction, we need to include ANY placing that had ANY Space Marine unit, correct? Is that what this data is reflecting? 100% of SM wins are of any color?
Again, not privy to the data right now, but given how 9th edition works... I don't think that you're gonna see many Guard armies taking a single unit of Marines.
And anything non-Imperium flat-out CAN'T take any Marine units. Excepting Votann, I think-though that might be an upcoming rule.
Fallen violate the non-imperium rule right? You can technically field a detachment of fallen DA with Cypher or whatever he's called. Did that go bye bye in 9th?
That hasn't been a thing done even in 8th WHEN Fallen had rules LOL
EviscerationPlague wrote: That's why tournaments should stop people entering a specific army once you hit a certain number. If you just have 10-15 of each army, you'd definitely only see a few particular things top.
why would tournaments do that?
The theory would be to test external balance, that's all.
thats not the community’s job.
I never said it was, just to more prove a point that GW creates a bad game and that it can be proven.
if you don't like it, don't play. no one is forcing you to.
Marines are currently about 20% of all tournament lists. So yes, winning 38% of tournaments would be somewhat disproportionate.
Win% and placings are also not the same thing, although typically there will be some correlation. If you have a low win%, you probably do badly into the more popular lists. And if you do badly into popular lists, going 5-0 at a tournament is going to be difficult.
Marines finished 1st, 5th 6th and 10th. So 40% appearance in the top 10. They had a grand total of 22 lists who didn't drop out which makes them 17% of that specific tournament.
So 17% of the playing field took 40% of the top finishes including 1st place. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
Beachhead Brawl: (129 players)
Marines finished 1st, 3rd, 7th, 9th and 10th. So 50% of the top 10 placings. 25 Marine players so 19% of the player base.
19% of the playing field took 50% of the top finishes including 1st. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
When more big tournaments happen which include AoO I highly suspect that this trend will continue. n
Automatically Appended Next Post: Smaller Events:
*Note: These little events have a high drop rate*
Viking Invasion (30 Players) Marines had 7 lists 23% of the lists, Marines finished 4th and 8th.
Lords Of War (22 Players) Marines had 6 lists 27% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 4th, 6th and 7th
Norcal Open (25 Players) Marines had 7 lists 25% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 7th and 9th.
So 3 events which were listed as "GTs" on FLG's page, Marines took 1st place in 2 of them and managed a 4th place in the event they didn't win.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/02/20 12:43:26
Just out of curiosity, what is the point of debating percentages with all the factions?
I mean, isn't it clearly obvious when a list is broken, and when it isn't?
Does anyone disagree that a S/T 10 unit with 2+ everything that has fly, fights first, fights last, and 5 wounds, costing 15ppm in a squad of 3-10 is broken?
Is anyone arguing that 50ppm for a base Tactical marine is too much?
Here are the concrete goal posts. Can't we just stay in between these?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Just out of curiosity, what is the point of debating percentages with all the factions?
I mean, isn't it clearly obvious when a list is broken, and when it isn't?
Does anyone disagree that a S/T 10 unit with 2+ everything that has fly, fights first, fights last, and 5 wounds, costing 15ppm in a squad of 3-10 is broken?
Is anyone arguing that 50ppm for a base Tactical marine is too much?
Here are the concrete goal posts. Can't we just stay in between these?
But neither of those are a thing.
Is a Tactical at 18 PPM, 90 for a min squad, fine? Yeah-arguably slightly too expensive for how lethal 9th is.
Is a Tactical at 18 PPM, 90 for a min squad, but with a free Multimelta, Combi-Melta on Sarge, and a Thunder Hammer fine? I'd say no-that's a lot of firepower for not a lot of points, and the Multimelta is pretty durable behind the four chumps, relatively speaking.
While I dislike the free upgrades, it's not inherently unbalanced if points are still appropriate. But how do you determine if they're unbalanced?
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Just out of curiosity, what is the point of debating percentages with all the factions?
I mean, isn't it clearly obvious when a list is broken, and when it isn't?
Does anyone disagree that a S/T 10 unit with 2+ everything that has fly, fights first, fights last, and 5 wounds, costing 15ppm in a squad of 3-10 is broken?
Is anyone arguing that 50ppm for a base Tactical marine is too much?
Here are the concrete goal posts. Can't we just stay in between these?
But neither of those are a thing.
Is a Tactical at 18 PPM, 90 for a min squad, fine? Yeah-arguably slightly too expensive for how lethal 9th is.
Is a Tactical at 18 PPM, 90 for a min squad, but with a free Multimelta, Combi-Melta on Sarge, and a Thunder Hammer fine? I'd say no-that's a lot of firepower for not a lot of points, and the Multimelta is pretty durable behind the four chumps, relatively speaking.
While I dislike the free upgrades, it's not inherently unbalanced if points are still appropriate. But how do you determine if they're unbalanced?
Being facetious a little, if I presented the new space marine transhuman-centipede, a 10 wound infantry model with those guns and deteriorates via losing shots, I'm not sure anyone would consider it revolutionary for 90pts.
It's actually not a million miles off an invader atv which nobody ever bothers with, it trades 2 wounds, 2 bolter shots, a melta shot and melee for +1 T, +8" movement and perk of auto advance at 70 pts.
Marines finished 1st, 5th 6th and 10th. So 40% appearance in the top 10. They had a grand total of 22 lists who didn't drop out which makes them 17% of that specific tournament.
So 17% of the playing field took 40% of the top finishes including 1st place. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
Beachhead Brawl: (129 players)
Marines finished 1st, 3rd, 7th, 9th and 10th. So 50% of the top 10 placings. 25 Marine players so 19% of the player base.
19% of the playing field took 50% of the top finishes including 1st. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
When more big tournaments happen which include AoO I highly suspect that this trend will continue. n
Automatically Appended Next Post: Smaller Events:
*Note: These little events have a high drop rate*
Viking Invasion (30 Players) Marines had 7 lists 23% of the lists, Marines finished 4th and 8th.
Lords Of War (22 Players) Marines had 6 lists 27% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 4th, 6th and 7th
Norcal Open (25 Players) Marines had 7 lists 25% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 7th and 9th.
So 3 events which were listed as "GTs" on FLG's page, Marines took 1st place in 2 of them and managed a 4th place in the event they didn't win.
are you going to provide or source or just keep expecting people to take your word for it?
Marines finished 1st, 5th 6th and 10th. So 40% appearance in the top 10. They had a grand total of 22 lists who didn't drop out which makes them 17% of that specific tournament.
So 17% of the playing field took 40% of the top finishes including 1st place. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
Beachhead Brawl: (129 players)
Marines finished 1st, 3rd, 7th, 9th and 10th. So 50% of the top 10 placings. 25 Marine players so 19% of the player base.
19% of the playing field took 50% of the top finishes including 1st. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
When more big tournaments happen which include AoO I highly suspect that this trend will continue. n
Smaller Events:
*Note: These little events have a high drop rate*
Viking Invasion (30 Players) Marines had 7 lists 23% of the lists, Marines finished 4th and 8th.
Lords Of War (22 Players) Marines had 6 lists 27% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 4th, 6th and 7th
Norcal Open (25 Players) Marines had 7 lists 25% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 7th and 9th.
So 3 events which were listed as "GTs" on FLG's page, Marines took 1st place in 2 of them and managed a 4th place in the event they didn't win.
Not to denigrate these statistics, counting Top 10 in 22-30 player events isn't exactly the same as for a 130 player event. That is the top 7.75% of Beachhead Brawl versus the top 45% of Lords of War. Heck, having 4 of 6 list in the Top 50% of a tournament isn't really statistically abnormal.
Still, I am very curious as to the overall Win Percentage Space Marines are putting up versus their overall field percentage along with other statistics.
Marines finished 1st, 5th 6th and 10th. So 40% appearance in the top 10. They had a grand total of 22 lists who didn't drop out which makes them 17% of that specific tournament.
So 17% of the playing field took 40% of the top finishes including 1st place. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
Beachhead Brawl: (129 players)
Marines finished 1st, 3rd, 7th, 9th and 10th. So 50% of the top 10 placings. 25 Marine players so 19% of the player base.
19% of the playing field took 50% of the top finishes including 1st. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
When more big tournaments happen which include AoO I highly suspect that this trend will continue. n
Automatically Appended Next Post: Smaller Events:
*Note: These little events have a high drop rate*
Viking Invasion (30 Players) Marines had 7 lists 23% of the lists, Marines finished 4th and 8th.
Lords Of War (22 Players) Marines had 6 lists 27% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 4th, 6th and 7th
Norcal Open (25 Players) Marines had 7 lists 25% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 7th and 9th.
So 3 events which were listed as "GTs" on FLG's page, Marines took 1st place in 2 of them and managed a 4th place in the event they didn't win.
so how many other factions were regularly taking 1st place and what were their participation rates?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/02/21 03:33:57
Is a Tactical at 18 PPM, 90 for a min squad, fine? Yeah-arguably slightly too expensive for how lethal 9th is.
Is a Tactical at 18 PPM, 90 for a min squad, but with a free Multimelta, Combi-Melta on Sarge, and a Thunder Hammer fine? I'd say no-that's a lot of firepower for not a lot of points, and the Multimelta is pretty durable behind the four chumps, relatively speaking.
While I dislike the free upgrades, it's not inherently unbalanced if points are still appropriate. But how do you determine if they're unbalanced?
I neither like nor dislike the points drops. I think the points drops are/were a test bed for turning Points into operating like Power Level. I think GW needs or very much wants Power Level to be a thing, but people aren't going for it. So, they're just going to turn Points into Power Level and this is the Beta or maybe the Alpha. I think it makes list building a little harder, and at times counterintuitive. The points/unit values (i.e. quality per point) is off, and they don't land on plateaus right - Nor were the upgrade paths built with that in mind (I'd guess based on the way I would have changed that part too). Its pretty easy to land on a 1975 or so point list that's better than 2000 points lists. Even your example - two -Melta, and a TH. You hit the same threat band over and over for a Tac Squad as opposed to a TAC threat band with a Multi-melta, Combi-plas and Power Sword or something similar. Maybe if you're going vs Knights, or Tank Companies or making a Melta Tac with a Plasma Tac paired setup, but that wasn't part of your example. Nor did you compare vs other units - I get you're probably talking about a Drop Pod Bomb type of unit - but then you didn't include the Drop Pod Points - at which point you're better off going Sternguard with all Combi-Meltas. And the power fist. And if you're not Podding, but plodding, you're better off going Eradicators for more T, and double firing. Even if you are Podding, the Erads might not be able to Pod, but you can get even more Erads with the cost of the Pod.
I'm hoping the points drops are just the first stage of the next evolution.
To get back on topic, I'm kind of curious how we went from Marine Players are 40% of a tournament to now Marine Players are less than 20%.
Marines finished 1st, 5th 6th and 10th. So 40% appearance in the top 10. They had a grand total of 22 lists who didn't drop out which makes them 17% of that specific tournament.
So 17% of the playing field took 40% of the top finishes including 1st place. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
Beachhead Brawl: (129 players)
Marines finished 1st, 3rd, 7th, 9th and 10th. So 50% of the top 10 placings. 25 Marine players so 19% of the player base.
19% of the playing field took 50% of the top finishes including 1st. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
When more big tournaments happen which include AoO I highly suspect that this trend will continue. n
I'm going to come back and look at the above two later.
I will note, though, that the above two events are for 11/12 Feb, while the below three are for 18/19 Feb. Not sure how important that is, unless you can read it as a sign of the meta evolving over time. As the above two events are on BCP, I'll do the same evaluations as below later.
SemperMortis wrote: Smaller Events: *Note: These little events have a high drop rate*
This seems to be a drop rate before the event began, rather than during the event. - Viking Invasion: 30 registered, 28 show in pairings - Lords of War: 24 registered, 22 show in pairings - NorCal Open: 31 registered, 24 started event (placings show 25, but 25th played no games), 2 dropped after 3 rounds
I wouldn't call 2 mid-event drops across 3 events totalling 74 players a "high drop rate". I might describe the pre-event drop rate for NorCal Open as high, though.
SemperMortis wrote: Viking Invasion (30 Players) Marines had 7 lists 23% of the lists, Marines finished 4th and 8th.
While tagged as 30 players, only 28 signed up for the event, and 2 dropped before it began.
Let's look at this in more detail, shall we?
Spoiler:
28 Players registered, 2 dropped before event began (as neither show in the pairings)
Participation % Adeptus Custodes - 7.69% Adeptus Mechanicus - 3.85% Chaos Space Marines - 7.69% Eldar - 3.85% Imperial Guard - 7.69% Imperial Knights - 7.69% Knights Renegades - 11.54% Necrons - 3.85% Orks - 3.85% Space Marines - 26.92% Thousand Sons - 3.85% Tyranids - 11.54%
Borrowing MTG's tournament structure, top 8 would make the cut. Factions in top 8 were: Adeptus Custodes x2 Tyranids x1 Space Marines x2 Imperial Knights x1 Orks x1 Imperial Guard x 1
Given participation in the field at this event, appearances in the top 8 seem about right for SM & Tyranids. Knights Renegades *underperformed*. Adeptus Custodes appear to have *overperformed* quite significantly.
Note - Given number of entrants, this can't be said to be statistically significant.
SemperMortis wrote: Lords Of War (22 Players) Marines had 6 lists 27% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 4th, 6th and 7th
Stated results are inaccurate (as Grey Knights are not a Space Marines Supplement, so shouldn't be rolled into their figures).
More detail
Spoiler:
24 Players registered, 2 dropped before event began (as neither show in the pairings)
Factions entered Adeptus Custodes - ||| (11, 10, 17) Adeptus Mechanicus - | (20) Black Templars - | (6) Blood Angels - | (15) Chaos Daemons (Slaanesh) - | (13) CSM - | (3) CSM (Emperor's Children) - | (14) Dark Angels - | (7) Dark Eldar - | (19) Death Guard - | (16) Eldar - | (9) Genestealer Cult - | (18) Grey Knights - | (1) Imperial Guard - | (5) Iron Hands - | (12) Salamanders - | (4) Tau - || (22, 2) Tyranids (Behemoth) - | (21) Ynnari - | (8)
Grouped by core Codex Adeptus Custodes - ||| (10, 11, 17) Adeptus Mechanicus - | (20) Chaos Daemons - | (13) CSM - || (3, 14) Dark Eldar - | (19) Death Guard - | (16) Eldar - | (9) Genestealer Cult - | (18) Grey Knights - | (1) Imperial Guard - | (5) Space Marines - ||||| (4, 6, 7, 12, 15) Tau - || (2, 22) Tyranids - | (21) Ynnari - | (8)
Participation % Adeptus Custodes - 13.64% Adeptus Mechanicus - 4.55% Chaos Daemons - 4.55% CSM - 9.09% Dark Eldar - 4.55% Death Guard - 4.55% Eldar - 4.55% Genestealer Cult - 4.55% Grey Knights - 4.55% Imperial Guard - 4.55% Space Marines - 22.73% Tau - 9.09% Tyranids - 4.55% Ynnari - 4.55%
Borrowing MTG's tournament structure, top 8 would make the cut. Factions in top 8 were: Grey Knights x1 Tau x1 Chaos Space Marines x1 Space Marines x3 Imperial Guard x1 Ynnari x1
Given participation in the field, SM overperformed by one top 8 slot, while Custodes underperformed by not getting any.
Note - Given number of entrants, this can't be said to be statistically significant.
SemperMortis wrote: Norcal Open (25 Players) Marines had 7 lists 25% of lists, Marines finished 1st, 7th and 9th.
Note that only 24 people appear to have played a game, despite it being tagged as 25 players .
More detail
Spoiler:
31 Players registered, 7 dropped before event began (even if one shows as 25th in placings), 2 dropped after round 3 (marked with a *)
Borrowing MTG's tournament structure, top 8 would make the cut. Factions in top 8 were: Space Marines x2 Adepta Sororitas x1 Chaos Daemons x1 Eldar x1 Imperial Guard x1 Necrons x1 Tyranids x1
Given participation in the field, Space Marines got exactly the number of top 8 slots you'd expect, while Imperial Knights underperformed by not appearing in the top 8.
Note - Given number of entrants, this can't be said to be statistically significant.
SemperMortis wrote: So 3 events which were listed as "GTs" on FLG's page, Marines took 1st place in 2 of them and managed a 4th place in the event they didn't win.
SM (or their sub-factions) took 1st place in one event, and managed 4th in the two they didn't win. Once reduced to core Codex (rather than Supplements/Sub-Factions), they were the largest single faction at each event.
What happens if we combine the numbers for these three events?
Spoiler:
74 players entered, two dropped after round 3 (shown with a *)
Factions entered Adepta Sororitas - || Adeptus Astartes - | Adeptus Custodes - ||||| Adeptus Mechanicus - || Black Templars - | Blood Angels - ||||| | Chaos Daemons - | Chaos Daemons (Slaanesh) - | CSM - || CSM (Emperor's Children) - |||* CSM (Night Lords) - | Dark Angels - ||| Dark Eldar - | Death Guard - || Eldar - |||| Genestealer Cult - | Grey Knights - || Imperial Fists - |* Imperial Guard - |||| Imperial Knights - ||||| Iron Hands - | Knights Renegades - |||| Necrons - | Necrons (Nihilakh) - | Orks (Goffs) - | Raven Guard - | Salamanders - | Space Wolves - | Tau - || Thousand Sons - || Tyranids - ||| Tyranids (Behemoth) - | Tyranids (Leviathan) - | White Scars - | Ynnari - |
Grouped by core Codex Adepta Sororitas - || Adeptus Custodes - ||||| Adeptus Mechanicus - || Chaos Daemons - || CSM - ||||| |* Dark Eldar - | Death Guard - || Eldar - |||| Genestealer Cult - | Grey Knights - || Imperial Guard - |||| Imperial Knights - ||||| Knights Renegades - |||| Necrons - || Orks - | Space Marines - ||||| ||||| ||||| ||||* Tau - || Thousand Sons - || Tyranids - ||||| Ynnari - |
Participation % Adepta Sororitas - 2.7% Adeptus Custodes - 6.76% Adeptus Mechanicus - 2.7% Chaos Daemons - 2.7% CSM - 8.11%* Dark Eldar - 1.35% Death Guard - 2.7% Eldar - 5.4% Genestealer Cult - 1.35% Grey Knights - 2.7% Imperial Guard - 5.4% Imperial Knights - 6.76% Knights Renegades - 5.4% Necrons - 2.7% Orks - 1.35% Space Marines - 25.68%* Tau - 2.7% Thousand Sons - 2.7% Tyranids - 6.76% Ynnari - 1.35%
Top 8 places (% of top 8 places) Adepta Sororitas x1 (4.17%) Adeptus Custodes x2 (8.33%) Chaos Daemons x1 (4.17%) Chaos Space Marines x1 (4.17%) Eldar x1 (4.17%) Grey Knights x1 (4.17%) Imperial Guard x3 (12.5%) Imperial Knights x1 (4.17%) Necrons x1 (4.17%) Orks x1 (4.17%) Space Marines x7 (29.17%) Tau x1 (4.17%) Tyranids x2 (8.33%) Ynnari x1 (4.17%)
Comparing participation % to top 8 %, SM appear to over perform slightly - maybe by one top 8 spot. However, I'd flag the Imperial Guard as a larger offender, securing 2.5x the number of top 8 spots you'd expect from the number of entrants. Knights Renegades are probably the biggest underperformer, as they didn't get a top 8 slot at all, despite being 5.4% of the field.
Note that these expectations are purely looking at the percentages, which assume players and factions are equal.
I'm still not convinced this is enough data to be statistically significant, however.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2023/02/21 08:34:28
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Great analysis, thank you. So it seems we're in the land of apace marines are strong enough to have an appropriate proportional representation of top finishes. Which is pretty much the ideal really. The only outstanding query is impact of free upgrades.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Marines finished 1st, 5th 6th and 10th. So 40% appearance in the top 10. They had a grand total of 22 lists who didn't drop out which makes them 17% of that specific tournament.
So 17% of the playing field took 40% of the top finishes including 1st place. I would argue that is heavily over represented.
10th place was Grey Knights, not Space Marines (or a Supplement thereof). I count 21 Space Marine lists (as there were 3 GK), but it is possible the list on the Roster tab that said "Imperium" was a SM - I don't have an account with BCP, so wasn't digging further.
Stud or Snotling
Spoiler:
134 players registered, 130 played at least 1 game, 9 dropped during the event (shown with a *)
Key:
Dropped after 1 round - Dropped after 2 rounds - Dropped after 3 rounds - Dropped after 4 rounds - Dropped after 5 rounds - Dropped after 6 rounds
Participation % (out of 130)
Adepta Sororitas - 3.08%
Adeptus Custodes - 10.77%
Adeptus Mechanicus - 3.08%
Chaos - 0.77%
Chaos Daemons - 6.15%
Chaos Space Marines - 3.85%
Dark Eldar - 3.85%
Death Guard - 2.31%
Eldar - 4.62%
Genestealer Cult - 2.31%
Grey Knights - 2.31%
Harlequins - 2.31%
Imperial Guard - 7.69%
Imperial Knights - 4.62%
Imperium - 0.77%
Knights Renegades - 3.08%
Leagues of Votann - 5.38%
Necrons - 3.85%
Orks - 3.08%
Space Marines - 16.15%
Tau Empire - 5.38%
Tyranids - 2.31%
Ynnari - 1.54%
Top 8 places (12.75% each)
Space Marines x3
Chaos x1
Imperial Guard x1
Leagues of Votann x1
Tau Empire x2
Space Marines outperform their participation percentage significantly (16.15% vs. 37.25%), as do Tau (5.38% vs. 25%). Adeptus Custodes are the big under-performer here, with no top 8 slots despite 10.77% of the field.
Top 16 places (6.25% each)
Space Marines x5
Chaos x1
Chaos Daemons x2
Grey Knights x1
Imperial Guard x2
Imperial Knights x1
Leagues of Votann x1
Tau Empire x2
Tyranids x1
Space Marines countinue to out-perform their participation % in the top 16 (16.15% vs. 31.25%). Chaos Daemons, Imperial Guard and Tau Empire also outperform in the top 16 compared to their participation % (6.15%, 7.69% and 5.38% vs. 12.5%). Adeptus Custodes remain the primary underperformer here, as they still didn't manage to get anyone in the top 16.
And why the heck get yourself marked as "Dropped" after the final round?
Grouped by core Codex
Adeptus Custodes - ||||| ||||| | (21, 28, 38, 41, 47, 61, 69, 70*, 74, 90*, 102)
Adeptus Mechanicus - | (35)
Chaos Daemons - ||||| || (2, 11, 22, 49, 73, 115*, 124*)
Chaos Space Marines - | (31)
Dark Eldar - ||||| (16, 59, 66*, 84, 101*)
Death Guard - ||| (42, 85, 104)
Eldar - ||||| ||| (4, 18, 51, 56, 80, 95, 98*, 111*)
Genestealer Cult - ||| (6, 14, 44)
Grey Knights - |||| (26, 50, 78, 94*)
Harlequins - | (87*)
Imperial Guard - ||||| |||| (17, 25, 30, 45, 52, 63*, 86, 92, 124*)
Imperial Knights - ||| (23, 24, 57)
Knights Renegades - |||| (5, 46, 105, 109*)
Leagues of Votann - ||||| || (8, 54, 64, 65, 72, 93, 113*)
Necrons - |||| (15, 48, 103*, 117)
Orks - ||||| ||| (13, 39, 40, 60, 83, 97, 99, 124*)
Space Marines - ||||| ||||| ||||| ||||| ||||| |||| (1, 3, 7, 9, 10, 19, 20, 27, 29, 33, 34, 36*, 43, 53, 62, 71, 75, 77, 79, 81, 88*, 91, 100, 112, 114*, 118, 121*, 123*, 124*)
Tau - ||||| ||||| | (37, 58, 68*, 76, 82, 89, 107, 110, 120*, 122*, 124*)
Thousand Sons - || (32)
Tyranids - ||||| | (55, 96, 106, 108, 116, 119*)
World Eaters - | (67) - I'm not 100% sure if World Eaters would be using their own book on an event running 11/2-12/2, but I've left them distinct for now Ynnari - | (12)
Participation % (of the 129 players who completed at least one game)
Adeptus Custodes - 8.53%
Adeptus Mechanicus - 0.76%
Chaos Daemons - 5.43%
Chaos Space Marines - 0.76%
Dark Eldar - 3.86%
Death Guard - 2.33%
Eldar - 6.2%
Genestealer Cult - 2.33%
Grey Knights - 3.1%
Harlequins - 0.76%
Imperial Guard - 6.98%
Imperial Knights - 2.33%
Knights Renegades - 3.1%
Leagues of Votann - 5.43%
Necrons - 3.1%
Orks - 6.2%
Space Marines - 22.48%
Tau - 8.52%
Thousand Sons - 1.55%
Tyranids - 4.65%
World Eaters - 0.76%
Ynnari - 0.76%
Top 8 places (12.5% per slot)
Space Marines x3
Chaos Daemons x1
Eldar x1
Genestealer Cult x1
Knights Renegades x1
Leagues of Votann x1
Space Marines are outperforming their participation % in the top 8, by one spot. Genestealer Cult is probably the surprise package here, given only 2.33% of the participants, though every faction other than Space Marines was below 12.5% individually.
Top 16 places (6.25% per slot)
Space Marines x5
Chaos Daemons x2
Dark Eldar x1
Eldar x1
Genestealer Cult x2
Knights Renegades x1
Leagues of Votann x1
Necrons x1
Orks x1
Ynnari x1
If we broaden the view to top 16, then SM still overperform by about one slot - 22.48% participation would lead to 3-4 top 16 on average. Chaos Daemons and Genestealer Cults also overperform, given 5.43% and 2.33% participation, respectively.
I am curious why this event had such a high drop rate, though.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Just out of curiosity, what is the point of debating percentages with all the factions?
I mean, isn't it clearly obvious when a list is broken, and when it isn't?
Does anyone disagree that a S/T 10 unit with 2+ everything that has fly, fights first, fights last, and 5 wounds, costing 15ppm in a squad of 3-10 is broken?
Is anyone arguing that 50ppm for a base Tactical marine is too much?
Here are the concrete goal posts. Can't we just stay in between these?
While I dislike the free upgrades, it's not inherently unbalanced if points are still appropriate. But how do you determine if they're unbalanced?
Okay, here's an easy way. Is a Tactical Marine squad with a Flamer better or worse than a Tactical Squad with a Grav Cannon?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Just out of curiosity, what is the point of debating percentages with all the factions?
I mean, isn't it clearly obvious when a list is broken, and when it isn't?
Does anyone disagree that a S/T 10 unit with 2+ everything that has fly, fights first, fights last, and 5 wounds, costing 15ppm in a squad of 3-10 is broken?
Is anyone arguing that 50ppm for a base Tactical marine is too much?
Here are the concrete goal posts. Can't we just stay in between these?
While I dislike the free upgrades, it's not inherently unbalanced if points are still appropriate. But how do you determine if they're unbalanced?
Okay, here's an easy way. Is a Tactical Marine squad with a Flamer better or worse than a Tactical Squad with a Grav Cannon?
That's not what they asked, the internal balance sucks, that's obvious. What they asked is at what point the unit slips into unbalanced by stacking the freebies on.
For what it's worth it's not impossible to have a grav cannon and a flamer appropriately balanced against each other if you revisited the weapon profiles.
I mean there are 4 major SM factions, more than a dozen sub chapters, and a "make your own". Not to mention soup.
If I recall my statistics lessons, in order to find the true performance of a given faction, we need to include ANY placing that had ANY Space Marine unit, correct? Is that what this data is reflecting? 100% of SM wins are of any color?
Again, not privy to the data right now, but given how 9th edition works... I don't think that you're gonna see many Guard armies taking a single unit of Marines.
And anything non-Imperium flat-out CAN'T take any Marine units. Excepting Votann, I think-though that might be an upcoming rule.
Fallen violate the non-imperium rule right? You can technically field a detachment of fallen DA with Cypher or whatever he's called. Did that go bye bye in 9th?
That hasn't been a thing done even in 8th WHEN Fallen had rules LOL
EviscerationPlague wrote: That's why tournaments should stop people entering a specific army once you hit a certain number. If you just have 10-15 of each army, you'd definitely only see a few particular things top.
why would tournaments do that?
The theory would be to test external balance, that's all.
thats not the community’s job.
I never said it was, just to more prove a point that GW creates a bad game and that it can be proven.
if you don't like it, don't play. no one is forcing you to.
Don't be mad at me for critiquing what is obviously a badly designed game.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Just out of curiosity, what is the point of debating percentages with all the factions?
I mean, isn't it clearly obvious when a list is broken, and when it isn't?
Does anyone disagree that a S/T 10 unit with 2+ everything that has fly, fights first, fights last, and 5 wounds, costing 15ppm in a squad of 3-10 is broken?
Is anyone arguing that 50ppm for a base Tactical marine is too much?
Here are the concrete goal posts. Can't we just stay in between these?
While I dislike the free upgrades, it's not inherently unbalanced if points are still appropriate. But how do you determine if they're unbalanced?
Okay, here's an easy way. Is a Tactical Marine squad with a Flamer better or worse than a Tactical Squad with a Grav Cannon?
That's not what they asked, the internal balance sucks, that's obvious. What they asked is at what point the unit slips into unbalanced by stacking the freebies on.
For what it's worth it's not impossible to have a grav cannon and a flamer appropriately balanced against each other if you revisited the weapon profiles.
Okay, how about Plasma Gun vs Multi-Melta?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2023/02/21 22:48:13
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Dysartes wrote: I'm curious - why the special vs. heavy comparisons, instead of special vs. special and heavy vs. heavy?
I assume because a 5-model Tactical Marine Squad is allowed to pick one (free) Special or Heavy Weapon. Therefore, the question becomes are those units roughly equivalent since they are both 90 points?
Dysartes wrote: I'm curious - why the special vs. heavy comparisons, instead of special vs. special and heavy vs. heavy?
I assume because a 5-model Tactical Marine Squad is allowed to pick one (free) Special or Heavy Weapon. Therefore, the question becomes are those units roughly equivalent since they are both 90 points?
Probably also the 4 Shots every time vs D6, while hoping nobody thinks about why the Flamer is so rarely chosen as a special in the first place.
Dysartes wrote: I'm curious - why the special vs. heavy comparisons, instead of special vs. special and heavy vs. heavy?
I assume because a 5-model Tactical Marine Squad is allowed to pick one (free) Special or Heavy Weapon. Therefore, the question becomes are those units roughly equivalent since they are both 90 points?
Probably also the 4 Shots every time vs D6, while hoping nobody thinks about why the Flamer is so rarely chosen as a special in the first place.
If the flamer is not being taken in the first place does it matter if the flamer and grav cannon are the points cost?
