Friday, May 28, 2010

A breakdown of the 'ard Boyz winners from 38 Tournaments


So, I was looking at Dakka's "How did you do" thread, and I was compiling the results for 38 different tournaments just to get a sense of what I'd be facing in the upcoming semi-finals.

Here's what I found. To get these numbers, I took a look at the winners of the 38 tournaments and assigned 3 quality points to the 1st place winner, 2 quality points to the second place winner, and 1 quality point to the third place winner. I then added the total quality points earned and then divided that total by the total number of times the race placed. For example, the Blood Angels placed 8 times in 38 tournaments, once in 1st (3 points), four times in 2nd (8 points), and thrice in 3rd place (3 points). Divide that by 8 times they appeared nets you an 1.75 quality points.

Here they are broken down in a more raw form:


Nids were surprising, as they placed 19 times out of the 38 x 3 positions available, making them the most populous of all the winners. We'll likely see more of them. Orks were not a surprise, as people were using them to meta the dreaded third scenario. I didn't expect my beloved Blood Angels to fall so low, not did I expect the IG to be so high, considering the internet babble about the death of the Dreaded Leafblower build. The numbers show that people still have trouble with that build.

Also, what the hell are daemons doing there?


I forgot to add the population totals from the orginal post, and I think it's vital to the discussion:

Army Total Population out 114 places

Nids -19 - 16.6%

IG - 13 - 11.4%

Daemons - 5 - 4.4%

Eldar - 6 - 5.3%

Orks - 17 - 14.9%

Wolves - 9 - 7.9%

Dark Eldar - 5 - 4.4%

Tau - 4 - 3.5%

Blood Angels - 8 - 7%

CSM - 10 - 8.8%

Black Templar - 3 - 2.6%

Marines - 9 - 7.9%

Vulkan - 4 - 3.5%

Dark Angels - 1 - .8%

Necrons - 1 - .8%

The numbers just above show raw success regardless of place. These numbers assume that the semi's are your only goal, and that success in reaching them is your only concern. I think that's a poor goal to set. It's far better to choose an army that will allow for greater success. In other words, it's better to be vying for first and just get second than to have to battle it out for third.

Doe you beleive that this trend toward Nid, Ork and IG success was caused by Scenario Three? Or do these scores show people's "first choice" armies?

What are your thoughts?


  1. I would have thought BA was going to top the list, so am a bit surprised to see Nids there. Perhaps the Nid players are just more vocal about their success and posted the most?

  2. I really expected BA to do better as well, as they have the tools to put IG to the test.

  3. This pretty much matches my local Ard Boyz results (that weren't reported on Dakka).

    Nids, Daemons, Templars

    Makes me wonder if some flunky at GW is designing the semi final missions to screw with the top seeded armies?

  4. We'll know more about that when we see them. I'm hoping that's sooner rather than later. Let's hope that GW is doing it's quality check now.

  5. The third scenario really benefited nids and daemons, as both have few units that qualify for the extra killpoints.

  6. It could be argued that foot orks had a similar advantage in that scenario as well.

    Still, it doesn't explain their success in the first two scenarios, though. They would have had to have success there to even have a chance at the top prize.

    Building on your comment, my supposition is this: experienced players took at look at scenario three and meta-gamed it. They took armies that withheld kill points for scenario three. Their experience at the game allowed them to beat enough face to get them past Scenarios 1 and 2.

  7. so does that make me the necron .8% awesome! once again i am the outlier that will bring down the fall of the tyrannical oppressors of well known armies! or im a get my face stomped in... prolly the latter but good work!

  8. Good stuff, Valhallan!

    I would think that it's hard to derive too many observations from the first round results. For example, I assume most people are fairly limited in their possible armies. Even among the (admittedly few) serious guys I know, few of them can field a competitive 2500 pt list in more than one faction. For example, I think you probably have a ton of people who might think BA is stronger on paper, but just don't have a BA list on hand. More to the point, there's probably a lot of people in the preliminary round who just aren't thinking about it that way. They play X, so X is what they bring. I'm inclined to believe there might be a lot of shakeup in these results in the semi-finals.