|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on May 2, 2022 11:19:21 GMT -5
Well the AOW guys put up a video saying the new nids would be dominating all tournaments and putting up win rates higher than pre-nerf harlies... turns out... well that didn't happen. Nids won two events... and John Lennon from Art of War, their main nid player, who complained about them being way too good on this video, brought them to the Dallas Open and came in third. so yeah... Interesting results though, showing the new nids have a quite healthy win rate out the gate, Harlies still doing well, but no one cracks more than 62% now (pre balance slate we had a few 70%+ win rate armies!) deathwatch, harlies and nids are hovering all around 60-62%, admech and iron hands are the only armies in the 20% club This is the results from 2,800+ games, so a pretty good sample! www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/duplicates/ugo5qj/meta_monday_5222_lets_go/
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on May 2, 2022 11:22:01 GMT -5
oh... and 90% of the winning lists for nids were leviathan... and included multiple harpies
so if you are expecting nerfs (I am!) I'd say both leviathan and harpies will get adjusted.
|
|
|
Post by artonas on May 2, 2022 12:03:52 GMT -5
Well the deathwatch makes me happy though I'm sure its with the army of renown as its pretty great to choose which chapter your army is each battle round compared to doing it once per round only in your battle round for 2CP. By the time I have enough painted to run the army of renown I know they'll take it away with the rumours of a space marine 2.0 book.
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on May 2, 2022 12:23:06 GMT -5
Looking at the #players stat alone it's pretty clear that folks believe Tau, Craftworlds, and Nids are the choices to take now if you want to attempt to win a major right now.
Despite Nids being overwhelmingly represented with 67/500 players the fact they _only_ put up a 62% winrate says to me competitive-minded-folks are already tooling up against their build(s) and have a plan against them.
Doesn't mean they won't catch some nerfs or adjustments, but that's certainly shocking giving AoW's cold call that Nids would smash the meta.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on May 2, 2022 13:05:58 GMT -5
Looking at the #players stat alone it's pretty clear that folks believe Tau, Craftworlds, and Nids are the choices to take now if you want to attempt to win a major right now. Despite Nids being overwhelmingly represented with 67/500 players the fact they _only_ put up a 62% winrate says to me competitive-minded-folks are already tooling up against their build(s) and have a plan against them. Doesn't mean they won't catch some nerfs or adjustments, but that's certainly shocking giving AoW's cold call that Nids would smash the meta. And because it's AOW they said it was stupid and broken yet brought it anyways... And didn't win with it lol Just made me chuckle a bit
|
|
|
Post by lightcavalier on May 2, 2022 14:49:38 GMT -5
Looking at the #players stat alone it's pretty clear that folks believe Tau, Craftworlds, and Nids are the choices to take now if you want to attempt to win a major right now. Despite Nids being overwhelmingly represented with 67/500 players the fact they _only_ put up a 62% winrate says to me competitive-minded-folks are already tooling up against their build(s) and have a plan against them. Doesn't mean they won't catch some nerfs or adjustments, but that's certainly shocking giving AoW's cold call that Nids would smash the meta. And because it's AOW they said it was stupid and broken yet brought it anyways... And didn't win with it lol Just made me chuckle a bit Back in 3rd edition of Flames of War there developed an interesting cycle, where the handful of internet talking heads basically created the metagame....not based on what was absolutely good in the game but more based on what they perceived as the best. Led to loads of mediocre players following their lead and running all tank forces with no infantry and often minimal artillery....because thats what "top dude X" said to run. Ironically anyone who had a modicum of skill could spank those armies with an infantry army in a competitive setting. But because so many ppl were copy pasting lists on the advice of talking heads, it meant that most tournaments were just a bunch of ppl with all tank armies duking it out, and drowning out the field so that the few infantry army players needed a little bit of luck to get the wins necessary to take the whole event. Alot of the rabid narrative on the 40k internet reminds me of the same thing....where ppl create a narrative of a meta that could be and just run with it (look at the universal dearth of Hammerheads, Falcons, and Webway gates for sale....yet those items, less maybe the falcon, arent really appearing much in actual games)
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on May 2, 2022 15:16:59 GMT -5
yeah the internet "wisdom" for 40k makes me shake my head sometimes... Most of it is based around a GT meta in the States (at least the popular "top tier" internet player advice) while everywhere plays differently and has widely different results on what is on top depending on where you play (Europe and Australia come to mind from various goonhammer GT results articles I've read).
Experience in playing where you're going to be playing trumps someone else's advice from a completely different environment every time - with the exception of course of if you're travelling to try and win the 40k championship at Adepticon, you'd best be preparing for that meta!
It would have been like for the past six months locally if all you prepared for was admech and custodes at tournies because they were "the best" so would be everywhere... but then realize you'd rarely if ever actually see it on a table.
But some people are making alot of money off this game, and capitalizing on what is the new "broken". I'm guilty myself of watching alot of these videos on tier lists etc. but I have to remind myself to take it with a grain of salt, as I'm not travelling anywhere to play, and I'm definitely not going all the way to California etc. to play in a tournament, so why get upset about any of that stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on May 2, 2022 15:49:08 GMT -5
yeah the internet "wisdom" for 40k makes me shake my head sometimes... Most of it is based around a GT meta in the States (at least the popular "top tier" internet player advice) while everywhere plays differently and has widely different results on what is on top depending on where you play (Europe and Australia come to mind from various goonhammer GT results articles I've read). Experience in playing where you're going to be playing trumps someone else's advice from a completely different environment every time - with the exception of course of if you're travelling to try and win the 40k championship at Adepticon, you'd best be preparing for that meta! It would have been like for the past six months locally if all you prepared for was admech and custodes at tournies because they were "the best" so would be everywhere... but then realize you'd rarely if ever actually see it on a table. But some people are making alot of money off this game, and capitalizing on what is the new "broken". I'm guilty myself of watching alot of these videos on tier lists etc. but I have to remind myself to take it with a grain of salt, as I'm not travelling anywhere to play, and I'm definitely not going all the way to California etc. to play in a tournament, so why get upset about any of that stuff. I actually saw a really interesting video a while back where Nick Nanavati of all people actually said the following paraphrase I was actually shocked _he_ of all people said this, as it was right during the peak of of the non-interactive-army meta last year. In the same video he talked about how he likes these non-interactive armies because he's a control-freak player and really likes to have a force that he can just play his game and remove as many variables from what he needs to accomplish as possible, and hence why he was having so much success in the meta because other players are effectively just trying to copy things his playstyle makes him want to do somewhat instinctively. Building your force to compliment the way you play and are comfortable playing, will often yield better results than playing a list someone else wrote for their playstyle. Which makes the concept of the internet-meta all the more ridiculous. "This is the top meta list" isn't even accurate. It's "This list in this tournament's rule set and terrain setup piloted by this type of player using this playstyle while expecting your biggest competition to be X, Y, and Z". The concept of "best list" or "best list for faction X" isn't even the right idea to be exploring, and players should be focused on what their playstyle is and tailoring their force to their command-vision and tactics. As we get closer to "complete 9th edition meta", I think we'll find this to be more and more true and the competitive meta archtype concept will slowly start to dissolve.
|
|
|
Post by raceygaming on May 2, 2022 21:11:12 GMT -5
One list I will sat that I'm not happy to see is a 43 man death wing that 4x10 blocks of terminator/ knights and 3 characters...took a first place. That AoC looks very strong on 2+ saves and transhuman.
I just can't see that being fun to play against in any form.
|
|
|
Post by distractedcarnifex on May 2, 2022 22:35:19 GMT -5
One list I will sat that I'm not happy to see is a 43 man death wing that 4x10 blocks of terminator/ knights and 3 characters...took a first place. That AoC looks very strong on 2+ saves and transhuman. I just can't see that being fun to play against in any form. The Lion has entered the chat.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on May 4, 2022 11:02:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Hi I'm Derek on May 4, 2022 12:04:36 GMT -5
One list I will sat that I'm not happy to see is a 43 man death wing that 4x10 blocks of terminator/ knights and 3 characters...took a first place. That AoC looks very strong on 2+ saves and transhuman. I just can't see that being fun to play against in any form. On the other hand, it's not a new list and it's only one podium. It was one of the last most successful ways to place with Dark Angels for the last half year before they finally got pushed completely out of the meta by power creep. AoC has just kinda put it back to a comparable level it was at before the December-on releases broke everything. And this list doesn't even benefit from AoC on fully half its units! It's actually kind of insane how much layered defense you need to pile on these days for a unit to not just evaporate to the first thing that looks at it (which these still do to MW). Like, my DW got scraped off the table in multiple games at club champs and not by a narrow margin, mostly by stuff that AoC wouldn't really influence, which is probably why this list doesn't lean into it. I think you may have a bit of an anti-terminator bias. There's LOTS of stuff in 40k that's not fun to play against, probably including virtually every list featured in these articles, and probably some whole armies (I would argue to some degree the entire premise of Tau is an army consisting almost exclusively of anti-fun skew lists, same is true of Knights) by you keep going out of your way to pick on the chonky bois :/
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on May 4, 2022 12:06:39 GMT -5
Yeah, the Eldar reddit has been abuzz about Hail of Doom + ______ lists from a few different lists with similar archtype to Nanavati's dallas open list. With most thinking it will be likely to catch the eye of the balance team. I'm not sure it categorizes as an oppressive build, but it definitely has very vicious teeth when taken to the extreme version that won the Dallas open. The more widely used template going around is Hail of Doom + Mobile Fighters to give +1 to wound when bailing out of serpents/falcons, scroll down to the Clash of Alba 2022 to see that version vs Levithan Nids.
Seeing GSC start to rise towards the top of the pile puts a smile on my face too, especially builds rocking 20 abberants.
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on May 4, 2022 13:47:06 GMT -5
It's actually kind of insane how much layered defense you need to pile on these days for a unit to not just evaporate to the first thing that looks at it (which these still do to MW). Like, my DW got scraped off the table in multiple games at club champs and not by a narrow margin, mostly by stuff that AoC wouldn't really influence, which is probably why this list doesn't lean into it. This is really a key to the late-9th edition meta imo. I know via the grapevine that I'm not the only one locally whose leaned hard into the disposable army mentality, where instead of trying to make a threat tough enough to survive whatever can be thrown at it, instead just focus a bit more on quantity-of-quality threats. That may seem like Sun-Tzu speak, but what it really means is taking units that are cheap-but-effective-at-the-job-you-care-about. Really what I find works for me, is just finding ways to keep unit costs under ~150 points per unit or at most ~200 for an expensive but powerful unit, which leads to having more units available in a strike-force sized army. (I scale this down as well for smaller games, such as trying to keep units under 100 points in 1000 point games unless they are really powerful) Your opponent regardless of matchup will be very likely to be able to remove ~2-3 of your threats per turn. That doesn't necessarily mean killed, but "rendered combat ineffective", and hence having more quantity of threats seems to get me to that balance point where the unit has a good chance to be capable of dealing effective damage, but also not be crippling if I just outright lose it before it does anything. I'd be curious to know if anyone else has explored this "disposable-army" mentality and their thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on May 4, 2022 14:21:03 GMT -5
I create all of my armies in that manner... nothing that's a deathstar or lynchpin because everything dies if someone wants them dead. If I'm relying on X unit to carry all my games, that's probably going to lead me to lose any game that unit doesn't do all the work, or isn't deployed poorly, tied up, rendered ineffectual etc. etc.
I understand that some armies due to their nature (custodes, knights etc.) have only so many pieces on the board so cannot really do this effectively.
I just go in with the idea that nothing in my army is indispensable and they are there to accomplish a goal. If they die, who cares.... must be all that time running GSC into the meatgrinder lol
|
|