Chapter Tactics is a 40k podcast which focuses on promoting better tactical play and situational awareness across all variations of the game. Today Peteypab grabs Reece, The Falcon, and Abusepuppy to deep dive into all the advanced statistics of this year’s LVO. Including Unit analysis, Faction vs. Faction win percentage, TWiP, and so much more!
Show Notes:
- Head on over to 40kstats.com for more faction stats for all major ITC tournaments!
- Shout out to Peter and the Best Coast Pairings guys and Peter for making all the amazing stats in this episode possible.
- Support us on Patreon, this month and get a chance to win a free Forgeworld Sanguinius con exclusive model!
- Click here for a link for information on downloading best coast pairings app where you can find lists for most of the events I mention.
- Check out the last episode of Chapter Tactics here. Or, click here for a link to a full archive of all of my episodes.
- Commercial music by Music by: www.bensound.com
- Intro by: Justin Mahar
Missed some kind of joke about Australians doing well with Tyranids because they’re surounded by weird dangerous bugs.
Unacceptable.
I got to play against a optimized squad of GSC abberants… holy cow those guys are potent.
Great Episode. I will now go down to LA and fight Reece over Canadian Money as requested.
hahaha, I better start running!
I’m actually in Anaheim next week for work, trying to sneak my way into Dicehammer GT. Beware!
Hey Petey Pab,
Chapter Tactics 101 didn’t come out on the website feed. There’s a you-tube version of it, but now mp3 (downloadable) version. Would you be able to get 101 up so those of us who use mp3 over you tube could grab it? Thanks! 😀
Ah… episode 101. A classic for all times.
Interestingly, this episode (#102) is labelled as #101 via the download link! I assume it is actually 102, from those who listened to it?
For faction break downs and rankings I think Drukhari and Chaos Daemons, should be represented as their the sub-factions rather than the overall soup. These two codices are unique in 40k in that they are essentially smaller codices bundled together. Rather than an overall faction that is separated only by a “chapter tactic”. Mechanically each sub-faction from these two codices has a nearly a completely different set of units, warlord traits, artifacts, and psychic powers. Mixing any sub-faction together from their respective codex nullifies their respective “chapter tactics” abilities like any soup detachment sharing a faction keyword. Composition wise there is more of a difference between Khorne vs Nurgle Daemons than Dark Angels vs Blood Angels.
A lack of granular reporting is why I feel the lesser sub-factions from these two codices are under-represented in discussion about faction standings. Compared to more perennial cry baby factions like Grey Knights that get more spotlight. Statistically thanks to 40kstats.com, we know that Kabal of the Black Heart & Prophets of Flesh Coven or Nurgle Daemons, are very strong and are the largest contributor for their respective factions overall success. We also know that Slaanesh Daemons are non-existent and Wych Cults are disproportionally absent compared to Kabals or Homoculi Covens. With 11% Drukhari lists being Wych Cult (59 lists total) and 2% of Chaos Daemon lists being Slaanesh Daemon (8 lists total).
Here the thing, though: no one but Chaos Daemon and Drukhari players actually is interested or cares about that. And the fact that you can “soup” those codices together with all of their subfactions- which is indeed what a lot of players end up doing- sort of defeats the point of that analysis.
Peter has all of those stats available, if you want to look at them, but we’re not gonna spend ten minutes talking about why a subfaction of a subfaction isn’t getting as much attention as you want.
Also Sean Nayden brought a Wych Cult detachment in his army, which ranked extremely highly, and he’s not alone in seeing them as one of the most powerful Drukhari subfactions.
One the same side of that coin, I, for example, don’t care about Space Marines. Blood Angels, Dark Angels, Space Wolves, Space Marines, it is 75% the same units and play nearly identical. If FLG put all the Power Armor rankings under one bucket, I couldn’t care less. I do care about Chaos Daemons because that is my faction and is where my time is invested for ITC. There are more differences between each of the 4 Chaos Daemon factions than there is between Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, and Space Marines. I think for statistical and ITC ranking, purposes that should be reflected.
Trying to play Khorne, Tzeetch, or Slaanesh, Daemon primary is a whole different beast than trying to play Nurgle Daemon primary, but Chaos Daemon players being ranked by the success of Nurgle Daemons because of the homogenous Chaos Daemon umbrella faction.
I would tend to agree, and if you notice they often get grouped together when we talk about stats for things. However, by simple number of players even the very smallest of those factions blows Chaos Daemons as a whole out of the water, to say nothing of subdividing it into four subfactions.
I get that you love your Slaanesh Daemons, and that’s great. But we- and especially Mr. Falcon- have to choose how to allocate time in our efforts and our discussions, and we’re naturally going to gravitate towards focusing on factions with more presence and more popularity. Do you think I wouldn’t appreciate a 20 minute divergence on Craftworld Ynnari vs. Drukhari Ynnari vs. Harlequins Ynnari and how each of them performed? Sure as hell I would, and I guarantee you there are more differences there than there are between the types of Chaos Daemons (because that literally is three difference codices), but it’s not a reasonable expectation nor a good use of our time. We don’t have the space to pander to the individual desires of every single listener.
Mmmm stats. Good stuff.
I have to be honest I found parts of this podcast really cringe worthy, particularly as an Ork player.
It seems to me that the poor results for Orks were really talked down while the good results were really talked up and the actual stats don’t coincide with what many on the panel seem to believe.
Despite everyone knowing that Castellans and IG were going to make up a large part of the LVO meta, everyone “had to tech for Orks”. So the reasons we had poor performances against CWE and DE were actually because those players built lists to counter Orks specifically and not the ton of IG players or Castellan bringers? This doesn’t seem right to me at all. The Ynarri Flyer list was difficult for all factions to handle so I really doubt it was made on the assumption that the player would be facing a ton of Ork opponents.
We only had a 48% win rate which is what, 1% better than pre bolter drill Space Marines fared?
We only had 2 players go 5-1 which is bloody awful. It also shows us to be a gatekeeper army – we perform well until we reach the highest echelons of competitive play where we fall over. Hard. What percentage of those who went 4-2 are Orks? I assume it’s less than 8 which you state is the number of primary Ork faction players at the event?
Reece stated how important it is for the whole Ork ‘machine’ to function as it should or the wheels ‘fall off the bus’. Factions are getting more and more tools to ensure that the Ork machine can’t function as it should with another faction having access to Vect through GSC and the new Assassin rules due to be launched. If nothing is done, Orks will plummet in terms of competitive viability. We’ve already been hit once with CA appearing about a month after our codex that buffed almost every other army in the game. These other tools are going to hit us even harder and I really think are going to be a huge problem for Orks competitively.
Bolter Drill was not in use at LVO.
And I think Orks are in a good place but as noted, when they start to lose, IME, they lose pretty hard as they are such a synergy driven faction. I also think a lot of Ork players are missing some of the best units and combos right now and focusing too much on the Loota bomb which while good, has some serious weaknesses, too.
Keep in mind win rate overall for a faction is not the same as win rate for individual players. There were several Ork players who only _barely_ missed getting into the top 8 by extremely small margins, and Orks as a whole had an excellent presence in the players who lost one or fewer games.
There were waaaaaaaaay more than eight players with Orks as their primary faction- they were 8% of the field, if I am recalling correctly. Any faction with those kinds of numbers inevitably slides towards the middle in terms of overall win percentage, because of simple math. More players means more players of all skill levels, both good and bad.
Orks are still a top-tier codex, just ask Nick Nanavati, Steve Pampreen, Rich Killton, or any of the other really, really good players who brought Orks (and who have won GTs/majors with them recently.) Just because they didn’t happen to make the top at LVO doesn’t mean they’re bad; one data point is not a good sample size.
Thanks for the replies both.
Pablo I know we had 8% of the field. I’m asking if 14 players going 4-2 is 8% of that sample because if it is not then we under performed.
We had exactly 2 players who lost 1 or fewer (never happened) games. Out of 62 I believe you said? That’s 3.23%, not what I’d call an excellent presence.
Finally as LVO is the largest tournament in the world I think it is the best data sample we have available. I dare say Nick and Steve maintain Orks are good. I don’t know if they’d say top tier. Nick went from #1 LVO champ to 16th, Steve finished 17th and Richard Killton was like 80odd. These aren’t good numbers. Not compared to Aeldari, Imperium, Chaos or even GSC/Nid presence in the top 100. A relatively rogue list can win a GT, particularly those less competitive GTs on the run up to LVO.
For me Orks performed middling at best at LVO according to the stats. There are a number of buffs to other factions due to launch/available that push us further down in terms of competitive viability. We are too reliant on stratagems and character buffs to be effective and both of those things are about to become way easier to shutdown.
I’m not sure on a better strategy to the Loota star Reece, I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Great Episode!
King Reecio, give us more Space Marine Articles! Your people demands it!
Yeah, for sure! Just been playing catch up after LVO but I am 7-0 in our league so far with my latest flavor of Marines.
Hey Reece,
Where can we find your list?
Hey Reece, sorry if this double posts, something went wrong with my browser, where can we find your list brother?
I’ve got a stat request. What was the win percentage of top 150 ITC players against non top 150 players.
I think that would really help Reeces horse vs rider analogy
The win rate of the 84 top 150 ITC players against non-top 150 was 79.19% over 359 games.
That’s crazy. I feel like that’s the stat that should be shouted from rooftops.
Turns out a balanced game means the better player wins super reliably.
Have you done any other sort of prediction analysis on ITC rank vs record or who should win a particular match up?
Also, this is awesome man, thanks for taking the time.
I’ve started working a bit on predictive modelling and regression analysis but I end up tossing out a lot whenever a new FAQ appears. If we can start getting more automated data so I’m not manually counting units, etc, then I could probably go full bore on it.
Come over to the dark side Mr. Pab and embrace triple Crusaders for Knights. 5-1 with my only loss to Brandon Grant without any Gallants, not sure they are so necessary. Which does not mean that they are not good or even quite good for their points, just that with such a low model count of things that actually do something the Crusader’s versatility is quite nice.
Thank you again for the stats and making that such a large part of the podcast. Any chance of getting a breakdown on IG with Castellan vs IG with no Castellan at LVO after removing mirror matches? I believe you had that stat previously and the gap was quite illuminating.
I think it was 57% vs 50%, but that’s off the top of my head.
Yes, Guard w/ Castellan was 57.76%, Guard w/o was a flat 50%
Chaplain Dreadnought is a 9 wound character with 2+ bs that can take a twin lascannon. Not too shabby.
Hey Reece,
Where can we find your list?