Topic: New old world statistics

[madeinitaly1]

Woehammer published the new statistics and not surprisingly the empire is still one of the lowest in ranking

[PowerSeries]

Here is the link

https://woehammer.com/2024/09/06/old-world-win-rate-statistics-since-july-faq/?amp=1

Hey we didn't do too bad since the FAQ: 63% win rate on sample of 16.

[drweir4]

Those stats look very janky

[Rodman49]

The sample size is just super small.

[madeinitaly1]

The sample size is just super small.

True, but it also refers to a competitive environment and i believe it's the only one existing

[Hoffa]

Unfortunately the rules are still in flux with each new faq bringing changes. (Drilled is for example even better than anyone thought it could be back in January) This means the stats have to be reset for each new faq and these are there fore only based on games played with the July faq so sample is very small. Hopefully the game rules will be more stable in the future as most major question have now been answered.

[Tiberius]

That is interesting, but so small I don’t think we can say anything about armies power levels through. One good or one bad general can swing those results so much. Those poor lizard men who never won a game!

[Rodman49]

True, but it also refers to a competitive environment and i believe it's the only one existing

True - but there just aren't a lot of events and Fantasy is way more likely than 40k to have tournament specific restrictions (think of Nova's for instance - I know it's not included here but when one of the biggest fantasy tourneys is running a hugely different comp set . . . wouldn't be surprised if other tournaments do the same).

[Dazgrim]

True, but it also refers to a competitive environment and i believe it's the only one existing

True - but there just aren't a lot of events and Fantasy is way more likely than 40k to have tournament specific restrictions (think of Nova's for instance - I know it's not included here but when one of the biggest fantasy tourneys is running a hugely different comp set . . . wouldn't be surprised if other tournaments do the same).

Jervis used to advocate the tournament comp being constantly in flux to avoid a solved meta.

[Skyros]

The most interesting thing to me is how much the empire population has dropped off. It used to always be one of the most popular armies (though never very strong). Now it's getting 1/3 the players of some of the other core factions. I think its the least played core faction army in the game.

I've noticed its presence drop off in the tournaments I've been too. It used to be fairly popular, now it's getting like, 1/3 the representation of dwarves, which are also a not terribly good and not terribly popular army.

Looks like more and more people are concluding if you want to win tournaments, don't take empire

OR

People are saying "The empire book is boring and bland, I don't care if I win or not, it's not fun to play"

OR maybe it's both.

[Hoffa]

I agree. I'm not happy playing Empire. I played them in 6:th and 7:th and most of the time placed in the middle of the pack. Now I just get angry building lists. There is some potential in the Empire rules but most things are ruined by being so overcosted it's silly.  I have several times though of some "clever" tactic only to realize that it can't be done due to all the buffs and support needed to pull it of cost so much that there is no points left for an actual army.

This is depressing and I'm thinking about playing something else for a change. I just can't shake the feeling that players of other factions get to use 2400 pts versus my 2000 pts.
 

[commandant]

I donno, Empire is playing much the same as Empire always played for me. I don't even take demigriffons except on characters.

That said it is a bit swingy. My Empire clobbered through a troll horde army and then hot absolutely tabled by fighty dwarf army.