whispersofblood

This isn't true, White always goes first, that's isn't balance neutral. Also the stat you quoted is true. White has between a 5-10% higher win rate.

From what I gather from your post your scene is very competitive. But if the same players find the double turn "boring" they have not sufficiently invested their time into understanding some of the core mechanics of the game. I also don't believe that any thinks rolling dice is entertaining, or plague monks would have been universally loved. So the only logical conclusion I can come to is that they think there are no decisions to be made in your opponent's turn from a competitive perspective. Which is flatly incorrect. Everything from wound allocation to unbinding takes place in your opponent's turn and frankly this is where a great many players lose their games. Not because of the double turn.

This is not true.

Yeah , I knew I should have refreshed my memory, thanks for the lodge name info.

Yeah that's fair OBR are a very complete faction. Possibly the most complete faction we have had in awhile.

Sure. But I suppose to me it's always a question of how much dmg is actually done, not the difficulty of doing that dmg. Vorstag battleaxes completely bypass or significant bypass most of OB rules. Poleaxes, even at full frontage do about 8 mw and about 6 more wounds before death saves. So let's say 12 Battle axes do About 9 before and say 14 afterwards. But at +1 rend your free tool for this situation the dmg is around PA 15 : BA 20.

IMO 40s will age out of the meta before, GE hits them with a point increase. Also are you keeping in mind the Vorstag fight before Motrek Guard can use their CMD ability in their turn? But I think you need to keep in mind this is a S tier faction and most armies will struggle to kill more than 10 at a time. Even two KoS only kill about 18-20 after fighting twice assuming they take no dmg themselves.

That's what you need though isn't it? Unless you believe 40s will stick around?

I think the key here is pumping your rend via runes and dealing with them all at once. Or pinning them with magmadroth.

I would say at that attack volume dmg 2 is still more relevent. They also have ways of improving rend when they need to, and should take almost no dmg themselves. OB v FS is a grind so you may as well build to settle in.

Old builds? But realistically the reasons you would take poleaxes don't exist, or the factions are hardly relevent and even then you can get by without it.

It may come across as arrogance, it's not. I am assured because I've done the research and the math. Broad axes are the most consistent dmg wise and meta wise. They are only worse against saves that ignore rend. They also just happen to bypass your argument, so it is interesting that you assumed the later. Also you have included none of the buffs the hero gives them, their free terrain piece or their shooting attacks. There is clear daylight between the units strictly on their warscroll and that only gets bigger when you include army synergies. Namely it's telling that a competitive S2D build may very well include 0 chaos warrior units in very short order, and the units being taken instead aren't better than HGB. +++ MOD EDIT +++ Tidied up comment from another post

Isn't that just had intro policy though? Model gaming is like any activity there should be a strong focus on learning the activity, not results.

You are talking about 800 points of warriors, daemon Prince and warscroll battalion. And they still don't do much to the HGB. It would be easier to just admit you were mistaken. HGB make chaos warriors look like goblins, it's just factual.

I've come to the sad realization that most people who talk Warhammer have no idea what most things in the game do. S2D players think plague touched plus Daemon Prince is good buts it is a simple rule to bypass, and even when you don't bypass it, in the scope of AoS it isn't scary at all.

Pretty much, why I think THW data is grossly misused, and under utilitized. Once you have an existing, accepted data set there isn't a reason to not use it for models. But there is some anecdotal work that needs to be done.

I forget sometimes that not everyone buys and reads every book. I'm curious for those who don't play the army. What do you think is in the HoS faction? HoS may be the only faction with more warscrolls with the hero keyword then without. And, two of its three battle traits only work on heroes from that specific book, which is odd because none of the other gods have a specific restriction.

Yeah. So based on the information we have from THW we can calculate exactly what the win % of each army could be if you adjust the win percentage of any one faction, at any given stage of a 5 round tournament. We know how many games they win, we know how many times out of 100 they appear in an event, and we know the relevent win percentage and how the number of wins each faction has an event. So you could run a representative 100 player tournament and figure out what theoretical new win percentages would be if you fixed HoS at 55%. Obviously rule interactions are more complicated than that, so there is margin for error but it would give you a good indicator of what could happen. Likely HoS were keeping other abusive lists under represented in the tournament wins department, and probably 5 wins categories. So there might see some surprise lists surge in results in the future. Namely FS imo, who just got a buff.

We have meta% we can math out meta representative shifts in meta win percentage for the desired win percentage of targeted faction.

Historically. Orruks, Hallowheart, and OB are all better armies than HoS, FEC and Skaven were. I don't know why GW won't admit to themselves that it is much easier to break an army by trying to decrease it's abilities than it is to break an army trying to errata them to be better.

What was different about them?

This is self-fulfilling since many times the changes only solidify the hegemony of the list people hate playing, which makes people say they weren't hit enough.

From a HoS player's pov most the army hits like tissue paper and a warm summer breeze ravages your ranks. The locus nerf makes any hero not a greater daemon unusable aggressively. The hike on depravity means you have to take the KoS or you won't generate any depravity at all, since the other models have low wounds, low dmg, and unlikely to be around long enough to summon off of. This is exactly like the hike on points for witches it just makes the only viable build the build everyone hates to play against. Despite the complaining about HoS, the army basically only does what it's been doing. Nothing else really has any rules, there are only 2 CMD abilities in the book and one is locked to a special character who needs to be the general. Obviously I get why people thought that HoS needed a nerf but they already were going to trend closer to 50% with their current ruleset against the books that came after them. Anyway it's just another constraint to build with at the end of the day . I'm sure I'll come up with something by the time the holidays are over.

Like anything to do with stats to make them relevant you need to do some analysis or it's just a picture of what has happened. For example at less than 1% of the meta, OB's stats are absurd. So to me the first question if I'm looking at competitive stats is who has the best OB match up in their current meta-state and who has a similarly untenable match up at the moment. The same can be said with Big Waagh. Regardless of the power some factions can throw around and historical match win percentage that number is going to be a whole lot different in a post-OB world if OB reaches say 3%. Something that is interesting to me is that OB seem to have at least 30% top tens on 3 wins, which would say to me that OB are tabling people in some match ups. Where as say HoS the pantomime villian has less than 6%. Which to me confirms what I've always thought HoS smash or have a very close game on the competitive circuit. Personally I'd like to see more complete stat documents, namely including match up and scores. Because margin of victory is a huge factor we almost never consider. If people are making purchase choices for the future the stats need analysis, not just description.

Sorry you can't handle criticism mate. What exactly is filth about this? I think S2D community is probably too used to having no rules at all. Personally I was expecting a whole lot more than what was given, given the content of the last 6-7 battletomes. But I'm content to let results speak for themselves in the new year. You all are excited, perhaps I should wait until you've played games and the frustration has set in. I'm as entitled to spaces for a faction I've collected for over 15 years as anyone else thanks. But if you have some objective critique of my position feel free to share mate. Ironically it's the overly enthusiastic who usually drop factions in the medium and long term so we'll see who's around in 4-5 months.