Kirb your enthusiasm!


"Pink isn't a color. It's a lifestyle." - Chumbalaya
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit
"I buy models with my excess money" - Valkyrie whilst a waitress leans over him

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Bayopen GT Statistics

So the Bayopen GT hosted by Frontline Gaming happened a while ago and I've been a lazy bum putting the statistics together. This is the first tournament we're looking at with full Win/Loss for all armies (minus some missing data) which isn't NOVA based and thus has draws involved. There were 82 players which is a decent sample size but of course when we break this down into armies we get tiny population samples so the usual tentativeness in conclusions will stand, particularly since the different mission format means we shouldn't really be cross comparing tournament results. Let's look at the army breakdown.


And in graphical form:

Black Templars 2
Blood Angels 4
Chaos Daemons 6
Chaos Space Marines 2
Dark Angels 5
Dark Eldar 5
Eldar 4
Grey Knights 14
Imperial Guard 8
Necrons 3
Orks 9
Sisters of Battle 1
Space Marines 4
Space Wolves 9
Tau 3
Tyranids 4

Only four armies really have decent sizes, Orks, Grey Knights, Imperial Guard and Space Wolves with Grey Knights being quite a bit larger than everyone else. Not surprising as we've seen this before - easy army to put together both in terms of models needed and intelligence required to get an even half decent army list and it's the latest thing since sliced bread still. The small number of Necrons at this stage is still pretty surprising but more might show up with the 2nd wave release.

Anywho, to the basic statistics! The draws have been counted as losses.

And we get a very interesting split.

Black Templars 0.36
Blood Angels 0.46
Chaos Daemons 0.38
Chaos Space Marines 0.50
Dark Angels 0.40
Dark Eldar 0.43
Eldar 0.46
Grey Knights 0.51
Imperial Guard 0.46
Necrons 0.33
Orks 0.51
Sisters of Battle 0.29
Space Marines 0.32
Space Wolves 0.52
Tau 0.33
Tyranids 0.61

The only armies above 50% and Grey Knights, Orks, Space Wolves, and Tyranids with Chaos sitting on a flat .500. With draws chucked in, we should  really take our cut-off point below 50% though we'd still be expecting the better players/army combinations to be doing better than this. We'll call our arbitrary cut-off 46% rather than 50%, there were 77 draws (or ~13% of the games) so taking one-third of that gives us .460. With this in mind, Imperial Guard, Blood Angels and Eldar slip above the cut-off point - two armies we expect to see and another one we don't. We see a couple other armies such as Dark Eldar and Dark Angels quite close to this as well which could be accounted for by the draws.

So what we're still seeing is the majority of the 5th edition books doing well excluding Tyranids and Sisters of Battle (though Tyranids are doing well here). The major exception outside of those two is Space Marines - this seems to be a recurring theme across tournament types. Necrons also didn't fair well but they are still new and like Space Marines, have a very small population sample size so player skill could have greatly affected this.

In relation to the top armies, Orks, Chaos, Tyranids and Eldar putting showings in is impressive. Whilst Orks, Chaos and Eldar certainly are some of the better older books (we've consistently seen Orks bully their way into contention with the 5th edition books), only Orks have a significantly large enough population sample to take much from this. However, the usual addage of a good general with a bad list is better than most bad generals with good lists stands as always. Tyranids putting in a good showing is again a testament more likely to relate to player skill than army ability but seeing so many of the non-5th edition (or poor 5th edition) armies move into the top army bunch could be a major difference between the NOVA format and non-NOVA format or an indiciation of the types of gamers they attract.

Hopefully we'll get some more statistics from other non-NOVA tournaments (waiting on Indy GT atm) and we've got several big ones coming up so more digging is in-bound. And remember, since I seem to need to say this multiple times every statistics post, population sizes are a huge restraint here and all conclusions must be based upon this and are thus very tentative until furthe data rolls in.

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...