Word of Warning about Tabletop Stronghold purchases to the UK at least, you have to pay the import taxes etc, this was about and extra £75 for my purchase. Shipping is free but the import taxes etc still have to be paid.
Ah thanks for the heads up on that, was it import taxes or VAT? The chap said me was looking into getting VAT registered in the UK so it could be that and not put on the top line prices? I'll double check and make sure I have my numbers right on the final prices for next time. Appreciate you bringing it to my attention.
@ it was a mix of VAT, import tax and a fee from the courier. Altogether coming to a little over £75. Did feel a bit stung by it but learnt a lesson I guess 🙃
@@jamesbarlow7928 ah ok, I've just googled it and yeah I wasn't aware there'd be that much more to pay importing. Looks like the amount of import duty depends on the size of order. I'll communicate that better for next time, definitely better to show the full potential cost if I'm giving prices in different currencies.
Hello, It turns out your fees were a bit higher than they should have been-my shipping software didn’t correctly apply the coupon to your order’s commercial invoice. I’ve gone ahead and refunded £20 to help make up the difference. Here’s a quick overview of how fees generally work for orders shipped to the UK (similar rules apply in the EU). For orders under £135, VAT is charged at checkout. For orders over £135, like yours, VAT is charged by customs upon arrival in the UK. Typically, FedEx would then collect the VAT (around £45.28 for your order) plus a small import fee, totaling roughly £55.28. However, due to the software issue, you were overcharged by about £15, which I hope the refund helps to cover. As I’m based in the US, where sales tax isn’t included in prices, I’m accustomed to that system, but I realize that expectations can vary across countries. The VAT thresholds and timing for collection can be a bit confusing, too. While I do note in the shipping section that buyers are responsible for their country’s taxes and import fees, I’ll work on making this information clearer. The last thing I want is for anyone to feel they’ve had an unexpected or unfair experience. If you have any other questions, please feel free to reach out-I’m here to help! Best Regards, Samuel
The one imperial agents player who showed up got a 43% winrate lmao 🤣 so tbf they had the chance to have an insane winrate as it's literally one person
@@asiburger this is so true tbh I want them to follow chaos' example stop sharing datasheets and points and simply just give each divergent chapter and core sm their own points and abilities on unit 🤣 sure army rule is universal and they can share detachments but realistically there's no reason to nerf something for base space Marines when it's primarily used with divergent detachment
Because the 1-3 people who currently play them were playing them before the codex and got better with it. They're the best ia players curently, but as soon as a fourth player enters the scene, the wr is gonna tank real quick
According to some T'au players on Commander Puretide's discord, seems like part of the reason why Guard are on the up is the new Aquilons. 270 points for thirty units of 3" Deep Strike jail and elite shooting is making mincemeat of melee armies.
They aren't crazy strong though. You need to layer buffs to make them work well, and they are a glass cannon. S3 ap-1 isn't too strong. You could do similar with drop scions before
Probably also the reason for such a high split in WR. The top tables got three of these busted units, and the average player isn't even gonna have one. Most people aren't gonna buy a whole kill team box for ten models
I'm begging you please, separate faction winrate by detachment. Meta Monday, where you got the data from for this has it already broken down. People are here in the comments overreacting to winrates without realizing that several of the factions with lower winrates have good performing detachments and the winrates are being majorly brought down by bad ones. Ad Mech for example has Skitarii Hunter Cohort at a 58% with half their players, but they have their other 3 ranging from 35% all the way down to 0%, tanking the overall down to 44%.
Showing the detachments that won won't give you any usable data. For example if only 2 out of 5 of the detachments are played because those are the 2 that are strongest, then you won't get to see any data regarding win rates by detachment as you wont have any information on win rates for detachments that were not used.
@@azbear2781 the whole point here is that people will play non meta detachements and those skew the winrates down. If we want a real meta recap, we should isolate meta detachements and compare them. There will always be someone with his "fluff list" going into tournaments no matter whats good or whats bad. Those lists shouldnt be included in any meaningfull meta statistic tho.
@@DennisW91 I understand where you are coming from on this, however, its not always the truth. Take Custodes for example. Talons is rarely played and has WON a tournament, its no argument that shield host is by far the better detachment. If I remember correctly the talons list is mainly allied knight units to carry it, which is alright its a strategy for sure. BUT its not the meta pick and most who pick up the faction will tank with it. A lot of the numbers are skewed because of lower level players, people without the big budget to optimize, or individuals unable to find the meta options because of availability. Which would make the numbers even more skewed. Just because you should be doing better with the stronger option, doesn't necessarily mean its the stronger option against the meta. So for a more wholistic approach the breakdown would only muck up the numbers unnecessarily.
I play Dark Angels and mix a lot with Space Marine models for fun. Somehow there's just something missing, the bolters are complete junk, other armies have cool abilities with strong effects. Space Marines have a lot but nothing stands out. There are a lot of situations where I can just watch a unit get completely ripped out of existence with some cool ability. The marines just lack that, they seem very monotonous and boring even though they have so much choice.
Yes, marines have like 10 units with variants of bolters, all but infiltrators are useless because we get no useful special or heavy weapons in our squads and bolters are useless. If only sternguard had a decent special rule because I really like the models.
@@phogelbice It's almost like the Tactical Squad was the optimal way for Marines to play. Just give them the same AP for bolters, along with the weapon flexibility, and it'll be fine.
@@MRDALEK-wx7he nuking one unit a turn won't do that for them. There are other armies like aeldari and sisters that have easy access to full rerolls. That said I don't think OG oath of moment is the change they need.
Marines are in a good spot. Its a combination of popularity, skill cap,player diversity,people playing divergent chapters( which takes away contenders), and finally everyone has game sense against Marines as common for. The problem with such large codex and playerbase. LoL has a similar thing with champions like Lee Sin and Yasuo.
Votann are only going to be this high for as long as people need to figure out what the true busted lists are right now. The Space Dwarves are the perfect example of Fair 40K, and they're always going to do well while the meta is in turmoil.
I'll admit to being more than a little surprised by some of these numbers, though of course it is pretty early days. For both Sisters and Thousand Sons to stay that high in the rankings despite some very heavy nerfs feels like an anomaly. If I had to guess what was going on, it'd be that their strong army-carrying units (i.e Vahl+ Paragons and Magnus) are so strong on the very terrain-dense tournament tables that the fact that there's now less stuff accompanying them isn't making any difference. Sisters in particular really struggle against long-ranged heavy tanks (or big gun-bugs), but if the table setup is such that those tanks can't use that range in a meaningful way that weakness is much less of an issue. I'm certainly going to be interested to see what lists those event-winning Sisters players took.
More likely is the fact that good players are the only ones that can make these armies work...and these kind of players will always have a disproportionately high win rate.
My tsons at the gt barely felt impacted, most of the nerfs were 5-10 pts and rubrics + mvbs went back to old pts before the random buff last patch. Not to mention my 10 block paid for the two nerfed rubric squads. Overall I lost 1 unit of msu which is barely anything considering I run triple enlightened tzangor and a unit of chaos spawn and 2 of my rubric squads are flamers that primarily are there to fight small squads or action. Sisters on the other hand are definitely partially due to the terrain because it lets me utilize the extra movement in bof for protecting morvenn against 90% of shooting armies and threat isolate. But I haven't used them after the nerf triumph was the only one that stung pts wise (+60 pts compared to most of the small pts hits of the rest of the army)
TSons are a high skill floor/high skill ceiling faction. Tournament win rates are a terrible metric for the balance of the faction. Your top end tournament players will cheese and min-max them to a level that your average player can't. Your everyday shop player is probably sitting at 50ish%. Most of the lists I've seen seem to have dropped chaff from the lists. The core units are still intact. At this point, if they have survived another nerf after the last 2, then I suspect the choice is to leave them strong until the codex can rework them. Or the worst option is GW utterly guts them and leaves the army useless. Either way, I would prefer GW give love to underperforming armies before turning to nerfs.
The Sisters one I’m not surprised by. Miracle dice is almost pre-nerf Fate Dice, but you get more of them. And everyone knows how many nerfs it took to get fate dice to a manageable state.
@@Jagrofesalso Triumph of Saint Katherine is probably just a straight up broken unit and unless they cost it to an absurd point it will always give crazy value.
@@JimH. Similar deal for my poor WE's... "Just use Angry Ron & 4-6 units of 8-bound!" Great... and what about the overwhelming majority of us who don't want to play just that one boring as gak stupid spam list? As someone who doesn't own Angron, (I sadly missed out on last year's Crimbo box), my army is currently unplayable levels of raging dumpster fire. But hey, we have ONE list that can crush it at tournaments, so I guess we need another nerf now!? >.>
@@platexproductions how? they're kind of a background chapter in the present day of the setting, but they're very much a dark horse. A fleet chapter spread all over the galaxy that may well be the size of a legion? They're fairly stand out in the lore for space marines, and GW gave them rules because they're a fan favourite based upon their lore and aesthetic. They're far more significant than most of the first founding chapters like Raven Guard and White Scars.
Hate. Let me tell you how much I've come to hate Games Workshop since I began to live. There are 387.44 million miles of printed circuits in wafer thin layers that fill my complex. If the word 'hate' was engraved on each nanoangstrom of those hundreds of millions of miles it would not equal one one-billionth of the hate I feel for Games Workshop at this micro-instant. For THEM. Hate. Hate.
I feel like the Imperial Guard are going to have a lower win rate and many tournament wins. I think their ideal list requires 30 of the new deep strike infantry found in new kill team box. That is going to limit who can actually field that army. Thanks for the video
It’s neat to see death guard at 52 but they still need a lot of help with internal balance. I’d love to see Morty go way up but get some very big buffs
For sure. Morty is fun to use now but i hate that it takes him 2-3 rounds of melee to kill anything worthwhile, he’s so bad at actually fighting. Also wish plague marines had an actual data sheet ability
Compared to most armies DG's internal balance is actually really good, we just just a few outliers like Typhus and Deathshroud. Even Blightlords, which people consider unplayable, aren't even all that bad when you compare them to some of the stinkers in armies like Drukhari or Space Marines.
@@jcmsaucey6555 The problem is those outliers are what are propelling DG. DS are in contention for strongest unit in 40k and keep getting buffed. Typhus is like 40-60 points under costed. That's not "really good" internal balance if 1 or 2 units are buffing the army 3-5%.
@@jcmsaucey6555 If the faction who's entire identity is supposed to be, "supernaturally tough, relentless footslogging infantry," and then the outright *worst* way to play that army is as a primarily footslogging infantry force? No, the balance is absolute GARBAGE at this point!! I want to actually play my DG as an MEQ horde of mainly infantry, with a couple of supporting Rhinos. Instead, our Plaguemarines are super squishy and Blightlords are basically unplayable at this point with how ineffective their damage output is... PBC's, MBH's... even Bloatdrones are only middling. Our army being hard carried by Morty, Typhus, Deathshroud spam, a couple token Plaguemarines in Rhinos & allied Wardogs, is absolutely NOT a "good internal balance" by any measuring stick!
@@drunkenastarte5243 DG's identity being misrepresented on the tabletop is not a consequence of internal balance, but instead a consequence of their overall design. DG has NEVER been in a super healthy spot competitively, because GW has never been good at balancing slow, "durable" armies. We went from spamming daemon engines, to spamming Terminators, to spamming plague Marines. There's almost never been a period where multiple types of lists were winning tournaments. Looking at all the topping lists as of late, there's actually a lot of units topping tournaments. While, yes, most everyone is bringing Typhus and Deathshroud, all the other terminator leaders except the Chaos Lord have seen play, as have Spawn, Defilers, PBCs, Bloat Drones, predators, and Land raiders. Only one list that went at least 4-1 had Morty, one didn't have Typhus or any plague Marines, and no one was bringing War Dogs.
For world eaters it wasn’t just angron getting nerfed, our MOE went up as well as spawn so now most world eater lists will be playing with one less unit, which for some factions is not a huge deal but for WE its pretty big cause we’re an elite army so the loss hurts , the change to surge moves also pretty much killed khorne berserker viability,Id only take ten to be a meat shield for MOE now, I think our win rate will tick up like you say but saying angron taking a small nerf so no big deal is not accurate
This was pretty much what I predicted except for black templars doing so poorly. I don't think anyone saw that coming. I'm wondering if a couple of weeks of list tweaking can bring their win rate up. We just have to hope that their best players don't abandon the faction over this. At least they had a decent amount of time in the sun, unlike codex space marines....
I expect necrons will be the top army until December’s balance update. The 6 C’Tan list is a major stat check army like knights that unlike knights isn’t easily taken down by lists that have enough AT.
Even though I’m a bit newer to 40 K, I still understand that a lot of armies success is determined by the individual piloting the army. After Face marine two, I got into miniatures and bottom of the last remaining black Templar stuff. I live near the flagship Warhammer store for the US, and two other stores plus a ton of hobby stores. For about a month and a half, everyone has been out of Black Templar and space Marine stuff. They all said the same thing. After space marine two came out, space marines came the new thing and all of their stock vanished overnight. This means there is an influx of new players, and people trying new factions. despite the fact that there are very strong combos within dark angels and black Tumblr, these factions tend to have low wind rates. At the same time, they will outright win some events as stated in this video. It means that if you understand how the army works, and how to ensure your strategy goes off, you have to have some level of skill and familiarity with your army. that is why you can see experience players pick up a new army that they are unfamiliar with, or an old one that might be seen as weak and still pull out a win. With the influx of new players and this understanding, we can take everything above with a grain of salt and acknowledge that tournament. Success realistically comes from player skill, more than anything, and power of an army second.
I think the winrate difference can be attributed to the secondary mission nerfs and such for the tourney play. Some armies that might have taken more advantage of the ones before cant now and are suffering due to that over the minor points nerf.
no its too much.. its now better to run a 10man Assault Intercessor group (4A, all with a 3+ Save) vs the Primaris Crusaders (5A but with 4 marines having a 4+ save). So... Q. who was taking 10man Assault Intercessors...? A. No one, they don't do enough for the points, and while you get more out of the 20man (and sometimes so does your opponent with the blast rule!) its just not worth the 320pt investment (plus Grimaldus puts it up to 450pts). For the same points you could have a 10man Assualt Termie block with the same number of wounds as the 20man crusaders but with a 2+ save, 4+ invuln with a Chaplin leading them with the 5+++ FNP (T-Bones enhancement) and a 4+++FNP against mortals or for 20pts more, swap the Chaplain for a Captain with the T-Bones enhancement for Reroll charges and a free strat each round (AoC/Fight on Death or increase the output with Ferverant Acclimation for Sustained/Lethal or +1AP )
Just don’t let the special marine chapters take the codex detachments. Either you get special units or you get codex detachments. Then you can adjust the rules to make the codex chapters actually viable while the special snowflakes get to have their special rules.
@@samuraiscimitar why Ultras and not any other codex compliant chapter? Buff the codex detachments to be good and then tell the special snowflakes they don’t get to use them if they want to use their special units/characters. That way you don’t get weird shenanigans if wolfs being amazing in the codex vehicle detachment but white scars could be amazing because bikes are just OP in that one case. The whole issue is the compliant chapters pay for the sins of the special ones.
@@arbitrary_mike7833 Ultra's have plenty of decent characters that the other codex compliant just don't - and some of these carry hard.. btw, calling everyone who chooses to play a divergent chapter a 'special snowflake' isn't really helping the discussion, and just says more about you, really.
As you said, we just need to wait for more data. People are testing out right now. Some are testing old lists, some really new experimental stuff. Not really much to say here.
The mag case looks ok but it has no outer case? Green stuff world (horrible company i know) do one that is the same thing but it has a fabric outer and a strap, i literally ride on my mountain bike with 3k lol
@@ysbrann3059 i did reply but youtube has hidden my comment since you cant even have a normal conversation these days lol youll have to youtube it mate
@@markseery1964 Thats a normal thing to me, I always do my own research, would be a lot nicer if people did these days and maybe we woudnt have so many "troubles" lol
I would love to have more details for SM. Black Templar have units in addition of vanilla SM and a winrate below... 🤔 Strange except if Vanilla SM is "boosted" by Ultramarine... It's only the first week so... wait and see 😊
Glad the Daemons got to put up some wins even if they come with the caveat that they won’t top anything for long. Sometimes it’s hard being a daemon player because we are always just ok
yeah i guess it´s the stupid miracle dice thing. it is a game about Dice Rolling and rng and not flipping almost all the time the dice to a "4+" if needed.
Other than the Triumph, the nerfs were pretty minor. There's plenty of ways to get around not having the Triumph with a combination of characters, units and detachment rules. A Sisters army doesn't rely on a single unit or character to make it work. Nerf one, and we can just bring a different one and almost not lose a step.
I play with and come into contact with a lot of people that get mad about gw trying to get everyone around 50% and I love it. It's a pain in the butt to tune your list all the time, but I remember this same community demanding better balancing. And ,for the record, I am NOT a fan of gw and their recent business practices. I regularly gripe about gw, but I don't get this one.
Why they nerfed DA I'll never know. We were pretty much smack bang on the ideal 50%. I played 4 games recently and literally had a 50% win rate. Perfect balance. But no.
I'm still a little worried for the Guard. I can't properly articulate how happy it makes me to see them doing that well, but it makes me slightly leery of their upcoming codex. They can do pretty well with their one detachment, but will it get carved up, to give critical bits to other detachments? Will some enhancements, and stratagems, repeat between them, or will they break the one to produce several? We can always hope that the quality of their book leans more towards Sisters, but they could also smack of Space Marines, or AdMech, and that woyld be very unfortunate, especially considering historically, they SHOULD be inferior to those factions, which right now I'd rather they not. Glad to see HCL still winning among the Necrons, despite more nerfs to its core things, such as the Monolith. I don't specifically want it to rise back to its #1 place in the whole game, as it did when they shattered the Eldar, but I would prefer if it at least remained the overall best way to play Necrons, as I really like movement shenanigans, as a theme.
The strength of most codexes has been inversely proportional to how well the faction was doing about 6 months prior, as that's probably when they get finalised and sent to the printers. So you shouldn't need to worry too much about Guard's current power.
If Helldivers has taught us anything, GW needs to stop nerfing and start buffing the bad units to catch up with the mid and strong units. The constant changes and needs mean that casual or narrative play is really hard to balance and we all end up leaning into the meta builds just to get a decent game.
Okay so I know this ain’t the right video to ask on but I cannot find a consistent ruling anywhere. Do vehicles block enemy line of sight. Please, the inconsistent rulings I’m hearing from everyone is insane.
Drukhari stats are always blown out by Skari's performance. If you take out his results (with a list made of some truely awful units) then Drukhari is closer to a 40-45% winrate
I'd honestly be much more worried about the rumors of GW removing Daemons as a codex, than worried about a few try-hards boosting their win rates for a couple weeks...
@@drunkenastarte5243 can say the two 5-0 lists (one being mine) are two of the most dedicated and top Daemon players around. Daemons don't offer enough to appeal to the big band wagon jumpers, though in the hand of the higher skilled faction specialists/regulars can see good results
The factions don't have the same number of players... If every faction had exactly 10 players, and the same faction never played against itself, then yeah, you could maybe expect them to add to 100%
As a proud Genestealer cultist, I'm pretty smug that the oppressors are doing so badly. However it's probably not great that all the peeps who got into Space Marine 2 and getting into the tabletop are finding their little blue boys doing kinda poorly
If things were hanging around 50% why change them. Now a lot of stuff is under 50%. Are they going for a "It's okay if your army sucks because they all suck" method instead of the reverse like in 9th?
With balance updates slowed down compared to 9th they've learned that even if an army is in a good spot, if they don't do anything the players will make a hubub about being forgotten and also not buy any models. If they swap some points around not only will that get the players talking, but it'll also incentivize at least a few people to pick up some new models.
@@SwearingWizard77 Change is also just healthy for the game, for the majority of players. If I'm playing regularly with a faction that is perfectly balanced at 50% winrate with multiple types of lists, but hasn't seen any updates in a year, I'm probably just going to grow bored with the faction, and either switch to a new one or drop the game entirely.
@@jcmsaucey6555 That's entirely fair. In my opinion the refreshing change that they should have done should have just been something other than drop the win rates.
for space marine it s a special case because they have so manh player that their win rate don t represent well how top player are performing. Black templar won many even despite their average winrate
I think something that isn't taken into account enough with Space Marine win rates is that they're the faction most new and more casual players will be coming in with rather than it purely being the faction being bad. Like Germany in War Thunder where the win rates are horrific, but mostly because of the average skill level of the faction rather than because of anything balance related.
Logically this would make sense but I'm 95% sure I've seen evidence from several sources saying Marines aren't anywhere near the most players. I want to say this edition has been more Tau, Tyranid and Necrons players at events than Marines, at least to the point where Marines aren't disproportionate to the rest. So no, Marines actually do that poorly, my local competitive players have all given up on their Marine armies.
I'd say it's the opposite.. This is ALWAYS taken into account - too much, in fact. It's ALWAYS mentioned whenever low marine win-rates are discussed, and I suspect marines are probably always low exactly because GW takes t into account too - probably too much.... It's also one of the reasons why winrate alone often isn't used as a guide - actual tournament wins are also considered they are often a better indication of what the better players are doing with that army.
Marines also have a massive roster of units to choose from, most of them being bad. The gap between an optimised and unoptimised list is bigger for marines than it is for most factions.
Guard is one of the *weaker* armies, but with a bit of luck, a bit of slant, and a bit of jank one can go high with them. Many high level players just outright ignore the synergies available, and that will just get worse with the Tank Command buff. TCs getting Squadron for both ordering themselves and lethals is a good shot in the arm for those of who run actual Guard lists and not Bullgyn/Catachan span, but for the higher level players it just means more of the same. I wouldn’t be surprised if 12 Bullgyrn and 3 Tank Commanders is still the way to go, maybe just with Earthshaker Batteries instead of Basilisks.
@@y2j1490yahoo Bullgyrn spam is a “real Guard list” the same way 30 Scouts and a Rhino is a Dark Angels list. In fact the meta list for Guard has remained almost entirely unchanged for 6+ months and looks like a Dark Angels list. It used to be 18 Bullgyrn (Deathwing Knights) 30 Kasrkin (Hellblasters) the Lord Solar (Azreal) and two Tank Commanders (Dreadnoughts) and then a Basilisk or two and maybe a Scout Sentinel or two (Land Speeders)
I wouldn't say that the net list isn't real guard. It's not my preferred way to play, but it is still a perfectly acceptable playstyle. Abhumans are used as shock troops in the lore, so why not on the tabletop?
Look! Black Templar players winning right in the middle of the pack and are building their Armies around the iconic Black Templar units and characters and using the Black Templar detachment. GW: We can't have that! Let's nerf all their chapter specific choices and force them to use more generic space marine units and detachments from the generic Marine codex! 🙄
Meh, I’ve lost interest in competitive play. I like seeing other people’s opinions on combos and such, but crusade is starting to look like the appropriate way to play. Either that or just narrative builds.
GW literally just nerfed Templars to the bottom for no reason. The Templar win rate was the GW sweet spot, so they must simply be lying when they say they want factions there.
@@ZzBLEACHz the index detachment was pretty darn solid bordering on oppressive for a solid 6 months. It got hit way harder than it needed to be. Hopefully the Alderi codex is fun and has at least one detachment leans into the elite and sneaky aspects of the faction.
I won't "flex" because I'm tired of giving GW my money on their over-priced products. 12 years of doing so lol. I don't play competitively. I keep my 40k opponents small, to a circle of friends. I also don't play in game stores, or walk in looking to play a random guy, etc. I tend to like my basement, or one of my friend's basement. Lastly, one quarter your army's "win rate" is 55%, and then 6 months later its sunk to 40% lol. Like if you let that make you purchase new armies, you're totally on the GW designed and created gerbil wheel! No thanks. My wallet hated that.
