Chapter Tactics #97: 2018 Statistical Year in Review, Top Performing Factions, Lists, and More!

Chapter Tactics is a 40k podcast which focuses on promoting better tactical play and situational awareness across all variations of the game. Today the guys go over all of the statistics gathered from 2018 to determine which Faction performed the best in 2018. They also cover interesting statistics like how Ynnari fared vs Knight Castellans and more top list analysis. 

Show Notes:

got a list

Need help with a list idea? Got a rules question? Want to talk tactics? Then email me at…

frontlinegamingpeteypab@gmail.com 

Please do not send an army list in a format such as Army Builder, send them in an easy to read, typed format. Thanks!

 

Tags:

About Petey Pab

Aspiring 40k analyst, tournament reporter and Ultramarines enthusiast, Petey Pab only seeks to gather more knowledge about the game of 40k and share it with as many people as he can in order to unite both hobbyists and gamers. We are, after all, two sides of the same coin.

27 Responses to “Chapter Tactics #97: 2018 Statistical Year in Review, Top Performing Factions, Lists, and More!”

  1. Xenomorph January 8, 2019 12:16 am #

    Where can I get the raw data for the analysis?

  2. Ujayim January 8, 2019 6:24 am #

    I literally cannot wait for GSC. I wanted to start them back in 7th, but with the edition shift I held off, and now everything is falling into place and I couldn’t be more excited.

  3. JimV January 8, 2019 9:43 am #

    I’m definitely running for Prime Minister now! <3

    • Yakhunter January 8, 2019 10:36 am #

      You have 1 guaranteed vote already!

      • Reecius
        Reecius January 8, 2019 10:39 am #

        Any chance of a text article with graphs and such? That would be awesome.

        • Yakhunter January 9, 2019 7:57 pm #

          I’ll throw something together over the next couple days.

  4. LawL January 8, 2019 11:23 am #

    I used to have time to listen to much, if not the entirety, of these and other podcasts I was interested in, but now that free time is less free for me I do wish there was some kind of associated write-up going over the same key points and noteworthy information discussed in the podcast, or even a simple transcript of what was said. It would remove a barrier to entry and make the same information a lot more accessible to a wider audience of people, even those who are not particularly compatible with verbal information and far more comfortable with written information.

    Just a thought.

    • WestRider January 8, 2019 7:10 pm #

      Same. I’ve got hearing issues, and podcasts are useless for gaining actual information for me.

      • Reecius
        Reecius January 9, 2019 8:15 pm #

        Me too, actually. Have gnarly tinnitus in one ear, drives me bananas.

        • WestRider January 9, 2019 10:14 pm #

          Tinnitus is a big part of it for me, too. Forgot my earplugs when I was going to see Motörhead back around the turn of the century, and my ears haven’t stopped ringing since.

  5. Kike January 8, 2019 3:18 pm #

    Any option to see these top list?

  6. Matt Obermark January 8, 2019 4:18 pm #

    “I imagine they can’t possibly get worse with the codex” – Sisters players would warn you not to tempt fate

    • abusepuppy January 8, 2019 5:19 pm #

      The Sisters book is quite good.

      • The Traitor January 8, 2019 11:58 pm #

        Actually in my community SoB players have found it to be quite amazing, being a challenge for even the most competitive armies.

    • Zweischneid January 9, 2019 4:41 am #

      I think there is no doubt that Sisters armies became a lot better with the beta codex (and it’s beta, send feedback).

      The one thing that arguably got worse was the lone Celestine (maybe with tiny a Dialogus or Seraphim entourage), mainly because that set-up had you use all the benefits that were supposed to boost the “army” concentrated on just some 300ish to 500ish min-allies.

  7. hvg3akaek January 8, 2019 6:58 pm #

    The download links for this podcast (#97) point to #96 – year in review. Would we be able to get an updated link?

    cheers 🙂

    • Petey Pab
      Petey Pab January 9, 2019 10:37 am #

      Hello, the download link is the correct episode. I just checked it and clicked on it. It is just mislabeled as Episode 96

      • hvg3akaek January 9, 2019 7:03 pm #

        Ah, ok – cheers! 🙂

  8. Zweischneid January 9, 2019 4:49 am #

    Good episode.

    I think there’re good Eldar builds that can give Orks a good fight. Orks are “only” a super-hard counter to some of the Eldar builds popular pre-Ork Codex (e.g. triple+ Alaitoc flyers would be something Lootaz love to face, I’d guess).

    And Dark Eldar doubly so. An Agent of Vect vs. Grot Shield and triple Ravagers firing at your Lootaz isn’t fun for an Ork players. Vexator Mask + Grot/Talos star isn’t fun for them either. Etc..

    I also found that Daemons’ “take double damage from perils”-strat is almost a “Vect” vs. Da Jump, given Orks fondness of perils. Which might be giving (otherwise already good) Chaos (e.g. TS) armies a tool for hopefully a breather in the first round in particular.

    • Reecius
      Reecius January 9, 2019 7:51 pm #

      That’s a good point. Frankie Vect’d my Loota/Grot Shield and I just sort of made a funny noise like: “ehrg” lol. Then picked my Lootas up and put them back on the tray.

      Orks are fragile but they clean up vs. some armies. IME, vs. Ynnari, Orks run them over, or Alaitoc like you mentioned. But yeah, I could see Drukhari being rough particularly if you deploy badly.

  9. Yakhunter January 9, 2019 8:01 pm #

    I 100% agree with these assertions. My hope is to do another one of these in the week prior to LVO, if there have been enough games recorded in between, to normalize the data by then. There are several gts/majors coming that should provide a lot of good insight. As I mention in the cast itself, I don’t feel we have enough data in most situations to really dive the faction v faction side of things of yet.

  10. Zweischneid January 9, 2019 10:12 pm #

    I’d be interesting to look at all those Knights vs. Knights fights in the data and see if there’s a difference in which House people picked (or even just Imperialis vs. Questoris).

    Another really interesting number would probably be along those lines a mirror match analysis of Coven Drukhari of Prophets of Flesh Grots/Talos vs. non-Prophets of Flesh Grots/Talos, though I assume the non-Prophets of Flesh coven players don’t even exist to generate that data.

    • Yakhunter January 9, 2019 10:30 pm #

      Your assumption is correct. 100% of coven players have selected prophets of flesh as their sub-faction so there is no data there. As to Knights vs Knights, I can put that together.

      • Zweischneid January 11, 2019 3:00 am #

        Cheers,

        Funny how that works. I theory, you’d think this’d be a great tool to test whether the constant default to Prophets of Flesh/Evil Sunz&Bad Moons/T’au Sept/etc… really holds up. In practice, it seems too few people even test the less obvious sub-factions to even get the data.

        • abusepuppy January 11, 2019 7:34 am #

          Some questions are so obvious, they don’t need testing at tournaments. There are some players who run alternative subfactions when they have merits, but for Prophets of Flesh there simply is no argument for taking anything else from anything resembling a competitive standpoint. The improvement to 4++ is simply far, far, far stronger than any of the other options.

          (Also, note that this data comes from only GT-level events of a minimum size- doubtless there are players who occasionally try other subfactions, but probably not at large events.)

  11. Pyrothem January 10, 2019 10:56 am #

    Wish Franky was still around so I could ask if he still firmly believes that the “Necron Codex is very strong and it is the player quality that keeps it from top tables”.

    As the Falcon says there is no good news for them and really no hope to see them competitive without some major changes.

Leave a Reply