Yes, I am a Highlander fan from day one. I state this so the astute may see my hidden agenda ;)

If you heard this one before, stop me...

Has anyone done any sort of "statistical study" on the actual units used in winning tournament armies? I have collected this info from the winners of the last couple of tournaments I have ran. Not enough data obviously, so I was wondering if the group would be willing to post/IM this info for a reasonable amount of time? Factual info would be critical. Also, pre/post CA designation would be needed.

I doubt anyone would be surprised at the results, but some actual numbers would be interesting.

I understand that all the data in the world probably will not change things, but the results would be interesting.

Is something like this worth a try?

Thanks for your time...

Good idea, but you won't get all accurate info based solely on which army wins.

For example, last week at a tournament, a newbie fielded 2 Highlanders Centurions and a Highlander Spider, with some mixed infantry. He actually won a game. He certainly didn't have skill on his side, as he was a little light on rules knowledge. He won because he was playing an inferior player, and that player even had a decent army. In other words, pure #### armies can win based on player skill or simple dumb luck.

On the flip side, really good armies can get decimated in the hands of the inept.

If you have a friendly BM who keeps good records, ask to look at his battle sheets for his events. From that, you can get which armies beat which armies, and hopefully support that info with some general idea of the skill level of the player involved. Look at both what wins, and what loses.

...Or on a really bad series of dice rolls. One time this summer at an unrestricted venue event (a 3-hour long, 500 point battle royale), one guy rolled about 6 or so crit misses. That can really suck. Even then some seemingly weak units could take down something like a Bounty Hunter.

Understood.

While my area may not be typical. Here is what we experience. Out of a pool of about 24 players in my area, there are 3-4 players that win 90% of the tournaments, a handful more who win on occasion, with the rest winning very rarely. Now, I understand there is a skill difference between players, but there is also a difference in the size of their collections. Of the 3-4 "favorites" 2 are mega collectors, who end up buying in effect multiple cases of each set, then Ebay away for what they don't pull. Can we say squadrons of DF Donars... The other 2 purchase modest amounts of new product, but trade or buy for the "god" figures.

I cannot honestly remember a tournament winning army that fielded a HL unit, at least not the last dozen or so I ran, and/or participated in.


(BTW, what I meant by "winning" army is the tournament winner, not the winner of individual games. Sorry if that was not very clear)

Thanks again...

That would be kind of neat now that the game has been shaken up with the rules changes and the new set.

I think everyone understands that player skill has a significant impact on the results but that doesn't completely diminish the value of the info. Just start a new thread something like: "Post Your Tourney Winning Army Here!"

In the text, request that only straight 3/450 HTH armies be posted (not Storyline events, or higher build totals) and the tourney record, 3-0, 4-1 etc.

People love to brag about winning, so you might be able to get enough responses to see some patterns.

you talking cheese-play or army pureness-play?
We see a lot of SS Balacs, SS DI AA Towed, SH DI Towed, SS Fenrir, DF Shock Troopers, DF Kanazuchis, Arnis Drummond, SS J-37, DF Donars and SS Towed Autocanons.
That's what gets played. I hate the people who play that. I hate them. I hate them. I love winning agaisnt them because they get angry and whine (I'm talking about the specific people who play at my venue). Mwuah!

Apart from that, most "good" units get used... you don't see many VV1 Rangers or Ghosts being played. But most units see some play time, unless they truly suck.

Add : I also dread the new SS Arrow IV Artillery Tank. I dread even more when I see people in the trading forum having wants like :
SS Arrow IV tank x 4
I mean common... go to hell, it'll save me some time not making you go there myself.

Funny.... I have seen the HL J-37 used to great effect at our venue, as well as the Shun, Regulator II, Peasants, and quite a few more.

It must be really boring to see the same units played over and over again.

When's the last time you saw a Forestry Mech B in play? I won last weeks tournament with 2 of the Mercs and a Capellan Targe. The ForMecs did far more damage than the Targe ever did. People underestimate those nasty Industrials.

Think of units that people rarely see and try playing them once in a while. You will be surprised how well the "WTF??!?!" factor works!

Roth.

I will be playing in two tourneys this weekend, and will post the winning armies here, and their records including VC wins.

The problem I see is that for your statistics to be even remotely valid you will need at least a sample size of 30 (barest of the bare for sample sizes) and then you have nothing to verify the posted results. If this was for a "scientific" paper, it would get laughed out of the room. But for gamer stats, it might be worth it.

Common units: uber effecient mechs. Bascially anything that has abilities very cheap, or a combination of abilities that dominate. Arnis, Katsu and Caden Senn all come to mind here.


Attack VTOLs are very common, even with AA units. Balacs especially. Most are 19+ on defense (20+ if cruising... and always cruising). The ability to move and shoot often gives them the ability to outrange a mech, either shooting first or moving in & out of the mech's effective range or arc. Opponents also underestimate VTOLs movement also, only to be surprised when a VTOL moves 18"+ instead of moving 6" and shooting at something.

Artillery... *wince* SS DI Towed AA & SW Padilla, sometimes the SH Towed Autocannon. With a SS/HL/SW J-37 or SW Maxim. I can expect to see at least one of those units in nearly every army I face currently, unless the player is committed to a complete offense army (ie, move across and fight the battle in the deployment zone).

Peasents & Trikes (DF/BR). Cheap infiltrators, base enemy units to keep them from attacking artillery pieces.

That covers a lot of major units/unit types I see. I expect less VTOLs after CA is legal and hold hope more mechs will surface, but Arty/AA is looking like the next big thing.

My venue is going through a change. It used to be everyone had a different army every week, but we have since gained about four new people. One of them loves DF and the Tank Drop, 2 of them like Swordsworn with multiple artillery and Balacs, and the other one is just out for fun. No one even played SS a couple of months ago and now this. Also, where most would play faction pure, now you are lucky if you see someone with less than three factions in their army. I pointed this out one week, and they said "Yeah, well you aren't playing faction pure either!" I had one Merc Zahn in my army, with the rest being SC. I guess they were technically right, but don't give me that #### when you have a SS Balac, Kenneth Medchelke, a Liao Targe, and a SW Padilla in your army. Christ.

kenjelly: yeah, people can be stupid...i consider mercs to be faction pure...especially when it's just one or two pieces, which is asbout the role they're meant to serve...

i win a lot of tournaments, and i play faction pure. sometimes it really is about tactics, because i think that sometimes my army build could be inferrior to my opponents, having the scorchers in their DZ on turn 2 usually takes them out of their game plan :)

units i like to use:

Malisa Nova Cat
Arnis Drummond
Kevin Nostra
:^^^: Sun Cobra (only used this and other CA in friendly games)
:^^: Mjolnir
:^: Hoverbikes
:^^^: Donnar
:^^^: Clan BA
:^^: ISBA
Scorchers
Shadow Stalkers
:^^: Shock Troops
:^^^: Crane
:^: Sniper (A merc?!?!)
:^: Arrow IV (i'm REALLY surprised by their performance so far)
:^: Kamazuchi
:^: Purifier

i wish i had a merc zhan...i'd get some real use out of that bad boy...of course, that list probably wasn't very helpful...but it's something.

They were NOT technically correct. According to the rules mercs can be included in a Faction pure force.

Our old BM used to run faction pure 500 pt events only. Those were the good old days. I have had trouble adjusting to all star play. It does not help that WK makes so many cheesy units. Individually, these units aren't too bad. Combined together, they make for stale gameplay.

The ones I see alot are:

1) merc Sniper
2) BR Sniper
3) BR Sprint
4) any Balacs
5) DF and HL Donar
6) Arnis D.
7) SS TAC
8) any J37
9) SS fenrir
10) SS AA arty

CA will change this in a big way.

Things I see at my venue.

Joel Nguyen
HL Long Tom and Sniper
Clara Parks
Ken Roos
Gus Edgington
E Targe

The venue I regularly play at is more fun than competitive and pretty much everyone prefers to play faction pure w and w/o mercs.

EVERYTHING DF!

And I run pure scenario events too, using mercs. I think 95% of players at least consider mercs pure, else why do they exist?

Here is what was asked. Not what you like, or what you see. WHAT ARE THE WINNING ARMIES COMPOSED OF. So post the complete winning armies at your venues. specific units in the amies, and point totals.