8th Ed. The BEST close combat units in all of Warhammer.

[Lizards of Renown]

I had this little clip planned for our epic final matchup....

I love this clip. I loved the cartoon movie as a kid. Now the 80's music is nostalgic rather than super cheesy

The Destroyer is just as likely to die (resulting in a draw) as it is to survive (resulting in a victory). A "Schrodinger's Destroyer" if you will.

I loved this reference by the way. Brilliant.

 

[Killer Angel]

T
And just like that, the tournament is concluded!

that was a hell of a ride!

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Tournament Stats! - Page 1

The completed table of matchup results:

Round-by-round results:

Final Standings:


Breakdown of match results:


Leaderboard in terms of greatest number of Massive Victories, Regular Victories, Draws, Regular Losses and Massive Losses:

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Tournament Stats! - Page 2

Army Standings:


Not a bad showing for Chaos! First, third and fifth!


Analysis of performance by Unit Type:


Analysis of performance by Unit Category:


Analysis of performance by Alignment:





Results of our betting favourites to win and lose the tournament:

The results are tabulated based on the degree to which our choices were off from the actual winner/loser. So if you guessed correctly, you would be off by zero. If your chosen winner came in third, you would be off by 2 (i.e. two other units beat your chosen unit). Basically, the lower your score, the more accurate your picks were.




Congrats to @Killer Angel for taking first place!


Next up we have the rankings in conjunction with the forum member who nominated each unit (i.e. the member who first suggested that the unit be included in the tournament).

The "Order in which each unit was nominated" refers to the chronological order in which each of the units were nominated/added to the tournament. This is one of the most interesting stats (IMHO), as it shows that the units we immediately thought should be included in the tournament were not necessarily the best ones in terms of actual tournament performance. The Beasts of Nurgle for instance were the 12th unit (out of 16) to be nominated, but ended up finishing second!



Here is the same data, but ordered chronologically by nomination date:



And finally, how each of the nominators fared in terms of average points earned by their nominated units:

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Acknowledgements!

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread. Your feedback, analysis, corrections, suggestions and encouragement were all greatly appreciated. I think together, we collectively created something that is rather interesting and unique. Hopefully people have (and will) find it insightful or at the very least... interesting.

I also want to take the opportunity to tip my hat to @Killer Angel , @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl and @Imrahil , who consistently contributed to our tournament throughout its entire duration.

Last but not least, special acknowledgement is owed to @Lizards of Renown , who was the most consistent contributor to the tournament and thread.



P.S. @Mrs. NIGHTBRINGER is owed an acknowledgement too, behind to scenes she has to listen to me blather on about these things for hours on end (you guys think I post a lot?... imagine the live and unfiltered version of that!). The woman's patience astounds me.



But wait... there's more. Closing Questions/Analysis!


1. Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

2. Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

3. How do you feel our tournament results translate to the tabletop? Which units do you feel would perform significantly better or worse in an actual WFB game? (external factors not accounted for in the tournament, other advantages they bring to an army or other counters that can be used against them, etc.)

4. If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?

5. Feel free to pose any additional analysis or questions!

 

[Killer Angel]

First of all:
great stats tables, @NIGHTBRINGER ! truly an in-depth analysis, kudos to you!

...and of course, thanks for this amazing contest and all the work you did for it.

Results of our betting favourites to win and lose the tournament:

The results are tabulated based on the degree to which our choices were off from the actual winner/loser. So if you guessed correctly, you would be off by zero. If your chosen winner came in third, you would be off by 2 (i.e. two other units beat your chosen unit). Basically, the lower your score, the more accurate your picks were.

View attachment 92601

Congrats to @Killer Angel for taking first place!

Horray!
I'll treasure this win!

But wait... there's more. Closing Questions/Analysis!


1. Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

2. Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

3. How do you feel our tournament results translate to the tabletop? Which units do you feel would perform significantly better or worse in an actual WFB game? (external factors not accounted for in the tournament, other advantages they bring to an army or other counters that can be used against them, etc.)

4. If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?

5. Feel free to pose any additional analysis or questions!

for these ones, I'll need some time to elaborate.

 

[Lizards of Renown]

Tournament Stats! - Page 2

Army Standings:
View attachment 92597

Not a bad showing for Chaos! First, third and fifth!


Analysis of performance by Unit Type:
View attachment 92598

Analysis of performance by Unit Category:
View attachment 92599

Analysis of performance by Alignment:
View attachment 92600




Results of our betting favourites to win and lose the tournament:

The results are tabulated based on the degree to which our choices were off from the actual winner/loser. So if you guessed correctly, you would be off by zero. If your chosen winner came in third, you would be off by 2 (i.e. two other units beat your chosen unit). Basically, the lower your score, the more accurate your picks were.


View attachment 92601

Congrats to @Killer Angel for taking first place!


Next up we have the rankings in conjunction with the forum member who nominated each unit (i.e. the member who first suggested that the unit be included in the tournament).

The "Order in which each unit was nominated" refers to the chronological order in which each of the units were nominated/added to the tournament. This is one of the most interesting stats (IMHO), as it shows that the units we immediately thought should be included in the tournament were not necessarily the best ones in terms of actual tournament performance. The Beasts of Nurgle for instance were the 12th unit (out of 16) to be nominated, but ended up finishing second!

View attachment 92602

Here is the same data, but ordered chronologically by nomination date:
View attachment 92604


And finally, how each of the nominators fared in terms of average points earned by their nominated units:
View attachment 92603

This was a painful one to read! my predictions here were not the greatest!

 

[Lizards of Renown]

Acknowledgements!

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread. Your feedback, analysis, corrections, suggestions and encouragement were all greatly appreciated. I think together, we collectively created something that is rather interesting and unique. Hopefully people have (and will) find it insightful or at the very least... interesting.

I also want to take the opportunity to tip my hat to @Killer Angel , @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl and @Imrahil , who consistently contributed to our tournament throughout its entire duration. View attachment 92606

Last but not least, special acknowledgement is owed to @Lizards of Renown , who was the most consistent contributor to the tournament and thread. View attachment 92605



P.S. @Mrs. NIGHTBRINGER is owed an acknowledgement too, behind to scenes she has to listen to me blather on about these things for hours on end (you guys think I post a lot?... imagine the live and unfiltered version of that!). The woman's patience astounds me.



But wait... there's more. Closing Questions/Analysis!


1. Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

2. Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

3. How do you feel our tournament results translate to the tabletop? Which units do you feel would perform significantly better or worse in an actual WFB game? (external factors not accounted for in the tournament, other advantages they bring to an army or other counters that can be used against them, etc.)

4. If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?

5. Feel free to pose any additional analysis or questions!

Awesome!

I'm going to have a think about my answers to points 1-5 and I'll post later.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I guess I'll break the ice...


Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

1. Beasts of Nurgle - this was the single greatest surprise for me. I had heard they were good, but I had no prior experience playing with or against them. At a glance I would have thought that their meager S4 would have kept them in the middle or lower end of the pack. Their defense turns out to be nothing short of sublime and poison seems to sufficiently augment their otherwise lacking strength. In my opinion, of all the units in the tourney, they are the hardest to reliably counter on the tabletop. We did see them fall to 1+ armour, but that was the premier 1+ armour save units in the game (Demigryphs and Skullcrushers). I'd be very curious to see how they would fare against defensive infantry or other highly armoured units, especially as they were able to defeat the 2+ armour save Mournfang.
2. Hell Pit Abomination - Another unit I had heard great things about, but I never would have guessed how consistently well it would perform against the elite of the elite. It only lost 4 out of 15 matches, and the only reason it didn't finish higher was because most of its victories were "regular" ones because it can't break steadfast (especially under the tourney rules). Additionally, the tournament didn't account for its impact hits or its ability to come back alive after being slain.
3. Black Guard - while they ended up in the bottom half of the standings, I had them pegged to come in last place due to their negligible defense and S4. I also underestimated them because I had never really seen them fielded in Dark Elves armies. After the tournament, it does make sense why they are underused. They fill the same niche as the Witch Elves, who simply do it better (even though the WE lose in a head-to-head) and they do it out of core. Still, the Black Guard are not as weak as I would have originally predicted.

Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

1. Skullcrushers of Khorne - I had these guys pegged to narrowly edge out the Destroyer for first place. I knew they would lose to the BoTWD and I knew their match against the Destroyer was going to be close, but aside from that I figured they would sail through the rest. Taking key losses to the Demigryphs, Executioners, HPA and a massive loss against the Trolls was unexpected. Obviously they are a top tier unit, but the tournament has revealed that they are not nearly as unbeatable as I originally thought them to be. Amazing, but not the best.
2. Mournfang Cavalry - on paper they seem to fit in the tier of the Skullcrushers and Demigryphs. Seeing them perform so much worse than their Monstrous Cavalry cousins was shocking. I expected all three of these units to finish near each other, but they were the clear outlier. Perhaps that is partially due to them not being able to utilize their impact hits, but the same can be said for the Skullcrushers not being able to utilize their charge dependent boost in strength. At the start of the tournament I would have expect these guys to finish in the top half of the field. Third last was shocking.
3. Chaos Warriors - I didn't have high hopes for these guys, but second last place is an extremely poor showing. Only managing 4 victories and finishing behind the rest of the infantry, was quite unexpected. On paper they seem to have a beautiful blend of offense and defense, but they are simply too expensive. Could a different setup (MoK AHW or MoT S&B) done better, who knows? They are still a dangerous core choice, but not as broken as people try to make them out to be.

How do you feel our tournament results translate to the tabletop? Which units do you feel would perform significantly better or worse in an actual WFB game? (external factors not accounted for in the tournament, other advantages they bring to an army or other counters that can be used against them, etc.)

Close Combat is only one phase of the game of WFB, and as such, there will be lots of mitigating or additional factors that play for or against our tournament units. Overall things like movement value, resistance or susceptibility to magic/shooting and additional factors like impact hits, terror or general counters can really alter the value of a unit beyond its pure CC prowess. Here are a few observations:

• White Lions of Chrace + BotWD - the BotWD is one of the single best items in the game. It grants huge protection in both the enemy and friendly magic phases. Protecting against the very best magic weapons is also a huge factor that was not represented in the standings. Against the DoC, the banner is absolutely broken. The White Lions (or Phoenix Guard) are key units in what is one of the most powerful WFB armies.
• Beasts of Nurgle - they dominated the field in the tournament and I see absolutely no reason why they wouldn't do the same on the tabletop. Good movement, some additional special rules and hardly any reliable counters make them one of the very best units in the entire game. The Destroyer proved superior in the tournament, but the Destroyer is also far easier to counter in an actual game. I see the Beasts of Nurgle's tournament success most easily transferring into actual game of WFB.
• K'daai Destroyer - being nearly unstoppable in the tournament does not necessarily transfer directly onto the tabletop where it has several weaknesses that can be exploited. The most notable are the Dragonbane Gem and Dragonhelm, which for a mere 5 and 10 points respectably, can completely neuter the Destroyer. Poison, ethereal and magical attacks are also key counters that an opposing army can take advantage of. Also, the Burning Bright special rule is a constant liability, and at times, frenzy too. That said, if the opposing general does not properly line up one of the Destroyer's key counters, the Destroyer can near single handily win games for the Chaos Dwarfs. Outside of the narrow range of counters, the Destroyer may stand as the single best hammer unit in the game... fast, impeccable defense and dominating offense that works perfectly well against nearly all types opposition.
• Witch Elves - probably the easiest unit to comment on. Devastating in CC, but extremely vulnerable to shooting and magic. Templates are the absolute bane of the Witch Elves. In CC, they crush lightly armoured targets with unsurpassed efficiency, but armour will forever be their counter. Also, Frenzy is both a blessing and a boon.
• Chaos Trolls - possessing factors that can make them perform both better or worse on the table top. The most obvious factor is their Stupidity and weakness to flaming attacks. If a general can manage these factors, the Trolls will absolutely shine. On the plus side, in the tournament they suffered by autobreaking from a lost round of combat, but with a general in range, the Trolls have a good chance of sticking around and actually wearing out their opposition in a battle of attrition. There are probably a couple of matches in the tournament that they would have won if it was a battle to the death (last man standing). Also, Chaos Trolls can be taken as core choices in a WoC army that field Throgg (who is an insanely good special character as is).

If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?

• K'daai Fireborn - if their big brother did so well, it begs the question, how well could the Fireborn do? In some respects they are weaker (i.e. worse against armour, less tougness), but in other respects they are better (more attacks initially and more wounds). Overall, my money is easily on the Destroyer, but I do wonder how the Fireborn would fare in key matchups where the Destroyer faltered. Would having a larger wound pool get them through the Witch Elves matchup? I do think that the Skullcrushers and Demigryphs would be a hard matchup for them, but I'd love to see how they would do overall.
• A defensively built infantry unit (MoT S&B or Ironbreakers) - I feel that most unit types were represented in the tournament, but one clear omission was a defensive infantry unit. 3+ armour save and a 5+ parry would make for some interesting matchups. It would also shakeup the landscape of the standings as some units would suffer (Witch Elves) and others would thrive. One of our 3 overlapping S6 infantry units (Executioners, Hammerers or White Lions) might have been better replaced with a different type of unit that tries to win through defense over offense.
• Treeman - a direct replacement for the Arachnarok, which proved itself undeserving of a tournament position. I wouldn't expect the Treeman to light up the field, but it would perform infinitely better than the Spider did. WS6 , 3+ scaly skin, stubborn, special attack and a 6+ ward save would have been an interesting addition to the contest. Ultimately only having 5 S5 attacks would be its undoing, but I would like to see how well it could compete.
• Bull Centaur Renders - this one is just out of pure curiosity and bias for the Chaos Dwarfs. They don't have enough attacks to do well in the contest, but I'd like to see how many competitors they could beat. Their T5 and 3+ armour save is great, but 2 attacks base just wouldn't cut it. Still, I'd be personally curious, even if their inclusion isn't purely justified.

 

[The Great White Lizard]

Since I wasn't on LO pre tourney, I can't really say, but here's my thoughts in relation to what I would expect.

Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

1. Chaos Trolls - I knew that trolls were strong, but I guess I had never seen them actually get into combat fully intact before, and I had never really viewed them as a threat on the tabletop. That certainly changed with this tourney, after watching them shred some of the best units in the game. They're super unwieldy and stupidity really hurts, but if they ever get into combat they shred.
2. Demigryph Knights - At first I felt this unit was very overrated, but that has really changed after seeing it come higher than the Witch Elves. I guess 1+ armor really is something. Monstorous cav seems to have performed quite well in this tournament.
3. Savage Orc Big Un's - I knew these were good, but coming in 3rd of the infantry really surprised me. Choppas and frenzy seem to really work for them.

Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

1. Arachnarok Spider - Not much explanation needed on this one. D:
2. Chaos Warriors - Similar to what @NIGHTBRINGER said, I thought second last place (especially compared to some other unit) was pathetic for a unit that I was terrified to play against. Seems that no extra attacks on supporting ranks really hurt them. I wonder if our saurus would suffer the same problem in a tourney like this.
3. White Lions - I felt the BOTWD would have upped their standing farther, but I didn't realize how much of that banner's utility came from preventing damage from wizards and not in CC.

If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?

• Lords and Heroes - Now of course these aren't 'units' per say but I think it would be interesting to see how lone characters or characters in units performed against some of the better performing units on this list. We would have to make them all comer's magic items otherwise some units would be completely countered (cough cough K'daai cough cough)
• Giants - Recently while watching a miniwargaming battle rep I realized how good giants are against monsters. I won't outright say it, but it might be the unit to finally hand the K'daai that massive loss.
• Minotaurs - As a beastmen player, maybe I just have a soft spot for them, but I feel like they could actually do ok in a tourney like this.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Lords and Heroes - Now of course these aren't 'units' per say but I think it would be interesting to see how lone characters or characters in units performed against some of the better performing units on this list. We would have to make them all comer's magic items otherwise some units would be completely countered (cough cough K'daai cough cough)

My bet is always on the WoC Hortennse Lord for the win!

Minotaurs - As a beastmen player, maybe I just have a soft spot for them, but I feel like they could actually do ok in a tourney like this.

Minotaurs do feature in @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl 's The Best Monstrous Infantry unit in all of Warhammer thread. The tournament is still in the early stages, but I look forward to seeing it progress once @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl resumes the matchups.

Giants - Recently while watching a miniwargaming battle rep I realized how good giants are against monsters. I won't outright say it, but it might be the unit to finally hand the K'daai that massive loss.

As one of Lustria Online's resident Chaos Dwarf players, let me step up in defense of the K'daai Destroyer. (possibly personal bias) The Giant has zero chance of handing it a Massive loss in a tournament setting.

The Giant only has initiative 3 compared to the Destroyers initiative of 5. So before the Giant even gets to strike it is dealt 4.8 wounds:



That leaves the 1.2 remaining wounds out of its starting wound total of 6. A potential Massive Victory is already out of the question and the Giant is just one turn away from being slain by the Destroyer.

Offensively, the Giant can hurt the Destroyer, but not nearly enough.

17% chance to Yell and Ball: the Giant wins combat by 2 and the Destroyer crumbles 2 wounds (leaving it on 4). Next turn the Destroyer wipes out the giant.

50% chance to Thump with Club: on average the Giant deals the Destroyer 0.6 wounds (it's too easy for the Destroyer to pass its initiative test). Next turn the Destroyer wipes out the Giant.

33% chance to 'Eadbutt: the Giant does 1 automatic wound, which has a 50% chance of getting past the Destroyer's 4+ ward save. If the Giant is successful, the Destroyer loses it ability to attack next round, if it fails, the Destroyer takes no wounds this round and wipes out the Giant in the subsequent turn.





I think the Giant's lack of defense would really hurt it in the contest, but it would make for a few interesting matchups (the Soul Grinder comes to mind).

Either way, those are some good choices. They would provide for some fun and interesting matchups!

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

That was certainly a fun tournament! Apologies for being relatively inactive on this thread everyone, but now that the it’s all over, I might as well shove in my fourpenneth:

Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

1. K’daai Destroyer - Gods that is one powerful monster when it gets into the melee side of things. It also begs the notion that if Chaos Dwarfs had been given a full-scale army book like the other factions and a full range of different units, I imagine they would have been in the upper tier at the very least, if not top tier - tough Infantry, powerful monsters, dangerous artillery and magic all rolled into one. It is just such a shame GW never gave them a level playing field when it came to attention. All we can hope for is that because GW has kept Chaos Dwarfs in the TOW universe and has deleted the Forge World ones, it might mean they are making a full plastic range for them at last. Justice for Chaos Dwarfs!
2. Demigryph Knights - I’m really surprised and a little annoyed at seeing these things doing better than the Skullcrushers in the tourney, because given their obvious inferiority in their profile you wouldn’t expect them to be better. However, one thing I think these need to be worried about is being so dependent on getting as many models in the front rank as possible, which in the tourney they were able to as per the rules, but in an actual game would be more difficult for them because they have to move through gaps between terrain to get to the enemy.
3. Chaos Trolls/Trolls in General - I’m surprised at how well Trolls fared here, but then they didn’t have to worry about their main weaknesses - Stupidity and Fire - very much. In an actual game they’d need babysitting by the General and any unit/character with flaming attacks would hurt them a lot. In my Monstrous Infantry tourney I’m running three types of Troll - Chaos Trolls with AHW, River Trolls and Nurgle Bile Trolls, so it’ll be interesting to see how well each of them performs against other Monstrous Infantry and each other.

Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

1. Hammerers - Oh my poor Hammerers, I really wanted better for them. Having to strike last and only a 5+ armour save is a real pain in the proverbial for them, not just against higher Initiative enemies but also shooting attacks. Well, looks like I’ll just have to keep relying on my missile units and war machines to whittle the enemy down before getting stuck in with the Dwarf Royal Bodyguards.
2. Mournfang Cavalry - I also was very surprised at these guys doing so poorly being Monstrous Cavalry. I was thinking they’d do better than the Demigryphs because of their better riders, but weren’t these guys given the defensive option of Ironfists? I think if they’d had Great Weapons they’d have done a lot better, if the Gutstar is anything to go by.
3. Skullcrushers - Yeah I thought these should have done better, especially against the silly Demigryphs. However, again I think the Demigryphs were favoured by the fact they could go as wide as they liked here, whereas if the units had to stick to the minimum width to claim ranks because of terrain or whatever, the Skullcrushers would be a much greater threat to any foe.

If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?

• Ironbreakers and Slayers - After I suggested Hammerers I kept wondering if I should have suggested Ironbreakers too, being their defensive counterpart, and @NIGHTBRINGER is right, we should have had a defensive unit in the tourney. WoC already have two units in there, and Dwarfs only have 1 so Ironbreakers would even it up. I certainly think they could stomp the Witch Elves, Savage Orcs and Black Guard as those units have little armour and loads of relatively low-Strength attacks that would just patter harmlessly off the Ironbreakers’ Gromril Armour. Also I’d be interested to see how Slayers would fare, because though they have no armour at all they can compensate for that with their Deathblow attacks, which can be made at Strength 5 if they choose Great Weapons. Furthermore they always wound on a 4+ or better, so Toughness is no obstacle for them.
• Khemrian Warsphinx - I’d like to see how a Warsphinx would do in the competition, because Tomb Kings deserve some representation. It has Toughness 8 which makes it incredibly difficult to wound, and its Thundercrush Attack is great at killing hordes. Not only that but being a monster it’d have a Thunderstomp to play with along with its regular attacks and the Killing Blow attacks of the Tomb Guard crew, and being Unbreakable it would fight to the death. I think it’d do better than the Arachnarok at any rate.
• MoK Chaos Warriors with AHW - Also I want to see what this combo can do to the opposition, and to see if it can fare better than the MoN build (which I thought wasn’t as OP).

• Minotaurs - As a beastmen player, maybe I just have a soft spot for them, but I feel like they could actually do ok in a tourney like this.

Yeah I’ll have to carry on with my tourney won’t I? As a fellow Beastmen fan I’m rooting for the Minotaurs too, though their atrociously expensive pricing in the 7th Edition book is currently hurting them. As part of my aim to give Beastmen the best possible 8th experience I’m writing my own 8th book for them, and as one of my amendments I’m giving Minotaurs a helping hand - once my tourney with official rules is over, I’m going to pitch my own Minotaur rules against all the opposition to see how balanced and good a rules writer I am

 

[The Great White Lizard]

As part of my aim to give Beastmen the best possible 8th experience I’m writing my own 8th book for them, and as one of my amendments I’m giving Minotaurs a helping hand - once my tourney with official rules is over, I’m going to pitch my own Minotaur rules against all the opposition to see how balanced and good a rules writer I am

That's one of the books I am most looking forward to, alongside Cult of Sotek. If GW won't give the beastmen what they deserve, then us beastmen players will have to compensate!

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

That's one of the books I am most looking forward to, alongside Cult of Sotek. If GW won't give the beastmen what they deserve, then us beastmen players will have to compensate!

That’s probably the only good thing about 8th no longer being supported by GW - it encourages custom rules to be devised to help balance out the factions that need fixing, and create new ones, to ensure the game lives on in our hearts!

Great to hear your enthusiasm for my work, the Beastmen one is coming along very nicely at the moment! As soon as it’s finished and a link to it is put up in the Great Library I’ll tag you so you can find it

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

nd @NIGHTBRINGER is right, we should have had a defensive unit in the tourney. WoC already have two units in there, and Dwarfs only have 1 so Ironbreakers would even it up.

WoC had three units in the tourney: Skullcrushers, Trolls and Chaos Warriors. Your point is valid though.

MoK Chaos Warriors with AHW - Also I want to see what this combo can do to the opposition, and to see if it can fare better than the MoN build (which I thought wasn’t as OP).

It would be interesting to see how MoK, MoN and MoT would fare in the tourney. MoN has historically been considered to be the best build, but I wonder if that claim is valid.

The problem with MoK is that the Frenzy rule can be lost. Still, 4 attacks a piece would be quite the output.

Khemrian Warsphinx - I’d like to see how a Warsphinx would do in the competition, because Tomb Kings deserve some representation. It has Toughness 8 which makes it incredibly difficult to wound, and its Thundercrush Attack is great at killing hordes. Not only that but being a monster it’d have a Thunderstomp to play with along with its regular attacks and the Killing Blow attacks of the Tomb Guard crew, and being Unbreakable it would fight to the death. I think it’d do better than the Arachnarok at any rate.

Interesting. Which units do you think it might beat?

You are probably right though, it can't do much worse than the spider!

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I’m surprised at how well Trolls fared here, but then they didn’t have to worry about their main weaknesses - Stupidity and Fire - very much. In an actual game they’d need babysitting by the General and any unit/character with flaming attacks would hurt them a lot.

Fire is always going to be a problem. At least it means your characters can easily obtain a 2+ ward save against the opposing character and/or unit.

For stupidity, Throgg is a great choice. He provides a second leadership bubble (18" bubble no less!) for your trolls (and war beats, monstrous beasts, monstrous infantry & monsters) to utilize. Two separate leadership bubbles can really cover a large percentage of the battlefield and can really free up your General. Of course, this is only an option if you are playing WoC.

 

[Lizards of Renown]

Acknowledgements!

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread. Your feedback, analysis, corrections, suggestions and encouragement were all greatly appreciated. I think together, we collectively created something that is rather interesting and unique. Hopefully people have (and will) find it insightful or at the very least... interesting.

I really hope so. It had a number of object lessons in Mathhammer that any 8th general worth his salt should know.

Fundamentally, in WFB you are doing educated gambling. You want to set up terrain, circumstance, units, characters and items to give you statistically the best chance of winning the combat. This contest gave some fantastic examples of what will give you the edge in combat.

I also want to take the opportunity to tip my hat to @Killer Angel , @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl and @Imrahil , who consistently contributed to our tournament throughout its entire duration. View attachment 92606

At thread is nothing without contributors. Those named are some of the brightest minds of LO

Last but not least, special acknowledgement is owed to @Lizards of Renown , who was the most consistent contributor to the tournament and thread. View attachment 92605

[LoR bows] My pleasure. I definitely had it in mind that if it were ME doing this thread, then I’d want as much feedback\response as possible.

P.S. @Mrs. NIGHTBRINGER is owed an acknowledgement too, behind to scenes she has to listen to me blather on about these things for hours on end (you guys think I post a lot?... imagine the live and unfiltered version of that!). The woman's patience astounds me.

Ha! Somehow, I can totally picture this.

But wait... there's more. Closing Questions/Analysis!

1. Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

K’Daai tops this list. Definitively. I never took the time to really study all of the rules and lumped it in with the rest of the monster category: situationally useful, but need back-up to really perform. This is one seriously OP monster. (I’m aware of the counters (Dragonbane Gem, Dragonhelm) but it’s still a MONSTER monster,)

Funnily enough, positions 2 and 3 were the next most surprising. I had the Beasts pegged as losers due to their S4 and I never thought that the Empire would end up in the top three. Definitely shocked by those positions.

2. Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

WoC with MoN. Very VERY surprised that they ended bottom of the list.

I definitely thought the Mournfang would end up middle/top-middle of the board, very disappointed with that. Also the Arachnarok. When I entered it, I guess I was a bit blinded by the whole rumour line I’d heard. In the end, this unit IS in the generic category of Monsters: situational, can be useful, don’t underestimate but needs back-up.

3. How do you feel our tournament results translate to the tabletop? Which units do you feel would perform significantly better or worse in an actual WFB game? (external factors not accounted for in the tournament, other advantages they bring to an army or other counters that can be used against them, etc.)

White Lions I think would do a lot better. I think they are a mean, mean unit to face and are much better on the table top than what we saw here. I think the Mournfang (sorry to bang on about this) since they do a lot better if you get that charge in with the D3 impact hits. I think the Trolls got a skewed viewing. They CAN be super dangerous but with the right counters then can be destroyed. Their position I don’t feel reflects reality. Yes, you can general bubble them but that doesn’t handle the Regen/flaming attacks problem. Still pretty awesome though.

4. If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?

Hmmmm.....

Not sure to be honest, I entered all of the ones that I thought could win. However, if a future match-up were done, I think we should review each army and take whatever top three units (regardless of category) and enter them to get a good all-round viewing.

5. Feel free to pose any additional analysis or questions!

None

I was very satisified with the contest and was always looking forwards to the next battle. Excellent job on the battle and on generating debate/conversation @NIGHTBRINGER !!!

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

At thread is nothing without contributors. Those named are some of the brightest minds of LO

I definitely had it in mind that if it were ME doing this thread, then I’d want as much feedback\response as possible.

Indeed. There were times when the grind was getting tiresome, but having interesting conversation to look forward to really does facilitate motivation. The fun of posting a matchup was reading the feedback, reactions and insights posted in response to it.

This is one seriously OP monster. (I’m aware of the counters (Dragonbane Gem, Dragonhelm) but it’s still a MONSTER monster,)

It really is a unique monster. Its base attacks are great against elite expensive opposition, while its Blazing Body auto hits deal with hordes of cheaper troops. So while most units specialize in either anti-armour or anti-horde/numbers, the Destroyer does both.

The Chaos Dwarf player just has to ensure that it isn't met with one of its hard counters, because at 325 points, it is an extremely expensive investment in what is already a very expensive/elite army.

Also the Arachnarok. When I entered it, I guess I was a bit blinded by the whole rumour line I’d heard. In the end, this unit IS in the generic category of Monsters: situational, can be useful, don’t underestimate but needs back-up.

I had a buddy who loved running the big spider in his army. He swore by it, so that's why I didn't peg it to come in dead last.

I think the Trolls got a skewed viewing. They CAN be super dangerous but with the right counters then can be destroyed. Their position I don’t feel reflects reality. Yes, you can general bubble them but that doesn’t handle the Regen/flaming attacks problem. Still pretty awesome though.

The question is how many armies can reliably field large amounts of flaming attacks. Typically it is a single unit with the Banner of Eternal Flame. The nice thing about Trolls is that they are relatively cheap.

I wish I could field Trolls in my Chaos Dwarf army (alongside of K'daai). So do you want to bring flaming attacks or not? (on second thought, I don't think the K'daai need anymore help).

That said, your point is taken. They definitely have more negative mitigating factors associated with them than most units do.

Excellent job on the battle and on generating debate/conversation @NIGHTBRINGER !!!

Thank you kind sir!

 

[Cptn Timmy]

Hello everyone,
First off wow. Hella job @NIGHTBRINGER . What an amazing showing of dedication, terrific terrific work. Very cool to see how this tournament played out and I have to say I am quite amazed at the results. I apologize for not contributing earlier, I sort of came in to this half way through. I am very excited to be able to go back through and analyze the match ups I missed. That being said heres my answers to the questions;
. Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?
The 3 units that surprised me are:
Beasts of nurgle, I always knew these guys were hard to bring down, but I did not think they would have the offensive capabilities to put other units in to the ground.
Witch elves I did not expect them to be so powerful without their cauldron or hellebron. I thought they would get cut down exceedingly quickly.

Savage orc big uns this one im not 100 percent sure i would say over performed, they are pretty close to where I expected them, but I've always thought they need their horde and numbers to be effective. I've also never been too worried about them on the table top so I didn't think much of them.
A lot of the top performers in the tourney I expected to be there although the mournfang not being there surprised me. Which leads me too:

2. Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?
The mournfang i thought would perform much better. Good to know that they are very very reliant on the charge to get there good damage in. I've always that they were a little weak defense wise for how awesome and large the models are, T5 would be huge but I guess that is reserved for rhinox riders.

White lions i cannot believe how poorly these guys performed. I've always thought that they were point for point the best unit in the game. Very satisfying to watch them lose, (they are my brothers army)

Chaos warriors. These are my guys! What the heck happened?!?!? Tzeentchs meddling must have messed up the numbers some how. I'm sure he/she/they are having a good laugh about it I think that as usual the high cost of the warriors gave them too little of numbers to really shine. It would be interesting to see how some of their other builds would fair although I do think MoN and halberds is their best.

3. How do you feel our tournament results translate to the tabletop? Which units do you feel would perform significantly better or worse in an actual WFB game? (external factors not accounted for in the tournament, other advantages they bring to an army or other counters that can be used against them, etc.)

I think that a lot of the high performing units have more glaring weakness' than the middle tier fighters. I'm still sold on chaos warriors and white lions perform significantly better on the table than they did in the tourney. Maybe it is the support from the rest of the armies that give them their strength. I very much feel that this tournament showed how awesomely balanced this game can be. For as scary as the k'daii is i mostly would still not be too scared to see it on the tabletop, and the same with trolls. For as powerful as monstrous cavalry can be artillery can really put the dents in them. And for as good at fighting I thought infantry is it showed they need their leaders and proper match ups. I always heard that infantry was king in 8th but this tournament shows us otherwise.

4. If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?
I would love to have seen how some chaos chosen would perform, although I know their special rules would probably be hard to work out in the tourney. T5 3+ 5++ chosen make a hell of an anvil and seeing how well the beasts performed with s4 i think they could do well. Or 2+ 5++, S5 A4 4++, S6 4+ MoN, or t5 s5 MoN or MoK the possibilities are endless lol.

Another 2 units id like to see would be the frostheart and Phoenix guard because i do think that this tourney showed how valuable a good defense is and if they performed poorly I would be happy to watch. Haha. That frostheart can be a real pain in the. . . .

Lastly vargheists and or crypt horrors would be cool to see how they perform as they are mostly offensive and defensive respectively. I dont knowntheir points cost off hand and I know the undead strength is in their rising back up but if the horrors are cheaper than beasts I would be curious to see how it turns out.


5. Feel free to pose any additional analysis or questions!
I wonder if there is a tipping point for infantry where the amount of wounds they have make them able to withstand x amount of rounds against all the other monsters in the tourney. And if so how high would that tipping point be?
I wonder how different the results would be if every units LD was 9 or 10, I find that it is more common for units to be within their generals bubble than not, and I wonder if this would vault some units up the ranking or have no effect at all lol.

Again I have to state this tournament is so so damn cool. I can't thank everyone who had a part in keeping it going and especially @NIGHTBRINGER for just a stunning amount of insight in to this excellent game we all love.
Thanks!

 

[Killer Angel]

time to answer some questions...

Which three units surprised you the most by over-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

Witch elves. i expected them to fall in the lower half. A closed enviroment, with no shooting, definitely helped them
Beasts of nurgle. The classic unit that you don't consider too much, and instead...
Demigriph knights. I know they were good, but not that much

Which three units surprised you the most by under-performing in relation to your pre-tournament expectations?

Chaos warriors. i knew they could not compete for the podium, but i was expecting to see them at least in the middle
White lions. I know the banner is broken, but i thought that without it, they would have been better than this. It's almost their victories are only tnx to the item.
Mournfang. huge difference between "they will end in the lower half" and "they will end in the negative podium"

How do you feel our tournament results translate to the tabletop? Which units do you feel would perform significantly better or worse in an actual WFB game? (external factors not accounted for in the tournament, other advantages they bring to an army or other counters that can be used against them, etc.)

Close Combat is only one phase, and even so we didn't take into account some special abilities that would be meaningful for some units (mournfangs and impact hits on charge).
So, this is basically an indicator of "now that you know this unit is dangerous, deal with it without playing at its own game"

If you could add any unit(s) to compete in the tournament, which ones would they be? Who would you wish to see tested and why?

I'd run ironbreakers instead of hammerers. more defense and not ASL can make the difference.
That said, i would change the setting, including 1 unit for each army, to have a entire view and obtain a ranking not only of the units, but also of the "hitting power" of the relative armies.
Treelord for WE, maybe a sphynx for TK, and so on...