AoS AoS 3.0 tournament meta as of August 1, 2021

Over at the Grand Alliance forum site, a user calling themselves Ragest tracks results of five-game AoS tournaments from around the world and compiles the data using methods that are not entirely clear to me, but which I still find useful. I'm not sure what the last column calculates. Anyway, It thought people might find this interesting. So far, anyway, Seraphon is doing well in tournaments in the 3.0 era

 

so we are 11th now? good to know. we are also firmly in 3rd place for popularity and hovering right at the 50% mark. this is very good news over all

 

It also highlights our major weakness in dealing with hero hammer. Different flavors of Archaon are Number 1, Number 2 and 3 are chaos lists with Belakor, 4 is DoK with Morathi, and 5 is SoB with 3-4 35 wound characters.

 

its a hit yes. but i think were fine with dealing with most of the heroes in the game

 

11th in winrate, but winrate =\= overall rank in the meta. Seraphon still seem to be consistently placing and methinks there also a lot of new players dragging the averages down. They're definitely not S tier anymore but are firmly A.

That being said, we're definitely in a much healthier place right now. I doubt we're likely to see any nerfs next errata.

 

this has far more to do with the quality of players. the people who stuck with lizards during the dark years are over all much better then the average AoS player(we had to be) and they tend to place well in turnies. case in point Nicolas the 3rd best player in the USA he constantly pulls us 1st place rankings using frankly meme builds.

 

Which I think is what is important. The portion of any given army being piloted well by experienced players is a more important metric of balance over the general average of players, at least when it comes to determining competitive rank. It also looks like there are a lot of new Seraphon players joining the ranks in 3.0 due to how good they were in 2.0. We definitely weren't the third most popular army in 2.0. Many competitive video games (e.g. MOBAs as an example) balance around how well the top players, and not the other way around.

 

but this scews the numbers by a lot. nick has half of the first place rankings for seraphon if he wasn't in the game this would show us doing much worse. and he isn't the only one dice the second best German player is a seraphon main we also have 2 of the top 5 Australian players. almost all of our good placings are from the best players in the entire game and are not representitive of how well our army is doing.

 

I understand that but every army has their best players bringing up the average. Judging by how much more popular Seraphon has gotten recently, I'm willing to be there are many more bad Seraphon players dragging the average down than the other way around.

You have to consider how well the good players playing do when looking at balance. It shows that properly piloted Seraphon players are capable of consistently 4-1ing big events and are doing quite well in that regard. There are other armies with similar overall win percentages that can't make that claim. There is a reason most competitive players still have Seraphon ranked highly. They're not the best army any more but if you are a reasonably experienced Seraphon pilot, you have a solid chance of doing well at a tournament.

Last point: 80 games or so is still a relatively small number when it comes to drawing any sort of reasonable, long term conclusion about the meta for us, especially after only a month or so into a new meta. My personal belief is that Seraphon judging by tournament data and placements is that they are doing quite fine. Something DEFINITELY needs to be done about Archaeon though.

 

Who is Nicolas?

Also, you could say that about a lot of armies. It isn't just nobodies with good armies that win tournaments.

 

you would know him better as wizard i used his real name in case you want to verify what im saying. and right thats why i don't value tournament placements in my how good a army is. when a player is so good they can win events with nothing but skink handlers and 15 knights (yes that did happen) then i don't think they make for a good comparison

 

I would like to see the GT that was won with handlers and 15 knights if you don't mind.

 

Same^^^^ I gotta see that madness

 

it was literally all handlers and 15 knights. with a skink hero as general. it's how me and wizard met. wizard was trying to prove a point that summoning was unneeded to win with lizard he took 3rd,

 

Sorry I meant what was the GT.

 

shoot it's been close to 4 years. let me go look for it

 

Oh wow thought it was something more recent. No worries if you can't find it, was just curious.

 

i was at the warhammer open this past weekend. lots of tzeentch. lots of sons. lots of deepkin with gotrek, a few seraphon and a lot of lumimeth. pretty much went the way things were predicted.

 

Yeah, I was thinking it was more recent too since the original conversation was about current tournament data Now I'm not sure how that was relevant to the conversation at all, lol, even though it does sound funny.

 

How’s it go?