Monday, August 31, 2020

40k - Harlequins: Secondary Objective Choices (Tournament Test)

 Generally, I like to keep things simple so I can keep my eye on the prize.

At The Long War IV on the weekend my Secondary Objective choices were generally consistent across the three rounds.

I went in with the view that in every game I would take the following three choices:
  • Linebreaker - 4 points for two units entirely within enemy Deployment Zone (Progressive)
  • Bring Them Down - 2/3 points for each Vehicle/Monster destroyed (End Game)
  • While We Stand, We Fight - 5 points for each of three most expensive models alive at end of game (End Game)
So how did they work out?

Linebreaker - This works really well as I generally want to be on my opponent's side of the board. Generally scoring it from Turn 2, however there is the opportunity for it on Turn 1 on some of the Deployment maps. I scored maximum points in all three games. One thing to be aware of is the width of the various deployment zones. In Scorched Earth, you only have a 10" wide zone rather than the more normal 12". The alternative is to go for "Engage on All Fronts" but this requires you to score it every turn to max out. 

Bring Them Down - Chose it in Games 1 & 3. In the first my opponent had a Repulsor, an Impulsor and a Redemptor meaning my max score was 9 which I achieved. In the third he had two Defilers, two Rhinos and two Daemon Princes with Wings. I destroyed the vehicles but couldn't get through 20 Rubrics to get to the DPs. That gave me 10 points. Generally I think this secondary is one where you must be pragmatic. If you can get 9+ points then I think for a Soaring Spite list it is worth taking. If available points are less then I wouldn't take it unless alternative choices were pretty poor.

The second game I didn't take Bring Them Down as I was playing Imperial Knights (3 big one, two small). I took Titanhunter and maxed it out. Basically a free hit as the Secondary complemented what I had to do to win.

While We Stand, We Fight - for my army the three models are the two Shadowseers and the Solitaire. In each game I lost one of them giving me 10/15. In two games I lost the Solitaire (surprise, surprise) and against the Knights I lost a Shadowseer from poor positioning and forgetting new targeting rules. I can see this one varying between 5-15 points per game.

So with the aim of trying to score 30+ points for Secondary Objectives each game, I went 34, 40 and 35. I think the choices are a good starting point for my army but know I'll need to develop 1-2 more backstop choices that I know I can get 10 points each from.


40k Data - The Importance of Primary

 Using my small data set of 27 games from The Long War this weekend, the results clearly show one thing - the scoring of Primary Objective Points is the paramount determinant in winning in 9th Ed.



YOU SMASH THE PRIMARIES....YOU WIN THE GAME

The Long War IV had 27 games, all resulting in a winner.

Those results can be categorised as follows:

Scored More on Both Primary & Secondary:                15

Scored More on Primary, Less on Secondary:                5

Scored Same on Primary, Won Secondary:                     6

Scored Less on Primary, Won Secondary:                       1

This underlines the importance of building your list to score Primary Objectives in the first place. In only one case, were Secondary Objective points enough to overcome a deficit in Primary Objective points.

And based on this data set.......Secondary Objectives were only decisive in battle outcome in 26% of the games. Effectively win on Primary and you are winning 3 games in 4.

Sunday, August 30, 2020

40k - The Long War IV Results

The Long War IV has held yesterday in Khandallah, Wellington. Three 2.5 hour rounds, 2000 points.

Results were as follows: 


PlacingPlayerArmyWinsBattle Points
1Pete DunnHarlequins3244
2Dave HodgettsSpace Marines3240
3Courtney ThomsonThousand Sons2231
4Aaron WilsonImperial Knights2183
5Sean SullivanDeathwatch2174
6Jasper FordCustodes2152
7Jordan GreenDeath Guard2148
8Craig StewartAstra Militarum289
9Chris ParkinSpace Marines286
10Locky ReidSisters of Battle1195
11Simon SmithSisters of Battle1161
12Jeremy WebsterEldar1155
13Chris SimsSpace Marines1149
14Hagen KerrCustodes199
15Sam WhittChaos Space Marines199
16Robert HigginsCustodes164
17Sam NightingaleSpace Marines0125
18Ross BrewsterAeldari066

BEST SPORT: Simon Smith

BEST PRESENTED ARMY: Sam Whitt

The results have been uploaded to rankings.

40k - Go First & Win

 There has been a lot of talk in the first days of 9th that "Go First & Win". Analysis showed that for the early GT-sized events (30+ participants) that the win rate going first was 58%.


I decided to collect the data for The Long War to see if that level of win bias was evident.

The Long War was an RTT here in Wellington with 18 participants. That gave 27 games over the day.

Here are the results:

First Round: Battlelines (22)  
Went First & Won (WFW): 6
Went Second & Won (WSW): 3

Second Round: Overrun (31)
WFW: 3
WSW: 6

Third Round: Scorched Earth (12)
WFW: 5
WSW: 4

So overall for this event, statistically there was no evident bias in whether you went first or second.

I decided to isolate the outcomes with a winning record - the nine players who won 2 or more games.

Went First & Won: 9
Went First & Lost: 3

Went Second & Won: 11
Went Second & Lost: 4

Again, statistically - no difference.

So why do I think there is variation from the early results overseas?
  • Small sample size
  • Local meta factors (possibly)
  • Mission choice (possibly)
  • Terrain density
After reading the Goonhammer articles and terrain density (or lack thereof) being a possible cause, I ensured that the tables all had the number of items of terrain we played with in 8th, on the smaller 60"x 44" area for TLW. This meant that the tables had more cover (relatively) than we were used too. Coupled with the new terrain rules people could protect themselves from a first turn strike. Yes, you could flood the board going first but you couldn't necessarily flood the board AND alpha strike your opponent.

On this basis I think those that tried to flood the board had to weigh up the cost of a relatively unblooded opponent hitting back....there was a potential cost.

Keen to keep tracking the data. 

Friday, August 28, 2020

40k - First "New Warhammer" RTT - The Long War IV

 This weekend I have my first "New Warhammer" tournament. It is a three round 2000 point event using the Chapter Approved Grand Tournament 2020 missions.

I've had exactly one game of the new edition going into the event so am looking to get a few more games under my belt. Earlier in the week I published the participants' lists.

My own list is a single Battalion of Harlequins, as follows:

 Masque Form: The Soaring Spite: Serpent's Blood 

 

+ Stratagems + 

 

Enigmas of the Black Library (2 Relics) [-3CP] 

 

+ HQ + 

 

Shadowseer [6 PL, 115pts, -1CP]: Shield From Harm, Shuriken Pistol, Stratagem: Pivotal Role, The Shadowstone, Twilight Pathways, Veil of Illusion, Webway Dance 

 

Shadowseer [6 PL, 115pts]: Shards of Light, Shield From Harm, Shuriken Pistol, Twilight Pathways 

 

Troupe Master [4 PL, 70pts]: Choreographer of War, Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Blade, Luck of the Laughing God, The Twilight Fang, Warlord 

 

+ Troops + 

 

Troupe [5 PL, 119pts] 

4x Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress 

. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Blade 

 

Troupe [5 PL, 90pts] 

4x Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Blade 

. Player: Harlequin's Blade, Shuriken Pistol 

 

Troupe [5 PL, 90pts] 

4x Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Blade 

. Player: Harlequin's Blade, Shuriken Pistol 

 

Troupe [5 PL, 119pts] 

4x Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Caress 

. Player: Fusion Pistol, Harlequin's Blade 

 

+ Elites + 

 

Death Jester [3 PL, 50pts]: Humbling Cruelty 

 

Solitaire [5 PL, 102pts]: Blitz, Cegorach's Rose, Harlequin's Caress, Harlequin's Kiss 

 

+ Fast Attack + 

 

Skyweavers [15 PL, 270pts] 

4x Skyweaver: Haywire Cannon, Zephyrglaive 

Skyweaver: Haywire Cannon, Star Bolas 

 

Skyweavers [15 PL, 270pts] 

4x Skyweaver: Haywire Cannon, Zephyrglaive 

Skyweaver: Haywire Cannon, Star Bolas 

 

Skyweavers [15 PL, 270pts] 

4x Skyweaver: Haywire Cannon, Zephyrglaive 

Skyweaver: Haywire Cannon, Star Bolas 

 

+ Dedicated Transport + 

 

Starweaver [4 PL, 80pts]: 2x Shuriken Cannon 

 

Starweaver [4 PL, 80pts]: 2x Shuriken Cannon 

 

Starweaver [4 PL, 80pts]: 2x Shuriken Cannon 

 

Starweaver [4 PL, 80pts]: 2x Shuriken Cannon 


So pure Clowns, single Masque. As a 40k player who greatly prefers mono lists over soup, it is great to be rewarded for sticking to that line. I appreciate that this list may be able to be stronger by subbing in other Aeldari units but it's now how I want to play.

I suspect players will pick "Assassinate" against me, given the high number of T3 characters while the ones I choose have been narrowed down to 4-5.

You can follow along Saturday NZ time on  Down Under Pairings