Pinned HE General and News - Discussion

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The website will be under maintenance this weekend (May 25st - May 27th), starting around 18:00 CET
During this time, the forum will be unavailable and downloading the rules will not be possible.
Though we will proceed as fast as possible, we are not sure yet how long the forum will remain out of reach. We might push info on Twitter if it takes more time than expected.

  • weltenspringer wrote:

    To date, noone has any proof shown or explained in any way that supports the claim "HBE in 2.0 are OP!".

    Noone. Not a single flaged person, not a single individuel, not a single tournament data.
    Well, @Arrahed just gave you one example so there is actually proof.
    We have also gotten a lot of tournament lists and results right here, check it out for yourself! For example, the latest one added, from Poland, was won by HBE, but a few before that wasn´t.
    The truth is that it is hard to say if HBE as an army is overperforming yet, the meta and beta are still too fresh.
    Are some of the items too good for their price? Probably. Are some of the combinations to good? Almost certainly. Does that directly lead to a tournament dominance? Not necessarily.
    ETC Team Sweden 2016 - Infernal Dwarves
    ETC Team Sweden 2017 - Infernal Dwarves
    WTC Team Sweden #2 2018 - Empire of Sonnstahl

    UN SW

    Tournament Support

    Tournament Analysist

  • Maelstorm wrote:

    weltenspringer wrote:

    To date, noone has any proof shown or explained in any way that supports the claim "HBE in 2.0 are OP!".

    Noone. Not a single flaged person, not a single individuel, not a single tournament data.
    Well, @Arrahed just gave you one example so there is actually proof.We have also gotten a lot of tournament lists and results right here, check it out for yourself! For example, the latest one added, from Poland, was won by HBE, but a few before that wasn´t.
    The truth is that it is hard to say if HBE as an army is overperforming yet, the meta and beta are still too fresh.
    Are some of the items too good for their price? Probably. Are some of the combinations to good? Almost certainly. Does that directly lead to a tournament dominance? Not necessarily.
    So according to this:
    If you base your "proof" that an army is OP just because it won 1 single Tournament, wouldnt that make every other army that won 1 single Tournament OP as well?

    I doubt it.

    As you said: its waaaaaay to early to come to any conclusion that would justify heavy nerfs on an army. Hotfix should exactly be whats it named: a hotfix.

    Not a giant nerf bat that has no solid data backed up the claim.

    So in the end i highly doubt that the decision were made with a clear consciousness or would hold up if it would be brought into court.

    Btw: my last 4 games results: 1 Draw, 2 loses (both against SA), 1 victory (against SA). What does this proof now? HBE UP? OP? Unlucky dices? No autowin? Or maybe, and i tend to this, i didnt played well enough. *shrug*
  • Absolutely not proven OP, no way. I just found it funny that you cried for anyone to show you anything suggesting that HBE won any tournaments, even after someone already showed that in the previous post.

    I would still say wait and see for the hotfixs before yelling about all the assumed nerfs. And for no data, you know that there has been a lot of internal playtesting prior to the launch of the beta and extensive external playtesting after the the launch? If something is changed, there is definitely data to back it up.
    ETC Team Sweden 2016 - Infernal Dwarves
    ETC Team Sweden 2017 - Infernal Dwarves
    WTC Team Sweden #2 2018 - Empire of Sonnstahl

    UN SW

    Tournament Support

    Tournament Analysist

  • Arrahed wrote:

    100 % of 2.0 tournaments I attended were won by HBE.
    1. tabletopturniere.de/t3_tournament_results.php?tid=20421
    2. Okay, I only attended one, and I have no idea whether it was a significant tournament or not. :D But still, it's data.
    I didn't play against the HBE army so I don't have a list. Maybe someone else here does?
    Protip: Thomas Ahlich would win this tournament regardless of what army would he bring.

    Also, I'm pretty sure he would end in top3 if he only brought half of his army.
  • Maelstorm wrote:

    Are some of the items too good for their price? Probably.
    Are some of the combinations too good? Almost certainly.
    Does that directly lead to a tournament dominance? Not necessarily.
    This leads us to the question if some above average items or combinations actually have enough influence on the external balance to justify a nerf. After all: all armies always had combos that performed above average. And likewise, all armies have items and combinations that are never used because they perform way below average.

    It's present in almost all games: a few best strategies, a few most efficient combinations.
    Why does that necessarily have to be a bad thing, provided it doesn't disturb the external game balance?
    Playing/painting: SA, DE & HbE ..
  • Maelstorm wrote:

    Well, @Arrahed just gave you one example so there is actually proof.

    Maelstorm wrote:

    Absolutely not proven OP, no way.
    Your argumentation was a bit misleading, though. (You better used "hint" in the first case, maybe.)

    It's hard to tell from few tournaments that were won by good players what was the most important factor for that: just pure player skill, army or meta/list?

    As far as I know from his battle report, @Furion made hard use of the HBE hereditary spell.

    It would be nice to see a list from Scrub in Herford, though.

    Maybe @Frederick played against him and got a list that he can share?

    The post was edited 5 times, last by teclis2000 ().

  • Maelstorm wrote:

    Absolutely not proven OP, no way. I just found it funny that you cried for anyone to show you anything suggesting that HBE won any tournaments, even after someone already showed that in the previous post.

    I would still say wait and see for the hotfixs before yelling about all the assumed nerfs. And for no data, you know that there has been a lot of internal playtesting prior to the launch of the beta and extensive external playtesting after the the launch? If something is changed, there is definitely data to back it up.
    Then you just didnt understand my point. Thats fine. ;)

    Still no solid data that HBE are OP and needs a nerf. If you wanna base your "proof" on a single tournament....well, at least this would give some insight how things are handled behind closed doors. *shrugs again*
  • Furion wrote:

    Arrahed wrote:

    100 % of 2.0 tournaments I attended were won by HBE.
    1. tabletopturniere.de/t3_tournament_results.php?tid=20421
    2. Okay, I only attended one, and I have no idea whether it was a significant tournament or not. :D But still, it's data.
    I didn't play against the HBE army so I don't have a list. Maybe someone else here does?
    Protip: Thomas Ahlich would win this tournament regardless of what army would he bring.
    Also, I'm pretty sure he would end in top3 if he only brought half of his army.
    Maybe. But not everyone there was a pushover like me. ;)
  • Arrahed wrote:

    Furion wrote:

    Protip: Thomas Ahlich would win this tournament regardless of what army would he bring.Also, I'm pretty sure he would end in top3 if he only brought half of his army.
    Maybe. But not everyone there was a pushover like me. ;)
    Gaussian distribution of skill disagrees with you.
  • So far, the only actual thing one can conclude from available data is that HE are able to hit podium in 2.0. :D

    Other than that, no solid conclusions can be drawn, one way or the other.

    That is EXACTLY why the HE TT looked forward to the BETA period, so that we can collect info on exact performance in both macro and micro level.


    That means: both in general performance and in list and character building.

    So that we had more info on more exact problems both up and down the scale.
    Used to be a Vampire ABC member... then an Elf lass bit me... nowadays I have this insatiable craving for cheese, whine and fancy dresses... 8| The Dawn Host of ArchangelusM

    Army Design Team

    Draecarion, may the Lord grant eternal peace to your soul, my Friend!
  • I feel I have to explain that I am in no way anywhere close to ADT or BLT, I simply help TOs and collect data, therefor my link to the repository.

    One data point is never enough to draw conclusions from, heck even after we collected data from over 130 tournaments in 1.3 we could only make broad statistics. I never intended to seriously take one datapoint as proof, only to somewhat jokingly point out that Arrahed just answered one of the things that were asked for.
    However, there have been extensive playtesting, so it is not like the beta was launched and then blindly fixed in this hotfix, everything have been tested quite a few times.
    ETC Team Sweden 2016 - Infernal Dwarves
    ETC Team Sweden 2017 - Infernal Dwarves
    WTC Team Sweden #2 2018 - Empire of Sonnstahl

    UN SW

    Tournament Support

    Tournament Analysist

  • So...I have seen results from Polish masters and now the two mentioned tournaments, where HBE player took the crown.

    In TGA play 17 (the germany one) no one else decided to show up with the HBE. But the HbE won.
    In the Gnome masters, there was one other HbE, running in the middle of the pack. But the HBE won.
    In Cancon, the HbE player was 5th and the second HbE player in the bottom third
    Tournament posted in thread "Please report your 2.0 tourney results here", post from 04.02, there were 2 HbE, both ending in the bottom 1/3
    Marburg cup, the HbE was 6th, no other HbE present
    The Betreutes Qualifying zur World Team Champ. team tournament, the HbE were 5th highest scoring army
    The Faschingsturnier tournamen, the HBE were second. Other 2 HBE bottom half

    I was unable to dig up anything more as I can not devote more time in to it at this time.

    We have 7 tournaments. Best HbE placings are: 1, 1, 5, bottom 1/3, 6, 5, 2.

    1) Not a lot of HbE presence /certainly neither dominant, nor even among top dogs
    2) What can we take from these results?
    - hbe are currently strong, top 1/3 (so amongst the five best). Someone has to be there ;) :)
    - are pleasure to build
    - have variety of rosters with successfull results SO FAR = not presently pushed into f***** shooty avoidance

    I am absolutely SURE the deciding team has got more evidence to back up the huge nerfs.

    A few pages back I proposed "nerfs"...well...toning downs really.

    That is all the HbE currently need + improvements to some things (LSG, Tiranoc Chariots, Foot Royal Huntsmen...)

    Then...in May, the nerf bet could have come, if something still felt AND WAS PROVEN to be OP.
  • I do think the fault lies in the final-decision maker for the HBE book. How did no one expect, even from a beta, that if you give only 1 of 16 armys 3 awesome Army-X-Only standards, allow them on their core units AND put a 0-3 tag on it, a howl from all the other armys? I mean .. come on. I dont state that they are completly OP. But swiftstride&dc and distracting are bonuses, wich i think ANY army would love to have and im also 100% sure, if these banners would be EoS or DH or DL or DE or KoE only, the HBE community would cry as much as every other community do now.

    In my opinion, it should have been clear that those buffs wont survive the first hotfix in his first state ... so giving it without a second thought only to cut it right after is simply cruel. No matter wich army is hit by it.
  • Furion wrote:

    Arrahed wrote:

    100 % of 2.0 tournaments I attended were won by HBE.
    1. tabletopturniere.de/t3_tournament_results.php?tid=20421
    2. Okay, I only attended one, and I have no idea whether it was a significant tournament or not. :D But still, it's data.
    I didn't play against the HBE army so I don't have a list. Maybe someone else here does?
    Protip: Thomas Ahlich would win this tournament regardless of what army would he bring.
    Also, I'm pretty sure he would end in top3 if he only brought half of his army.
    Prorip: Frederick also has the potential to win it. Thx same hieß to all ihrer German ETC or Ex ETC Players there ;)

    SA-ACS

    Coordinator Translation DE

    United Nations DE

    Playtester

    Info over the work of TouS and where to report your lists.
  • Maelstorm wrote:

    However, there have been extensive playtesting, so it is not like the beta was launched and then blindly fixed in this hotfix, everything have been tested quite a few times.
    Is the hotfix based on data of recent tournament results / lists or based on extensive internal playtesting?

    I ask that, because 2.0 had to be approved by the team, right?

    In that case I don't see the base of this nerf, unless the 2.0 release was rushed and the actual approving of HBE 2.0 wasn't complete.

    If that would be the case, that should have been communicated to avoid this understandable rage here.

    Wouldn't you agree ;) ?
    Furion about our SeaGuard (V.0.202.0): "I don't expect much of them, and indeed not much have they delivered"
  • Evaenarion wrote:

    So...I have seen results from Polish masters and now the two mentioned tournaments, where HBE player took the crown.

    In TGA play 17 (the germany one) no one else decided to show up with the HBE. But the HbE won.
    In the Gnome masters, there was one other HbE, running in the middle of the pack. But the HBE won.
    In Cancon, the HbE player was 5th and the second HbE player in the bottom third
    Tournament posted in thread "Please report your 2.0 tourney results here", post from 04.02, there were 2 HbE, both ending in the bottom 1/3
    Marburg cup, the HbE was 6th, no other HbE present
    The Betreutes Qualifying zur World Team Champ. team tournament, the HbE were 5th highest scoring army
    The Faschingsturnier tournamen, the HBE were second. Other 2 HBE bottom half

    I was unable to dig up anything more as I can not devote more time in to it at this time.

    We have 7 tournaments. Best HbE placings are: 1, 1, 5, bottom 1/3, 6, 5, 2.

    1) Not a lot of HbE presence /certainly neither dominant, nor even among top dogs
    2) What can we take from these results?
    - hbe are currently strong, top 1/3 (so amongst the five best). Someone has to be there ;) :)
    - are pleasure to build
    - have variety of rosters with successfull results SO FAR = not presently pushed into f***** shooty avoidance

    I am absolutely SURE the deciding team has got more evidence to back up the huge nerfs.

    A few pages back I proposed "nerfs"...well...toning downs really.

    That is all the HbE currently need + improvements to some things (LSG, Tiranoc Chariots, Foot Royal Huntsmen...)

    Then...in May, the nerf bet could have come, if something still felt AND WAS PROVEN to be OP.
    You can't just look at the top placement. That's cherry-picking. Those lower placements are data too. If the army was truly overpowering, every HbE player would be placing in the top half at least, if not skewed more upwards.

    Also, really need to control for player identity so you ensure your data points are unique. How many of the HbE places are the same player? I have no idea, but i'm guessing at least once it's the same player. I don't know about you, but my expectation is not P(place high) is random with respect to player.
    Just because I'm on the Legal Team doesn't mean I know anything about rules or background in development, and if/when I do, I won't be posting about it. All opinions and speculation are my own - treat them as such.

    Legal

    Playtester

    Chariot Command HQ

  • Furion wrote:

    Arrahed wrote:

    Furion wrote:

    Protip: Thomas Ahlich would win this tournament regardless of what army would he bring.Also, I'm pretty sure he would end in top3 if he only brought half of his army.
    Maybe. But not everyone there was a pushover like me. ;)
    Gaussian distribution of skill disagrees with you.
    Now it's getting interesting. (And fairly far off-topic. Let's see how far we can push it before a mod steps in :D )
    What makes you think skill follows a Gaussian distribution? That would maybe be the case if the players at a given tournament are randomly sampled. I think however that it is much more likely that their are other influences. About half the players at the tournament are ranked top 20 in Germany. A quite significant fraction in fact is part of just two wargaming groups. If skill at the tournament would follow a Gaussian distribution, rank of attending players should be evenly distributed.

    So even if overall player skill would follow a Gaussian distribution, the distribution at an individual tournament most likely does not.

    Not that it really matters for this topic, but I find it interesting to think about. :)

    Evaenarion wrote:

    Marburg cup, the HbE was 6th, no other HbE present
    I don't know about the other tournaments, but this one used 1.3 rules.