Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Eevika

What should GW do to balance AoS?

Recommended Posts

After checking some statistics on The Honest Wargamer I saw that DoK is sitting at an insane 76.9% winrate and LoN is at 62.3%. Now if we make comparisons to the most competitive videogame League of Legends and card game Magic the Gathering those numbers are insanity and shows how bad GW is actually at balancing a game.

Now I have played League of Legends for a long time and in my opinion it's the most competitive videogame there is right now. Now if we look at the top 10 winrates for champions in high level play its around 55.2-53% thats the strongest stuff there is they have balanced the game so that 102 champions are over a 50% winrate while only the lowest 5 champions drop under a 45% win rate. League of Legends has 214 different champions and almost endless combinations of runes and items you can buy for every champion and they still manage to keep that total mess in balance. Looking at the stats for AoS its just cruel. Now I know that the sample size on the Honest Wargamer is small but when multiple armies have winrates under 45% its just sad to see. Now League of Legends of course has the advantage of being a digital game with an update every other week but even MTG manages to keep its best decks around 55-50% win rate (Data from standard 6 months ago) even though its a card game with a banlist update like twice a year with probably more moving parts than AoS has ever had. I honestly feel like Games Workshop neglects play-testing and their balance team is too small if they even have one. 

Now I mostly just play for fun and have actually never even played a tournament in my life but I really think GW should invest in a balance team that figures out the broken stuff and updates the game more frequently like monthly or every other month. Keeping the app the most up to date database for all the new rules and giving us a better formatted "Patch notes" to read instead of the mess that FaQs are. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same thing they are doing now, adjusting points and warscrolls.  The stats on honest wargamer (as compiled by LLV) is, to my knowledge, the most complete dataset we have. GW isn't like wizards in that they have thousands of events happening every week (Friday night magic) to gather data from. 

Odds are DoK will get massive points adjustments in the next GHB to the witches and hags, and from what I've gathered all that needs to happen to "fix" legions is simply removing the summonable keyword from the grimghast reapers.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gotrek said:

The same thing they are doing now, adjusting points and warscrolls.  The stats on honest wargamer (as compiled by LLV) is, to my knowledge, the most complete dataset we have. GW isn't like wizards in that they have thousands of events happening every week (Friday night magic) to gather data from. 

Odds are DoK will get massive points adjustments in the next GHB to the witches and hags, and from what I've gathered all that needs to happen to "fix" legions is simply removing the summonable keyword from the grimghast reapers.

But isnt a yearly cycle too long? Having two armies be the only competitive choice for a year seems too long

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eevika said:

But isnt a yearly cycle too long? Having two armies be the only competitive choice for a year seems too long

Well, one would assume that other, newer, potentially more powerful, books will be released over the course of the year?

As for balancing the game? Play narrative ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mosquito onthe TenthFloor said:

Well, one would assume that other, newer, potentially more powerful, books will be released over the course of the year?

As for balancing the game? Play narrative ;)

No one plays narrative at least where I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eevika said:

After checking some statistics on The Honest Wargamer I saw that DoK is sitting at an insane 76.9% winrate and LoN is at 62.3%. Now if we make comparisons to the most competitive videogame League of Legends and card game Magic the Gathering those numbers are insanity and shows how bad GW is actually at balancing a game.

Now I have played League of Legends for a long time and in my opinion it's the most competitive videogame there is right now. Now if we look at the top 10 winrates for champions in high level play its around 55.2-53% thats the strongest stuff there is they have balanced the game so that 102 champions are over a 50% winrate while only the lowest 5 champions drop under a 45% win rate. League of Legends has 214 different champions and almost endless combinations of runes and items you can buy for every champion and they still manage to keep that total mess in balance. Looking at the stats for AoS its just cruel. Now I know that the sample size on the Honest Wargamer is small but when multiple armies have winrates under 45% its just sad to see. Now League of Legends of course has the advantage of being a digital game with an update every other week but even MTG manages to keep its best decks around 55-50% win rate (Data from standard 6 months ago) even though its a card game with a banlist update like twice a year with probably more moving parts than AoS has ever had. I honestly feel like Games Workshop neglects play-testing and their balance team is too small if they even have one. 

Now I mostly just play for fun and have actually never even played a tournament in my life but I really think GW should invest in a balance team that figures out the broken stuff and updates the game more frequently like monthly or every other month. Keeping the app the most up to date database for all the new rules and giving us a better formatted "Patch notes" to read instead of the mess that FaQs are. 

In regards to "They keep LoL in balance" as you said there are 2014 champions. 25-30 are actively picked at any tone time? Item wise only 30-40 items are really used a lot at any one time? I don't think they keep in as a balanced field as you propose. 

 

3 minutes ago, Mosquito onthe TenthFloor said:

Well, one would assume that other, newer, potentially more powerful, books will be released over the course of the year?

As for balancing the game? Play narrative ;)

For those who want to play matched play "Play narrative" is a bit of a arrogant response :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eevika said:

But isnt a yearly cycle too long? Having two armies be the only competitive choice for a year seems too long

No its not. It takes at least 3 months to finalize a book and print it. So even if they did it every 6 months that means they'd only have 3 months worth of tournament data to go off of. Go back and look at the honest wargamer stats again. Count how many events there are and when they are. The sample size is just too small to make informed decisions from. And I sure as <explicative deleted> wont buy a new GHB every 6 months and rewrite my lists every other week. 

This isn't like magic where you buy a card and just slot it in. You gotta buy the models, build the models, and paint the models before you can put them on the table in a tournament. There's a lag time there and it'll just push non hyper competitive players away with the upkeep.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or people could stop trying to turn it into something its not?

GW are not (were not) interested in perfect balance, thats why they were not keen on stats being collected.  Watch WHTV and you'll see they push all aspects of games and miniatures, not just competitive.

Balance take time and effort.  Time costs money (its a business). They have decided their time is best spent on a balance of creating cool models, fun rules, enjoyable background.  So my suggestion for 'GW' to achieve balance is to create a crowdfund page and the people who want balance over everything else can donate money to GW so they can spend more time on it 🤣.

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 7
  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you just have to accept that AoS/WHFB was never designed to be a truly balanced game meant for competitive play.

The difference between it and something like a video game is like chalk & cheese really.

Sure they can tinker around the edges, make adjustments every now and then when something seems too egregious but the sheer number of variables to consider, combined with hangovers from around 4 decades of evolving game systems designed, ostensibly, for fluffy narrative play and selling new models rubbing up against a competitive crowd actively looking to exploit min-maxed game breaking combos is always going to result in a ‘here’s the best we can do for now’ situation.

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AaronWIlson said:

In regards to "They keep LoL in balance" as you said there are 2014 champions. 25-30 are actively picked at any tone time? Item wise only 30-40 items are really used a lot at any one time? I don't think they keep in as a balanced field as you propose. 

Still out of 214 champs 212 were played in professional leagues last year that speaks something about how good they are doing in terms of balance even though everything is not actively picked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JPjr said:

I think that you just have to accept that AoS/WHFB was never designed to be a truly balanced game meant for competitive play.

The difference between it and something like a video game is like chalk & cheese really.

Sure they can tinker around the edges, make adjustments every now and then when something seems too egregious but the sheer number of variables to consider, combined with hangovers from around 4 decades of evolving game systems designed, ostensibly, for fluffy narrative play and selling new models rubbing up against a competitive crowd actively looking for game breaking combos is always going to result in a ‘here’s the best we can do for now’ situation.

 

2 minutes ago, stato said:

Or people could stop trying to turn it into something its not?

GW are not (were not) interested in perfect balance, thats why they were not keen on stats being collected.  Watch WHTV and you'll see they push all aspects of games and miniatures, not just competitive.

Balance take time and effort.  Time costs money (its a business). They have decided their time is best spent on a balance of creating cool models, fun rules, enjoyable background.  So my suggestion for 'GW' to achieve balance is to create a crowdfund page and the people who want balance over everything else can donate money to GW so they can spend more time on it 🤣.

Totally agree with both of those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eevika said:

Still out of 214 champs 212 were played in professional leagues last year that speaks something about how good they are doing in terms of balance even though everything is not actively picked

By the same stretch Ironjawz, Phoenix Temple, Legion of Azgorz, Bonesplitters etc all went 5-0 last year at one point but aren't actively doing it. Is not the same thing?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could compare LOL to politics, sports, domestic chores, or anything else we can think about and it would make the same sense than comparing it to AoS

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Benkei said:

We could compare LOL to politics, sports, domestic chores, or anything else we can think about and it would make the same sense than comparing it to AoS

I was just comparing competitive games and win % to demonstrate what is usually the % when something is deemed stupidly over powered. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gotrek said:

No its not. It takes at least 3 months to finalize a book and print it. So even if they did it every 6 months that means they'd only have 3 months worth of tournament data to go off of. Go back and look at the honest wargamer stats again. Count how many events there are and when they are. The sample size is just too small to make informed decisions from. And I sure as <explicative deleted> wont buy a new GHB every 6 months and rewrite my lists every other week. 

This isn't like magic where you buy a card and just slot it in. You gotta buy the models, build the models, and paint the models before you can put them on the table in a tournament. There's a lag time there and it'll just push non hyper competitive players away with the upkeep.

Disagree
First, books are not necessary for playing the game in the age of smartphones and tablets, even though they are cool and shiny I don't take 4 flipping wood bricks to play a game, I bring Warhammer App
Second, sample size can be small, but there are lots of people playing AoS every week around the world and GW can figure out how to gather data from community, having to wait for a year (and it's actually almost a year and a half in case of DoK) is ridiculous
GHB issue - look "First"
Third, comission painting does exist and if its worth your time to paint minies to a tournament next mounth - its worth your money (also unless you are playing SCE you can go away with collecting an army and suddenly after a year of collecting you won't have to buy 10 boxes of models to adjust your list)
Fourth, uncompetetive folks just won't care, as they can play with whatever they want as long as they have opponents willing to have fun together

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, personally, also suspect that especially in regards to which factions get played by competitive players these things become self fulfilling prophecies. Because of the time & cost involved in putting an army together if all you're concerned about is winning tournaments then you're going to take a look at the current 'meta', see what's doing well and just copy that and stick with it. It's not like a game where to change character all I have to do is scroll left and then learn a few unique moves. 

I have absolutely zero evidence to back this up but I honestly reckon that whilst a faction like DoK or LoN are undoubtedly strong, and possibly the strongest, at the moment they're not unbeatable at all but the kind of people who want to win tournaments don't see any value in taking a risk with a fun, weird, flavourful army because they believe it gives them zero advantage and that's all that matters.

Which if winning tournaments 5/0 and tabling your opponents is what matters to you then is totally understandable. But whilst there are certain factions that will definitely struggle I reckon a good player could probably do well with a wide range of armies (and if you look there. are lots of tournaments where people win with factions that people would deride as trash etc) if they think outside the box and actually try to win on the table than before the first dice is rolled.

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • LOVE IT! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, stato said:

Or people could stop trying to turn it into something its not?

I'm aware that GWs won't ever master the balance but... "Matched Play" called this way for a reason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JPjr said:

I, personally, also suspect that especially in regards to which factions get played by competitive players these things become self fulfilling prophecies. Because of the time & cost involved in putting an army together if all you're concerned about is winning tournaments then you're going to take a look at the current 'meta', see what's doing well and just copy that and stick with it. It's not like a game where to change character all I have to do is scroll left and then learn a few unique moves. 

I have absolutely zero evidence to back this up but I honestly reckon that whilst a faction like DoK or LoN are undoubtedly strong, and possibly the strongest, at the moment they're not unbeatable at all but the kind of people who want to win tournaments don't see any value in taking a risk with a fun, weird, flavourful army because they believe it gives them zero advantage and that's all that matters.

Which if winning tournaments 5/0 and tabling your opponents is what matters to you then is totally understandable. But whilst there are certain factions that will definitely struggle I reckon a good player could probably do well with a wide range of armies (and if you look there. are lots of tournaments where people win with factions that people would deride as trash etc) if they think outside the box and actually try to win on the table than before the first dice is rolled.

 

Yeah I understand your point but if GW actually got the balance to where 70% armies fit in that 55-45% winrate bracket I believe we would see a much more diverse meta as even the competitive people would probably be interested in mastering their own army not just playing the best numbers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, XReN said:

First, books are not necessary for playing the game in the age of smartphones and tablets, even though they are cool and shiny I don't take 4 flipping wood bricks to play a game, I bring Warhammer App

As do I, however the points are locked behind a paywall. Whether it be the ghb or azyr (which I've heard too many problems about to ever trust), a paywall is still a paywall.

 

5 minutes ago, XReN said:

Second, sample size can be small, but there are lots of people playing AoS every week around the world and GW can figure out how to gather data from community, having to wait for a year (and it's actually almost a year and a half in case of DoK) is ridiculous
GHB issue - look "First"

Small sample sizes lead to stupid mistakes and assumptions. Furthermore, there is a VAST difference between what people will throw on the table for a casual game and what they bring to a tournament completely aside from the fact that even the vaunted DoK and nagash will still lose horribly when piloted by a non competitive player. Even then, GW doesn't have a system in place to even gather that information. This isn't LoL where every mouse click and key bind is logged and available to see. This isn't magic where you have a submitted deck list every week. The only data they can get is what TOs provide.

 

10 minutes ago, XReN said:

Third, comission painting does exist and if its worth your time to paint minies to a tournament next mounth - its worth your money (also unless you are playing SCE you can go away with collecting an army and suddenly after a year of collecting you won't have to buy 10 boxes of models to adjust your list)

You assume people have the money and the desire to do so. Most places will charge at least 10USD for a standard infantry model just for painting and assembly to a bare bones tabletop standard. While I do outsource most of my painting (aside from standard infantry troops), it's not what most tournament players do.

Also, you are forgetting the purpose of what the goal of faster balance updates are for. To shake up what's placing where. So, yeah people would be "forced" into buying entirely new armies to chase the meta.

 

13 minutes ago, XReN said:

Fourth, uncompetetive folks just won't care, as they can play with whatever they want as long as they have opponents willing to have fun together

Wrong. I'm not competitive but I still play exclusively with points. It's the standard where I'm at and from what I've seen, it's the standard nearly everywhere.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OP is assuming way too much about how most people play the game and mistaking what he wants for the game for what the game needs. 

Edited by Benkei
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Benkei said:

I think the OP is assuming way too much about how most people play the game and mistaking what he wants for the game for what the game needs. 

I actually play for fun I have never even played against LoN or DoK but I still think balance is the thing that gives games longevity and thats what I want

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Gotrek said:

As do I, however the points are locked behind a paywall. Whether it be the ghb or azyr (which I've heard too many problems about to ever trust), a paywall is still a paywall.

Points are actually not behind a paywall. You can get them for free on Warscroll builder and the app if you just put units in to my battle and click the show profiles button. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Eevika said:

Points are actually not behind a paywall. You can get them for free on Warscroll builder and the app if you just put units in to my battle and click the show profiles button. 

I just installed the App, I don't have subscription or any books unlocked and no where on the units data does it display points for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Creatan said:

I just installed the App, I don't have subscription or any books unlocked and no where on the units data does it display points for me.

Put a unit in to my battle by pressing the hammer icon in the top right corner when you are looking at a warscroll. Then press the same hammer icon in the bottom bar when you leave the warscroll. This should show you all unit you have added to your battle list. Then press the Show Profiles button in the top right and it will you show you points, unit size and unit type

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eevika said:

Put a unit in to my battle by pressing the hammer icon in the top right corner when you are looking at a warscroll. Then press the same hammer icon in the bottom bar when you leave the warscroll. This should show you all unit you have added to your battle list. Then press the Show Profiles button in the top right and it will you show you points, unit size and unit type

Who designs this stuff?! That's a non-obvious place to hide the points. Thank you for letting me know where I can find them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×