What is the better predictor of tournament success: the army you play, years playing the army, years in the hobby, or population you’re from?
Most Warhammer 40,000 tournaments consist of three games. To be considered a top general, and therefore have a shot at winning the tournament, it is best to win all three of your games. Given the data provided by my various populations, I will attempt to ascertain the most consistent factor in successful generals, and project how often that factor propels them into the top tier (three wins) over a series of 25 simulated tournaments.
I generated a win percentage based on the factors expressed above. Each population will be divided in logical fashion, based on the following:
Army: each army will be a separate group. There were three groups that received two entries or less (Blood Angels, Black Templar, and Necrons). These populations will not be considered for portion of this simulation, as their data sample size is too small to be a good sample.
Years playing the army: the data will divided into 4 groups, based on their positions within the quartiles of this group’s data: 0.25-.75, .76-1.99, 2.00-5.49, and 5.50+
Years in the hobby: the data will divided into 4 groups, based on their positions within the quartiles of this group’s data: .25-2.99, 3.00-7.99, 8-13.99, 14+
Population: Data will be used from the three largest respondent groups, and all the smaller forums combined into a category marked “other”. I have decided to combine data from groups with less than 15 responses due to the small sample size skewing win percentages.
Random numbers were generated via MS Excel. I used these random numbers to compare them against the group’s win percentage as pulled from the data. If a number was found to be less then that group’s win percentage, then conditional formatting highlighted the random number entry. A series of three wins will be considered a success.
Here is what I found:
The greatest predictor of success in the data that I obtained was one’s army selection. I was not surprised by this, as this has been a consistent contention of the online community .To be honest, I was surprised at the army at the top of the heap, win percentage wise. Chaos Daemons are held by a great many “in the know” to be a mid-tier army due its struggle against the new paradigm of Mechanized armies (armies with the majority of it’s forces in armored personnel carriers with tank support). With a larger sample size, you might see some shifting of this percentage, as well as a shifting of the win percentage of Dark Angel armies. There was also a significant amount of evidence that poor army selection would be a severe hindrance in tournament success. Suffice to say, I won’t be likely to buy a Tau Empire army anytime soon. An army built around advanced long range weaponry, their lack of close combat ability, coupled with the increased effect of cover in 5th Edition has put a severe crimp in their ability to function as a successful army.
Although the simulations pointed next to the next highest success factor as being “8-13.75 Years in the Hobby”, I wanted to point out the consistency of those who post in online forums. Even the least of them (DakkaDakka) would achieve a top tier position over 16% of the time in my simulation, with the others ranging from 25% to 28% of the time. Getting into the top of your game a quarter of the time is certainly to be lauded. From my experience, the advice given on such forums is certainly a significant factor in forum browser’s consistent performance, and is to be recommended for those who wish to improve their tournament performance.