You guys should put this to the test. Give a hyper tuned list to a mid-skill player and then a mid-meme list to a very skilled player and see who wins!
37:24 Very interesting to see the “Uncontrolled Factors” reduced to such a small portion. - Scenario - Terrain - Opponent Skill - Opponent List - Tournament special rules - Hot/Cold Dice - Roll Offs Definitely not a 3rd of the pie, but I would tend to find it making up 20% like Charles originally displayed.
If you want to have a chance to podium a tournament, you have to focus on player skill first. If you’re not good, it won’t happen. After that, tuning your list will help your odds getting at first, but it’s ultimately secondary to skill when you consider the whole tournament.
I’m noticing the comments have a common theme. Mid List + High Skill v High List + Mid Skill. I don’t think either player is actually referring to that. Skill will win out in the vast majority. The conversation is really around the game at the extremes. Not average list building, but the list building that sets you apart in the final rounds of a tournament when high skill can already be assumed. Nor is it around average skill, where one player has never witnessed a Heroic Combat + Heroic Strike situation. I think both players are right. Your list and skill can only get you to the finish list. Unless you fine tune/master both, you won’t get across the finish line. And so our quest to perfect continues! Cheers!
Would say that the luck part is a bit bigger. Like 15%. There are just moments were if you lose 1-2 50/50 rolls the game is over. Or one Player keeps winning the priority. For example i lost a game on a tournament recently: it was contest of champions, i had Moria with the watcher , but Groblog as my leader (realy bad for the Szenario) vs Angmar with Witch-king(on horse) and Gulavar. In the first turn he managed to kill Groblog with Gulavar, what ended the game. But that he managed to do that was part skill but also a lot of luck. ->Fist the Watcher did not showed up(3+ roll). he used two spectors to move my Batswarm and a goblin to make room for Gulavar to attack (i failed both courage checks, even if it was only c1), then the witch-king casted transfix on a 6 with one dice and i rolled only a 3 to resist (if he only rolled a 5 or i a 4, i would have had enough might to resist and still strike up). Then i casted tremmor with my B. shaman on a 6 (bit lucky) but he manged to resist (with 4 dice, but even getting 2 will back for nat. 6). My regular shaman tried to transfix but failed. At the end he won the fight and killed Groblog. There were a lot of rolls in his favor ,but that he got all of them was just dumb luck.
Luck probably varies depending on your playstyle and list as well. If you prefer a more aggressive playstyle or play list that relies on a key models to do well, I can see dice being a far bigger factor than say playing a support hero that is guaranteed to provide benefits regardless of how good or bad your rolls are.
Good discussion. I like you videos 👍 . I liked you pie chart as well. Two things from me: 1. A way of clarifying what a few people were saying in the video and in comments about skill; if we imagine two players of exactly equal skill. Lets say they both play to exactly their skill level against each other, if this happened by definition the skill contribution to the outcome of that game would be 0% on the pie chart, and all other contributing factors other than skill would become more significant, as 100% of the chart will always be filled. As the skill gap between players increases there is gradually less room in % terms for the other stuff. Which is why when an expert plays a newbie they can think to themselves - "doesn't matter that I don't have a bad list, he will make some big mistakes and I'll win anyway" or " bad rolls for me...oh well not going to make a big difference in this game". 2. I like the idea of a test. Maybe good/bad lists made using the high/low ranked profiles on the tier videos you have been making of the profiles - put that to the test! Another way to work it out would be to look at GBHL statistics and see if win percentages are more correlated to people, or to particular factions or even particular models.
That’s a good way of visualizing the pie chart! Great point you brought up with the way a skilled player can think in a game against a newer player. Important to keep in mind as well that there’s always a portion with list and uncontrollable factors though - I have more than once lost due to matchup, scenario to a newer player! -Charles
Definitely feel like the end chart was fair. A good player will most likely win with a subpar list against a less good player with a meta, scenario favorable list. Of course there’s exceptions like facing goblin town in recon or command the battlefield. But I’m pretty confident I could bring Host of the Dragon Emperor against any of you and would probably loose.
I think the problem doesn't really exist. A player that wants to do well at a tournament, no matter how skilled, will not play a bad list. At worst it could be an off meta, maybe sub-optimal list, but won't play Sharkey's Rougues.
I've definitely seen good players attempt to play a "bad list" and still try to do well with it! Of course, they may not win the tournament or even podium but if they have realistic goals, they can still exceed expectations and maybe land in the top 20%.
I feel like the end chart was fair, overall, but I do believe that levels of play have widely different charts. Paradoxically, at top level the "unpredictable" element has more impact: yes, a good player can make the most of an unfavorable matchup, but their opponent can also make the most of a favourable one. Essentially: assuming the lists are optimized (as they usually are at top level), and a substantially even skill level, that 5% becomes way more important. On the opposite side of the spectrum, skill is more relevant, being almost the sole deciding factor when we're talking about beginners. Meaning: if you don't know any rules or have no experience at all on how the game is played, you can have any kind of powerful army but you're going to have a hard time even against great matchups if you're versing even just a moderately knowledgeable player. E.g. you're playing Beornings and your Beorn gets lured across the map by 3-4 infantrymen for enough turns to lose you the game.
i reckon skill over lists. but only to a point. generally the better you are at one side, the less good you need to be at the other but lists can only swing this so far in you favour, but hugely to your disadvantage. a great list gives you a minor edge over a good one, but if i bring 16 orc shamans as a 800 list for example, doesnt really matter how skilled i am. winning at top tables require both to be high
pretty much all my preferred factions are skewed by default so all rounder lists with minimal uncontrolled factors aren't really an option 🤣 (corsairs,dunland,khazad,barad dur)
Unlike 40k where the meta changes with each new release, MESBG developes much more slowly. So there are several viable paths to winning games. So what is a strong list for player A might not work at all for player B or vice versa. Just look at diffrences in metas across the world. I always advice newer players to find what works for them - wheter it is magic, big heros, monsters, magic, or any combination thereof. However, I would like to raise a little warning for LLs they may nudge us towards the 40k state. We have seen some really bad excamples lately that have had to be FAQ’ed rather quickly. In addition to shoehorn listbuilding in a specific direction LLs may become the downfall of MESBG.
@@intothewestpodcast for the jank list I suggest a yellow alliance list with druzhag, azhrak and the spider queen for Maximum enrage beast + shroud of shadows fun
You guys should put this to the test. Give a hyper tuned list to a mid-skill player and then a mid-meme list to a very skilled player and see who wins!
💯! That would be an interesting matchup!
I was thinking the exact same thing. I even volunteer as tribute to be the newbie
37:24 Very interesting to see the “Uncontrolled Factors” reduced to such a small portion.
- Scenario
- Terrain
- Opponent Skill
- Opponent List
- Tournament special rules
- Hot/Cold Dice
- Roll Offs
Definitely not a 3rd of the pie, but I would tend to find it making up 20% like Charles originally displayed.
Interesting to list your opponent’s list and skill as an uncontrollable factor!
3:43 Scott catching strays?! 😳😂
They cant handle the skill it takes to build 1 point under
or the lazyness to add a shield to an orc, because i dont want to have to remember
If you want to have a chance to podium a tournament, you have to focus on player skill first. If you’re not good, it won’t happen.
After that, tuning your list will help your odds getting at first, but it’s ultimately secondary to skill when you consider the whole tournament.
I’m noticing the comments have a common theme. Mid List + High Skill v High List + Mid Skill.
I don’t think either player is actually referring to that. Skill will win out in the vast majority.
The conversation is really around the game at the extremes. Not average list building, but the list building that sets you apart in the final rounds of a tournament when high skill can already be assumed. Nor is it around average skill, where one player has never witnessed a Heroic Combat + Heroic Strike situation.
I think both players are right. Your list and skill can only get you to the finish list. Unless you fine tune/master both, you won’t get across the finish line. And so our quest to perfect continues! Cheers!
Agreed. Skill will win you more games, but to compete at the top, you need both!
Would say that the luck part is a bit bigger. Like 15%.
There are just moments were if you lose 1-2 50/50 rolls the game is over. Or one Player keeps winning the priority.
For example i lost a game on a tournament recently: it was contest of champions, i had Moria with the watcher , but Groblog as my leader (realy bad for the Szenario) vs Angmar with Witch-king(on horse) and Gulavar. In the first turn he managed to kill Groblog with Gulavar, what ended the game. But that he managed to do that was part skill but also a lot of luck. ->Fist the Watcher did not showed up(3+ roll). he used two spectors to move my Batswarm and a goblin to make room for Gulavar to attack (i failed both courage checks, even if it was only c1), then the witch-king casted transfix on a 6 with one dice and i rolled only a 3 to resist (if he only rolled a 5 or i a 4, i would have had enough might to resist and still strike up). Then i casted tremmor with my B. shaman on a 6 (bit lucky) but he manged to resist (with 4 dice, but even getting 2 will back for nat. 6). My regular shaman tried to transfix but failed.
At the end he won the fight and killed Groblog. There were a lot of rolls in his favor ,but that he got all of them was just dumb luck.
Luck probably varies depending on your playstyle and list as well. If you prefer a more aggressive playstyle or play list that relies on a key models to do well, I can see dice being a far bigger factor than say playing a support hero that is guaranteed to provide benefits regardless of how good or bad your rolls are.
Great talk guys, recognizable points all around
Good discussion. I like you videos 👍 . I liked you pie chart as well. Two things from me:
1. A way of clarifying what a few people were saying in the video and in comments about skill; if we imagine two players of exactly equal skill. Lets say they both play to exactly their skill level against each other, if this happened by definition the skill contribution to the outcome of that game would be 0% on the pie chart, and all other contributing factors other than skill would become more significant, as 100% of the chart will always be filled. As the skill gap between players increases there is gradually less room in % terms for the other stuff. Which is why when an expert plays a newbie they can think to themselves - "doesn't matter that I don't have a bad list, he will make some big mistakes and I'll win anyway" or " bad rolls for me...oh well not going to make a big difference in this game".
2. I like the idea of a test. Maybe good/bad lists made using the high/low ranked profiles on the tier videos you have been making of the profiles - put that to the test! Another way to work it out would be to look at GBHL statistics and see if win percentages are more correlated to people, or to particular factions or even particular models.
That’s a good way of visualizing the pie chart! Great point you brought up with the way a skilled player can think in a game against a newer player. Important to keep in mind as well that there’s always a portion with list and uncontrollable factors though - I have more than once lost due to matchup, scenario to a newer player!
-Charles
Finally, MESBG bloodsports!
Definitely feel like the end chart was fair. A good player will most likely win with a subpar list against a less good player with a meta, scenario favorable list. Of course there’s exceptions like facing goblin town in recon or command the battlefield. But I’m pretty confident I could bring Host of the Dragon Emperor against any of you and would probably loose.
I think the problem doesn't really exist. A player that wants to do well at a tournament, no matter how skilled, will not play a bad list. At worst it could be an off meta, maybe sub-optimal list, but won't play Sharkey's Rougues.
I've definitely seen good players attempt to play a "bad list" and still try to do well with it! Of course, they may not win the tournament or even podium but if they have realistic goals, they can still exceed expectations and maybe land in the top 20%.
I feel like the end chart was fair, overall, but I do believe that levels of play have widely different charts.
Paradoxically, at top level the "unpredictable" element has more impact: yes, a good player can make the most of an unfavorable matchup, but their opponent can also make the most of a favourable one.
Essentially: assuming the lists are optimized (as they usually are at top level), and a substantially even skill level, that 5% becomes way more important.
On the opposite side of the spectrum, skill is more relevant, being almost the sole deciding factor when we're talking about beginners. Meaning: if you don't know any rules or have no experience at all on how the game is played, you can have any kind of powerful army but you're going to have a hard time even against great matchups if you're versing even just a moderately knowledgeable player.
E.g. you're playing Beornings and your Beorn gets lured across the map by 3-4 infantrymen for enough turns to lose you the game.
Great perspective, 100% agree!
i reckon skill over lists. but only to a point. generally the better you are at one side, the less good you need to be at the other but lists can only swing this so far in you favour, but hugely to your disadvantage. a great list gives you a minor edge over a good one, but if i bring 16 orc shamans as a 800 list for example, doesnt really matter how skilled i am. winning at top tables require both to be high
pretty much all my preferred factions are skewed by default so all rounder lists with minimal uncontrolled factors aren't really an option 🤣 (corsairs,dunland,khazad,barad dur)
💯% agree
Unlike 40k where the meta changes with each new release, MESBG developes much more slowly. So there are several viable paths to winning games.
So what is a strong list for player A might not work at all for player B or vice versa. Just look at diffrences in metas across the world. I always advice newer players to find what works for them - wheter it is magic, big heros, monsters, magic, or any combination thereof.
However, I would like to raise a little warning for LLs they may nudge us towards the 40k state. We have seen some really bad excamples lately that have had to be FAQ’ed rather quickly.
In addition to shoehorn listbuilding in a specific direction LLs may become the downfall of MESBG.
Ohh bummer, I thought this was a bat rep of a pro with a janky crap list against a newby with a tournament viable one :D
Great episode idea!
@@intothewestpodcast for the jank list I suggest a yellow alliance list with druzhag, azhrak and the spider queen for Maximum enrage beast + shroud of shadows fun