With all of the larger events for the Beastgrave season completed, I thought it would be interesting to see what the warband stats for the entire season were, irrespective of the release schedule or FAR at the time.
To find this information, I have compiled the data from all of the "Grand Clash Level Events," which I am defining as an event with 30 or more players, using the best of 3 championship format.
The 11 events included in this data are:
The October 2019 Warhammer World Grand Clash - 114 players
The Grand Skirmish Germany 2019 (It was played in a Grand Clash format, despite the name) - 56 players
The January 2020 Warhammer World Grand Clash - 141 players
LVO 2020 Grand Clash - 47 players
Prague Open - 44 players
Vassal Clash I - 30 players
Vassal Clash II - 62 players
Curse of the Katophrane Vassal Tournament - 44 players
Vassal Clash III - 44 players
Vassal Clash IV - 41 players
Vassal Clash V - 52 players
I would have included the Alberta Grand Clash, since it is an official GC, but I had trouble getting the data for it. It also only had 24 players. Rippa's Snarlfangs won the event.
I find these numbers interesting as I think they do a decent job of indicating the general power level of the warbands across the season. I do think it's important to keep in mind that the changing meta across the season does mean that some of these warbands may have times they were doing better or worse than the numbers show, so this is only a wide look at their success across the season, and at the end of the day all these numbers indicate for sure is what happened at these 11 events, and the rest is mostly speculation.
But speculation is fun, so here we go!
Here are the numbers of each warband played by the 675 players at these 11 events:
The Grymwatch were the most popular warband, followed by the Nightvault starter warbands Stormsire's Cursebreakers (especially at the start of the season) and Thorns of the Briar Queen. Profiteers were also very popular towards the beginning of the season, with Snarlfangs, Skaeth's, and Lady Harrows popular throughout the season.
The most popular Shadespire warband was Spiteclaw's Swarm, followed by Magore's Fiends.
The "perfect average" percentage of players for a warband in this data set would be 3.85%, or about 25 players, and the "popular" warbands with more than this number are:
These 11 warbands (11/26 = 42% of warbands) made up 76% of the meta and can be said to have been "popular" this season.
Note: Mollog was almost popular, needing 1-2 more players to get over the average number. Poor troll!
Here are all of the different numbers calculated for each warband, sorted by the number of events won by each:
As you can see, Grymwatch won the most large events with 3 (the first 3 of the season in a row!), Rippa's won 2 (3 if you count Alberta, which I think I might), Hrothgorn won 2, and Skaven, Stormsire, Thorns, and Wurmspat each won one event.
This means that the Beastgrave warbands won 8/11 events, Nightvault warbands won 2/1, and Shadespire warbands won 1/11 (go Rats!).
You can also see the Event Win Rate for these warbands, showing what percent of a warband's players won the event they played in. I find these numbers interesting as well, showing that Hrothgorn, Wurmspat, and Rippa's had the highest percentage of winning players.
Top 4 Placings
Winning an event is great, but I think getting close to winning is a good indicator of warband success as well. Here are the warbands sorted by the number of top 4 placings:
These numbers are much more diverse than the pure event winner list, and the main difference in order is that the Thorns of the Briar Queen and The Wurmspat are in much higher positions.
You can also see the conversion rate for each warband that made it into the top 4, showing how often the top 4 player won the event.
Overall Win Rates
Here are the warbands sorted by match win-rate:
Here is another way to look at these win rates:
Win rate puts Thorns at the top, followed by Wurmspat, Mollog, Krushas, and Grymwatch. Some of these warbands only had a few players, though, so I think it's useful to separate them out a bit:
The "popular" warbands with win rates of 50% or better this season are:
Thorns of the Briar Queen - 64%
The Grymwatch - 57%
Hrothgorn's Mantrappers - 52%
Thundrik's Profiteers - 51%
Lady Harrow's Mournflight - 51%
Rippa's Snarlfangs - 50%
The "unpopular" warbands with 50% win rate or better, usually signifying a few players doing very well with these warbands, or a brief spike of their success, are:
The Wurmspat - 60%
Mollog's Mob (who was almost popular) - 58%
Morgok's Krushas - 57%
The Farstriders - 50%
Interestingly, some warbands were popular, but still ended up having below average results across the season:
Cursebreakers - 47%
Grashrak's Despoilers - 44%
Spiteclaw's Swarm - 42%
Zarbag's Gitz - 41%
Skaeth's Wild Hunt - 40%
Average First Loss
The Average First Loss shown the average round a warband's players lose or draw their first game. A 1.8 is considered average, so anything higher than that would be considered good.
I like this stat because I think it shows the overall success of a warband the clearest, since going undefeated is more difficult than simply winning half of your games (WWLL is theoretically harder than LLWW, for example). A higher score here should mean that most players that play this warband go on win streaks, while a lower score should indicate that only a few players, if any, do.
The Wurmspat have the high score here, due to only having 19 players across the events, but having a high number of players winning 3 or more games in a row. Given their other high stats like win rate, and having 4 of these players make it into the top 4 of events, this should not be much of a surprise.
Other warband's numbers (such as thorns, Mollog, and Grymwatch) make sense based on their win rates, but others are a bit more interesting.
The Eyes of the Nine and Godsworn Hunt have very high numbers despite their lower win rate due to a few players doing very well while the rest tended to lose early in their events, and having generally low sample sizes.
Rippa's Snarlfangs, one of the more successful warbands as far as event wins and top 4 placing go, had a relatively low score, meaning that although a few players had good results with them, the rest tended to lose early on in their events. This might indicate that the warband is powerful but not easy to play, meaning that most players have trouble winning 2 or 3 games in a row with them. I think their popularity and 50% win rate also indicates this, though it's also important to keep in mind that their power level may also have changed over the season as the meta developed.
Well, that's it for the Beastgrave season! I will say that some of this data was as expected (Thorns and Grymwatch are good!) but some of it was also somewhat surprising (Wurmspat OP?).
All in all I think the numbers show a fair amount of variety for the season, though in my opinion it's fairly clear from this and other data that objective play was dominant this season, with the primary exceptions to this rule being specific points in the meta when the particularly strong warbands from the previous seasons (Skaven, Cursebreakers, Mollog, Profiteers) and the newer warbands with better cards and access to Hunter tools (Hrothgorn, Rippas), or great fighter stats (Wurmspat) had a chance to shine.
All in all I think Beastgrave was a good enough season for warband representation, though I do have issues with some of the mechanics and playstyles we saw this season, and the overall playstyle balance and card diversity it displayed. The FAR lists this season have helped some of these issues immensely, they just haven't come often enough for my liking.
That said, now that the last FAR showed GW is willing to restrict faction cards, I am hopeful that the warband diversity in Direchasm will be even better, and I am curious to see what warbands will be on top this time next season.