# Beastgrave Q1 Data Final Results

Updated: Dec 1, 2019

The below data is from the first "Quarter" of the Beastgrave season. The data began with the release of the FAR1.0 on October 17th 2019 and ended with the release of the Snarlfang warband on November 23rd.

As always, you can see the stats for each quarter __ here__.

If you would like your events included in this data, be sure to use __ Best Coast Pairings__ or

__to run your events.__

**Underworlds Deckers**

**First lets look at the basic numbers for this quarter:**

Events Calculated: 53

Total Matches: 1507

Number of players: 783

This data includes one Grand Clash: The October Warhammer World Grand Clash in the UK. You can read more about that event __ here__.

Although there were fewer events included in this data due to the short time window (due to the staggered release of Grymwatch and Snarlfangs) there were actually more players and more matches recorded, due to the large size of some the events that took place during this time frame.

**Now lets look at warband representation:**

Here are the raw numbers:

Something to keep in mind when looking at the percentages are the total number of warbands, and what a perfectly event distribution would be. With 21 warbands, that number would be 4.7%, and anything over that number could be considered "popular."

Unsurprisingly, the newer warbands are very popular. The exception to this are the Dreadfane warbands, but this is likely due to their still limited release and legality during this quarter.

Ylthari's Guardians are the warband with the closest to the perfectly even number of players, with Gitz and Mollog being the next closest.

Thundrick's, Cursebreakers, Thorns, and everything from Beastgrave could be considered popular this quarter.

**Warband Performance**

How well each warband is doing can be viewed a number of different ways.

**Win Rate**

The simplest but likely least accurate way is pure win rate. This is a nice thing to know, but does not take into account how difficult the games might be, only if the result is a win or a loss.

Here are the raw numbers:

Here is a chart showing the same data:

A few interesting points here:

Despite having very few players (31) Mollog's Mob had the highest win rate of the Quarter. This likely indicates that only a few die-hards are sticking with the big troll in the new season, but that he still has some serious potential.

The few (17) Lady Harrows players are also doing very well. We will have to watch their performance in the next quarter now that they are released globally.

After those two, the warbands with the next highest win rates (and the only ones above 50%) are The Grymwatch, Thundrick's Profiteers, Thorns of the Briar queen, and Zarbag's Gitz. To me, this indicates the power of the objective meta during this quarter, and the inherent power of the Profiteers (the #1 warband of Nightvault).

Godsworn Hunt and Ironsoul's Condemners sit right at 50%, perhaps indicating they are perfectly balanced?

Steelheart's, Sep Guard, Chosen Axes, Spiteclaw's Swarm, Farstrider's, Cursebreakers, and Despoiler's all have win rates above 40%, which I feel is ideally where most warbands would be due to ties throwing off the numbers a bit. It will be interesting to see how these warbands fair as more universals come out to help them vs the objective warbands.

Reavers, Ironskull's, Magore's, Eyes of the Nine, and Skaeth's Wild Hunt all have sub 40% win rates. This seems to indicate that they are hard to play in this current meta.

**Events Won:**

Another stat to look at is how many events a warband won, and what percentage of players that took a given warband won the event that they attended.

The higher each number is, the better the warband is doing. A large number of events won with a small percentage (such as the wild hunt) would indicate a warband is popular but not many of its players won their events, while a smaller number and a higher percentage (Godsworn) would indicate that although only a few players used that warband, they did well with them. A high number and a high percentage (Harrows) would seem to indicate that players that play that warband are very likely to win their event. This number is fun to look at, but is heavily effected by the sample sizes. To me, the warbands with higher win rates and larger sample sizes seem to indicate that a percentage of 10% or higher is a good number for a competitive warband.

## Rounds Undefeated and Average First Loss

These two data points are my favorite indicators of a Warband's performance.

The first, Rounds Undefeated, gives the percentage of players still undefeated after each round. Because most events are three rounds, I usually only keep track of the numbers for the first three rounds. The perfectly balanced numbers to compare the results to would be 50%, 25%, and 12.5%. If a Warband's numbers are higher than these, it means they are doing well.

The second, Average First Loss, tells you the average round a warband usually takes their first loss. This number will usually range between 1 and 3, due to most smaller events being 3 rounds, and the tiny number of players that end up playing more rounds than that without losing a game. Typically a score over 2 is considered to be good.

These numbers are, in my opinion, much more indicative of success than pure win rate, as they do take into account the matches getting more difficult as an event goes on.

Here are the numbers for these stats:

Although many of these numbers do reflect similar levels of performance as the other stats for some warbands (Mollog, Harrows, Thundrik's, Grymwatch, Thorns), there are also a number of interesting differences:

Despite having a relatively poor overall win rate (39%), the Magore's Fiends players (29) that did well in their games tended to go the distance with above average rounds undefeated percentages and a solid 2.07 average first round loss, and had better numbers than warbands like Cursebreakers, Despoilers, and Condemners.

Chosen Axes players (11) were fairly likely to win the first 2 rounds with above average percentages, though none won the third round.

Farstriders (7) and Godsworn (13) hunt had very good numbers, with very high percentages and AFL scores.

**Final thoughts:**

Bonus chart showing the ranking of each warband in each stat:

The purpose of tracking this data was to try and get a good look at the current state of the game, and I am happy with the number of games I was able to collect and track over the course of Season 3 Quarter 1. If you'd like to see the raw data for this quarter, you can view it ** here**. Here is the entire end result image:

If you have an event you would like me to include in future data, let me know by messaging me on Facebook, discord, or here. All I need is the win/loss/draw/bye info for each player (WDLW, BWWL, LLBW, etc) and who ended up winning the event. Names are not needed, so Orks 1, Orks 2, etc, is fine.

I will automatically gather the results on ** Best Coast Pairings** and

**as they are submitted, so don’t worry about those.**

__UnderworldsDeckers__If there is anything else I should track going forward, let me know and and I will see if I can add it in for the next quarter.

Thanks.