Here is another Grand Clash breakdown for the July 6th-7th two day Grand Clash at Warhammer World in the UK.
I’ll be breaking this event into two articles, one for each day, so stay tuned (here is part 2).
The format of the event was different from the previous grand clashes in that it is a two day event, with 5 Swiss rounds on the first day, and then a cut to the top 16 players. The top 16 players then get to come back for day 2 and play four more rounds to find one undefeated winner.
All of the data shown below can be found here on Best Coast Pairings. Let me know if i made any errors or missed anything.
Sixteen of the Eighteen Warbands were represented at the event by 82 players.
Below you can see the numbers and percentages of each faction represented. No one played Steelheart’s Champions or Garrek’s Reavers at this event.
Round by round break down
Here is a round by round break down of faction performance at the event. The first 4 numbers (wins, losses, draws, win %, etc) are the stats for that round only. The number undefeated and percentage undefeated are for that faction so far.
Skip to the end for the final results.
Round one saw some very surprising results as the event kicked off.
Thorns of the Briar Queen players had a very rough round, with only one of the 7 players emerging victorious.
All four of the Sepulchral guard and Eyes of the Nine players won their games, making a great start for those Warbands.
The only Farstrider player won his game.
Cursebreakers, Mollog, Godsworn, and Magore’s players had good results, with over half of their players making it through the first round.
Skaven and Chosen Axes each had one player win and one player lose for a 50% win rate.
The only Boyz player lost his first game.
Gitz, Guardians, and Profiteers had below average showings, with less than half of the players making it through to next round.
Round 2 saw a number of Warbands drop from the undefeated list, though some others picked up their performance.
Sepulchral Guard, Chosen Axes, and Spiteclaw’s Swarm did not have a good second round, with all players losing their games.
The lone Farstrider player continued victorious.
Both Eyes of the Nine players continued victorious.
Magore’s, Cursebreakers, and Gitz each had a difficult round, with low win rates and only one player from each Warband remaining undefeated.
Ylthari’s Guardians and Thorns of the Briar Queen had a great round, with great win rates and all three of the undefeated Guardians players continuing their win streak, though the only Thorns player who won round 1 did lose their game.
Mollog and Godsworn Hunt players did well, with good win rates and high numbers of undefeated players.
The profiteers had low overall results, but three players continued on undefeated.
Round three really starts to narrow down the number of undefeated players .
One Magore’s player and one Sepulchral Guard player dropped before this round.
Godsworn Hunt pull ahead of Mollog’s Mob for the highest number of undefeated players, but both have above average rounds.
The lone Farstrider player continued undefeated.
Cursebreakers have a difficult round in general with a below 50% win rate, but the only undefeated player continues on victorious.
One of the two Eyes of the Nine players continued victorious.
Thorns of the Briar Queen had another very good round and a great win rate despite having no undefeated players.
Magore’s had a good win rate for the round, but the only undefeated player lost their game.
Profiteers continue to have a 40% win rate for the round, with only 1 undefeated player remaining.
Due to the format of the event (5 rounds and a cut to the top 16) and the number of players (82), 2-3 players would be undefeated at the end of 5 rounds, and something like 11-13 would be 4-1, with it also being possible for a few 3-2 players to make the cut as well.
This meant that the fourth round was unique in that any players who emerged undefeated were guaranteed to make it into the top 16 cut no matter what happened in round 5, and anyone with one loss at the end of round 4 would still have one more chance to make it into the top 16 cut by winning in round 5.
Round 4 four saw 5 players lock in their spots in the top 16 by going undefeated. You can see these 5 players below.
There were also 23 players with either a 3-1-0 (W-L-D) or 2-1-1 record. Due to cut system, any of these players could still make it into the final cut if they won the final round. You can see their factions below.
In addition to these 28 players, two 2-2-0 players could still make it into the next day if they won their final game and had also the highest tiebreaker scores of the 3-2-0 players and none of the 3-1 players drew their games.
Both Spiteclaw’s players lost their matches this round.
Ironskulls Boyz, Sepulchral Guard, and Chosen axes had a good round, with all players winning their games.
Magore’s, Thorns, Cursebreakers, and Gitz all had a very difficult round with below average win rates.
The only Farstriders player lost his first match of the event, but was still in the running with a score of 3-1.
The two eyes of the nine players both ended round 4 with scores of 3-1, meaning they were still in the running.
Profiteers had their best round of the event so far, managing a win rate of 50% overall for the round. They did have one 4-0 and one 3-1 player, though, so would still be around for day 2.
Godsworn and Mollog both had above average rounds, and each warband having 5 players in contention to make the cut with scores of 3-1, and one Mollog player sitting at 4-0.
Godsworn had their best round of the event with a win rate of 73%, 2 players at 4-1, and 2 more at 3-1.
Round 5 was tough on quite a few Warbands.
Farstriders, Eyes, and Chosen Axes were defeated in their final games and did not make the cut to day two.
Magore’s, Thorns, Mollog, Profiteers, and Ylthari’s all did well in the final round, with at least one player from each faction making it into the final cut.
Godsworn had a relatively poor round, with the lowest overall win rate for the round at 28%, though one of the two 3-1 players did make it through to the cut and Tom Bond won his fifth match of the event.
Here are the final results of the event. Below you can see the overall win rates for all Warbands and the undefeated progression for each faction, as well as the ultimate cut to top 16.
The top 16 players are shown here:
Due to the size of the cut, the top 16 includes:
- Three 5-0 players
- Eleven 4-1 players
- One 3-1-1 player
- One 3-2 player
Special Note: Tony Field (13th) was not able to make it to day two, so the 17th place player, Nick Bayton (LWWWL), who is also playing Cursebreakers, will also make it into the second day (which you can read about here).
The above are the stats and facts, what follows is just my opinion. It could likely be wrong, and I could be missing things, so let me know if you think that’s the case.
- Looking at the event, I generally love the new two day format. Having a second day to make sure there is a true winner is great, and is a great step towards making Warhammer Underworlds the competitive game we want it to be.
- Overall the attendance seemed lower than some of the other UK events, though 82 is still a great showing.
- It is great fun following along with the event as it takes place via Best Coast Pairings. It also allows for stats breakdown like this one, so I hope it behaved well and that they continue to use it in future events.
- I think a top 16 cut might be too large for an event of this size, for a few reasons.
- Generally, it seems strange to allow over 19% of the playing field into the cut.
- In many ways, the last round wasn’t needed. The end of the 4th round had 5 undefeated players, and those players didn’t even need to play the final round to know they had made it into the cut, which takes a little away from the drama of the event.
- I think a top 8 cut after the 4th round would have worked just as well, as it would only have included the 5 undefeated and the top three 3-1 players, and would have likely been easier on the players who have to play so many games over 2 days.
- Larger events could still have a cut to 16, though.
- I would like to see some kind of weight put on the timing of wins and losses, so that losing in the final round (WWWWL) would count for more than losing in the first round (LWWWW) since those games are likely to be more difficult.
- The reason for this is that is quite possible in the current system to lose in the early rounds of the event and then place higher than someone that did not lose in the final round (which happened in this event, if you look at the scores of 5th, 6th, and 7th place compared to 8th place). Theoretically, it would have been possible to win every round except the last one, and place as low as 14th in an event of this size, which does not seem ideally competitive to me.
- Although I do not have any reason to think anyone purposely did this in this event, it would be possible for someone to abuse the current system and “submarine” the event by losing the first round by a small margin and be paired against easier opponents for the rest of the event, score highly in those games, and then make the final cut (especially if the cut is smaller) above players that have similar scores but harder games.
- I think this should possibly be the second tiebreaker after games lost and is basically SoS-lite.
- I think the current system should use random pairings instead of the Dutch Swiss system, which gives the highest scoring players each rounds potentially easier games, and puts too much emphasis on the tiebreakers and is possibly game-able because players could theoretically drop games in order to avoid certain pairings.
Overall it seems like it was a great event with an exiting and surprising first day, and I cannot wait to see how tomorrow pans out.