In looking at these select lists, some things immediately strike me (although in some cases the data is based on few players):
My hypothesis from my previous post is wrong. Skill does not make a Late Antiquity list filled with cheaper units less deadly. Indeed, as you gaming pros surmised by looking at the unsegmented data for all results, these lists in the hands of more skilled players are about the same or more deadly in the hands of A/B players. Kingdom of Soissons and Indian have about the same win percentage across skill levels (at more than 78%) while Jewish Revolt, Spanish (Sertorius), and Romano-British, all see increase win percentage in the hands of more skilled players; in the case of Romano-British the increase is a full two games per season (22%). For my hypothesis to hold water, I would need to find that the win percentage of these cheap infantry list decreases in the hands of A/B players because the A/B opposition would be more skilled at defeating cheap infantry lists.
This validates the previous decisions to nerf the Indian and Jewish lists and supports the decision being made now to nerf the Kingdom of Soissonss and the Romano British. These two lists seem to have advantages regardless of skill level and they are almost unbeatable in the hands of the best skilled players.
Where the impact of skill is most evident is on A/B players ability to defeat heavy lists. In the case of Roman (24BC-196Ad with Jewish allies), the win percentage dropped 45% (four wins) when facing A/B opposition. This further supports that there is something about cheap infantry lists that may make match ups against heavy lists overly advantaged.
If I had to be a benchmark for considering when a list should be review for nerfing it is when that list wins more than 75% of its games, specifically when that is in the A/B level.
What also strikes me is how appropriately careful RBS and the other design leaders are when it comes to making changes. The list nerfs so far have have been surgical strikes rather than game overhauls. That strikes me as sound. The next lists that might be a nerf candidate are the Spanish and the Scots-Irish. I may not have the skill to put the Scots-Irish into that 75% game win category (3 of the medals won by the Scots-Iris have been by me) but if dklanda, Snugglebunnies, ruskicanuk, Nosy_Rat, or ludendorf (should he ever return) played Scots-Irish they might have what it takes to make the Scots-Irish list a nerf target.
From all the ideas I have read about how to nerf a cheap infantry list, what is being done makes the most sense to me...change the unit cost to reduce the advantage numbers by a few units. Things like removing flank disruption for medium flank attacks when flanking heavy units is too drastic and would ruin one of the most fun features of this game: breaking the line with a heavy for exploitation by a nimble medium.
As far as I am now concern, some lists do offer an advantage and segmenting the data like I did may be insightful, but is not ultimately needed for determining if a list needs nerfing. If anyone wants my data to see what they might find or to continue the analysis for the other ages, I would be happy to share. Just PM me your email and I will send it to you.
- Impact of Skill, select lists.JPG (75.01 KiB) Viewed 1727 times
