How have Daemons of Khorne Been Doing?

[atropabelladonna]

Hi, First post is a long while.

It has been ~ a year or more since the Deamons of Khorne were released on Cyanide. I was wondering how they have been doing statistically? I know it was a controvertial team when it was first released and it isn't my goal to stir up that arguement all over. I am just wondering how they are doing on Cyanide and in individual leagues, those that allow them. I tried searching but I couldn't find much on this.

[VoodooMike]

It has been ~ a year or more since the Deamons of Khorne were released on Cyanide. I was wondering how they have been doing statistically?

From the limited dataset I've seen, they do fairly poorly. Does that mean they are inherently poor performers? That's a question the current data can't answer, as there are a few fairly damning confounds... such as:

- Very few coaches play Khorne.
- Community bias against Khorne may suggest the better coaches aren't playing them.
- As a new team people are still experimenting with the best "play style" for them.

Those, and more, will tend to push the performance down, and make variation high. I'm not sure anything definitive can be said based on the past year's available data.

[dode74]

I've got several hundred games worth of Khorne data, mostly from FOL MM, but also from a large Cyanide league. I'll post some later when I have time.

[atropabelladonna]

I've got several hundred games worth of Khorne data, mostly from FOL MM, but also from a large Cyanide league. I'll post some later when I have time.

That will be neat to see!

[atropabelladonna]

From the limited dataset I've seen, they do fairly poorly. Does that mean they are inherently poor performers? That's a question the current data can't answer, as there are a few fairly damning confounds... such as:

- Very few coaches play Khorne.
- Community bias against Khorne may suggest the better coaches aren't playing them.
- As a new team people are still experimenting with the best "play style" for them.

Those, and more, will tend to push the performance down, and make variation high. I'm not sure anything definitive can be said based on the past year's available data.

Thanks for the info. I assumed since they didn't get NAF support they wouldn't be too popular so that seems to be true. It looks like it would take a lot of games played to get the team to a decent level to perform (i.e. so many basic skills the team is missing).

[dode74]

In FOL (Cyanide MM format, seasons last ~2 months) for Khorne
Played: 2886
Completed: 2294

Of the completed games, for Khorne against all opponents:
W/D/L: 758/472/1064
Giving Khorne a win% in FOL of 43.33% of games which were completed

Of the incomplete games:
Khorne conceded: 246
Conceded to Khorne: 202
Khorne disconnected: 56
Disconnected to Khorne: 88

Including the incomplete games:
W/D/L: 1048/472/1366
Giving Khorne a win% in FOL of 44.49% of all games played.

Khorne was the second most played team in FOL S11 (the first season the team was available) after the runaway favourites, Chaos Dwarves. They dropped to 4th (after CDs, Orcs and Chaos) in S12 and dropped to 6th (behind Undead and Dwarves) for S13 and then 12th for S14.

In OCC (21+ 10-team single round robin Cyanide leagues with promotion/relegation) for Khorne:
Played: 169, all were completed.
W/D/L: 67/26/76
Giving Khorne a win% in OCC of 47.34% of all games played.

Khorne has only been available for 4 seasons of OCC (the 4th being the one just started). In that time there have been 4, 7, 9 and 8 Khorne teams of the 210+ total. This chart courtesy of Gobas on OCC puts that into context:

[Warpstone]

Thanks for the interesting data Dode.

Is it possible to get the mode of the scoreline for Khorne games too? It would be interesting to see if Khorne games go the way of the 2-1 grind or if they're a bit wilder or one-sided like a tier 2 or 3 team's results.

BTW, is a 1/5 abandoned game rate normal for most races in the Cyanide MM format?

[atropabelladonna]

Thanks for the info dode74. This is what I was looking for.

[VoodooMike]

Khorne was the second most played team in FOL S11 (the first season the team was available) after the runaway favourites, Chaos Dwarves. They dropped to 4th (after CDs, Orcs and Chaos) in S12 and dropped to 6th (behind Undead and Dwarves) for S13 and then 12th for S14.

Is this in terms of teams made, or games played? Only the latter would be interesting.

Do you have the 95% CI? I realize you're reporting what actually happened (which itself needs none) but if we're trying to use it to extrapolate the roster's performance in general, it does need it.

BTW, is a 1/5 abandoned game rate normal for most races in the Cyanide MM format?

It's better than it used to be, really. I think there used to be a 20% disconnection rate, so... 20% incomplete is a dramatic improvement!

[dode74]

@ Warpstone
I'll put together scoreline data if you like - it won't be soon though. You can do it yourself too: the data can be found at the bottom of this post.

20% as a completion rate is about average for FOL, which is a moderated league. I stipulate completion of 80% of games, and the majority manage that. I have to give some leeway before booting people now since Cyanide screwed up the ability to change rules mid-season (which means I can't let teams back in once I boot them any more). I'm less sure of rates on unmoderated leagues like Auld and Nagg but may be able to get some data on that: it would be interesting to see if moderation is having any effect at all, tbh.

@ atropabelladonna - you're welcome

@ VoodooMike
That's games played. As we've discussed before, that is the more interesting stat. I get no data on teams which are made but not played.

I've not done 95CIs. The whole of FOL data to 30 May is attached as a compressed .csv (~9MB) file below should you wish to do so. It's worth noting that they've moved the table around a little bit since moving servers, so you'll need to do a little jiggery-pokery if you're planning on using your previous database as a working basis.

[Warpstone]

@ Warpstone
I'll put together scoreline data if you like - it won't be soon though. You can do it yourself too: the data can be found at the bottom of this post.

20% as a completion rate is about average for FOL, which is a moderated league. I stipulate completion of 80% of games, and the majority manage that. I have to give some leeway before booting people now since Cyanide screwed up the ability to change rules mid-season (which means I can't let teams back in once I boot them any more). I'm less sure of rates on unmoderated leagues like Auld and Nagg but may be able to get some data on that: it would be interesting to see if moderation is having any effect at all, tbh.

Great, thanks! I'll take a crack at it.

I never realized that a 20% incompletion rate was average due to only playing in a league that was an extension of our TT club. Too bad you can't give someone how bails on a league game a digital kick in the nuts.

[dode74]

To be fair, scheduled leagues tend to have a far better completion rate in my experience (there is still the occasional tantrum or last-matchday disconnection). It's only in the open leagues such as FOL where the problem is more emphasised.