Age of Sigmar: What The Latest ‘Metawatch’ Tells Me About The State of Tournament Play
Let’s take a look at what the latest data from Games Workshop says about who’s the best and who’s not doing so hot in the Age of Sigmar Tournament scene.
Games Workshop’s latest Metawatch article does a pretty good job of looking at some very high level data point for Warhammer: Age of Sigmar. They have some good info and a breakdown of a few high-ranking lists from players that did very well at the Orlando GT. While that’s all good info I wanted to take a broader look at the reported data from the Meta and talk about a few things that should be sending up some smoke signals to GW.
Before we dive into that, I would also like to point out that this data is an aggregate of 20+ events that had at least 5 rounds. We don’t know which events GW is pulling data from, we don’t know how the events were run, the scenarios, terrain density, the overall number of players, and most of the nitty-gritty of the details. So take the “Metadata” for what it is and keep in mind that your local scene may mirror this data exactly or vary wildly due to your player pool and lots of other factors we aren’t going to list here.
The point is this is more of a thought exercise than absolute rules – this data should be used to track and monitor. It should be treated like general guidelines and not taken as hard and fast absolutes in the AoS world. That said, let’s check out the numbers.
The first thing to note are the top 5 armies – or really the top 7. Each of these armies had at least seven (7) 4+ wins at tournaments.
#1 Sons of Behemat (17)
#2 Disciples of Tzeentch (12)
#3 Seraphon (12)
#4 Lumineth Realm-lords (12)
#5 Daughters of Khaine (11)
#6 Soulblight Gravelords (11)
#7 Slave to Darkness (7)
However, of those armies, which ones had +5 wins at the tournaments? And what would the rankings look like if we arranged them that way using the amount of 4+ wins as the tie breaker?
#1 Disciples of Tzeentch (3)
#2 Slaves to Darkness (3)
#3 Seraphon (2)
#4 Lumineth Realm-lords (2)
#5 Soulblight Gravelords (2)
#6 Sons of Behemat (1)
#7 Daughters of Khaine (1)
Things shifted around quite a bit. Why is that? Well, both the Disciples of Tzeentch and Slaves to Darkness have something in common: Archaon. Is it surprising that they both had 3 tournaments where they went the distance?
Now, if you’re familiar with the current top meta builds, this shouldn’t surprise you. If you’re not, GW mentioned why and what you should expect for these top builds:
Mega-Garagants and Characters – specifically big hitters like Archaon, Morathi-Khaine, and even Gotrek.
I wish we could have seen a breakdown of the all the characters that were taken in these lists but I’d be willing to bet we’d see a healthy dose of Telics and Kroak right up there, too. Without getting into all the list details of why, at a high-level view those are the big things to look out for at the top end of the meta. If you can deal with them then you’ve got a shot if/when you run into them at a tournament. If you don’t have a plan then get ready for a rough go.
Now let’s look at the other end of the spectrum at the armies that didn’t do so well:
#21 Flesh-Eater Courts
#22 Ossiarch Bonereapers
#23 Gloomspite Gitz
#24 Nighthaunt
#25 Beast of Chaos
Of these armies, each only netted a single 4+ win at a 5 round event. And only the Flesh-Eater Courts and Ossiarch Bonereapers scored a 5 win. I’d be very interested to see both the winning Nighthaunt and Beast of Chaos lists, too.
Again, if you’ve been following the current meta, then these shouldn’t shock you. But if you’re not here’s some general thoughts about them to help summarize why they are low. Beasts of Chaos and Nighthaunt are both considered to be pretty weak in the current meta (and have relatively older books at this point). Gloomspite Gitz can be hard to play at a tournament due to the sheer volume of models. Flesh-Eater Courts has been a bit of a one-build army for a while and most players at the top are used to playing against it. And the Ossiarch Bonereapers didn’t get access to much of the 3rd edition changes – but their newest FAQ did help.
So What Signals Should This Send
First up, Mega-Gargants probably need a good once-over. Why are they so dominant in the current meta? What’s making them stand so much taller than other armies? (hint: It’s because they can hold objectives for days). And how can that be adjusted to make playing against them more appropriate?
Secondly, the Chaos lists featuring Archaon probably need a second glance – particularly Disciples of Tzeentch. Why is this combo doing so much better than the other 3 options? What interactions are making this army win so consistently and how/does that need to change? It should also be no surprise that Characters are such a dominant force in AoS right now. 3.0 actively boosted their power so seeing them on top could be working as intended.
Thirdly, the armies at the bottom need some help. As mentioned the OBR FAQ should help that army out (we’ll see how they fair with the new changes). The Flesh-Eater Courts need something to help shake-up their bag of tricks but they are still deadly. It’s really just the Gloomspite Gitz, Nighthaunt, and Beast of Chaos that could REALLY use some reworks. They don’t seem like they are really competing and that’s unfortunate. This should be a pretty large red flag to GW and hopefully they are looking into those armies in particular. At minimum, some points could be adjusted downward for them. On the other end of the spectrum new Battletomes with much needed boosts could be warranted.
There’s lots more info to glean off the metadata that GW has provided. But again, this data is so high level is best used as guidelines and not an absolute set of instructions. For example, one thing this data doesn’t track is the “skill” of the players – that’s almost impossible to quantify anyhow. But that could by why you have some “lower tier” armies pull off a 5 win streak at an event, too.
What details are you noticing about this metadata from Game Workshop?
