Background Image

Arkhona War Report Week 34

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Forj, May 22, 2017.

  1. Forgrim Forj Battle-Skald

    As always, the pretty colours can be found at https://arkhonareports.wordpress.com/2017/05/22/arkhona-war-report-week-34/

    This week was the Loyalists opportunity to shine, and they certainly did in comparison to their past performance. Their campaign saw them dominate the map for much of the week, and they not only reached above 24 territories for the first time since mid-January but maintained it all week. They were pushed hard by the Eldar, and bested by them on a number of days, but held steady against Chaos and the Orks. On only two days did they record an average negative balance against any faction. Their peak has not reached the heights of either the Orks or Chaos, but it was enough to eke out a last minute campaign completion - almost literally. Although it has dropped off from it's peak, their TD7 is still positive, and their TD30 continues to climb - though still negative.

    As for the campaign itself, the chart shows that the Loyalists did not do as well as Chaos or the Orks at the outset, but did better than the Orks did later in the campaign. However, the Orks had already completed their campaign by that point, and the Loyalists were behind the Chaos performance at almost all points.

    The Orks suffered the most from the Loyalist campaign,and not just at the hands of the Loyalists themselves. With their already small population hurt by a probably reduction in activity from Da Lead Belchas, they lost ground against all factions and were unable to retake any of it. What little population they did have was getting pulled into Loyalist matches, so any losses to the other factions remained permanent. The upside of so few matches going on was that their total average territorial holdings remained fairly stable. This has stablised their TD7, but it remains negative and their TD30 has plummeted to below the Loyalists by a considerable margin, with the steepest drop since I started recording.

    The Eldar have been the next most volatile after the Loyalists. While they pushed back the Orks and gave trouble to the Loyalists, they did lose ground at several points. However, they were able to maintain an overall positive balance the whole week by limiting the incursions of the Loyalists and that of Chaos even more so. Their population appears to be over whatever threshold caused the problems for the Orks. Both their TD7 and TD30 are currently positive, and have a positive outlook.

    Chaos has had an even week, clinging on to a positive balance for most of it. With the exception of a single day, they lost ground to the Loyalists, and mostly lost to the Eldar. They did, however, manage to make and keep modest gains against the Orks, and push the Eldar to a stalemate on two days. They were the least affected by the campaigns, have the population to keep activity on all fronts. Their TD7 has barely recovered from the negative, and the rise of their TD30 has slowed.

    This week saw the Loyalists complete their campaign with little to spare and some trouble from the Eldar, while Chaos and Orks held steady. The Orks were the worst hit by the campaign, without the numbers to fight back against Chaos and Eldar at the same time. The territorial rankings as of now are:

    LSM: 29.7% (-5.2)
    Eldar: 29.7% (+3.1)
    Chaos: 25.0% (+1.6)
    Orks: 15.6% (+0.5)

    The TD30 rankings are:

    Chaos: 105.5 TD30 ( +5.5)
    Eldar: 54.5 TD30 (+11.0)
    LSM: -29.0 TD30 (+80.0)
    Orks: -131.0 TD30 (-96.5)
    ByeBye, Ecaja, HappyPillz and 6 others like this.
  2. Asyran Eldritch Arkhona Vanguard

    I think a big factor for Orks here is the matchmaking.

    A lot of losses on their side were due to imbalances in team numbers, sometimes up to 5-6 people.
  3. thanks for the write up, suprising that the marines managed their campaign.

    Sadly the imbalances on gamestart are a real thing, just not enough people playing orks atm
    Daemonkz, Forj and Eldritch like this.
  4. Sigvald Darthy Curator

    I wasn't terribly surprised by LSM managing to win their campaign, if very barely.

    I found the whole thing hilarious though.
  5. Viking Vking Arkhona Vanguard

    Well, let's be glad that this one-sided campaign is over and future campaigns will be different.
    CMDante and LOBOTRONUS like this.
  6. Forgrim Forj Battle-Skald

    Well, there's the Eldar campaign to go. There's been some hints it might be done differently, but I'm not going to assume that's the case until there is some official word on the matter.
  7. Sceviour Sceviour Arkhona Vanguard

    Um...Eldar still have to do their 1 sided campaign...
  8. Sigvald Darthy Curator

    Yes, do it.

    I was screaming about how bad an idea this was during the ork campaign, and now after the single worst iteration thusfar, why stop now?

    Let's keep going and see what happens, stick to your guns Nathan.
    LOBOTRONUS, Deathwish and Forj like this.
  9. Viking Vking Arkhona Vanguard

    Even if they don't change anything about the campaigns, the eldar camp won't be as one-sided (player-number-wise) as the lsm one. Just like the ork one wasn't. I think the reason for this is pretty clear.
  10. Fangz Fangz Confessor

    It was, indeed, a giant Clusterf*ck that would have greatly pleased Slaanesh (and maybe Tzeench?).
    Maybe this would motivate the devs to finally do something about the Campaign mechanics.
    Oddly I'm really looking forward to the Eldar Campaign though; I'm hoping it would greatly change player perspectives of the faction and stimulate some good brainstorming towards balance.
    LOBOTRONUS likes this.

Share This Page