# Win lose draw



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

I can't help but notice that rather alot of members have "win lose draw" stats floating around, and it got me thinking; applying a little bit of logic would imply that some of them must be a complete fantasy, seeing as _every_ single one of them has a much higher win count than the other two stats. Therefore, if you think about it, if everyone is wining 70+% of these matches, some of them MUST be fake, because of the simple fact that whoever these persons play against are losing the matches that these persons win - but they are ALL claiming massive win counts (compared to losses).

Anyone else noticed? :biggrin:


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

you can tell most are complete fakes, I just can't believe someone who posts something like
SUPZOR NIDZ ARMY OF TEH DOOOOOOOMZORS!!!111!!!
W/L/D 100000, 0, 2

heck mine would be
W/L/D 2, 1000000000000000, 1
heck why would I lie about that


----------



## HOBO (Dec 7, 2007)

I think that a lot of them are fak..well favouring the wins anyway. If writing a chart I think it should be done in 2 stages -

1st stage...when you start out with a new list and trying to come to terms with it, the chart will be mainly draw/loss - heavy.

2nd stage...once you've got a handle on it the chart will be more win/draw heavy.

Me, I think it's a bit of a [email protected]#k including it in the first place...leave it on the Computer/Scoreboard at the Club.


----------



## Garven Dreis (Oct 26, 2009)

Totally agree, to be honest, the best result i've gotten so far is a draw


----------



## Marneus Calgar (Dec 5, 2007)

Mine is deadly serious.


----------



## NoiseMarine (Jun 8, 2008)

I've honestly only lost... Four times during 5th, once against Blood Angels, three times against Necrons...

Yeah, I fuck shit up. Since it isn't terribly hard to win more than you lose when you don't intentionally gimp yourself.


----------



## chromedog (Oct 31, 2007)

In my sig on another board is the inscription:

W/L/D for [year x]: Is your life so empty that you need to know this stuff?

It's gamerwank.

I lose more games than I win, and even draw more than I win. 
I cherish my wins, sure - but without losses to compare against, they are meaningless.


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

gawd my stats would be horrible. When I do win I win big (I have no idea why), but when I lose...ugh. Every army I have ever owned (except my second IG army) has been wiped completely off the board more than once. We had this Tyranid player in my old gaming group back in 3rd edition this kid was unstoppable. He would beat everyone in our gaming group, in our gaming store, at every tournament he went to.

Another kid (15 I think, real nerdy) he had this Ultramarine army that he used some pretty fantastic tactics with. So he use to destroy every opponent he went against. So that's two examples of people who I know would have the unbelievable stats of win, lose, or draw.

I however would probably be W-3, L-googol, D-ha, ah what?


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Never posted mine because I always felt that doing so was kinda a jerk move. Having said that my armies realistically brake down as follows.

Warhammer 40k

Chaos Undivided (First army) W5/D4/L12
Warp Fiends (My re-themed Chaos undivided army) W14/D3/L5

As you can see mentioning ones first army usually shows where all those losses people fail to mention are hidden.

Fantasy
Chaos Undivided (First fantasy army) W4/D5/L5
Vampire counts (My broken I'm a cheap prick list) W8/D2/L2

In other words this serves to illustrate that some may have lists/armies that have 70% win rates, however often these lists are hyper competitive lists, and most of there wins are probably from playing friendly games against none cheese lists. Not even taking into account that most of these players don't included the 10 or so losses while they refined said cheese lists.


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

Alot of them are fake yes, some it's just a easy way to view it and keep it online on a site like this they visit constantly. I know I wouldn't bother putting it in my computer word doc as it would been seen to me as a waste of space where as at the bottom of a sig on a WH site it wouldn't waste space on a computer.

I have never really done this but may decide to keep a record of my fun army for the sake of seeing how it goes.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

There's some math freak at our LGS who photographs every dice roll, and records every movement he and his opponent makes, and then analyzes them after the game. 

One thing that you're sure of though, is that while you'll never miss an action, you can be sure he's going to win the next game against you with the same list.

An annoying thing he has done though is name EVERY single one of his models in the army, and names which ones die from "light casualties", such as say something like an arrow, or severe casualties (getting obliterated by Archaon in a challenge, cannonball wound, blade of realities, etc), and then writes up a story about them.

If they suffer a light casualty, then he rolls a dice - on a 4+, it stands back up, on a 3 or lower, it stays dead, and he renames it.

Hell - each one has a record of kills, "rebirths", kills of specific units of specific armies of particular players. Against regulars, some of his stand out warriors (his Savage Orc warboss has killed my Oldblood so many times now (4) that he's actually got a Temple Guard skull helm modelled onto his armour) recieve unique models that he makes only for them. Should they die, they are kept aside.

I think it adds a psychological edge as well - that Black Orc Champion which killed your Stegadon and a Kroxigor champion last game, and modelled carrying a Kroxigor weapon this time; it's going down before the end of the game.

I can only thank god that he doesn't play hordes.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Sounds like a fantastic idea, to me.


----------



## NoiseMarine (Jun 8, 2008)

Baltar said:


> Sounds like a fantastic idea, to me.


 A bit tedious if you ask me, I've named my squad Champions and my HQs and I'll convert them if they absolutely kick the shit out of another HQ/squad single handedly... Farthest I'll go, the rest of that just sounded ridiculous. :shok:


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

I think that I would have to kill something in a pretty epic way for me to want to model extra parts onto it. Still a cool idea, though.


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

My stats are legit, pure legit, and I don't post it up for people to expect more from me, I just post it up for my own benefit, I tend to randomly start the count over when I start a new list or two, just to track my own wins/losses with that list.

My record is pretty average, I win slightly more then I lose, but I'm about even.

I really don't care if I win or not, but I love my "What. The. FUCK!" Moments, more then anything. Especially against people who play really cheesy army lists, having kommandos waltz onto the field turn four to contest their objective despite me barely holding my own is just hilarious.

EDIT: I've modelled some guys based on in game exploits, not a lot, but I have a PK Nob with chaos lord kit, simply cause he killed it himself. I have an ork with a daemon banner with "Orks" scrawled on it too, cause I took it from some daemonettes I smoted.


----------



## NoiseMarine (Jun 8, 2008)

Baltar said:


> I think that I would have to kill something in a pretty epic way for me to want to model extra parts onto it. Still a cool idea, though.


 I stuck Nightbringers hand in my Daemon Prince's claws when I took all four of his wounds yet died simultaneously all in one round of combat... 

Pretty much the most epic thing he's ever done... Asides from the wondrous moving units of Imperial guard 12'in into a big "C" shape to be assaulted by two walkers...


----------



## Partof1 (Mar 2, 2010)

I think it's either that many are fake, coupled with the fact that people with unfavourable records are unlikely to pot them.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Well the opening argument makes no logical sense at all... Unless every single person who posts their win/loss ONLY plays against other people who post their win/loss, and even then ONLY other people from Heresy.

As far as I know, only two other people from my local gaming club regularly visit heresy (and even then, they only lurk). It's perfectly possible for me to have played 50 games against 50 different people and none of them post up their win/loss for you to see, so the only record you have is what I put up.

I post my win/loss for several reasons:

- It's a very easy place to keep track of it.
- I'm proud of my accomplishments.
- I like to see how my armies "curve out" over time, for example my Emperor's Children are losing more or less every game they play right now, but hopefully as I get better at using the list then that will improve, and eventually I'll have a bigger win count than losses. I would only know I was improving in a general sense if I didn't write it down.


----------



## Garven Dreis (Oct 26, 2009)

Sethis said:


> Well the opening argument makes no logical sense at all... Unless every single person who posts their win/loss ONLY plays against other people who post their win/loss, and even then ONLY other people from Heresy.


I think what he's getting at is that statistically speaking, he'd expect to see a large range of win/loss ratios than what he perceives as seeing positive win/loss ratios. Because this is a cross-section of the gaming community, even I'd expect to see an even representation of ratios. But I suppose you wouldn't post your ratio unless you thought it meant something, but I doubt it really bothers a large percentage of players. It doesn't matter in my opinion how many games you've won with an army compared to how many you lost, it's just the fun for me.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

I also sometimes suspect that people who do record hundreds of wins are probably the type who like to beat little children, so they avoid any challenge


----------



## Dies Irae (May 21, 2008)

Sethis said:


> - I'm proud of my accomplishments.


I think that's why you see more 20/5/2 ratios out there than 2/5/20. Mine is real (well I still need to include this 2 wins against a friend's Raven Guard army), and I don't mind saying that I lost some of my battles.
However I know that when I'll live near a GW store/ be in a club, my ratio will go down, as I only play against beginners right now, the only times I played against tournament player I was whipped out of the table at turn 3-4.


----------



## Blue Liger (Apr 25, 2008)

I think Stella has it I know so many gamers and younger gamers who prey on the little idiots who just started and played about 2 games all up, one little kid at my local GW one day comes up to the painting atbel and is like I've won all of my 6 games today, when I went to see the games he was playing it was fantasy his oponents were newbies and his list was a beardy DE list made by one of the GW staff there


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

the first sign of trouble is a player finishing 6 games of fantasy in a day


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

Agreed.

I think it's a combination of playing on the weak, and only the winners record their ratios in sig.

My own, so far:
SM: 2/1/3
DE: 0/0/2
Orks: 4/0/17

Sadly, the orks aren't my beginner army.  They're my mainstay, normal army.


----------



## Abomination (Jul 6, 2008)

Mine is real. Easier to just keep track in my sig than float around with a word doc. I have been doing extremely well with my Space Wolves. With Tau & Tyranids & IG its was more balanced between the three results. In 4th edition I was terrible, out of 118 games I lost over 75 and draw, I think, at least another 8.


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

See, though? No one ever posts the massive loss profiles. People only display their high-win lists. Even if none of these are made up, it still distorts perception. 

There needs to be a motion for a bunch of always-losing players to post their most hideous army record. That could be fun.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

I had my win/loss/draw ratio on here at one stage.
I seen everybody else had theirs up, and as i was new to the forum, i thought it was the thing to do.

I counted up till i got around 50 wins, with 3 draws and 3 losses.

Thats when i realised that the whole thing is a massive wank, and i stopped caring about winning games and just enjoyed playing them instead.:biggrin:

I have no idea what my tally is up to now. At a guess, i would have 70% wins, 20% draws, and 10% losses.
But seriously, i dont really care. All i care about is playing the game and having fun.


----------



## VanitusMalus (Jun 27, 2009)

I admit I've been playing since 2nd edition and I have sucked in each (doing good in 5th though, strange). I sucked in 2nd edition because I didn't have the funds (nor skills) to fashion a good army, also I played Orks and in 2nd geez you were lucky to keep the army from killing itself much less the opponent. In 3rd edition I built 4 armies but went the route of cheap (this is what happens when you're living with some chick who wants to buy $200 worth of groceries but then eat out every night). So ofcourse loss after loss after loss. I played in a tournie with my IG and they were systematically wiped off the board in all three games, I then took my Eldar to another tournie and guess what happened.....

In 4th edition I collected a massive IG army. I do mean massive I literally bought out my local gaming shop. The guy who owned the place even joked to me at one point that I should just cash my checks there (the owner of the liquor store down the street made the same joke around the same time). Anyway because of the diversity of the army I was able to win a little bit more, but pfft against Tyranids, Tau, and the like they still got their asses handed to them. 

My fifth edition Goff Orks, Cadian Imperial Guard, and Crimson Fists however are doing much better (thanks a lot to this forum by the way). I still wouldn't post their W/L/D because again it would still stink.


----------



## jimbob1254 (Apr 22, 2009)

With my new sisters of battle my win lose is 
W=0 D=0 L=4 
yeah im doing well lol 
But that doesn't mean i dont enjoy playing them, I guess for some people its more about the winning. 
Take it easy

Jimbob


----------



## Siphon (Jan 17, 2009)

Blue Liger said:


> Alot of them are fake yes, some it's just a easy way to view it and keep it online on a site like this they visit constantly. I know I wouldn't bother putting it in my computer word doc as it would been seen to me as a waste of space where as at the bottom of a sig on a WH site it wouldn't waste space on a computer.
> 
> I have never really done this but may decide to keep a record of my fun army for the sake of seeing how it goes.


I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this really made me laugh as the worst possible reason for putting them in a sig. I mean do you have a computer from 1980 or something? A word doc would use up a massive 20kb for what most people on here have in their sigs. That's way less than the proverbial drop in a bucket.


----------



## The Thunder of KayVaan (Jun 19, 2009)

I think his point is that he might forget about it. Well i think it is anyway...

My one at the moment is pretty good but if you guys saw my last years one well ill just post it up.

W= 6
D= 7
L= 78

I am not joking here. Really bloody terrible in 4th.


----------



## ItsPug (Apr 5, 2009)

mine would be:
Imperial Guard W17 D3 L6 (4 of the losses came at the Irish GT - not a good weekend for my score lol!)


----------



## Siphon (Jan 17, 2009)

I also find it amusing that a thread debating the veracity of win/loss records posted on the internet, has turned into just a bunch of people posting their win/loss records.

I guess us gamers juuuuuust can't help ourselves can we?


----------



## Inquisitor Varrius (Jul 3, 2008)

I also love how people preface it with "mine is real." Like someone's going to say: "This score is totally bogus and exists solely 'cause I like to be manly." I'm not trying to insult the people who posted scores (Hell, I did too) but isn't saying yours is true a little redundant? It's already implied.


----------



## unxpekted22 (Apr 7, 2009)

lol god I love reading some of these threads.


----------



## Asmodeun (Apr 26, 2009)

Well, hate to second guess your logic OP, but the reason that they have more wins than losses is because they visit these boards and soak up the tricksy ideas, and anyone with enough gamer-wank in their blood to have a win-loose-draw ratio in their sig probably has more than enough to use some of the more unfair, gamebreaking tricks that most people would admit to being dick moves.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

I win lots because I use dick moves? How about I win lots because I have an IQ of 130, use it during the game, read several tactica articles on both my armies and the armies I play against, theorycraft how my units perform in several hypothetical situations, and actually put work into creating my army list.

No, you're right, I must win lots because I use dick moves. There's no other explanation. :alcoholic:


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

There is no such thing as a "dick move". Unless you count cheating.

There is only a dick.


----------



## Dark Strategies (Sep 17, 2009)

I'm going to start posting my win losses too! Starting... NOW. Prepare yourself for a lot draws and losses!


----------



## Lucio (Aug 10, 2009)

To be fair my main opponent plays an older codex than I do (4th vs 3rd) but I'm also a new player and he's competed in tournaments. I started counting games when I had a good grasp of the general rules of the game and the only games I don't count are when I'm either allied with or fighting against a new player. 

The game I lost last week for example was an 1100 pt game with an experienced IG player versus an ork player who had started two weeks prior (700pts) and my little 400pt marine group helping on the side. It was a learning game and the point wasn't to win or lose but to help the ork player to learn to play which we accomplished, though I disagree very much with using special rules with large blast templates against such a new player.

The point of having it is as a self-check and knowing how well I'm doing tactically and how well my developement logically is progressing.


----------



## liforrevenge (Oct 6, 2009)

I did notice before, that's why I decided to throw mine in a while back. Despite my relatively low score I'm proud of my few wins. 

But as for the surprisingly high numbers I'm not surprised as those who go to the forums are going to be more well informed with the game and have a better chance of winning than those who don't (who would have lower scores, but don't post them on the interwebs.)


----------

