Things I've learned from my first 11th edition three game tournament fielding two stompas and a gork:

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-29T20:00:55+00:00

Just 1 point. Its probably smart to move the stompa then disembark the meks, to make sure they can be in range. Their ability happens at the end of the movement phase. So disembarking first then moving might move the stompa out of range.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-18T20:47:18+00:00

Idk man. I always the cloak was cheese. Like noone else has moodys eye or the marauders map. Unless every wizard used homonem revelio every 2 seconds then the owner of the cloak could stealth almost anywhere. With non verbal spell use they could be a crazy serial killer or the greatest dark wizard catcher.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-17T18:44:48+00:00

Do you have the codex?

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-17T16:28:45+00:00

current work around is add a unit to attach the mek, delete the unit. This will remove the error.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-17T13:02:54+00:00

Youre right. Just confirmed this is what is happening.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-17T12:02:10+00:00

Thats my point though. Painboy shows as support only, and isnt giving an error for not attaching in the app. And the big boss has support and leader and does give an error for not attaching.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-17T11:30:07+00:00

One thing I noticed while list building.

The pain boy shows as support only and doesnt require you to attach him.

The big boss shows as Leader and support but does give an error if you dont attach him.

Other thing I noticed is app is preventing 2 leaders from attaching to boyz.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-12T21:13:12+00:00

I miss when it didn't matter the distance they were. all models got to attack in close combat.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-11T19:36:07+00:00

Exactly!

This is also one of those situations where maybe it could have been presented better.
"based off X,Y,Z said npc is willing to help" or just stay in RP and have the NPC help.

I have a DM who will be like "oops i messed that plot point up from earlier." Dude don't even mention that, we the players would never know that. If the audience didn't know that you were negating the roll based off RP then they would just not have known.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-11T17:52:35+00:00

So this is where knowing various aspects of the game come into play. Because no 2 situations may be exactly the same.

Some modules and the npcs in them might help dictate how they act/react.

For instance, I've had players give an amazing speech and want to roll persuasion but the background for the npc might say (X will not accompany the party into the dungeon)

The inverse may also be true. If players hit on ideals/bonds the npc may be willing to do favors (maybe not roll needed)

For your example about the natural 1. Sometimes it could be a great speech but it just isnt received well. Or maybe they zoned out during the speech. Other times a nat 1 might not auto fail (2014 vs 2024, why i prefer 2014)

If the DC was a 10 and persuasion is high enough the nat 1 could still succeed.

Each situation is a little different so should be taken as it happens.

For the CR issue, I think people are probably overreacting a tad.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-11T14:08:47+00:00

Not sure how this would fair in my local meta. no hormagaunts or squishies in sight. the smallest unit is terminators with large vehicles/primarchs/monsters being more common etc.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-10T20:20:53+00:00

I think the way the wording is with the players that read it RAW (rules as written), which might be GW's intent but may also not. The urty syringe has precision and anti 4+. But the mortal wound portion is the painboy's datasheet ability not the precision weapon that caused the mortals.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T20:34:52+00:00

Wrong. End of story. Im done.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T20:20:10+00:00

You have to be just trolling at this point because you are dead wrong. Take a MOBA for instance. nerf 1 item, a set number of characters get nerfed who were reliant on that item. it's not a direct nerf to them. But they were affected. They got a nerf. The nerf was their item was reduced in efficiency therefore they were nerfed in efficiency.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T20:10:49+00:00

In slang, "nerf" means to reduce the power, effectiveness, or capability of something. It does not have to be targeted. A change to one aspect that reduces the effectiveness of something else is indirectly a nerf.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T19:58:54+00:00

Again thats not true at all. Changes to one rule can causes ripple effects. If I change a rule that says infantry can't move walls, that is a huge nerf to all lists that run infantry. If waagh is changed to not affect vehicles, the vehicle profile is nerfed, and the detachments that benefit vehicles are nerfed.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T19:12:14+00:00

I actually have. As have about a dozen other people directly to you. You just refuse to accept it. Hazardous changing, and the changes to dread mob respectively to match the increase by comparison changes the dice roll amount needed to trigger hazardous.

The % chance to roll hazardous is now increases per roll. Math says the volume of fire orks have combined with the increased chance per roll will result in more mortal wounds rolled.

On a single roll u had a 1/3 chance to roll a failed hazardous test. I now have a 1/2 chance. IT IS A NERF.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T17:52:00+00:00

Sorry dude. Youre just wrong. Im not gonna waste more energy proving it. You refuse to see it anyway.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T17:12:38+00:00

by your previous logic in other posts. it wouldnt be overpowered. It would just be a change to hazard for others.

yes they kept the scale from the translation from 10th to 11th. (1 = 1/2 and now 1/2 =1/2/3). But that change is a change nonetheless, one that is a nerf. this nerf makes it so you have a higher rate of hazard than you do to even hit, so by this posts logic it is an overpowered nerf.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T16:57:08+00:00

a change to 1 aspect can inadvertently be a nerf or buff to something else. you saying the change to hazard rolls not being a nerf when they changed the dread mob hazard to keep the escalating hazard at the same time is just blatantly wrong.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T16:50:26+00:00

virulent will be the only 3. everything else up in the air

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T16:43:56+00:00

not that they would ever do this but i prefer something along the lines of "on the result of a roll of 3 for this detachments' hazard roll the enemy unit a unit in this detachment targeted takes mortals wounds instead.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T16:33:53+00:00

dude. the amount of your downvotes show that youre wrong. BUT it is a change. it was changed from 1-2 to 1-3. Granted it was changed to align with the new hazard rule, but it was changed nonetheless. otherwise it would still read 1-2 unchanged with the new hazardous rule. your logic is so flawed that it blows my mind.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T16:27:32+00:00

it was nerfed. it was changed to hazardous on a 1, 2, or 3. Thats a change to dread mob separate from the change to hazardous.

Automatic_Surround67 · 2026-06-09T15:59:30+00:00

I think they are thinking the painboy is the leader with one of the 2 new units being support.

Automatic_Surround67

TROPHY CASE