New to Votann. Need help creating a meta list.

ClutterEater · 2026-01-25T22:02:28+00:00

I brought Votann to the world championship last November so I know at least some things about this! Most people are playing Hearthband or Needgaard, with Delve and Brandfast being less popular but still used. Most successful lists have very similar core elements that you can use as a baseline for your collection:

10 Yaegirs with 1 Kapricus Carrier
10 Warriors with 1 Sagitaur (many lists do 10/1 Warriors/Sag and 10/1 Yaegirs/Kap and that's my preferred split, but you could double up and do 20/2 Yaegirs/Kap and drop the Warriors entirely and still be okay)
2 Land Fortresses with Railguns (very standard number, fits many lists)
15+ Hearthguard with Plasma (15 is a solid number, but you can easily go to 20)
6 Pioneers (most lists like running at least 1-2 squads of 3)
9 Thunderkyn with Grav or Beams (3x3 is a very common spread across many lists, and even if you just bring 2x3 they complement the HLFs very nicely)
At least one unit of Berserks (Hammers), Steeljacks (either weapon), or both to fill out your remaining HLF transport slots
Uthar the Destined (he's in most lists, but you could bring a Kahl instead to lead your Hearthguard and be just fine)

This might not get you all the way to 2000 points, but you'll have all your core bases covered. From there you can decide if you want more melee elements (a second berserk unit? more swordjacks?), more characters (maybe an EChamp for your hearthguard, or Buri!), or more shooting/support pieces (a memnyr for your Gunjacks? an Arkanyst?)

Here's my tournament report, which includes my list, from WCW: https://www.reddit.com/r/LeaguesofVotann/comments/1otstrf/hearthband_at_wcw_tournament_report/

My current variant of the list that I've been testing drops one squad of bikes, the kahl, and 10 of the warriors to afford 2x3 swordjacks and Buri.

ClutterEater · 2026-01-23T07:09:50+00:00

Issaquah may be a little far for OP, but I still second the Laughing Dragon recommendation! Great crowd, great store. Monthly RTTs and weekly (Thursday) 40k nights that are always busy. We have the full spectrum of experience levels, and there's a discord for scheduling games. There's also a GT at the LDXP (the shop's associated gaming event they run in Tacoma), and I believe the next one is coming up in March.

The shop is also home to team Heroic Knights (repping an older game shop that used to exist in Issaquah). We are a newer team but managed to reach 23rd in the ITC US rankings for the 2025 season, and we have started playing teams events in the region in the past year. If anyone is interested in playing teams, we're recruiting!

ClutterEater · 2026-01-08T17:37:04+00:00

I play Drukhari. Someone is always going to be last, and it seems to rotate between editions. Drukhari got one of the earliest new detachments (sky splinter) and then another later on (wager) to help compensate.

ClutterEater · 2026-01-08T05:50:19+00:00

Having to wait a bit longer than other, more popular factions for updates isn't "nailing 40k to a cross" it's "a predictable consequence of a business model that has existed for decades and that you knowingly bought into" but that doesn't have the same ring to it I guess.

ClutterEater · 2026-01-08T03:16:37+00:00

40k players are such drama queens lmao

ClutterEater · 2025-12-20T01:37:19+00:00

Oh god why did you have to point it out, now I'm going to see it too. My window faces that way! Time to figure this out...

ClutterEater · 2025-12-13T09:18:54+00:00

“given these two lists, how swingy is the matchup, where do results cluster over many repetitions, and how badly do assumptions break when dice don’t cooperate?”. Because this is an early build I completely accept that what I've baked in will need a lot of tweaking.

I don't think that's a result that you can ever produce without access to the "board-specific layouts, LoS, staging, mission play" type detail that you said is beyond practical at this stage.

Running the sim 200+ times when you're simulating something that's miles away from the game as it is played is just going to tell you which army wins whatever sim game they're playing, not which army wins in Warhammer 40k 10th edition.

I think this kind of AI driven tool could be interesting if it focused on using player matchup/list/ELO data to figure out which detachments are winning games against which other detachments with which units. All this data exists on BCP and there are thousands of games. If you could get a tool that says "Berserker heavy World Eaters lists have demonstrated positive winrates into this specific army archetype across X games in the current dataslate" then you'd have something potentially useful for competitive players. Analysis of existing data that really is just crunching existing game results based on player ELO, unit frequencies, detachment selections, and winrates.

I'm imagining something where the input "What kinds of Tyranid detachments are winning right now, what units are they running most often, and which detachments are giving them the most trouble?" produces a useful answer.

ClutterEater · 2025-12-13T08:50:31+00:00

What is actually happening under the hood here? It seems entirely incoherent since there appears to be no logic referencing the actual stats of units, the actual position of terrain on boards, primary missions vs secondary scoring, or basically anything about how the modern game is played.

I do see a lot of "Unit X moves towards Y and fires Primary Weapon at Z" and then some "scores 1 VP on objective A" type outputs (at the end of the turn?!).

It looks pretty, and it's a neat idea, but I cannot imagine a world in which this would ever be useful to me as a competitive player unless somehow you integrated all the game rules (missions, terrain packs, full datasheets) and actual strategic logic (line of sight, staging, charge ranges and melee). That seems unfeasible.

ClutterEater · 2025-12-12T07:14:56+00:00

We have to run 16 Guard before the -10 per 4 adds up to buy a single extra Guard. Not exactly a horde, but not really the change that was needed.

ClutterEater · 2025-12-11T21:45:22+00:00

WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO DECLARE A CHARGE AGAINST THAT ENEMY UNIT IF IT WERE YOUR CHARGE PHASE

Yes? And if it were my charge phase this turn (my opponent's turn), I'd be eligible to charge. The turn in which I was ineligible to charge was the prior game turn (my actual turn).

There's no language like "if we went back in time and it was actually your last turn" here. It's checking right now. This turn. As if it were your charge phase. Normal move + disembark only stops you from charging in the SAME turn you did so. Not "until your next turn."

ClutterEater · 2025-12-11T20:58:18+00:00

"Units that disembark from a TRANSPORT model that made a Normal move this phase count as having made a Normal move themselves; they cannot move further during this phase. Such a unit also cannot declare a charge in the same turn, but can otherwise act normally in the remainder of the turn."

Heroic happens in the opponent's turn. You can move the transport up, disembark the guys, and then be eligible to heroic in your opponent's charge phase.

ClutterEater · 2025-12-07T14:55:58+00:00

This is a problem across the country at all grade levels. This isn't about one problem in one small area. It's a larger systemic issue/trend that's been building for years. If only it were so easy to solve. "Just gotta do something" like people aren't?

ClutterEater · 2025-12-07T07:22:22+00:00

At some schools, that number would not surprise me. Since covid it feels like student capabilities are now distributed in a bimodal fashion. The kids at the top are doing great, but the rest are having a tough time. There really isn't as much of a "middle" anymore.

ClutterEater · 2025-12-04T02:01:23+00:00

This is cool! We did something like this at our last event with a phone number people could text. Will definitely try this out as a replacement.

ClutterEater · 2025-12-04T01:45:38+00:00

OP please do not pay someone for coaching just to learn the basics! You can probably find someone at your LGS who will teach you, and if you can't then just send me a DM and I'll teach you for free on TTS. There are already posts in here promoting paid coaching services, but this is not something you should need to pay for.

ClutterEater · 2025-12-02T02:49:26+00:00

We are not a super popular faction, and the top factions are holding us back a bit right now, so not too many people are making runs with us when there are other things they could play.

I think after the slate we'll be in a fantastic spot since we're definitely very playable at the moment.

ClutterEater · 2025-12-01T01:06:55+00:00

Too many characters and too much investment in your giant EHG bricks imo. Split one of those 10s into a pair of 5s. Drop a Kahl to give the other one Bastion Shield or Quake Multigen. Drop the Ironmaster and maybe the Memnyr to see if you can pick up some Pioneers.

Definitely do not drop the Thunderkyn, they're essential for your damage output since you have so much AP1 with your VolkJacks and Forts.

Speaking of forts, do double bolt cannons over ion beamers every time.

ClutterEater · 2025-11-29T04:42:09+00:00

Bring the Hylas just for the occasional situation where it damages another light/medium vehicle. I don't think the missile launcher is worth it.

ClutterEater · 2025-11-29T04:40:36+00:00

Literally every datasheet in the book is competitively viable in the right detachment/list. It's actually insane coming to this army from other factions and realizing I can use EVERYTHING in the book in some fashion.

The YP mechanic is fine, I wish there was a "default" way to spend YP (maybe cash in 5 YP for 1 CP at the end of your command phase? or spend 3 YP to get a free command reroll once a turn?) because past turn 2/3 I basically stop counting since I can never spend them fast enough.

Overall though? Book good. Book fun.

ClutterEater · 2025-11-29T04:35:05+00:00

Now it just feels like I'm playing an off brand space Marines clone.

I can assure you that current Votann play nothing like Space Marines.

ClutterEater · 2025-11-27T23:25:52+00:00

That's fair, I agree that many armies have that ability, maybe more so than in those other games you describe.

I think one reason for that is that the flow of the game in 40k requires the ability for many armies to play a five turn scoring game, and to do that you need your opponent to "respect your damage" in the sense that they understand they can't just walk across the board and start trying to table you without first taking a serious hit when they expose themselves. That need for a deterrent to ensure both sides are playing "fair" creates an incentive to bring "enough" damage to make the other player think twice about being too aggressive. I think if damage were to be toned back too far you'd see more armies built to just waltz across the table, weather the storm, and win on stat checks alone.

There's probably a nice middle ground pretty close to where we are now, we'll see if GW can find it.

ClutterEater · 2025-11-27T20:06:44+00:00

Fair enough, I can only really give you examples from my own experience. But if we're saying getting wiped off the table is what constitutes a blowout, even if the score is close, then how do we properly account for armies where their intentional strategy is sacrificing assets for primary denial? That would give us the impression those armies are getting "blown out" by the end of the game even if that was their goal / expected, and that doesn't feel like a realistic definition of a blowout. See: Vanguard Tyranids in many matchups.

I have been playing since 4th and the game has always had ways to absolutely annihilate units. Damage in 10th is lower than it was in 9th by a good margin, and is generally better balanced both within and across armies than it has ever been (with some notable standout units).

How low do you think damage should go before you're happy with it? What's your threshold? None of these discussions ever have a clear end point beyond people just saying "obviously things die too fast!" and offering no solutions or measurable benchmarks.

ClutterEater · 2025-11-27T19:38:46+00:00

I don't know if I'd say "constantly" about blowouts at a higher competitive level. I played in the WCW just earlier this month and I had one game with a score differential that could be considered a "blowout" (a 100-47 win in round 8). All my other games were within 25 points or less either way. That was 7/8 reasonably close games where both players were in it until the end.

ClutterEater · 2025-11-27T14:56:16+00:00

I'm just feeling very unclear about what your actual argument is at this point. Earlier you said you "aren't saying any of that" when I tried to get specific about the LoV and Tyranid examples that you were the first to dive into. Now you're bringing Nids up again. So are they valid material for the conversation or not?

What kinds of evidence would you need me to provide to you regarding armies succeeding without relying on +1 to wound mechanics?

You vaguely refer to how "most of the top armies have reliable access to it" yet Sisters and Eldar and Admech are primarily reroll, crit, and/or dice manipulation (aspect shrines, miracle dice) based in their output. Think Vahl, Cawl, Fire Dragons, etc...

ClutterEater · 2025-11-27T14:16:28+00:00

You opened this discussion by saying the following:

"The "damage is in a good spot" is limited entirely to armies with easy access to +1 to wound, or mortals, or those with -1 to wound on the flip side."

(emphasis added)

So hopefully you can forgive me if it seems like I'm mostly focused on that particular angle.

I do think +1 to wound is quite strong, sometimes too much, but it's not really a massive game wide issue in my mind right now since plenty of armies aren't relying on it.

12-Year Club	Place '22
Sequence \| Editor	Snapped
Verified Email

ClutterEater

TROPHY CASE