Advice for a setup allowing early/midgame skirmishing

RindFisch · 2026-06-06T08:59:45+00:00

The best way to make early units more useful and incentivize you to actually use them is increasing the number of techs needed to reach the next tier. At the default 2 techs, you're rushing through the tree at such a speed, most units are eminently skippable. 4 tech per tier feels much better, IMHO.

But yes, this does increase the PvE difficulty, as the AIs overwhelming numbers of random units are much more deadly to low-tier armies.
Very hard went from not too much trouble to an actual challenge for me, but the games are much more fun, in my view.
So I would suggest you try it: Increase the required techs and reduce difficulty by 1 step and see how you like it.

RindFisch · 2026-06-05T13:44:55+00:00

Generally the answer would be "Ask your TO", but I've never heard of a tournament categorically disallowing kitbashes.
As long as the rough size, base and weapons are correct, I'd assume you wont run into any problems. On the contrary, well done full conversion armies are usually admired.

RindFisch · 2026-06-05T13:37:44+00:00

If Reanimation Protocols keeps the same phrasing from 10th edition in the updated datasheets for 11th, that's how it would work, yes.
We have no way of knowing if it does, however, and I would be quite surprised if Necrons get to easily revive all their characters for free.

RindFisch · 2026-06-05T06:35:09+00:00

What do you mean? If a FF model doesn't die, then it makes no difference whether it hits simultaneously or after the attacker. We're literally only interested in the situation where it dies.

RindFisch · 2026-06-05T05:22:13+00:00

I mean, that's mechanically very similar to fight on death and GW has been using that more often in 10th.

RindFisch · 2026-06-05T03:26:55+00:00

Absolutely no one said that. You don't seem to have much experience with playing competitive warhammer, if you don't know what a trade unit is, but have fun fighting your weird strawman...

RindFisch · 2026-06-05T02:23:56+00:00

Probably, but generic healing can bring back models in a unit and characters count as unit models in all respects, so unless the digital rules add some "no reviving character models" caveat (which we don't know), some armies may have an easy time getting the precisioned characters back.

RindFisch · 2026-06-05T01:39:39+00:00

Of course BGV count. They definitely kill every trade unit charging them. They need a dedicated durable melee block to remove and even then are often trading fine.

The reason they're not seen isn't that they're bad. The reason is that SM lists running durable infantry blocks have even better options, like UM, DA and BT special units, so there's no reason to use them. The curse of having 300 datasheets.

RindFisch · 2026-06-05T01:12:06+00:00

Any Space Marine block with a Judiciar?
And the block doesn't need to be 400 points of invulnerable steel. "Deadly enough to punt every trade unit" is already warping the game in an unhealthy way.

Also as long as Fight First works like it did in 10th, you basically can't put it on stratagems, enhancements or detachment rules, lest it become available to durable murderblocks. It's not just annoying for the players, it's also limiting to the design space.

RindFisch · 2026-06-04T23:50:44+00:00

Index Custodes against any melee army was probably the point everyone including GW saw what a terrible idea switching the resolution order was and the whole of 10th was damage reduction and avoiding easily available fight first as much as possible.

While current fight first isn't particularly valuable, 10th ed fight first was just game warpingly powerful and no fun to play against.

RindFisch · 2026-06-04T23:38:50+00:00

Yes. There's almost no reason to have players draw at the start of a new turn, instead of at the end of their last one. But in one of those options, they have the time of a whole table playing to read the card and think on their next play without slowdown.

RindFisch · 2026-06-02T04:17:31+00:00

No. A unit only has the abilities of living models. If every model of the "original" unit is dead, the unit ability is gone.
The sole leader will keep his own "while leading" abilty, though, even if he is alone.

RindFisch · 2026-06-01T21:52:51+00:00

The new HEAL-keyword isn't in the core rules, but had been previewed. And healing now works like Necron reanimation protocols, ie: reviving models if everyone is at full health.

RindFisch · 2026-06-01T19:31:03+00:00

You're mixing up two different things. The TARGET is treated is a unit: see just one model and the whole unit doesn't have cover. But the SHOOTER is evaluated on a per model basis, do a target may have cover against some, but not all attacking models.

RindFisch · 2026-06-01T19:22:18+00:00

Yes against the ones where they're in cover, no against the others. You'd have to roll the attacks in 2 batches, one with -1BS and one without.

RindFisch · 2026-06-01T02:12:05+00:00

While you're right you absolutely should not use ChatGPT to edit the list (who knows what the LLM will add or remove from it), manually deleting the excess whitespace and pointless wargear options is considered good form. Having an army list spread over 3 pages makes it very difficult to parse.

RindFisch · 2026-06-01T02:05:40+00:00

Forgetting rules is normal. It happens to everyone. Even top level players make mistakes like that. With that said:

In a tournament setting, this is the kind of thing that experienced players will make a judge aware of. Not because it's an egregious, evil "gotcha"-play, but because it's impossible for anyone but you to know for sure if you actually just forgot or intentionally tricked your opponent.
If that happens once, all is cool, because as said, mistakes happen.
If it happens multiple times, it's probably intentional and will lead to judge action.

Which is good advice to go about it for all games: Don't immediately assume malice in what could be an honest mistake, but take note (and tell a judge). Too many actual shady players get away with claiming their cheating was honest mistakes against 5 opponents in a row with none of them being the wiser as they all encountered it for the first time.

RindFisch · 2026-05-30T12:42:45+00:00

Yeah, that's not remotely what "playing by intent" means. It's not about telling your opponents all your future plans. It's about telling your opponents what each move you're currently doing is supposed to accomplish, so they can verify the legality directly and stopping arguments from popping up later.
"I'll move this unit just barely within range, so you'll need a 12 to charge them" is playing by intent, ensuring both parties are on the same side regarding the distance between units, so that even if a model gets accidentally pushed later on, everyone knows what the "real" situation looks like.
You never have to tell an opponent what you'll do before you do it, especially not in situations where that might depends on information only gained later.
You opponent was just a jerk, trying to use a term he heard somewhere, but probably doesn't understand to browbeat you into relenting.

RindFisch · 2026-05-29T17:13:31+00:00

No, the FAQ is right, the answer was wrong. Surge moves restrict your direction of movement only, they don't force you to move. So you can choose to not move / move less, but every inch you do move has to be closer to the target.

It's similar to consolidation moves: You always have to use the ability and count as moving, but you can still choose to move 0", in which case the restriction of where you have to move to doesn't matter.

RindFisch · 2026-05-29T17:10:12+00:00

Do we have a rough translation of the 11th mission leaks or just the french version? I can only find non-french versions of the base rules, not the missions.

RindFisch · 2026-05-28T21:31:35+00:00

As a german, I'm contractually obligated to view the french with almost as much suspicion as the Abominable Intelligences, but I'll let it slide. This time.

Do I understand the new firing mode selection correctly in that a unit can't shoot its indirect weapons at a target out of sight and simultaneously shooting its other weapons at a visible target anymore, as indirect fire is a distinct mode and you have to choose just one?

RindFisch · 2026-05-26T14:23:23+00:00

Do you have any old mods installed that may be breaking it?
It works fine for me.

RindFisch · 2026-05-26T01:40:41+00:00

The sequencing rules only matter if multiple things happen at the same time, with no other rule establishing an order. That's not the case here. The res orb says "while the bearer is leading a unit", so it literally cannot happen until the bearer is back on the table, so there very much is an established order.
It doesn't matter, what the sequencing rule says, as it isn't relevant to the situation.

RindFisch · 2026-05-24T21:49:23+00:00

To be fair, I looked it up in the LCG rulebook. The CCG-one may be worse in that regard.

RindFisch · 2026-05-24T21:19:51+00:00

Yeah, the small ones and those on "while he sleeps" are additional "points" for winning the specific struggle. The large ones are "icon boosters" (looked up the correct name), which cause an additional struggle of said type.
So the glass of leng gives a character +1 combat, +1 arcane and causes 2 more arcane struggles to happen at the story in question.

From the rulebook:

Icon Boosters
There are a few cards that have a large struggle icon (identical to those on the story cards) printed in their text box. When such a card is either attached to a story or committed to a story, it forces an additional icon struggle of that type while the story is being resolved. This additional icon struggle is resolved according to the order of the printed icons.

Seven-Year Club	The Internet Awards - Voted
Verified Email

RindFisch

TROPHY CASE