r/WarhammerCompetitive

Im thinking mainly to stop movement turn one. I play gsc so i have access to genestealers so when they die, i can have them come back. Let me know your thoughts

Hi everyone! I'm new to 40k, built my first army and I'm practicing for my first WTC June. I'm struggling with time as I barely manage to do 2 rounds in my 1h and 30 minutes. I deploy around in 15 minutes to 20 minutes and I think I can cut in more by studying the maps. but I really don't know how to improve my game time. thanks in advance!

This chart tracks all singles events with 21+ players and 5+ rounds.

We have a very small sample size this week due to the holiday, so I wouldn't draw too many conclusions. Only 5 qualifying events and fewer than 200 players.

Obviously Leagues of Votann and Dark Angels are far too strong and need to be nerfed immediately for the health of the game.

Sarcasm aside, obviously there are some outliers due to the extremely small sample size, but most of the armies that you'd expect to do well still did well, and most of the armies that you'd expect to do poorly still did poorly.

No Black Templars players this weekend.

Faction	Wins	Games	Win Rate	Players	X-0/X-1	X-0/X-1 %	Event Wins
Deathwatch	5	6	83.33%	1	1	100.00%	0
Leagues of Votann	13	16	81.25%	3	2	66.67%	1
Dark Angels	12	16	75.00%	3	2	66.67%	0
Grey Knights	5	8	62.50%	2	0	0.00%	0
Adeptus Custodes	29	49	59.18%	10	1	10.00%	1
Drukhari	10	17	58.82%	3	0	0.00%	0
Imperial Knights	7	12	58.33%	3	0	0.00%	0
Necrons	48	85	56.47%	17	2	11.76%	1
Adeptus Mechanicus	9	16	56.25%	3	1	33.33%	0
T'au Empire	29	55	52.73%	11	2	18.18%	0
World Eaters	13	25	52.00%	5	1	20.00%	0
Chaos Space Marines	16	31	51.61%	6	2	33.33%	1
Adepta Sororitas	18	35	51.43%	7	1	14.29%	0
Space Marines	33	67	49.25%	14	1	7.14%	0
Astra Militarum	13	27	48.15%	6	0	0.00%	0
Emperor's Children	12	25	48.00%	5	1	20.00%	0
Space Wolves	10	21	47.62%	5	1	20.00%	1
Tyranids	26	56	46.43%	11	1	9.09%	0
Death Guard	20	44	45.45%	9	1	11.11%	0
Blood Angels	14	32	43.75%	6	0	0.00%	0
Chaos Knights	20	47	42.55%	9	0	0.00%	0
Chaos Daemons	19	46	41.30%	9	1	11.11%	0
Genestealer Cult	2	5	40.00%	1	0	0.00%	0
Imperial Agents	2	5	40.00%	1	0	0.00%	0
Orks	4	11	36.36%	2	0	0.00%	0
Aeldari	5	18	27.78%	4	0	0.00%	0
Thousand Sons	5	18	27.78%	4	0	0.00%	0
			Total Players:	160		Total Events:	5

Top 3 lists for Ogr Cubb Singles. Tzeentch takes 1st and 2nd with Slaanesh in 3rd.

I am new to competitive 40k and trying to wrap my head around utilizing infiltrator units.

I play CSM so I am trying to understand how to best utilize 5man RCR squad.

As they cost 110pts, it seems to me I shouldn't use them like I would kommandos or nurglings (for move blocking the opponent), as they aren't very cheap.

Especially if opponent does not have scout/infiltrator units for me to try to play the infiltrate game with - whats the best way to play these guys? What should my game plan for them be and what should I hope to get out of them?

Hello,

As implied by the title, the following question is asked;

Scenario:

Keeper of secrets destroys a transport with 10 wyches and a succbus inside. Both units are in no-mans land with an objective under the control of the Slaanesh player, implying that the area is within the shadow of chaos.

When disembarking from a destroyed transport, amongst other effect, the unit is also battle shocked. This battle shock is applied automatically without the need for a battle shock test.

Daemonic terror rule: while an enemy unit is within your army's Shadow of Chaos, each time that unit takes a Battle-shock test, subract 1 from that test and, if that test is failed, that enemy unit suffers D3 mortal wounds.

Now, given the above, does the automatically applied battle-shock trigger the D3 mortal wounds?

Arguments for; because to be battle shocked, infers that the unit has failed a test, therefore D3 mortal wounds triggers.

Arguments against: the wording of th daemonic terror rule, explictly states taking a test. You cannot fail a test, if no test is taken, and therefore if no test is taken, you cannot fail it. Since the D3 only triggers upon failure.

Question: does automatically getting battle-shocked trigger rules and effects, even though no test was taken?

Cheers.

Hi All, I have started trying to get better and more competitive at 40k and have seen alot of the bigger tournaments will have mini maps in their streams. I really like the mini maps as I struggle to keep track of the units, especially in armies I'm not familiar with which makes following battle reports with photos a bit tricky for me. Is there an app or website that let's you track your moves/attacks in a similar way some of the streams show?

So I’m doing doubles with a friend that will be playing either Dark Angels or Death Guard. I will be using CSM. The Death Guard will likely be vehicles and plague marines, maybe some Deathshroud… not sure on the DA. I’m having a really hard time choosing a detachment to suit my collection at 1000 points… it feels harder than making a 2k list effective. Originally I was thinking Deceptors and Jailing as some of you may have seen, but I was somewhat steered clear. I don’t need a list built for me, just some suggestions on where it might fit best.

My collection is as follows (I could add maybe one purchase to make it work if I do it quick):

1x Chaos Lord

1x Chaos Termie sorcerer

1x Chaos Lord with Jump pack

1x Cypher

1x Dark Commune

1x Fabius

1x Huron

1x MoE

20x Cultists

5x Legionaries (could play as chosen)

5x Chosen (could play as Legionaries)

10x Termies

5x Warp Talons

5x Raptors

1x Nemesis Claw

1x Masters of the Maelstrom

2x Predator (both options)

1x Vindicator

1x Helbrute

2x Rhino

1x Forgefiend

Could I get some suggestions on fitting this into an effective detachment/list?

ive had this guy a while and finally decided to bring him out to a game as a technomancer which is what he always was in 9th but eith alternate wargear. i just remembered his base is too small. but is he still classed as a legal model or has he been effectivly removed?

ofc i can put him on a bigger base but like... i guess what im asking is, somtimes when models get refreshed, if they stay about the same size eg: ork boyz being a recent example, the older boyz models stay legal for tournament play as tney are on the same bases and effectivly still the same size.

does kamoteph fit the bill as a legal to play technomancer still or would he either need re basing or proxy as a geo or chrono?

id rsther not re base a limited release model and i dont like how it looks to stack models either. id rsther proxy him but my list for the tourni needs a technomancer and nothing else of similar size and base.

or in this case would it just be down to asking the organiser?

cheers for any and all help. !

With the realisation that with the ability in the new edition to combine multiple detachments, each with their own dispositions (and that detachments are also stated to one or more dispositions), this would mean that a list having access to multiple dispositions would likely be the norm, not the exception. My mind was racing with possibilities around how players would resolve selecting dispositions when both player’s choices could affect the mission they and their opponent played. That both players would have to select a disposition card in secret and reveal simultaneously to keep the process fair.

Then I reread the article, and realised I totally fixated on the “for each battle” statement at the top about selecting dispositions, and completely forgot about the bit further down which stated at tournaments, you’d typically be expected to lock in a disposition when submitting your list. So any possibility of tailoring your disposition to your match up would only be a consideration in casual games.

This significantly lessens the meta-gaming element around selecting disposition, and forces you to to stick with a singular disposition for an entire event, but might the alternative be better or worse?

Being able to change your disposition with each game would give you a much wider array of potential missions, and would allow you to actively try to influence what sort of mission you and your opponent end up playing, something that would greatly reward a deep knowledge of the mission deck, what sort of missions are the most rewarding / punishing for certain armies, and what disposition and mission your opponent would likely prefer.

It would also greatly incentive stacking access to as many dispositions as possible in your list, and make having multiple detachments favourable over a single three point detachment. Let’s also face the fact that unless the designers stick to a hard rule that a one-point detachment can only have one disposition, it won’t be long until armies with lots of detachments like Space Marines could field a detachment mixture that grant them access to all five possible dispositions at once.

Fixed dispositions definitely streamline mission selection though. You might not think it would be by much at first, but thinking about it, if you did draw dispositions with your opponent each game, you’d probably want to want your opponent to introduce their list first. Your World Eaters detachment can only play Purge the Foe? Allow me to leaf through the entire mission deck before picking which of my three dispositions would draw a mission that would probably frustrate you the most.

That’s probably the most pressing reason they went with suggesting fixed dispositions for competitive play. If you truly do have only have access to a singular disposition for your list, you are effectively ceding control of mission selection to an opponent who has multiple possible dispositions. Nevertheless, I can’t help but think per-game disposition selection could give some events a unique flavour.