Frantic Scribbling

Part Two: Evaluating Units

Soon, I want to show and discuss some lists I’ve been working on since my first battle. I have a battle scheduled for this Thursday with my Kharadron, in fact, and so I aim to have it done by then. But those lists have been produced quickly out of necessity. I have not yet done a thorough examination of how the Kharadron work in 4th edition, and so I am not ready to discuss lists in this format. Or, I should rather say that I have not yet gleaned every lesson available from that first battle. So rather than rush off to the next battle, it’s worthwhile spending some time reflecting on that battle and extracting every lesson that I can. In this article, which I already sense is doomed to failure, I set out to take a look at units. I say it is doomed to failure because before I do, I need to introduce a concept that I call “Damage Index.”

The damage index is a set of a few numbers that tells me how much damage a unit can do at a glance. I frequently see people posting bar graphs of unit damage that break down how much damage a unit can do based on different enemy armor saves, whether All-Out-Attack or some other buff is active, etc. These are interesting, but I rarely find them very useful. For one, it is often information overload. I rarely am able to leverage all of that information in a battle, and so the information has dubious value. Dubious value to me, I should say. I don’t know how other people’s minds work, and maybe others can leverage more value from these numbers. But I want no more than one or two numbers that show damage for the game, and maybe another number for list building.

Now, I am not usually a “math-hammer” kind of person. I like movement and placement and tricks. Damage is of secondary concern. The highest compliment I received during the Tacoma GT was after a battle when my Slaves to Darkness opponent looked at my Tzeentch army and said, “I look at your list and I can’t see where the damage is coming from…and yet, you destroyed my whole army. My Varanguard, Chosen, and Abraxia are all dead.” In some ways, Tzeentch and Kharadron are similar, because they both try to play a different board control/movement game than most other armies. But Kharadron needs to deliver numbers in a way that Tzeentch doesn’t. My Tzeentch army will debuff the enemy’s attack power, trap key units in pointless melees, and then use what little damage it has from spells and concentrate that damage exactly where it needs to go. All the while, Tzeentch is flipping it’s own dice, simply deciding what dice rolls come up, and depends on the mass firepower of bad attacks over time. Kharadron, on the other hand, shoot guns. Lots and lots of guns. They roll lots of good dice that need to be applied well or they turn into bad dice. Positioning and efficiency are everything for Kharadron, and so a bit of mathhammer becomes necessary where it wasn’t with Tzeentch.

The damage index I use is the simple average damage that a unit produces without buffs against a target with a 4+ save and no ward. I will include a little note about whether it has some advantage against one target or another. I haven’t done this for a 4th edition army yet, but an example of a note might be “+vs Infantry” if it has “Anti-Infantry (+1 Rend).” Sometimes a unit will be the consistent target of a buff. For example, if I run an Arkanaut Admiral and Arkanaut Ironclad, that Ironclad will always receive the Admiral’s free All-Out-Attack. So I’ll do the Ironclad math with AoA. And since the Ironclad gets my AoA, that means my Thunderers never will. And so there’s no point in doing the AoA math. Of course, there are situations where the Thunderers will get AoA. I take it that means my Ironclad is destroyed and things are not going well. I won’t do the math for situations like that, because that is information overload. Needless to say, if I’m in that position in the battle, I will know that if there’s any hope in saving the game, I need to give one of my units a little boost, and that unit of Thunderers may be the best target. I won’t need Math-Hammer for that.

Sigh. Let me go back and change the title of this post. I promise not to make this a habit. This is just about the only time in this game that I use math. But for Kharadron, it is an important starting point.

Part Two: Evaluating Units Math Time

The Math

So how does the math work? Let’s start with a humble Arkanaut Company privateer. At base, they have 2 attacks with their pistols each, at 4+ hit/4+ wound/-rend/1damage (I will abbreviate these 5 keys numbers in the future as 2/4+/4+/-/1). In addition, 1 model for every 10 has a Light Skyhook at 1/4+/3+/2/d3 Anti-Monster (+1 Rend), 1 model with the Aethermatic Volley Gun at 2d6/4+/4+/-/1, and a Skypike which removes any shooting attack and replaces it with a single cheeky melee weapon. Finally, the whole unit gets +1 to hit when attacking a unit which contests an objective: essentially a free AoA.

We start the math with a single pistol attack. Each attack is 1 dice. What happens to that dice after successive rolls will reveal what damage that attack can do. At 4+/4+/-/1, there is a 50% chance it hits, a 50% chance it wounds, a 50% chance the attack is not saved against a 4+ target. That’s a 12.5% chance the attack causes damage. If it does cause damage, it causes 1 damage. Therefore, the damage index of this single attack is .125. Because this unit has frequent access to +1 hit, it’s worthwhile taking a look at that number. 1x.67x.5x.5×1=.168. For this single attack, I might then express to damage index as .125(.168).

In a unit of 10 arkanauts that have all special weapons, there are a total of 15 such attacks. 3 arkanauts have different weapons, and the champion gets an extra attack. 2×7+1=15.
15x.125=1.875.
15x.168=2.52.
Index= 1.88 (2.52).

Look, I’m not a math genius. But I can do arithmetic until the aether-cows come home. And I will leverage the assets I have.

This is all about average damage, so when the Aethermatic Volley Gun has 2d6 attacks, I simply plug that in with 7. It also has Crit (2 hits). On average, 1 out of 6 attacks will produce an extra attack. 7 attacks is 1.17 of 6. So I will multiply the total by 1.17. Skipping the now redundant math, this gives the volley gun an index of 1.02(1.37). The Light Skyhook has .56 (.74). Finally, I add together these three groups, to get a total result for the basic Arkanaut Company at 3.46 (4.63).

Some Math Help

If you’re interested in applying this math to different units, but you’re a little confused about the numbers above, this section is for you.

A dice roll is broken down into 6 equal probability segments, each about .167%. When you roll an attack dice, think about the dice going through three different “gates.” These gates are the hit roll, wound roll, and save roll. The attacker gets to make two of these rolls, and they are based on the attacking model’s stats. The defender gets to make one of these rolls, and thye are based on the defending model’s stats.

A hit of 4+ of course means that 50% of attacks make it through the gate, and 50% do not. A hit of 3+ means that 67% make it through, and 33% do not. A

Save rolls are reversed. A 3+ means that 33% make it through the gate, and 67% fail.

Since the index assumes the target has a 4+ save, a rend of +1 would push that save to a 5+, meaning that 67% of attacks make it through the Save gate.

A Crit applies to .167% of attacks. The math can get tricky without a fancy function, and I don’t know how to use fancy functions. So if I feel like it’s important, I will usually hammer it out by first subtracting 1/6th of attacks from the initial calculation, and then run the last 1/6th of attacks assuming they all crit. Then I add the numbers together. Crit (Auto-Wound) is the most annoying, because these are numbers that skip the wound gate, but rejoin their non-crit siblings for the save gate.

Finally, we found a way to punish Nighthaunt players.

Efficiency Index

There is another important number useful for list building, and that’s the point-to-damage efficiency. Which units do we get the most bang out of for our buck, and how big of a difference is that? 100 is a nice round number, so my last number is how much damage a unit does for 100 points of models. An Arkanaut Company is currently 110 points. 100 is 91% of 110, so we take that previous damage index and multiply it by .91.

3.46 (4.63) x .91 = 3.15 (4.21)

All in all, then, a quick glance at that number tells you that you can expect an Arkanaut Company to do 3-4 points of damage against a moderately armored target. You can just guess your way from there: 1-2 points of damage against heavier 3+ armor targets, maybe 5-8 against lighter 5+ or 6+ armor targets.

The Limits of Math and the Art of War

But let’s not get too tempted by point-to-damage efficiency. It’s worth looking at, I think, but it is far from everything, especially for Kharadron. Remember that Kharadron live or die based on their Transport Skyfarers ability. Kharadron is all about taking as much damage potential as possible, stuffing it inside a boat, then putting that damage where you want it to go. You can only put so many dwarves inside a boat, and an Arkanaut Privateer takes up the same space as a Thunderer. A good list will have the proper balance of power concentration and efficiency, and that is more of an art that requires good judgment and battlefield awareness than it is a process of grinding out nice looking numbers. But inside an Ironclad, you get 22 infantry, or 33 with the upgrade. What do you want inside that boat? 20 Arkanauts, or 20 Thunderers? Efficiency be damned, Thunderers brought the guns.

Some Actual Numbers

Now, I’m not going to do the math for every unit. There are some units whose job it is to do damage, or whose value is in whether they are relatively efficient. For the Kharadron, this mainly includes the Thunderers, Ironclad, Arkanauts, and Gunhaulers. In some builds, I might also look at weapon loadouts for Frigates, Skywardens, and Endrinriggers. Look at the damage profile for Brokk is worthwhile, especially when you see he does nearly as much damage as a Frigate for less points and different utility. But in general, I bring Endrinriggers and the other heroes for their utility, not for their damage. And while it’s fun to sometimes get your admiral into combat and see him do 9 damage, that’s not how he should typically be used.

Arkanauts and Thunderers

10 Arkanaut Company Privateers (110 points):
Damage Index: 3.46
Damage Index w/+1 Hit: 4.63
Efficiency Index: 3.15
Efficiency Index w/+1 Hit: 4.21

10 Thunderers with 3 rifles and 2 heavy weapons (280 points):
Damage Index: 6.74
Efficiency Index: 2.39

10 Thunderers with max special weapons (280 points)
Damage Index: 9.42
Efficiency Index: 3.34
Damage Index vs Infantry: 5.25
Efficiency Index vs Infantry: 3.72

On the surface, the Thunderers with only rifles and heavy weapons looks rough. But they also have an 18″ range, whereas the other units are mostly limited to 10″ or 12″ ranges. So deciding which loadout to take is not just about hard damage, but also about how you’re positioning your models on the board. I’m surprised to see that Thunderers with Special Weapons actually have better efficiency than Arkanauts, at least until the Arkanaut’s +1 hit kicks in. Of course, it’s interesting to see what 10 Thunderers could do with an All-Out-Attack and the Aether-Khemists extra point of rend…so let’s take a look.

10 Thunderers with max special weapons (280 points)
All-Out-Attack, Aether-Khemist’s Aetheric Augmentation, against Infantry
Damage Index: 16.32
Efficiency Index: 5.79

That’s a massive increase. But it requires using an extra CP, not putting AoA on the Ironclad, and rolling a 3+. That’s a big and non-guaranteed investment. Is it worth including a Khemist and spending that CP against, say, a unit of Slaves to Darkness Chosen or thick Stormcast Infantry? Let’s take a look at the Ironclad.

The Indomitable Ironclad

The Ironclad is interesting because of all the permutations we could look at. All-Out-Attack is a virtual given until your admiral dies, and then you need to make choices. The Ironclad is also a great choice for the seasonal rule “Priority Target,” granting a +1 hit and +1 wound when targeting a unit from the enemy’s General’s Regiment. When that’s active, you actually have a reason to spend a CP to grant those Thunderers All-Out-Attack.

Furthermore, we should also take into account the Admiral’s once-per-battle “Bring Every Gun to Bear” ability, allowing the Ironclad to add 1 attack to each profile for one shooting action. The results were surprising to me.

All of these will assume profiles will assume All-Out-Attack, because even when the general is dead, I think the Ironclad will still be the preferred candidate given it’s massive point cost and firepower. But we still have 6-7 version to look at, for each of the 3 weapons, for when Priority Target is active or not, and for the Volley Cannon against infantry.

The Basics: Ironclad with Great Sky Cannon (500 Points)
Damage Index: 12.97
Efficiency Index: 2.6

I won’t list the efficiency index to every profile, since this is mostly about comparing one version of the same 500 point model to another. More damage is more efficient, simple as. But I will look at the low and high end, just for the sake of comparing it to the infantry. I think one Ironclad is an auto-take in the majority of Kharadron lists, simply for the transport ability. But if the Ironclad is extremely efficient, is it worth taking two? Probably not– let’s keep in mind how few wounds you’re getting for 500 points. But it at least is part of the conversation. Anyway, we’re starting off looking pretty good. The raw damage is great, and the efficiency (2.6) is already better than Thunderers with rifles, cannons, and no buffs (2.39).

Ironclad with Great Sky Cannon w/Priority Target
Damage Index: 14.91
Efficiency Index: 2.92

Ironclad with Great Skyhook
Damage Index: 12.37

Ironclad with Great Skyhook, Priority Target, into Monster
Damage Index: 15.11

The Skyhook lags behind the cannon just a bit, but peaks ahead when it can utilize the extra rend into a priority target monster.

Ironclad with Great Volley Cannon
Damage Index: 12.57
Damage Index into Infantry: 13.59
Damage Index with Priority Target: 13.59
Damage Index with Priority Target and into Infantry: 16.77

Here we get close to the highest peak, and it can go much higher. The Great Volley Cannon has 4d6 attacks. Sometimes it can do much more than this, and sometimes it will do very little. Keep in mind that the volley cannon has a shorter range than the other two weapons, and it requires the most stacking buffs.

The Volley Gun also benefits the most from Priority Target, since all of it’s weapons can benefit from the +1 wound.

Bring Every Gun to Bear
Let’s just throw in all the buffs here:
Great Cannon Damage Index: 18.96
Great Volley Cannon Damage Index: 18.96

Oddly, the math converges perfectly, assuming perfectly average rolls. It’s like the designers were paying attention here. Again, the Volley Cannon is less consistent and requires the most buffs, but has the highest potential. This number also assumes the enemy has a worthwhile infantry target in their general’s regiment.

I’m not including the Skyhook profile, because as we’ve seen, it’s slightly worse than the Great Cannon against non-monsters, and slightly better against monsters.

Personally, I’m sticking to my Great Skycannon, The only thing it requires to get max damage are the things in my control. Plus, it has superior range, which for me is the real selling point.

Who am I kidding, I just love firing big cannons.

The Humble Gunhauler

I love ships. I lived on a ship while I was serving in the marines, I was an infantry with a volley gun and I was the beneficiary of transport skyfarers groundpounders as a way of life. I can’t say I am an expert on them, but I enjoyed living on them. As a land-locked midwesterner, I wish I could have spent more time on ships. I love dwarves, I love beers, and my dad was an aircraft mechanic. There are all kinds of reasons I’m drawn to the Kharadron. And one unit that I love to include is a Grundstock Gunhauler, usually two. They are great for sending some supporting fire downrange, for scoring battle tactics, for escorting the Ironclad. I love putting a small fleet on the board and firing lots of cannons.

Sometimes, you have to recognize that the thing you love isn’t good for you. I’ve been including two Gunhaulers in my list for a long time, sometimes three. But are they good? Let’s look at the damage index. We have two, the Sky Cannon and Drill Cannon variants.

Gunhauler
Damage Index: 2.55
Efficiency Index: 1.28

It turns out it doesn’t matter which gun you equip it with. The Drill Cannon’s 3+ hit and -3 rend are tempting, and it does give you access to an almost non-existent -3 rend in this army. But only having 1 attack brings it back in line with the Skycannon.

That index is, uh, not good. The Gunhauler has by far the worst damage-to-point efficiency of any unit we’ve looked at by a wide margin, and doesn’t provide much concentrated damage either. Even if the points were cut in half, it would still do less damage than a unit of 10 arkanauts.

Does that mean it’s time to shelve the Gunhauler until the next edition? Maybe, but let’s try to make the case for the Gunhauler before abandoning it altogether. It certainly doesn’t do adequate damage, but does it provide enough utility for the cost?

The Gunhauler provides three important assets:
1. It can provide a 6+ ward to your Ironclad.
2. It has a 12″ move.
3. It can transport 1 unit of up to 5 models. This means a single hero, a unit of Endrinriggers/Skyfarers, or a unit of Thunderers.
4. It can be the ship you put in reserves using the Flying High and Descend from the Clouds ability.

In short, this can be a vehicle for battle tactics, or for extending the life of your Ironclad a bit.

This probably means that 2 Gunhaulers is out the window. But we’ll leave the door open for one.

Concluding Thoughts

That’s all the math I’ll do for now. If I was interested in a melee build, then I would certainly include numbers for the Frigate, Endrinriggers, and Skywardens. I’ll probably do that at some point anyway. But these units are the ones I am most likely to include with the expectation that they would do some damage. This have given me a more clear picture of what kind of damage I can expect, and will hopefully help me make better decisions about how I build and use my list. One thing I’ve learned from doing this is that Gunhaulers may very well need to be ejected from my list. I’m also more confident that I can keep my Great Skycannon on my Ironclad, that I should continue using all special weapon Thunderers, and that Arkanauts are not necessarily the most efficient pick.

Also, maybe if you were going to get two units of 10 Thunderers without Decksweepers, you should just get a second Ironclad instead.

This article looked at the quantitative value of damage from different units. In the next article, I will focus more on the qualitative aspects of these units, including a look at the various heroes. Further ahead, we’ll want to raise the question of ship repair, battle formations, heroic traits, artefacts, battleplans, battle tactics, and finally more list building. I won’t finish this all before my next game, but we’ll see if I can put what I’ve learned to affect.

For now, here’s a review of the damage and efficiency indices we looked at, ranked from least efficient to most efficient.

Review: Damage and Index Efficiency

Grundstock Gunhauler (200 points)
Damage Index: 2.55
Efficiency Index: 1.28

10 Thunderers with 3 rifles and 2 heavy weapons (280 points)
Damage Index: 6.74
Efficiency Index: 2.39
Utility: Universal 18″ range.

Ironclad with Great Volley Gun, All Out Attack (500 points)
Damage Index: 12.57
Efficiency Index: 2.51

Ironclad with Great Sky Cannon, All Out Attack (500 points)
Damage Index: 12.97
Efficiency Index: 2.6

Ironclad with Great Sky Cannon, All out Attack, with Priority Target active (500 points)
Damage Index: 14.91
Efficiency Index: 2.92

Arkanauts vs enemies not contesting an objective (110 points)
Damage Index: 3.46
Efficiency Index: 3.15

Ironclad with Great Volley Gun (500 points)
Damage Index into Infantry: 13.59
Damage Index with Priority Target: 13.59
Damage Index with Priority Target and into Infantry: 16.77
Efficiency Index on the last: 3.354

10 Thunderers with max special weapons (280 points)
Damage Index: 9.42
Efficiency Index: 3.34
Damage Index vs Infantry: 5.25
Efficiency Index vs Infantry: 3.72

Ironclad with Great Volley Cannon, All out Attack, Priority Target, versus Infantry, and Bring Every Gun to Bear (500 points)
Damage Index: 18.96
Efficiency Index: 3.792

Ironclad with Great Sky Cannon, All out Attack, Priority Target, and Bring Every Gun to Bear (500 points)
Damage Index: 18.96
Efficiency Index: 3.792

Arkanauts vs enemies contesting an objective (110 points)
Damage: 4.63
Efficiency: 4.21

Thunderers with max special weapons, all out attack, vs. infantry, and with the Khemist’s Aetheric Augmentation buff (110 points)
Damage Index: 16.32
Efficiency Index: 5.79

In this series of entries, I will attempt to examine how the Kharadron Overlords have changed in 4th edition, and what kind of playstyles will be needed to succeed. While it is too early to have any reliable data on Kharadron’s success rate, we do know that it is among the least popular armies, with only Bonesplitterz having fewer recorded tournament battles. In these few battles, Kharadron’s winrate is in the mid-30’s. That’s what we know. What does it mean? It doesn’t mean they are weak. They might be, of course. Or, it simply means that those few people who have played at a tournament have not figured out how to make the most of our new tools.

My approach is an essay format. I am an average player with decent but not stellar tournament results. If others read this, I hope that it proves useful not just for Kharadron players, but for anyone who wishes to rethink how they play their army.

Part One: The Problem

These 4th edition journey posts will come in non-sequential order. I played my first 4e game with Kharadron two days ago, lost handily, and I’ve been thinking about it ever since. This entry is to help put these thoughts into written form. But before I played Kharadron, I played twelve games with the Disciples of Tzeentch in 4th edition: four practice games, followed by eight tournament games at the GW Open in Tacoma. While the Disciples of Tzeentch are my main army, I took Kharadron to my three final 3e grand tournaments in Spring 2024.

At the close of 3rd edition, Kharadron felt like they were in a good place, and I felt comfortable playing them. For my first 4e game, I decided to take as similar a list as possible to the one I closed out 3rd edition with at the GW Open-Dallas. I knew the army had gone through significant changes, more than most, and believed the best way to gauge and think about new KO would be to run a similar list and just see what happened. I would do my best to win, but the goal was to learn.

As a side note, putting the goal for my non-tournament games onto learning rather than winning has helped me liberate myself from a need to win in my home game environment. It feels healthier than the attitude I took before I played in tournament games: since my most competitive games were simply any game I played, it felt more important to me to win. Now, I think I appreciate losing more, because losing spurs me to think. Winning simply makes me proud and lazy. At best, it is confirmation that my list is working. But it can be poor confirmation.

So here is my first 4th edition list that I put through a game, my 3rd edition Dallas army converted to 4th edition:

“Dallas in 4th”
Battle Formation: Aether-Runners (Sky Vessels add 2″ to move characteristic)
General’s Regiment
Arkanaut Admiral…180
-Heroic Trait: Cunning Fleetmaster (Skyvessels wholly within 12″ uses “Redeploy,” roll two dice and use the highest).
-Artefact: Celestium Burst Grenade (Once per game in the shooting phase, select an enemy within 12.” That unit cannot make ward rolls for the rest of the turn.)
Aetheric Navigator…130
Arkanaut Ironclad…500
-Great Skycannon
10 Thunderers (Reinforced)…280
-All special weapons
Grundstock Gunhauler…200

Regiment 2
Endrinmaster with Endrinharness…130
Grundstock Gunhauler…200
6 Endrinriggers (Reinforced)…260
10 Arkanauts…110

Total Points: 1990

This list rarely hit especially hard, but it had a lot of movement options. And in all my armies, this is the way I prefer to play. I never won a GT, but I managed to go 4-1 twice and 6-2 at Dallas. In 3e, my Endrinmaster had a dirigible suit too, but I downgraded him to make the point cut. However, this army did not end up performing well in my first 4e foray. I’ll attribute it primarily to reduced firepower, reduced/changed mobility, and some poor decision making on my part. Overall, I did not factor in the changes very well and was punished for it. As I should be!

1. Reduced Shooting Range and Power
Firepower in general has been toned down and ranges decreased. I frequently put myself into positions expecting to do a certain amount of damage, and got much less in return. As a prime example, I was losing going into the 3rd round, getting hammered by Skaven artillery. I saw an opening to move up my Ironclad and the Thunderers inside, then open fire on the Jezzails and Warp Lightning Cannon. Foolishly, I split fire, believing I could destroy both units, removing the major irreplaceable threats from the battlefield. The Thunderers targeted nearby clanrats, because I believed they would erradicate the rats. Instead, I brought the WLC down to 1 health, and only did 2 to the Jezzails. The Thunderers ended up killing just a few clanrats, and they quickly replaced their numbers. At the next opportunity, the Jezzails rallied back to full, the WLC did 10 MW to my already damaged Ironclad, and soon thereafter a little chip damage destroyed the Ironclad. I’ll note that the Skaven had their Bell of Doom nearby, meaning all of my attacks were -1 wound. I didn’t want to waste shots to destroy something that could be quickly summoned back. But in hindsight, that was probably the play, or focusing fire on the WLC, which doesn’t benefit from the Bell.

2. Mobility has changed.
Mobility has been greatly reduced and changed, although new options open up. Kharadron are no longer a teleporting army, but a movement trick army. A level of my mind was still playing 3e KO. My Ironclad’s captain kept trying to push the “Fly High” button on his dashboard, but a mysterious “Error 4e” message would be the only response he received. So I put myself into positions that I normally would have had no problem escaping, only to find myself stuck. The whole point for taking the Aether-Runners battle formation (+2 move) was to help mitigate the new mobility limitation, fly over units and reposition behind enemy lines. But since Skyfarers must now be deployed outside the boat, the boat’s footprint with infantry is huge. I could not find a place to land my Ironclad behind enemy lines without abandoning my troops. Granted, the large numbers of Skaven made this a bigger problem than it might be against some other armies.

3. Scoring Victory Points
In my games with Tzeentch, I often finished the round behind in points, and then catch up later. This has often been the way of things for my Tzeentch games, and now I would be rewarded for it with Underdog bonuses. So I was not initially worried when my Kharadron game began similarly. We were playing Border War, which only has 1 objective in friendly territory. Unfortunately, I found myself struggling to make inroads on the two flanking objectives as hoards of Skaven moved in, supported by ranged firepower in their rear. I also realized I did not have a good plan for battle tactics, with my opponent taking advantage of round one/turn one to place troops on the flanks and near the center. With killing power reduced, I was not bold enough to get into combat for battle tactics like “Do Not Waver” or “Attack on Two Fronts.” I ended up scoring 1 vp on primaries for the whole game until I was tabled, and only luckily eaked out a few battle tactics.


A hint at solutions:
Kharadron’s mobility has been changed, but they got something in return with the Transport Skyfarers ability. This reaction can activate whenever a skyvessel declares a non-Charge Move ability, allowing you to remove a number of infantry units wholly within 6″ of the ship, move the ship, then set those units back up wholly within 6″ of the ship. Move abilities include Normal Move, Run, Retreat, Redeploy, and Power Through. In addition, Frigates can do something similar in the Charge Phase with their unique ability Assault Boat. It is in this single ability that Kharadron will find their great power, if it exists. But it is a strange new ability that requires a paradigm shift in how to play. We’ve seen some small examples of similar abilities in Endless Spells, some Nighthaunt abilities, and most closely the Lofnir Drothkeepers Army of Renown. But never before has it been the core ability of an entire army.

In short, playing Kharadron requires a major shift in how to think about this army and our approach to the game. In future posts, I will take a close look at the various aspects of gameplay, and eventually, I hope, make some progress in how I play Kharadron. As the season rolls on, I have a couple tournaments in August and September in which I am bringing the Disciples of Tzeentch, but I will be playing Kharadron periodically at home as well.