Disclosure: This post is reader-powered and contains affiliate links. If you click through and make a purchase, I may earn a commission at no additional cost to you.

Method and caveats

My simulation method: how I test every unit

My simulation method is simple to describe: I roll dice through the full rules, many times, and write down every assumption I make along the way.

By DaveUpdated 2026-10-282026 Rules & ErrataHow I test

Why I simulate instead of calculating averages

Expected-value maths works for a single volley, but combat is not linear. Break tests, Killing Blow, ward saves, losing Frenzy, pursuit rolls and Fall Back in Good Order all create outcomes that an average hides. So I roll every die as an independent D6 and play every combat through to an end state.

My rules sources

Sample sizes

My studies use very different sample sizes, so every results table on the site carries its own sample-size tag.

StudySampleHow I read it
Warriors of Chaos builds478,800 combats, 500 per matchupStable enough to compare builds, though still a simplified duel.
Old World shooting units4,080 volleys, 10 per cellBroad patterns. Small gaps between units can be dice variation.
Battle March units10–20 fights per matchupExploratory. I read 10/10 as excellent in this batch, not a 100% win rate.
Old World war machines10 shots per cellEspecially variable, because of blasts, bounces and misfires.
Skaven and Cathay labs10 fights per matchup, 60 per directionExploratory; good for spotting each unit’s job.
Issuing Challenges duels1,000 duels per matchupAbout ±3 points per matchup; the build averages over 64,000 duels are much tighter. Champions use basic or free equipment only.
Grand Cathay shooting10,000 trials per matchupVery stable dice. Single volleys at fixed range are my cleanest evidence; the scripted multi-turn approaches show how often each unit gets to shoot, not who wins a game.
Chosen and Forsaken, Tomb Kings2,000 fights per matchupMy most precise combat results. The model’s simplifications matter more than the dice here.

How sure can you be of a win rate?

Next to every win-rate table I show a ± figure: the 95% margin of error for a single win rate from that many fights. It is widest for results near 50%, which is the figure I quote to stay on the safe side.

Fights behind the numberMargin of errorExample
10±31 pointsBattle March units, Skaven and Cathay per-opponent tables
60±13 pointsSkaven and Cathay totals in each direction
500±4 pointsWarriors of Chaos builds, per matchup
2,000±2 pointsChosen, Forsaken and Tomb Kings, per matchup
3,000±2 pointsWolves of the Sea pass, per matchup
10,000±1 pointsDedicated Chaos Marauder test, per matchup

So a 7/10 result could easily turn into anything from about 40% to 90% over a longer run, while a 70% from 2,000 fights is very unlikely to be off by more than 2 points. That only covers dice luck: it says nothing about how closely my model matches a real table, which is the bigger question for every study on this site.

How I set up the shooting tests

How I set up the combat tests

2026 rules that changed my results

Rules readings I want to re-check

If an FAQ changes any of these, I will re-run the affected results and update the date at the top of each page.

FAQs

Are these tournament win rates?

No. They are simulations under the assumptions on this page. I left out terrain, magic, characters and scenarios on purpose, so the numbers show what the unit itself does.

Why do some results use only 10 trials?

My shooting and Battle March tests started as exploratory batches. The Warriors of Chaos build lab uses 500 combats per matchup, so I trust those numbers most.

Do the Skaven results use an official army list?

No. I used the fan-made Skaven Renegades draft v1.5.2.2, so check its latest version before you rely on those results at an event.