Matchup analysis → Purge the Foe vs Disruption
Purge the Foe vs Disruption — Punishment / Delaying Action
Warhammer 40,000 11th edition · GDM 2026 matched play · primary mission matchup
Disruption holds the slight edge here.
| Force disposition | Primary mission card | Edge |
|---|---|---|
| Purge the Foe | Punishment | 9 |
| Disruption | Delaying Action | 11 |
The matchup in a nutshell
Two killers with different accountants. Punishment pays a generous flat rate for objective parity and treats kills as a bonus; Delaying Action pays 2 VP per enemy unit destroyed, counting units rather than points. Edge to Punishment on reliability, but two well-chosen objectives can swing 8 VP a round for the Disruption player.
| Purge the Foe | Disruption | |
|---|---|---|
| Card | Punishment | Delaying Action |
| Scores at | command phase | mixed |
| Hold window | 1 enemy turn | 1 enemy turn |
| Exposure | 13/20 | 12/20 |
| Activation cost | 9/20 | 9/20 |
A hold window of 1 cuts both ways, and most players only think about one of them. It means your grab has to survive a full enemy turn before it pays — but it also means you get a whole turn to shoot theirs off the marker before they bank it. Denial is not a side quest on this card; it is half the card.
Playing Purge the Foe
Your card: Punishment. Scoring checkpoint: command phase. Hold window: 1 enemy turn.
How you score
At your Command phase, 4 VP for holding anything and 5 VP for holding more objectives than them. 5 VP at the end of a turn when a condemned enemy unit leaves the battlefield. And 8 VP at the end of battle for their home objective.
What it costs you
Parity is cheap. The 8 VP finish is not — it needs a unit to survive on their home objective, which on the boards we have measured means standing in the open. Exposure 13/20, activation cost 9/20.
How you break them
Their 3 VP end-of-turn line needs one central and one expansion objective simultaneously — not two of anything. Deny either type and it is gone. Their kill line counts units, so your losses are what fund them: do not feed them three cheap units when one big one would have died anyway. Consolidate rather than scattering.
What your list needs
- Board presence for parity — 5 VP a round for 1 objective of lead.
- Units that die expensively rather than in threes; their card counts bodies, not points.
- A raid package for their home objective, set up by round 4.
- Restraint on kills: the condemned clause is a bonus, parity is the engine.
Playing Disruption
Your card: Delaying Action. Scoring checkpoint: mixed. Hold window: 1 enemy turn.
How you score
2 VP per enemy unit destroyed each turn. 4 VP at your Command phase for holding anything. And 3 VP at the end of your turn for holding one or more central objectives and one or more expansion objectives at the same time.
What it costs you
Kills can be taken from cover, so your exposure is genuinely low. The central-plus-expansion clause forces you to hold two specific pieces of ground, but you choose which. Exposure 12/20, activation cost 9/20.
How you break them
Their parity bonus is worth 5 VP a round and needs strictly more objectives than you. Choose your central and expansion pair so that it also matches their count: the same 2 objectives then score your 3 VP and deny their 5 VP, an 8 VP swing per round from one deployment decision. Screen your home from round 4 against the 8 VP finish. And their condemned clause needs specific units gone, so protecting the marked one is worth more than saving a bigger unit.
What your list needs
- Focused firepower that reliably finishes a unit every turn — the card counts kills, not damage.
- Cheap targets preferred: killing three 60-point units beats killing one 300-point one.
- 2 objectives chosen at deployment to score AND deny parity.
- A home screen from round 4.
The three layouts
Purge the Foe vs Disruption is played on one of three boards, and they are not the same game. All three are transcribed and measured below.
| Board | Deployment | Openness | Centre exposure | Cost to raid a home marker | No-man's-land |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Layout 1 | diagonal halves | 7/20 | 20.7% | 66.8% | 0% |
| Layout 2 | diagonal across the long axis | 2/20 | 3.9% | 14.2% | — |
| Layout 3 | diagonal across the short axis | 5/20 | 8.1% | 46.2% | 2.4% |
- Layout 1 — diagonal halves, openness 7/20. The middle is contested ground — the best holding spot on a central marker is still visible to 20.7% of the enemy deployment zone. Home markers are a fortress: taking one means standing in front of 66.8% of their deployment zone. No-man's-land markers sit at 0%. 70% of the legal holding spots can go fully out of sight — pick the spot, not the marker.
- Layout 2 — diagonal across the long axis, openness 2/20. The middle is free real estate: there is a legal spot within range of a central marker that only 3.9% of the enemy deployment zone can see. Home markers are soft: walking onto one of theirs exposes you to only 14.2% of their zone. 63% of the legal holding spots can go fully out of sight — pick the spot, not the marker.
- Layout 3 — diagonal across the short axis, openness 5/20. The middle is free real estate: there is a legal spot within range of a central marker that only 8.1% of the enemy deployment zone can see. Raiding a home marker costs 46.2% exposure — real, but payable with one screened unit. No-man's-land markers sit at 2.4%. Almost anywhere you stand near a marker (87% of legal spots) can be put fully out of sight.
If your plan needs enemy ground, Layout 2 is where it is cheapest (14.2% exposure against 66.8% on Layout 1) — the same raid can be a bargain or a suicide depending on which board you drew.
Purge the Foe and Disruption must survive a full enemy turn before banking a grab, so Layout 2 (openness 2/20) is the board where that plan is cheapest, and Layout 1 (7/20) the one where it bleeds.
Numbers are measured on the transcribed sheets: every legal spot within control range of each marker is tested, and the best one is reported — the way a real player looks for the safest place to stand, not the middle of the marker.
Decision points
- Deployment — Disruption picks the central-plus-expansion pair that also contests parity.
- Every turn — Disruption asks "which unit can I actually finish?", not "what is the best target?".
- Round 4 — Purge the Foe commits to the home raid; Disruption decides whether to screen or keep scoring.
Ratings and why
Every score is an integer out of 20. For edge, 10 is dead even and the score is given for side 0; the other metrics are absolute, per side. How these are derived →
| Metric | Score | Confidence | Basis | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| edge (for Purge the Foe) | 9/20 | medium | theory | Punishment prints more — a net 13 VP of clauses with no counterpart on Delaying Action, including an 8 VP finish on the enemy home. But 5 of its 9 VP a turn sit behind a kill on ground the Disruption player chooses whether to offer, while Delaying Action banks 7 from its own half and pays 2 VP per body with no cap. A printed lead you have to cross the board to collect is not a lead. |
Purge the Foe
| Metric | Score | Confidence | Basis | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ceiling | 15/20 | medium | theory | 9 VP a round, 5 VP per turn of condemned kills and an 8 VP finish. |
| floor | 15/20 | medium | theory | Holding 1 objective and staying ahead on count needs no special condition. |
| tempo | 10/20 | medium | theory | The condemned clause resolves at the end of a turn; the engine is a Command-phase checkpoint. |
| complexity | 8/20 | medium | theory | Track objective parity and the condemned units. |
| exposure | 13/20 | medium | theory | Parity is cheap, but the 8 VP finish requires a unit to survive on the opponent home objective. |
| activationCost | 9/20 | medium | theory | Little non-fighting work beyond the raid. |
Disruption
| Metric | Score | Confidence | Basis | Why |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ceiling | 13/20 | medium | theory | 2 VP per enemy unit killed adds up against a wide army but has no single big payout. |
| floor | 13/20 | medium | theory | One central and one expansion objective pays 3 VP a turn on top of the flat hold. |
| tempo | 12/20 | medium | theory | Kills and the central-plus-expansion clause both check at the end of your turn. |
| complexity | 10/20 | medium | theory | Needs the right 2 objectives, not just any two. |
| exposure | 12/20 | medium | theory | Kills can be taken from cover; only the central-plus-expansion clause requires holding forward ground. |
| activationCost | 9/20 | medium | theory | Two well-chosen objectives, and the rest of the army fights. |
Playbook
Playing Purge the Foe
- Punishment pays 4 VP for holding anything and 5 VP for holding more objectives than the opponent — 9 VP a round for a one-objective lead — plus 8 VP at the end of battle for their home objective.
- This card scores at your Command phase, so an objective taken on your turn only pays if it survives a full enemy turn (hold window 1) — price the grab accordingly before committing a unit to it.
- Their 3 VP end-of-turn line needs one central and one expansion objective simultaneously — not two of anything. Deny either type and it is gone. Their kill line counts units, so your losses are what fund them: do not feed them three cheap units when one big one would have died anyway. Consolidate rather than scattering.
- Purge the Foe needs: Board presence for parity — 5 VP a round for 1 objective of lead. Units that die expensively rather than in threes; their card counts bodies, not points. A raid package for their home objective, set up by round 4. Restraint on kills: the condemned clause is a bonus, parity is the engine.
Playing Disruption
- Delaying Action needs one central AND one expansion objective for its 3 VP end-of-turn line: which 2 objectives you hold matters more than how many.
- Delaying Action pays 2 VP per enemy unit destroyed, counting units not points — killing three cheap units beats killing one expensive one.
- This card moves its checkpoint during the game, so the same grab costs a full enemy turn early and nothing late — price the grab accordingly before committing a unit to it.
- Their parity bonus is worth 5 VP a round and needs strictly more objectives than you. Choose your central and expansion pair so that it also matches their count: the same 2 objectives then score your 3 VP and deny their 5 VP, an 8 VP swing per round from one deployment decision. Screen your home from round 4 against the 8 VP finish. And their condemned clause needs specific units gone, so protecting the marked one is worth more than saving a bigger unit.
- Disruption needs: Focused firepower that reliably finishes a unit every turn — the card counts kills, not damage. Cheap targets preferred: killing three 60-point units beats killing one 300-point one. 2 objectives chosen at deployment to score AND deny parity. A home screen from round 4.
Applies to both sides
- An aggressive Purge army feeds the Delaying Action kill counter every time it over-extends; conversely, a passive Purge player loses the tempo they need for the condemned clause.
- Measured across all 45 transcribed layouts: a central objective can be held from a spot only 4.6% of the enemy deployment zone can see (best board 0%), while taking an enemy home objective means standing where a median of 47.7% of their deployment zone has line of sight, rising to 91.7% on the most exposed board. Cards that pay for enemy home objectives are charging you that difference, and the board decides the price.
- All three boards for this pairing are transcribed and measured. Layout 1 (diagonal halves) reads 7/20 for openness, Layout 2 (diagonal across the long axis) reads 2/20 for openness, Layout 3 (diagonal across the short axis) reads 5/20 for openness. Taking a home marker off the opponent costs 14.2% deployment-zone exposure on Layout 2 and 66.8% on Layout 1 — the same play, priced very differently. Central markers stay the safest ground on all three, bottoming out at 3.9% on Layout 2.
Frequently asked
Is Purge the Foe or Disruption favoured in this matchup?
Disruption holds the slight edge here.
How do you stop Disruption scoring when you are playing Purge the Foe?
Their 3 VP end-of-turn line needs one central and one expansion objective simultaneously — not two of anything. Deny either type and it is gone. Their kill line counts units, so your losses are what fund them: do not feed them three cheap units when one big one would have died anyway. Consolidate rather than scattering.
What units does a Purge the Foe list need against Disruption?
Purge the Foe needs: Board presence for parity — 5 VP a round for 1 objective of lead. Units that die expensively rather than in threes; their card counts bodies, not points. A raid package for their home objective, set up by round 4. Restraint on kills: the condemned clause is a bonus, parity is the engine.
How do you stop Purge the Foe scoring when you are playing Disruption?
Their parity bonus is worth 5 VP a round and needs strictly more objectives than you. Choose your central and expansion pair so that it also matches their count: the same 2 objectives then score your 3 VP and deny their 5 VP, an 8 VP swing per round from one deployment decision. Screen your home from round 4 against the 8 VP finish. And their condemned clause needs specific units gone, so protecting the marked one is worth more than saving a bigger unit.
What units does a Disruption list need against Purge the Foe?
Disruption needs: Focused firepower that reliably finishes a unit every turn — the card counts kills, not damage. Cheap targets preferred: killing three 60-point units beats killing one 300-point one. 2 objectives chosen at deployment to score AND deny parity. A home screen from round 4.
How do the Purge the Foe and Disruption primary mission cards score?
Punishment pays 4 VP for holding anything and 5 VP for holding more objectives than the opponent — 9 VP a round for a one-objective lead — plus 8 VP at the end of battle for their home objective. Delaying Action needs one central AND one expansion objective for its 3 VP end-of-turn line: which 2 objectives you hold matters more than how many. Delaying Action pays 2 VP per enemy unit destroyed, counting units not points — killing three cheap units beats killing one expensive one.
What are the common mistakes in this matchup?
An aggressive Purge army feeds the Delaying Action kill counter every time it over-extends; conversely, a passive Purge player loses the tempo they need for the condemned clause.
Related matchups
Disruption mirror — Outmanoeuvre
Disruption and Disruption come out dead even.…
Priority Assets vs Disruption — Extract Relic / Locate and Deny
Priority Assets holds a clear edge here.…
Purge the Foe mirror — Meatgrinder
Purge the Foe and Purge the Foe come out dead even.…
Purge the Foe vs Priority Assets — Destroyer’s Wrath / Vital Link
Left alone, both players score exactly 45 — the cap. The printed rate buys margin rather than points, and only 1 of the 2 denials in this matchup remo…
Purge the Foe vs Reconnaissance — Consecrate / Triangulation
Purge the Foe holds the slight edge here.…
Reconnaissance vs Disruption — Surveil the Foe / Smoke and Mirrors
Reconnaissance holds the slight edge here.…
Provenance
- Status: draft — ratings carry their own confidence and basis above.
- Written against the GDM 2026 matched play data snapshot pinned as
2026-05-09 23:42:21. - Subjects analysed:
gdm:disposition/purge-the-foe,gdm:disposition/disruption,gdm:primary/purge-the-foe/punishment,gdm:primary/disruption/delaying-action. - Machine-readable: JSON · Markdown source