{
  "id": "disposition-matchup/purge-the-foe--vs--priority-assets",
  "kind": "matchup-analysis",
  "lang": "en",
  "title": "Purge the Foe vs Priority Assets — Destroyer’s Wrath / Vital Link",
  "subjects": [
    "gdm:disposition/purge-the-foe",
    "gdm:disposition/priority-assets",
    "gdm:primary/purge-the-foe/destroyer-s-wrath",
    "gdm:primary/priority-assets/vital-link"
  ],
  "sides": {
    "side0": {
      "disposition": "purge-the-foe",
      "card": "gdm:primary/purge-the-foe/destroyer-s-wrath",
      "scoringCheckpoint": "mixed",
      "holdWindow": 1
    },
    "side1": {
      "disposition": "priority-assets",
      "card": "gdm:primary/priority-assets/vital-link",
      "scoringCheckpoint": "mixed",
      "holdWindow": 1
    }
  },
  "keyFinding": "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 removes points at all.",
  "ratings": [
    {
      "metric": "edge",
      "value": 11,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "Reversed by the cap. Primary stops at 45 and both cards clear it if they run cleanly — Destroyer's Wrath in the fourth round, Vital Link in the fifth — so the printed 17-against-11 rate buys margin, not points. What separates the sides is what each denial actually removes. Matching the objective count is free and automatic for Priority Assets, but it takes Purge the Foe from 18 VP of margin to 2 without costing them a point. Holding both central objectives removes 19 real points from Vital Link, and doubles as the clause that puts Purge at 4 objectives to 3. The only points-removing denial in the matchup belongs to Purge and pays for itself, which is worth more than a free one that only removes slack."
    },
    {
      "metric": "ceiling",
      "side": 0,
      "value": 16,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "Reaches the 45 primary cap in the fourth round with 18 VP of margin unspent."
    },
    {
      "metric": "ceiling",
      "side": 1,
      "value": 16,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "Reaches the 45 primary cap in the fifth round, and reaches it without the end-of-battle raid at all."
    },
    {
      "metric": "floor",
      "side": 0,
      "value": 14,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "Still caps with the objective count matched against it, but only in the fifth round and with 2 VP of margin — every clause has to land, every round."
    },
    {
      "metric": "floor",
      "side": 1,
      "value": 9,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "26 VP if both central objectives are held against them: 2 clauses carry the card and both need a central."
    },
    {
      "metric": "tempo",
      "side": 0,
      "value": 13,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "7 of 17 VP settle at the end of your own turn, and in the fifth round the 10 VP of holding clauses move there too, so a last-turn grab pays with no enemy turn to survive."
    },
    {
      "metric": "tempo",
      "side": 1,
      "value": 11,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "The central objective and marker lines pay at the end of your turn; the 8 VP of holding clauses wait through an enemy turn until the fifth round, when they also move to end of turn."
    },
    {
      "metric": "complexity",
      "side": 0,
      "value": 12,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "Deciding by turn 2 whether the far central objective is reachable, then holding 2 objectives more than 8 inches apart that no single unit can cover."
    },
    {
      "metric": "complexity",
      "side": 1,
      "value": 10,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "A rotation of action-doers, an objective count checked every turn, and a raid that is optional once you know the plan caps without it."
    },
    {
      "metric": "exposure",
      "side": 0,
      "value": 12,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "The plan needs a body on the central objective in the opponent's half — 17.2% to 29.1% deployment-zone exposure on the measured boards — but the kill clauses are collected from wherever the guns already are."
    },
    {
      "metric": "activationCost",
      "side": 0,
      "value": 8,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "Almost nothing on the card asks a unit to stop fighting; the cheapest plan in the matrix to run."
    },
    {
      "metric": "exposure",
      "side": 1,
      "value": 11,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "Central objectives are the safest ground measured (as low as 2%), and the 50% to 79% enemy home objective is optional once the plan is known to cap without it. The doer must still stand visible on a central every turn."
    },
    {
      "metric": "activationCost",
      "side": 1,
      "value": 13,
      "confidence": "medium",
      "basis": "theory",
      "rationale": "1 unit permanently performing an action instead of fighting, plus spares — a bill that is paid again on a scoreboard where secondaries are worth as much as primary."
    }
  ],
  "claims": [
    {
      "type": "engine-note",
      "side": 0,
      "phase": "whole-game",
      "text": "Destroyer’s Wrath pays at 2 different moments: 7 VP of kill clauses settle at the end of your own turn, while 10 VP of holding clauses check at the end of your Command phase — except in the fifth round, where those also move to the end of your turn."
    },
    {
      "type": "engine-note",
      "side": 1,
      "phase": "whole-game",
      "text": "Vital Link rests on 2 clauses that both require a central objective: 2 VP for controlling one and 4 VP because one of the objectives you hold is central. The marker line that makes the card look frightening is bolted onto those, and falls with them."
    },
    {
      "type": "engine-note",
      "side": 0,
      "phase": "whole-game",
      "text": "The trade clause measures enemy units destroyed this turn against friendly units destroyed last turn, so a passive opponent lowers the bar to 0 rather than starving it. Against a stationary army a single kill pays 7, and their engine has to park a unit on a central objective every turn to supply it."
    },
    {
      "type": "cost",
      "side": 0,
      "phase": "whole-game",
      "text": "Only the 4 VP and 6 VP holding clauses have to survive an enemy turn, and not in the fifth round. Price a grab against those 10 points, not against the whole card."
    },
    {
      "type": "cost",
      "side": 1,
      "phase": "whole-game",
      "text": "The action completes only if your unit still controls the objective at the end of your turn, so the doer has to win a summed-Objective-Control comparison, not a fight — and it must stand visible on a central objective every turn to do it."
    },
    {
      "type": "terrain",
      "phase": "deployment",
      "text": "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.",
      "refs": [
        "rule:13.08",
        "rule:14.02"
      ]
    },
    {
      "type": "disruption",
      "side": 0,
      "phase": "whole-game",
      "text": "There are 2 denials and only one removes points. Stalling the marker on the objective they actioned still leaves them reaching the 45 primary cap on schedule. Holding or tying BOTH central objectives leaves them on 26, because both of their carrying clauses need a central. On these boards the 2 centrals are 8 to 9 inches apart, so no single model covers both — and holding both is also what puts you at 4 objectives to their 3."
    },
    {
      "type": "disruption",
      "side": 1,
      "phase": "whole-game",
      "text": "Match their objective count, do not beat it. Their 6 VP parity clause needs strictly more objectives than you, so equalling it is free and requires no movement. Be clear what it buys: they still reach the 45 cap, but in the fifth round with 2 VP of margin instead of 18, so every clause has to land every round. Do not try to starve their kill clauses — the trade line measures itself against your own previous-turn losses, so playing carefully lowers their bar."
    },
    {
      "type": "list-building",
      "side": 0,
      "phase": "list-building",
      "text": "Purge the Foe needs 2 units able to hold a central objective alone rather than 1 that splits, because the gap between the centrals exceeds 8 inches on every board in this pairing and the far one must arrive by turn 2. Add enough Objective Control to match rather than beat, a cheap reliable kill, and a home screen from turn 4."
    },
    {
      "type": "list-building",
      "side": 1,
      "phase": "list-building",
      "text": "Priority Assets needs a rotation of 2 or 3 action-doers so a single kill cannot stall the compounding, enough Objective Control on the doer to hold the objective alone, 1 durable holder for the flat 4 VP, and a unit able to keep a central objective against a serious attempt on it. The end-of-battle home raid is optional: the plan reaches the 45 cap without it, so it buys margin rather than score."
    },
    {
      "type": "layout",
      "phase": "deployment",
      "text": "All 3 boards for this pairing are transcribed and measured, and every figure is given per side rather than averaged. Layout 1 (diagonal across the short axis, openness 5/20) is the raider's board: an enemy home objective costs 49.1% and 46.3% deployment-zone exposure. Layout 2 (diagonal halves, 5/20) is the most even, with the 2 central objectives 8.2 inches apart and one of them under an inch from the dividing line. Layout 3 (bands on the short edges, 7/20) kills the raid at 70.5% and 79.4% while the far central objective stays cheap at 25.6% and 0%."
    }
  ],
  "listRequirements": [
    {
      "side": 0,
      "role": "A holder for the central objective in the opponent's half",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "objective-control",
        "speed"
      ],
      "phase": "list-building",
      "why": "Their engine needs only 1 central to pay, so both must be denied. The 2 centrals are more than 8 inches apart on every board in this pairing, which is further than 1 unit can cover without splitting its Objective Control across 2 separate additions and losing both."
    },
    {
      "side": 0,
      "role": "A holder for the central objective in your own half",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "objective-control",
        "durability"
      ],
      "phase": "list-building",
      "why": "The second half of the same denial, and the cheaper one to keep — measured exposure on your own central runs 0% to 5.2%."
    },
    {
      "side": 0,
      "role": "Enough Objective Control to match their total, not beat it",
      "trait": [
        "objective-control"
      ],
      "phase": "list-building",
      "why": "Equal levels of control mean neither player holds the objective, so denial costs 1 point of Objective Control less than taking — unless they secure it, which requires beating their total instead."
    },
    {
      "side": 0,
      "role": "A reliable kill every turn, cheap enough to lose",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "expendable-bodies",
        "damage"
      ],
      "phase": "list-building",
      "why": "The trade clause compares against your own previous-turn losses, so a list that bleeds raises its own bar. 7 VP a turn rests on killing 1 thing while losing little."
    },
    {
      "side": 0,
      "role": "A home screen from turn 4, and a counter-charge unit near it",
      "count": 2,
      "trait": [
        "screening"
      ],
      "phase": "rounds-4-5",
      "why": "Their 10 VP end-of-battle bonus on your home objective is the largest single number on their card and the only clause that obliges them to come to you."
    },
    {
      "side": 0,
      "role": "A reactive threat that makes the approach cost something",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "reactive-deterrence"
      ],
      "phase": "rounds-2-3",
      "why": "The holding clauses check at your Command phase in rounds 2 to 4, so those grabs have to live through a full enemy turn. Taxing the commit is cheaper than buying enough wounds to tank it."
    },
    {
      "side": 1,
      "role": "A rotation of action-doers",
      "count": 3,
      "trait": [
        "action-recycling",
        "expendable-bodies"
      ],
      "phase": "list-building",
      "why": "The marker line compounds, so a turn missed costs its increment for every turn after it. Spares keep the engine running when the doer is killed."
    },
    {
      "side": 1,
      "role": "Enough Objective Control on the doer to hold the objective alone",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "objective-control"
      ],
      "phase": "list-building",
      "why": "The action completes on a summed-Objective-Control comparison at the end of your turn, not on the doer surviving. This is the most common way the card is thrown away."
    },
    {
      "side": 1,
      "role": "A holder that can keep a central objective under a real attempt on it",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "durability",
        "objective-control"
      ],
      "phase": "list-building",
      "why": "Both carrying clauses need a central objective. Losing control of the centrals is the only thing that takes this card 19 points short of the cap, so this unit is the matchup."
    },
    {
      "side": 1,
      "role": "1 unit whose only job is to match their objective count",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "objective-control"
      ],
      "phase": "list-building",
      "why": "Equalling their count denies the 6 VP parity clause without moving — 24 VP over the game for the cheapest slot on the list."
    },
    {
      "side": 1,
      "role": "A home raid, only if it is cheap",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "deep-strike",
        "speed"
      ],
      "phase": "rounds-4-5",
      "why": "The plan reaches the 45 primary cap without this, so the 10 VP is margin rather than score. It also means standing where 50% to 79% of their deployment zone has line of sight. Worth a cheap unit, never worth a quarter of the list."
    },
    {
      "side": 1,
      "role": "A reactive threat that makes the approach cost something",
      "count": 1,
      "trait": [
        "reactive-deterrence"
      ],
      "phase": "rounds-2-3",
      "why": "Your doer has to stand visible on a central objective and still control it when the turn ends. Taxing the units sent to contest it is cheaper than making the doer survivable."
    }
  ],
  "dependsOn": {
    "corpus": "2026-05-09 23:42:21",
    "gdmPack": "GDM"
  },
  "status": "draft",
  "sources": [],
  "body": "## The matchup in a nutshell\n\nDestroyer's Wrath prints 17 VP a turn. Vital Link prints 11. Left alone, both players score exactly 45 and the difference between the 2 cards is a rounding error.\n\nThat is what a cap does. Primary stops at 45, and both of these engines clear it comfortably — the Purge the Foe player in the fourth round, the Priority Assets player in the fifth. The printed rate does not buy points. It buys **slack**: how much of your plan can fail before you stop reaching the ceiling anyway.\n\n```figure\nkind: vp-curve\ncap: 45\ncapLabel: primary cap — 45\nseries: [{\"label\":\"Purge the Foe\",\"colour\":\"a\",\"values\":[3,18,33,45,45]},{\"label\":\"Priority Assets\",\"colour\":\"b\",\"values\":[3,15,28,42,45]}]\ncaption: Both cards played out clause by clause with nobody interfering, each section opening on the round it is printed to. **They finish in the same place.** Purge the Foe gets there a round earlier, which is the only thing the higher printed rate actually wins.\nalt: Cumulative primary victory points by battle round for both cards against the 45 point cap\n```\n\nSo the question is not who scores more. It is what each player can do to the other, and those 2 answers are nothing alike.\n\nThe Priority Assets player switches off the biggest clause on Destroyer's Wrath — 6 VP a turn for holding more objectives than the opponent — by holding exactly as many as they already hold. It costs no movement and no risk. And it does not cost the Purge player a single point: they still reach 45. What it takes is their margin, from 18 VP down to **2**. They now have to hit every clause, every round, for 4 rounds.\n\nGoing the other way removes points for real. Vital Link runs on the 2 central objectives, and stopping it means standing on both. On these 3 boards they sit between 8 and 9 inches apart, further than any 1 model can cover, and 1 of them is on the wrong side of the table. Pay that price and the Priority player finishes on 26 — **19 short of a cap they would otherwise reach without leaving home**.\n\nOne player can take the other's margin for free. The other can take real points, but has to walk for them. That is the matchup.\n\n## Playing Purge the Foe\n\n*Your card: Destroyer's Wrath. It pays at 2 different moments, and on the last turn it changes its mind.*\n\n### How you score\n\n4 VP at the end of your Command phase for holding anything that is not your home objective. 6 more — the big one — at the same moment, for holding more objectives than your opponent. 3 at the end of your turn if anything of theirs died. 4 more at the end of your turn if you killed more this turn than you lost last turn.\n\nThat is 17 a turn, and you will never bank all of it. You reach 45 in the fourth round and everything after is decoration. What the 17 is really for is the 18 VP of margin it leaves you.\n\nTwo things about *when* it pays, because most of this article hangs off them.\n\n**Half your card pays instantly.** The 3 and the 4 for killing settle at the end of your own turn. Nothing to survive, nothing to hold. Only the 4 and the 6 for holding ground wait through the opponent's turn.\n\n**On the last turn, the rest of it pays instantly too.** The holding clauses check at the end of your Command phase — *except* in the fifth round, where they check at the end of your turn. Round 5 is not the same game as rounds 2 to 4. Ground you take on the last turn cannot be taken back before it scores.\n\n### What it costs you\n\nLook at that 6 again. **More** objectives. Every board in this pairing splits the middle, so the count starts 3-all: your home, your expansion, your half of the middle, and the same 3 for them. To get to 4 you have to take something of theirs, and they have to fail to replace it.\n\nAn opponent who has read their own card simply matches your count and never moves. You still cap — but on the last round, with nothing to spare.\n\n```figure\nkind: vp-curve\ncap: 45\ncapLabel: primary cap — 45\nseries: [{\"label\":\"nobody stops them\",\"colour\":\"a\",\"values\":[3,18,33,45,45]},{\"label\":\"count matched\",\"colour\":\"a\",\"values\":[3,14,25,36,45]}]\ncaption: **Destroyer’s Wrath** with the objective count matched. It still reaches 45 — 1 round later, and with 2 VP of margin instead of 18. The cheapest decision in the matchup does not take your points. It takes your right to miss one.\nalt: Purge the Foe scoring unopposed against Purge the Foe with the objective count matched\n```\n\n**And now the part that argues against me.** The obvious read is that a passive opponent starves your kill clauses — no targets, no 7 VP. That read is wrong, and it is worth being precise about why, because it is the strongest thing your card has.\n\nThe trade clause compares enemy units destroyed *this* turn against friendly units destroyed *last* turn. An opponent who stands still and shoots nothing kills nothing of yours. Your previous-turn losses are 0. A single kill — any kill, anywhere on the table — clears the bar and pays 4, on top of the 3 for killing at all.\n\nAnd they have to give you a target. Their engine cannot run without parking a unit within range of a central objective and leaving it there until the end of their turn. That unit is cheap, it is visible, and it comes back every single turn. Your kill clauses are not starved by a passive opponent. They are *fed* by one.\n\n### How you break them\n\nTheir card is 2 clauses in a trench coat: 2 VP for controlling a central objective, and 4 more for the fact that 1 of the objectives you hold is central. Everything else — the marker that compounds, the whole reason it looks frightening — is bolted onto those.\n\nSo there are 2 denials available, and only 1 of them is worth anything.\n\n**Stalling 1 marker does nothing.** Deny the objective they performed the action on and the marker does not land that turn. They still reach 45 in the fifth round. You have cost them margin, not points.\n\n**Denying both central objectives is the game.** They only need to control *1* central for the 2 and the 4 to pay. Hold or tie both and the card collapses to the 4 VP available from any objective at all: 26 over the game, 19 short of the cap, and that is with their end-of-battle raid still landing.\n\n```figure\nkind: vp-curve\ncap: 45\ncapLabel: primary cap — 45\nseries: [{\"label\":\"nobody stops them\",\"colour\":\"b\",\"values\":[3,15,28,42,45]},{\"label\":\"1 marker stalled\",\"colour\":\"b\",\"values\":[3,14,26,39,45]},{\"label\":\"both centrals denied\",\"colour\":\"b\",\"values\":[0,4,8,12,26]}]\ncaption: **Vital Link** under the 2 denials. Blocking the action they performed leaves them capping on schedule. Standing on both central objectives leaves them **19 short**. Almost everyone plays the first one.\nalt: Priority Assets scoring under no denial, 1 marker stalled, and both central objectives denied\n```\n\nThree things about control, because each of them loses games.\n\n**It is not a headcount.** Add up the Objective Control of every model you have within range and compare it to their total. The higher total holds it. 1 model with OC 2 outholds 2 models with OC 1 apiece.\n\n**Equal totals mean nobody holds it.** That is why denying is cheaper than taking — you match their number rather than beat it. Their action-doer is a lone character with OC 1? Any OC 1 model of yours, in range, ties it, and their action fails: it only completes if their unit still controls the objective when their turn ends.\n\n**Unless they have secured it.** A secured objective stays theirs until your control is *greater* than theirs — matching does nothing. If anything in their army secures ground, budget to beat their number, not to equal it.\n\nNow the geometry, which decides whether any of this is available to you.\n\n```figure\nkind: board-map\nboard: purge-the-foe-vs-priority-assets-2\nannotate: centre-gap\ncaption: Layout 2, traced from the official sheet. The 2 central objectives are **8.2 inches apart**, so no single model covers both — control range is 3 inches and the shaded discs are drawn to scale. Splitting 1 unit across the gap splits its Objective Control between 2 separate additions, and loses both.\nalt: Battle layout 2 showing the gap between the two central objectives\n```\n\nYou need presence on 2 objectives that no 1 unit can hold, and 1 of them sits on their side of the line.\n\nHere is the part worth carrying to the table: **that trip is not a tax on your plan, it is your plan.** Standing on both central objectives is what denies their engine — and it is also, on a 3-all board, exactly what puts you at 4 objectives to their 3 and turns your 6 VP clause back on. The same models do both jobs.\n\nWhich is why \"is the 4th objective worth it?\" is not a judgement call. It is worth your margin, and it is worth 19 of their points.\n\nScreen your home from turn 4 anyway. Their 10 VP at the end of the battle for holding your home objective is the largest single number on their card. It will not decide whether they cap — but it is the difference between them capping comfortably and capping on the last clause of the last round.\n\n### What your list needs\n\n- **2 units that can hold a central objective on their own, 1 of them fast.** Not 1 unit that splits. The gap between the centrals is over 8 inches on all 3 boards, so the far one needs its own body, and it needs to arrive by turn 2 to be worth anything.\n- **Enough Objective Control to match, not beat.** A tie denies. Budget against a lone OC 1 character on the cheap boards and against a squad total on the rest — unless they secure it, in which case you need 1 more than they have.\n- **A reliable kill every turn that you can afford to lose.** Your previous-turn losses set the bar for the trade clause, so a list that bleeds is a list that raises its own bar.\n- **A home screen from turn 4.**\n- **Nothing else.** Once the count is 4 to 3, a 5th objective pays you 0.\n\n## Playing Priority Assets\n\n*Your card: Vital Link. It pays at 3 different moments, and the last one is insurance rather than income.*\n\n### How you score\n\nWalk a cheap model onto a central objective. Perform the action in your Shooting phase. If you still control that objective when your turn ends, leave a marker.\n\n2 VP for controlling a central objective, plus 1 for every marker sitting on it. So 3 on the first turn, then 4, then 5, then 6, then 7. From the second round on, add 4 VP for holding any objective that is not your home and 4 more because 1 of them is central — that pair checks at your Command phase, and on the last turn at the end of your turn instead.\n\nThen 10 VP at the end of the battle if you hold their home objective.\n\n**You reach 45 without it.** The walk alone caps you in the fifth round. The raid is worth 10 VP of margin, not 10 VP of score — which makes it a decision about robustness, and a very different decision from the one the card's biggest number invites.\n\n### What it costs you\n\n1 unit, permanently employed, doing something that is not fighting — and permanently visible.\n\nRead the completion condition again, because it is not the one people expect. The action completes *if your unit controls that objective* at the end of your turn. Not if it survives. **Your doer does not have to win a fight. It has to win an addition** — and your opponent gets a full turn to work out exactly how much Objective Control they need to bring, because you have shown them where it is standing.\n\nAnd be honest about the second cost: that unit is also the kill your opponent's card is asking for. Destroyer's Wrath pays 3 for any kill and 4 more for killing more than they lost last turn. If they lost nothing, your doer alone clears both. You are not just running an engine. You are feeding theirs, once a turn, on schedule.\n\n### How you break them\n\nDo not race them on breadth. You lose that race, and trying is how you hand them their 6 VP.\n\n**Match instead.** Their parity clause needs *strictly* more objectives than you. Equal counts pay them nothing, it costs you only what you were already holding, and you do not have to move a model.\n\nBe clear about what that buys, because it is not points. They still reach 45. What you have taken is their margin — from 18 VP down to 2. From that moment they need a kill every turn, the trade every turn, and an objective they do not own every turn, for 4 straight rounds. Miss any of it once and they finish short. Your job for the rest of the game is to make them miss.\n\nThen accept what you cannot fix. You cannot starve their kill clauses. The trade clause measures itself against *your* previous-turn losses, so playing carefully lowers their bar rather than raising it, and your engine has to leave a unit on a central objective every turn regardless. The move is not to hide the doer — it is to make it cheap, make it replaceable, and make sure losing it does not stop the engine.\n\nThe clause worth guarding is the last one. On the final turn their holding clauses pay at the end of *their* turn, not at their Command phase, so anything they take on turn 5 cannot be taken back before it scores. Whatever screen you were planning for turn 5 needed to be in place at the end of turn 4.\n\n### What your list needs\n\n- **2 or 3 units that can perform the action, in rotation.** A kill that stops the engine for a turn costs you the compounding for every turn after it. Buy the spare.\n- **Enough Objective Control on the doer to hold the objective alone.** The action fails on an addition, not on a casualty. This is the most common way this card is thrown away.\n- **1 durable holder for the flat 4 VP**, which is the most valuable model in your list that never throws a punch.\n- **A unit that can hold a central objective against a serious attempt to take it.** This is where the matchup is decided, not at their home objective.\n- **A home raid only if it is cheap.** It is 10 VP of insurance on a plan that already caps. Spending a quarter of your list on it to reach a total you were reaching anyway is the trap this card sets.\n\n## The three layouts\n\nThis pairing is played on 1 of 3 boards, and they are not the same game. All 3 are transcribed and measured below.\n\nThe measurement is per side, never averaged between them — this matchup turns entirely on which player has to walk, so a number that blends both describes a player who does not exist. The pack does not fix which disposition deploys in which zone, so the 2 zones are named A and B; read the pair, not 1 number.\n\n```figure\nkind: exposure-bars\nrows: [{\"label\":\"Layout 1 — enemy home\",\"a\":49.1,\"b\":46.3},{\"label\":\"Layout 2 — enemy home\",\"a\":58.6,\"b\":50},{\"label\":\"Layout 3 — enemy home\",\"a\":70.5,\"b\":79.4,\"gapAfter\":1},{\"label\":\"Layout 1 — far central\",\"a\":29.1,\"b\":0},{\"label\":\"Layout 2 — far central\",\"a\":17.2,\"b\":12},{\"label\":\"Layout 3 — far central\",\"a\":25.6,\"b\":0}]\ncaption: What it costs to stand where the plan needs you. **Raiding a home objective is 3 to 5 times more exposed than holding the far central objective** on every board — and on a capped scoreboard the far central is the one worth points.\nalt: Exposure by side for enemy home objectives and far central objectives on all three boards\n```\n\n| Board | Deployment | Openness | Centre gap | Far central (A / B) | Enemy home (A / B) |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| Layout 1 | diagonal across the short axis | 5/20 | 8.9\" | 29.1% / 0% | 49.1% / 46.3% |\n| Layout 2 | diagonal halves | 5/20 | 8.2\" | 17.2% / 12% | 58.6% / 50% |\n| Layout 3 | bands on the short edges | 7/20 | 9.3\" | 25.6% / 0% | 70.5% / 79.4% |\n\n**Layout 1** is the only board where the raid and the denial cost about the same, and it is also the one where the far central is dearest for side A at 29.1%. If you were ever going to spend a unit on an enemy home objective, it is here.\n\n**Layout 2** is the one to know. The 2 central objectives sit closest together, and 1 of them is under an inch from the dividing line — close enough that both players can contest it without committing. It is also the most even board in the pairing: the 2 sides' figures differ by 6 points or less everywhere. Nobody gets a free half.\n\n```figure\nkind: board-map\nboard: purge-the-foe-vs-priority-assets-3\nannotate: centre-gap\ncaption: Layout 3 — bands on the short edges. The widest gap between the central objectives in the pairing, and the most punishing home objectives on any board here.\nalt: Battle layout 3, bands on the short edges\n```\n\n**Layout 3** settles the argument. An enemy home objective means being seen by 70 to 79% of their deployment zone, the worst figures in the pairing, while the far central objective stays cheap at 25.6% and 0%. Both players should be looking at the middle and nowhere else.\n\nEvery figure is the *best* legal spot within control range of that objective, not the middle of the marker — the way a player actually looks for somewhere to stand.\n\n## Decision points\n\n- **Turn 1, Priority Assets** — walk on and perform the action even under guns. The line compounds, so the first marker is the most expensive one to skip.\n- **Turn 2, Purge the Foe** — the far central objective is either reachable now or it is never worth taking. Commit a body to it or write the plan off; the 1 thing that does not work is arriving on turn 4.\n- **Turn 3, Priority Assets** — count objectives before you move anything. Matching their number is worth more than any grab you were considering, and it is free.\n- **Turn 4, both** — Purge screens home. Priority decides whether the raid is still cheap, and puts the screen for turn 5 in place now.\n- **Turn 5, both** — the holding clauses pay at the end of the turn on both cards. Whatever you can reach, take: there is no enemy turn left to take it back.\n\n## If you want the numbers\n\nPrimary scoring stops at 45, and every curve above is drawn against that ceiling. Both engines clear it if they run cleanly, which is why this article is about margin rather than totals.\n\nThe curves come from modelling each card clause by clause — where it obliges you to stand, whether it needs a kill, when it checks, and the earliest round its own printed section allows. The first round is thinner than the printed rate on both cards, because the 8 VP that hang on holding ground do not open until the second.\n\nThe denial figures are the same model with the denied clauses switched off. Matching the objective count leaves Destroyer's Wrath capping in the fifth round with 2 VP of margin instead of 18. Stalling 1 marker leaves Vital Link capping on schedule. Holding both central objectives leaves it on 26.\n\nThe terrain figures come from the transcribed measurement sheets. For every objective, every legal holding spot within control range is tested against both deployment zones, and the best one is reported per side.\n\nThree limits worth stating. The pack does not say which disposition deploys in which zone, so terrain figures are given as a pair and never merged. Whether a single round has its own scoring ceiling is not something this corpus can confirm; it would change how much margin the higher-printing card has, not which round either player reaches the cap in. And this is a primary-mission analysis on a scoreboard where secondaries are worth just as much — when both players cap the primary, the game is decided by what their primary plan cost them everywhere else, and the plan that permanently employs a unit performing actions is paying that bill twice.",
  "url": "https://hive-perdita.vercel.app/analysis/purge-the-foe--vs--priority-assets/"
}