Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

tneva82 wrote:

 DarkHound wrote:
I think everyone is seriously over-estimating the amount of churn there'll be on the front page. By the time a topic sinks past the first page, it'll mean that the discussion is not active. It's okay if a week later another player asks a similar question. Nobody is going to ask the same question; the discussion is going to be different and worth engaging in by different people. You're not going to get multiple threads on the same topic active at the same time, and in the uncommon instance it does happen it'll be pointed out and locked.

Now it is very likely to be the case that there isn't always a thread active for a faction. For example, despite all the news about a new expansion focused on them, the Imperial Knights mega-thread just had its first post in over three months. Similarly, the Grey Knights mega-thread is dead. As are the Tempestus, Renegades and Heretics, and Thousand Sons threads. It's already not the case that multiple discussions are active for every faction, and that's okay. If you have something you want to talk about, you just start a new thread.

So you don't think there's going to be even TWO thread per faction? Especially when whole edition changes and there's going to be everything being new?

Sheesh. You have pessimistic view on how 9th ed will affect tactics talk Such a death of topics...

Yeah, this. The forum is going to be flooded when the edition comes out, as every army is going to be talking about the changes.

There are going to be a lot of threads created, just not at the same time. Not every faction is played or discussed at the same rate, and not every aspect of the new edition is discovered or relevant immediately. And a lot of changes are going to be general, since the codexes aren't changing. This likely means many of the first topics will be about broad trends where multiple factions can discuss the impacts. A lot of theory crafting should probably go to the Army Lists section. That's going to unburden Tactics a lot initially. It's going to take time to play-test and digest the changes before meaningful discussions start.

And again, there's the cultural impact to consider: I'm sure a lot of forum users have written off the Tactics section because it's difficult to engage with. You aren't going to hear those voices in this thread (maybe some kind of thread should be in general to advertise the change). For example, I'm trying to engage with the AdMech megathread about the new release, but if what I'm interested in isn't what's currently being discussed, then people just ignore the post. People just don't engage with topics outside the mega-threads as much, so I can't get my questions answered or discussed. If I hadn't had a history with Dakka, I'd probably just have left for a competitive 40k subreddit.

 DarkHound wrote:
Now it is very likely to be the case that there isn't always a thread active for a faction. For example, despite all the news about a new expansion focused on them, the Imperial Knights mega-thread just had its first post in over three months. Similarly, the Grey Knights mega-thread is dead. As are the Tempestus, Renegades and Heretics, and Thousand Sons threads. It's already not the case that multiple discussions are active for every faction, and that's okay. If you have something you want to talk about, you just start a new thread.

I think this is more due to the fact that there hasn’t been a major tournament in 3 months than any lack of enthusiasm on the part of players. Also, one of the armies you mentioned is a subfaction and another hasn’t enjoyed any meaningful support from GW this edition. GK and T-Sons have a relatively small player base. And rumors/rules previews are just that; no one is going to talk about Engine War (except in the N&R threads) until the rules are out.
I’m not saying we should keep mega-threads, just that I think now is a bad time to judge the current post count.

Points for mega threads -
Taking them away is going to create a lot more work for the MOD team. There will be multiple threads started by different people, all with the same general question but asked in a slightly different way. You’ll have to decide which one stays and gets used as the focus point, and then how to redirect the OP to the “selected” thread whilst closing their thread.
If you don’t do this, then, at first, you are going to end up with a lot of new threads constantly vying for position on the front page. It might just be me, but I very rarely flick past page 1 of topics unless it is to find one of the current mega threads.

Point against them –
A lot of them often get quickly side tracked or have the same points reguatated over and over again throughout the year. It is hard to search for the answer to your question, especially as answers are not often in sequential posts. I bet you could cut every single mega thread in half (post count) and still have most of the “most discussed” questions repeated.

Unfortunately, I think the only way around this issue, is to create mini sections for each “codex” within the “tactics” sub-forum. You would also need a “general” section, which would allow for more generic questions such as “Can someone explain how wrap and trap works” etc.

If you're going to do this we need faction-specific sub-forums in addition to a more generalized tactics section. I get that spending 10 whole minutes to create a few more subdivisions is hard but if you've chosen to be a mod isn't that worth doing?

Also, if you're too shy to enter a mega-thread and too busy to read one, why are you on a web forum at all? This isn't google where you can use a quick search to find the answer to a specific question, this is a community where people should integrate and carve out their own niche.

I have to say that talking against mega-threads is a kneejerk reaction from lazy people. Lots of people come in those threads to repeat questions that have been asked, and it is completely fine. No one minds that. Often first posts are maintained as good, solid source of info on the faction (and kept up to date).

Making own thread for every thing, will lead to massive spam and multiple threads about same subject that are seperated by poor titles. Besides, if I search a thread and see talks about thing I need an answer for - if it is year old, I will spam and ask again. But most people will create a new thread regardless.

Then there's the reschooling. "No, CC questions goes in the other thread, go ask there"

"There's a separate thread for tournament/competitive discussion, go ask there"

How about thread starter is encouraged to maintain a thread index of sort.

March FAQ 2021 discussed here

Etc.

Or others gets permission to edit the opening post if he goes unresponsive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
How about just separating between novice and experienced tactical discussion.

If you're new or know you have basic questions on tactics, there's a "Starting Necrons" thread, perhaps pinned.

And then there's an "Advanced Necron Tactica"

The will-be poster gets to see both and can make a judgment call on where he belongs if he's not sure. Splitting into more than two will be confusing for all levels.

Ilgoth wrote:
I have to say that talking against mega-threads is a kneejerk reaction from lazy people. Lots of people come in those threads to repeat questions that have been asked, and it is completely fine. No one minds that.

Unfortunately, as I noted earlier with regards to the Imperial Guard & CWE threads, they're also just as often left unanswered or given token responses, and with significantly less visibility than they might have otherwise gotten, even for questions that may not strictly be repeats.

Often first posts are maintained as good, solid source of info on the faction (and kept up to date).

In reviewing the megathreads myself, this just isn't the case, the overwhelmingly vast majority of first posts in each megathread are just "Lets talk X faction", or "new thread, here's the new stuff from the latest release!" or the like with maybe some links to GW previews.

The Space Marine, Harlequins, Necrons, Sisters, AdMech, Imperial Guard, Custodes, Daemons, Space Wolf, CWE, Tau, Deathwatch, Death Guard, Grey Knight, Blood Angels, Renegades & Heretics, Dark Eldar, and Thousand Sons thread first posts all fit that bill.

The Dark Angels and CSM first posts attempt to show some information breakdown/overview stuff in the first post, but their first posts haven't been updated since 2018, the DA post mostly links to other sites while the CSM one is pretty barebones, and the Tempestus thread OP is basically a copy-pasting of the rules, units, but no actual tactics breakdown or unit discussion. EDIT: forgot the Tyranid thread, it fits in here as well, it has a decently developed first post, but hasn't been updated in over two years.

Pretty much only the Ork thread that Jidmah has maintained has a first post of particularly great value that's consistently maintained from my review of the tactics threads (if I missed a thread, let me know).

Making own thread for every thing, will lead to massive spam and multiple threads about same subject that are seperated by poor titles.

That's possible, but also maybe they'll see a specific thread covering what they want to know and have direct answers. I can say that in previous editions before the megathreads developed the way they have now, there wasn't a profusion of spam threads all trying to talk about the same thing at the same time.

 Canadian 5th wrote:
If you're going to do this we need faction-specific sub-forums in addition to a more generalized tactics section. I get that spending 10 whole minutes to create a few more subdivisions is hard but if you've chosen to be a mod isn't that worth doing?

That's not how the site works, at all. New features and sections have to be individually developed, tested, and deployed by Legoburner, Dakka is not an easily editable template site where mods can just hop in and add subdivisions by clicking a few buttons.

Also, if you're too shy to enter a mega-thread and too busy to read one, why are you on a web forum at all? This isn't google where you can use a quick search to find the answer to a specific question, this is a community where people should integrate and carve out their own niche.

As I noted earlier, most of these threads have little or no coherency, and often go for hundreds of pages, many with little relevancy to the current metagame. Going through and reading 20+ (or 200+) pages of scattered discussion (often mostly centered around list construction/feedback) isn't always terribly informative regarding how to play a faction or understand exactly how to use specific units or combinations during the actual course of a game or how to engage specific opponents or scenarios. Some threads are better than others, but it's an issue we've come to feel is a problem.

 Vaktathi wrote:
That's not how the site works, at all. New features and sections have to be individually developed, tested, and deployed by Legoburner, Dakka is not an easily editable template site where mods can just hop in and add subdivisions by clicking a few buttons.

So Dakka is in serious need of modernization of its code base and/or a backend hardware update, good to know.

As I noted earlier, most of these threads have little or no coherency, and often go for hundreds of pages, many with little relevancy to the current metagame.

Then create a new thread, those tend to get answers and the mega threads ensure that new threads stay on the front page for a while so more people can see them. Win-win.

Going through and reading 20+ (or 200+) pages of scattered discussion (often mostly centered around list construction/feedback) isn't always terribly informative regarding how to play a faction or understand exactly how to use specific units or combinations during the actual course of a game or how to engage specific opponents or scenarios. Some threads are better than others, but it's an issue we've come to feel is a problem.

Isn't that what watching/reading a battle report or checking out an article from Goonhamer is for? Forums, and especially threads, don't need to be a one size fits all solution for ever user.

Also, consider that you may lose the activity of those posters among us who are fans of the megathreads before culling them.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
That's not how the site works, at all. New features and sections have to be individually developed, tested, and deployed by Legoburner, Dakka is not an easily editable template site where mods can just hop in and add subdivisions by clicking a few buttons.

So Dakka is in serious need of modernization of its code base and/or a backend hardware update, good to know.

Sure, as soon as someone wants to pony up the time, money, and resources to do a complex overhaul of a very old tabletop gaming discussion board that generates just enough revenue to cover server costs

Then create a new thread, those tend to get answers and the mega threads ensure that new threads stay on the front page for a while so more people can see them. Win-win.

That's what we're hoping to encourage.

Isn't that what watching/reading a battle report or checking out an article from Goonhamer is for? Forums, and especially threads, don't need to be a one size fits all solution for ever user.

I certainly don't discourage people doing those things, but it's what we'd like the Tactics board to be for, and not everyone likes watching or reading battle reports (I personally don't enjoy watching them too much for various reasons, be the production or personality related, and usually only read battle reports that have some sort of interesting hook, not generally for tactics).

Also, consider that you may lose the activity of those posters among us who are fans of the megathreads before culling them.

We are aware of that. We're also aware that we may have lost activity of various sorts as a result of the megathreads, which is the impetus behind this. Either way, it's an experiment, not an eternal proclamation

 Vaktathi wrote:

Ilgoth wrote:
I have to say that talking against mega-threads is a kneejerk reaction from lazy people. Lots of people come in those threads to repeat questions that have been asked, and it is completely fine. No one minds that.

Unfortunately, as I noted earlier with regards to the Imperial Guard & CWE threads, they're also just as often left unanswered or given token responses, and with significantly less visibility than they might have otherwise gotten, even for questions that may not strictly be repeats.

Often first posts are maintained as good, solid source of info on the faction (and kept up to date).

In reviewing the megathreads myself, this just isn't the case, the overwhelmingly vast majority of first posts in each megathread are just "Lets talk X faction", or "new thread, here's the new stuff from the latest release!" or the like with maybe some links to GW previews.

The Space Marine, Harlequins, Necrons, Sisters, AdMech, Imperial Guard, Custodes, Daemons, Space Wolf, CWE, Tau, Deathwatch, Death Guard, Grey Knight, Blood Angels, Renegades & Heretics, Dark Eldar, and Thousand Sons thread first posts all fit that bill.

The Dark Angels and CSM first posts attempt to show some information breakdown/overview stuff in the first post, but their first posts haven't been updated since 2018, the DA post mostly links to other sites while the CSM one is pretty barebones, and the Tempestus thread OP is basically a copy-pasting of the rules, units, but no actual tactics breakdown or unit discussion.

Pretty much only the Ork thread that Jidmah has maintained has a first post of particularly great value that's consistently maintained from my review of the tactics threads (if I missed a thread, let me know).

Making own thread for every thing, will lead to massive spam and multiple threads about same subject that are seperated by poor titles.

That's possible, but also maybe they'll see a specific thread covering what they want to know and have direct answers. I can say that in previous editions before the megathreads developed the way they have now, there wasn't a profusion of spam threads all trying to talk about the same thing at the same time.

 Canadian 5th wrote:
If you're going to do this we need faction-specific sub-forums in addition to a more generalized tactics section. I get that spending 10 whole minutes to create a few more subdivisions is hard but if you've chosen to be a mod isn't that worth doing?

That's not how the site works, at all. New features and sections have to be individually developed, tested, and deployed by Legoburner, Dakka is not an easily editable template site where mods can just hop in and add subdivisions by clicking a few buttons.

Also, if you're too shy to enter a mega-thread and too busy to read one, why are you on a web forum at all? This isn't google where you can use a quick search to find the answer to a specific question, this is a community where people should integrate and carve out their own niche.

As I noted earlier, most of these threads have little or no coherency, and often go for hundreds of pages, many with little relevancy to the current metagame. Going through and reading 20+ (or 200+) pages of scattered discussion (often mostly centered around list construction/feedback) isn't always terribly informative regarding how to play a faction or understand exactly how to use specific units or combinations during the actual course of a game or how to engage specific opponents or scenarios. Some threads are better than others, but it's an issue we've come to feel is a problem.

I created the new CSM thread.

It was not a good idea for me to do that, since I'm not able to properly maintain a good first page. So that's my bad.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I created the new CSM thread.

It was not a good idea for me to do that, since I'm not able to properly maintain a good first page. So that's my bad.

My post wasn't intended to blame you for anything, I apologize if it came off that way, don't feel bad about it, you didn't do anything wrong, it's not like there were any rules in place for that sort of thing and there was at least some general army overview unlike most of the others. It's a lot of work to do that overview and constant updating, and so far we've only had one thread really do so, we're going to see if a change in gears and a new route may result in a fresher stream of content.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
I created the new CSM thread.

It was not a good idea for me to do that, since I'm not able to properly maintain a good first page. So that's my bad.

My post wasn't intended to blame you for anything, I apologize if it came off that way, don't feel bad about it, you didn't do anything wrong, it's not like there were any rules in place for that sort of thing and there was at least some general army overview unlike most of the others. It's a lot of work to do that overview and constant updating, and so far we've only had one thread really do so, we're going to see if a change in gears and a new route may result in a fresher stream of content.

Appreciated.

I think getting rid of the megathreads isn't the best idea, though I can see why it might be preferable. If this is how we're going to do things in the future it might be a good idea to add some stickied posts at the top of the forum with links to certain important threads that may disappear from tehf ront page while still being very useful. Other firums I'm on do this and it's a very useful resource. Just havinga sticky for Imperium, Chaos and Xenos would probably work, then someone could add links to stuff that is good to know but doesn't necessarily need any further discussion. Things like the mathhammer of certain weapon options might fit into that category, for example.

I think getting rid of the megathreads isn't the best idea, though I can see why it might be preferable.

Its the worst idea you can think of.
A prefer a coherent view of tactics for a faction.
And I not too lazy to read through a view pages I've missed recently.
Such a thread allows to move from one aspect to another and come back and forth.
Tactics requires a coherent view at the army, the enemy and the battlefield.
Discussing singular aspects by starting each time a new thread is not purposeful.

The mega threads are never that unified nor organised. Heck half the time they don't even focus on tactics they drift - tactics, hobby projects, cool new model photos, sneak peaks, rumours, back to tactics, army list, back to tactics, back to rumour..... 5 pages of rant, back to tactics, painting.


Also having singular threads doesn't mean you can't do a longer conversation on combined tactical aspects. It just means that it remains focused purely on that instead of drifting into other areas. Or the current question gets overlooked as someone leaps in with another that's easier or simpler/quicker to answer.

 wuestenfux wrote:

I think getting rid of the megathreads isn't the best idea, though I can see why it might be preferable.

Its the worst idea you can think of.
A prefer a coherent view of tactics for a faction.
And I not too lazy to read through a view pages I've missed recently.
Such a thread allows to move from one aspect to another and come back and forth.
Tactics requires a coherent view at the army, the enemy and the battlefield.
Discussing singular aspects by starting each time a new thread is not purposeful.

OK, let's take the example of the Necron thread. It's over 300 pages and at first glance it looks like there's a handy summary of units in the first post but closer inspection reveals that info to be over a year old and therefore very outdated both in terms of the CA19 points changes and the current meta. Anyone coming along to the forum for the first time and wanting to get some Necron tactics info has 300+ pages to wade through, most of which is not really relevant either because it's outdated or because it's not actually tactics and is just random ramblings, wishlisiting or army lists. It's not too bad for me as I've been keeping up to date with new posts but it's about the least user-friendly format I can think of short of being written in actual Necron glyphs.

That's why I suggested a few sticky threads to collate useful links. That way you can get more focussed topics (are Gauss or Tesla Immortals better, for example) but still make them easy to find for new players even if they drop off the front page. You also increase the likelihood that info on the front page is relevant to the current meta. I'd love it if we could collate it all into one useable mega-thread but I don't think that's feasible judging by the experience of the last few years.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Pretty much only the Ork thread that Jidmah has maintained has a first post of particularly great value that's consistently maintained from my review of the tactics threads (if I missed a thread, let me know).

Not to sound presumptuous, but perhaps the Genestealer Cults thread? Admittedly I haven't been able to include much in the way of specific tournament data (army disappeared competitively in the last tournament circuit before the epidemic) but the main topic itself has been kept more or less up to date (last major revision was for the Greater Good psychic awakening book and some unit revisions based on the fall-out from Chapter Approved 2019).

Admittedly it is only 10 pages long so it might not count as a mega thread at this point.

 Vaktathi wrote:
That's not how the site works, at all. New features and sections have to be individually developed, tested, and deployed by Legoburner, Dakka is not an easily editable template site where mods can just hop in and add subdivisions by clicking a few buttons.

Huh, really? I mean, I know when I had a proboards forum it was trivially easy to add subforums, but I guess everything is more custom here.

I would think that adding subforums would be one of the easiest things to do on a forum generally, so if what you say is true I'm a bit surprised.

As said megathreads often drift away from tactics and become a place to have general discussion about a faction.

To me it seems that they took the place of faction sub-sections. It just happen that they are in the tactics section, but most of them could pretty much be in any section.

I think that they are a lot of investment for little return, especially when you take interest in a faction you usually don't. You got to crawl through a lot of page to get a cohesive view and understand the current discussions, most of them being not related to tactics and when you go up in time it quickly become obsolete.

On the other hand, be it a good thing or not, it seems that people need or want a "place of there own" for their faction and megathreads just became thrat kind of place. To talk with other fans of their guys. Sometime, someone will wander in another faction thread to taunt them. It a bit communitarian but it is very human. If you take that away without giving an alternative, you will generate a lot of frustration.

Removing the tactics focus, would an "Adeptus Custodes Chat" thread in 40K General Discussion be acceptable?

 IronSlug wrote:

On the other hand, be it a good thing or not, it seems that people need or want a "place of there own" for their faction and megathreads just became thrat kind of place. To talk with other fans of their guys. Sometime, someone will wander in another faction thread to taunt them. It a bit communitarian but it is very human. If you take that away without giving an alternative, you will generate a lot of frustration.

This. Ripping out a place for folks to come together on a specific topic and replacing it with an FAQ board full of post-its isnt a net positive.

I think the issues being pointed out with the mega threads are valid but I don't think splitting up the threads will fix that. Issues like questions getting ignored and unanswered, and meandering discussion aren't going to go away just because you moved them. It's going to be the same people contributing to those discussions regardless of how it's structured. It will just be a bunch of threads that are unanswered or off-topic instead of a few mega threads

I feel the only way to ensure quality content would be if there were people actively curating post for quality content.

 CrownAxe wrote:
I think the issues being pointed out with the mega threads are valid but I don't think splitting up the threads will fix that. Issues like questions getting ignored and unanswered, and meandering discussion aren't going to go away just because you moved them. It's going to be the same people contributing to those discussions regardless of how it's structured. It will just be a bunch of threads that are unanswered or off-topic instead of a few mega threads

I disagree.
The issue with questions getting missed is that the mega-threads typically will only have one perhaps two subjects under discussion at any one time. So if your question isn't picked up quickly it will get overlooked and buried. Because its just one thread the question doesn't take long to get lost and once you're a page behind (which is very easily done when a conversation between two or more people gets going) then you can find your tactical question buried because two people are debating over a point of faction lore.

With separate threads those same single conversations can carry on and they don't progressively bury an unanswered thread. It takes multiple conversations to do that and even then the act of "bump" after a few days/hitting page 2 sends you back to the first page and the top of the list for far longer which increases the chances of getting attention and getting replies

 Overread wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
I think the issues being pointed out with the mega threads are valid but I don't think splitting up the threads will fix that. Issues like questions getting ignored and unanswered, and meandering discussion aren't going to go away just because you moved them. It's going to be the same people contributing to those discussions regardless of how it's structured. It will just be a bunch of threads that are unanswered or off-topic instead of a few mega threads

I disagree.
The issue with questions getting missed is that the mega-threads typically will only have one perhaps two subjects under discussion at any one time. So if your question isn't picked up quickly it will get overlooked and buried. Because its just one thread the question doesn't take long to get lost and once you're a page behind (which is very easily done when a conversation between two or more people gets going) then you can find your tactical question buried because two people are debating over a point of faction lore.

With separate threads those same single conversations can carry on and they don't progressively bury an unanswered thread. It takes multiple conversations to do that and even then the act of "bump" after a few days/hitting page 2 sends you back to the first page and the top of the list for far longer which increases the chances of getting attention and getting replies

There are plenty people who regularly read through all the post. Anyone who checks daily only has a few posts to read to stay caught up, those questions aren't getting missed. They aren't getting answers because the people having discussions don't care to replay to them. A matter that doesn't change simply because you break up the threads

Except that we've also identified that many don't pay close attention to the mega-threads because of their very nature. Those who dont' check on the site every day are more likely to just skip to the last page of a mega-thread.


If you stick to only mega-threads then only those in the mega-thread who are keeping up will answer questions. Thus you get a community within a community replying to queries which means a higher chance of them overlooking some questions.

 Overread wrote:
Except that we've also identified that many don't pay close attention to the mega-threads because of their very nature. Those who dont' check on the site every day are more likely to just skip to the last page of a mega-thread.


If you stick to only mega-threads then only those in the mega-thread who are keeping up will answer questions. Thus you get a community within a community replying to queries which means a higher chance of them overlooking some questions.

While what your saying might have a point the behaviour is esentially a basic function of human nature as I understand it, the people regularly posting in mega threads, I admit to being on tmof those do so because it feels like a group of similar people, unfortunately that occasionally leads to situations of in jokes and other things as the regular posters start to bounce of each other, but I would say the reason people do that as it gives them a comunity of people that like that faction.
If the mods don't want said threads in tactics could they possibly be added as stickys in general chat or such?

Also sometimes people post questions without sufficient information and then don't understand when you ask them certain key questions.

One advantage of ITC and GW events combining to try and push for a unified format of 40k does mean that outside of the crusade or matched play question which is GW is to be believed shoulf be "similar enough" now ansers might be able to be given without having to ask for another 10 pices of information that new posters don't often think to provide.

 Overread wrote:
Except that we've also identified that many don't pay close attention to the mega-threads because of their very nature. Those who dont' check on the site every day are more likely to just skip to the last page of a mega-thread.


If you stick to only mega-threads then only those in the mega-thread who are keeping up will answer questions. Thus you get a community within a community replying to queries which means a higher chance of them overlooking some questions.

This is why I'm all for splitting up the mega threads. "Oh look, the <my faction> megathread has three new pages, I wonder what tactics they're discussing.". *sifts through three pages of wishlisting, army lists and lore posts*.

I get the appeal, but these threads are currently behaving like single thread faction subforums. I've committed to reading through a few of these threads over the years, once when returning and a few more times when branching out into new armies. And when you want to learn how to use your army it sucks having to wade through page after page of banter, lore talk, army lists, unanswered questions and heated discussions, only to find a few tactic posts every now and then (that may or may not be outdated).

I've mostly stopped going to the tactics section alltogether because of this. My biggest gripe is that I can't search for how to use <unit x> or apply <tactic y> in these threads, and I can't be bothered to keep up with all the non-tactic tactic stuff.

I too think faction subforums would be the answer, it would address the need that the mega threads are filling now. But barring that I'd prefer having no mega threads over having them.

Ice_can wrote:

If the mods don't want said threads in tactics could they possibly be added as stickys in general chat or such?

I've suggested as much (though not making them sticky). I can see the community appeal of the mega-threads and they are not, on their own, a bad thing. They do soak up a lot of general chatter about factions without having whole subsections dedicated to them. I think that's the value of them more so than having them as tactical discussions. I'd still say the best is to push megathreads into the general section; leave tactics for tactical chat and let the mega threads settle into being more social community groups for the various factions. They do that already for the most part

Sasori started a Necron thread here:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/788624.page

I think, seeing it now, that this may be a much better place for the megathreads. You can link from this thread into specifics in the Tactics forum, but can also expand out to background, modeling, etc in these threads as well.