Switch Theme:

What happened to the 40k Tactics section?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Oozing Plague Marine Terminator







Back when Dakka was my go-to forum, 40k Tactics was my section of choice. It was a mix of noob questions, wild theories, and tournament talk. Now there's a lively mega-thread dedicated to each faction, but there are so many factions that these threads cover the top of the forum. It's honestly hard to see new threads crammed between the factions. Very few new topics are created, and they garner hundreds of views with only a couple comments before fading away.

As a (functionally) new player, those megathreads are extremely unhelpful: there's too much to catch up on and contribute to the conversation. More over, there doesn't seem to be discussions of the game in general, or even of specific aspects or match-ups; everything is so siloed.

   
Made in gb
Irked Necron Immortal




Factions are deep and unique enough that for detailed tactical discussions it really comes down more to faction-specific army composition versus other-faction army compositions. That fosters a Faction specific dialogue thread.

And then, with the rapid pace of change since mid-7th edition, all the faction changes/indexes/codexes have likewise promoted deeper faction-specific threads/conversations.

...which then segue into the first bit all over again as prior discussions are revisited in light of changes on both sides.

The more flat/high level tactical discussions simply are too generic to be applicable to every faction, so they tend to get only a light treatment in response. Moreover, there really isn’t any dispute about the detailed tactical “tips and tricks”, so debate and discussion doesn’t really feel merited.

Overall, I think the hobby has developed a clear tiering of discussion: there’s new player help, there’s competent player discussion and deeper level help, and there’s competitive arguing about balance... but there’s not much else.
   
Made in gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Manchester, UK

I did suggest having a Tactica sub forum, but the idea didn't seem to be supported. I think a sub forum would work, clearing the main forum for general tactic discussion. A lot of those threads probably get buried.

Edit: found the thread

 Manchu wrote:
The site staff has discussed this in the past but decided against it. Generally, we disfavor breaking down topics into further and further subcategories because it doesn't actually encourage more discussion. Thanks!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/03/03 21:40:58


The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in us
Oozing Plague Marine Terminator







It's certainly a complicated problem. I work in technical documentation so I agree that splitting up the Tactical into more sub-sections would just make the issue worse. People just don't drill down into endless subcatagories. They won't look for something they don't know is there. You have to strike the right balance between presenting all their options at a surface level without presenting too much and creating choice paralysis.

I also see how the state of the game necessitates the consolidation of discussions. There are too many disparate rules that it's hard to keep track of your own options, let alone pro-actively consider an opponent's.

What I'm really interested in is the cultural change that affects all the non-megathread topics. You reach dead topics almost immediately after the megathreads. In other 40k sections, it takes several pages. Judging by the last post history, normal topics get about one comment per day.

But they're getting thousands of views. People are there, they just aren't commenting. Why aren't they commenting?

If I had to hazard a guess, as someone who doesn't know anything, it might be that nobody is confident that they are discussing the same game. There may be too many optional rules and scenarios to begin a discussion, since it would be exhausting to qualify exact situation for every discussion.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/03/03 22:33:02


   
Made in gb
Irked Necron Immortal




Too many opinions presented as fact. Too much hostility to alternative interpretations. Too many dismissive tones toward new voices.

...an inactive old guard of pleasantry and warmth shown to budding commenters.
   
Made in us
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel




Douglasville, GA

I believe most of the "megathreads" devote the OP to which units/sub-Factions,/whatever to take and which to avoid, so that should, at least, give you a decent idea of where to start as a new player. If you have more specific questions, you could always make a new thread, or just drop a line into the ones already there.

From my experience (which, to be fair, is limited to the Ork thread), most of the conversation centers around competitive builds, upcoming rules, or discussing the "viability" of certain units as the meta shifts.
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 DarkHound wrote:
As a (functionally) new player, those megathreads are extremely unhelpful
*waves* Yeah. I found that too.

I mean, take the Tyranid one (the first one I opened). It has a ton of incomplete but very detailed information... from October 2017. Wonderful.

   
Made in us
Oozing Plague Marine Terminator







And you know what's funny? Now that I'm looking for it, I'm seeing all those threads... just in the General Discussion instead. All the same nooby help, the general discussions armies and match ups, everything. I think those megathreads is stifling to the ecosystem, but I also see that they're going to naturally occur given the state of the game.

I'm not necessarily advocating for this, but I wonder if discussion would improve and diversify if the mods pruned the megathreads periodically.

   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch






 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 DarkHound wrote:
As a (functionally) new player, those megathreads are extremely unhelpful
*waves* Yeah. I found that too.

I mean, take the Tyranid one (the first one I opened). It has a ton of incomplete but very detailed information... from October 2017. Wonderful.


Might be worth reaching out to the other interested parties in the tyrranid sub community and creating a new thread, starting fresh by someone more active who will update all the information.
CWE community had a discussion and a consensus was reached to create anew thread with updated information. See below OP 2.0 thread you might want to use as a template:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/782636.page

Understandable if new players don't feel confident to do this as they lack the relevant knowledge etc.
We essentially recapped all the units in a discussion and categorised them by use/effectiveness.

I think given the scope of the game this works.
You will get more of a response to specifics in a List forum where you post your list and propose the theory behind running the army and what's it designed to kill.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/03/04 04:21:59


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/772746.page#10378083 - My progress/failblog painting blog thingy

Eldar- 4436 pts


AngryAngel80 wrote:
I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
 
   
Made in us
Heroic Senior Officer





Murray, Kentucky

I think the main problem is just how fast the game evolves these days. Back in 5th, you could get threads going on for pages and pages about something as simple as whether to take autocannons or lascannons on infantry squads or whether power blobs needed additional weapons at all or if they should be kept lean. You saw a new codex maybe every few months, many codexes weren't even updated every edition, and stuff like FAQ's and errata were extremely rare. So people had time to settle in, read the codex, come up with ideas, and test them. The meta wasn't going anywhere, ITC didn't exist to my knowledge until 6th-7th, and stuff like strategems didn't even exist. Some threads would turn into mini generals, but were a lot more focused. For example I remember power blob threads popping up every so often to discuss what people were seeing.

That all changed with 8th. We went from a new codex once every few months to every month. Erratas and FAQs dropped constantly, and all the points got adjusted every year. ITC radically changes how useful certain units are and how they should be played. Formations came back. To try and pick just one thing to talk about kind of feels crazy honestly, so many things tie into each unit, ability, and weapon that it's really hard to narrow down conversation to a single thread on a single topic. And that's just for one faction. Everyone is getting rules these days. So instead of lots of disjointed threads, you see general threads in an effort to keep the tactics board from being overrun with say 5 Imperial Guard tactics and pushing other factions off the front page.

Things are moving so fast now, especially for competitive play, that I'm amazed people have time to test lists at all. Unless you are proxying heavily or just already have a massive collection, most of the most dominating units and strategies are nerfed within 6 months, which can be difficult for the average Joe to follow. Also, I've noticed other forums also going to a general style format. /Tg/ has been overrun by generals, and Facebook has groups dedicated to every faction that you can imagine that function the same way. I'm sure Reddit is this way too but I don't bother with them. I'm not sure why multiple forums all switched over to this style around the same time, but it's interesting to see. Definitely has its pluses and minuses.

'I've played Guard for years, and the best piece of advice is to always utilize the Guard's best special rule: "we roll more dice than you" ' - stormleader

"Sector Imperialis: 25mm and 40mm Round Bases (40+20) 26€ (Including 32 skulls for basing) " GW design philosophy in a nutshell  
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch






 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I think the main problem is just how fast the game evolves these days. Back in 5th, you could get threads going on for pages and pages about something as simple as whether to take autocannons or lascannons on infantry squads or whether power blobs needed additional weapons at all or if they should be kept lean. You saw a new codex maybe every few months, many codexes weren't even updated every edition, and stuff like FAQ's and errata were extremely rare. So people had time to settle in, read the codex, come up with ideas, and test them. The meta wasn't going anywhere, ITC didn't exist to my knowledge until 6th-7th, and stuff like strategems didn't even exist. Some threads would turn into mini generals, but were a lot more focused. For example I remember power blob threads popping up every so often to discuss what people were seeing.

That all changed with 8th. We went from a new codex once every few months to every month. Erratas and FAQs dropped constantly, and all the points got adjusted every year. ITC radically changes how useful certain units are and how they should be played. Formations came back. To try and pick just one thing to talk about kind of feels crazy honestly, so many things tie into each unit, ability, and weapon that it's really hard to narrow down conversation to a single thread on a single topic. And that's just for one faction. Everyone is getting rules these days. So instead of lots of disjointed threads, you see general threads in an effort to keep the tactics board from being overrun with say 5 Imperial Guard tactics and pushing other factions off the front page.

Things are moving so fast now, especially for competitive play, that I'm amazed people have time to test lists at all. Unless you are proxying heavily or just already have a massive collection, most of the most dominating units and strategies are nerfed within 6 months, which can be difficult for the average Joe to follow. Also, I've noticed other forums also going to a general style format. /Tg/ has been overrun by generals, and Facebook has groups dedicated to every faction that you can imagine that function the same way. I'm sure Reddit is this way too but I don't bother with them. I'm not sure why multiple forums all switched over to this style around the same time, but it's interesting to see. Definitely has its pluses and minuses.


Speak the truth!!!

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/772746.page#10378083 - My progress/failblog painting blog thingy

Eldar- 4436 pts


AngryAngel80 wrote:
I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
 
   
Made in de
Ladies Love the Vibro-Cannon Operator






Hamburg

Well, the tactical section is clearly structured atm.
The threads are faction- or chapter-based and are in this way focused on the tactical needs of the player base.
My current interests centers around the Aeldari and GK threads.

Former moderator 40kOnline

Lanchester's square law - please obey in list building!

Illumini: "And thank you for not finishing your post with a "" I'm sorry, but after 7200 's that has to be the most annoying sign-off ever."

Armies: Eldar, Necrons, Blood Angels, Grey Knights; World Eaters (30k); Bloodbound; Cryx, Circle, Cyriss 
   
Made in gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Manchester, UK

The megathreads are basically slow chatrooms about factions. Pretty nice to use when something new comes along, or to ask general questions.

The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in us
Pestilent Plague Marine with Blight Grenade




I'm not necessarily advocating for this, but I wonder if discussion would improve and diversify if the mods pruned the megathreads periodically.


I've had similar thoughts as well. I used to love the tactics section. It was my favorite part of the site. That stopped being true right around the time that GW started upping the speed on their releases. I think its was roughly some time in 6th, and when that started happening, the meg-threads ended up becoming monsters. The first 10-20 pages are all conjecture based on "what might work based on rumors, leaks and previews", the next 10-20 pages are post-codex release pages sorting out what we actually got, and THEN you start getting into useful content. Except that, since they run over multiple editions, and since they also adjust based on different things like ITC changes, FAQs, etc etc, it just becomes a bit of a mess. To mitigate this somewhat, you can try to run a specific search, which helps a little, but if you just want general tactics info, those threads aren't very helpful.

I've also noticed that, for the more popular factions, if you try to post a faction specific tactics question outside of the mega-threads, they don't tend to get as much traction or views, which then forces you back into the mega-thread and the cycle starts all over again.

Some of this we can't really control. The pace of change in the game isn't going to slow down and that's fine, but do we really need to start discussing tactics before the actual codex is out and we KNOW FOR SURE what's in it? Do we really need to keep the first 60-70 pages of those threads when the data is no longer valid/applicable? IDK what the solution is exactly, but maybe an occasional cull at least makes things a little easier?

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in gb
Instigating Incubi




The dark behind the eyes.

I would suggest that a big part of the issue is that many of the tactical elements have been removed from the game.

Hence, most of the actual decisions come down purely to list-building. And once you've got a few solid builds to focus around, there really isn't much else to discuss.

Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"



 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot





 vipoid wrote:
I would suggest that a big part of the issue is that many of the tactical elements have been removed from the game.

Hence, most of the actual decisions come down purely to list-building. And once you've got a few solid builds to focus around, there really isn't much else to discuss.


Listbuilding, to be fair, has always been the single easiest thing to discuss when it comes to 40k online. Very few people have the time to create the diagrams necesssary to, for example, discuss tactics surrounding Charge moves+Consolidation+Pile in techniques or tactics surrounding model removal to maximize screening.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






The problem is GW, they change and add rules so fast that players need to adapt every few months and sometimes change completely how to play their armies, which large changes that fast players are forced to always talk about changes. B.c each change effects each army completely differently there isn't much room to talk about broad tactics.

Then combine with GW taking out literally 80% of the tactics in the game, the only thing really left to discuss if your army.

So therefore its always army tactics, and why it moves from page 26 to 56 within 3 moths.

15k+
:harlequin: 4k
Beastmen 9500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Pestilent Plague Marine with Blight Grenade




The problem is GW, they change and add rules so fast that players need to adapt every few months and sometimes change completely how to play their armies, which large changes that fast players are forced to always talk about changes. B.c each change effects each army completely differently there isn't much room to talk about broad tactics.

Then combine with GW taking out literally 80% of the tactics in the game, the only thing really left to discuss if your army.

So therefore its always army tactics, and why it moves from page 26 to 56 within 3 moths.


As I said in my post, the pace of change isn't something we can ... change. Personally, I'm fine with that. I'm down for large threads as well. I think where it starts to become an issue is when you have the first 30 pages being "Tactics Tallk" based solely on pre-release conjecture, the next 30 being the same folks hashing out what we can ACTUALLY DO with the units and rules that ACTUALLY CAME OUT, and then having that thread last continuously over several years. The "Conjecture" section of each thread is almost instantly pointless, so we don't need it. If we didn't have to clean that mess up post-release, we also wouldn't need the next several pages cleaning up the conjecture, and if we maybe pruned the thread every so often (IDK what's reasonable - maybe twice a year around the major FAQ releases?), we would be able to maintain a more relevant discussion.

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in us
Heroic Senior Officer





Murray, Kentucky

That's happened from time to time. I want to say the admech thread rebooted recently and that helped. The problem is people want to make these megathreads a repository of knowledge and then realize that only the op can edit it and the OP is never going to take on that much work on what is starting to be 3-4 major changes a year.

Really people should just treat them as faction chatrooms and realize that if you want to know something specific odds are you're just going to have to ask. It sucks, but that's the way of things. I've also noticed actual tactic talks creeping into general discussion sometimes, since it's about the only place with breathing room to say "hey I want to try infantry guard, where do I start" for example.

'I've played Guard for years, and the best piece of advice is to always utilize the Guard's best special rule: "we roll more dice than you" ' - stormleader

"Sector Imperialis: 25mm and 40mm Round Bases (40+20) 26€ (Including 32 skulls for basing) " GW design philosophy in a nutshell  
   
Made in gb
Daring Dark Eldar Raider Rider




The smoke

The Tactics section is far from perfect, but as a player of a less popular faction, I'm just glad that the thread I'm interested in isn't being shunted back half a dozen pages.

I'd actually like to see the Tactics and Lists subforums grouped togather, and seperated by faction.

2500
1500
 
   
Made in ca
Boom! Leman Russ Commander





London, Ontario

As a one-time producer of decent quality articles regarding the Imperial Guard, regarding tactics and strategy...

(I coined the term Power Blob. Check it out over on 40kOnline if you like being told to straighten up and fly right. )

I can say the game shifts too fast to create meaningful content that lasts. It is my observation that 40k has become diluted. Many sections of players are using different rules. I mean, you have core-book players, Chapter Approved players, people using expansions or not, people playing ITC...

Unit changes with FAQs, then new releases, then FAQ's again...

The overall homogenization of abilities that give you a reroll. The stacking rules like the SM situation. Chapter tactics, levels of "only SM detachments" benefits that change. Custom tactics... quasi Formations. Multiplied by various factions, and sub factions.

There's just such a variety of what people call "40k" these days that trying to give tactical advise, already niche and situation dependant, doesn't fit everyone's rules version of what 40k means to them.
   
Made in us
The Last Chancer Who Survived




On moon miranda.

Ill echo what others have said. The game just has too much stuff from too many sources changing too rapidly for the kind of stuff we used to do. Tactica writeups and articles from previous editions didnt have to deal with that, and, more importantly, the killing power was substantially less and details more relevant. With all the big guns, rerolls on everything, faction bonuses, fight again abilities, etc, a lot of games basically just boil down to target priority and little else.

In 5E, I'd talk about using a chimeras to tank shock a unit into a clump so another can roll up and use its heavy flamer to whack everyone at once while keeping frontal armor pointed towards the enemy mainline. Mechanics like that aren't terribly relevant anymore, both units would just get within 8" and get their D6 heavy flamer auto hits and none of the other stuff is relevant. Now, the scales the game is trying to play at basically demands that level of abstraction, but there's just less to work with as well if one is after deep tactics.

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

Heavy Gear Painting Log, Northern Guard, Southern Republican Army, and Terrain
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Pestilent Plague Marine with Blight Grenade




Ill echo what others have said. The game just has too much stuff from too many sources changing too rapidly for the kind of stuff we used to do. Tactica writeups and articles from previous editions didnt have to deal with that, and, more importantly, the killing power was substantially less and details more relevant. With all the big guns, rerolls on everything, faction bonuses, fight again abilities, etc, a lot of games basically just boil down to target priority and little else


Definitely agree with a lot of this. I think my thing is that it would be great if we could even just cull the mega-threads once or twice a year. If anything, the fact that the game changes so fast now is even more incentive to not have a tactics thread that runs continuously over the course of years. I think it's the Tau thread that actually starts in 2017? What's the point in keeping all that? It's certainly unrealistic to expect a cull at every change/FAQ/meta adjustment, but a once or twice a year pruning doesn't seem unreasonable?

And then some community policing so we aren't blowing pages and pages of what SHOULD be "tactics talk" based on conjecture prior to a release? Am I crazy? Eh ... probably. lol

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Manchester, UK

 harlokin wrote:
I'd actually like to see the Tactics and Lists subforums grouped togather, and seperated by faction.


I don't think that would work. For example, I create a mixed Guard/AdMech/Knight list. What faction would that go in? Or would it be just Imperium, in which case all you are doing is splitting off half the factions into other forums?

The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in ca
Revving Ravenwing Biker




Vancouver, BC

 Trickstick wrote:
 harlokin wrote:
I'd actually like to see the Tactics and Lists subforums grouped togather, and seperated by faction.


I don't think that would work. For example, I create a mixed Guard/AdMech/Knight list. What faction would that go in? Or would it be just Imperium, in which case all you are doing is splitting off half the factions into other forums?

That kind of spread works for Bolter and Chainsword so why wouldn't it work here?
   
Made in gb
Daring Dark Eldar Raider Rider




The smoke

 Trickstick wrote:
 harlokin wrote:
I'd actually like to see the Tactics and Lists subforums grouped togather, and seperated by faction.


I don't think that would work. For example, I create a mixed Guard/AdMech/Knight list. What faction would that go in? Or would it be just Imperium, in which case all you are doing is splitting off half the factions into other forums?


I guess you could take your pick of the constituent factions.

The point for me is how much of a difference is there between a discussion about an Ork list, and one about Ork tactics? They are surely likely to include elements of both as a matter of course.

2500
1500
 
   
Made in us
Oozing Plague Marine Terminator







Beyond the taxonomic issues, the real problem with segregating the discussions is... you segregate the discussions. Which, I'll note, is the same problem we already have in Tactics.

To get a diverse discussion, players need casual exposure to foreign ideas and strategies. Just seeing topic titles can pique interests.

If you're only talking to other Guard players, at worst you only learn about Guard, and at best you only learn one side of the table for any given match up. Especially now that the game is so complicated, you might not be able to make an informed judgment on whether your opponent utilized their options correctly. If you're discussing this with other Guard players, you might get bad information and make bad strategies. All it takes is one skilled player of that opposing faction to weigh in and say 'yeah, your opponent made this mistake, I'd have played it like this, so the strategy you're considering won't work in the future.' That cross pollination should be the goal of a tactics forum.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/03/06 05:47:29


   
Made in us
Heroic Senior Officer





Murray, Kentucky

 DarkHound wrote:
Beyond the taxonomic issues, the real problem with segregating the discussions is... you segregate the discussions. Which, I'll note, is the same problem we already have in Tactics.

To get a diverse discussion, players need casual exposure to foreign ideas and strategies. Just seeing topic titles can pique interests.

If you're only talking to other Guard players, at worst you only learn about Guard, and at best you only learn one side of the table for any given match up. Especially now that the game is so complicated, you might not be able to make an informed judgment on whether your opponent utilized their options correctly. If you're discussing this with other Guard players, you might get bad information and make bad strategies. All it takes is one skilled player of that opposing faction to weigh in and say 'yeah, your opponent made this mistake, I'd have played it like this, so the strategy you're considering won't work in the future.' That cross pollination should be the goal of a tactics forum.

Yeah but the problem is what kind of tactics are left that are able to cross armies? You know, stuff that every army needs to know. A lot of stuff that used to be available for every army is gone now, you know, usr style pysker abilities, tank shock, universal damage tables, usr's (stuff like "is zealot worth taking") most of those are gone. From what I've seen, we've got objective placement, screening, close combat tricks, and perhaps CP management, perhaps how to deal with flyers too. And even there, much of this varies so much faction to faction for example that an eldar player isn't really going to have much genuine advice for someone like a guard player beyond "I hate it when guard player did X, but Im not really sure exactly what he did."

Also, remember that weapons have changed up a ton since the past editions and gotten far more bizarre and all over the place. Part of the reason you could have a thread like "autocannon vs lascannon" or "melta vs plasma" was because a ton of armies had those exact weapons, or something that had the same stats with a different name. Nowadays every weapon is just different enough to be somewhat unique, with new armies rarely, if ever, just getting big standard weapons. This is of course most likely so established players can't just kitbash the new unit with what they have, but it does hurt tactics discussion when there's little shared weaponry amongst the codexes. Heck, even the once thought classic standby of a Bolter isn't even a constant now. We've got what, 6 or 7 Primaris ones that all do something slightly different, and can only be taken by their main unit and no one else? How much discussion could you really have for weapons like that, or even their parent unit, when they're so homogeneous and yet completely unique at the same time? It's not like the old units such as a tactical squad or infantry squad known for massive customization, and even they lost options.

There's a lot that contributes to this

'I've played Guard for years, and the best piece of advice is to always utilize the Guard's best special rule: "we roll more dice than you" ' - stormleader

"Sector Imperialis: 25mm and 40mm Round Bases (40+20) 26€ (Including 32 skulls for basing) " GW design philosophy in a nutshell  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






And don't forget that even Str 3 can hurt Landraiders, Knights, etc.. before a large amount of guns couldn't even hurt things, then you add in AP into that, cover being almost gone, and finally everything (well 99.9% of everything) can fallback.

I'd estimate 75% of all general tactics are gone from the game.

15k+
:harlequin: 4k
Beastmen 9500

Reading/Writing LD, be kind!

https://maddpaint.blogspot.com 
   
Made in gb
Irked Necron Immortal




Eh, for the Necron Tactics thread, we’ve had other faction players come in to ask for advice on countering Necrons and I’ve seen fantastic responses providing detailed discussion on how their faction can best counter ‘crons.

Maybe it’s a bit of unnecessary shyness?
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: