PDA

View Full Version : Poll: Are 500 page tactical discussions useful?



ArmyC
19-09-2011, 02:17
I say no.

Can we please break them down a little more somehow?

Tupinamba
19-09-2011, 02:20
Agree with the OP.

Gaargod
19-09-2011, 02:58
(There is no poll)

Obviously, in theory, yes. It would be lovely to have a tactic roundup of the main tacticas, picking out the salient advice about every individual unit, then leave the actual tacticas to basically formulate new ideas to put in them.

Problem arises however. Who in their right mind has the time and patience to do that?!
There is an actual collected together tactics 'book' for Imperial Guard somewhere, i think there's a link in the tactica for them. Don't know if its been updated for the new codeces. But its crazy long and took literally weeks of effort by multiple members, and there's still tons of arguments about it. Some players may hold that all units of type A are awesome and B are crap, whilst others argue the opposite!


Its a nice idea, but impossible in practice.

34thGingerbread
19-09-2011, 03:00
I think they are to an extent, being able to sift through for a long time and see exactly what the major debates and what various questions community members may of had helps me better understand the game and keeps me from asking the same questions twice.

I'd say cull down the information maybe, so that whenever a general consensus on one subject is reached slap it into page one with the relevant info? Q & A style?

Dirty Mac
19-09-2011, 03:42
I think, that the tactics section should have a sub-forum for each army.
Then each army sub-forum should have more sub-forums for either each phase deploy-move- magic- shooting-CC.

or each selection choice, lord ,heroes, core, special and rare.

Eg:

Tactics:
Beastmen
Brets
Empire
Dark Elves

-Deployment
-Movement
-Magic
-Shooting
-Close Combat

High Elves
Lizardmen
Etc......
Or


Tactics:
Beastmen
Brets
Empire
Dark Elves

-Lords
-Heroes
-Core
-Special
-Rare

High Elves
Lizardmen
Etc......

Being new to WHFB, and reading the tactia threads that were made for the armies because of 8th edition.
Because they were started last year, Page 1 seems more like guesswork theories, and then i have to sort through 500 pages
to find stuff that has been found to either work or not work in 8th.
just a bit hard. also there is like 2 or 3 new 8th ogres threads going,
having a dedicated army sub- forum shouldn't be that hard., it would clean the place up a bit too i think.

MrCarbohydrate
19-09-2011, 03:53
That's also nice in theory but awfully time consuming for the admins, even if it is relatively easy to do on vBulletin.

Plus, really, how much use would the Vampire Counts or Beastman subforum get?

That's intended as a joke. Kind of. But not really.

russellmoo
19-09-2011, 04:51
The 8th ed orc tactica thread is relatively useful- mainly because O&G players agreed not to start discussing 8th ed tactics until players could get their hands on the new book- but in general a lot of the tactica threads are almost impossible reads unless you've been in on them from the start-

There is nothing stopping players from getting together- like in the case of the Imperial guard, and putting together a pdf tactica- and I think this is a good direction-

Leave the tactica threads for tactical questions- and maybe have a separate thread called "Tactical guide:such and such" where players put together and agree on viable/useable tactics-

Vsurma
19-09-2011, 08:21
We have but 1 front page, most people rarely go past the first or perhaps the 2nd page, nor should they really.

To do so merely resurects long since gone threads.

Generally people that are into lizardmen, will read the lizardmen tactics group etc. It doesn't matter if we discuss the same topics 3 months after the previous conversations where had. Perhaps something new has been learned since then.

This way you know where to go, want to get tips on lizardmen, go their tactics thread. If everyone starts a new thread all the time, we will have 20 new threads every day when most of them do fit inside an old heading and would still get the answers your looking for inside.

Then again I think it ultimately comes down to how you want to use the forum.

If you want to come here and get an immidiate answer = already answered prior question, then having seperate threads with precise headings will work better.

If you want to use it as a forum for Q&A then I think the current way of having broader threads with more inside works. I use the forum a lot so I don't mind the large threads.

popisdead
20-09-2011, 00:00
They are not living documents but for the people who regularly contribute to or read it, it's useful.

I wouldn't go back and read from the start any tactica but I would keep in touch with the recent posts.

Tuttivillus
20-09-2011, 00:07
I've read one hell long thread and found it interesting and very helpfull and it makes things easier, if you need an answer, you go to that thread. For me it works fine.

Tzeentch Lover
20-09-2011, 00:09
Without army specific sub forums, yes the tactical pages are quite useful for getting army specific questions answered.

Nocculum
20-09-2011, 00:15
I think it would be wise, perhaps prudent to sticky each of the main tactica threads in a sub-forum (or indeed, in a stickied thread at the header of the tactics forum to link to the respective threads).

Any more administration or specification than that and we're looking at too much work and too much strain on resources.

vinny t
20-09-2011, 00:16
I think there are good ideas in the first 10 or so pages then you get to "this is my list how can I make it better" and it just becomes the same old stuff

Wargamejunkie
20-09-2011, 04:02
Usually not I have found.

Trustey
20-09-2011, 04:29
I like them just fine "search this thread" feature almost always brings me to exactly what I was looking for.

RandomSpecific
20-09-2011, 05:11
yes they are usefull as long as they contain up to date relevant info. if its all 8th (example) then let it run, you can always skip to the end or skim read if you dont find what you want.

more discussion the better when it comes to the thinking side of the game.

decker_cky
20-09-2011, 05:18
Yeah. Back when I was new to warhammer, I would read through a good portion of those threads. In reading through larger quantities of those threads, you see a lot more ideas than tend to make it into a static document, and you see dominant ideas that are pushed by a few individuals come and go. It takes time, but it's very useful. Or you can skim it by searching the topic (I do it very often when I'm interested in how a particular unit or item functions).

As an example...I'm a good Beastmen player. I could write a guide on how to play Beastmen competitively in 8th edition. You could listen to the Mark Wildeman bad dice podcast episode and get a lot of the same ideas and a few differences and neat twists. For the most part, there's a pretty simple basis to most competitive beastmen armies. But if you read through the beastmen tactica, you see lots of interesting different ideas that come out too, like Memnos running his Ghorros army completely against conventional wisdom. I've personally taken some of his ideas and had some good success by mixing them with my concepts, including beating armies much 'harder' than the list I built around a centigor core.

The most confusing thing in those big threads is rules changes and erratas, but that's why you think critically about what you're reading, and hopefully have read the latest rules first.

If you want army specific subforums and discussion, go to army specific forums. Beastmen players can gain a lot by reading ideas on the Herdstone. Dark elf players can gain a lot by reading ideas on druchii.net. Warseer is great for having all the different player pools mixed together, but you tend to get away from the army into discussions of power levels here a bit more, and it takes some effort to sift out army specific info.

loh
20-09-2011, 05:44
I've read one hell long thread and found it interesting and very helpfull and it makes things easier, if you need an answer, you go to that thread. For me it works fine.

This, also gives me heaps to read at work :3

Isambard
20-09-2011, 06:07
Useful? Maybe. Interesting? Yes!

If your contribution is not on the first page then your views are obviously not worth reading......

Frankly
20-09-2011, 16:07
I think they're useful.

If I go to a tournament or have some questions and thoughts regarding an army I'll usually troll a tactics thread and have a look for a debate about the topic, instead of looking at one persons view, because its usually in the debates on the thread that the details of a certain topic or question will be hammered out and alot of idea, veiws and examples are put forth.

Malorian
20-09-2011, 16:28
They are definately useful.

If you took all of the subjects covered in the various tactic threads and broke them up you would swamp the Warhammer Tactics section, basically making it needed to break it up into race specific sections.

By grouping them together you keep the threads cleaner.

badguyshaveallthefun
20-09-2011, 18:15
Are people really that A.D.D. that they can't muscle through all those pages of a tactica? I've done it now with 4 different Fantasy races and three 40k ones (Warriors, Beastmen, Daemons, High Elves, Imperial Guard, Codex Daemons and Deathwing in case anyones wondering) and am all the better for it. I usually skip past all the posts where people post army lists (because those belong elsewhere), but I read every single post.

And to answer the OP, yes, I think that those 500 page tactica threads are useful and helpful.

DivineVisitor
21-09-2011, 02:48
I reckon there largely useless information, or at least as an Empire player i've found the Empire thread to be largely useless. Though if im looking for tactics on a specific army il usually visit a site directly for that particular army.

Warhammer-Empire (http://www.warhammer-empire.com/theforum/), The Daemonic Legion (http://z7.invisionfree.com/wyrmling_x/index.php?), Druchii.net (http://www.druchii.net/) or The Under Empire (http://s6.zetaboards.com/The_UnderEmpire/index/) for example.

Im glad there up though. Occasionally when i decide to see if there's any good info il come across something, it is however few and far between.

Aggronor
21-09-2011, 06:01
Some of them are better then others.

If you're newer, or just starting a new army, the threads where someone has taken it upon themselves to consolidate all the Really Important stuff in the first page are pretty handy.

On the other hand, the stuff that's just a very long ongoing discussion doesn't seem that helpful if you're not already following it.

Lord Solar Plexus
21-09-2011, 06:53
For the homo communicans every communication is more useful than a book or library.



It would be lovely to have a tactic roundup of the main tacticas, picking out the salient advice about every individual unit, then leave the actual tacticas to basically formulate new ideas to put in them.

Problem arises however. Who in their right mind has the time and patience to do that?!


As you say yourself, the Imperial Guard players did just that. While it did take quite some effort, it is just a question of expectations. You seem to suggest that only a perfect tome will do. On the contrary, something like this has to be seen as a work in progress.



Don't know if its been updated for the new codeces. But its crazy long and took literally weeks of effort by multiple members, and there's still tons of arguments about it. Some players may hold that all units of type A are awesome and B are crap, whilst others argue the opposite!


That are suprising things to say. Last time I looked, there was a table of contents, and the length of individual articles was manageable. Also, we did have an (imperfect) editorial process in place to root out simple cheering articles with little tactical value.

Lastly, if you actually expected a condensed Tactica to end all discussion by faithfully describing everything, then you should reconsider that notion. Such a thing is impossible.