Revised Tactics

[Princelarming]

Hello people - fellow Tyranid players!

I've been looking at these boards for some time, and I've drawn great inspiration and help from the various articles on Tyranid Units, Builds and Tactics in the past.

Now, the advice seem to be disordered, short and without backing. People spew out their own opinions, without giving enough time to back their claims, state reasons or find references.
(This, of course, being my own opinion is subject to the same criticism i just leveled at others...)

What i think we need is a revision of the very helpful articles in the "Tactica Tyranids". not necessarily by the same people who wrote them in the first place, but along the same lines as the originals. The point would be to make a common ground for evaluating units, builds and lists, when people post them here on the boards - not a consensus, but something we can all refer to.

Just my two cents... What do you guys think?

[Lanesend]

Hey Prince, You're absolutly right.

But I think that we'll have to wait some time until the tactica- writers have enough games and (very important) the meta changes settle down a bit. Where I play, everybody is still testing what works and what doesn't.

So be a little patient and in a few weeks the first tactics threads will be written.

[Illithid]

It is hard to figure out what exactly is a viable tactic until we know what 6th ed. has in store, we get a FAQ and the meta all settle. Everyone is just experimenting at the moment. What works one game may not work the next and I would not be comfortable for 4-5 months on giving any advise.

Been actually been keeping away from this section of the Hive for the above reason.

[Princelarming]

I get it - but that also means that we all keep doing the same things, and testing the same builds, when we could be sharing the experiences, and actually understanding the meta...

I understand the need for getting some games under your belt before making the precise predictions and guides needed for beginners to understand the army we use - but there are some simple corrections to existing documents that could be made without any (or many) games... MC's with Poisoned Weapons for instance, or a section on the abilities and values of FMC's... Seeing as any revisions are a long-running process, why not get started with what you can actually revise now?? It's in the writing, commenting and talking about the army, that true insights are gained... (along with playing games, of course!)

If the threat of possible FAQ's is what's keeping the tactica-writers from writing, then I hope they have more substantial evidence to expect FAQ's than the rest of the web - GW has just released massive FAQ's, and their update frequency has not been know to be fast...

[coredump]

The BRB FAQ is the one folks are waiting for.

We are sharing info about games, and changing and experimenting based on other peoples experiences.

But it does no good to have a consensus-type tactica, when we are no where near a consensus

[Princelarming]

Aug 10, 2012 15:14:06 GMT coredump said:

But it does no good to have a consensus-type tactica, when we are no where near a consensus

Well, a consensus doesn't just happen - it has to be worked at. And with solid starting points, such as Loate's Unit tactica and other articles like it, the work doesn't have to be that long or hard (pun intended...)

What i'm trying to say is that i would like those otherwise brilliant articles made for 5th to be updated to 6th...

[Illithid]

Again, how could we grade what is an A-C scale when we do not even know what is viable and what will change in 5-6 months? Loate's tactica still was extremely accurate at the dying stages of 5th Ed. but something we spend time writing now will most likely be extremely misleadig in 3 months time. Imagine if we grade Raveners a "B" now, yet they lose Acute Senses in a FAQ and get infiltrate instead?

Right now, we are a month into 6th Ed. and really, no one has a clue or even a firm enough grasp of the rules and opponents. It is all speculation.

[commandersasha]

I second waiting at least a few months; even if no further FAQs are forthcoming, settling in is vital before attempting a revision of a stickied tactica.

For now, the Tactics and Army Lists sub-forum provides a thriving discussion place, as we all report back on our successes and failures. I suggest (if it hasn't already been done) that Loate's has a coloured intro text added at the beginning to warn newcomers, but that should be all for now.

Can you still comment on Loate's thread? This might be a good place to start compiling obvious changes to each unit.

Does anyone know where Venerable Loate's chamber is, and what his activation codes might be?

[Princelarming]

I don't think you can comment on the thread, i'm afraid... Would if i could ;-)

It makes sense to get things started as fast as possible, while noting that the work would never be "done"... Even though we thought it was done for 5th, it could still have used some revisions from time to time...