|
Post by Typhus on Mar 24, 2021 15:46:05 GMT -5
Conversely, if this wasn't useful or you felt could have contained more info to make it useful you, I'd also like to know. My feelings aren't going to be hurt by negative feedback. Personally, I think it's too generic to really be applicable to Warhammer 40k.
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Mar 25, 2021 9:18:55 GMT -5
I'll echo what Typhus said above a bit. For new players to read this, I feel it paints a bit of a false picture of 40k.
I sometimes think of 40k in terms of a container of paint brushes (or you could substitute a toolbox if that works better for your imagination). It feels like you're saying, "if you buy these "X" number of brushes, you'll be good and can handle any painting situation ever". When really, you need a huge variety of not only brushes, but techniques to properly utilize those brushes in order to be successful. No different than if you bought a single phillips & robertson screwdrivers, hammer and a pair of pliers could you handle every job that needs tools.
However, if new players take what they read as the first brush, or some of the first brushes they put into their mug that will help them learn some basics of strategy and a general understanding of how to move little plastic men across the board then it's not bad advice.
40k is just SO incredibly complex; trying to paint all armies with such a generic brush is going to leave a lot of information on the table.
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on Mar 25, 2021 9:44:37 GMT -5
However, if new players take what they read as the first brush, or some of the first brushes they put into their mug that will help them learn some basics of strategy and a general understanding of how to move little plastic men across the board then it's not bad advice. This is part of why I was considering expanding the series, this was written as an introduction level series, and I was hoping by expanding I could get more specific. It's definitely intended to be used as your metaphor implies, as an introduction to a very deep subject, and provide the first few tools required to be able to innovate and build upon. Looking back over it, you guy definitely have a very good point. Perhaps being this generic isn't as helpful as I thought and having some concrete and specific examples of units or army lists would help improve it at this level before building on top. I specifically tried to avoid being too-specific or tying to 40k too tightly, and maybe that was a mistake.
|
|
|
Post by lightcavalier on Mar 25, 2021 10:01:06 GMT -5
Just my 2c, but something I've taken from the army and applied to wargamming forever....
Learning to conduct a simple estimate of your mission/situation will benefit more than trying to memorize a playbook of tactical plans/formations/drills. The latter, without understanding, can lead to things like "we always turn left when ambushed" (a long story ill be glad to explain later).
Given that in 9e matched play, the objectives of the mission are known....the question becomes
1. What are my assigned tasks (primary + secondary objectives)
2. What are my implied tasks (what things do I need to do to be able to accomplish the tasks in step 1, or to prevent the other guy from accomplishing their tasks)
3. What are my constraints and restraints (time, terrain, army composition, auras, conditions relating to stratagems, reserves, etc)
You can then get into things like evaluating your assumptions etc.
My point is that you need to know how your objective can even be achieved before you start looking at frontal vs refused flank and things of thar nature.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Mar 25, 2021 10:27:22 GMT -5
To be brutally honest, the battleplans appear to be more suited to rank and flank games such as Old editions of Warhammer Fantasy (or Game of thrones, flames of war, Kings of war etc.) than to the current edition of 40k.
The concept of driving forward into the enemy lines, flanking etc. are just not universally applicable to 40k tactics, where often you're just not doing any of that, as the game has fundamentally changed this edition.
Tactics in 9th have moved towards more of how are you going to score your primary and secondary missions, active vs. reactive play, minimizing shooting lanes, use of terrain, screening, use of strategic reserves, probabilities with shooting/melee expected results etc.
Just my two cents of course, and I don't want to discourage anyone from talking tactics which I think is always a fun exercise.
For new players, I would actually recommend more watching high quality battle reports (play on tabletop has them reduced to 40 minutes if time is an issue) and I highly, highly recommend watching Tabletop Titans for full games, and specific videos talking about 9th edition tactics you can do with your army - as the tactics change dramatically depending on what army you're playing!
|
|
|
Post by Frosty the Pirate on Mar 25, 2021 10:57:13 GMT -5
I'm grateful for the honest feedback, I really do appreciate it.
Perhaps this way of thinking is a little dated. It worked very well for me in past editions but 9th is a very different game, much more skirmishy than battle-lines driven, which can limit the applicability of this way of thinking.
Perhaps I'll leave the idea of expanding or editing/improving on ice for now.
|
|