Talk:Warhammer 40,000/Tactics/Genestealer Cults(8E)

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

Given that Genestealer Cults are an army that is intended to be allied in to Imperial Guard and Tyranids, I feel that it would be worthwhile creating a section on this page that talks about good allied takes and general strategy for Brood Brothers. Not listing all possible units, just the "hot takes".

There's nothing wrong with that and other tactics pages have done the same in the past, go for it. -- Triacom (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Look, I know you guys are terrified of the "no reserves on turn 1" beta rule, but I really don't think we can in good conscious write this article as if your opponent will let you just ignore it. Because odds are they won't. 21:08, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

It's a beta rule. Not a current rule. Deal with it -- 21:15, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Your opponent's going to have to ignore it if you don't want to play with it, until it's no longer a beta rule it is not a part of the official rules. If they don't want to ignore it then they don't want to play the official game and you might as well be using house rules. -- Triacom (talk) 06:20, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

I believe that when it says “the enemy can’t get within 9”” , it means that you can’t deepstrike if they’re within 9”. Otherwise you’re literally creating impassable walls , which is exploitable as hell. is this accurate? Because I refuse to believe that GW would give a faction the ability to permanently hold an objective, as the could just put an ambush marker on top and then create an 18” bubble where the enemy cannot enter

Armouries on the various army pages.[edit]

This is mostly a repost of a question I had on the main tactics page, but I'll be posting it on all the most frequently updated tacticas because it applies to all of them and I'd like to hear any arguments against it.

I've been wondering this for a while now, but what do the armoury sections add that cannot be covered by unit entries? Everything in them is either stating info that is obvious and redundant to anyone holding the relevant book (which are the people using the tactica in the first place), or it's insight that is restated in the unit entry itself, where it's actually relevant. I get why we list relics since those are usually unique to the army and can be applies to a ton of different characters for different builds, same with Warlord Traits, and both of those are usually not covered in the various unit entries, instead that advice is usually covered in the relic and traits sections which makes sense. But for the regular armouries I'm not really seeing why we keep them around at all to be honest, since they take up so much space and it's annoying to scroll past that kind of bloat. How should we improve them, if possible (so that they're not just restating profiles) or should we just remove them? Personally I'm leaning more towards getting rid of them entirely. -- Triacom (talk) 18:50, 17 April 2019 (UTC)