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

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

Where is this faction?[edit]

Maybe I'm missing the right page from the leaked Indexes, however as far as I can tell Imperial Agents is no longer a thing. Am I missing it, or should this page be put up for deletion? -- Triacom (talk) 07:54, 10 June 2017 (UTC) I've gone over the leaked rules several times now, where the hell are you getting the idea that Imperial Agents is a faction, let alone one that includes the Astra Telepathica, the Assassins, and the Inquisition? -- Triacom (talk) 03:55, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

  • As far as I can tell, "Imperial Agents" is a mashup of various other Imperial Organisations including the Sisters of Battle, Inquisition and Assassins. They're all rolled into Index: Imperium 2.
Yes, and none of them have the 'Imperial Agents' keyword, not in their faction, and not in their normal keywords, so this faction no longer exists and everyone else was split apart into their individual factions again. -- Triacom (talk) 19:20, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
The cover of the index still refers to them as Imperial Agents though. Personally I would keep them all on the same page. -- Acherousia (talk) 23:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I created this page exactly because of what Acherousia said, but I myself think that maybe it's now a better idea to separate them into stubs like we did with some Age of Sigmar factions (Ironweld Arsenal, for example). --24.150.106.124 01:23, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Well at least we have an answer. Sorry to tell you anon, but it's not that we should separate them, it's that we have to because this faction doesn't exist. No it does not matter if the book lists 'a' faction called Imperial Agents, there's nothing in the game currently that belongs to it. -- Triacom (talk) 04:43, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
"Sorry to tell you Anon" implies I'd be broken up about the loss of the Page. I am not in the slightest. Also, I haven't added anything to the actual page. Anyway, we need to decide where everything's going. I can see the Sisters of Battle, Inquisition and possibly the Assassins getting their own pages (we already have a page for the Custodes, and we should have one for the Sisters of Silence if we're not going to add them to the Custodes Page). Everything else is largely copypasta'd from the Imperial Guard unless I'm missing something. Arguably not even that since everything the Imperium has has the "Imperium" Faction Keyword, meaning you can safely add in them Wyrdvane Psykers to your Space Marine force and still count as Battle Forged.
If you want to make an 'Imperium' page then you should do that. As for the other factions, they are their own thing and as such should get their own pages. As for Imperial Agents, the only place this page should go is in the trash bin because as stated, it does not exist. -- Triacom (talk) 04:13, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Why are we still adding to this? I mean that seriously, the only reason I haven't blanked the page is because I remember Wikifag asking users not to do that, but this page is full of misinformation, such as telling people that these units are all part of the same faction when they are not. For this reason I'm not going to let new units be added on here unless they have the 'Imperial Agents' faction, which right now doesn't exist. -- Triacom (talk) 10:11, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

It would be even more wasteful to have a bunch of stub pages for each faction listed here, which wouldn't even be a paragraph long apiece. Let it go. --Newerfag (talk) 05:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm not letting this go because I don't think we should have a page for a faction that doesn't exist. If you really want to make an Imperium faction page then you should do that instead, but this one was made under false assumptions. -- Triacom (talk) 10:00, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Why not just move it to Imperium(8E) then? That keyword exists. --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 10:17, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
That's what I've been saying for people to do if they wanted something like this, though honestly I've got little interest in making that page myself right now (especially not after the amount of work I put into the 7th edition Imperial Agents page). If nobody else does it I'll probably do it in a few days when I have more time, but for now I'm not going to see the delete tag removed from something that doesn't exist. -- Triacom (talk) 11:05, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
I've just moved it now, complete and as is, so it'll probably take a little bit of work to restructure it away from this "Agents" idea and back to the Imperium keyword. But it's a start. --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 11:08, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Good, this is what I suggested back on the 29th, as seen above. The only problem I can foresee with this is if GW actually does make an Imperial Agents faction again as that will result in making it more annoying to recreate the Imperial Agents page. -- Triacom (talk) 11:16, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure they will do that, I think they're pretty sold on the Key Word system for defining factions. They might do a Codex: Imperial Agents once again, but I'd expect that would just be an umbrella book for the various factions that use the Imperium key word, like Battletome: Order. With respect to the common key word though, why not use this page as the hub for the various Imperium factions and simply link to the other articles via drill down (eg: Imperium > Adeptus Astartes > Blood Angels). And later, if a minor faction such as ASTRA TELEPATHICA does actually get it's own full codex, then we just create the new page and link out (eg: Imperium > Astra Telepathica) from here rather than duplicating information. Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 11:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Thinking again, I really don't see the point of this article at all, we already have pages for the Inquisition and Assassins... this page is likely going to end up being forgotten and ignored. Best to just get rid of it until we actually need it. -Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 10:23, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
If that's your stance then we're right back where we started when the delete tag was first added to this. -- Triacom (talk) 12:25, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Again, what about the factions too small to have their own list? The Adeptus Astra Telepathica and the Aeronautica Imperialis come to mind, among others. This is the only place where such designated allies can really fit right now, because let's face it, they probably won't be getting their own Codexes.--Newerfag (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
I see your point, having lots of articles covering at most one or two units just creates unnecessary clutter, when they could easily be grouped into one place, I suspect it's an issue of categorisation more than anything else. I'd suggest reverting the Inquistion tactica and the Officio Assassinorum tactica back to here if that is the case since it's very messy having multiple tactics article covering exactly the same source material. I'd also suggest that anything which cannot fill a old-school traditional FOC should probably not warrant it's own tactica. --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 16:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Impending Custodes codex[edit]

In light of the Golden bananas getting a full codex, I've removed the old redirect to this page and begun work on updating their pre-redirect page to match what we know. New special rules and known Stratagems are currently up now. --Newerfag (talk) 16:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Weapon Critiques[edit]

At present, there seems to be only "this is bad, never take." While these assessments might be true, taken over the entire article they're both unhelpful and confusing. If everything is bad, then nothing is bad (internally). If everything is bad externally, then it's a desperate category and heading altogether.

Battlebrothers[edit]

NOTE TO EVRY ONE the battlebrohters rule is in beta at moment this means it is by no means mandatory to use and give you feeback to gw about this toppic they need that.