Scholarly Articles

[spec.ops]

I would like to mantra “DoA/DS Army - Tips & Tricks” thread started by Syypher and if that thread could be sticky'ed. Because, it allows those who really embrace the BA DoA theme and gives them the knowledge on how to beat face with that theme for a lack of subtly. However, I would like to take this moment to highlight something that is a bit difficult to address - the lack of data.

 

For example, I was hoping to click on the B&C: BA forum and read the latest volume on the “Idiots guide to all things BA” but I never saw it. Maybe it’s somewhere, maybe I didn’t scourer the thousands of threads and link them all together into my own personal “BA Nexus” detailing all things doctrinal and tactical. Regardless, if there is something out there I think it would be great boon to everyone if we revitalized it – or create our own.

 

Now, hold onto your emotions. I am not attacking this site, far from it. I simply want to see this forum to become the #1 BA site out there, and if it already is why not add to it?!

 

What I am envisioning is something like snippets of scholarly journals, but BA related. Isn't this why forums like this exist? It’s at the core of community like this and ours is no different. I know this forum produces scholarly articles; however, they are a decentralized or have yet to be addressed. So i propose we centralize and add to our data or library per say.

 

This way when the masses come to this forum wanting to serve the emperor we have stickies (“our” forum standards) acting as “Field Manuel for X subject” and/ or “Tactical Doctrine on how to play X.” Now, I am not talking about writing a tactic for X unit engaging Y element in Z situation, but aspects of BA defined and our uniqueness expounded through well thought out principles.

 

For example a scholarly article could address DoA and cover questions such as:

What is a DoA list? How does it play? What is its strengths and weakness? How do I achieve victory based on 5th Editions standard missions? How do I deploy a DoA? What units should I be looking to deploy in a DoA? If the enemy tires to counter my DoA by deploying their forces in a specialized manner what might they look like, and how to I address it? Should I go first or second, and why? Etc…

 

One last thing I would like to suggest is that we nominate and/ or select members to sort of, “sign-off,” on X article rather than just sticky anything that’s more than 500 word long =P. There purpose would be to sanction X article but only after it was thoroughly picked apart by them and/or others. Once revitalized it would be added to our doctrine nexus.

 

These select few could be simply selected by the community and/or moderators. Once nominated or selected those few would prove themselves by writing their own tactical article or address a principle or elaborate on something. Obviously it would be a great read, and from there, they then post a roster of topics that the masses could attempt to write.

 

So, who is well respect around this community and who thinks they know there stuff?

 

I know I would vote for antique_nova based on his post in this thread: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...howtopic=217038

 

DV8 based on his firm understanding of BA based on his post 48 in this thread: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.p...16161&st=25

 

Who else?

 

And are those who are mentioned willing to command such a position?

[Bradley Powers]

I think this is a great idea, although "Scholarly Article" could use some definition. As an engineer, I have a certain idea of what a scholarly paper should be (something like: "Statistical Analysis of Vanguard Veteran Configurations versus Monstrous Creatures") and others might have very different ideas. With that said, posts like the ones mentioned are very good. One thing I think could be helpful is some sort of peer editing, to fix grammatical/typo errors, as well as bettering readability. I don't think that this sort of editing should focus on content though.

 

I would be more than happy to write an article on something like DoA. I could also do some interesting statistical analysis on units and various loadouts. I would also be happy to act as a peer editor. Lastly, I think that typesetting the articles, using a system like LaTeX (a professional typesetting markup language) could make these articles easier to read and use. I can also help with that.

 

Let me know what I could do to help!

[Gv0zD]

Well, that's surely a good idea. Such article would be more than valuable both for the veterans and the newbies. I wish I could contribute to this work, but, sadly I'm a newby in 5th ed Blood Angels ;)

Speaking of the members, who can contribute to such article, I'd recommend JamesI, Morticon, BOBMAKENZIE, Redfinger, as well as already mentioned antique_nova and DV8. These guys have provided invaluable advice regarding BA tactics. I think that syypher can also contribute his knowledge and skills. I might have forgotten others, who can also help with creating Tactica: DoA. Check the army lists section - there you'll surely find other willing to help and capable of giving valuable advice.

[BOBMAKENZIE]

Speaking of the members, who can contribute to such article, I'd recommend [*blah blah blah mods*] BOBMAKENZIE, [*blah blah blah other people*]

 

I love you too brah :)

[DV8]

Well, that's surely a good idea. Such article would be more than valuable both for the veterans and the newbies. I wish I could contribute to this work, but, sadly I'm a newby in 5th ed Blood Angels :(

Speaking of the members, who can contribute to such article, I'd recommend JamesI, Morticon, BOBMAKENZIE, Redfinger, as well as already mentioned antique_nova and DV8. These guys have provided invaluable advice regarding BA tactics. I think that syypher can also contribute his knowledge and skills. I might have forgotten others, who can also help with creating Tactica: DoA. Check the army lists section - there you'll surely find other willing to help and capable of giving valuable advice.

 

Double love :) :wub:

 

But I will say this. I am a strongly opinionated writer. Do people always agree with me? I'd put the tally at 50/50. I may not be the one you want to put solely in charge of writing an article by myself. :P

 

 

DV8

[Bradley Powers]

I'm pretty sure that rigorous peer review will filter out the whackjobs *cough* DV8 *cough* :)

 

I'm kidding of course, your advice has been incredibly valuable for me.

[DV8]

I'm pretty sure that rigorous peer review will filter out the whackjobs *cough* DV8 *cough* :)

 

I'm kidding of course, your advice has been incredibly valuable for me.

 

It just means I'm suffering from the Black Rage :wub: Or the Mark of the Wulfen, depending on whether I'm wearing Red or Grey armor...

 

 

DV8

[Bradley Powers]

Gray armor? Is that some Blood Angels successor chapter's DC scheme? I didn't know. :P

[DV8]

Gray armor? Is that some Blood Angels successor chapter's DC scheme? I didn't know. :P

 

I can't tell if you're yanking my chain or not, but my other PA army is Space Wolves. (See what I did there as well? :yes: )

 

 

DV8

[BOBMAKENZIE]

Gray armor? Is that some Blood Angels successor chapter's DC scheme? I didn't know. :yes:

 

I can't tell if you're yanking my chain or not, but my other PA army is Space Wolves. (See what I did there as well? ;) )

 

 

DV8

 

Why why do you hurt us so?

 

:P

[JamesI]

If people want to write some high quality articles, I suggest submitting them to the Librarium. If we get some good BA strategy articles, we can sticky a post with links to the Librarium articles or good threads on the forum.

[Bradley Powers]

yanking my chain

 

Ha! Good one!

 

Oh Space Puppies...

[syypher]

Wow. Thanks spec.ops. That's really nice of you to nominate that article I was compiling for DoA strategies and advice! You too Gv0zD. I would love to help out when I can ;)

 

I think this is a great idea. Most other forums that are mostly army specific have stickies for articles that are written for the reasons stated above in the OP. This would also add value to the forum and bring people back. Eventually some of those people may gain knowledge that others don't know yet and they can give back to the community.

 

The topics I think I could help with the most is DoA tips&tricks (like the one I already have except more elaborate) and Mech BA play.

 

Another topic that I can contribute to but would not be able to do alone and I'm sure we would all agree would be better compiled by many people would be a unit over. When I start a new army I love going to army specific websites and finding a unit overview, for the current edition of course, to help me get started. We could use all the people who are nominated or whoever can contribute some value to the topic and combine it into one article.

 

 

If I had to nominate some members I would definitely put DV8, redfinger, Mekzh and antique_nova on my vote.

 

 

Great idea spec.ops!

[Bradley Powers]

I've also gotten excellent advice from WarpWalker, I think he could be good for this too.

[spec.ops]

Wow, I am shocked this went over so well!

 

@Bradley, you got me on that one. Scholarly Articles do usually contain math or stats and thankfully we can use math hammer to fill this void. For example, it could be quite useful to know the likely percent of how many DS’ing units will arrive on turn 2. Reason, gives a person a standard estimate based on their number of DS’ing units will normally arrive. Again, just an example. Hmmm…it would be nice to know the kill percentage of the Hand Flamer on Geq and Meq.

 

@James, can we keep these articles “In-House” rather than subjecting them to non BA enthusiasts. Reason, it gives this forum and its community a sense of ownership. What do I mean by ownership…good question – self. Ownership, a sense of belonging, and in this reference – pride. If we subject our articles outside of our peer raters “select few” what’s so great about being one of the select few. This isn’t for the greater good of the imperilum, this is for BA – us. We write our tatica for us and only for us, but if there is something that is general enough that could be applied outside of BA tactics we could pass it out to the non BA masses.

 

@Syypher, no problem, you were the one who caused all of this in the first place. =P

 

Well, we already have some enthusiast! However, many others have yet to sound off. Let’s give them some time, say 3 days. In 3 days I’ll make a new thread detailing who the community voted for and a status if they accepted the responsibility to write BA article, peer review others articles, render a compile a roster of topic for anyone to write. All of this will be stiky’ed (I hope) except the peer reviews.

 

In the mean time why don’t we flesh out what we want to write about.

 

DoA is talked about A LOT! However, there is no centralized data or a single article outlineing DoA from top to bottom. Since DoA is BA’s claim to fame other than Death Co I think we could all agree that this needs to be written by our top candidate. Don’t be shy, grab your pair and stand up if you think you know DoA and let us know. On the flip side, its pretty cool, because your article is going to read for a lot and for a good while!

 

Hybrid DoA is a very popular build. The same applies, if you think you know this build well then let us know.

 

Mech BA is another very talked about build. The same applies, if you think you know this build well then let us know.

 

Now, there is much more than these articles. I know someone mentioned a rundown of each unit choice…that’s a daunting task.

 

Deployment, that’s another topic of interest. It is always neglected till it’s time to put some boots on the ground. The funny thing is that those first few decisions of where to some models or when to go first or second can make or break someone.

 

If anyone else has some ideas throw them out here so we can start building a topic roster.

[syypher]

DoA is talked about A LOT! However, there is no centralized data or a single article outlineing DoA from top to bottom. Since DoA is BA’s claim to fame other than Death Co I think we could all agree that this needs to be written by our top candidate. Don’t be shy, grab your pair and stand up if you think you know DoA and let us know. On the flip side, its pretty cool, because your article is going to read for a lot and for a good while!

 

I could help with this as I've already compiled a list on my thread about DoA tactics and strategies. But as far as writing an article I'm not worthy of that. I'd botch that up...

 

 

Hybrid DoA is a very popular build. The same applies, if you think you know this build well then let us know.

 

 

Mech BA is another very talked about build. The same applies, if you think you know this build well then let us know.

 

I'd love to do this one.

 

Now, there is much more than these articles. I know someone mentioned a rundown of each unit choice…that’s a daunting task.

 

I did. :) It is a daunting task but that's why my suggestion was for all the collaborators who are chosen to do articles to contribute. One person can compile and add his/her own stuff while everyone else adds what they know about certain units and it's added to the unit tactica.

 

Deployment, that’s another topic of interest. It is always neglected till it’s time to put some boots on the ground. The funny thing is that those first few decisions of where to some models or when to go first or second can make or break someone.

 

If anyone else has some ideas throw them out here so we can start building a topic roster.

 

 

If you want others to see this maybe PM them, change the title or something. I just happen to click on this by chance to be honest. I didn't know what "scholarly articles" were having to do with BA. >_<

[Bradley Powers]

@Bradley, you got me on that one. Scholarly Articles do usually contain math or stats and thankfully we can use math hammer to fill this void. For example, it could be quite useful to know the likely percent of how many DS’ing units will arrive on turn 2. Reason, gives a person a standard estimate based on their number of DS’ing units will normally arrive. Again, just an example. Hmmm…it would be nice to know the kill percentage of the Hand Flamer on Geq and Meq.

 

One of the things that I think that typical "Mathammer" treatments are missing is not just mean number of wounds, but also the Standard Deviation. For example, in comparing a Furioso Dreadnought with Blood Talons gets ever so slightly more wounds inflicted than the DC Dreads, the standard deviation on wounds is higher, meaning that the DC are actually more consistent. Definitely worth considering.

[shatter]

+1

 

It's quite a pity in my opinion that this game hasn't really received significant statistical analysis beyond basic single sample probability.

[The Yncarne]

If I may be so bold, there's another site that might serve as some inspiration for organizing the proposed content.

 

I think the idea will complement the current stickies.

 

Edit: I'm talking organization, not the subject matter. ^_^