Terrain placement: make the table a twisted labyrinth?

Howdy folks!

I read the tactical guide on objective placement and it got me further thinking about terrain placement. As the dark kin hail from a twisted and dark labyrinth, does the army play well if you choke the board with an abundance of LOS blocking terrain, creating kill lanes and mazes on the table?

Seems like with our ability to quickly reposition and ignore certain kinds of terrain, coupled with our abundance of assault units and short ranged Blasters, the more we crowd the board the better. I'm talking like 60% coverage

Has anybody had any experience with this particular tactic?

I personal prefer to arrange the table with losb in "grid" to maximize the effect about enemy shooting at my veichles on a side that isn facing. However i usually mantain a large (12" inch) pot in the centre in wich i often stay with talos or similar high stayn power units.
However i must say that in our local meta the "obviusly underdog" army list gain the advantage to place terrain while to choose the side you dice off: in this way i always put terrain (Just because you know... the Sad dark kin) but i am not tempted to give too much advantage to Just one deployement zone.

Common wisdom on this is about to change drastically Adma. Previously, it was accepted that all units could move through walls with a difficult terrain roll. That may be changing with the FAQ drafts that have been posted. If it does change so that infantry can no longer do so, that will significantly alter the game, making all those walls impassable for all units that don't have a method of movement that specifically allows it to ignore intervening terrain, like jump/jetpack, jetbikes, or skimmers.

Therefore, we can speculate as to what sort of terrain placement will be best for various strategies, but I don't know that anyone, including myself is really qualified to make a dependable assertion at this time.

Qualifications not necessary; it can be fun to muse

I remember seeing that change in the FAQ draft. At first glance this seems like a mobility asset: we could deliver our troops over a wall in a skimmer where a bawks could not. In theory at least, right? If that were true, clever terrain placement ( I'm almost imagining a hashtag pattern) of walls and such could let us hop around tobjectives where landlubbers must go around. Thoughts?

That would be the idea, yeah. As a tournament player(where you don't get to choose/place terrain), I'm curious to see how this effects the proliferation of terrain in the tournament scene. As time went by with the previous ruling, tournaments added more and more terrain as a nerf to shooting armies and a buff to more assault based armies. But the current ruling would likely turn that around, making shooting armies better now, since many shooty armies like Tau and DE are the ones who have lots of skimmers and jetpack units to take advantage of the terrain the most.

Long range shooting might still be impeded by terrain, but jetpacks, jetbikes, and skimmers will get a pretty big boost against such terrain. This leads me to believe that the amount of terrain on tables at tournaments will see a sharp decline, to allow all the metal boxes space to move again.

As a reaver nut i approve of this no move through walls FAQ. Another little boost! HOW in the rear AV of walkers is sweet too!

When it comes to terrain the more LOS blocking the merrier is the overall rule for DE. For the reasons you mentioned and more.  
When i do get to set up some terrain I place LOSB on the flanks, both sides of the table, as i tend to attack the flanks and roll up the line.  
Place the terrain to support your tactics.