View Full Version : Setting up terrain

07-12-2007, 05:48
Just a question on your opinions about setting up terrain.
Do you go for a randomised approach or do you try and use the scenery to create a realistic looking battlefield?

For example.

My friend and I play 40 every other weekend at my house. I own all the terrain and if I have time I will set it up across the board so that its grouped together. e.g. my trees form a little wooded area. My buildings are used to form a city. My sandbags and barricades are used to create an outpost etc etc. I set up buildings so they are at 90 degree angles or parallel to each other and the board edges. I dont try to gain any advantage by doing so and I allow my opponent to choose board edges first despite the scenario.

My friend prefers to scatter the terrain at random across the board, which looks (to me anyway) visually unappealing. Buildings are aligned randomly and whilst there is no lack of cover it just looks strange when you have trees growing between two buildings surrounded by sandbags.

07-12-2007, 05:54
I prefer to make a small scene. Depending on the available terrain I like to make villages, outposts, castel defenses, ect. The difference is I like to set it all up at 45 degree angles. very rarely do armies agree to fight at 90 degree angles to the terrain around them. ;)

07-12-2007, 05:57
in campaign games we always set up realistically to represent area we are fighting over. The defender sets up terrain but attacker picks sides.

in one off game we set up terrain fairly randomly but trey ot let teh battel feild tell a story.. ie:
Lonely road through the woods.
Checkpoint at the bridge.
Mountainous scout scrap.
Edge of the city (popular of rmisind wood and cities paricually if each side ahs alittel of both.
Crossroads battle.
Cities of death is set up at 45 degree angle 60 % of the time (this changes the phsysics dramatically) often with two major thoroughfares and a bunch of twisting alleys.
River crossing (The enemy must be stopped, here!)

Set up gernally provides on half of mostly open terrain and another half failry dense. this way both shooty and assaulty armies have an equal chance.

07-12-2007, 07:00
We don't have that much terrain (something I'm fixing right now) but usually we go randomizing it a little bit and try to run scenarios for some of the major battles. I'm building bunkers and such now.

07-12-2007, 07:10
Depends on the game system. For 40k, we usually just grab what's available and put it on the table in a balanced way, looking as best as we can get it.

For Fantasy we take turns placing terrain until both people are satisfied.

07-12-2007, 07:41
Our group's process is like this: Firstly, we make sure we follow the rules and at least have the table with 25% of terrain. We then make sure no quarter is without terrain and that it's scattered with some balance. The final process is to make it look appealing, fitting for our mission.

07-12-2007, 07:52
We usually are playing on a 4x4 table at 1000 pts a piece, so we'll have about 5 pieces of terrain; 2 decent terrain pieces about 6" off the corners on each side and 1 in the middle. Its almost always forest terrain, though if we're playing take and hold, we'll put a building or something in the middle. On the few occasions when we play with a 4x6 or larger, we'll throw out more terrain in more variations.

Kor Phaeron
07-12-2007, 08:54
I prefer to theme the table if possible.

So I'll make groups of buildings with fencing around them or wooded areas.

I don't like the idea of things just being randomly placed, it just doesn't look right.