PDA

View Full Version : Scenery more prevalent / relevant in 6th Edition?



StraightSilver
31-05-2012, 09:58
I didn't post this in rumours as it's not really a rumour, just something that came about during a discussion about the upcoming GW price increase.

I received a very cool spreadsheet with the new prices compared to the current ones with a percentage increase per item.

When filtering the spreadsheet by % increase a pattern emerged that may or may not be relevant to the new edition.

The most marked increases appear to be within the scenery range, in particular the 40K scenery.

For example the Imperial Strongpoint has had a more than 50% increase, and then items such as 40K Barricades, Craters (Moonscape) and buildings have had between 30-50% price increases.

Admittedly this also occurrs within the fantasy range, but predominantly it's within 40K.

And there are other equally outrageous increases, in particular some of the Battle Forces, the Space Marine one being the most noteable.

However a couple of months ago I had a chat with somebody I know at Lenton and they told me that scenery would play a much larger role in 6th Edition, in particular the Skyshield landing Pad with the advent of flyers.

I don't know if that's true, but could it be that the new missions in 6th will require specific scenic items? Or will they go back to random scenery tables which have specific things like Bastions etc in them?

Of course it could be completely unrelated, and may just be that for a long time GW scenery has actually been (in my opinion) quite reasonably priced and they now just want to capitalise on it and generate more profit from it.

So does anybody have an opinion on this? Am I seeing conspiracies, or does anybody have any rumours regarding scenery?

Carlosophy
31-05-2012, 10:27
There have been rumours of terrain pieces gaining special rules in every game like WFB so you're probably right.

Of course price increases are largely irrelevant when polystyrene is free to scavenge from electrical stores. Nobody can say they have no time to make anything when breaking bits up and spraying them black does the job.

Gertjan
31-05-2012, 13:55
To be honest, I reckon it's your last point that's the truth there. We all know that the GW scenery kits were damn cheap for what you got, they were relatively cheap, plastic and damn good looking (well, aside fromt he abundance for skulls but that's just something GW has a raging hard on for:D). I just think they decided to pull them back in line with the pricing strategy of all their other kits i.e. a tad bit on the high side rather than good value for money.

Cheeslord
31-05-2012, 14:30
There have been rumours of terrain pieces gaining special rules in every game like WFB so you're probably right.

Of course price increases are largely irrelevant when polystyrene is free to scavenge from electrical stores. Nobody can say they have no time to make anything when breaking bits up and spraying them black does the job.

I tried that once. Aerosol solvents dissolve expaoded polysterene foam was the result I obtained (can be done, just need to paint with diluted PVA first!)

Anyway, more relevantly ... if the rules are going to be adapted to force the players to buy expensive GW terrain, can we expect store managers to ban home-made terrain / GW try and encourage a policy of It Must Be Official GW Terrain If Youre Playing Properly?

Mark.

Iron Puritan
31-05-2012, 14:33
The average WHFB and WH40K table looks positively naked compared to those used for many other wargames. Encouraging players to use a realistic amount of terrain would make for a more tactically challenging game.

althathir
31-05-2012, 16:10
I think it will be more relevant, but i think the rules for it will be designed more for narrative campaigns then for pick up games/tournies. So if I had to guess I'd suggest the price increase on terrain has more to do with bringing them inline with what they charge for other kits.

Jericho
31-05-2012, 16:23
I'm not certain that there will be quite as much going on with scenery as there is in Fantasy - where the landscape is infused with magic in almost every territory - but I certainly hope it's more involved than just saying building = 4+ cover save, forest = 4+ cover save, trenches = 4+ cover save...

The price increase on scenery is annoying as hell, since terrain was one of the very few things in the GW range that had some very affordable and easily justified kits. For a long time it was what, like $30-35 for the Temple of Skulls and other big kits? The pricing encouraged you to buy more than you need to increase the variety in your games. Not so much if it goes up 30%.

If I need 40k scenery now I'll likely be going to ranges like Battlefield in a Box, as it's dirt cheap and doesn't require the work. I might still hunt down some of the old school 2nd edition cardboard terrain kits I always wanted (mostly the IG Command Tower).

althathir
31-05-2012, 16:41
I'm not certain that there will be quite as much going on with scenery as there is in Fantasy - where the landscape is infused with magic in almost every territory - but I certainly hope it's more involved than just saying building = 4+ cover save, forest = 4+ cover save, trenches = 4+ cover save...

The price increase on scenery is annoying as hell, since terrain was one of the very few things in the GW range that had some very affordable and easily justified kits. For a long time it was what, like $30-35 for the Temple of Skulls and other big kits? The pricing encouraged you to buy more than you need to increase the variety in your games. Not so much if it goes up 30%.

If I need 40k scenery now I'll likely be going to ranges like Battlefield in a Box, as it's dirt cheap and doesn't require the work. I might still hunt down some of the old school 2nd edition cardboard terrain kits I always wanted (mostly the IG Command Tower).

I actually think being cheap enough that you "buy more than you need" is bad for GW. The one thing people underestimate about GW product is how long it lasts for, used markets are a huge issue for alot of industries (videogames in particular), and I can't see it being any different for them. So raising the prices to encourage people to keep their products instead of selling them is in GW interests granted at some point they are gonna go to far.

greenmtvince
31-05-2012, 17:01
but I certainly hope it's more involved than just saying building = 4+ cover save, forest = 4+ cover save, trenches = 4+ cover save...

I'd settle for any rule that included "forest" and "blocks line of sight" in the same sentence. This crack shot through 4 feet of trees and ruins to hit the tip of a chainsword is a bit rediculous.

Konovalev
31-05-2012, 19:52
This thread has me thinking I might want to buy up a bunch of GW terrain now before the prices raise and new edition... Something which I have been planning to do for a while now since my friends and I are building ourselves a table, but i've been putting off since i didn't expect terrain prices to change much...

MajorWesJanson
01-06-2012, 03:24
I see both the possibility of more rules for terrain, like Fantasy did, as an option. Many of the strategems from cityfight would work well for this. Think buildings with reinforced walls for +cover saves, medical station for FNP, ammo dump for twin linked weapons, ect.

I also see the idea of purchasable terrain for armies, like in Apocalypse or planetstrike. gun emplacements, barracades, bunkers, webway gates, capillary towers, mek shops, ect.

AndrewGPaul
01-06-2012, 09:13
The average WHFB and WH40K table looks positively naked compared to those used for many other wargames. Encouraging players to use a realistic amount of terrain would make for a more tactically challenging game.

That's to do with your local environment, I think; round here, 40K tables have a much higher terrain density than those being used for, say, Saga or Warmachine.