PDA

View Full Version : Who Plays by the rules?



N00B
21-09-2014, 19:53
So for basically the first time ever, i actually played a game by the rules the other day. Specifically rolling for amount and type of terrain as per the basic rules book.

Normally I am used to playing with much less but this totally changed the game for me and I managed an unusual victory against a fairly tough warriors of Chaos list. It turns out chariot spam and as many skullcrushers as you can take dont do so well when you can position units to force them to take a lot of dangerous terrain tests.

This got me thinking... Which armies benefit most from light terrain and which from heavy (and which from the more unique types - like arcane ruins). Certainly if you follow the rules there are a lot of things to block cannons, to block cav and to stop chariots out there. Are the complaints about most OP stuff just due to people not using enough scenery?

EvanM
22-09-2014, 00:09
I think a huge problem is 1) how annoying the real rules for terrain are (random stuff thats deadly or insanely impacts the game in some way) and 2) how annoying terrain is to deal with when moving soldiers on the board.

i think almost no one actually uses the real terrain, its such a hassle, but i wonder what kind of effect that would have on the game.

Lordcypress
22-09-2014, 00:49
In our gaming group we do use terrain but its more for looks and scenery. We treat all woods as just difficult terrain. We have buildings on the table but use the as impassable terrain and not be entered. We have used the rules for terrain in the past but we find is kind of a pain in the butt. You need to write down what each terrain was and then remember what it does later on. Half the time we forgot to even use the terrain. After the game would be over it would be like: "Ah right that forest was a Blood Forest or Ah right that stone was an Elven magic source etc.."

russellmoo
22-09-2014, 04:56
I tend not to use the specialized buildings and arcane monuments as they tend to be pretty game altering. However, the mysterious terrain is usually pretty good for a laugh and tends not to effect the game too much, minus the river of light.

It also helps if you only make one roll and then apply it to all terrain of that type. If you discover one forest to be a blood forest then after that all forests are blood forests, same for rivers, marshes and hills. This tends to make the scenery male more sense.

This was also the problem I had for the use of all of the different buildings. Like the game I had where a tower of blood ended up right next to a sigmarite shrine. It left both sides trying to figure out wether the forces of evil built their blood tower next to a sigmarite shrine or vice versa.

Anyways, yes the terrain rules have a huge impact on the game, in a lot of cases the influence is too much, or sometimes the table gets ridiculously crowded. Like if you roll multiple 12's and a 10 for the number of terrain peices.

BorkBork
22-09-2014, 05:21
We use terrain...but we dont use all the 'mysterious' or 'magical effects'

And we tend to apply true los very mildly (a rule thatt annoys the hell out of me)

Rudra34
22-09-2014, 05:41
I've used the book's terrain rules before, and it's really not that much different than a game without. The little quirks from different terrain pieces can be fun, but are almost always unnecessary. Either way, it rarely has a serious effect on the game.

yabbadabba
22-09-2014, 06:52
I think a huge problem is 1) how annoying the real rules for terrain are (random stuff thats deadly or insanely impacts the game in some way) and 2) how annoying terrain is to deal with when moving soldiers on the board.

i think almost no one actually uses the real terrain, its such a hassle, but i wonder what kind of effect that would have on the game. You do know you don't have to use the mysterious terrain rules, even if you "play by the rules"?

Shadeseraph
22-09-2014, 07:16
I do use the full terrain rules. They are potentially very game altering, but they also make the game much slower: during deployment, it can easily take a full additional hour, with all the rolling, cross-referencing and adding a whole additional deployment phase. Once in game, it tends to slow down things a lot, both because of the cross referencing, stopped game flow, and rearranged strategies (you forgot a certain key forest is a blood forest and need to redo the whole movement phase).
Also, random terrain creates some seriously weird tables.

bigbiggles
22-09-2014, 11:07
I found little reference cards somewhere for all the terrain rules. That would be the only way I used them though.

pinktaco
22-09-2014, 11:39
My friends and I use a simple method for terrain: we roll off who starts and then we place 6 pieces of terrain one at a time and not all at once. It's easy, simple and you get to place some funny stuff along the way. We do play with magical forests, rivers, marshs and arcane objects. It makes for an interesting game when you don't know what the forest might do to you.
As a LM player I can utilize the aquatic rule so it's not completely unnecessary. The same goes for my wood elf friend. 20 skinks in a house on the middle of the board isn't bad either.

I personally think that if you use terrain to your advantage it can be a great asset. When I play in the local store it's not uncommon we just throw it complete randomly around as if nothing, but this is usually against strangers.

With that said I've come to realize the 1" apart rule isn't always followed by everyone and the same with declaring charges. It can somewhat alter the game when you suddenly play vs one who's very strict with the rules and you/your group isn't.

malisteen
22-09-2014, 12:18
When I play, my opponent and I generally set up an interesting, agreeable table with a fair bit of terrain, then we pick one or two of the more interesting pieces on the table and mutually agree to declare them as something interesting from the descriptions of specific pieces of terrain. Remaining terrain is treated as its generic version - 'just' forest, or pond, or whatever. Buildings are just impassible.

Honestly, I like terrain, but the actual rules for it tend to reduce my fun rather than enhance it. They eat too much time, they get obnoxious - with the normal rules tending to result in way too much 'wacky' terrain, and stopping the game to roll for terrain, then look up what you rolled, then try to remember it at the start of every turn thereafter, just repeatedly brings the game to a screeching halt and wastes a ton of time.

Ero-Senin
22-09-2014, 12:30
I am shocked that so many people ignore this part of the game. Almost every game I play uses the correct terrain rules (sometimes I will re-roll a result if we already have too many of something on the board). I don't think people can complain about OP units (cannons etc) and the like if they are not using the full rules. Terrain massively impacts a game. It helps to prevent deathstars, war machine abuse, protects lone characters more etc. Sure it can be annoying, my horde infantry empire list hates it as I struggle to deploy properly sometimes but think how disadvantaged some armies are by very little terrain and what would be the point of all the 'strider' rules without much terrain? Terrain was an important strategic point in battles through-out history why shouldn't it be in warhammer. I cannot express how suprised I am.

N00B
22-09-2014, 13:00
^^^pretty much this.It equalises many of the otherwise most powerful armies, not by placinc excessive amounts of terrain but just by placing the amount described by the rules.

Folomo
22-09-2014, 13:44
We do use BRB terrain and scenarios here. It makes a HUGE difference against skew lists.
Chariot/monster spam? Meet watchtower/B&G.
Slave spam? Feel the friendly embrace of the rivers and forest.
Gunline spam? Cant shoot effectibly over these forest/obstacles/buildings?
Deathstars? Can't manouver freely? A shame.
In general, it prevents games being won on the list-building phase.

While it may be a bit slower it makes the game FAR more tactical than sumo hammer (more forward, smash and see who roll's higher).
We do tend to reroll the sorcerous portal, but the rest of the terrain is fairly easy to remember once you start using it.

Probably I am biased since I use TK and get a hefty amounts of victories by using smartly these terrain/scenarios. :D

forseer of fates
22-09-2014, 13:55
Wood rules are mandatory, the rest is optional. Or at least that's how I read it.

EvanM
22-09-2014, 14:39
i think another issue is the physical terrain itself, the models dont sit well on them. often you remove a hill/forest and say "well its there, we just moved it" because its in the way.
I saw some people using felt (green for forrest, blue for river, etc) instead of real terrain and it works a lot better in this respect. anyone else do that?

in a game obsessed with angles and tiny fractions of distances, the terrain needs to be manageable.

also, skew terrain makes skew lists look rediculous. chariot spam? Meet the all forest table. roll dangerous terrain every single turn. HA.

Horace35
22-09-2014, 15:35
i think another issue is the physical terrain itself, the models dont sit well on them. often you remove a hill/forest and say "well its there, we just moved it" because its in the way.
I saw some people using felt (green for forrest, blue for river, etc) instead of real terrain and it works a lot better in this respect. anyone else do that?

in a game obsessed with angles and tiny fractions of distances, the terrain needs to be manageable.

also, skew terrain makes skew lists look rediculous. chariot spam? Meet the all forest table. roll dangerous terrain every single turn. HA.

No I like my games to look reasonably pretty..

We play with some of the lesser mysterious rules. Some of them seem to be too powerful and game changing. Also all buildings can not be entered

EvanM
22-09-2014, 17:16
I think that there isn't enough impossible terrain in the random terrain generator, there should be boulders and ruins and locked buildings more often to really change the way the battle flows.

Andy p
22-09-2014, 20:12
I enjoy a decent amount of terrain.

What do I mean by decent? Somewhere between people whining because they have hordes and large amounts of terrain impedes their style and people whining because they use MMU and gunlines and small amounts of terrain makes them too vulnerable and open to be swamped and flanked.

But I'm a fair man, I whine just like the rest.

idols11
24-09-2014, 14:21
Wood Elves get quite a lot of benefit from forests (they fight in an extra rank and re-roll 1s to wound)

EvanM
24-09-2014, 14:37
Wood Elves get quite a lot of benefit from forests (they fight in an extra rank and re-roll 1s to wound)

hahaa so in woods, wood elves turn into high elves and dark elves at the same time. LOL

Kingly
24-09-2014, 15:06
Much like Yabbadabba says, you don't have to use the mysterious terrain rule, which I never do.

We always roll D6+3 for pieces of terrain and take turns in placing, then we decide edges.

It's a ceremony and part of the game that no one should miss out on, as it's such a huge part of the game in itself.

the rules are basic and easy to understand, if you're struggling reread the rules, make bullet points and get that laminated, it soon settles in, I find the rules almost too basic tbh!

I also played by rules against one of my cheesy opps last week and won the first game off the bat because it was blood & Glory and he didn't have a single standard!

I feel sorry for people that play without terrain or missions, it makes me think they are missing the essence of Wargaming.

EvanM
24-09-2014, 16:48
No terrain and no mission means the game is just "belly bumping" and that's not really that fun. Most "op" lists out there would be useless against certain terrain and certain missions. Which I find funny

malisteen
24-09-2014, 17:04
It's a ceremony and part of the game that no one should miss out on, as it's such a huge part of the game in itself.

The problem is that it's also a huge part of the time that a game takes. Last time I played a game that tried to use the actual terrain rules, with all the mysterious terrain and whatsits, it was a 1500 point game that ended up taking over five hours from when we started rolling for mission and setting up the board to when we finished putting the models away and got out of the store. Now, to be sure, if we played that way all the time things would get a little faster, since part of the delay was unfamiliarity, but even so the general opinion in these parts is still 'ain't nobody got time for that'.

I like 8th edition fantasy. A lot. But the amount of random stuff, and the sheer quantity of models the game wants you to bring to the table these days, has resulted in games that take considerably longer than games of 7th, 6th, or 5th. Where I play, that's hurt the number of games people can play, which in turn hurts motivation to play the game at all. That combined with relatively poor downward scaling of 8th edition and increasing model costs making the entry fee too high to bring in new blood has really led to some stagnation in the local Fantasy community over the past few years. Streamlining the game by glossing over some of the terrain rules (again, we play with a lot of terrain, but don't make a separate mini game out of generating it, and don't stop the game every time a unit moves into terrain to randomly derive what it is) is as much a matter of necessity as preference.

On top of that, I find terrain in 8th edition to be viscerally unsatisfying. 8e terrain does all sorts of obnoxious, distracting, gimmicky things that suck me out of the game experience, while failing to do the one thing you would intuitively expect rough terrain to do - slow down units moving through it. Maybe no marching AND half movement was too much in the past, but no movement penalty what so ever is too little now. Combine with some of the awkwardness of true line of sight rules applied to representational terrain (that's not a 'forest' that's a 'three trees'), and yeah... Not only do I often find I need to gloss over terrain to get a game played in a reasonable amount of time, but I generally want to anyway because the terrain is more obnoxious and distracting than immersive and engaging.

russellmoo
24-09-2014, 17:40
I agree that the real issue with terrain and especially random terrain is the amount of time wasted looking up what the different types of terrain do, or what the various effect of an arcane monument or magical what not does.

It is awesome that there are so many different terrain options and magic what nots, but when you end up with 2 swamps, 2 forests, and 2 rivers all of which have a different random effect it really slows down the game.

I've found a good solution is just to roll for the number of terrain peices as the book says, then take turns selected peices of terrain to use. While only allowing for a player to choose a randomly determined arcane monument or magical building, for example this prevents a dwarf player from populating the table with dwarf brewhouses, or an evil army placing down multiple towers of blood.

Random terrain is placed and then at the start of the game, after sides are chosen, you roll the effect and apply it to all of the terrain types. This makes it easy to remember what the effects of the terrain is for the whole game.

N00B
24-09-2014, 19:46
I think a good way might be to theme it. Roll once to see what area it is then use that to determine which smaller list things will be generated from.

TheLionReturns
25-09-2014, 10:42
I like the missions and terrain rules because they help keep the game fresh. This is especially important when my collection has been limited in options and my gaming group is likewise limited. I can understand complaints over the time it takes, but Warhammer has never been a quick game for me, and there are plenty of other options if I want a more streamlined tabletop experience. Hopefully if GW do something about scaling to low point levels to tackle the barrier to entry issue, then perhaps we will have an option to play a quicker version of warhammer with small armies in 9th edition.

Ero-Senin
25-09-2014, 12:54
The problem is that it's also a huge part of the time that a game takes. Last time I played a game that tried to use the actual terrain rules, with all the mysterious terrain and whatsits, it was a 1500 point game that ended up taking over five hours from when we started rolling for mission and setting up the board to when we finished putting the models away and got out of the store. Now, to be sure, if we played that way all the time things would get a little faster, since part of the delay was unfamiliarity, but even so the general opinion in these parts is still 'ain't nobody got time for that'.

I like 8th edition fantasy. A lot. But the amount of random stuff, and the sheer quantity of models the game wants you to bring to the table these days, has resulted in games that take considerably longer than games of 7th, 6th, or 5th. Where I play, that's hurt the number of games people can play, which in turn hurts motivation to play the game at all. That combined with relatively poor downward scaling of 8th edition and increasing model costs making the entry fee too high to bring in new blood has really led to some stagnation in the local Fantasy community over the past few years. Streamlining the game by glossing over some of the terrain rules (again, we play with a lot of terrain, but don't make a separate mini game out of generating it, and don't stop the game every time a unit moves into terrain to randomly derive what it is) is as much a matter of necessity as preference.

On top of that, I find terrain in 8th edition to be viscerally unsatisfying. 8e terrain does all sorts of obnoxious, distracting, gimmicky things that suck me out of the game experience, while failing to do the one thing you would intuitively expect rough terrain to do - slow down units moving through it. Maybe no marching AND half movement was too much in the past, but no movement penalty what so ever is too little now. Combine with some of the awkwardness of true line of sight rules applied to representational terrain (that's not a 'forest' that's a 'three trees'), and yeah... Not only do I often find I need to gloss over terrain to get a game played in a reasonable amount of time, but I generally want to anyway because the terrain is more obnoxious and distracting than immersive and engaging.

I do understand this point of view and a lot of it comes down to how badly the rulebook is laid out (some bits are so hard to find and not logically where you would expect them to be) you can sort this by photocopying the pages (once you've found them). Then it's just rolling a cuple of dice which doesn't take that long. Seriously it's worth it, we play like this all the time and a 2.5k game can be done in 3 hours.

Kingly
25-09-2014, 15:36
I understand what you guys have said, but like the quote I have spoken about, and specifically what I have said is that I dont use the random effects table for terrain, it is just the standard terrain with no special rules, buildings are just that, same goes for woods, hills and monuments...Even graveyards.

My last game was won simply because my gamey friend who rocked up didn't have a single banner, or maybe he had one and it was 1-0 to me off the bat because he created an op gamey all viable list and didn't take missions into consideration.

It does get much quicker with practise and once you get to the board you put everything in the corner, roll a D6+3 and take it in turns to place that many pieces of terrain then boom, go for it, that way the board can be tailored to suit both of the gaming styles as well.

The terrain rules are simple and very easy to understand.

FatTrucker
25-09-2014, 19:26
We use the terrain generation method in the BRB including all the special stuff.

Once its all generated we roll off to see who gets first pick and then alternate placing a piece each until its done. We do this before deployment.

It introduces a lot of different tactical options and makes deployment a lot more interesting.

It takes about 5 - 10 minutes per game to generate, choose and place terrain prior to deployment.

Malagor
25-09-2014, 20:52
Where I'am we do not use mysterious terrain nor do we use the whole "scatter the terrain" thing.
Either person that gets there first sets up the field with 5-6 terrain pieces(various kinds) and place them so it looks nice and even on both sides or we place it together.
Regardless we get a board that is fair and approved.
Other then we got no house rules and play the game with the rules that is written.
A 2500pts game usually takes 2-2.5hours to complete so things go very smooth.

In Dark Trees
27-09-2014, 16:24
My group actually uses the terrain rules as written. I've found they encourage a more maneuver-oriented, flexible approach and can reduce the incentive to produce ungainly hordes of troops and fling them down the table. Too many games of Warhammer end up as melees in the middle of green meadows.

It helps that our group favors smaller armies, however. We tend to play 1,500 to 2,000 pt games.

EvanM
27-09-2014, 16:45
does the BRB say anything about having to use a 6' by 4' table? beecause honestly i think most 2.5k games should be played on 7' by 5'. it would make more proportioned battlefield and allow more manuevering.

phlewis
02-10-2014, 19:33
My gaming group uses most of the terrain rules. All woods are mysterious, and if one of the players wants mysterious river or swamp it is. We use the full number of terrain pieces generated as specified in the BRB. Buildings are generally accessible. A garrisoned building are be a real thorn in your opponents side or a waste of your troops garrisoning it. Scenarios, and the full range of terrain does a lot to get rid of the unbeatable OP list problem.

The good thing about mysterious terrain is that it makes entering that terrain a gamble. You never know if it is safe or something that will eat most of your unit. I find it works as a replacement for the difficult terrain slowing movement and disordering troops from previous versions of the rules. Do I take the chance of going through the woods or play it safe and go around?

The size table we use is 8' by 4'. A piece of plywood painted green.

EvanM
02-10-2014, 20:40
8' by 5' would be my preference for a more dynamic board. more places to move/flee and stuff.

Saldiven
04-10-2014, 02:32
Any time I play, outside of tournaments where I have no control, I prefer to play with the terrain rules from the rule book.

Any half-baked player can throw down mathematically dominant lists on a table as bare as a pool table and win.

Just like in real warfare, the best players (generals) are the ones that make best use of the terrain at hand to give themselves the best advantage. With proper terrain usage, an "inferior" force can defeat a "superior" one, where on a flat, open battlefield they'd have no chance.

Saldiven
04-10-2014, 02:33
We use the terrain generation method in the BRB including all the special stuff.

Once its all generated we roll off to see who gets first pick and then alternate placing a piece each until its done. We do this before deployment.

It introduces a lot of different tactical options and makes deployment a lot more interesting.

It takes about 5 - 10 minutes per game to generate, choose and place terrain prior to deployment.

This is pretty much how we tend to do it, too.

Terrain placement becomes a pre-battle strategy in and of itself.

Spiney Norman
07-10-2014, 08:07
i think another issue is the physical terrain itself, the models dont sit well on them. often you remove a hill/forest and say "well its there, we just moved it" because its in the way.
I saw some people using felt (green for forrest, blue for river, etc) instead of real terrain and it works a lot better in this respect. anyone else do that?

in a game obsessed with angles and tiny fractions of distances, the terrain needs to be manageable.

also, skew terrain makes skew lists look rediculous. chariot spam? Meet the all forest table. roll dangerous terrain every single turn. HA.

Games workshop terrain is a huge problem in this regard, the hard plastic of the citadel RoB board, hills and woods is simply horrible to play on. We have some molded flocked hills and an old grass mat that we play on, we also use gale force nine woods which are composed of a thin base plate and a number of easily movable trees so there is minimal interference with the models.

The number of times I have had a horde of night goblins or skelly warriors cascade down a citadel hill makes me never want to use their stuff again.

As far as rules go, we roll for amount of terrain as per the rules in the book, we also use mysterious terrain by agreement before the game.

Kingly
07-10-2014, 16:56
I'd have to agree,

I came back to the fold of WHFB later in the game, so the only battlefield available to me was the Realms of Battle Board, having bought one with my mate I soon experienced the crazy frustrations of the balancing acts we had to do with dice and blue tac etc.

I think this is half the reason people magnetise everything now...

So I have a green matt now (Thanks Ebay) and some of those old school hills...Annoyingly they are a different colour, but I grabbed them for a cushty price so no big deal.

Other than that I think the GW terrain is amazing, they've done a top job and I think it's one of the things they do that is very reasonably priced, especially given the competition...