Too much Terrain?

[Polare]

Looks like a good amount to me.

[Rated_lexxx]

I'd be tempted to say there's almost not enough for my tastes. More terrain = a better game.

Just play devil's advocate there can be to much terrain. When the end of every movement cause my trukk to take a difficult terrain check, or when demons take dangerous terrian checks for every unit you might have to much

I think most games play like having a tree in the middle of the board and calling it good

[Thoth62]

I think that looks fantastic. I've always preferred a little more terrain because it makes you think about tactics a little more. Things like fire-lanes, assault approaches, choke points, counter assaults and flanking are all situations that depend a great deal on terrain.

[yabbadabba]

Lovely table mate. I'd play 500-2000 pts on there.

[KaisKlip]

The best and the only way I find to set up terrain is to spend 7-10 minutes actually trying to create a 6x4 chunk of a realistic battlefield. That way not only does it look inherently nice, but people can't complain since it looks like a valid battlefield of the 40k universe. Sure one side might have an advantage, but that just adds more of a challenge, which is always good (besides, you win you bget bragging rights, you lose you have a perfect excuse right there ).

Your board and layout looks great - however I would split the wood in the middle into its individual parts just so you have some cover-to-cover movement rather than a rush towards the only place of safety the centre of the board. Alternatively place some craters and the like, while stretching the wood so the you have a 2" gap between individual parts for easier gameplay.

[Dylius]

Looks great to me. Way better than the usual towel-taped-to-the-table-for-a-hill I usually have to use...

[Dnd_dad]

That is a great looking table and maneuvering through terrain is part of the game. I hate flat unimaginative tables with few terrain pieces.

[Scaryscarymushroom]

My gaming group has been having the discussion of "Too Much Terrain" recently, and honestly three of us are aligned, one is not. now I'm not going to name names, but everyone in my group posts on Warseer and they are welcome to add their thoughts to this post if they like, but I would like to get the greater community's opinion on what you think is too much terrain and what is too little.

For this first post I will give an example table that was never actually used in a game (not yet at least). 5 pictures from different angles, I want to hear what people's reaction is to this table, is there too much? would it be difficult to move around on the table, how many points would you be willing to play on a table such as this?

First of all, this is a beautiful table. You have a lucky gaming group. Second, to answer your question: I would happily play games up to 2,000 points on this table. Any more than 2k points and I'd want a larger table with equally dense terrain.

My personal belief is that I like to see a board that looks good, that looks alive, that it looks like somewhere you could actually visit... It should look like a real place, not a table with terrain haphazardly put down or randomly generated.

I agree whole heartedly.

[Iron Puritan]

The more terrain, the better. WH40K and WHFB games are often played with far too little terrain on the table. Take a look at what a lot of historical gamers put on their tables before starting a battle. Flames of War tables, especially those representing Normandy, are positively jam packed with terrain. It looks more natural and presents plenty of tactical challenges.

As far as the table in the OP is concerned, it is rather nice.

[MajorWesJanson]

Looks great.

[Chapters Unwritten]

Tank traps, fences and barricades can add a lot to your game, too. It might feel a bit less crowded if you swap some stuff out with more of these (if indeed you feel it's crowded).

[Kulgur]

I'd love to play on there. Shame all I can get nowadays is a game on 4x4 with not nearly enough terrain.

[Angelwing]

Looks great. Area terrain, some crowded areas, open areas. Nice. The very large ruined building (picture 3), is that one whole block of area terrain or just difficult walls to get over with an open interior?
If I were to change this set up, I might remove one or two sets of trees, in a mutually agreeable manner.

[DeviantApostle]

That is a gorgeous table that I'd play on in a heartbeat.

The only time I think 'too much terrain' becomes an issue is when tanks don't have room to move around.

[Zirkonicky]

seems about right to me ;-)

[Balerion]

It's a gorgeous table, but it seems like the coverage might actually be pushing 40-50% instead of 25% (supposing the enclosed areas are being counted as homogeneous area terrain).

Now, I play Tyranids, so I have sensual fever dreams about 100% area terrain boards when I crawl into my flesh-pod of a night.

And, furthermore, too much terrain is better than too little terrain.

However, with those caveats, I could totally understand it if the shootier members of your gaming group would like to see the ratio of terrain to clear space brought down closer to the 25% mark. Also, I think the beauty of the table could skew the results. If it was translated into a 2D MS Paint diagram that just illustrated the coverage with no aesthetic allure I think you might get different comments.

[Memnos]

40K or fantasy? If fantasy, the trees don't limit movement .They just act as dangerous terrain for cavalry. If 40K, that's a magnificent and characterful piece of terrain. Well done, that man.

[Abaraxas]

The more terrain, the better the game.

[Polaria]

Just play devil's advocate there can be to much terrain. When the end of every movement cause my trukk to take a difficult terrain check, or when demons take dangerous terrian checks for every unit you might have to much

I think most games play like having a tree in the middle of the board and calling it good

Actually I think my local Ork and Daemon players also rather like to have much terrain as it keeps them safe from being insta-raped by psyflemen on round 1. I can't actually think of any current Codex that would be overly hindered by having much terrain. I can, however, think of several lists that would be. Mostly those are overly shooty, fully mechanized internet-lists constructed specifically to be played in open table with no terrain to mention and no LOS blocking terrain ever.

[The Marshel]

40K or fantasy? If fantasy, the trees don't limit movement .They just act as dangerous terrain for cavalry. If 40K, that's a magnificent and characterful piece of terrain. Well done, that man.

given it's posted in 40k general rather then gw general, and the flikr account the pics are from is full of 40k miniatures i'd say this is mostly used for 40k

@ Captain Ventris: loving that necron colour scheme!