PDA

View Full Version : Terrain set up.



wingedserpant
28-04-2007, 19:55
I was wondering what was your worst case of terrain being set up. Since terrain can be really important, a proper set up will create a balanced game whereas if its not done right, you can be greatly hindered.

For example, what if your opponent had nothing but cover while you got impassiable terrain and a sheep...?

And have you ever had people deliberately doing this or was it sheer laziness of staff at tournaments?

What is your ideal set up and does it annoy you when your opponent keeps moving peices right after?

I searched the forum and couldn't find any simaliar threads so I thought I'd start it...enjoy.

RavenMorpheus
28-04-2007, 19:57
I played a game where myself and my opponent set up the ruined buildings we have and when we'd started the game we realised we'd left only a few "corridors" for movement and they were having the bodies pile up in them very quickly. :wtf:

Bunnahabhain
28-04-2007, 23:12
Few weeks ago, we made all the trees size 2 by accident, on a board where the only cover was the forests. That was with my 4 tank 1500pt list.

We really should have an official size 4, ie hills.

MrP
29-04-2007, 00:38
Worst occasion was a mega game I played at uni. The organiser set it up along the lines of A Bridge Too Far. The Marines had to race across a bridge and secure the other side. I had a pair of Basilisks and a pair of Bombards. And about eight other Leman Russes entering a few turns later. The board was 17' long, and the Marine player had neither HK missiles nor anything of greater range than 4'.

I must admit, it wasn't very dissimilar to the actual debacle at Arnhem. Poor old Marines got blasted into nothing. I felt a bit bad about that.

Laughingmonk
29-04-2007, 00:42
I haven't really had a one-sided set up... but I have had alot of bad ones.

Gamers really need to understand that a good terrain set-up is just as important as rules and lists. Maybe even more important.

My favorite is what I see in the rule books. Completely flat, except for a couple of random things. Or, lots of terrain, but with a big no-man's land in the center.

All I have to say is that everyone should take a look around at the world around you. The world isn't flat.....

Onisuzume
29-04-2007, 00:44
I was wondering what was your worst case of terrain being set up. Since terrain can be really important, a proper set up will create a balanced game whereas if its not done right, you can be greatly hindered.

For example, what if your opponent had nothing but cover while you got impassiable terrain and a sheep...?

And have you ever had people deliberately doing this or was it sheer laziness of staff at tournaments?

What is your ideal set up and does it annoy you when your opponent keeps moving peices right after?
We usually take turns putting down a piece of terrain.
That way we're ensuring that it's at least a bit balanced.
And we also try to spread the terrain about evenly.

Though one of the tables has terrain modeled onto it that I can't really agree with. (basicly; planet bowling ball with a hill in one corner and a few trees scattered about) So I've pretty much condamned that table for LotR gaming purposes. (they can have that one, then we can have a table with proper terrain)

Worst occasion was a mega game I played at uni. The organiser set it up along the lines of A Bridge Too Far. The Marines had to race across a bridge and secure the other side. I had a pair of Basilisks and a pair of Bombards. And about eight other Leman Russes entering a few turns later. The board was 17' long, and the Marine player had neither HK missiles nor anything of greater range than 4'.

I must admit, it wasn't very dissimilar to the actual debacle at Arnhem.
That'll be fun with cheese marine armies.
On a side-note: I'm painting up an brittish airborne soldier that fought there. (at Arnhem that is)

Serpent
29-04-2007, 05:48
The two worst cases of bad terrain I've seen:

1) My 13th Company against a Tau army. More or less empty midsection of the table, He had two forests and a large area of ruins. I had two farm houses (unaccessible, as they were #€%& solid) and a very small strip of ruins. On my right flank there was a small wood to advance behind. He got the first turn. I had my Wolf Lord (on Bike) and three Bikes left in the beginning of my turn 3...

2) Tournament run by a pair of (perhaps a bit naive) Outriders. All the Fanatsy tables had enormous woods and lots of buildings. The 40K tables had one wood each and very little to hide behind. The final was played on a table which looked like a parking lot. The organisers claimed that 25% of the board was covered with terrain. They counted roads (i.e. flat!) as terrain.

As for Woods needing to be Size 4 - nothing can see past Size 3 terrain, as far as I know...

Serpent

chromedog
29-04-2007, 05:55
At my club, one of the players will set up the terrain while the other is getting his horde army out of their boxes. That player can then reposition pieces up to 6" if they choose.
I try to position terrain so that either side will have equivalent advantages / disadvantages from it. Haven't had any complaints yet.

big squig
29-04-2007, 06:09
I was in a tourny at a my LFGS and the owner (who was running the event) thought it would be hilarious if one of the tables was completly empty...seriously, not one piece of terrain. Needless to say my tau vs ork game I played on the table was over pretty quick.

There was a WD artcle not to long ago (within the last year maybe) that talked about proper terrain set-up in 40k. Everyone who plays should read it. The basic summery they gave was:
- 25% terrain at minimum
- Have a large LOS blocking piece near the center. Pretty much try to aviod giving players many places to shoot from one end of the table to the opposite.
- Leave no area greater than 12" in diamater empty.
- Don't place really tall places or extreamly useful cover in deployment zones. Make players work for really useful terrain.

Thylacine
29-04-2007, 07:20
wingedserpant and others.

I sometimes wonder what goes through the minds to tournament organisers, I have been to a couple of events where the tables were almost devoid of scenery, they had very little preparation for the tournament aside from printing out flyers and taking peoples money. They did not have much in the way of scenery and were too lazy or inept to acquire more, the main comment on that weekend was on the lack of scenery. I always offer to lend a box of hills size 2 - 3+ and Taka-Studio Models, buildings single and 3 story buildings and ruins. Anything that blocks LoS, adds height and makes you think and looks good is good.

One thing that annoys me is when folks start moving scenery to suite themselves, the TO's lay it out and that's the way it is supposed to stay. Last tournament I went to one of my opponents started to move the scenery (there was not much there to start with) to benefit himself, I told him to stop, we rolled for sides and at that time I was called away. When I came back to the table he had changed the scenery again! In my quarter I had one low hill and during the game I caught him moving a rock outcrop to improve his LoS, comments/criticism to this guy were like water off a ducks back.

At the same tournament there was a fantastic CoD table with roads and canal that cut the table in half, two bridges and 2-3 CoD barricade sets on the roads as well. However by the time I played that table the barricades had been moved around and there was no vehicle movement under 10" without a terrain test. My army was vehicle heavy and my opponents (Eldar) was unhampered in its movement because it was mostly skimmers. He won the roll off for choice of sides and chose the side that I would have picked if I had the chance, less rubble and easier movement. If the barricades had not been moved in the earlier games, I am sure that my vehicle movement would not have as hamstrung as it was.

At the next tournament I will take a few happy snaps of the tables prior to the start of the gaming, so that if a table looks like it has been rigged it can be set back to the way it was laid out. If anyone complains we can just call up the image of the table, as it was set up and change it back to what it was.

My preference is for scenery heavy tables, one or two long fire-lanes and lots of scenery to make both players think about movement, concealment and firing, otherwise it is the army that takes the biggest guns and shoots first that tends to win. Classification of terrain is another thing that I find some people will take for granted (I did) and some will use to their advantage. In some previous tournaments I have seen flying Rhinos, Razorbacks and Land Raiders. Why? Because the owners took advantage of terrain not being classed as impassable to vehicles by the TO's and or their opponents, so their tanks (not skimmers) were able to climb 12" up the rock spire or fly to the roof of a ruined building (buildings as such aren't classified in 4th ed) so these players move their vehicles up a building as far as they move it in.

I contacted the local ' Hobby Service Team Leader' and asked about vehicle movement, he was somewhat stunned that someone would pull a stunt like that in a tournament. After explaining that GW were aware of the problem and acknowledge that it is a grey area they expect people to play in the spirit of the game. Part of the GW response " Wait… so the Rhino was on the roof of the building? Ignoring first how the Rhino got up there, they’d need to make 2 dangerous terrain tests, and not be able to disembark troops, since you can only move up or down as far as your movement is. See page 17 of the rulebook. By your definition the Rhino would have had to move 12 inches to get up there.That’s Cheating!"

As far as I am concerned, for a vehicle to go up in a building there would need to be a ramp, collapsed wall or large pile of rubble that at least looks as if a vehicle could traverse it, vehicles don't climb not even walkers.

I think it is nice for the TO's to put a little blurb on the table to define what the terrain is; city ruins, jungle, ash wastes, ice world. One table I saw at a tournament had clear resin rocks and rock outcrops, it used the GW Hazardous Environments List, Reflective Crystals that spiced up the game every time a Las Cannon was fired.

Another tournament had felt cut-outs of various colours dumped on the table and the players had no idea what they were so they were ignored, during lunch I asked the TO's about the felt cut-outs, they were supposed to define area terrain and hazards but we weren't told about them.

:chrome: Thylacine:chrome:

Ravenous
29-04-2007, 07:36
Worst I ever saw was at Conflict Montreal.

It was the 2 guys up for best general. 1 was an all shooting marine army and the other was all assault blood angels.

The mission didnt favour the blood angel guy, so he managed to convince the shooty player that they had to redeploy terrian (which is illegal by the tourny rules as the tables are set up properly before hand) So they took turns doing so and the blood angel player built a giant wall directly in the center of the table completely cutting off effective shooting.

The blood angel guy won of course, got best general, and it was the most cowardly low ball tactic I had ever seen.

Mr Hat
29-04-2007, 08:00
The most important thign is to not block off movement. Impassable terrain will almost always hinder a table. The only restrictment on movmeent should be the slow moving through difficult terrain, which also gives the advantage of a cover save.

jubilex
29-04-2007, 09:20
There was a WD artcle not to long ago (within the last year maybe) that talked about proper terrain set-up in 40k. Everyone who plays should read it. The basic summery they gave was:
- 25% terrain at minimum
- Have a large LOS blocking piece near the center. Pretty much try to aviod giving players many places to shoot from one end of the table to the opposite.
- Leave no area greater than 12" in diamater empty.
- Don't place really tall places or extreamly useful cover in deployment zones. Make players work for really useful terrain.
This is gospel.
Learn the mantra, chant the mantra, rejoice in the mantra. The more terrain the better the game.

wingedserpant
29-04-2007, 11:21
I have now remembered my worst incident. We got a third person to set up the terrian but my opponent kept moving them as soon as they were placed on to the table. We told him to stop it but he continued to do it up until the beginning of the first turn. We had finished deployment and he muttered something while moving a wood with two CSM units inside forward. Yippee, four plasma guns in range of my havocs first turn...

Onisuzume
29-04-2007, 11:30
Slap him with the BGB I'd say. Especially the hardcover version.
Might considder slapping him with IA2 and IA4 afterwards if he keeps doing it.

Or if it happens during a tournament; call in a judge. He'll probably get disqualified.

swamp_slug
29-04-2007, 15:30
played in a 40k in 40mins tournament, so all the terrain was set up by someone else on 4'x4' boards.
My opponent and I rolled for deployment and I got to choose board edge. We then started setting up, I had a few hills that I deployed on placing my fire warriors in the centre of my deployment zone.
He had lots of large LOS blocking cover as well. Problem was the board was open in the middle so whenever he popped his head out to attack me he had 30 pulse rifle shots going into the squad. In the end it took 4 turns eliminate his army, 1 squad at a time and I only lost a few fire warriors.
At the end of the game the guy who had set up the table told me we were playing on it in the wrong direction. It was a balanced table in the N-S direction, but one-sided in the E-W direction, but being 4x4 there was no long edge to dictate direction of play.

wingedserpant
29-04-2007, 17:50
Slap him with the BGB I'd say. Especially the hardcover version.

The doctors are still trying to get the kill team rules out of his liver. And you don't want to know where the wood is now...

Codsticker
29-04-2007, 18:06
There is this one young fellow that comes over and plays against my son (sometimes I join in, but usually have to "ref") and he is in the habit of moving terrain pieces around while the game is in progress! It drives me a bit nuts and I'm not even playing. The funny thing is: my son doesn't usually notice.

Onisuzume
29-04-2007, 19:53
The doctors are still trying to get the kill team rules out of his liver. And you don't want to know where the wood is now...
I bet that place begins with an "a" and ends with an "e".

There is this one young fellow that comes over and plays against my son (sometimes I join in, but usually have to "ref") and he is in the habit of moving terrain pieces around while the game is in progress! It drives me a bit nuts and I'm not even playing. The funny thing is: my son doesn't usually notice.
Now that's an odd thing...

wingedserpant
29-04-2007, 21:33
I bet that place begins with an "a" and ends with an "e".

Yes its in Alicante. Anyways, not many people let him touch terrain anymore. He is sometimes still at it though like accidently knocking the piece and putting it back in a more handy position.

Some people...

Sylph
29-04-2007, 22:08
Does anyone else play by the 'alternate placing terrain pieces, one for each 2x2' of table' rule of thumb?
Our bunch plays on a 6' board, so that's 3 chunks of terrain each, placed alternately. This is about the most fair way of doing it, we find, and can become somewhat strategic.