Terrain An Underrated Modifier In 40K? - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
General 40k This is the place to talk about everything related to Warhammer 40k.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-27-12, 01:50 PM Thread Starter
Well That Was Unexpected
 
D-A-C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,646
Reputation: 2
Default Terrain An Underrated Modifier In 40K?

Hey everyone.

I was just wondering if any of you have experienced having the terrain used on a 40K board deciding the game?

I've played a few games recently with my Chaos Daemons and as usual I payed far too little attention to the placement of terrain and it has really screwed me over.

In one I had two Units of Long Fangs perched high up in a building in the enemies deployment zone which had line of sight on almost all the objectives (except for one behind a hill in my zone) and they just sat sniping at me for the entire game and cost me the victory.

Then in another I was playing a smaller 500pt game and I placed a ruined building in the middle of the board and watched as my opponent infiltrated his Kroot into it for a 4+ Cover save and a 360 degree view of the entire table. If that wasn't enough there was a mysterious Archeotech Objective in the middle of it that gave his Kroot Initiative 10!

Both these instances and more have really made me appreciate that I need to pay more attention to the positioning of certain pieces of terrain. In both games I either placed, or allowed to be placed, pieces of terrain that influenced the flow of the games to the extent that they put me at even more of a disadvantage to begin with.

So, my questions are:

1. How fussy are you about the positioning of terrain, are you casual like me, paying little attention until its to late or are you very particular about how your board is set-up?

2. Have you ever been screwed over by the positioning of certain terrain pieces so that it felt as if your opponent either had an unfair advantage or that you had lost the game before it even started?


What do you guys think, is terrain an underrated modifier for deciding 40K game, or has always been very important and I've just been ignorant of it until it cost me some games?
D-A-C is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-27-12, 01:53 PM
Banned
Magpie_Oz's Flag is: Australia
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Not every shadow, but any shadow
Posts: 7,889
Reputation: 74
Default

1. Very fussy I try to make sure we each have an equal amount of terrain.
2. Dunno about lost before started but yes I have been at a serve disadvantage because of terrain. Mysterious Terrain can be a real bugger in that regard too.
Magpie_Oz is offline  
post #3 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-27-12, 03:06 PM
Senior Member
 
Sethis's Avatar
Sethis's Flag is: United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Alston, Cumbria
Posts: 4,190
Reputation: 58
Default

Quote:
1. How fussy are you about the positioning of terrain, are you casual like me, paying little attention until its to late or are you very particular about how your board is set-up?
I follow a series of three basic steps for every game.

1. Divide the board into 6 equal sections. (24" squares)
2. Place either one large or two smaller pieces of terrain in the middle of each section.
3. Place two medium terrain pieces on the halfway line, approx where the corners of four sections would each meet, so 24" away from both the long and short table edges.

Then choose sides. Each deployment zone, regardless of the game being played, is near-symmetrical and is therefore fair.

Quote:
2. Have you ever been screwed over by the positioning of certain terrain pieces so that it felt as if your opponent either had an unfair advantage or that you had lost the game before it even started?
Only when I first started playing, before I began always using the above system. Now if the terrain is unbalanced, I treat it as a challenge when playing someone worse than me, or ask to alter the terrain slightly if playing someone on my level or better.

90% of people think they are above average.

Statistically Improbable. Psychologically Inevitable.
Sethis is offline  
 
post #4 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-27-12, 03:43 PM
Tzeentch laughs at likely
 
Dave T Hobbit's Avatar
Dave T Hobbit's Flag is: Europe
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Inside my Head, Bristol, UK
Posts: 8,556
Reputation: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethis View Post
Then choose sides. Each deployment zone, regardless of the game being played, is near-symmetrical and is therefore fair.
It is a fair way to distribute terrain; however, the default is to pick sides before setting up terrain now, so you would need you opponent to agree.
Dave T Hobbit is offline  
post #5 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-27-12, 05:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Iron_Freak220's Avatar
Iron_Freak220's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,727
Reputation: 9
Default

I usually divide the board into 6 sections and roll a D3 for each section and add that many pieces of terrain. I don't care if it's equal because you should get a benefit for rolling well and choosing the deployment zone with better terrain placement.

Terrain influences every move I make in the game. I will only deploy heavy weapons where the have clear lines of sight to most of the board. I run my Daemon Princes behind as much terrain as possible. I don't care if my monsters look like scaredy cats if they survive the game.

I generally move my Rhinos to a position near terrain, where should the Transport explode the units inside can deploy in terrain.

Terrain is very important and you'll become a much better player if you can master it.

Chaos Space Marines: Stay Spikey

Codex: The Ascended (Malice) WIP

Forging the Corruptor


Forum Formula Forever!

Iron_Freak220 is offline  
post #6 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-27-12, 07:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Archon Dan's Avatar
Archon Dan's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,825
Reputation: 17
Default

I enjoy getting to my gaming club early and setting up the table sometimes. It doesn't really work with the new rules for table set-up in 6th but our players like to walk in and just start playing. I enjoy setting up scenic and cinematic tables that could be used for various battles as this is what happens.

What happens frequently though is that a table may have a great/even-sided set-up for Dawn of War but if Vanguard Strike or Hammer and Anvil is rolled then setting up first becomes more important. And I feel that the first roll-off should have some importance. Being able to pick where you deploy should have some advantage.

I recently had two players modify a swamp table I set up. Honestly, I was upset they did not like my set-up, because I work hard at it. I don't just throw terrain randomly. I even put in choke-points and valleys too narrow for vehicles on some tables. They said they changed it because one side had half the dry ground in their deployment zone the other side did. As I told them, that was the point. I've played games where terrain, or more importantly the terrain because of the deployment map, has influenced the game.

"Fetch me another plaything. This one seems to have broken." -Urien Rakarth

Space Marine- "This planet is ours, witch."
Eldar- "No ... This planet is theirs ..."
Archon Dan is offline  
post #7 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-28-12, 08:46 AM
Senior Member
 
VX485's Avatar
VX485's Flag is: Australia
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 359
Reputation: 1
Default

I try to set up the terrain as fair as possible but also try to make it all fit together and seem natural.
VX485 is offline  
post #8 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-28-12, 09:02 AM
Where is Jessica Hyde?
 
humakt's Avatar
humakt's Flag is: England
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,182
Reputation: 30
Default

Terrain in games I generally play just appears to be scattered across the table in a random manner, which is fine by me.

I did just play a game where a fortess of redemption stood in the very centre of the table. It is so massive and blocks LoS so effectivly, that it was pivotal to the entire game. It more or less left my orks unmolested while I closed in for the kill.

So yes its important, and it can swing games, but thats one of the challenges I like. How best to use terrain for any given situation.

Your toast has been burnt and no amount of scraping will get rid of the black bits.
humakt is offline  
post #9 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-28-12, 09:37 AM
Senior Member
 
Sethis's Avatar
Sethis's Flag is: United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Alston, Cumbria
Posts: 4,190
Reputation: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave T Hobbit View Post
It is a fair way to distribute terrain; however, the default is to pick sides before setting up terrain now, so you would need you opponent to agree.
We're pretty relaxed at my club about things like that. So long as the table looks fair, people are happy to pick sides after we've put the terrain out.

Quote:
I usually divide the board into 6 sections and roll a D3 for each section and add that many pieces of terrain. I don't care if it's equal because you should get a benefit for rolling well and choosing the deployment zone with better terrain placement.

Terrain influences every move I make in the game. I will only deploy heavy weapons where the have clear lines of sight to most of the board. I run my Daemon Princes behind as much terrain as possible. I don't care if my monsters look like scaredy cats if they survive the game.

I generally move my Rhinos to a position near terrain, where should the Transport explode the units inside can deploy in terrain.
So if through fluke, you got a side with 3 pieces in each square, and your opponent got 1 piece per square, and you were playing a shooty army and blew him off the table by turn 3 because he had no cover to advance behind, would you take satisfaction from the win? How would your opponent feel?

That's why I hate unbalanced tables. To me a game is only fun if it is fair. A game is only fair if both players have a near-equal chance to win. While some variables are beyond your control (your opponent writes bad lists, you fail 3 reserves rolls in a row etc) terrain *is* under your control and should therefore be balanced as much as possible.

90% of people think they are above average.

Statistically Improbable. Psychologically Inevitable.
Sethis is offline  
post #10 of 22 (permalink) Old 08-28-12, 01:10 PM
Senior Member
 
ARMYguy's Avatar
ARMYguy's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Cleveland OH
Posts: 129
Reputation: 1
Default

On the same token then Sethis you probably hate purchasable cover then too, cause i can have my whole IG in a fortress and have 3+ cover and heavy weapons, and you dont? Cover will basically never be fair in 6th.... so It does not bother me. Strategy and army always trump the cover, if you lose it was not because of cover.
ARMYguy is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Warhammer 40K > General 40k

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome