Switch Theme:

Cover is "Too Big"?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut




Setting up the terrain us usually the first thing we do, even before deployment type has been rolled off. And we don't take turns placing terrain. That way, everyone puts down terrain in a fair way. Just ask at the end if everyone is fine with the lay-out.

If someone is stupid enough to build one side of the table heavily fortified, he only has himself to blame if he ends up on the other side of the table (or if the buildings aren't facing any army at all because of the deployment type).

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/01/31 10:47:30


You don't have to be happy when you lose, just don't make winning the condition of your happiness.  
   
Made in us
Trigger-Happy Baal Predator Pilot






Tell the store owner to grow a spine and lay down some ground rules. A few people have already thrown out the great idea of having a 3rd party set up the terrain for a given battle, and if the store owner, upon seeing a ridiculously lopsided terrain set up, gently explains that the warzone shouldn't favor one side over the other and should have one or two medium sized line-of-sight blockers, people will eventually fall in line. If it comes from the store owner, it carries an unbiased weight, which is exactly how things need to be perceived.

Seriously, this type of bullcrap isn't an issue if there are respected people around to help cultivate a healthy gaming environment. If no one's keeping the wolves in check, the lambs will be slaughtered.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





West Chester, PA

Here's a fun exercise the next time they challenge your use of terrain. Ask them to look out a window. See any terrain? Unless you're playing in an empty meadow there are going to be buildings and trees all over the place. Check out the news, where are people fighting in the real world? In the cramped streets of cities.

Nobody has tried fighting in open terrain since WWI.

"Bringer of death, speak your name, For you are my life, and the foe's death." - Litany of the Lasgun

2500 points
1500 points
1250 points
1000 points 
   
Made in us
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot





 TheSilo wrote:
Here's a fun exercise the next time they challenge your use of terrain. Ask them to look out a window. See any terrain? Unless you're playing in an empty meadow there are going to be buildings and trees all over the place. Check out the news, where are people fighting in the real world? In the cramped streets of cities.

Nobody has tried fighting in open terrain since WWI.


Well.... I do live in the middle of Pennsylvania, so excluding a handful of small 1-story buildings there are some large open fields nearby.....
   
Made in au
Lady of the Lake






 TheSilo wrote:
Here's a fun exercise the next time they challenge your use of terrain. Ask them to look out a window. See any terrain? Unless you're playing in an empty meadow there are going to be buildings and trees all over the place. Check out the news, where are people fighting in the real world? In the cramped streets of cities.

Nobody has tried fighting in open terrain since WWI.


Even then they dug trenches to make terrain.

   
Made in us
Flashy Flashgitz





St Louis

look at my batreps.... we PACK the board with terrain

Orks! ~28000
Chaos Dwarfs ~9000
Slaanesh ~14700

Gaming Mayhem on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/MovieMayhem6

Ork P&M Blog: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/625538.page#7400396

 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




Nobody has tried fighting in open terrain since WWI.

wasn't Kursk, the biggest battle of WWII, fought on a plain ?
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






Makumba wrote:
Nobody has tried fighting in open terrain since WWI.

wasn't Kursk, the biggest battle of WWII, fought on a plain ?


Even if it was, they probably still had trenches and battlements. Hell, even sandbags. People shouldn't fight in the open, the American Revolution taught us that.

~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





West Chester, PA

 jreilly89 wrote:
Makumba wrote:
Nobody has tried fighting in open terrain since WWI.

wasn't Kursk, the biggest battle of WWII, fought on a plain ?


Even if it was, they probably still had trenches and battlements. Hell, even sandbags. People shouldn't fight in the open, the American Revolution taught us that.


I suppose I should've included the addendum, "unless you're in a tank." Artillery, tanks, and air power make it near impossible for infantry to take or hold ground in the open. This holds true in 40k too.

Point is, modern warfare is almost exclusively focused on cities and major terrain features, rapid fire weaponry makes open ground too vulnerable. This isn't Napoleonic warfare where you can stand in the open and have muskets firing 6 times a minute and missing if the wind carries the wrong direction.

I play IG and I hate playing on open battlefields, it's just not fun. You should have fortified positions in both deployment zones, and there should be at least some line of sight blocking terrain preventing either side from seeing the entire table from any one location.

"Bringer of death, speak your name, For you are my life, and the foe's death." - Litany of the Lasgun

2500 points
1500 points
1250 points
1000 points 
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






 TheSilo wrote:
 jreilly89 wrote:
Makumba wrote:
Nobody has tried fighting in open terrain since WWI.

wasn't Kursk, the biggest battle of WWII, fought on a plain ?


Even if it was, they probably still had trenches and battlements. Hell, even sandbags. People shouldn't fight in the open, the American Revolution taught us that.


I suppose I should've included the addendum, "unless you're in a tank." Artillery, tanks, and air power make it near impossible for infantry to take or hold ground in the open. This holds true in 40k too.

Point is, modern warfare is almost exclusively focused on cities and major terrain features, rapid fire weaponry makes open ground too vulnerable. This isn't Napoleonic warfare where you can stand in the open and have muskets firing 6 times a minute and missing if the wind carries the wrong direction.

I play IG and I hate playing on open battlefields, it's just not fun. You should have fortified positions in both deployment zones, and there should be at least some line of sight blocking terrain preventing either side from seeing the entire table from any one location.


Agreed. Plus, most of the time you don't agree to meet on a field, you fight the enemy where you find them. Plus, it gives most units an advantage. In open field, my Vindicator or my IG tanks will just pound the feth out of you with no regard.

~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in gb
Hallowed Canoness





Between

In an open field, your vindicator will get totalled by someone standing 600m to the left or right because the Vindicator is designed to have a wall covering at least one of its sides.



"That time I only loaded the cannon with powder. Next time, I will fill it with jewels and diamonds and they will cut you to shrebbons!" - Nogbad the Bad. 
   
Made in gb
Keeper of the Holy Orb of Antioch





avoiding the lorax on Crion

Terrain is great, it forces people to think, adapt and also means that a smart player can use it in creative ways.
Broken firelanes help both sides, no shots into other deployment zones, tanks have to be escorted, and outnumbered sqauds in good spot have fair odds to win.

City fights make even a little infriantry sqaud a potential dangerous for.

Sgt. Vanden - OOC Hey, that was your doing. I didn't choose to fly in the "Dongerprise'.

"May the odds be ever in your favour"

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have no clue how Dakka's moderation work. I expect it involves throwing a lot of d100 and looking at many random tables.

FudgeDumper - It could be that you are just so uncomfortable with the idea of your chapters primarch having his way with a docile tyranid spore cyst, that you must deny they have any feelings at all.  
   
Made in fr
Wing Commander






See, I think I'm the opposite of your opponents; I refuse to fight someone who wants to play on a big gunline table. Without, and this is important, LoS blocking terrain (moreso than just cover; too much easily accessed 4+ isn't ideal either) the army with the most big guns will win, that's just how 40k mechanically works.

Gunlines are uninteresting to play as or against (my first army was a stereotypical 5th edition Guard army; tanks, mechvets, vendettas, boring as all hell as I got better at the game and wanted to do more than stand and shoot), and by catering to a gunline neither play will really actually be playing the game, it'll just play itself with people rolling a few saves and attacks. Movement stops mattering, positioning stops mattering, even objectives aren't as important if they're easily accessed, seen and fired upon. One of the reasons, broadly speaking, skirmish games are considered more tactical is how much more important terrain is on that scale, with fire lanes, flanks and avenues of approach all being key and hotly contested, and bringing that up to 40k's scale helps the game go from boring, mechanically broken unbalanced mess to something which can at least be fun for an underdog army.

I've been able to win horribly unfair matches against some of the worst kinds of army tailoring WAACs by having enough terrain on the board I can muddle up their perfect plan. Terrain is a variable which mucks up mathhammer and list optimization, which is only ever a good thing.

Therefore, I conclude, Valve should announce Half Life 2: Episode 3.
 
   
Made in us
Flashy Flashgitz





St Louis

 jreilly89 wrote:
Makumba wrote:
Nobody has tried fighting in open terrain since WWI.

wasn't Kursk, the biggest battle of WWII, fought on a plain ?


Even if it was, they probably still had trenches and battlements. Hell, even sandbags. People shouldn't fight in the open, the American Revolution taught us that.


Kursk was the largest TANK on TANK battle. The villages were on either side of the field they fought. There were no foot soldiers in the open plain area (at least not for more than a few seconds) Ive been there and it the reason this happened is becasue the tanks HAD to fight there as the surrounding area is not conducive to tank combat at all.

if 2 armoured battle groups wanted to fight.. then sure an open board makes sense.

The only player that ever wants "less" terrain in our group plays an armoured battle group of course

Orks! ~28000
Chaos Dwarfs ~9000
Slaanesh ~14700

Gaming Mayhem on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/MovieMayhem6

Ork P&M Blog: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/625538.page#7400396

 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




About open terrain, that is ok once in a while just like having lots of terrain is ok once in a while. It's called compromise.

You are TFG if you will not compromise. One game is open terrain, next game is not. Next game is open terrain next game is not.

Or more like we play my way, next game is your way, next game is my way, next game is your way. Really simple if you ask me.

Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.

Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?

Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





West Chester, PA

Davor wrote:
About open terrain, that is ok once in a while just like having lots of terrain is ok once in a while. It's called compromise.

You are TFG if you will not compromise. One game is open terrain, next game is not. Next game is open terrain next game is not.

Or more like we play my way, next game is your way, next game is my way, next game is your way. Really simple if you ask me.


Easier said than done though, I mostly play with folks who are willing to compromise, but plenty of folks at my FLGS were not.

"Bringer of death, speak your name, For you are my life, and the foe's death." - Litany of the Lasgun

2500 points
1500 points
1250 points
1000 points 
   
Made in us
Deranged Necron Destroyer





Once played a game for wh40k Escalation league playing against a Tau player who asked if they could set up the terrain when i was heading to lunch (pretty lax about times and stuff for this tournament no prize support, all just for fun). Went to lunch came back. The terrain was 6 forest scattered about and two building ruins on the opposite corners of the board. I made the comment that there might as well be no terrain on the field and he gave me a puzzled look I told him that all the forest meant nothing to his tau with his marker lights, he asked if I wanted to change the terrain but I said it was fine, in the real world can't always pick your battles, i was a bit sour about this but I did say he could set up terrain and I honestly do feel he wasn't trying to cheat me or anything. I deployed everything I had in that one ruin building that blocked all the LOS like a parking garage (was playing very heavy vehicle MSU SOB with exorcist). Looking back on it all I see it as a very good experience for me to become a better strategist being forced to not rely on cover and being out gunned and out ranged. Like any super underdog story I just barely won thanks to some lucky rolls and it felt great.

When I place cover I try to always have SOMETHING blocking LOS from one side of the board to the other space all over the board so people can't just sit and shoot in a trench But I don't flood the area with it.

I don't think there is such thing as "to big" and not every battlefield can be perfect for both armies. Trying different extremes in terrain and set up is a good exercise in strategy and can make some pretty good game stories. i'm sorry that you have people that don't want to try new things.

It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.  
   
Made in ru
!!Goffik Rocker!!






I often suggest to put some blos on the board when i see shooting grounds. People playing heavy shooters sometimes do it unintentionally. Usually they don't mind.
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




Kursk was the largest TANK on TANK battle. The villages were on either side of the field they fought. There were no foot soldiers in the open plain area (at least not for more than a few seconds) Ive been there and it the reason this happened is becasue the tanks HAD to fight there as the surrounding area is not conducive to tank combat at all.

I could of course bring up the fact that most of armies played in w40k are marines and they are described in the fluff as tanks, or point how most armies are made out of multiple serpents, MC or other vehicles. But I won't.


Or more like we play my way, next game is your way, next game is my way, next game is your way. Really simple if you ask me.

That maybe work, if you have a realy high status in your gaming community. And the maybe is a strong one. At all other times if you allow someone to do something he will do it all the time. That is why people stick to stuff like no FW, extra CAD is an ally slot etc
   
Made in ca
Trustworthy Shas'vre




I have to say that this thread is worthless without pictures so we can judge if the terrain was unfairly large.

However, as a Tau player, I personally find the game more fun with lots of terrain. Some of my favourite matches have been on close cityfight tables or using a Zone Mortalis style set up. Yes I know a lot of terrain puts some of the best units in my codex at a disadvantage, but utilizing a dense battlefield to my tactical advantage is more interesting.

Tau and Space Wolves since 5th Edition. 
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






 Furyou Miko wrote:
In an open field, your vindicator will get totalled by someone standing 600m to the left or right because the Vindicator is designed to have a wall covering at least one of its sides.


Called my Aegis Line or my two other Vindicators

~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut



Cheyenne WY

 kingbobbito wrote:
The past few games I've had people ask me not to use certain pieces of terrain, one going so far as to say he won't play me if "I'm going to be that way".

We generally play on a 4'x4' or 4'x6', depending on the size of game we're playing (4x6 for anything above 1000, or for 1000 if we're using a lot of vehicles/bikes). In terms of terrain, we have about 30 pieces that we switch around every game, using anywhere from 4 to 8 on our table. They range from anything from 3"x3" craters up to 12"x8" buildings.

When placing terrain, we alternate picking and placing it, rolling off to see who places first. I tend to want at least two decent sized pieces, and then an assortment of smaller ones, with no more than 12-18" of absolutely open ground between them.

The piece of terrain that has recently faced complaints is said 12"x8" building, which has 3 stories that are mostly blown out, so only about a third of the second floor and less than a quarter of the third floor is intact. I went to place it up against the edge of the table (so that it wouldn't take up the entire center of the table, but got a complaint about it. I then chose a slightly smaller one, about 8x8, and still was asked why I was "building a wall" across the middle of the table. Keep in mind this was at the far edge of the table.

On a separate occasion that I tried to place two small buildings near each other in the center of the table (two 6x6 wrecked houses placed about 8" apart) I was again accused of "blocking all LOS". They also complained that I was placing objectives "where no one can see them", aka inside a courtyard that could only be attacked if you were at least 18" into the table.

Am I in the wrong with my terrain choices and placement, or are these guys just trying to get the upper edge by creating a giant open death field? I know it's not coincidence that one was Tau, one was Guard, and one was marines with a lot of ranged firepower. I mean, my army is moderately shooty too, the cover would definitely be hurting my dev squads and my snipers.

I mean, am I actually being TFG? Which is how I was treated. I honestly thought the idea of terrain is that it does mean you have to maneuver your units a bit to get good shooting, and to give troops a bit of a cover save.....


I only have your side of the story...but they sound like whiner babies. I had the word "Tau" in my head as soon as I started reading. Nothing nice to say about 'those people" If all you can play is Gunline, then that is not my problem.

The will of the hive is always the same: HUNGER 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Vallejo, CA

Jefffar wrote: Yes I know a lot of terrain puts some of the best units in my codex at a disadvantage, but utilizing a dense battlefield to my tactical advantage is more interesting.

To be fair, several of them are only "best" when you don't play with enough terrain.

In any case, you can definitely play tau and eldar without fighting over yet another open meadow. There's actually a reason to take things like piranhas and scorpions.


Your one-stop website for batreps, articles, and assorted goodies about the men of Folera: Foleran First Imperial Archives. Read Dakka's favorite narrative battle report series The Hand of the King. Also, check out my commission work, and my terrain.

Abstract Principles of 40k: Why game imbalance and list tailoring is good, and why tournaments are an absurd farce.

Read "The Geomides Affair", now on sale! No bolter porn. Not another inquisitor story. A book written by a dakkanought for dakkanoughts!
 
   
Made in us
Locked in the Tower of Amareo




The distinction between terrain and LOS-blocking terrain is pretty big. I typically plan on 40-60% terrain, but virtually none blocks LOS.
   
Made in gb
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?





UK

Martel732 wrote:
The distinction between terrain and LOS-blocking terrain is pretty big. I typically plan on 40-60% terrain, but virtually none blocks LOS.


This could be whhy you find your Marines die so fast, as you have said elsewhere. I say any board needs 3-4 6" square LoS-blockers MINIMUM to provide an interesting game, preferably more.

 
   
Made in ca
Mutilatin' Mad Dok





What's the Tau player complaining about anyhow? He has things that ignore cover AND line of sight...
   
Made in ca
Dour Wolf Priest with Iron Wolf Amulet






Canada

 Paradigm wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
The distinction between terrain and LOS-blocking terrain is pretty big. I typically plan on 40-60% terrain, but virtually none blocks LOS.


This could be whhy you find your Marines die so fast, as you have said elsewhere. I say any board needs 3-4 6" square LoS-blockers MINIMUM to provide an interesting game, preferably more.

Hmm, I have noticed this recently as well. In my last couple Apoc games, I keep getting massively outshot by Guard armies and I'm pretty certain this is largely due to the fact that we don't have a lot of BLOS. We try to use a lot of terrain, but this ends up being mostly low cover and ruins with holes all through them.

   
Made in dk
Stormin' Stompa





 Ailaros wrote:

Anyways, 40k's rules used to say 25% of the board had to be terrain, and more recently, that you should have D3 pieces per square. The game has never been written, even now, assuming that you would have only a little terrain on it. Anyone who insists otherwise is playing a different game than you are.



And nowadays the lazy, incompetent, barely-worthy-of-the-name retards that work as Games Designers have decided that the following is an adequate description of how to place terrain;

"Exactly how you set up Citadel scenery models is purely a matter of personal taste, and they can be placed
upon the battlefield in any way the players find agreeable. In general, we have found that the more scenery
you can place on the battlefield, the better the game will be. That aside, placing the scenery so as to create
an interesting and inspiring looking landscape should be your primary goal."




Sigh.

-------------------------------------------------------
"He died because he had no honor. He had no honor and the Emperor was watching."

18.000 3.500 8.200 3.300 2.400 3.100 5.500 2.500 3.200 3.000


 
   
Made in au
Missionary On A Mission




Australia

I don't really understand why the BRB doesn't include 5 or 6 "standard boards" that the designers have come up with to just lay out where to put various terrain features. Then it would give a good starting point to new players on how to set up a board (simply just lay it out like in the book) and also give a basis to setting a standardised board for more competitive play.



 
   
Made in us
Deranged Necron Destroyer





Hmmm I wanna try a new game type now WIP name "London Fog"

no? terrain on the table but night fighting is always in effect and nothing has LOS past 24"

Everything has shrouded if someone brings a fog machine.

thoughts/ improvements?

It's easy to assume that people arguing an interpretation you disagree with are just looking for an advantage for themselves... But it's quite often not the case.  
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: