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.

I haven't bought into the game yet, and don't have the rulebook, but I had a question to anyone that might play Dropzone Commander on these boards.

Does the game support playing on tables that don't use heavy urban terrain? You can still have large LoS blocking stuff like canyon walls, stone pillars, tall hills, large/tall forests, etc. Just not the same buildings on the table every game.

By support, I mean are there scenarios that support objectives not inside buildings? Do the rules have well defined and interesting terrain rules that encourage the use of terrain?

I'm pretty big into making fun and interesting tables, but every game of Dropzone Commander I've seen is played on a dense urban tablescape and the sameness of it is making me want to avoid the game. Story-wise the game takes place as the UCM are retaking formerly human worlds, so it does make sense, but that doesn't mean it's not boring to see the same table over and over again. That's why I stopped playing Warmachine.

I was thinking of making new terrain for the game anyway, stuff that if I can't get away from the urban style terrain, then I could otherwise disguise it. Turning the buildings into vertical colonies attached to the sides of canyon or pillar walls like Native American settlements. Or having more open fields, with geysers spewing LoS blocking clouds of gas, and other things.

So long as you can:

1) Ensure that you've lots of line of sight blocking features because the weapon ranges are very long

2) Ensure that you've terrain features which can count-as buildings (ergo allow foot soldiers to garrison inside).

You could do a rocky canyon with caves replacing the buildings. Or bunkers in the landscape.

Generally so long as the players are clear what is blocking what and what can and can't be garrisoned you should be fine. I think you see a lot of city scapes because the rules are built around that idea and they also sell a fair few so it makes for a quick and easy way to buy into the game and get terrain as well .

The rulebook actually has quite a few images of the models in non-urban settings. It was always something I wanted to try (as PHR suffer horrendously from the close-in urban environment) but I gave up on the game before I could really be bothered.

If you're trying to play one of the book scenarios then you'll need to have a few terrain pieces that can proxy as buildings (for objective searching etc), but if you're not bothering then just go ahead. Be aware though, that without buildings to hide in/objectives to search for, Infantry in DzC may as well not be there. Both players normally need to include at least one infantry battlegroup but you could waive this requirement if you're not planning to give them anything to do.

I was aware of infantry being useless without buildings. But what you guys are saying has me concerned.

I know there's a setting reason for why infantry isn't that great anymore, and there's a good variety of vehicles, but I kind of really like combined arms gameplay, along with great terrain.

Remember, infantry are only needed for objective that are inside buildings. Objectives that are out in the open can be picked up by vehicles.

Also, remember that army lists are not constructed until after the scenario has been selected. So, if you know you are not fighting in an urban setting, you can minimize the amount of infantry you take accordingly.

I've also seen a few outdoor boards that have bunkers, towers and other building-like terrain pieces that house objectives, so infantry can still useful in the outdoors, depending on how you construct the board and the scenario rules.

Also note that 6" is the magic number for terrain height in DZC, since all aircraft are assumed to be flying at that height (even if the flight stands are lower), unless they've landed or are flying low (which is risky). So you want not just LOS blocking terrain, but 6"+ high LOS blocking terrain.

I don't think it'd be too hard to make up some rules for infantry 'digging in' to give themselves the same protection as they get whilst in a building.

The rules do cover non urban terrain but the game works really well in urban environments and the urban cityscape and ruinscape terrain are so cheap and easy to get and build most players play in urban but there is no reason why you couldnt do other boards.
im toying with doing a desert board with some small out post in.

You know, I see infantry use, and non-urban areas being a big avenue of expansion for DZC in the future. Although I understand the game is centered around vehicular combat due to scale, some more diversity in infantry, or infantry-like units can help.

Same goes for terrain. I also notice that in these urbanscapes that they have, the ground is so pristine that it doesn't give infantry one of the key reasons why digging infantry out of urban terrain was such a problem. All that stone and metal rubble is perfect terrain for infantry. Although modern tech helps defeat that considerably, it's a big deal.

One of the reasons people play tabletop miniature wargames is for the tabletop itself, being able to make fun and usable dioramas, then play a game while also admiring the scenes as they unfold.

THe game is "N" scale, so any train hobby store has plenty of alternative terrain.