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.

Wanted to pose this question. I see a lot of AOS tables that have very sparse terrain, and with LOS being what it is, this often means that half the terrain pieces don't matter because they don't do anything. I have yet to actually see a good example of terrain suited for AOS, and GW's own boards in half their battle reports tend to be pretty wide open which is funny because you never tend to see a lot of shooting dominate their battle reports.

Does anyone have any good examples of what an AOS board should look like? I know the 4-page rules suggest 1-2 pieces per 2x2' square, but with how most of the GW terrain works, this never seems like enough. I'm looking at buying some third-party mats and terrain but I'm not really sure what I should be looking for (and supplement it with some GW terrain for the AOS feel)

d3 per 2x2 works pretty well. Generally speaking you want 8-10 pieces of terrain on a normal size board at the least.

8-12 peices seems right, with some scatter terrain and perhaps a larger space left open somewhere for tactical reasons. I have some pictures of a toruney locally tht had a decen amount of terrain.
There was one that had quite the open killing field in the middle, wile another was littered with rocks and small terrain peices.

Unable to post them at this time though.

D3 per 2x2 is good. Funny enough my last AOS game we had about twelve pieces of terrain on the table (a dense jungle) and people coming into the store wondered why we would play a game with so much terrain because it was "screwing people over".

I do note that most tables I watch do indeed tend to have like three or four pieces max and they are an after thought. Terrain makes the game much better.

 auticus wrote:
D3 per 2x2 is good. Funny enough my last AOS game we had about twelve pieces of terrain on the table (a dense jungle) and people coming into the store wondered why we would play a game with so much terrain because it was "screwing people over".

I do note that most tables I watch do indeed tend to have like three or four pieces max and they are an after thought. Terrain makes the game much better.

Indeed. AoS was designed with a much more terrain-heavy approach in mind as compared to WHFB. The game simply works much better with a lot of terrain on the field, a mix of area and a few for blocking LoS.

Matched play rules recommend 1-2 pieces per 2' square while the base core rules recommend a 2-dice system with the rough probability breakdown for each square:

8% - No terrain
39% - 2 terrain pieces
44% - 1 terrain piece
8% - 0-3 pieces, players' choice.

I wouldn't necessarily agree that AoS is intended for a more terrain busy board than 40k per se, especially because the intention seems to be that each of those terrain pieces has some special property to it players are expected to keep track of, (haunted fences, remarkably deadly sign posts, etc.)

This is where narrative should insert itself into matched play. Without using the Realm specific rules my recommendation would be to pick a realm in which to battle and then create appropriate terrain. I'd still be terrain heavy no matter the realm (8-12) but it would vary. So Aqshy and Chamon would likely be a lot of hills and impassable rock formations (so mostly elevation differences and scatter terrain). Ghyran would have lots of forests or other living features (area terrain).

Basically even though it is matched play you should be trying to tell a story with the terrain. Terrain can still be dense but not block line of sight.

 Captain Joystick wrote:
I wouldn't necessarily agree that AoS is intended for a more terrain busy board than 40k per se, especially because the intention seems to be that each of those terrain pieces has some special property to it players are expected to keep track of, (haunted fences, remarkably deadly sign posts, etc.)

As much as for 40k sounds right. Assuming you have tables that don't give Tau and Eldar a bigger advantage.

The 2 D6 system in the rules works, D3 per 2"x2" is good too. Generally, more is better in either Warhammer.

When I am setting up a table at the club I use the 4 page rules to determine how much terrain is on the board. Those rules are good.

At tournaments in the UK, some have pre set tables and will have around 8 pieces. Tournaments like SCGT require each player to bring 5 pieces so you have a total of 10.

I think some of you aren't giving White Dwarf credit for the amount of terrain they have in their battle reports. This month's has 7 pieces with names and some extra scatter pieces. Last month's had 10 pieces.

If you are looking to build a collection for playing at home, 7-10 pieces seems like a good target to aim for.

 Bottle wrote:
When I am setting up a table at the club I use the 4 page rules to determine how much terrain is on the board. Those rules are good.

At tournaments in the UK, some have pre set tables and will have around 8 pieces. Tournaments like SCGT require each player to bring 5 pieces so you have a total of 10.

I think some of you aren't giving White Dwarf credit for the amount of terrain they have in their battle reports. This month's has 7 pieces with names and some extra scatter pieces. Last month's had 10 pieces.

If you are looking to build a collection for playing at home, 7-10 pieces seems like a good target to aim for.

Maybe if White Dwarf gave clear shots of the map. I know the one with Tzeentch vs. Stormcast seemed to have barely any terrain at all, a few pieces here and there but like nothing to block LOS significantly.

Are you sure? The battlereport has 9 pieces (not including the scatter terrain), including a massive bespoke keep in one corner (it's like 3x the height of the Stardrake) and then a clustered centre with 3 archways, a numilous and a dais. Seems to be a great amount of terrain.

I think expecting multiple pieces that a Treelord could be fully concealed behind is an unrealistic expectation (and it seems that's the sort of LOS blocking you want). The standard rules dictate around 6 pieces for a 6' by 4' with a range of 0-18 if you randomly generate them.

It's very easy to get LOS on a target in AoS, I don't think that means every board needs to offer multiple hiding places for behemoths and 40 strong units though. The GW archways provide ample LOS blocking for small characters and squads, and a tower from the Khorne Castle can provide a single large LOS blocking piece to divide the board into 2 flanks. In general though I feel the game is meant to be played with LOS being easy to get on your targets, and the offset of this is the reduced range and increased movement in AoS compared to WHFB.

Again checking that battle report it looks like a lot of Wide Open Spaces. Maybe it's just me but since I mainly face Army for the ton of shooting Wide Open Spaces even with however many pieces they had means the game is not enjoyable at all.

Also for obvious reasons they only use the terrain they produce I think they are artificially limiting because of that.

 auticus wrote:
people coming into the store wondered why we would play a game with so much terrain because it was "screwing people over".

Why would they think it is screwing people over?

 Vash108 wrote:

 auticus wrote:
people coming into the store wondered why we would play a game with so much terrain because it was "screwing people over".

Why would they think it is screwing people over?

Because auticus plays with competitive donkey caves who think the game needs to have many wide open spaces so their Sylvaneth/Kunnin Rukk/Stormcast Judicator spam can table the enemy turn one.

In my group we have got a few pieces of hills / stalagtites / craters. We usually randomly place 5 of em on the board, then roll using the list in the basic rules.

The scenery we rolled using the list gets traits rolled for (like arcane or such), the hills (or stalagtites or craters) dont have any special traits.


This way there usually is enough terrain on the battlefield.

WE use a fairly large amount but always in a "organic" way that looks more like an area that could really be there as opposed to a "game" organization of terrian. alot is inspired by actual battlefields.

I at the very least try to keep two-three pieces on the medium. Forcing armies to split makes amuch more fun game. After that, it varies a bit, around 3-8 pieces depending on the player.

We always used whatever the mission had on the table. and placed it where the mission had it. Felt that was the easiest way.