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've been thinking about this a bit more, and have come to a radical(totally! cowabunga!) solution.

If I get a set, I'm mounting them on a hefty chunk of foamcore that I'll be cutting into to enough of a depth that the trenches will be "submerged" a bit.
It should hide most of the Wall o' Dead Cadians but leave some exposed here and there for extra cinematicity.

 Kanluwen wrote:
cinematicity.

That's not a real word son.

Also, I'm getting the feeling that those poor Cadians are like the coloured soldiers in the South Park movie: Ablative armour. "Guardsmen, protect our walls. Astartes, try not to get shot."

I dunno. If I've got to cut up something like that, or sculpt over the bad design choices, or cut up foamboard and so on to cover them...well, couldn't I just save all my money, and do all that stuff to make some terrain that actually looks like I want it to?

If GW would make some "toned down" 40K and Fantasy terrain, I would be all over it, because I don't enjoy DIY-ing that stuff all that much. At the same time, with the price they're asking, I am not prepared to accept poor design choices like dead cadian skirting.

 BrookM wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
cinematicity.

That's not a real word son.

I know it isn't, father. But I'm declaring it one now!

Behold the cinematcity of the Wall o' Martyrs!

 Kanluwen wrote:

 BrookM wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
cinematicity.

That's not a real word son.

I know it isn't, father. But I'm declaring it one now!

Behold the cinematcity of the Wall o' Martyrs!

I bet it would look even better with a Daktari perched on the wall.

With a what? I don't know what you're referring to!

Ah, I think I found the mute button. :p

I think you triggered my memory wipe. I can't remember who I am!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I dunno... I still find the idea of 'trenches' terrain where the trench floor is the same height as the ground kinda defeats the purposes of trenches.

Maybe they won't call 'em trenches...


And I really hope the "Piles'O'Cadians" are optional.

Problem with making pre-made trenches is it's impossible to do so unless you cut into your own gameboard, thus making it impossible to come out with pre-made trenches...

 Harriticus wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I dunno... I still find the idea of 'trenches' terrain where the trench floor is the same height as the ground kinda defeats the purposes of trenches.

Maybe they won't call 'em trenches...


And I really hope the "Piles'O'Cadians" are optional.

Problem with making pre-made trenches is it's impossible to do so unless you cut into your own gameboard, thus making it impossible to come out with pre-made trenches...

Ayup.

This is actually why FW discontinued their trench line set. There are plans to build a ROB game tile with the trenches already dug in and the ability to mount heavy weapons into designated spots.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I've been thinking about this a bit more, and have come to a radical(totally! cowabunga!) solution.

If I get a set, I'm mounting them on a hefty chunk of foamcore that I'll be cutting into to enough of a depth that the trenches will be "submerged" a bit.
It should hide most of the Wall o' Dead Cadians but leave some exposed here and there for extra cinematicity.

If you are going to get submerged trenches, why not get some that are designed to be submerged?

Like these. I would have also suggested the FW trenches, but they don't make them any more

Or even get some cheap future zone trenches and cut off the slopes so you just have the inner trench and a lip of plastic.

I agree with the sentiment that the dead cadians need to go. GW missed a great opportunity here for a cross-promotion with various DIY stores: Buy our new trenches, and get a discount on a tub of spackling compound to cover up the dead bodies!

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
I agree with the sentiment that the dead cadians need to go. GW missed a great opportunity here for a cross-promotion with various DIY stores: Buy our new trenches, and get a discount on a tub of spackling compound to cover up the dead bodies!

GW doesn't like to admit anything but GW exists

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
I've been thinking about this a bit more, and have come to a radical(totally! cowabunga!) solution.

If I get a set, I'm mounting them on a hefty chunk of foamcore that I'll be cutting into to enough of a depth that the trenches will be "submerged" a bit.
It should hide most of the Wall o' Dead Cadians but leave some exposed here and there for extra cinematicity.

If you are going to get submerged trenches, why not get some that are designed to be submerged?

Like these. I would have also suggested the FW trenches, but they don't make them any more

Or even get some cheap future zone trenches and cut off the slopes so you just have the inner trench and a lip of plastic.

Maybe I don't like those?

Maybe I like these.

If I want "generic WW1 style trenches", I can make them myself. It's not difficult. I would probably spend less buying a big huge thing of sandbag kits from Tamiya than I would on the trench line you linked.

These, IMO, are less "generic sandbag trenches" and more "established defensive network".

The first ones are easy to do. The second is a lot more complex, unless I decide to start using a lot of plasticard and raiding bits boxes.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Maybe I don't like those?

Maybe I like these.

Although not enough to use them as supplied

As I said though, if you are planning on building a board around these "submerged" or "semi-submerged" trenches, you may as well go for something that is designed to be used that way - I linked only a couple of examples of literally tens of different sites supplying different products.

If I want "generic WW1 style trenches", I can make them myself. It's not difficult. I would probably spend less buying a big huge thing of sandbag kits from Tamiya than I would on the trench line you linked.

Sure, I made my own trench system that I quite liked. I spent about £20 on about 40,000 matchsticks and several days sticking them together into walls and floors etc and embedding them in foam (another £20 for a 6x4 ft table of foam). But then again I could make cheaper above ground barricade systems than these using some card and plaster etc... and it wouldn't look like gak

These, IMO, are less "generic sandbag trenches" and more "established defensive network".

You can get trench systems like that; I just pulled up the first reasonably cool example of a modular submerged trench system on google

Do you think taking a hacksaw to the trench in order to submerge
it is worth the trouble? Or would the angle on the embankment
make it look odd either way?

 malfred wrote:
Do you think taking a hacksaw to the trench in order to submerge
it is worth the trouble? Or would the angle on the embankment
make it look odd either way?

Definitely not. The angle will make it look weird unless you do some very high-effort foam cutting, and once you're putting that much work in to eliminate detail, it's probably worth it to buy a less expensive but less detailed piece in the first place.

If seeing this anyone is interested in making their own trench systems having seen this thread/new GW product, this blog is one you will want to look at - gives all sorts of information on building modular gaming boards with trenches etc in, as well as designing boards with removable sections/buildings/craters etc.

Also plenty of general information on creating terrain.

 malfred wrote:
Do you think taking a hacksaw to the trench in order to submerge
it is worth the trouble? Or would the angle on the embankment
make it look odd either way?

I am not following you.
If you want a hole in the gaming table, fine. If you want a non-gothic trench, fine. Why bother buying this set for 130€ then?

Here some alternatives for people who don't like the 40k style:

Ziterdes:
http://www.ziterdes.de/ziterdes/en/produkte/listview.php?catID=64&subcatID=68

and
http://www.ziterdes.de/ziterdes/en/produkte/listview.php?catID=64&subcatID=96


Amera


And you can wait for ROB tiles by GW/FW featuring trenches.
Buying this 40k trenchline and burying it under greenstuff doesn't sound like a feasable idea though.

Da Boss wrote:
I dunno. If I've got to cut up something like that, or sculpt over the bad design choices, or cut up foamboard and so on to cover them...well, couldn't I just save all my money, and do all that stuff to make some terrain that actually looks like I want it to?

If GW would make some "toned down" 40K and Fantasy terrain, I would be all over it, because I don't enjoy DIY-ing that stuff all that much. At the same time, with the price they're asking, I am not prepared to accept poor design choices like dead cadian skirting.

http://www.warmill.co.uk/



Generic, functional, looks good and made by a hobbiest rather than an impersonal corporation.

That Ziterdes set looks pretty expensive, unless I'm reading that catalog all wrong. Warmill looks good, but only provides cover from the one direction.

Does anyone have the warmill set? Can you mount the foot traps on the inside to give it better protection (and to be closer to the canon stuff)?

The other problem with the Warmill set is that Games Workshop's fortification rules obviously won't work well with it, so your chances of actually being able to use it in a game are pretty low, especially since it's a rather unbalanced piece to put on the table.

On the other hand, it seems quite likely to me that this new GW piece is going to have a set of rules coming soon that allow people to play it in normal games.

 Kingsley wrote:
The other problem with the Warmill set is that Games Workshop's fortification rules obviously won't work well with it, so your chances of actually being able to use it in a game are pretty low, especially since it's a rather unbalanced piece to put on the table.

The warmill set is completely modular - you can make some pretty interesting fortifications with it (and Lobukia - I've seen pictures where the kit is laid out so that two walls are put back to back to form a double sided fortification that looks like a trench - from the top of my head the resulting trench would be wide enough for an IG heavy weapon team base to sit in the middle; check out Warmill's thread here on dakka as there are plenty of pictures of their kits in action), and don't need to plonk down a massive fortress. Additionally, they have a separate kit which allows you to add on a second floor with extended walls and so on, which is cool

I'm not sure how the 6th fortification rules work, so why would their kit not work with 6th?

On the other hand, it seems quite likely to me that this new GW piece is going to have a set of rules coming soon that allow people to play it in normal games.

Again, I am not sure on the 6th rules for buildings/fortifications/etc, but surely they are covered by the generic fortification/cover rules?

Grey Knights built this...

Loving sculpted by our crack team of Grey Knight masons, the Wall of Martyrs is constructed of a high grade cadian ground bone and sisters of battle blood mortar to provide a 'loyalist' aesthetic. These artisans have even left the skulls on to frighten and distress the enemy...

So proxy models are ok?
But proxy terrain isn't?
I didn't realise dakkadakka had become such an official terrain only place...

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Generic, functional, looks good and made by a hobbiest rather than an impersonal corporation.

And? So? But? Therefore?

Some of us like the 40K style on this thing.

Alsoust point out I feel that warmills fort is probably represented by the aegis defense line better then trenches on the table top. Although I'm not too familiar with the fortifications rules.

Zwan1One wrote:
So proxy models are ok?
But proxy terrain isn't?
I didn't realise dakkadakka had become such an official terrain only place...

It's a pretty piece. I prefer it to the other options, but I'd like to wait
until I can buy it in parts. Buying large kits is a good way to get
overwhelmed and want to quit building/painting a project.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
The other problem with the Warmill set is that Games Workshop's fortification rules obviously won't work well with it, so your chances of actually being able to use it in a game are pretty low, especially since it's a rather unbalanced piece to put on the table.

I'm not sure how the 6th fortification rules work, so why would their kit not work with 6th?

On the other hand, it seems quite likely to me that this new GW piece is going to have a set of rules coming soon that allow people to play it in normal games.

Again, I am not sure on the 6th rules for buildings/fortifications/etc, but surely they are covered by the generic fortification/cover rules?

The GW fortification rules apply to the specific GW fortification models. Buildings that don't have the exact dimensions, number of fire points, etc. as the GW ones are incompatible with these rules. For instance, an Aegis Defense Line consists of several small wall segments. Unless the Warmill wall segments are the exact same height and length as GW's Aegis segments (they aren't-- the Aegis segments have a unique shape to prevent this very situation), using them is not, strictly speaking, compatible with the rules, especially in serious or tournament play.

 Kanluwen wrote:
There are plans to build a ROB game tile with the trenches already dug in and the ability to mount heavy weapons into designated spots.

*salivates*

If GW brought out some decent RoB trench tiles, I'd probably buy the RoB just to use them.