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.

So I'm thrilled that terrain has some more robust rules in 9th, but I've got questions.

For my understanding, you assign 1 of 4 types, then add traits to the terrain piece?
The BRB has a few "examples" but those can be tweaked between you and your opponent.
So while Ruins don't have 'Dense Cover' or 'Defensible', we could add those traits if we wanted to?

I'm trying to work with the terrain I already own and want to include as many of the traits as possible to make our terrain more interactive.

Also, is there and reason a feature couldn't have both Light Cover and Dense Cover? Based solely on those terms, you would think those should be exclusive, but I can't see any rules reason a feature couldn't have the Light, Heavy AND Dense cover rules.
Actually, it would make sense that Heavy & Dense cover would also have Light cover rules but default.

-

You can combine terrain rules that suit you. Just add the tags and apply the effects.

This is what I love about the new terrain rules. You can freely mix and match and stack.

Want to have a "defensible" crater? Why not. I'd indicate this visually by adding a piece of fence/sandbags/rubble on one edge, for example.

Hoping this type of terrain rules will be making their way into Kill Team as well.

I am sure there will be many small changes and assumptions re the ne terrain. I plan to make colored tokens that tue players can pkace on terrain so they both agree and know. R.. Ratberthan veryhitlycontest their differingassumptions later in game.

Yeah, I like it too. My Ruined Walks are attached to a flat section of Area terrain and they are taller than 3", so I don't want to use them as Obstacles and I want to add Dense cover & Defensible.
Sounds like I can do that so that's awesome.

Now I just have to figure out how to use my bunkers, which aren't used as Forts at all. I just put them in opposite corners for each player to use to either block LoS or put a heavy weapon unit on top of.
Since Buildings can be attacked, I guess I'll have to just say it's Area terrain with the Obsuring trait instead.

 Galef wrote:
Yeah, I like it too. My Ruined Walks are attached to a flat section of Area terrain and they are taller than 3", so I don't want to use them as Obstacles and I want to add Dense cover & Defensible.
Sounds like I can do that so that's awesome.

Now I just have to figure out how to use my bunkers, which aren't used as Forts at all. I just put them in opposite corners for each player to use to either block LoS or put a heavy weapon unit on top of.
Since Buildings can be attacked, I guess I'll have to just say it's Area terrain with the Obsuring trait instead.

Look up "Armoured Container". Seems like a good example to try and mimic for something like that.

I am also looking very forward to choose from 12 different terrain traits and assign them to 15 terrain pieces before each game

Your terrain is that different than the GW suggested terrain pieces? If so, write up what they are and just present those to your opponent pregame as your standard traits. Work with your most common opponents when you decide on the standard.

 p5freak wrote:
I am also looking very forward to choose from 12 different terrain traits and assign them to 15 terrain pieces before each game

Well we use the same pieces every game so once we start getting used to them, we won't have to reassign traits every game.

 alextroy wrote:
Your terrain is that different than the GW suggested terrain pieces? If so, write up what they are and just present those to your opponent pregame as your standard traits. Work with your most common opponents when you decide on the standard.

Our terrain isn't that different but there are specific qualities I'd like to use in our games.
As I noted above, my Ruined walls are on Area Terrain. So I'll probably just treat the as Ruins but with all the traits of Ruined walls.
My converted Bastion/Bunkers and split Landing Pad are board terrain, not Forts, so I probably shouldn't use the Buildings type for them as I'll have to also assign a stat profile.

Otherwise I agree that making little write ups for the terrain we use will be ideal

-

 alextroy wrote:
Your terrain is that different than the GW suggested terrain pieces? If so, write up what they are and just present those to your opponent pregame as your standard traits. Work with your most common opponents when you decide on the standard.

There is possible potential for discussion when one player with his melee army wants light cover everywhere, and the player with his gunline army doesnt want light cover at all. Terrain in 8th was bad, but at least it had fixed traits.

 p5freak wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
Your terrain is that different than the GW suggested terrain pieces? If so, write up what they are and just present those to your opponent pregame as your standard traits. Work with your most common opponents when you decide on the standard.

There is possible potential for discussion when one player with his melee army wants light cover everywhere, and the player with his gunline army doesnt want light cover at all. Terrain in 8th was bad, but at least it had fixed traits.

This is an ideal situation for a roll off. You want this piece to have Light cover, but I don't so we roll it off.

But in my experience this will be pretty rare. Either you're playing with friends and can both agree on terrain traits or you're playing in an organized event in which the terrain us preset.
But on the rare occasions that you and an opponent are AHDEMENT on opposing opinions and neither is willing to relent, rolling off for each piece is fair

-

If I can’t agree with my opponent on simple and fair terrain, I’d pass on the game entirely. It will almost certainly be the first of many disagreements during the game.

How you guys play ruins on bases.. do you give the cover if you are on the base.. my last game my opponent got cover in front of the ruins when he was just touching the base of the ruined building. I didn't like that all.. Should we just remove thr bases from ruined buildings or what do you recommend or how you play these situations?

Xirax wrote:
How you guys play ruins on bases.. do you give the cover if you are on the base.. my last game my opponent got cover in front of the ruins when he was just touching the base of the ruined building. I didn't like that all.. Should we just remove thr bases from ruined buildings or what do you recommend or how you play these situations?

Even if you remove the base, you'd still have to define the footprint if you are treating it as Area terrain. And if you treat it as an Obstacle like Ruined walls, you'd still have situations that you "don't like" happening because 9th terrain is more abstract than 8th (which is good IMO). Abstract terrain is far more useful than strict true LoS terrain, which ends up just being "are you blocked or not"?

But this is also why the "Ruins" that I have don't 100% fit the BRBs examples of Ruins or Ruined walls.
As my walls are on bases, they have a footprint, thus are Area Terrain like Ruins. But they are also between 3" and 4" tall so the can't be Obscuring like Ruins and can be Dense cover.
And because you can stand on the Area Terrain, it doesn't make sense to be Unstable position like Ruined walls.

So my specific terrain is going to be an amalgamation of Ruins (Area Terrain, Scaleable, Breachable & Defensible) and Ruined Walls (Defense line, Breachable, Defensible & Dense cover)

Xirax wrote:
How you guys play ruins on bases.. do you give the cover if you are on the base.. my last game my opponent got cover in front of the ruins when he was just touching the base of the ruined building. I didn't like that all.. Should we just remove thr bases from ruined buildings or what do you recommend or how you play these situations?

Just because you do not like a rule, does not mean you should not follow that rule.

The rules were not written to be "Modern day real world" logical. It is a rules system. an abstract system used to play a game.

So people will find all sort of interactions that they may not like. But the rules do not have to make sense from a "what would happen in our world" standpoint because it is juat a game with rules.

discuss with your opponent before the game-or check the tournament pack. Its area terrain so what counts as the area

The base that its on

Or the area inside the walls

They are both valid options