I know people are playing with the terrain pieces they have, and a hill is a hill and a forest is a forest, but I do think people misappreciate the amount of and nature of terrain that is usually found in the real outdoors.

One thing I have tried to emulate (but wargamers generally disapprove of) is the fact that in populated areas (and we do like to plunk down those Gothic buildings), woods are generally restricted to hills or other unproductive land. The flat lands are used for agriculture or commerce. I started to build tables with hills covered with woods, but found out that many wargamers' general idea of an in-game hill is a rolling green Irish hill in a deforested country and the idea that a hill covered in wood would be a "natural" and preferred place to deploy strangely refuted.

/Fredmans

I think it comes down to are you playing a game or a simulation?

Game wise it's important to have a varsity of features to allow for some difference in games rules interactions.

Simulation games are there more for the visual impact of the game over the result or playing of the game.

Horses for courses basically.

_________________
@MephistonAG for all sorts of twitter madness

We usually play with 3-5 hills along the edges of the board that are 2-3 levels. The 2nd and above of each are trees, along with half a dozen pieces of scatter terrain as well.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

In the UK we play with 12 terrain pieces, usually 6" or more in from the edges and often with 4x woods, 4x hills and 4x buildings. (so the exact image that Fredmans rightly disagrees with as being 'unnatural').

More importantly, the gothic buildings and ruins are all mounted on bases that are a minimum of 10cm x 10cm, and we interpret the entire base as being the defined terrain type and blocking LoS.

Could people please post pictures (or possibly diagrams) of their tables together with their 'interpretations' and tactics to we can make sensible comparisons. . . . .

One further thing to add is that as Epic uses a sliding ground scale trying to be too exact with terrain really doesn't work.

_________________
@MephistonAG for all sorts of twitter madness

You're also comparing 20th/21st century Earth terrain, rural areas and urban areas to those in the 40K universe. Nine times out of ten that isn't going to work at all.

And what's wrong with fighting on a rolling green Irish hill in a deforested country? Your view is a bit limited; terrain is as wildly different as anyone's imagination--especially in a make-believe sci-fi universe.

But, terrain is in the eyes of the players. No one person's opinion on it is better than another's.

_________________
http://thorvirshobbydumpster.blogspot.com/

Tau Empire, Mymeara Eldar, Tallarn Desert Raiders

I think Fredmans is not talking about who's view of terrain is better/more right etc., just that obviously there's a definite gap between what is present on a tabletop and what terrain really looks like.

I made the experience that it is simply a necessity to abstract terrain to a certain level. While you want to be able to identify it immediately (i.e. a hill being a hill and not a flat green mat with the letters "hill" on it), it has to be simplistic enough to be played with. I made terrain once, and found that either you didn't have enough room to place miniatures, or it was too difficult to actually get to your miniatures (imagine placing bases in a dense forest), or miniatures tend to topple over (I hate that!).

I'd love to have a table that looks like the real outdoors, but I am pretty sure it would be impossible to play upon.
And, after all, if you want the real outdoors, just go outside - it's healthy too

I think quantity of terrain is more important than the look. I see no fundamental difference to understanding the board in having a hill modeled vs a cutout with hill written on it. I see far too many tables that look like parking lots in my opinion. Maybe its the geography of where I live but I am in the 12th largest city in the US right outside of downtown and within a few hundred meters radius I have 4 forest nature reserves, dense urban areas, canyons/ravines impassable by vehicles, steep LoS blocking ridges that run for kilometers and two rivers and a lake. Real life isn't trees in hills, it's plurality of environments.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

To me it's far more important that the terrain leads to a good game than whether it would be a realistic layout on 21st century earth.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

We play true LOS ... when in doubt ... give the target a cover bonus ...

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

I think this is were you see a main difference between the historical gamers and the more GW-centric wargamers. A lot of historical wargames have some brilliant looking tables and terrain, more often than not based on the real world locations, BUT it seems more realistic yet much more fragile, much cheaper and in bigger quantities.

Were as the sci-fi/40k scenery is more detailed, larger, more expensive and more robust- built to with stand the vigorous of day to day gaming.

Google some of the large historical displays you sometimes see at shows or in wargames illustrated- some of the tables look like they would be imposable to play on with epic miniatures, but work fine for rank upon rank of the historical. Chock full of terrain but I just couldn't imagine a '40k' titan smashing its way through the English country side with out looking stupid.

One of the many reasons I no longer pay any attention to GW or their fluff. I love gothic sci-fi, but their 40k worlds seem so desolate and flat!

_________________
Epic 40,000 (3rd Ed.) & 6mm Fantasy Blog, tutorials and resources

My 6mm Sci-fi and skirmish TactComms Plog: Vermin!/Orks!/Micro-munda!

Echoing Zombocom's point, I don't have any trees on my hills even though you are right to suggest that would be unrealistic. The fact of the matter is that often the miniatures don't always sit nicely on the hills and positioning them would be made worse if I had to fiddle about with trees in the way as well. I find trees so annoying in fact that my "woods" are simply large pieces of card with perhaps 3 - 6 trees on a large sheet of green card! It is the green card which represents the entirety of the woods and aids smoother gameplay.

Abstract but effective!

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

I actually noticed the terrain in your video - very simple but effective. It actually reminded me of a 3d risk board or something in a really good way.

Reading my last post, I realised that I sounded a bit full of myself. Oh dear! Anyway...

Cheers Alf! It's not that I wouldn't like my boards to look even better, just that from a practical point of view that I personally feel that this works better for gameplay. I think when you are dealing with so many small minis - many of them brittle - that realism sometimes has to take second place to functionality.

_________________
Clickable links for more Epic goodness:

Life of Die Channel including Epic Podcasts and Battle Reports

Epic 40K Players Page on Facebook
Net Epic Evolution Rules
Net Epic War! Campaign Rules

Hey if it's realism your looking for, I stay in Scotland and there are LOADS of hills here that have no trees on

_________________
Walk softly. And carry a big gun.