Blip wrote:
Couple of questions regarding the terrain for this year :
A question particularly from my friend's Ulani - how are the trenches being played this year? Baring in mind Reedar's "experience" last year... As a suggestion would it be worth ruling that armies are free to move over trenches in their own deployment zone ? you'd a imagine a mechanised force would build in ramps/bridges for their own forces which could be dismantled prior to an attack?
Couldn't agree with you more regarding moving through your own trenches. The pure and simple reason why Reedar's poor orks were hindered by their own trenches was that I simply (and stupidly) forgot to remove three sections from either side of the table before the games began....Doh! All of the other tables had plenty of gaps between each trench line section.
Therefore, further to your suggestion I'll make this official for the day:
A defending trench line does not count as dangerous terrain for its own infantry or vehicles (it still offers cover in the usual way - 4+ cover save for trench sections and 3+ cover save for bunkers) . Attacking force vehicles moving through defending trench sections will still count them as dangerous terrain as usual.Razorwire however will restrict movement and still be dangerous terrain for BOTH sides though.
Blip wrote:
More generally are the tables going to be as dense in terrain as last year ?
The tables that were packed with terrain last year were the Forge World and Agri World tables. The Hive world had a good mix of buildings, but I wouldn't say packed with scenery. All the other tables i.e chaos wastes (lava), Ice World, Wasteland (Ork World) etc were VERY open.
This year, same ratio - 2-3 tables with more buildings/scenery (less buiildings on forge world than last year though) and remaining 5 tables will be very sparsley populated with scenery.
Trench rules/deployment are the only changes to scenery rules so thanks for that good idea Blip
