# Terrain in 40k! When is too much?



## Luisjoey (Dec 3, 2010)

I see people complaing a lot about the terrain in my gamin group, some calls that is too much terrain or is too few for a game. 

how much is enough? 40% of the table covered? 

I really like the terrain in game, even not all gives you advantages like cover, but prevent your moving. I know there are several OPTIONAL rules for terrain and i would like them in the basic game for warhammer 40k as in WHFB. 

Wh40k is not fantasy where armies try to fight each others in convenient terrains like in the medieval era, preferring plains than citiscapes. but 40k is in the ruins of civilization, jungle worlds, ice world, etc. 

thoughs?


----------



## GrimzagGorwazza (Aug 5, 2010)

In earlier rulebooks there was a set amount of terrain that should be used on boards, i think it was approximately between 25-33% I would say 40% is too high unless you are going to be playing cityfight or jungle scenarios.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

i like to have some sort of terrain just about everywhere - some may not do anything besides LoS elevation change (like hills) - but i prefer to be able to fit at least 1 LR between each piece of terrain.


but the games i play are typically "terrain heavy" compared to WD or other GW pictures of games. even most video battle reports are a little light on terrain for my preferences.

Edit: ill always take a game with more terrain to start with than with less (easier to get rid of terrain than to add more...unless books & coke cans are alright.


----------



## Grins1878 (May 10, 2010)

Fallen said:


> i like to have some sort of terrain just about everywhere - some may not do anything besides LoS elevation change (like hills) - but i prefer to be able to fit at least 1 LR between each piece of terrain.


Same here, provided there's paths for teh widest vehicles (like roads/fields) the more terrain the better for me. Small bits of scenery just looks half arsed to me! lol


----------



## Dermon Caffran (Jul 20, 2010)

yeah i think terrain can make games much better and certaiinly more problematic, as long as theres plenty for my camo cloaked tanith then im happy. But when you end up having to roll to move anywhere then i draw the line at that


----------



## Moonschwine (Jun 13, 2011)

Depends really: on larger boards i'd say up to 50% mixed terrain with roads is fine. On smaller boards - probably 1/3rd or even 1/4 max. 

I've played on boards where two ruins and some shrubs is what constitutes 'terrain'. The other extreme was a small board that was packed with craters, woods and shrubs all over. It was fun to play on, but it certainly slows the game right down - turns can be messy and slow business as is at the moment so if DTT's are slowing things down too much I tend not to come back or even ask to remove pieces in game.


----------



## C'Tan Chimera (Aug 16, 2008)

The more terrain, the better- especially if it proves detrimental to all this mechanized crap.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

25-40% realistically anything more will end up favoring one list over another rather then favoring those that know how to use the terrain to their advantage. 

For all those that mindlessly say more terrain the better I posit that you play against a infantry guard/tyranid swarm army with a marines/Tau list. I will be here waiting and possibly laughing when you realize that the terrain does nothing for you, but makes all his infantry 50% more resilient.


----------



## sybarite (Aug 10, 2009)

if your not playing city fight then l would say around 30 - 40% should be the max. Any more and it makes the game go way to slow l find.


----------



## Boc (Mar 19, 2010)

I always strictly play to the 25% rule except with Apoc games, we measure out a 2x3 section of the table, fill it, then start placing. 40% seems like it'd be way to much, especially since cover is already a bit ridiculous.


----------



## HOBO (Dec 7, 2007)

My group usually sticks to 25%, but sometimes we'll deliberately boost it up to even 50%just for the handicap it does give to some lists, Mech for example....makes you play smarter as you have to adapt to the limitations you face.


----------



## chromedog (Oct 31, 2007)

25% unless playing cityfight games.

Fill one 2'x3' corner with pieces with a mix of LOS blocking and area terrain. Scatter across table.


----------



## arumichic (May 14, 2011)

I think 25-30% is best since if there's any more, the game goes on for wayyy too long. And if there's too little, it's unfair to some armies. We've found this out by starting out with very few terrain pieces.


----------



## Bubblematrix (Jun 4, 2009)

We tend to the terrain heavy boards, I find that any army which uses the terrain tactically gets the advantage and disadvantage.

The key however with terrain heavy boards is to not play like arses, a bit of cover over one unit doesn't give cover saves, not every rock is difficult terrain, and climbing over stuff is possible in most cases (measure up then down).
If your play group is more lax like this then heavy terrain boards are much more fun than light ones.

Heavy terrain boards do however make competitive play much harder.

I would say that the best thing is to get a nice looking board with a reasonable amount of blocked sight and then make sure you agree before starting exactly what effect terrain will have.

I also find that lots of terrain mitigates the shootiness of some armies and makes games less of a 'my gun is bigger than yours' game which mech seems to cause. That said I can see how a CC heavy play group would see disbalance from such boards.

I think another key thing is to make sure that terrain settup varies, otherwise all the tricks are learned too quickly and the advantages of seeing the use of terrain features looses out to army mechanics.


----------



## effigy22 (Jun 29, 2008)

50%+ - means you got to work for TLOS. Also, being a Dark ELdar player we kind of rely on a lot


----------



## Luisjoey (Dec 3, 2010)

Well some people calls that "heavy terrain" favours swarm armies a lot, for example orks, tyranids and non-mech guard; that usually get AP shoots get the cover save of 4+ meanwhile they get in close combat. 

Is pretty annoying people that complain about that. 

And the trouble with high terrain is when it comes to los of move thru terrain with dices and well the vehicles get pretty hindered.


----------



## Caliban (Nov 27, 2010)

we play terrain heavy but add rules such as tumbling collums or warp rifts depending on who we are to balance. always makes it interesting


----------



## Tzeen Qhayshek (May 4, 2010)

The more terrain the better. More terrain is always more of a challenge.


----------

