Jump to content

Terrain is now pointless


Recommended Posts

More specifically, tournament style terrain is now pointless.

In order for me to understand this I had to look at the typical tournament style terrain setup, which is generally 6 pieces of approx 36 square inches of table space mirrored on the battle field and compare it with essentially 6 6"x6" pieces of felt laid onto the battlefield.

What's the difference. Not much unfortunately.

Rule 1 is the whole unit has to be completely inside the terrain in order to gain a cover save.

If a unit is not completely inside the terrain the unit does not get a cover save. For infantry models this isn't that bad, especially since blast templates are gone. So no need to worry about spacing anymore. For vehicle/monster based units this is not good. The base of the monster or the entire vehicle has to fit inside the terrain piece in order to gain a cover save bonus. When you compare this with a flat piece of felt you get exactly the same effect by just putting the bases of the unit onto the piece of felt. And since vehicles/monsters wouldn't get a cover save anyway, there is no difference.

Rule 2 Hills are no longer considered to be terrain.

So putting hills onto a battlefield doesn't give a cover save. The only benefit for having height based non-terrain is to completely block line of sight to the entire unit, if any portion of the unit can be seen, it can be shot with no cover save bonus. Putting a unit onto the top/sides of a hill doesn't give a cover save. Even if 50% of your monster/vehicle is obscured by the hill, you still don't get any cover save bonus unless the unit is wholly within a (separate) terrain piece. I suppose you could say "That's not a hill, that's a piece of terrain" but then you would have to then say "so any model on that hill, I mean terrain, get's a cover save". But then someone is going to say, "But that doesn't do me any good, because my vehicles have to be also 50% obscured, so let's just take that piece off and put a piece of real terrain on that allows me to put my full base inside of it and get 50% obscured".

Rule 3 Non Infantry units have to have their complete base(s) entirely within a terrain piece AND gain 50% obscurity in order to gain a cover save bonus.

This rule really explains why non based terrain that lacks height obscurity is pointless. If there is a piece of terrain w/o a base, then players have to have a discussion about where the boundaries of the terrain are. Worse, you would have to take multiple pieces of a column or pylon pieces and set them up in a triangle or square formation and say "anything inside of these pieces is inside terrain" and then, with the escalation of the size of models you would have to add a bunch more tall (6"-8") pieces onto the formation of pieces to give fair play 50% obscured cover to vehicles/monsters.

So for terrain to gain battlefield value with no unnecessary arguing (because nobody wants that), terrain will have to be denser than in past editions, fully based, big enough to contain 1-2 vehicles/monsters and tall enough to give 50% obscurity. More specifically, a tournament terrain set up will need to include 6 pieces of terrain designed to give both infantry and large base non infantry models/units a cover save.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

So for terrain to gain battlefield value with no unnecessary arguing (because nobody wants that), terrain will have to be denser than in past editions, fully based, big enough to contain 1-2 vehicles/monsters and tall enough to give 50% obscurity. More specifically, a tournament terrain set up will need to include 6 pieces of terrain designed to give both infantry and large base non infantry models/units a cover save.

Or, we accept that cover is MUCH rarer than it was in previous editions and simply roll with it.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, pretre said:

Or, we accept that cover is MUCH rarer than it was in previous editions and simply roll with it.

Three things. First, you want to play on a panoramic table. You want to have a visually exciting, or at least non-boring, tableau as you play. So the bits you put onto the board need to fulfill that expectation. And you need to understand that your opponent wants the same thing. The table needs to be cohesive and vibrant. So just having an empty board takes away from the game and the experience.

Second. The table needs to be equalized in match/tournament play. Having a table setup that punishes people for the models they bring isn't fair play. So having a table setup that refuses cover to one player and gives it to the other is unfair play. A player that brings more vehicles/monsters against a player that brings more infantry shouldn't be accepting that the table is going to give one player a better save.

Third. tournaments traditionally minimalize the terrain on the table to 6-8 pieces of terrain. With the new rules, unless a terrain piece can functionally give a cover save to both infantry and non infantry vehicle/monster models without the need for unnecessary discussion it shouldn't be used. Because any player that sees it will just go "ya this terrain piece may be pretty, but it has to be replaced with something that gives a cover save".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, peter.cosgrove said:

Third. tournaments traditionally minimalize the terrain on the table to 6-8 pieces of terrain. With the new rules, unless a terrain piece can functionally give a cover save to both infantry and non infantry vehicle/monster models without the need for unnecessary discussion it shouldn't be used. Because any player that sees it will just go "ya this terrain piece may be pretty, but it has to be replaced with something that gives a cover save".

That is not necissarily true. MOst tournaments have limited terrain due to the cost and time it takes in doing such an amount for that many tables. I'm feeling that pain right now getting ready for the Boise Cup, but more events are already talking about the need for more terrain on the tables and many events already have had more terrain. Just not necessarily themed terrain, which is what I'm trying to do more of.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CaptainA said:

LOS is the new black in Tournament terrain and will show up more and more as well as house rules to make current terrain LOS terrain like no shooting through windows.

 

The less you have to rely on "oh no, your LOS to my model is completely blocked" and have more available "my model is in terrain and gets a cover save" the better off things will be. Less arguing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, peter.cosgrove said:

The less you have to rely on "oh no, your LOS to my model is completely blocked" and have more available "my model is in terrain and gets a cover save" the better off things will be. Less arguing.

I disagree, most area type terrain is pretty pointless in 8th with how many devastating weapons players are bringing to bear, especially for vehicles and monsters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CaptainA said:

That is not necissarily true. MOst tournaments have limited terrain due to the cost and time it takes in doing such an amount for that many tables. I'm feeling that pain right now getting ready for the Boise Cup, but more events are already talking about the need for more terrain on the tables and many events already have had more terrain. Just not necessarily themed terrain, which is what I'm trying to do more of.

I don't know of any tournament, and I have never played in a tournament that specified a mandatory minimum square inches of terrain. 4' by 6' is just under 3500 square inches of table space. 6 pieces of terrain at about 36 square inches per piece is less that 7% of the table. There was a 40k edition that I think required a terrain piece in each 2" by 2" square and I think that may be what started the 6 terrain piece tournament mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CaptainA said:

I disagree, most area type terrain is pretty pointless in 8th with how many devastating weapons players are bringing to bear, especially for vehicles and monsters.

uh, you flipped when I wasn't expecting. If the LOS is blocked you can't shoot at the unit. The difficulty is determining if the LOS is actually blocked. Since that can end up being both a significant time waste and an argument, the less you have to rely on LOS blocking the better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, peter.cosgrove said:

uh, you flipped when I wasn't expecting. If the LOS is blocked you can't shoot at the unit. The difficulty is determining if the LOS is actually blocked. Since that can end up being both a significant time waste and an argument, the less you have to rely on LOS blocking the better.

completely disagree. LOS is imperative to a good table now. If you can see across the table, it will invalidate many armies in 8th as the new deathstar will reign supreme.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, peter.cosgrove said:

The less you have to rely on "oh no, your LOS to my model is completely blocked" and have more available "my model is in terrain and gets a cover save" the better off things will be. Less arguing.

 

14 minutes ago, CaptainA said:

I disagree, most area type terrain is pretty pointless in 8th with how many devastating weapons players are bringing to bear, especially for vehicles and monsters.

Ya, this makes no sense. Are you saying you would rather have MORE arguing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, peter.cosgrove said:

 

Second. The table needs to be equalized in match/tournament play.

 

Actually, it needs to be the opposite. I ran into this a lot when organizing Warmachine tournaments. In Warmachine one person picks table side, and the other can go first. If the terrain is mirrored, than there is no reason to give up first turn to pick deployment zone. Or in the case of this new edition of 40K, there is no thought to deployment. Just pick a side. It doesn't matter, there isn't a good reason to give up first turn.

Part of the skill to be shown in this game is the ability to not only capitalize on terrain, but to overcome it as well. Otherwise, you might as well save a ton of money and play Risk, or Chess.

In tournaments, every decision should matter. That includes deployment, and turn order.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sugarlessllama said:

Actually, it needs to be the opposite. I ran into this a lot when organizing Warmachine tournaments. In Warmachine one person picks table side, and the other can go first. If the terrain is mirrored, than there is no reason to give up first turn to pick deployment zone. Or in the case of this new edition of 40K, there is no thought to deployment. Just pick a side. It doesn't matter, there isn't a good reason to give up first turn.

Part of the skill to be shown in this game is the ability to not only capitalize on terrain, but to overcome it as well. Otherwise, you might as well save a ton of money and play Risk, or Chess.

In tournaments, every decision should matter. That includes deployment, and turn order.

This isn't warmachine. The sides and first turn aren't chosen like that. In 40k both players set up the terrain before each game. A player isn't required to let the other player deliberately stack the terrain on the table. It's not a gentle process if one player is trying to pull a fast one with terrain, because the other player doesn't have to say anything when he/she takes the terrain away and puts it back into place. And since stacking the terrain inevitably leads to an argument which means grabbing a tournament judge who will come by and place 1 piece in each 2 foot section and tell the players to play on. It would be more accurate to say that putting a terrain piece in each 2 by 2 section and mirrored is an ungentlemen's agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Sugarlessllama said:

I understand that. However, there still needs to be thought put towards deployment.

Your comments are pretty confusing, because typically deployment is based on objective placement, which happens after side choice, which happens after deployment type choice. And who goes first while it used to be completely separate from the above, is now even more isolated because it's based on the comparison between your army list and theirs.

Players are not required to be forced to allow the other player to stack terrain. A player that sees that will just take the pieces and put them essentially back where they belong. Any discussion will just go to the floor judge who will come along and arrange them in a mirrored 2 by 3 grid and tell the players to play on.

In THIS edition, there is no reason to give up first turn, kind of the same as 6th edition but with extra sparkles because you can be tabled at the end of ANY player turn, not just the game turn. However, in older editions, going second with an alpha strike was part of the game and lists were built around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lord Hanaur said:

being ON a hill provids no cover but being obscured 50% by a hill does.

No it doesn't. you have to be IN a piece of terrain AND 50% obscured (if you are a vehicle/monster) to gain a cover save bonus. if you aren't completely inside a piece of terrain you can't get a cover save bonus.

Even if you are 50% obscured you can't get a cover save bonus unless your unit is wholly inside a piece of terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sugarlessllama said:

According to the rules, objectives are placed first, and then sides are picked.

Also, why are players moving terrain? Terrain should be placed by the TO and remain stationary.

There isn't always a TO.  I do agree though.  In tournaments the terrain needs to be what it is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...