scottshoemaker Posted October 13, 2023 Report Share Posted October 13, 2023 Hi all, I'm developing a terrain set that meets the Leviathan Tournament recommendations with the limitation that it be under $100 for the foundation set. No small feat. Before I get too far in the process I'd like to hear from the community what you'd like see. Some points I've factored in: Flat pack- A panel and clip design so that it may be stored away easily Flexibility- Standard sizes and shapes to allow for various configurations Laminated Construction- 3d printing only the surface veneers and laminating them to another material saves time and cost. Interoperability- Meshes in dimension and design to work not only with my terrain line, but with GW terrain. I'd like to hear your needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Glacius Posted October 13, 2023 Report Share Posted October 13, 2023 Great idea Scott, and good luck with it. I have a few thoughts inspired by your post. Tournament terrain means painted and flocked to a specific standard. So one of my first thought is the damage assembly and disassembly could cause to it. So maybe another direction to come at it is from a stackable viewpoint, where sets of pieces stack around each other to take up less space without having to take it apart. Area terrain with flexible pieces - I've seen these on kickstarter where trees or bushes or rocks could be taken out of an area piece to allow the models greater freedom to move on it. In a tournament setting, having a well defined line for area terrain is a must, and having a piece that is friendly to all model types to move through it would be great. Personally, I wouldn't bother with Interoperability with GW stuff. You make nice looking stuff and I'd rather have a table of consistently themed terrain. Your goal of a kit means a single purchase covers one table. So there isn't a need to combine it with more terrain. Plus, since a set is supposed to meet the requirements, it actually gives you less incentive to mix and match with other sets because the tables then won't be equal. Hope that helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ish Posted October 14, 2023 Report Share Posted October 14, 2023 I agree with @Brother Glacius, “flat pack” terrain sounds great on paper but is a bit of a drag when repeated assembly and disassembly ruins the paint job. Stackable would be good, nesting would be even better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Glacius Posted October 14, 2023 Report Share Posted October 14, 2023 "nesting" that is a better word than my stacking. Its basically what I was trying to get at, terrain that fits within like pieces (kind of like stacking cups). But nesting is a much better description. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottshoemaker Posted October 14, 2023 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2023 The intent is for low cost tournament sets. Your points are great and I'm working on new items for my standard line that are more in line with your suggestions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarwickRockbourne Posted November 8, 2023 Report Share Posted November 8, 2023 Scott, I'm not sure how collaborative you want to get; but Jonathan (jonnylectitio on discord) and Zack (eldrago_1 on discord) are working -- independently -- on this style of terrain. Jonathan is going the 3D route, while Zack is going MDF. The TO circle in the PNW has also been providing a lot of input to those building up terrain sets. I believe the only deviation has been our brothers over in the Hillsboro area (PPM) who are tailoring their terrain more towards some WTC/European style changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.