Wargaming Terrain, is it important?

[Murphy'sLawyer]

Wargaming Terrain, is it important to you? Sometimes,when I swing on down to LGS's I like to watch games being played, but I will admit I can not ever watch a game that lacks terrain or uses two templates when terrain is available.

 

This is just an opinion peice and by no means is ment to insult how players play their games. Also this didn't look like it belonged in the Warp Space.

 

I myself love games that uses lots of terrain becuase it pushes me to look at my surroundings to change my tactics. But yesterday I was at GG and saw the Warmachine crowd playing with the extreme minimal amount of terrain. And everything on the table, 2 to 3 pieces only, were 2 dimetional when GG has more than enough terrain to fill their boards. I just can't watch that game anymore.

 

So that got me thinking, am I in the minority of players that loves terrrain? What is your opinion?

[splinx]

I actually spend as much time making terrain as i do my figures! 

 

I think terrain falls into the category of Modeler rather than Gamer which is why a lot of the Gamers have terrain building on the bottom of their list. When i build an army i love having terrain that fits in wit the army. For example my empire army has got its own town being built to fit in with the theme. My snow based space marines got a snow themed aegis defense line etc etc. I am currently working on boards and scenery for my local game store up here in Vancouver so hopefully if you come up to play you will enjoy the amount scenery the guys have and enjoy all of the themed boards we have done. (Snow, Lava and Green Pastures and another couple on the way!)

 

I am probably in the minority as well but love painting and modeling scenery as much as my figures and it will continue. :) Glad to hear someone else loves their scenery and terrain! :)  

[Swan-of-War]

I'm right there with you Murphy's Lawyer - well-made terrain is something I really enjoy and sadly, people don't put enough priority towards it.  Big turn off to see tables with just a few pieces scattered here and there.

[pretre]

Terrain is super important!

[MexicanNinja]

Terrain adds to the overall effects of a game, imo. Watching two fully painted army on a tble with completed terrain is much more enjoyable than watchin two non-fully painted armies playing on a table with books and paper towel tubes.

 

However, there have been times I've used books because that was what was available and we wanted to play a game. I have enogh terrain for a full table but I don't have my table yet. As a side effect, I have had the desire or need to paint my terrain yet.

[MexicanNinja]

ML, also remember that wm/hordes is much different that warhammer and 40k. I used to play and we didn't use a lot of terrain. It's also played on a smaller board. The most crowded tables I have played on are for morheim (because the game needs to have the middle of the board with all types of terrain).

[Murphy'sLawyer]

I hear you MN but I played Warmahordes for 5 years, but I can say terrain hinders Warhammer Fantasy more than it does WM/H. The issue I saw yesterday was that they had flat templates representing forests and other obstacles when GG has more than enough terrain to play with. This was all the tables too, not just one.

 

(I will admit that the issue with Terrain in WM/H is the assaination win condition. The best factions at assassinating also ignore terrain to boot. Worst imbalance flaw in a game system I have seen, hence why I quite WM/H. Got really bored play the same table with almost no terrain and suggesting otherwise got me raised eyebrows and "it makez the game hard to play." And I played Rhulic most of that time.)

 

But aesthetics are a huge part of wargaming to me. Boring clear fields ment to keep the tactics played the same everytime is not my game at all.

[MexicanNinja]

I played hordes as troll bloods, but the group I attempted to learn the system with used roughly 5 pieces of terrain.  One for each quarter and then one near the center of the board.