Goatboy’s Warhammer 40K: Learning To Master Terrain
Warhammer 40K is dominated by awesome models on the tabletop – but the true controlling factor of a matched play game is terrain.
Terrain – the walls your armies dance around, the buildings that always seen destroyed, and the landscape that is always post apocalyptical. The game might be a battle of damage dealing resources but the broken masonry you throw bullets between seems to be the bigger factor in how you win your battles on these hellscapes.
It is always an interesting thing to read online as a lot of the time terrain can make or break you depending on how the events throws things on the tabletop. From the grumbles of player placed terrain, the locked in see-through fields of GW, and all the others in-between terrain discussions dominates discussions after a big event. From players saying they got screwed by lack of walls and buildings to those armies that lose on a specific type of deployment – terrain seems to matter.
I’ve played on all kinds of terrain tabletops. I think the only one I haven’t played a ton on is some of the European setups beyond just our own personal desires to cover the table in L’s and quarter buildings with shattered windows. All terrain types have issues and all options can make certain armies feel amazing or just completely terrible. It’s one of those things I kinda think about when building an army for an event. But I figure getting screwed by terrain is a little easier to swallow than just a ton of games where you only roll 1’s .
Locked-In vs Player-Placed
Personally – I like it when terrain is set as it helps speed up the start to the game. I haven’t had a game not finish naturally in a long time so anything that helps keep my streak going is a good thing. I don’t always like the shooting galleries some of them create but again – if terrain is locked-in I can usually make a plan no matter how bad it ends up being. I also end up liking a lot of terrain too as I just think it looks cooler as well but I liked building cities as a kid so that desire continues as I move my hobby from Legos to Warhammer.
Now this isn’t to say I hate player placed too. I just usually have a plan for that based on the armies I play. In fact I tell most players to make sure they can figure out a plan for attack with any army they bring and the terrain you might see. From just ensuring you can survive a turn 1 shooting phase to ensuring you figure out ways to jump from piece to piece – you should think how you need to twirl thru the ruins to victory.
I hope as we move towards a new rumored edition we see the continued push to “lock” in terrain traits to just make things easier. I do like getting to a table and knowing what each piece does before hand. It helps eliminate some of the chance to have a little argument based misinformation if both players think that little base with broken bits on it might be obscuring, dense, or just something to look cool. Having keywords on each option is how we get this game to be a little more distinct in their interactions and allow for less wiggle room for players to misuse. I would always rather screw myself from terrain than make a game bad for an opponent because he thought those weird trees did something different.
Terrain Makes or Breaks Events
Beyond all of this, terrain is what really helps sell the tournament experience. It is a big factor of cost for a TO and probably the biggest thing people remember when they go to an event. I have distinct memories of seeing the updated Adepticon terrain back in 4th and 5th edition where they threw a ton of money into making it look good. I also remember how that terrain was awesome for that edition but got kicked in the teeth on the next one where all those windows now offered true line of sight. It is the biggest “threat” to going in the black for an event and one of the things that sticks with an event if terrain was bad.
Heck there is also the fact you have to deal with the players not treating it that well. I won’t say how many times my sweater catches a building with some kind of eye gouging spike on it. Or when one of your models fall over and breaks the Ork fort up like it was the Koolaid man trying to get to a kids birthday party. It is hard to keep it looking good, keep it valid, and keep players happy to try and play on it. I don’t envy any TO starting out and trying to think how to build the battlefields for 20+ tables let along 500+.
Standardization is Good!
I think my only real vice in all of this is I just like things to be as standard as possible. Just like how the majority of events started using neoprene objective markers as a method to help determine if you control – events should probably push to have more locked in terrain set ups. They don’t have to follow GW’s but maybe creating a few basic tabletop setups that are cookie-cuttered across an event might make for a much more consistent table top experience. Or just let someone sell a bunch of MDF terrain that is labeled “Tournament Battlescape V1”.
~How to you like terrain handled at 40K events?
