Are GW terrain kits a let down?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Having started in 3rd I can’t help but compare modern kits to the old terrain they used for pictures in codexes, and I just find the modern kits not nearly as cool.

 

Any one else feel this way?

[Karhedron]

Do you have any specific examples in mind? A lot of the old terrain was scratchbuilt so comparing that to a mass produced kit is always going to be a bit unfair.

[Valkyrion]

I don't feel it, brother. The new kits and photographic artwork in general in modern 40k far surpasses green flocked hills and upcycled coke cans. 

 

That said, no scenery has got me as excited as the Imperial Firebase did all those years ago!

Edited March 25, 2022 by Valkyrion

[Halandaar]

Having started in 3rd I can’t help but compare modern kits to the old terrain they used for pictures in codexes, and I just find the modern kits not nearly as cool.

 

Any one else feel this way?

 

100% opposite opinion. Modern terrain kits are amazing compared to the 2 plastic ruin corners and weird jungle trees from third edition, and all the other scenery of the day was either printed cardboard that slotted in to plastic bulkheards, or completely scratchbuilt (which were occasionally cool, but also very often looked exactly like it had been assembled from old bean tins and bog roll tubes)

Edited March 25, 2022 by Halandaar

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I don't feel it, brother. The new kits and photographic artwork in general in modern 40k far surpasses green flocked hills and upcycled coke cans.

 

That said, no scenery has got me as excited as the Imperial Firebase did all those years ago!

the imperial fire base is exactly the sort stuff I am talking about!

Do you have any specific examples in mind? A lot of the old terrain was scratchbuilt so comparing that to a mass produced kit is always going to be a bit unfair.

things like the imperial firebase

 

 

Having started in 3rd I can’t help but compare modern kits to the old terrain they used for pictures in codexes, and I just find the modern kits not nearly as cool.

 

Any one else feel this way?

100% opposite opinion. Modern terrain kits are amazing compared to the 2 plastic ruin corners and weird jungle trees from third edition, and all the other scenery of the day was either printed cardboard that slotted in to plastic bulkheards, or completely scratchbuilt (which were occasionally cool, but also very often looked exactly like it had been assembled from old bean tins and bog roll tubes)

Not talking about the terrain from the 3rd Ed starter box but the imperial firebase and things like that

 

Applying modern production method to the firebase would blow all their other modern kits out of the water imho

Edited March 25, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Axineton]

I think the terrain gw produce for 40k and necromunda is ace but I do wish they created more xenos terrain instead of the constant imperial terrain.

[Firedrake Cordova]

On the 40K side of things, I really liked the recent Sector Mechanicus and Sector Imperialis kits - they're highly versatile, characterful, and well-designed for gaming use. I do understand people not being overly keen on "yet another ruins kit" when looking at the Sector Imperialis kits, and I think seeing some of the old card terrain re-imagined in plastic could be interesting - I'd love to see a "modern plastic" version of the original card Necromunda terrain.

 

Oddly, on the Fantasy side I do miss the "complete building" kits - the Chapel, Manor House, Watchtower, etc - I think ruins work better for 40K, but less well for Fantasy (but we probably shouldn't talk about that).

Edited March 25, 2022 by Firedrake Cordova

[Hfran Morkai]

The only letdown for me terrain wise is currently the "Sector Imperialis" stuff is unavailable apart from the Kill Team Chalnath stuff (which from my understanding is quite limited details wise although modular).

 

I'm hoping they bring them back, in the run up to Chalnath they mentioned the Sector Imperialis terrain was frequently requested/popular so hopefully it sees a full return.

 

My Sector Imperialis board would appreciate it.

[Halandaar]

I think the terrain gw produce for 40k and necromunda is ace but I do wish they created more xenos terrain instead of the constant imperial terrain.

 

Agreed on that, i think it's a shame the Deathworld Forest kits went away as they had some cool Eldar ruins in amongst them. That said at least we got the Ork buildings in Octarius last year, that adds a good bit of variety.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I personally think the ruins are too busy.

I get that the imperium is known for being fancy and grandiose, but not every building in a hive is or needs to be like that.

[Valkyrion]

They've generally moved away from hills and woods (I think there is one woodland kit across the entire GW range, nurgle tree notwithstanding ), so you are pushed to play on the flat with ruins granting your elevation.

 

I also think the ruins are too busy, and I actually found the sector imperialis kits a pain to build, much preferring the older Imperial Sector (good naming, GW!).

 

But back in the day, terrain rules were more abstract as you were encouraged to scratchbuild. Now the official GW terrain has to be fairly static whilst also being modular, so that the rules are the same across the board (no pun intended). 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

They've generally moved away from hills and woods (I think there is one woodland kit across the entire GW range, nurgle tree notwithstanding ), so you are pushed to play on the flat with ruins granting your elevation.

 

I also think the ruins are too busy, and I actually found the sector imperialis kits a pain to build, much preferring the older Imperial Sector (good naming, GW!).

 

But back in the day, terrain rules were more abstract as you were encouraged to scratchbuild. Now the official GW terrain has to be fairly static whilst also being modular, so that the rules are the same across the board (no pun intended).

They could release a kit of terrain that’s modular but intended to build stuff like the old firebase.

 

Eons of battle designed and printed something very similar for a new video

I believe black magic craft did a video sponsored by a company that was modular but still had that old school style

 

 

Edited March 25, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Redcomet]

New products can almost never compete with things that get your nostalgic feelings going.

 

New terrain is objectively superior to what came before.

 

But that doesn’t always mean you will like it more than what made you go “coooool” when you where in your younling days

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

New products can almost never compete with things that get your nostalgic feelings going.

 

New terrain is objectively superior to what came before.

 

But that doesn’t always mean you will like it more than what made you go “coooool” when you where in your younling days

in terms of production quality 100% 1000x better.

When it comes to style and appearances I definitely disagree

[Warhead01]

I still prefer diy terrain over GW kits. I like Gw terrain bitz for decorating diy terrain but I'm not overly excited by full kits. I like the new height some of their ruins and structures have, I think that's one of the best aspects of the new terrain. Some of the new terrain seems mostly unplayable, like the pipe line sets look wrong to me. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

On the 40K side of things, I really liked the recent Sector Mechanicus and Sector Imperialis kits - they're highly versatile, characterful, and well-designed for gaming use. I do understand people not being overly keen on "yet another ruins kit" when looking at the Sector Imperialis kits, and I think seeing some of the old card terrain re-imagined in plastic could be interesting - I'd love to see a "modern plastic" version of the original card Necromunda terrain.

 

Oddly, on the Fantasy side I do miss the "complete building" kits - the Chapel, Manor House, Watchtower, etc - I think ruins work better for 40K, but less well for Fantasy (but we probably shouldn't talk about that).

between siege engines, monsters, artillery, and magic, I feel that destroyed buildings still make plenty of sense for fantasy.

 

Also not every battlefield in 40k is going to have been so for months, weeks, or even days.

Some battlefields will indeed fresh battlefields and I wish GW had kits to represent that.

Edited March 25, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Bryan Blaire]

As I have the old 2nd Edition (not 3rd) Imperial Firebase sitting up on the shelf (most parts of it at least), along with some of the 3rd Edition ruins (using them to learn my airbrush and oil washes) and a bunch of broken 3rd Ed “palm-style” trees near the more recent Sector Manufactorum and Sector Fronteris stuff, I think that people have nostalgic daydreams.

The new kits, while not being 100% LoS blocking in most cases, are so much more present on the battlefield than the card clipped into some plastic bulkheads stuff, as they have much more 3D detail in terrain itself.

Are they better or cooler? It depends on what you want and what your terms for “better” or “cooler” are (something the supposition in the original post failed to define). Card is certainly cheaper than full plastic. Full plastic is more aligned with the model making portion of the hobby.

The central “bunker” of the Imperial Firebase and the “bunker” type building from the Sector Fronteris are also fairly close together in size as well. The Imperial Firebase central bunker area is about 6” wide by 7.5” long, while the central part of the Sector Fronteris bunker type building is 4.75” wide by 6.75” long (extends out to 6” x 8” if you include the protruding beams on the sides that form the corners). Once you stack on the additional ruins, you have a fairly similar sized bit of terrain between the two sets, but the Sector Fronteris can be arranged a bit more flexibly around a battlefield.

I think the terrain gw produce for 40k and necromunda is ace but I do wish they created more xenos terrain instead of the constant imperial terrain.

Agreed on that, i think it's a shame the Deathworld Forest kits went away as they had some cool Eldar ruins in amongst them. That said at least we got the Ork buildings in Octarius last year, that adds a good bit of variety.

Agreed on all counts!

Applying modern production method to the firebase would blow all their other modern kits out of the water imho

I’m not sure if it would blow them out of the water so much as sit alongside them, but it would definitely be an awesome kit for GW to make with modern modeling and casting technology! It’d be really nice to have some of the old Wall of Martyrs kits back, like the Firestorm Redoubt, Aquila Strongpoint, Vengeance Weapon Battery, and even the Fortress of Redemption back - those were all in some form similar to a modern style Imperial Firebase (especially combined, and having some elevated walkways).

Taking a look at the terrain side by side:

(click the images to view larger)

To me those images illustrate what I mean - the Imperial Firebase was cool because for the most part, it was ready to go out of the box - you didn’t have to paint the bulkheads if you didn’t want to (I clearly didn’t) and it didn’t really change it’s presence in the gaming environment. Additionally, it was flat card stock, so it was automatically line of sight blocking (the same as a shoebox would be) - those elements are about the only things that makes it “better” than the modern terrain in my mind.

The modern terrain looks a lot cooler to me once it’s painted up, but even unpainted, it’s got better details and is much more of a modeling task to hobby through. It also has more “presence” on the battlefield to me (even if that battlefield is beige carpet) and overall fits the setting better (as opposed to being bright blue). The modern Sector Mechanicus terrain also has the Imperial Firebase beat hands down in multi-level coolness IMO, but both would provide about the same amount of cover where you have the walkway railing (which you don’t get enough of).

The con - the modern stuff costs more and there’s a lot more to paint - but that can be mitigated with a dry brushing of color and rattle cans, or even better (IMO) airbrush and oil washes.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

One thing I think I dislike about the modern stuff is

1. It’s all essentially the same

2. Kills my own creativeness for making terrain. All GW products just show destroyed cities. No more cool wilderness boards featured, no more remote outposts, etc.

 

To me the modern kits are basically just re-skins of each other. Just ruins with different details on them and then a smattering of different scatter terrain to fill in in between the ruins.

[Firedrake Cordova]

between siege engines, monsters, artillery, and magic, I feel that destroyed buildings still make plenty of sense for fantasy.

That's true, it's just not my preference (give me pristine, or ancient tumbledown)

 

Also not every battlefield in 40k is going to have been so for months, weeks, or even days. Some battlefields will indeed fresh battlefields and I wish GW had kits to represent that.

That's very true. In my mind, civilian buildings are likely to be turned into rubble seemingly simply by pointing some of 40K's heavy weapons at them. Having said that, I prefer the industrial buildings intact, so I'm obviously inconsistent in my preferences. As you say, it'd be great if GW did a mix, so you could build to your own preferences.

[Cleon]

The only real issue I have with the current terrain is that it's mostly different textured versions of the same 'panel and floor' kit, which is great for making ruins and flexibility, but lacks the focus of a specific design.

 

It's a bit like the difference between the full multipart models that let you put any combination of parts together versus the semi monopose models that only make one pose that's really cool - we could do with a few modern 'firebase' style cool terrain pieces that aren't meant to be flexible that don't end up as purchaseable fortifications.

[Bryan Blaire]

One thing I think I dislike about the modern stuff is

1. It’s all essentially the same

2. Kills my own creativeness for making terrain. All GW products just show destroyed cities. No more cool wilderness boards featured, no more remote outposts, etc.

 

To me the modern kits are basically just re-skins of each other. Just ruins with different details on them and then a smattering of different scatter terrain to fill in in between the ruins.

That’s two things (in a numbered list even!):

1.  All the card terrain that GW released was pretty similar too (as was the old Cityfight terrain) - you basically got some variation on what the walls and floors looked like.  The Necromunda/GW Industrial Battlezone was even the same color as the Imperial Firebase.  From what I can remember, all of the cardstock terrain even used the same plastic bulkheads to make it, so all of those were basically the same - maybe some different colors.

2.  Why do you let GW products kill your own creativity?  If you want wilderness stuff, make it!  It would probably be awesome!  You shouldn’t let GW’s depictions and use of their own stuff guide your vision of the war torn far future… there’s definitely folks still doing the DIY terrain builds for some wilderness combat, check them out online!

 

They aren’t really “reskins” of each other, at least not in the video game sense - they don’t share basic models, just with different texture maps laid over them - there are similar components, but the Sector Mechanicus stuff isn’t built like the Sector Imperialis stuff, which isn’t built like the Sector Fronteris stuff, which isn’t built like the Sector Manufactorum stuff.  There’s similarities because it’s all Imperial design stuff, so of course it shares some similarities (the supports for the Mechanicus stuff looks like the beam supports for Fronteris, the Manufactorum stuff is a thinner half wall support, but shares a half hexagonal shape to the Imperialis full hexagonal wall support stuff, etc.), except for the Sanctum Administratum, which uses the full hexagon walls of the Ruined Manufactorum, which did have a reskin quality from the Sector Imperialis (walls with hexagonal supports, but different details) - but it’s no more similar than the older Cityfight terrain was.  Even the Necromunda stuff is similar to the other Imperium based stuff, but not a “reskin” of any of it.

 

Even the Ork terrain shares some visual similarity because it looks like a lot of it is actually taken from Imperial terrain components!  

 

”Ruins” as a concept is a pretty wide net to cast and not expect it to grab the majority of what GW makes, but I will give you that they are all ruins, yes.  It’s not wrong to want GW to produce some non-Imperium based stuff at all, I know I would really like to see it - however, in a game about war, most of that is probably also likely to be some amount of ruins.

 

The Tau stuff isn’t ruins (combat emplacements, but without much visual damage on them) though - it could use some expansion however.

[MARK0SIAN]

Until they bought in obscuring rules in 9th the GW kits were definitely a let down in that they looked good but didn’t really do anything to block line of sight or cut off firing angles because they’re pretty much all see through.

 

In terms of visual appearance I quite like them but I do agree there are too many ruins kits. It would be good to have something different but it’s quite hard to imagine what that would be that would work in a game.

 

Overall though the biggest issue I have with GW terrain kits is that they are (even by GW standards) quite poor value for money. You need a lot of them to create a decent table for full size games and I feel like terrain is (unlike a lot of the army units) something that can be done just as well by generic 3rd party manufacturers who charge less.

[Noserenda]

I dunno, i prefer the current GW stuff, its not competing against an absolutely huge set of rivals when you bring in train and historical stuff or against my own creativity in the least. If i want a blander set of ruins they are trivially easy to make very cheaply. If i want some super detailed, super 40k ones i can buy GW's which now have a ridiculous amount of modularity and cross compatibility to do all kinds of things from flattened ruins to giant industrial plants or buildings. Hell, some of them are even designed with magnets in mind for the truly insane :D 

Honestly its one thing to critique the aesthetics but the amount of work and thought the GW terrain team put into their work is outstanding. I mean it has to be given the folks setting the prices seem determined to not sell it :P 

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I think it's hard to compare the old vs new terrain from an aesthetic standpoint. They didn't have competition with the older kits so it's easy to look back at it with rose tinted glasses. On the other hand, the third-party competition for terrain now is pretty crazy. That's going to influence what you prefer.

 

I personally think the ruins are too busy.
I get that the imperium is known for being fancy and grandiose, but not every building in a hive is or needs to be like that.

 

I think they do need to be busy with how much they charge for them. I mean if you buy terrain at full sticker price from GW, it's probably going to cost you more than a 2000-point army would, to fill a 60 by 44-inch table. If you go with bundles, killzones and/or look for best value (multiples of the same kit) you can do it cheaper but it's still pretty crazy how expensive they are. They can't do simple terrain at those price points it has to be fancy. The worst part is that I think it hurts customer retention for them. Say two friends start and one of them likes tau, is his/her buddy going to want to keep investing or will they be turned off of the game because of the blood bath on planet bowling ball? Cheap functional terrain could really alleviate that.

[Chaeron]

I actually am hugely nostalgic for those 3rd Edition ruins - I really, really like them - even now! 

 

That said, there's just something about the newer plastics and their potential that makes them so desirable. It's just a challenge to want to get more terrain instead of 'models'!