Do all battle fields need to look the same?

[Mr Garibaldi]

So kinda like the title says, Do all battle fields need to look the same? Is it common for people to just buy GW stuff or do people actually make terrain anymore?

 

I understand that at this point in the timeline the empire collapsed in on itself in total war, so the battles fought would normally be on worlds reintegrated to the Imperium. Would this mean all structures were rebuilt in a gothic style? From reading the HH books it seemed as long as the inhabitants were subjugated then much of the cultural garnish remained. Have I missed something here?

 

As a bit of a fan of the open ended world building from 40k Mk1 I love building terrain from scratch, it just somehow makes the galaxy seem bigger when there is some variation. What terrain do you folks use and what makes you enjoy that particular style?

[Lathe Biosas]

Terrain should fit the story you want to tell.

 

Some of my favorite battles on the tabletop have been custom missions with fun terrain layouts.

 

We used to have a Blackhawk Down style middle eastern table we constructed that was made so vehicles could not fit through most of the map.

 

We had a Pegasus Bridge style terrain setup that we used, where you set up your defending forces on a bridge, and your opponents have to come down either side to dislodge you.

 

In the 40k universe there are endless worlds with wacky terrain, from tracked Megacities that are constantly at war with other tracked Megacities to zombie-filled marshlands of perpetual fog.

 

And while it feels like every game is fought over some curious planet where every building is L-shaped, there are tons of ways to play.

 

(Just don't let the Tau set up the terrain, otherwise you'll be facing a wall of steel, while you are stationed on a big open field with not a single bit of cover... on second thought, that sounds like it could be fun.)

[Mr Garibaldi]

@ Lathe Biosas

 

Ah cool, the terrain making project shall continue.

 

I have been working on a modernised version of the Battle of the Farm from the Mk1 40K book, scattered farm ruins, low hills, power generator and plenty of jungle. Was also collecting foam for building a small 4x4 city fight board with tall buildings and an over and underpass. lots of wrecked street furniture to hide behind but lots of places to snipe from

 

[Griefbringer]

18 hours ago, Mr Garibaldi said:

I understand that at this point in the timeline the empire collapsed in on itself in total war, so the battles fought would normally be on worlds reintegrated to the Imperium. Would this mean all structures were rebuilt in a gothic style? 

 

As regards "Imperial architecture", keep in mind that at the time of Heresy, your average human world had been a member of Imperium for less than two centuries (depending on how early in Great Crusade they were "liberated"), which gives limited time for architectural unification after five millennia of isolation. There would likely be a number of new administrative buildings in the Imperial Gothic style, but beyond that a lot might depend on local circumstances.

 

(Admittedly, there were also ancient STC building designs, dating back to the earlier expansion of humanity into stars, that could be find in many human colonies across the galaxy.)

 

That said, not all fighting took place in cities, and beyond them you can find all sorts of terrain. Verdant jungles, fertile farmlands, muddy swamps, arid deserts, ice wastes. Huge underground caverns. Mining colonies on airless moons. Massive industrial landscapes of the Forge Worlds. Vast spaceports. Landscapes of black rock with rivers of molten lava. Worlds devastated by apocalyptic weapons unleashed by the traitor forces.

[Mr Garibaldi]

@ Griefbringer Nice, yeah thats kinda what I figured. For the most part it would be indigenous architecture and plenty of scope to go nuts riffing on any and all branches of human design

[Griefbringer]

As for urban architecture, after a fair bit of heavy bombardment the local architectural features are not necessarily that easy to discern in the ruined remains...

[Brother Sutek]

I've used tables that are just trees and rock features. It annoyed a few of the guys that only used "L" shaped buildings, both 40k and HH players to be fair.  My point is that it is healthy IMO to shake up the thought that we only play in destroyed cities. My friend built one table that had colored teddy bear stuffing as "toxic gas", couldn't see through it and it was dangerous to enter. We have also made tables that are grossly unfair to the person who gets that area, or to the other side! We had a table that was mostly dangerous terrain that my drop pod army really hated and his mostly infantry loved.

[techsoldaten]

No, not all battle fields should look the same.

Something to understand about 11th edition: the rules are structured around battlefield layouts that heavily favors combat at 12" - 24". The terrain in missions is more about block fights instead of open fields, heavy use of cover instead of firing at range. My sense is the reason we are getting so many buffs to power armor, bolters and energy weapons is BECAUSE fixed terrain positions create some constraints that didn't exist before.

The mechanics of the game shift dramatically when you get away from standard battlefield layouts. Remove any walls that are over 2" high and suddenly 36" shooting becomes a much more effective tactic on a per-unit basis. Remove large buildings in the middle of the table and 48"+ shooting dominates.