"FIW on the tabletop" Topic

Hello:

I've searched the 18thC board but haven't discovered a thread on this specific subject. After decades of wishing and waiting I'm finally jumping into the FIW.

I have had the French forces (Suren) since the 70s. With all the nice 28mm-plus stuff coming out recently, especially the huge variety of NoAm Indians and rangers, etc, no longer any excuse for procrastination.

Question: those of you already doing FIW, in any scale, how are you handling the need for representing the NoAm wooded countryside, general undergrowth and even deep timber? Granted, there were open areas, but a tabletop would probably require say 50%, and up, in various types of growth.

Are you actually setting up near "model railroad" quality terrain with 100s, or 1000s, of trees and truckloads of lichen, or is something abstract more in vogue for praticality's (both playabilty and ecomonic) sake?

I have, over the years, seen large forests represented by a "ring of trees" which then has lichen, "logs", etc., tossed inside to represent density. On a scale of 1 (abstract) to 10 (realistic) I'd probably lean to the high end (7or 8) myself.

Comments, links most welcome as food for thought…

TIA…

Michael

The way I like to do it for dense forest is jungle is too basically consider the whole table as being forest, with the open areas marked.

My forested areas are represented by "mossy mats" that you can get at Michael's or AC Moore craft stores at Christmas time. They are by Lemax.
The mats are cut irregularly and define woods edges.
I then fill the mat with lichen and model RR trees which are bsed on 3" squares.

The scenario defines woods visibility from the edges.

Model railroad terrain is just not feeasible if you have to put the terrain up for a game, nad then take it down to put away. This is particlalry true if tyou do games at conventions or local shops.

My streams and roads are flexible rubber strips.

For my FIW games, I typically set up the forested areas in an abstract manner so as to maintain playability. That is, the 'green' areas of my terrain tiles are considered woods while the 'brown' areas are treated as open. An example from a recent game is linked below:

link

From the main screen, select 'Battle Reports' and then 'Fort William Henry'.

Jon

Clumps of trees spaced out
link

I think I lean with you on that 7-8/10 side as far as the trees go – always ready to buy another bag or make a couple new stands.

That said, we always freely pick up any trees that might be in the way of gaming and set them aside as needed and return them as the battle moves on. The wooded area edges are clearly defined with clumps of green ground clutter.

If the scenario is a deep in the woods, no farms or settlements, ambuse type game – on a 6x10 table we will have a few hundred trees out. Of course hidden/map movement cuts down on the need to dig in there until the fighting actually starts. But those games are not the norm – settlement raids and such don't need nearly as many.

Gotta do what you like.

That said, we always freely pick up any trees that might be in the way of gaming and set them aside as needed and return them as the battle moves on. The wooded area edges are clearly defined with clumps of green ground clutter.

That may be in some people's games, but I always absolutely forbid moving the terrain to accomodate the figures. Terain is SUPPOSED to limit movement and get in the way of your perfect formations. I am always appalled when people move buildings around because the tanks don't fit on the road too.
If you have individually based skirmish figures, moving trees out of the way is just plain wrong.

For us, moving the trees is not moving the terrain, per say. Buildings, streams, hills, walls, fences, etc are never moved as the represent a hard object. Since the woods are defined by outlined edge, the trees are abstract representations – they need not be there at all. The area is the same as John's "mossy mats" but with more visulas. Personnally, I seldom have to move the trees – but my brother with his ham hocks for hands keeps knocking 'em over. To each his own.

Well, I like to determine LOS by individual trees, woodpiles, etc. If one tree blocks it, Hawkeye doesn't have a shot.
I simply like to treat a model tree as representing an individual immoveable tree.

Of course, in a Plains of Abraham game, the tree model just means "Woods here".

French and Indian War looks great with lots of trees and different types. I continually add to my collection of trees, both individual bases and terrain pieces.

As for representation, I have Old Growth and New Growth forest.

Old Growth (a.k.a. primeval forest)are the trees that have been there a long time with relatively open spaces between them and a high, dense canopy which creates a shady world where it is relatively clear of underbrush. These terrain pieces predominate in the inner regions of the wooded areas.

New Growth are the young trees and forest growth which thrives in the sunlight along the fringes, trails and edges of the forest. You see this especially along some (not all) trails and most clearings. The edge of an unmanaged forest tends to be thick with brush and younger trees; thus, more difficult and slower to move through than the Old Growth.

I have terrain bases of immovable trees and individual tree bases. I never allow them to be moved. I use bases to delineate the edges, trails and clearing edges of woods and add thick brush (lichen and terrain clusters) to the New Growth areas.

As mentioned above – that's a no-go moving trees or terrain for conveniences. I do the same with making tree bases:

link

Hopes this helps.

Greg P.

Photos of our recent FIW game:

link

We assume everything is lightly forested, and that areas marked by felt, with trees on them are of a thicker variety, blocking line of sight and providing significant cover.

Thanks all for the broad variety of ideas, ranging from about "2" through "8" on my scale. Several creative approaches here. Will give me "pondering material".

I model European alpine railroads. I use this technique pinched from a German mag to do FIW trees and/or Hurtgen forest.
Take one of those big boxes of short pine trees (50 or 100 3 to 4" trees) by Heki or Noch etc.
Cut up some dowel or other tubular material into 6 to 8" lengths, tapered if possible.
Bung commercial pine tree in the end of the dowel creating a 8 to 12" tree.
Hide the join with filler.
Coat trunk with brown paint.
Sprinkle sawdust on trunk whilst wet to simulate bark.

(Or forget the above as Auhagen make something ready to go in 6" which have detachable bases. Glue the base to the terrain. Remove tree at will.)

The end result is foliage at 8" off the table. 0 to 8" is clear, just trunks only. Natty and co can wander around under the canopy, hide behind trunks etc.

Period reports of the original growth forrest often state that there are wide enough spaces to drive a carriage through. The high canopies of trees blocked out sunlight and in many areas the undergrowth was minimal.

We also move our trees in games, as they are representational, as others have stated. John's idea is kind of neat though. Do you use a laser pointer or something to determine seeing and possible hits?