"Layout for Modular Terrain?" Topic

I think I have enough material to put together a decent-sized gaming terrain, but I'd like to make it modular for storage along with having the ability to set up a different map just by rotating or rearranging the modules.

Ed from Two Hour Wargames was using a borrowed 6-unit, custom-built set a few years back for demonstrating "Nuts" in a village, I don't need to have specific areas set up for buildings, but being able to move the high ground around, or changing the way a road runs through a battlefield would be ideal.

Does anyone know of, or have, any examples? I'm going for 15-20mm and WW2, but a basic design should be scalable and work no matter which war.

Wyatt

How large is your table? Skirmish games or larger scale?

Do you want modules for streams, swamps (lower level)?

Does it need to be Geo-Morphic (streams always line up)?

I'm thinking company-sized battles at the most. If its modern, then it'll be skirmish size. Table size is probably 4x8 max and I'll either use a piece of plywood as the base or a couple of folding tables – if I'm not just taking these to a convention.

Now that you mention it, I'd probably make streams/water features their own modules. They'd have to run "north/south" or "east/west" but that shouldn't be an issue. If I do the rivers/streams as thin modules, then it doesn't overly add to the board size.

Good suggestions, I hadn't considered that.

2x2 or 2x4 foot modules sounds like they would work. Maybe with some 1x1 panels too. Storage is a big issue.

I have really been happy with 1' squares. I have cut all rivers so that they are all 3" wide and start 1.5" off an edge. This way I can lay the tiles side by side or can arrange them in a brick pattern also. Very flexible with seperately made hills that can be placed anywhere on top.

Allen

I built my project box to hold trays like you get in a cafeteria or fast food place. I use mine to store terrain, figures, future projects, and general storage. I am sure it could be used to hold modular terrain if it was cut to the proper sizes.

picture

picture

picture

I had all of the plywood cut at the hardware store. I cut the trim with my miter saw, put the whole thing together in a couple of hours using wood glue, bar clamps, and brads.

LLC aka Ron

I can see setting up a couple of transportable, plywood shelf/cases to transport these and 2" squares does make things about the right size to easily fit in the back of a car with a lift gate.

Good point on setting a fixed width and distance from the edge, Allen. Model railroaders have a "template" for modular construction where tracks "A", "B" and "C" plus a road "D" must exit the module in order to connect to someone else's.

I think I may have to abandon the concept of integrated rolling terrain – which was where I was running into the most issues. I was trying to avoid the "Geohex" hills as those are always subject to a lot of damage – making them look bad after a use. But,I think I can put in some rises within the module that'll achieve the effect. I have some old vacuform terrain that should be pretty good for inspiration.

Keep the ideas coming, please!

Wyatt

Kallistra's Hexon II system:

link

This is what I did to have 3 different river configurations. Maybe it will work for a road:

link

I went with 1/2 inch mdf sections (mostly 20" x 40", with one 40" x 40").

Hope it helps.

CC

I do like the Kallistra set, but that is completely out of budget. Especially considering that at today's prices, I have about $500 USD worth of styrofoam sheet.

I was going to use pink foam board as the base, but I'm looking at this fiberboard backing board (for flooring) that I'm working with and it seems like it might be a more rigid base.

Cacique's board gave me an idea about having a few river sections that go diagonally – just as long as they end in 3" wide sections 1.5" from an edge.

Hmmm.

Wyatt

Another option I've been considering (if I ever do a tile based layout rather than geohex cloth and elements placed on it is inspired by the Skeleton Key Games forest tiles for RPGs.

The tiles are 3:2 aspect ratio which allows a mix of horizontal and vertical placings.

For example, if you did 12" x 18" tiles, you could array them four across lying on their side on a four foot table width, or three across on end, or a mix.

For rivers and roads, or gulleys/wadis, you could have them exiting the center of the short edge and 1/3 or 2/3 along the long edge to allow maximum matchups.

To my mind it gives a lot of flexibility while avoiding the 'grid' look of square tiles.

A 4'x4' board, with a couple of 2'x4' boards, similar to what CC has done, would be a great way to go, I think. It would also give a nice solid 4'x4' table for skirmish, allowing the add-ons to be used for larger games.

The number of tiles needed at 1'x1' would leave too many seams, imo, that could spoil the look of the terrain.

"A 4'x4' board, with a couple of 2'x4' boards"

only gives 4 possible variations on the table layout. Not the level of modularity Wyatt is looking for, I'm thinking.

Of course, I didn't just make the river sections. I made plain and hill boards as well.

Diagonal river:

link

U-shaped river course:

link

River in corner (makes use of the larger river section):

link

River in corner (does not use the larger river section at all):

link

Additional 40" x 40" board created solely to have a large hill in center and not corners (here you actually see only the large river board and the large hill board.:

link
link

Another hill board (this one 20" x 40") in the far corner:

link

NOTE:

If I was to do it all over, I would still have the same number of river sections, but would do away with built-in hill boards. All hills would be stand-alone and any additional non-river board would simply be level ground.

This would reduce the number of boards to make plus, if the hills are made to fit into good sized bins, would make the storage of the boards a lot easier.

CC
PS. I'm seriously considering doing away with these boards, but only after I have suitable replacements made.

If making square boards, one excellent piece of advice is to try and make terrain features (including rivers and roads exiting the board) *not* be in the centre.
So put your hill in one corner, and so on.

By having things off centre you make a board much more versatile, because you can shift things round just by rotating the board.

If you have your river exits, say 1/3 of the way along the edge, then you only need build a 'short curve' (1/3 to 1/3 across the short corner) and 'long curve' piece, plus one piece which jinks the river from 1/3 across one edge to 2/3 the other. This then allows you to have your rivers close to a table edge, or nearly central, or winding across the table – all of which are hard to do with centrally exiting rivers.

CC is right about not building hills into the terrain boards. I started off with some, then dug them out to become depressions/swamps. Mainly it is a storage issue.

The exception is I have a couple of boards with a ridge along one side. The boards are 2" thick so one side ends up 3" thick. I did this because a lot of battles occurred along ridge lines. Storage is less of a problem because the low and high areas are opposite each other, so the two boards together take up 3".

If I did it over, I don't think I'd put roads in the terrain panels, but use "rubber roads" from various manufacturers for greater flexibility.

TBW.

I'd be inclined just to have rivers and depressions modelled in to the terrain boards. Modelling roads onto the boards is too inflexible, and built in hills, as other have noted, create storage problems.
One idea which I've had floating for a long time but never got round to trying is to have flat boards with 'lift out' sections which can be replaced with things like hills or villages, so you get the nice looks of modelled in terrain, without the difficulties.

As you can see here, my next generation terrain will be simple plain boards with removable hills:

link
TMP link

If I do build water features (such as rivers, lakes, etc.), I would prefer that they be lower than the basic surface level. I have yet to try it, but that's the direction I'm headed.

Maybe something like this (imagine that mdf board on top of a blue-green surface)?

link

CC

Mr. Pumblechook, I like your 3:2 idea especially as you point out, it increases permutations and breaks up the grided look of squares. I use Kallistra Hexon at the moment but would like to have the modelling challenge of doing some boards.

Pyruse, I have seen such boards in action. Some of the boards had say a 10" x 5" oblong cut out of their middles (offset) and into that gap, one could drop a blank grassland, marshland, a building group or hillock module etc that was also cut to 10 x 5 and that had been based to match the board texture. I thought it looked superb. The possibilities are endless, you could intersect a river and drop in a river piece, ford or variety of period bridges.

I made a modular table one Christmas vacation. I made it out of an 8*4 piece of foam with cardboard on the bottom for support. I put both roads and a river on it. I then made hills and forrest to match. I then made some hard cover in the forms of modular cliffs and rock formations. I still use what little remains of my original terrain after I lent it and it got broken and borrowed into a third of its size. I plan to make a 1*1 modular table which will be more work but hopefully easier to store and more flexiable.

Look for pictures of it set up various ways in various 40K battle reports.

link