"Would this be your reaction?" Topic

Since moving to the Lone Star State I am finally having success with getting in some games. I have introduced folks to Lion Rampant and it is gaining a following, I've dove into Bolt Action and found I like the game, and have started getting my Flames of War army together. The local game store has a number of excellent game tables and a decent selection of various terrain for folks to use. Great. Recently a gentleman set up an exceptional modular table to demo games of Bolt Action. He is the equivalent of an "outrider" like GW used to have to demo their games and this person does something similar for Warlord. He had created one of those works of art like you sometimes see hosted at the big conventions. The four by four board had terrain features worked in that clearly was to show the bocage country of France with a small creek and bridge, crop fields, build up areas, the works. It was a fabulous table to game on.

Now one individual who shall remain nameless walks up while I am admiring the craftsmanship and states with no hint of being sardonic, " Well that's nice but you cannot game on that."

"What?" I ask incredulous.

"You can't game on that it has too many blocked lines and you cannot move the terrain aside and half of it is usable because of the river and what is this thing here?" (He is pointing at the hedgerows) "You can't move your figures through that."

I should note at this point this person plays a lot of Flames of War and other historical games. I found myself completely dumbfounded.

"You're pulling my leg?" I ask.

"No," he states in all sincerity," I mean you could not have fun on that board. It is too much of a mess. And at best you could run maybe 500 points on that."

"Mmmm…" I nod sagely and wonder how I can disengage from this conversation.

Now my approach to miniature gaming is to bring my best to the table whether that is how I paint the models or create the terrain. Nazrat and I have won awards at HMGS conventions for the detail and time we take. This game board was as good if not better than anything he and I have ever put on. Did I miss something in translation with this person?

In other words, "You can't have any fun if it is a challenge."

Having seen many of the games of Flames of War being played at this particular store I notice a number of the set up are sparse on terrain features. This is really strange considering the store owner has provided a bounty in hills, rivers, trees, roads and 15 mm buildings for various theaters. I understand that Flames of War is the store owner's favorite war game. Yet I see time and again these games that all look like the steppes of Russia. Which might be appropriate when you are playing Germans against Russians perhaps but not Europe. And in an IGOYOUGO game like Flames of War I want LOTS of terrain and broken sight lines. All I can do is shake my head.

"terrain just gets in the way"

"something that gets in way of seeing makes it hard"

Dude don't know what he's talkin about! I'm with you kallman, 100%. The cooler the terrain is, the cooler the game is!
That's why I do this…
board2deathterrain.com
I've had one guy say to me "It's great for a diorama, but you can't play on". What?! This was on my WW1 Trench board. And right after we finished playing a game on it! All the players, and onlookers really dug it. Later another guy was hanging around watching me pack up & I started shootin the bull with him. Turns out he builds museum dioramas. He's like "This is so cool, it's just as good as I do (blush… well I 'm not sure bout that but, thanks!) AND you get to PLAY on it!" It made me feel good. So for every one of the folks who would complain, there are a bunch who really do appreciate the time & effort. Some people cannot be reached.
Peter

Don't stress it, some folks don't like to think during games. It's not their fault.

I would just tell him you are entitled to your opinion but I do not agree and leave it at that.

Kallman, you know my view on terrain……the more the merrier. Terrain is what makes a game in my opinion.

And Ceterman, you do awesome stuff! To me terrain and nicely painted figures go hand in hand to make an enjoyable game. :-)

I had that conversation decades ago with a guy that turned out to be a bit of a name in the hobby. He didn't like too much bumpy terrain in his games. I was stunned, but just said,"okay".

Maybe his perspective about the game is different, maybe he doesn't see the terrain as an increase in challenge, but as a reduction in challenge. Chess doesn't have much terrain, is there no challenge in it?

Today, I would be less stunned by that conversation, and probably say "okay". To each their own. As long as we each enjoy what we are doing, I figure what does it matter?

It would depend entirely on the game itself.

For example, games where units or elements are based on rectangular or square bases with multiple figures, such terrain is rather hard to game on. Especially if the units have to be base-to-base for the rules to work. With these games a more modular approach is better, where the extent of the terrain is identified, but the mod elec bits can be moved out of the way of the elements.

For games with individually based figures with units in loose arrangemeant, or skirmish games with no units, that sort of game board would be great to play on

So yes, I think you did miss the translation. For FoW, such a board might be a pain in the @£$; to play on. Not because it is hard, but because the way the rules work doesn't support it.
Cheers,
JohnG

Even the Russian Steppe wasn't flat, or treeless! Sadly the advent of FOW has attracted the gamers who believe their 1500 point army can defeat every other 1500 point army, as long as neither player is required to use tactics, terrain, or even a little imagination!

Only response I'd have is "maybe you can't have fun on this, but we certainly shall"….

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. His was simply wrong.

It is first and foremost a visual hobby. If it is only the game and not the look of the thing, cardboard counters would suffice.

Some mothers do have 'em.

Someone should introduce him to X-Wing (without asteroids of course)

"Terrain just gets in the way…."
Reminds me of a doofus who ACTUALLY MOVED THE TREES in an FIW skirmish game. They got in the way of the deployment of his Rangers.

Or another guy who tried to push the buildings back because his Crossley tenders could not fit down the alley in an IRA game.

Excellent teaching opportunity.

"Reminds me of a doofus who ACTUALLY MOVED THE TREES in an FIW skirmish game. They got in the way of the deployment of his Rangers."

? I almost always move terrain items if thy are in the way, very hard to put figures inside a solid building.

I would normally have some way of indicating the extent of a terrain feature though, even if the indivdual trees/buildings aren't fixed.

JSchutt, NICE! I doubt he would learn anything. But ya never know. Thanks Doug. We think alike!

terrain just gets in the way

We had that same problem when I commanded a tank company in the Army.

Good to see that you are settling in and starting to find your gaming niche in the DFW area. You know what they say about opinions and "A" holes…everybody's got one. Or, at least, every "A" hole has one! Sounds like your encounter falls into the second grouping.

Trying out Lion Rampant is on my short list of things to do along with Dux Britania.

Had a similar thing at Triples some years ago. Some "expert" complained that there weren't enough figures on the table. In fact it was a 1 to 1 representation of an actual raid. As someone previously said, everyone is entitled to their opinion, even when it is wrong!

"So yes, I think you did miss the translation. For FoW, such a board might be a pain in the @£$; to play on. Not because it is hard, but because the way the rules work doesn't support it."

Nope, he didn't, because Flames of War has rules for and works great with bocage terrain, although like in every other Normandy game (at whatever scale and system one uses) it is indeed a challenge to play with.

Kim, I would have just said "More for me!!" and left it at that. If he persisted I might take the time to let him know EXACTLY how wrong he was. And I know you're more than aware that no matter what game store you are in there will almost always be a small percentage of creeps and misanthropes that are best avoided.

I solved the problem in a unique way.

I use modular terrain based on large hexagons. The Hexagons are 12" between the parallel sides of the hex. They are 14" in diameter from point to point. They are made of 1/4" luan plywood. Onto this base I model whatever tarrain I wish from flat open hexes to undulating, to roads, streams rivers, hills etc. The relief featers are of reinforced papier mache. Fences are made of hard copper wire from electrical BX cable and so forth so the stuff is fairly indestructagble. Forests and trees are boxes into which you can really hide troops. Buildings are the Lithuanian Candle Houses, which look like stuff from Europe in the 18th century because-- well, they are.

The game is a free movement game, not hex bound, but the terrain is graded for game purposes by hexes. Hills and woodlots are rough, towns and forests (the hidey-away boxes) are heavy cover etc. The urban hexes or hexes for buildings have "locks" to hold the buildings and prevent them from falling over. Terrain conforms to the hex lines, or it is ruled inconsequential. The rules are forgibving. The whole thing when put together looks very good, or as good as I can get it while still having the terrain robust enough to handle rough handling in a game. If you've gone to one of the HMGS con's or the Weekend, you've seen it.

Anyway the buildings can be "unlocked" to move aside and then put back when the troops move on, the forests easily accommodate the stands, and the small rills and fences and the like can be ignored and are robust enough to hold up huge stands (4" by 8") for infantry.

The rules are very forgiving and don't care a bit about the idly-fiddly many other sets are besotted with.

Still… I too at conventions have had the same type of guy come up and critique the terrain and say, "You can't play a battle on that stuff!" After a few minutes of his snarking at my honest protestations I realized he was just complaining because he couldn't make something as good.

I can just imagine when he sees the terrain sections I am completing with the lovers en flagrant delicto in a Gazebo, Hansel and Gretel and the witch and the gingerbread house, picknickers, and the traveling Punchinelli.

If you can't get your head lost in the terrain with an aching desire to actually BE there and wander about such a beautiful place, then half the fun of the game is lost.

Otto

IMHO it gets down to how "fiddly" I need to be to move and place stands on the table. Am I in danger of "breaking something" when I move a stand? Are all the trees fixed, or is there a zone/template for the terrain feature?

I have seen beautiful tables that would work for some games, but become "so much clutter" and interfere with play in others.

Last, is it easy to transport and fast to set up?

My guess he is one of those that stops 1/4 inch from max range of a unit and couldn't balance his troops on hedgerow or some such.

& that's why I play Lardie rules & not Flames of War.

I'm always amazed at how many games are played on flat boards.

& that's why I play Lardie rules & not Flames of War.

Very important to use cover and not get caught in the open in CoC!

Cold Steel wins the thread!

The best teacher for the use of terrain is when live bullets are whistling past your helmet.

The best teacher for the use of terrain is when live bullets are whistling past your helmet.

Yeah, but the store are likely to bar you for introducing that element…. ;-)

Sounds like he did not understand what game it was made for. Please provide pics if you can, it sounds excellent.

Wargames has two primary roots. Both of them are by H.G. Wells. The first and most known is "Little Wars." The second is his "Floor Games" I which he delightfully delves into the idea of making terrain and buildings, environments and magical worlds and continents in "Floor Games."

These two roots are often violently antagonistic.

The logic of the game would mandate ONY an attention tot he rules and the free play of the game elements of combat power and force. For this a two-dimensional board would be the best.

The logic of the aesthetic, of terrain would if carried to its extreme banish the game for the simple fact that far beyond the exquisite terrain would crowd out the game because it would be too fragile or cluttered, the beauty of the table top, like some model railroad layouts, would be so striking, so engaging, so fascinating that we would forget about the game entirely.

I have no doubt that my best efforts fall far short of Kallman's creation. But there are times when setting up a battle for the next day I will take pause and gaze at the field and imaging walking down that quiet country lane, in the warm sun, with no bullets flying about and taking a nice long lounge at the winekeller on the slope, and sitting there at a table and enjoying a good Moselle or Gewurtztraminer. While off in the corner a quartet is playing Shubert or an oompah-band is belching forth purely 2nd rate music.

But you can do that even with boxish cardboard buildings and felt with construction paper roads.

So much of our hobby is really just "let's pretend and make believe."

The one aspect that keeps me coming back for more is good looking games tables. Terrain is 60% of that, figures 40%.
A great looking table makes the game.

He's just used to playing on one.

You're all being a bit too harsh on FoW. This is clearly an issue of mindset, not a rules system. It's all in the wrist! Or rather it's all in how you play, not what.

As an example, FoW had a very decent set of rules for bocage fighting, but they never sat well with comp game players and you rarely see it being played accordingly. Point is the rules allowed for a reasonable simulation of bocage fighting, even though many players won't play it.

I always want something to hide behind, even in horse and musket games. Each to their own. Plus pretty terrain sure beats a billiard table.

Maybe he should play ancients

Ah, Grasshopper, the game is not on the table.
The game is in the mind….