Help support TMP

"Battle Mats - Your thoughts…" Topic

7 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Hobby Industry Message Board

Areas of Interest


Featured Hobby News Article

Featured Link

Featured Ruleset

Quickie Figs

Rating: gold star 

Featured Profile Article

How Scurvy Got His "Style"

How Scurvy developed his unique approach to miniatures.

Current Poll

657 hits since 16 May 2022
©1994-2022 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Pancreasboy16 May 2022 3:55 a.m. PST

Hi there guys, based off my recent questionnaire I'm looking to start with something that was fairly in demand and yet serves all genres of gaming… modular Battle Mats in square format so you can mix and match them to have several options each game.

Now these could range from generic nature or biomes, to detailed specific Battle Mats and I've got a super short 3 question survey to ask for your thoughts ( link )

Tom Molon Supporting Member of TMP16 May 2022 4:48 a.m. PST

survey submitted

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP16 May 2022 6:42 a.m. PST

Submitted, but you're making some interesting presumptions.

One is the assumption of scale. The more the mat says "I'm 28mm!" or "Microscale only!" the less use it is to me.

The other is the use of a mat for tactical features. If I have a stone wall and a woods printed on a mat, they'll always be the same distance and direction apart, which means either I need a ton of mats, or I'm severely limited tactically. So "grassland with woods" is no use to me. Actual modularity--grassland and I can put woods or streams where I need them for this battle--could be fun. but I'd like to know the pieces won't drift apart during the battle.

Wargamorium16 May 2022 8:21 a.m. PST

Survey completed. Will you publish results?

Old Contemptible16 May 2022 5:06 p.m. PST

I agree with Robert. I don't want a mat with pre-printed geographic features. Mats with pre-printed features on them like roads, buildings, rivers etc., are useless to me. I have buildings, farm fields, roads, stone walls. I can place them where I want them or where the scenario dictates.

I want a 3D look not 2D where it gives the same view I get when in an airplane looking done. It looks your walking on the tops of trees. I just want a mostly green mat with some brown, yellow grass colors. They are useless if you do historical scenarios.

advocate17 May 2022 5:53 a.m. PST

Yes, not a brilliant set of questions. The answer to the first one could be both or (in my case) neither – I want as far as possible a scale-independent generic map I can use with my existing scenery. And (not covered in the questionnaire) I do want a material that will happily go over 'hills' to provide a 3d table.

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP17 May 2022 8:22 a.m. PST

What I actually try to keep on hand is grassland, desert, urban and a copper to red suitable for traditional SF Mars. Mostly I have hills to match--except for urban--but a material going over the hills would be a space-saver. (I'm not sure the material would have to be happy while doing so. How can I tell?)

It's the "modular" bit which intrigues me, but I'd need a lot of detail.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.