[Model] Terrain Madness...

Hey,

On Dec 30, 5:00 pm, Myrmidon <im....RemoveThis@home.com> wrote:
> I've completed basic construction on 30+ 'concrete supports'
> which will be supports for a fairly large overhead transport system to
> go along with the buildings I'm designing

Oh? What's the height dimension? Negative Nelly mode on:

I've heard dozens of people plan just such a multilevel project.
Exactly zero got past the sketching stage for logistical reasons.
It seems *every game*, someone accidentally hip-checks the table.

> double height supports for buildings with large
> doors on the 2nd story or roof top pathways.

You lost me. Please expand on this.

> I'm not a fan of the 3 inch high wall segments as one can't get
> any decently sized model inside the buildings. Which seems rather
> ridiculous in light of all the 40K Fluff and illustrations

Fuff is to rules as diorama is to gaming terrain.

Also, define 'buildings' (as in, not 'ruins'?).

> the floors are the 6" height between
> each level

I think I've mentioned before that the 3in wall height is rule-
driven.
Your six-inch storeys may present squad coherency/ CC problems.

> I haven't
> finished painting any of the new buildings yet, the results have been
> pleasing

Bah! Who cares whether you're pleased?
What about *our* needs? ;- )

> large enough to get vehicles, dreads, MCs, etc inside and not
> look like they entered the building by use of a shoe-horn

Well, how *did* they enter the building? Bay doors?
Pics, dude. Come on. Something!

> they're magnetically held together for easy storage.

Nelly:
This supported roadway is going to be elevated over the board?
Such that people could put expensive tank models on it?
While then trying to move models under the roadway?
Um, just how *stable* is your table?

> So, what has everyone else been up to?

Combing the collection for crummy 'field repairs' to touch-up.
Nothing as grand as a double-decker table. :- (


Playa

--

"Perhaps you're teasing us. Are you teasing us?"
- Cenobite, Hellraiser 2

Hey,

On Dec 31, 6:43 am, Myrmidon <im....DeleteThis@home.com> wrote:
> I'm not worried about the supports and road
> sections tumbling

Well, that's all right, then . . .

> there are huge interior spaces with their own
> elevated Highways criss-crossing the spaces. I'm going for that sort of
> feel with the terrain design

But Grimdark has STC, free Awesomium and unlimited slave labor.
You don't have those in Ohio. Yet.

> some of the old fluff pics show
> Titans fighting it out in Hives while climbing up and down the sides of
> buildings and these elevated roadways.

Oh yeah, I remember those illos. Commissioned to promote Epic, right?
Where the "people" look like relatively tiny things? Like one-inch
toys?
To underscore the immense destructive capability of the man-size
Titans?

> it's '3 inch high building walls require less plastic
> to make and therefore put more Cha-Ching! in GW share holder and
> executive's pockets

I disagree, and am *by no means* a GW apologist.
The weight of the boxes alone disproves your theory.
The thickness and density of the CoD building frames are unmatched.

Well, outside Bristol . . .

From people who want twenty bucks for a plastic Lord, they're a
bargain.

> since you can't get a
> standard mini with a back banner inside, one is hard pressed to argue
> that the GW wall sections height was well thought out

A Marine with a Banner is <3in tall, but where should accommodation
end?
(Remembering that 1in bases and 2in coherency are the "norm".)
Must *all* 40k buildings be sized to seem roomy for Monstrous
Creatures?

That would only serve to make "normal" size models look small.
Outside Apocalypse, the exact opposite is the desired effect.
And even in 40kA, I want model LoS blocked, not player LoS.

But that's me. =- >


Playa

In article <7f4d4bdf-05ac-4b4e-846c-58ee24cd0b33
@a29g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, JohnPaulPontiff DeleteThis @gmail.com says...
>
> Hey,
>
> On Dec 30, 5:00 pm, Myrmidon <im... DeleteThis @home.com> wrote:
> > I've completed basic construction on 30+ 'concrete supports'
> > which will be supports for a fairly large overhead transport system to
> > go along with the buildings I'm designing
>
> Oh? What's the height dimension? Negative Nelly mode on:

6 inches high - same height as the '1st Floor' of multi-story
building or the roof tops of single story buildings.
>
> I've heard dozens of people plan just such a multilevel project.
> Exactly zero got past the sketching stage for logistical reasons.
> It seems *every game*, someone accidentally hip-checks the table.

Heh! Of this I'm well aware. The supports are made of 1 inch
thick foam with a pair of 1/2 thick buttresses glued on either side for
an additional inch in thickness and the bases on the supports are 6
inches wide length wise. So, I set up 3 road sections with supports,
put some minis on them (free standing without any ruins on either side
for added support), and then tried hip checking the table vigorously
repeatedly. Short of tackling the table and knocking the whole table-
top off the saw horses, I'm not worried about the supports and road
sections tumbling over and sending nicely painted minis bouncing around
the tabletop below.

>
> > double height supports for buildings with large
> > doors on the 2nd story or roof top pathways.
>
> You lost me. Please expand on this.

If you look at a lot of the illustrations of long settled Imperial
Worlds with Hives, there are huge interior spaces with their own
elevated Highways criss-crossing the spaces. I'm going for that sort of
feel with the terrain design. Hell, some of the old fluff pics show
Titans fighting it out in Hives while climbing up and down the sides of
buildings and these elevated roadways.

>
> > I'm not a fan of the 3 inch high wall segments as one can't get
> > any decently sized model inside the buildings. Which seems rather
> > ridiculous in light of all the 40K Fluff and illustrations
>
> Fuff is to rules as diorama is to gaming terrain.
>
In this case it's '3 inch high building walls require less plastic
to make and therefore put more Cha-Ching! in GW share holder and
executive's pockets'. Which I find to be a piss poor excuse for rinky
dink undersized terrain design. It would be one thing if even standard
minis fit inside or on the walkway sections, but since you can't get a
standard mini with a back banner inside, one is hard pressed to argue
that the GW wall sections height was well thought out.


> Also, define 'buildings' (as in, not 'ruins'?).

Ruins for the most part - some more intact than others but the
idea being that someone like me with reasonably large meat-hooks can get
them into the building/ruin interior to move minis around without making
a total mess of things.

>
> > the floors are the 6" height between
> > each level
>
> I think I've mentioned before that the 3in wall height is rule-
> driven.
> Your six-inch storeys may present squad coherency/ CC problems.
>
And I'm prevented from doing what GW typically does and 'hand-
waving' an inconvenient problem because? It'll simply be a matter
of using the standard coherency rules and ignoring the extra height. As
for moving between floors - I generally like the 4th Ed City Fight rules
- roll a D6 for difficult terrain 1-2 no luck finding a way up/down, 3-5
up/down a single floor, and 6 = up/down 2 floors.


> > I haven't
> > finished painting any of the new buildings yet, the results have been
> > pleasing
>
> Bah! Who cares whether you're pleased?
> What about *our* needs? ;- )
>
Oh, righto... <Hypno-Toad voice on...> You all *NEED* to send me
$50 by Friday. You *NEED* to send it... <H-T voice off...>

> > large enough to get vehicles, dreads, MCs, etc inside and not
> > look like they entered the building by use of a shoe-horn
>
> Well, how *did* they enter the building? Bay doors?
> Pics, dude. Come on. Something!

Yeap, bay doors (just like they show in the fluff pics). After
all, tanks have to get out of the building once they roll off the
assembly line somehow, and odds are they aren't having Mr. Scott beam
them out of the building. Or they're simply entering / exiting through
large holes blown in the walls. Again, I'm personally of the idea that
if you're got have things like 'wrecker' Carnifex and Dreads with
assault drills, one might want buildings large enough that they can
actually enter them after poking holes in them. But that's just me.

>
> > they're magnetically held together for easy storage.
>
> Nelly:
> This supported roadway is going to be elevated over the board?
> Such that people could put expensive tank models on it?
> While then trying to move models under the roadway?
> Um, just how *stable* is your table?
>
Apparently stable enough. I'm sure one could knock them over if
one really purposely tried, but generally I don't game with that sort of
twat so I'm not really worried about it.

> > So, what has everyone else been up to?
>
> Combing the collection for crummy 'field repairs' to touch-up.
> Nothing as grand as a double-decker table. :- (
>
Ah well. At least you're getting some work done on your minis.
I've barely had time to work on the terrain, and thus none to work on
the hordes of minis awaiting paint.

Myr

--
Skellie Proxies...

Blue Raja - You could proxy skellington rules for the unit with no
rules. "Ph34r m`/ 1337 5+33dz 0f 5k311|n9+0nz!"

Old Bear - This is a logical step and one which GW can't really object
to, being as they have raised no objections to skellies proxying in
general. I've actually been driving to work in one for about three
weeks now. It's proxying as a 1956 Austin Cambridge, and is quite
impressive.

RGMW FAQ: http://www.rgmw.org