Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Future Wars => Topic started by: Timbor on 05 May 2015, 04:24:21 PM
-
Hi folks,
A friend recently tricked me into starting up Necromunda, and I have been thinking about table size. Without much scifi terrain to use at this point, how do you think the game would play on a 3x3 table with lots of terrain rather than a 4x4 table?
-
I think it will work just fine.
-
In my experience, the peripheral edges of a Necromunda table rarely get used (they're generally devoid of terrain anyway, as all the cool stuff goes in the middle!). You might need to adjust some of the deployment distances for some of the scenarios, and be aware that a smaller table will favour combat-orientated gangs a tad more than shooty ones, but otherwise a 3x3 should work fine.
-
The only real change you'll notice is the first turn 'run for position' activity will either not happen or become very important depending on scenario. I don't think it'll be a problem at all. Just make sure there are places to hide etc, as on a 3ft table, a standard lasgun can be hitting people first turn if you go second.
-
In my experience, the peripheral edges of a Necromunda table rarely get used (they're generally devoid of terrain anyway, as all the cool stuff goes in the middle!). You might need to adjust some of the deployment distances for some of the scenarios, and be aware that a smaller table will favour combat-orientated gangs a tad more than shooty ones, but otherwise a 3x3 should work fine.
This is what I figured, as I see the same when I play Mordheim. Usually in Mordheim I place my figures as far forward in the deployment zone as possible (in cover) and they never see the edge 6" of the board again. I figured if I do a 3x3 table for Necromunda I can fill it up more easily and just shrink the deployment zones a bit to compensate. I have a decent amount of terrain incoming over the next several months - 40k imperial sector plus a bunch of mantic battlezone stuff, plus some DIY plans, so it should hopefully work well.
How do people feel about fixed terrain features vs modular features? I am thinking of making 4 x 18" square sections, and maybe including a polluted river running through 2 of the sections. I was also thinking of making a large hill/mountain in one corner to signify a cave-in/trash heap that is being mined for valuable minerals and archeotech.
-
Even 2x2x1 ft worked fine for us.
-
"Officially" I think the board was supposed to be 6' x 4'... But I know few people who actually played on tables that big and had fun games (not least because getting that much terrain was an issue for most I think!).
When I was younger, I used to play directly on my tabletop which was 3' x 5'. Playing "wide", weapons like lasguns and bolters were rather dominant, as were the massed flamers of the Redemptionists - the short distance meant that many shots were being fired on turn one! Playing "long" was better, although the narrow width and bigger starting distance between gangs made for a lot of moving during the first two turns and tended to favour more defensive gangs.
I found that 4' x 4' is good, as deployment can be on any two opposing table edges, and because you can get a good amount of cover whilst still being able to reach the figures. It's also a fair distance between starting gangs, and still has enough width for some manoeuvring.
In terms of cover, I found that you need at least five big terrain pieces forming a rough X that's slightly offset against the table (i.e., running 30/60 degrees to edges rather than 45 or 90 degrees between sides or corners). Arranging terrain like this helps to avoid being able to shoot your opponent in their deployment zone from yours on turn one, and helps with scenarios that have models coming in/leaving table edges during the game. Having a couple of extra bigger pieces also helps break up some further lines of fire, and plenty of scatter helps with more open areas. It's also worth counting some of the bulkhead designs as being solid for line of sight purposes (the door and X bulkheads can be as they are though).
Finally, a few thoughts on setting up a table:
- You need some longer lines of fire, and some more open areas. Without these, heavy weapons are not worth taking, and faster melee-orientated gangs can dominate. This helps with scenarios involving sentries too, as otherwise it's very one-sided in favour of the attacker. Having some open areas also assists with getting your hands in to move models around!
- You need a good amount of proper blocking terrain. This allows models to duck into and out of cover properly, and allows for manoeuvring. Blocking terrain covers things like the solid bulkheads for example, and it also blocks movement. Without enough of this, Overwatch and shooty gangs can dominate.
- You need some railings and cover on walkways, especially longer ones. Without these, they are deathtraps that people will avoid if they can - this in turn makes it very difficult to move between building above ground level. Short walkways (5"-6" or less) are okay, as you can generally cross these in one turn of movement. I like that any model shot near an open edge in Necromunda has a chance to fall, but since falling is so dangerous, I found that having a mixture of open/protected edges is both more fair and fun.
- Make sure that there are lots of walkways and some stepped levels/overhangs on buildings. This helps to provide some incentive for lesser-used actions like jumping, allows better movement around the board, and makes vertical LOS a bit more interesting (as opposed to just perching on the edge of a building and shooting downwards)
- You need varied heights of terrain (several 2-4 story buildings), and avoid having more than one or two "deep" buildings. Varied heights help break up high-level LOS, and shallower buildings makes it easier to get models in/out as well avoiding too many LOS issues.
- Make sure that there is a reasonable amount of scatter terrain around the table edges, as well as having a few buildings touch the table edge. This allows deployment by Tunnels and Vents to be worth considering!
- Consider adding areas of rough terrain and non-building type terrain. Things like sludge pools, treacherous ground, etc., all change how models move over/around them. They shouldn't be huge impediments that lock down areas of the board, but they should have some impact on models' movement. It also makes certain skills more useful, and also makes actions like jumping across at a higher level a bit more appealing in terms of risk/reward.
Ahem, I realise that this is rather a long (and tangential) answer to a simple question, but games like Necromunda *really* need some thought in terms of table/scenery if you want to have more balanced games. :P
I see a lot of cool-looking scenery made from old junk that personal experience tells me doesn't make for good gameplay (i.e., I know because I've made/played over a lot of that stuff myself for years!).
Good examples of better terrain are the original GW studio pieces which matched the style of the cardstock stuff but were more playable, a great example made by Rob Hawkins here (http://robhawkinshobby.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/necromunda-building.html), a few great buildings here (http://thenutoncave.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Necromunda), and... Infinity boards (another game that needs lots of terrain and plays with a similar number of models on a similar-sized board). Modular terrain can be okay, but with boards for this size of game I probably wouldn't bother; being able to reconfigure is more important than not.
Anyway, enough from me for now!
-
Necromunda was always meant for 4x4. You could enlarge that if you had multiple gang games (more than 2).
I also found that use of the edges of the board was very much dependent on the mission, terrain, gang types and terrain spread.
If all of the really useable terrain was in the middle of the table then I doubt you would see much action on the edges at all. That does come with it's own problems though - as a more compact game will suit some gangs more than others.
I always tried to include a couple of bigger buildings and objectives in areas that tend to be more overlooked, it made for more fun games.
In a standard gang fight - the edges are typically more useful for infiltrators (various ways of infiltrating depending upon what you have!) who can pop up on the periphery with a ranged weapon and start taking targets down.
3x3 is doable, I'd say especially so in the early stages of a campaign where gangs are typically more balanced against each other and where most characters will struggle to be decent at range anyway. Later on, it may become an issue when you have characters becoming more specialist and being closer to the enemy negates some of their skills and weaponry.
It's a close call to make but personally, 4x4 was always the most fun to play in my experience.
-
I found that the larger tables turned our games of Necromunda into drawn out affairs of maneouvering around into the best positions before the actual combat started.
Many times, snipers were king/queen, next to their Heavy counterparts during those turns. It made for pretty tense games and the fighting tended to be over pretty quickly. Games did tend to last for an entire evening though...
When The Voivod and I took up Necromunda again some time ago, we started playing on a 6x4 table, but quickly switched to a 4x4.
The smaller table tends to compact the games somewhat, getting into the thick of things even faster. But it also changes the dynamics of the game somewhat.
For instance, when playing the scenario with sentries on a 6x4 table, it paid to bring screamer grenades, silencers etc, as the sentries would be so spread out it would pay to be stealthy, whilst on a 4x4, things are so compressed that the stealth tends to go overboard in favour of immediate assaults.
Which I find a shame, as I really liked the sneaking up on the bad guys, but granted; it took an unholy long time to get into position.
I've never tried a 3x3, but I reckon things would be even faster and deadlier...
-
It varies a lot from scenario to scenario.
The shoot out scenario can be played on a very small table.
-
My group have been playing on a slightly smaller than 4' x 4' table, using the tiles from Dust tactics - these really set the table off a treat if you put the Necromunda terrain on top of them, and is a real recommendation as it makes the table look really cool. Gives you a naturally defined palying area, too. 3' x 3' ought to be fine I reckon.
I'd also strenuously avoid multi-player games on a smaller table as well. Mind you, I think Necromunda is at its best played 1-2-1 anyway (as is Mordheim, really).
-
Just dug out the old rule books. All of the scenarios say either:
It is suggested that the terrain is set up within an area 4' x 4' or thereabouts.
Or -
It is suggested that the terrain is set up within an area 4' x 4' or slightly smaller so that the gangs start off a reasonable distance apart.
I always found that the best thing for heavies was to get them into good positions of overwatch, and to designate a juve as their sidekick. It should be advised that until your gang has some decent skills and experience, don't spread them out too thinly.
-
We used to play half sized gangs (500creds) on a 3'x3' or 2'x2' with a fair bit of terrain on. Because the cost of many of the heavier weapons are prohibitive most of our players left them out. And because each gang only consisted of about six figures it became a very tactical game with the use of cover being paramount.
We used to play a couple of the scenarios on Spacehulk corridors as well which was always interesting. :)
-
We used to play half sized gangs (500creds) on a 3'x3' or 2'x2' with a fair bit of terrain on. Because the cost of many of the heavier weapons are prohibitive most of our players left them out. And because each gang only consisted of about six figures it became a very tactical game with the use of cover being paramount.
We used to play a couple of the scenarios on Spacehulk corridors as well which was always interesting. :)
Hmm, interesting... I wonder if a Juve swarm would be effective at these points-levels? :P
-
Hmm, interesting... I wonder if a Juve swarm would be effective at these points-levels? :P
More than likely. Scavvies became a very dangerous gang to play against. Especially if the player kept aside 10creds for the D6 plague zombies. ;)
-
A very useful summary Maj. Gilbear :)
I liked 6x4 but games were longer and it was hard to get that much terrain together....
-
We played on 4x3 a week or so ago. Works just fine. I'm sure 3x3 is fine too as long as you have enough terrain to break up the advances. You could also compensate a bit by having minis enter from the table edge rather than having a deployment zone.