Destroyed - Explodes and difficult ground/craters

[Crablezworth]

I've never liked the replacing a vehicle with a crater/difficult ground. It's too undefined and arbitrary for me. For one, what is difficult ground? Difficult terrain is something; difficult ground is not (according to the rulebook). Right off the bat there's an issue there for RAW. Obviously it's just shitty writing and they mean to say difficult terrain. At least it's reasonable to assume so.

Let's forget about difficult ground though and go with craters. My issues are many. The first being the issue of "if you have one". My problem with that is it's not fair. Free 4+ cover saves for those who happen to have craters with them. Not cool. I guess I'm a communist; everyone should have craters or no one. I often play mechanized guard, could you imagine if I had a crater packed with me for every chimera in my list. Lame.

My second problem is one of size, the GW craters are huge, and almost always far larger than the vehicle that blew up. There are better solutions out there like micro art studios vehicle wreckage which is approximately 3x5 inches just a little bit bigger than a rhino. But still, the issue is that there is no guide for size. Anyone could pack a bunch of gw craters in their bag and bring them to a tournament. Nothing you could really say, the rules say use them if you got'm and they got'm.




Another issue with putting down a crater which is larger than the vehicle that blew up is it may prevent the remnants of a squad (assuming it was a transport) from being assaulted. That or the crater may simply not fit because of other models or terrain in close proximity.

Also, consider this. Before the game you define what everything is. You decide along with your opponent what is impassable, difficult/dangerous, what will count as area terrain or ruins and of course what save will be conferred by each piece of terrain. (you may or may not decide to go with the chart on page 21). What if there were no craters beforehand and as such neither side has agree to how they’ll work, where the edge is, if it is going to count as area terrain and what save it will confer and so on. The book will offer you a rough guide, like page 21 will tell you craters probably confer a 4+ save. But what about where the terrain starts and ends, is just the hole section of the terrain going to count or is any part going to be difficult terrain?




I just want to state that I like the idea of a vehicle blowing up and leaving a big hole for infantry to hide in. I like the idea of a changing battlefield over the course of the game and cover where there was no cover before. My issue is there's no standard for size, it's rife for abuse. If gw had a bunch of pieces similar to the micro art studio wreck pile for each vehicle I'd be fine with it. Obviously they would fit because they're more or less the same size as the vehicle that just blew up. There's still the problem of being able to afford enough for every vehicle in your army, again leading to situations that aren't fair. Also, there is the issue of real line of sight to take into account. You’d pretty much have to define craters/wreckage piles as area terrain to circumvent real line of site issues.

In a friendly/casual game this is likely a non-issue assuming you discuss it beforehand. I'm focusing more on in a tournament setting. What would you do if you were facing a big mech force and your opponent had gw craters for every one of their vehicles? Great you blew up his chimera/rhino, the squad is still getting a 4+ cover save in subsequent turns. Boourns.



discuss...

[Gahris]

I have one of those micro art studios vehicle crater markers, and its not much bigger then a rhino at all. Essentially its the same size

[Crablezworth]

I think that's a good thing because it's not going to take up more space than the rhino did before it got blown up.

The downside is it pretty much has to be defined as area terrain to circumvent line of site issues (because it won't block any part of the models standing on it).

[Chimera]

I was just thinking about the tournament aspect of this the other day. Who brings craters to a tournament (I'm sure someone does)? You need to put down something, though. Those troops should have difficult terrain in which to hide. I find most people just flip the vehicle over when there isn't a crater to be had. You can call the "wreck" a piece of difficult area terrain and put your models on top. It's the easiest solution.

When placing craters I try to have it make some sense given the current setup, which usually means the majority of the crater is placed to the rear of where the vehicle was since that will affect any assaulters the least. Honestly, I've never had a problem with it. Sometimes the smallest vehicles spread flaming debris over a wide area, so it isn't really an issue.

This also gets to the heart of the issue with 40k tournaments. The game is so arbitrary it's impossible to make everything consistent. This sometimes makes winning or losing a tournament hinge on something that's completely arbitrary, so arbitrary that you need to resolve it with a random roll! It's just the nature of the game and why I prefer pick-up games to tournaments.

[Dead]

it was a pain when people would put their destroyed vehicles on their end so they were as tall as possible to block los in 4th edition

[Chimera]

it was a pain when people would put their destroyed vehicles on their end so they were as tall as possible to block los in 4th edition

Well, that's just plain douchebaggery. At least in this edition the models must be placed in the area where the exploded vehicle used to be, so they'd need to go on top of the tank if using it as a "crater".

[Tickron]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought a wrecked vehicle counts as dangerous terrain now, so it makes the need to have some sort of marker for the debris almost necessary. I do not have my rule book with me to check...

[Henshini]

Wrecks are dangerous, exploded vehicles are just difficult.

[Crablezworth]

I was just thinking about the tournament aspect of this the other day. Who brings craters to a tournament (I'm sure someone does)? You need to put down something, though. Those troops should have difficult terrain in which to hide. I find most people just flip the vehicle over when there isn't a crater to be had. You can call the "wreck" a piece of difficult area terrain and put your models on top. It's the easiest solution.

When placing craters I try to have it make some sense given the current setup, which usually means the majority of the crater is placed to the rear of where the vehicle was since that will affect any assaulters the least. Honestly, I've never had a problem with it. Sometimes the smallest vehicles spread flaming debris over a wide area, so it isn't really an issue.

This also gets to the heart of the issue with 40k tournaments. The game is so arbitrary it's impossible to make everything consistent. This sometimes makes winning or losing a tournament hinge on something that's completely arbitrary, so arbitrary that you need to resolve it with a random roll! It's just the nature of the game and why I prefer pick-up games to tournaments.

"You can call the "wreck" a piece of difficult area terrain and put your models on top. It's the easiest solution."

I guess but the but putting models on top is rife with "wobbly model syndrome" and the los issue is that you may be giving your enemies a greater ability to target the squad because they're now several inches higher. I myself prefer to just remove the model and put nothing. There may or may not be craters available but I'm a bit of an aesthetics nazi when it comes to game and terrain. I try my best to only play painted armies on finished terrain/tables. I hate putting down craters that clash (redish craters on urban table as an example).

"This also gets to the heart of the issue with 40k tournaments. The game is so arbitrary it's impossible to make everything consistent. This sometimes makes winning or losing a tournament hinge on something that's completely arbitrary, so arbitrary that you need to resolve it with a random roll! It's just the nature of the game and why I prefer pick-up games to tournaments."

I think pickup/friendly games and tournament games are both fun but for different reasons. Tournament games are little more stressful and exacting ruleswise and also have a quicked pace to them. Friendly games offer more laughs and a slower pace. I agree it's impossible to make everything consistent but I like the idea of going into a tournament and knowing how certain abstract and subjective areas of the game will be dealt with.

[Crablezworth]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought a wrecked vehicle counts as dangerous terrain now, so it makes the need to have some sort of marker for the debris almost necessary. I do not have my rule book with me to check...

That's the thing, a wreck is a lot simpler cuz all you do is put a marker or some cotton (smoke) on a vehicle. I probably play wrecks differently than most, I prefer to play them as dangerous for infantry and walkers and impassable for vehicles. Although in some larger games lke apoc we've played that you can ram a wreck out of your way with a vehicle.

With putting down a crater or an area of wreckage, the downside is if you haven't discussed what it counts as pre game it ends up being totally decorative. You'll still have people insisting the rulebook on pg21 tells you it gives you a 4+ cover save because it lists suggested cover saves for various piecse of terrain. The problem with that is terrain isn't anything until you and your opponent define it pre game and if you haven't discussed how craters work (cover save, if it's area terrain or not ect..) it's not really anything.