Scatter Terrain?

[Wraith01]

I have plenty of ruins and buildings to play on a nice table but I feel I need some smaller stuff to throw around, stuff like barrels and boxes...

What do you guys use and where do you buy it from?

[Greyshadow]

I was thinking about this the other day. I think scatter terrain looks fantastic but I have found it a bit fiddly. Takes awhile to set up and pack away and can be a little tricky to transport and store. I have found that gluing your scatter terrain on to the bases of larger terrain pieces is more practical. Tabletop World sells some great scatter terrain such as carts, crates, barells, etc that I have used for this. I would next like to experiment with some natural type scatter, fallen trees, cork bark rocks to see if that works too.

[Lucio]

Personally I like the new Azyrite Ruins for scatter terrain. The old world walls / fences aren't too bad either.

Agree that basing them in a set formation helps, and for some times of scatter terrain (rocks, tall plants etc.) it gives a defined area for cover and any other rules

[Menkeroth]

https://ultraterrain.ru/products/category/7745

[Wraith01]

8 hours ago, Lucio said:

Personally I like the new Azyrite Ruins for scatter terrain. The old world walls / fences aren't too bad either.

Agree that basing them in a set formation helps, and for some times of scatter terrain (rocks, tall plants etc.) it gives a defined area for cover and any other rules

I ordered the Blaster Hallowheart (which includes the Azyrite Ruins) and I already own the Realm Gates, Wyldewoods, Sigmarite Mausoleum  and Ruins of Osgiliath. I consider those Scenery or big Terrain not Scatter Terrain; which would be smaller stuff to create areas of clutter, like stacks of Boxes or Barrels, Rubble... 

[BunkhouseBuster]

Scatter terrain...  now that's a phrase that I've not heard in a long time.  Like, in

At the wife's instructions, I'm now planning on grabbing up some of those Azyrite Ruins  as my next purchase, and getting more scenery collected and painted up is one of my next hobby goals.  I have a bunch of partially built ruins that I need to finish up, but I haven't put any thought into scatter terrain.  My ideas and plans have been focused on larger LOS blocking pieces or objective markers, but some good scatter terrain would be nice.

I think those new sets of Azyrite Ruins would be pretty good scatter terrain. 

[RuneBrush]

Depends entirely on what you're after.  Mine is mostly composed of the walls and fences from a Garden of Morr/Mausoleum and the old Fortified Manor.  It's pretty easy to knock some out of things like coffee stirrers and such like - just pop them onto an appropriate base and jobs a good one.  @Greyshadow is right in suggesting Tabletop World - some gorgeous bits in their range!  He's also right in saying that scatter terrain can be really fiddly and too much of it will impede on the speed of your game (though it's amazing for Skirmish), it can also hamper moving large units or large models, effectively blocking off huge areas of the board.

[Wraith01]

5 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

Depends entirely on what you're after.  Mine is mostly composed of the walls and fences from a Garden of Morr/Mausoleum and the old Fortified Manor.  It's pretty easy to knock some out of things like coffee stirrers and such like - just pop them onto an appropriate base and jobs a good one.  @Greyshadow is right in suggesting Tabletop World - some gorgeous bits in their range!  He's also right in saying that scatter terrain can be really fiddly and too much of it will impede on the speed of your game (though it's amazing for Skirmish), it can also hamper moving large units or large models, effectively blocking off huge areas of the board.

I just want the table to look more immersive. The amount of terrain and stuff would depend on the scenario and battle mat, maybe even  keep most of it on the fringe.  One of my main armies is Khorne and they need cover, specially when I play against shooty armies. 

[RuneBrush]

18 minutes ago, Wraith01 said:

I just want the table to look more immersive. The amount of terrain and stuff would depend on the scenario and battle mat, maybe even  keep most of it on the fringe.  One of my main armies is Khorne and they need cover, specially when I play against shooty armies. 

That makes sense, having some decent line of sight blocking terrain is pretty key for Khorne (or any melee focused army).  I'd probably be looking at things like the new Ruins, possibly "blocking up" some of the doorways and windows so that your larger than average models stand a chance of being hidden by it

[MacDuff]

Don't the new rules for these ruins say that if you're within 1" you get cover, and LOS thru doorways & windows doesn't matter?

[stato]

1 hour ago, MacDuff said:

Don't the new rules for these ruins say that if you're within 1" you get cover, and LOS thru doorways & windows doesn't matter?

Cover is just +1 save, no LoS means not getting shot at all.

I do like odd bits of LoS blocking but having a lot, especially if its scatter terrain and you have enough you can skip heros across the entire board without getting shot, does reduce the tactical element required for some armies slightly.

[Wailslake]

I use lichen as scatter terrain to add vegetation to the plain bits of the battlefield. is easy to shift out of the way and can be used to tie in the "main" pieces of terrain as well.

I use certain colours depending on which realm I am playing in; pale (biege, yellowed) pieces for Shyish and darker, richer colours for Ghyran.

[Jamopower]

Individual trees here and there look very nice on the battlefield, along with the mentioned barrels, carts, crates, walls and fences. Bushes and scrubbery are also nice and fields (the ikea door rugs are the go to choice). Batches of tall grass made from teddy bear fur would also work nicely. Also individual large rocks look nice and small ruin pieces. Fallen trees make also nice terrain.

 

Combining factor in these is that often they don't have a big impact on the game play, but they make the battlefield a lot more immersive and visually pleasing. Also as they have little impact on the game play, they are easy to set aside if they would hinder the moving of models when a combat erupts around a bunch of barrels. Small individual thematic pieces like statues or wells are also the only pieces I like to use the mystical terrain rules. It's easier to remember and adds a bit of game play aspects on them.

[Aegisgrimm]

That's what I like to do, too.  Add some small, largely inconsequential bits like model-sized boulders or statues or small individual trees, which neither block LoS or movement, and if they impede the placement of models in a unit, you just move them over a bit.  A lot like the individually-based trees inside of forest area-terrain bases.  Or the cool  little beast skeleton terrain bit that comes with the Stonehorn/Thundertusk.

Much like the wood piles and barrels in this picture.  They don't need to be there, but is helps stop a tabletop from looking so bland.  Although it can be a grey area, because if they end up large enough (usually for me its solid objects at least waist-high), they can be given quick rules to impede line of sight, especially in skirmish-scale games, where individual models are going to interact with them.

In an army scale games, though, I don't care if one Orruk in a mob of 20 could be in cover behind a lone boulder.  They are then just for visual spice.

[Redmanphill]

I use a lot of small to medium sized terrain. It breaks up the battlefield, restricting movement and offering cover. 

This is based on a CD, so it’s fairly small. I’ve about four of these that I can scatter amongst other terrain on the battlefield. It works well for our games.

 

http://subjecttostupidity.blogspot.de/2011/05/warhammer-terrain-on-cheap.html

[Kramer]

On 3/13/2018 at 10:16 AM, stato said:

does reduce the tactical element required for some armies slightly.

That's cool. I read you post and was with you until this point. The fact that you can jump from cover to cover increases the tactical element in my view. 

I.g. in the first couple of games we didn't have a lot of line of sight and deployment for shooting was not much more than checking range. Now we play with 6 pieces of LOS blocking minimum. And it really increases tactical side of the deployment and movement, in my opinion. 

[stato]

20 minutes ago, Kramer said:

That's cool. I read you post and was with you until this point. The fact that you can jump from cover to cover increases the tactical element in my view. 

I.g. in the first couple of games we didn't have a lot of line of sight and deployment for shooting was not much more than checking range. Now we play with 6 pieces of LOS blocking minimum. And it really increases tactical side of the deployment and movement, in my opinion. 

By 'increases tactical element' though you mean makes it easier for combat armies to keep buffing characters alive by making it almost impossible for shooting armies to take them off.  I totally approve of having some LoS blocking terrain, but what i was meaning with my comment you quoted was having so much that buffing characters can move about without having to think about being shot or keeping out of range, as it unbalances the game.  Shooting units should be able to shoot at their max range, its what you are paying for, not all the time i agree but certainly they should have the opportunity. I know some armies dont have a counter to shooting which makes it hard, but many dont have a counter to magic which can be even more devistating with the amount of mortal wounds getting kicked out and no LoS needed in many cases.

[Kramer]

36 minutes ago, stato said:

By 'increases tactical element' though you mean makes it easier for combat armies to keep buffing characters alive by making it almost impossible for shooting armies to take them off.  I totally approve of having some LoS blocking terrain, but what i was meaning with my comment you quoted was having so much that buffing characters can move about without having to think about being shot or keeping out of range, as it unbalances the game.  Shooting units should be able to shoot at their max range, its what you are paying for, not all the time i agree but certainly they should have the opportunity. I know some armies dont have a counter to shooting which makes it hard, but many dont have a counter to magic which can be even more devistating with the amount of mortal wounds getting kicked out and no LoS needed in many cases.

Well that's what I meant by interesting. What you are describing is not what happens in our group. Because our LOS terrain usually also blocks movement, it also impacts the movement of those melee centred armies. Since we updated our terrain, the players winning has evened out I feel. 
But you are right if it's so much terrain you don't have to think about being shot... yeah, that's definitively unbalancing  

[MrCharisma]

A quick eBay search will highlight a bunch of great scatter terrain pieces. That’s usually where I get mine from.