N18 Table set-ups?

[Stompzilla]

Greetings all.

A general enquiry as to how most people set up their tables for Necromunda.

Whilst chatting and looking at various threads and FB posts I see a lot of people recommending things like Long Rifles and making comments about being able to shoot further than 24" being important and it genuinely puzzles me.

I/we tend to play on 3ft x 3ft tables that are heavily terrained, as would befit a crowded and massively industrialised Hive City/Underhive, with plenty of large terrain pieces that block LOS, as well as lots of ZM games.

Most of the real action in our games takes place at around 12" with the occasional snipey opportunity shot as the gangs close in. I've really struggled to find much utility for the sniper rifle and most games tend to be a cagey and dynamic contest of cat and mouse, maneuvering for the advantage, diving for cover, so models can't be seen and then springing ambushes and well planned out group activations.

Are we A-typical in that regard? Do people, in your experience, or that you've seen play, set up a 40k style board and blast away at each other, in general? I'm just trying to get my head around whether or not we're missing something and things like sniper rifles are actually quite a bargain and to better judge how to treat a lot of the advice/ discussions that I see online about tactics and how effective the various load outs are.

Thanks in advance!

 

[spafe]

Our group tends to have 2 concerns, 2d games and 3d games. 2d games played on tiles or similar will be engagement ranges of 12" and be close brutal affairs, where the snipers and heavy weapons tend to play a secondary role.

The 3d games though, played on a 4x4 board, even with lots of terrain, high rise buildings and LoS blockers, will have sight lines up 24" plus easily, there will likely be parts where 40" is visible at top levels. And if you cant play easily into the heavy weapons, then a couple of snipers are a cheap effective way to project some influence across the table, stopping the other side having free reign.

Do you have any pics of your setups?

 

[Stompzilla]

Our Sector Mechanicus stuff doesn't tend to have a lot of vertical terrain, so maybe that's the difference. I'll fish out some pics later.

 

[JawRippa]

Usually shooting and snipers dominate on our tables, even when we play with inifity terrain and stack it heavily.

 

[Squee]

TBH, Infinity terrain was specifically designed with a shooting game in mind, and thus leads to a very shooting heavy gameplay. Look at all the wide straight shooting lanes that go almost through the entire table from end to end on the pictures above. Yeah sure, the walkways make it seem that the space is broken into sections, however it's really not.

 

[JawRippa]

TBH, Infinity terrain was specifically designed with a shooting game in mind, and thus leads to a very shooting heavy gameplay. Look at all the wide straight shooting lanes that go almost through the entire table from end to end on the pictures above. Yeah sure, the walkways make it seem that the space is broken into sections, however it's really not.

I honestly think that if 'more terrain' is the only answer to make some style of gameplay work, then the rules are not very good. At some point terrain starts cluttering the table and moving/measuring becomes a hassle.

 

[Oojamaflip13]

Whilst chatting and looking at various threads and FB posts I see a lot of people recommending things like Long Rifles and making comments about being able to shoot further than 24" being important and it genuinely puzzles me.

I/we tend to play on 3ft x 3ft tables that are heavily terrained, as would befit a crowded and massively industrialised Hive City/Underhive, with plenty of large terrain pieces that block LOS, as well as lots of ZM games.

Most of the real action in our games takes place at around 12" with the occasional snipey opportunity shot as the gangs close in. I've really struggled to find much utility for the sniper rifle and most games tend to be a cagey and dynamic contest of cat and mouse, maneuvering for the advantage, diving for cover, so models can't be seen and then springing ambushes and well planned out group activations.

My gaming group also often plays on tables that are very cluttered with lots of high rising terrain, so the majority of the action takes place at mid-to-close range, with the same cat and mouse dynamic that you mentioned. However, adding a couple of snipers (or just longer ranged guns) on each side adds another contest to the game, 'Sniper Duels!' Your snipers take up position higher up on the table, trying to find the perfect position to threaten anyone in their sights whilst trying to avoid the scope of their opponents. If only one gang has a sniper then, even on a very cluttered table, there's usually one open area or a long lane that they can keep watch down (aka, the killing zone), forcing their opponent to find alternate routes around the table, lest they are targeted by the sniper. Conversely, does the sniper stay keeping watch in this spot (and thus potentially not taking a shot all game), or do they move with the enemy and give up a) their sweet vantage point and b) their aim action (or even their entire shot if armed with an unwieldy gun) due to moving?

Even if you prefer close ranged firefights and melee heavy battles, snipers can still come into play because you can use the threat of their extended reach to pin your opponent in place or force them to move in directions that they would normally not, straight into your shotguns and chainswords.

Each to their own, of course, but I would recommend not discounting sniper ranged weaponry just because a table is crowded with terrain. Many a time have I moved "under the safety of cover", only to find that I've ended my move right in the one spot that a long range gun can see me because I've missed where the sniper was due to the heavy terrain.

 

[mateyboy3000]

I honestly think that if 'more terrain' is the only answer to make some style of gameplay work, then the rules are not very good. At some point terrain starts cluttering the table and moving/measuring becomes a hassle.

Not played og munda but from what I know the game has always been about the 2/3 levels above ground and the walkways between them. There is also a difference between clutter and tables that don't have 10+ cross map sniper lanes which it looks like that table does. You should have some but they shouldn't dominate board space

 

[Heart of Storm]

We play a mix of 2d and 3d, we used to use a lot of verticality but found it became a pain to move models around with (we use TT combat terrain and haven't glued it together, giving us more modularity but being that gantry can get knocked off!)

We now tend to be 1-2 floors, we make sure to not have big firing lanes but there is a place for snipers and engagements happen within the 18"-24" bracket fairly commonly

 

[JawRippa]

Not played og munda but from what I know the game has always been about the 2/3 levels above ground and the walkways between them. There is also a difference between clutter and tables that don't have 10+ cross map sniper lanes which it looks like that table does. You should have some but they shouldn't dominate board space

What I'm trying to say is if the only way to be safe from shooting is to exclude LOS completely, and regular scatter cover is not enough, then the game is too killy.

 

[almic85]

I’d love to criticise @JawRippa ’s table set up, but the reality is most of the games played at my local club end up similar or worse.

We often have larger sight lines along the edges (because we don’t put terrain touching table edges) and a couple of big firing lanes in the middle of the table. But having said that shooting doesn’t really dominate our games and I will almost always end up with my Goliath gang getting into 5 or 6 good combats in between the 3rd and 5th turns.

We also hit the issue that terrain is often made for 40k or other games with abstracted or simpler vertical movement rules so most vertical terrain needs climbing points to be agreed before hand. Usually anywhere there is a hatch in the floor we assume there is a ladder and anything that looks vaguely vertical with hand holds (like drainpipes and vents) can be climbed like ladders.

Some examples from various games of Necromunda over the past few years.

782F42E4-7D16-4124-8C93-EDC03FD5FBDB.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

9C7797F8-AE61-4DE9-9DAB-5D19D484A40E.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

5A25B222-FA36-4C28-B89E-0C80CFFE43C0.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

0F2C486D-E7F3-4F01-803F-8EAC5600E865.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

27E428D9-5222-4D92-BD7D-B496278E749D.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

E3569588-6395-4978-B375-4F47F7BCA2AB.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

7A952B7B-8184-45CC-8751-358D9C718EF1.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

E72F9CFA-065B-4928-A2E3-6C8250FEB842.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

35C83BC3-4D71-4074-9E99-151EB8B35BDA.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

8C060A2A-9481-44A9-8A45-012E8865C5B6.jpeg

• almic85
• Feb 1, 2022

 

[Mr. M]

I really love seeing how other tables are set up. Between ideas for overall boards and specific terrain pieces, it's incredibly helpful to see how others have "put it all together." Thanks for sharing!

 

[spafe]

This one could be so good, like so so good. clear that killing ground in the middle and put a building or those red containers in there to block LoS across the middle of the table and its great, lots of LoS blockers, some height, some scatter. Generally a really good mix.

Funnuily enough the 'necromunda' laser cut terrain a few tables later is really poor because it doesnt have LoS blockers to stop a heavy stubber dominating.

At least, that would be my take on them anyway

 

[Banjulhu]

More of a tactical note than anything but having the capacity in a gang to fire well over 24" is just useful for campaign play.

It wont always crop up but even in zone mortalis there will be situations where longer ranges will come into play and if you dont have the ability to reach out that far then you wont be able to exploit the situation when it does crop up.

 

[almic85]

This one could be so good, like so so good. clear that killing ground in the middle and put a building or those red containers in there to block LoS across the middle of the table and its great, lots of LoS blockers, some height, some scatter. Generally a really good mix.

Funnuily enough the 'necromunda' laser cut terrain a few tables later is really poor because it doesnt have LoS blockers to stop a heavy stubber dominating.

At least, that would be my take on them anyway

That table is actually set up for an ambush scenario which is why there is a dirty great big killing field in the middle of it with all my poor little Orlocks waiting to be gunned down by those damn sneaky Delaques (I actually fought my way out of that one!).

I agree that the Necromunda style terrain is also usually not LOS blocking enough but that table was actually pretty good at blocking LOS on the ground floor. It was a Ghast Harvest with my Orlocks up against Slave Ogryn and the Ogryn pretty much waltzed across the entire board without being hit. The trick with that board was the two sets of stairs right in the middle which effectively block all line of sight on ground floor plus all the additional horizontal walls and solid huts on the ground.

I’ve also picked up the habit of putting down the Zone Mortalis doors from the Underhive box as scatter terrain as well. They are really good scatter size LOS blockers that you can use the infill some of the open spaces in traditional Necromunda terrain.

 

[KA7777]

What I'm trying to say is if the only way to be safe from shooting is to exclude LOS completely, and regular scatter cover is not enough, then the game is too killy.

That seems like a retroactive galaxy brain rationalization to make your vision of the game baseline-tenable in the face of an overwhelming and obvious contradiction.

ie.

You: Shooting is so powerful it makes the game unplayable
Others: You're not using enough terrain
You: Uhhh... well... using terrain is bad, actually

 

[JawRippa]

That seems like a retroactive galaxy brain rationalization to make your vision of the game baseline-tenable in the face of an overwhelming and obvious contradiction.

ie.

You: Shooting is so powerful it makes the game unplayable
Others: You're not using enough terrain
You: Uhhh... well... using terrain is bad, actually

That's a wrong conclusion you are making. I'm not against people putting a lot of terrain, I'm pointing out the fact that if stacks of terrain are absolutely required to make the game playable, then the rules are too killy. In fallout wasteland for example you get additional penalty for every piece of terrain between you and the target, so in necromunda it'd be a measly partial cover, in fallout it'd be -3 because between us there is a stack of barrels, car hull and you are behind a fence. So a 'bowling planet' type of table with decent number of scatter terrain would still be playable.

 

[TopsyKretts]

Some examples from various games of Necromunda over the past few years.

That is a fantastic variety of terrain!

 

[KA7777]

That's a wrong conclusion you are making. I'm not against people putting a lot of terrain, I'm pointing out the fact that if stacks of terrain are absolutely required to make the game playable, then the rules are too killy. In fallout wasteland for example you get additional penalty for every piece of terrain between you and the target, so in necromunda it'd be a measly partial cover, in fallout it'd be -3 because between us there is a stack of barrels, car hull and you are behind a fence. So a 'bowling planet' type of table with decent number of scatter terrain would still be playable.

It sounds like you're against TLOS, not +/- terrain!

(which is good, because TLOS has always been terrible, and inferior to a system that uses silhouettes and/or default size categories)

 

[TopsyKretts]

I don't think it matters much if you use TLOS or silhouettes (replace minis with cylinders?). Light cover is still -1 in Necromunda and -3 in JawRippa's fallout example.