http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f348/jkmvalgaav2/4x4Tau.png
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f348/jkmvalgaav2/4x4Crash.png
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f348/jkmvalgaav2/6x4DesertPass.png
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f348/jkmvalgaav2/6x4OpenField.png
All in all, I think my biggest problem is OVERdoing cover. What do you think?
- Anne"
This one looks fine but the middle terrain is perhaps too big as well as the forest in the top right. You don't want the centre terrain allowing a whole army to hide behind it!
This is a bit better IMO but there's no terrain between the big pieces so I'd look to downsize them a little bit and put more barrels/crates/etc in the open empty spaces. I know this is hard with Vassal but you've got the basic layout, I just feel there's too much 'open space' due to huge terrain pieces.
No Road, unless it's there for looks only. Roads/rivers add advantages to some armies which makes it unbalanced so not needed. I think here the terrain is weighted too much to the right and not enough in the centre. There's a better mix of large and small terrain pieces with less open ground but a lack of balance across the halves.
Same deal with Rivers as with Roads - some armies have an advantage, others don't. I think this is the worst of the lot, no offense. The spread of terrain isn't very good. You've got cover on the board edges but nothing in the middle and no LoS Blockers. This gives shooting armies a huge advantage as an aggressive opponent has to go a long way round to get to them whilst in cover or drive right out in the open.
All in all I think you've got a decent grasp on the amount of terrain, it's just placement. When you put down the deployment zones, you want each DZ to have roughly the same amount of terrain in it and you don't want just big pieces but a combination of big pieces and smaller pieces between them. Hope this helps.
