Duck and Cover

ok guys, i need your opinion again, and it's back to the church/HQ design. basically, the set up is almost done, but i ran into some trouble on picking a pattern for detailing. so here it is.

they're the stone/rock halfwalls...... that's what's different.... they're only for detail, and i know i know, it's a waste of tiles and space. 8O but hey, it looks kinda nice.

C was the original and without a second wall.

oh, and i know it doesn't look all that great, but that's just because the picture is small. i didn't want to have a big picture that would take forever to load.

If yer going for the "ruined" look, I'd pick D. If not, go with A, I say. THe tiles in B look like ass, I think (not your falt, WB, just the look of the actual tile).

I voted A 'cause since it's a HQ, I doubt yer going for the "ruined" look.

I'd say B looks the best in the picture shown, though how it would look around the entire building I don't know. C looks odd without the outer wall but I think that's down to the tiles you used for the base of the building and the fact it's not in situ. A is too over powering and D, well I've never liked those tiles. Either go for B or C but break up the line with plenty of grass shoots, shrubs and whatever junk fits into the rest of the map.

at first, i was pushing for b a little. the tiles actually look a lot nicer up close. thanks for the opinions folks... :) keep em coming....

I think A combined with B. And change the floor tiles maybe.

I'd say that A is right out.

My choice would be B considering the walls are wood, since you have that piled stone look rather than the neat, symetrical bricks in A.

C is okay, but rather cliche since it's been done so many times before. It is passable for an unimportant building -- I've used it myself -- but since you're going for something special I say, "Ditch it!"

D would be a good choice if you're going for a dilapidated/ruined look, or if the base is supposedly built on the ruins of something else.

Cheers,

OTB