Should wargamers be obsessed with "landmarks" to the extent that they seem to be? (For example if Whykickamoocow Farm is mentioned in a battle you can safely bet that most wargamers will feature it in any recreation of the battle and give it an undue influence on events.) Historically, I believe, that such features were mainly used for their ability to name a point on the battlefield. In the scale of things most buildings could only house an insignificant number of men and didn't really come to much. (Yes, we can all name exceptions such as La Haye Sainte, but I'm talking in general terms. ACW gamers seem to be most obsessive.) Peter Pig's use of templates is a good way round this issue with individual scenic items being just that and placed on or moved about the table as is convenient, or suits the camera!
Derek
Specific buildings like Basing House, La Haye Sainte or Rourkes Drift were effectively sieges. The effect most other terrain had on battlefields was largely to impede progress like Bourlon Wood or Marcoing. Rules and scenery should reflect this so generic built-up areas or woods are therefore more preferable for most wargames. However, it is also important to convey the historical context of the battle and period-specific scenic items add local colour and context.
For aesthetic reasons it is easier to make the scenery match the figure scale but in doing so it is also easy to forget the difference in ground scale. The recent popularity of skirmish games where the figure scale and ground scale are approximately the same skews our perceptions too.
The use of templates to denote areas is a good work around. PP have evolved the classic felt patch beloved by old-guard wargamers into a viable alternative with visual appeal.
While I don't actually use RFCM rulesets, I still try to follow the spirit of them with what I consider to be 'best practice' with using scenery. I'm currently struggling with how best to represent a hacienda for MexRev on a limited footprint. Essentially it is a Villa complex, but the best I can achieve in the size and still look feasible is a ranch comprising farmhouse, barn and outbuildings...
If I fancy a building in a game I'll plonk it on the table. The Joy of not having to Overthink in Solo Play.
I've done that in the past and I'm a solo gamer, but I've found such indulgences tend to skew the rules somewhat. I like the stricture of sticking to a limited footprint which I find gets the creative juices going. Some basic scenic features will not be moved around the table though as in some rule sets...
I don't think I have creative juices any more so i shall continue to plonk.
Plonking can be a good strategy... particularly if you randomise the placement so it becomes an interesting objective or something you have to work around...
Neil
A great strategy for the Wars of Oz rules.
Weymouth clock tower appears in many games in the built up areas.
It does Les! It mainly crops up in my SCW games, but could fit into WW2 as well I suppose :)