How practical is this for moving big units around on big trays?
What do you actually use on your tabletops and is the terrain eye candy or of tactical significance?
I like to play slowly, and even place individual combatants within terrain pieces if a unit enters them. This is a modelling approach to gaming, where the game is a reason to toy with the models and terrain pieces.
I usually try to frame the board with two or three dominating terrain elements, but I place one or two of them on the sides. They act more like scenery, and tell the story why there is no significant attempt at flanking maneuvers. For example, a river on one side and a rugged, wooded hill on the other side.
In this way, there is usually just one or maybe two larger terrain pieces on the board centre. And these are then key tactical elements, and usually objectives too.
In addition to this, there are usually some fields and/or small woods, some fences and/or hedgerows, and possibly a creek with a bridge, which are present as gaming terrain that has minor influence on movement, cover and line of sight. I find the existence of these is paramount for giving the players small tactical goals and creating the story of the battle: the defence and charge around a hedgerow, the nuisance of a scout unit in a woods, hesitation to cross the creek (or the bridge), etc. etc.
Lastly, I love putting all sort of scatter terrain and even domestic/wild animals on the board, But these are cosmetic, and can be moved around to make place for the units.
In general, I like to play games where units are not WFB 8th ed horde-size. On the other hand, I find it perfectly acceptable that this size units may be awkward to maneuver. Me & friends are well-adviced to think twice if we want to bring such units. We know the terrain is not easy, and that there is bound to be a trade-off between the effective & reliable aspects of large units and the hindraces for maneuver.
Lately, I've mostly played story-oriented campaigns, or then with people who share this kind of an approach to gaming terrain & its meaning for the game. Also, I prefer games where units fight units and heroes play a minor role (or play as individual units), so that it is not paramount to see exactly how the units align, which models touch which models, and where some individual characters are within the unit and in relation to the opponent.
Competitive tournaments and any kind of all-comer games are a different beast. One reason (among many) why I avoid such is the lacklustre attitude towards terrain. Some like to play with 2d terrain. Blasphemy, I say! They could go playing with 2d units too. Suits their standard, and is easier & cheaper that way.
In my holy opinion, miniature gaming requires meaningful miniature terrain too.
-Z