Ok so I was wondering if I could gain some input on a couple of ideas I had for fixing terminators.

Fix 1: Terminators gain the ability to reroll all failed saves the (game) turn they deepstrike or assault an enemy unit.

Fix 2: Terminators become T5 and gain a 5+FNP.

Fix 3: Terminators gain Hammer of Wrath and the ability to ignore the unwieldy rule.

Fix 4 ???

Add in what you think would work, and critique what I've got up here.

Reroll armor saves?

I rather like the idea of giving them T5, and FNP would be interesting. Now, Iron Hands termies with 2+/5++/4+FNP at T5 would be, um, interesting to kill. Ever fought Wraiths in a Canoptek Harvest formation so they have Reanimation Protocols? Yeah, almost like that.

On the other hand, terminators that aren't scared of meltaguns sound like an interesting proposition - make their save hard enough to get through that the best option is to line up a pile of Guardsmen, cast Prescience, then FRFSRF? Now that might make volume of fire interesting again.

They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
Ok so I was wondering if I could gain some input on a couple of ideas I had for fixing terminators.

Fix 1: Terminators gain the ability to reroll all failed saves the (game) turn they deepstrike or assault an enemy unit.

Fix 2: Terminators become T5 and gain a 5+FNP.

Fix 3: Terminators gain Hammer of Wrath and the ability to ignore the unwieldy rule.

Fix 4 ???

Add in what you think would work, and critique what I've got up here.

All no.

Reserves is about the risk management. if you are removing a big chunk of the risk what the point.
no T5 i dont need a new form of Bike chaptermasters immune to sub 9 ID
HoW maybe. ignore unwieldy? no. there would be no point in any other power weapon options they ever get
fix 4??? Nerf everythign else instead of buffing the weak.

Eh HOW I can see, maybeeee with a huge grain of salt T5.
What I really think termies could use is to be dropped by 10 or 15 points and gives power swords standard with options for fists and hammers. That way they can be cheaper with more options ( and sword termies look cool to boot)

 Gavik Dross wrote:
Eh HOW I can see, maybeeee with a huge grain of salt T5.
What I really think termies could use is to be dropped by 10 or 15 points and gives power swords standard with options for fists and hammers.

You think Terminators should be 20 points with Power Swords? Seriously? No, really?

Or 25, basically honor guard with crappy invul and DS, we might certainly see them on the table then at least.
Sure it's not perfect points cost but around that area would work.

DoomShakaLaka wrote:Ok so I was wondering if I could gain some input on a couple of ideas I had for fixing terminators.

Fix 1: Terminators gain the ability to reroll all failed saves the (game) turn they deepstrike or assault an enemy unit.

Fix 2: Terminators become T5 and gain a 5+FNP.

Fix 3: Terminators gain Hammer of Wrath and the ability to ignore the unwieldy rule.

Fix 4 ???

Add in what you think would work, and critique what I've got up here.

1: it's pretty fiddly and gimmicky.

2: With this it is very difficult to defeat FNP. I think that this is not what a game is. Normally against FNP you would have to decide if it is worth moving strength eight weapons into position and risking them, and you have to have the skill to move them there. With toughness five and FNP that just isn't a game anymore. Also, you have to decide whether you want multi-wound characters become immune to most ID. I don't care for that.

3: Usage of assault terminators doesn't really go up or down, usage of regular terminators doesn't go up or down because assault terminators are still better, chaos terminators don't go up or down, wolf guard, death wing knights, etcetera. They are still hard to move and don't shoot well. Ignores unwieldy across the board is too much and too little. Maybe if it were just on powerfists, or it only made them initiative 2. I really think it should be powerfists only, and that TDA powerfists should then go up in points by ten points.

I got a little mad at the dumb posts chipping in their (old) ideas until I noticed your last line.

What I have to add is that most of the problem is bad shooting from any of the TDA armies. All the shooting they do, no matter what gun they have, has to get better. Not more heavy weapons, not different weapons, any weapon you have on a terminator should shoot better than it does on a different unit.

The other thing is that you should add FNP to many more units than just TDA, because that way TDA will get tougher but people will still be prepared to shoot it, and there is also s8 that doesn't have ap2 (battle cannons, krak missiles, and rokkits) so many people will spam those instead of plasma and they'll beat FNP but still get an armor save on 2+.

I think at the end of the shooting phase, all TDA units get to fire snap shots. TDA snap shots have bs user - 1 instead of bs1, including overwatch and anti-air. They all get FNP. TDA uses power fists at initiative 2 instead of 1, and normal terminator squads go up to 50 ppm; assault terminators still start at 35.

The extra snap shots and FNP goes for all marines too. Power armor gets pierced by autocannons, heavy bolters, plasma missiles, and missile pods to compensate. Sisters same except for FNP. That way people stop spamming so much AP2 for marine killing.

jade_angel wrote:On the other hand, terminators that aren't scared of meltaguns sound like an interesting proposition - make their save hard enough to get through that the best option is to line up a pile of Guardsmen, cast Prescience, then FRFSRF? Now that might make volume of fire interesting again.

Many people think that they are already weak against massed attacks.

I think that its best just to focus them into cc oriented models instead of making them better in an area where they currently suck.

You know build on their strengths no their weaknesses. How about this:
Terminators may reroll their armor save and built in 5+ invulnerable save and they gain a 5+ FNP. Note that storm shields do not benefit from this.
Plasma, melta, thunderhammers etc. still have a good chance of killing them, but they become much more resistant to massed fire.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

This fix makes them very tough and stand up better to their price cost. Also would like to add in that the 5+ FNP will replace any FNP the model already has. I.E. It won’t be stackable.
This still gives an advantage to taking stormshields… just not a huge one as it changes from a 54.7% chance to make a save compared to 66.6%

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

They're still awful. You're paying for a 35 pt stormbolter.

"Many people think that they are already weak against massed attacks. "

Because they are.

No matter what you do, though, they will probably be crap because their shooting attack sucks out loud and assault is irrelevant in Dakkahammer 7th ed.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

Is that directed at me? No I don't want them to be gods... I just want themto be a tough cc oriented infantry units that's worth its points.

No matter what you do, though, they will probably be crap because their shooting attack sucks out loud and assault is irrelevant in Dakkahammer 7th ed.

I'm not sure I agree.

DoomShakaLaka wrote:I think that its best just to focus them into cc oriented models instead of making them better in an area where they currently suck.

You know build on their strengths no their weaknesses. How about this:
Terminators may reroll their armor save and built in 5+ invulnerable save and they gain a 5+ FNP. Note that storm shields do not benefit from this.
Plasma, melta, thunderhammers etc. still have a good chance of killing them, but they become much more resistant to massed fire.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

This fix makes them very tough and stand up better to their price cost. Also would like to add in that the 5+ FNP will replace any FNP the model already has. I.E. It won’t be stackable.
This still gives an advantage to taking stormshields… just not a huge one as it changes from a 54.7% chance to make a save compared to 66.6%

I think you should take another look at shooting. They have the basics to be pretty good: they are relentless and can get perfect DS if it ever became worth it to buy teleport homers.

Terminators as it is are capable of doing things once they reach cc. I think I'll let Martel cover the usefulness of "better" cc. What are they going to do, spend 250 points on a dumb oversized rhino and flatten a single squad that I feed them? I think I'll be fine.


The ways to be a super powered unit are to be really good at shooting, or really good at being fast and killing things in cc. Terminators are never going to be really good at being fast. I have to think of it as the only thing assault terminators will be good for is being a counter unit for tarpitting normal shooting terminators.


I think the re-rolls isn't really a rule that you should put on any unit, no matter what description.

Jump pack infantry is a really nice rule. If you have it, you can do way different things than you could with just normal infantry.

Precision shots is a really nice rule. Getting precision shots allows you to do something you can't do otherwise.

Fleshbane / special issue ammo is really nice. You can wound wraith lords, and easily. It's a nice rule.

Rerolling saves doesn't let you do anything you wouldn't do otherwise. I can already roll armor saves, you don't need to give me a special rule to roll an armor save.

Fortune is totally different. The eldar player has to use a farseer, get the farseer in position, cast the spell, the opponent can deny the spell, the opponent can kill the farseer. It's a whole thing that you can interact with. It is almost the opposite thing as writing a special rule to reroll armor saves.


As for feel no pain, there is only one reason to give a model any rule, and terminators don't have it for FNP. If you looked at the model and it didn't have rules, you'd say since it has really heavy armor, it should have a really good armor save, not a 5+, but a 2+ save. You'd say since it is really heavy and motorized, that it should be a stable firing platform and have relentless. You'd say since it has a big motorized claw, that it should have a really strong grip, like strength 8. There is nothing about terminator armor that looks like he has an extra suprarenal gland secreting extra adrenaline and epinephrine to stop shock. It just doesn't have any reason to take that rule.

If you want to make FNP a faction-wide trait, that is a different story and I'm happy for it.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I really wish the were gods. You want to see the interesting thing about gods? Scatterbikes are "gods," but think about them being t4 3+ units that are terrible in cc. Gods can be all kinds of things. I think a unit that I described in my last post is a god unit, but it still moves 6" a turn, has one heavy weapon, and can't get a transport for less than 200 points.

Martel732 wrote:

"Many people think that they are already weak against massed attacks. "

Because they are.

No matter what you do, though, they will probably be crap because their shooting attack sucks out loud and assault is irrelevant in Dakkahammer 7th ed.

word.

You don't agree, Doom? People think assault terminators are dumb. They are literally a pile of points that can overspend to kill two units a game with their hammers. It's not like they can be fixed by getting bigger hammers.

Give them all assault cannons. Dump the storm bolters. Make them 45 pts. They are fair compared to scat bikes. Done. They need bigger guns, not more gimmicks.

No more FNP. Just stop it. Everyone is getting FNP and it's gone from something cool to who gives a feth.

Let's go back to Rogue Trader/2nd edition for these guys since all the other factions are benefitting from it. Eldar come to mind.

Terminators

Terminator...WS5 BS5 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 LD9 SV2+
Sergeant......WS5 BS5 S4 T4 W2 I4 A3 LD10 SV2+ (This follows from Rogue Trader, and in the same way as Eldar Exarchs which also had 2W in Rogue Trader and do so today)

Terminator Armor: Terminator armor grants a model a 2+ armor save. It also grants a 5+ invulnerable save. It also incorporates a Sealed suit, which makes this model immune to any weapon with "rad" in its name or incorporating a special rule that includes "rad" in its name. Finally, shooting attacks from a model in Terminator armor force a -1 Cover save to any unit it targets.


Terminators have this:

Terminator Storm Bolter
Range 24" / Str4 AP5 / Assault 2 / Following Fire

Following Fire: Count all successful to-wound rolls this model makes, regardless of whether they are saved. This model may then make an additional shooting attack against the unit it just shot at, or a unit within 4". If there are multiple models with a weapon with this special rule in this unit, all models must choose the same unit to make their additional shooting attack.


For every 5 models, a model may replace its Terminator Storm Bolter with one of the following:

Heavy Flamer.......5 points
Assault Cannon....15 points


All other options stay the same. Cost stays at 35 ppm.

Edit: Couldn't speak my mind without breaking rule #1, ignore this.

Martel732 wrote:
Give them all assault cannons. Dump the storm bolters. Make them 45 pts. They are fair compared to scat bikes. Done. They need bigger guns, not more gimmicks.

Either that or change stormbolters profile to be S5 ap3 Assault 4.

Its like Heavy Bolters but better-er!

Just fix their cost and access to heavy Weapons. Easiest way to do it. They suffered most from being unfocused and spending multiple editions watching everything around them get cheaper.

30pts for TA with PW and SB
35pts for TA with PF and SB or Dual Lighting Claws
40pts for TA with LH/SH

2 Heavy Weapons for five models, reduce Heavy weapons costs by 5pts and give flakk missiles to the CML.

Fought a guy today who tried with partial success to convince me that Assault Terminators in the 7e space marine codex could assault from deepstrike and could roll their 3+ invuln save on top of their 2+ armour save. I laughed in his face and he got mad when I asked to see the rulebook.

Ass Terminators are supposed to be the shockiest, troopiest shocktroopers. Give them turn 1 deepstrike or less scatter or something nice for winning assaults

Vanilla terminators are supposed to be actually good at something. They aren't.

Over all other issues, Terminators need bigger stats and to cost more points. It feels better on table to have 3 terminators with bigger stats that don't die to smallarms fire as easily than it does to have 5 for the same cost and smaller stats. Even BS5 WS5 S5 T5 is a huge improvement, and you will feel it in playtesting.

Keep everything as is and add another wound. Personally, through I don't have any problems with terminators as is and I am happy they went down in points.

I don't know why they don't just give Terminators a 4+ invulnerable save. In 2nd they pretty much had a 2+/3++ save and were absolute beasts (they were also far more expensive points-wise, you'd be lucky to fit five into most games).

 Zagman wrote:
Just fix their cost and access to heavy Weapons. Easiest way to do it. They suffered most from being unfocused and spending multiple editions watching everything around them get cheaper.

30pts for TA with PW and SB
35pts for TA with PF and SB or Dual Lighting Claws
40pts for TA with LH/SH

2 Heavy Weapons for five models, reduce Heavy weapons costs by 5pts and give flakk missiles to the CML.

Still crap. I'm not paying 30 pts for a storm bolter. Ever. Two heavy weapons per squad does not meet the new standard of dakka in 7th ed. Especially with all the AP 2 running around.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quintinus wrote:
No more FNP. Just stop it. Everyone is getting FNP and it's gone from something cool to who gives a feth.

Let's go back to Rogue Trader/2nd edition for these guys since all the other factions are benefitting from it. Eldar come to mind.

Terminators

Terminator...WS5 BS5 S4 T4 W1 I4 A2 LD9 SV2+
Sergeant......WS5 BS5 S4 T4 W2 I4 A3 LD10 SV2+ (This follows from Rogue Trader, and in the same way as Eldar Exarchs which also had 2W in Rogue Trader and do so today)

Terminator Armor: Terminator armor grants a model a 2+ armor save. It also grants a 5+ invulnerable save. It also incorporates a Sealed suit, which makes this model immune to any weapon with "rad" in its name or incorporating a special rule that includes "rad" in its name. Finally, shooting attacks from a model in Terminator armor force a -1 Cover save to any unit it targets.


Terminators have this:

Terminator Storm Bolter
Range 24" / Str4 AP5 / Assault 2 / Following Fire

Following Fire: Count all successful to-wound rolls this model makes, regardless of whether they are saved. This model may then make an additional shooting attack against the unit it just shot at, or a unit within 4". If there are multiple models with a weapon with this special rule in this unit, all models must choose the same unit to make their additional shooting attack.


For every 5 models, a model may replace its Terminator Storm Bolter with one of the following:

Heavy Flamer.......5 points
Assault Cannon....15 points


All other options stay the same. Cost stays at 35 ppm.

Still S4 crap shooting. Useless.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marik Law wrote:
I don't know why they don't just give Terminators a 4+ invulnerable save. In 2nd they pretty much had a 2+/3++ save and were absolute beasts (they were also far more expensive points-wise, you'd be lucky to fit five into most games).

Because they would still suck.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Come on people. The new reality is scatbikes, decurions, D-scythes and skyhammer grav dev squads. The only hope terminators have is to be able to kill back at range. All assault cannons, all the time. Feth storm bolters; they have always sucked.

Martel732 wrote:


Still S4 crap shooting. Useless.

So 2 BS5 Assault cannons for a total squad cost of 215 points is bad now?

If anything, I'd only add an addendum to Terminators with the following:

Terminator armor grants a model a 2+ armor save and a 5+ invulnerable save.It has a Sealed suit, which makes this model immune to any weapon with "rad" in its name or incorporating a special rule that includes "rad" in its name. A unit comprised entirely of Terminators only scatters D3" when it Deep Strikes. Any shooting attack from Terminators incurs a -1 Cover Save modifier.

Essentially this makes them a very accurate Beta Strike unit. On drop they scatter D3", then have 2 BS5 Assault cannons and 3 BS5 Storm Bolters with Following Fire. You'll also notice that nowhere in the Terminator armor description are they disallowed from Sweeping Advance.

Come on people. The new reality is scatbikes, decurions, D-scythes and skyhammer grav dev squads. The only hope terminators have is to be able to kill back at range. All assault cannons, all the time. Feth storm bolters; they have always sucked.

With my above suggestion, most of your fears are removed. Terminators in my mind have always deep struck. They are "tactical" dreadnoughts first and foremost!

With all of the above (excepting D-scythes that use Webway portal), Terminators come in after these units and get the first hit against them. That's what helps make Terminators keep staying power.

Let's say they fight 215 points (2 Assault Cannons, 3 Storm Bolters) in all of the above units - who's going to win?

Versus T4: 6.66 wounds dealt
5.555 (let's say 1 Rending and 4 normal wounds)

Then 3 Stormbolters: 2.5 stormbolter wounds first hit, with following fire granting an additional wound for a total of 3.5 wounds dealt by these "pathetic" STr4 weapons.

Total of 7.5 saveable, 1 unsaveable. Against Scatterbikes or Grav Cannon devastators, that's 3 down in the opening salvo. Decurion Necrons are extremely resilient to shooting so you'll want to engage them in close combat. With 11 WS5 S8 powerfist attacks, not only are you ignoring armor but you're reducing their Reanimation roll by 1.

Oh and let's not forget: this is -all- without any sort of Chapter tactics taking effect.

Let's not forget that the Sergeant has 2 wounds, making the squad more resilient with an effectual 6 wounds. At 175 points base, that's pretty good. Terminators are not overpowered but definitely give some of the best units in the game a decent run for their money.

"So 2 BS5 Assault cannons for a total squad cost of 215 points is bad now? "

Yes, because the 24" range puts you in counter-fire range of all kinds of horribleness in this game. The scatterlaser laughs at you from 36" out. And your other three terminator dudes are useless as ever.

"You'll also notice that nowhere in the Terminator armor description are they disallowed from Sweeping Advance. "

So they can sweep in that assault that never happens. Got it.

"With my above suggestion, most of your fears are removed"

No, not really.

"Terminators in my mind have always deep struck"

Why? Deep striking sucks. Of course, foot slogging also sucks, as does riding in a Land Raider. The mobility problem is part of the suck equation for terminators.

"Terminators come in after these units and get the first hit against them"

Not necessarily. That's a horrible assumption as an actual game unfolds.

"dealt by these "pathetic" STr4 weapons. "

And I still say S4 weapons are pitiful. There's too many units that just don't give a feth.

Martel732 wrote:
"So 2 BS5 Assault cannons for a total squad cost of 215 points is bad now? "

Yes, because the 24" range puts you in counter-fire range of all kinds of horribleness in this game. The scatterlaser laughs at you from 36" out. And your other three terminator dudes are useless as ever.

D Scythes put you in counter-fire range of all kinds of horribleness in this game. Gauss guns put you in counter fire range. The other three Terminators cause multiple additional wounds. You seem to be asking for a unit that's impossible to kill which I won't create. Instead, I've created a unit that most Marine players would potentially consider taking.

"You'll also notice that nowhere in the Terminator armor description are they disallowed from Sweeping Advance. "

So they can sweep in that assault that never happens. Got it.

Yes I forgot, assaults never happen in this game anymore, ever. Thanks for letting me know.

"With my above suggestion, most of your fears are removed"

No, not really.

"Terminators in my mind have always deep struck"

Why? Deep striking sucks. Of course, foot slogging also sucks, as does riding in a Land Raider. The mobility problem is part of the suck equation for terminators.

Holy crap dude. So for you, Webway portal D-Scythes suck because they Deep Strike. Drop Pods suck because they Deep Strike (thus completely rendering your argument about Skyhammer moot). Can you at least try to maintain some semblance of an argument without defeating your own points?

"Terminators come in after these units and get the first hit against them"

Not necessarily. That's a horrible assumption as an actual game unfolds.

Expand on this point. How is it a horrible assumption other than how my suggested Terminators deep strike D3". And apparently, Skyhammer also doesn't get the first hit in, because "it's a horrible assumption". You keep arguing against your own points.

"dealt by these "pathetic" STr4 weapons. "

And I still say S4 weapons are pitiful. There's too many units that just don't give a feth.

Neat, clearly Shuriken weapons are useless because they're Str4. Gauss weapons are useless because they are Str4. Old D-scythes, nobody ever took them because they were Str4.
The Terminators I have suggested give weight of fire and BS5, which makes Str4 worth it.

"D Scythes put you in counter-fire range of all kinds of horribleness in this game. Gauss guns put you in counter fire range."

D scythes accomplish something though. Assault cannons and storm bolters? Don't make me piss in my power armor with laughter. Necrons don't care about the counter fire. They are giving up far fewer points per cleared wound than terminators. Their durability/pt is so much higher its disgusting. So that's a false equivalency.

"Can you at least try to maintain some semblance of an argument without defeating your own points? "

Unassisted deep strike was what I was referrring to. Deep strike and shoot leaves you in "Please rape me" formation. With your terminators, it's deep strike in, shoot some guns no one cares about and then get raped by real weapons. Against these guys, even plasma cannons are good. That's amusing right there.

" You seem to be asking for a unit that's impossible to kill which I won't create. Instead, I've created a unit that most Marine players would potentially consider taking. "

Now who's not reading. Everything dies in this game now except for a few select units with the right stats for true durability. Terminators are one wound and T4, so they will never have durability in this game at this point. So you have to fix their offense. Which your changes don't do, in my opinion. It's really moot because the GW terminators are still awful and no one is going to play with homebrew terminators.

"The Terminators I have suggested give weight of fire and BS5, which makes Str4 worth it."

No pseudo rending and no gauss rule makes them still gak. Ask the DA how huge amounts of S4 dakka worked out in their 6th ed codex. S4 with no special rules is terrible firepower in 7th ed.

"Skyhammer also doesn't get the first hit in"

Sky hammer picks its turn and can engage a much greater range of opponents than a couple of lame ass assault cannons and a bunch of useless stormbolters. I've been playing since they put reserves in and I've seen them backfire so many times. That's why drop pods are so hot; they short circuit that problem with drop pod assault.

"Yes I forgot, assaults never happen in this game anymore, ever. Thanks for letting me know"

They often come after 80% of the Astartes have been blown apart by shooting, making them a moot point. Only the Skyhammer cheese force changes this. But is it necessary to even make assault a thing? That's the question. GW has really painted itself into a corner.

You're kind of straw manning quint. He would most likely admit that many of those are exceptions to his stance, except that putting in each exception would be incredibly time consuming. For example, anything that has no-scatter and anti-mishap functions along with good firepower bucks the trend of deep striking sucking.

And melee really doesn't happen anymore. At wgc, I was involved in melee like 3 times in the whole tournament. Most of that was necron wraiths, one of the few melee units to be so utterly broken-good that it actually steps into awesome territory despite being a melee unit.
With a few exceptions, shoothammer 40k is as strong as ever.

And str 4 is pitiful. Maybe not in lgs funsies games. But in top tables you'll only find str 4 shots in someone's list of they were forced to take them like the Warriors in a decurion. Again, there's an exception. My battle company build relied on overwhelming with obsec units and didn't care that str 4 sucks, I just wanted more bodies and units. With an army full of bolt shots and doctrines to reroll hits, I regularly killed less than 10 models in entire games. I only killed 3 in game 1.

Martel732 wrote:
"Can you at least try to maintain some semblance of an argument without defeating your own points? "

Unassisted deep strike was what I was referrring to. Deep strike and shoot leaves you in "Please rape me" formation. With your terminators, it's deep strike in, shoot some guns no one cares about and then get raped by real weapons.

" You seem to be asking for a unit that's impossible to kill which I won't create. Instead, I've created a unit that most Marine players would potentially consider taking. "

Now who's not reading. Everything dies in this game now except for a few select units with the right stats for true durability. Terminators are one wound and T4, so they will never have durability in this game at this point. So you have to fix their offense. Which your changes don't do, in my opinion. It's really moot because the GW terminators are still awful and no one is going to play with homebrew terminators.

"The Terminators I have suggested give weight of fire and BS5, which makes Str4 worth it."

No pseudo rending and no gauss rule makes them still gak. Ask the DA how huge amounts of S4 dakka worked out in their 6th ed codex. S4 with no special rules is terrible firepower in 7th ed.

"Skyhammer also doesn't get the first hit in"

Sky hammer picks its turn and can engage a much greater range of opponents than a couple of lame ass assault cannons and a bunch of useless stormbolters. I've been playing since they put reserves in and I've seen them backfire so many times. That's why drop pods are so hot; they short circuit that problem with drop pod assault.

D3 Deep Strike is about as close to unassisted as you can get, while still requiring some sort of risk management. And obviously nobody does homebrew, this is a thought exercise. feth, the name of the forum is PROPOSED rules.

P.S. Wind rider jet bikes are only 1 wound. 1 wound isn't bad and if 1 wound is a big deal we'll guess what my proposed sergeant has 2.

Dark Angels were just bad in 6th, giving them salvo was like putting lipstick on a pig.

Ah and now Assault cannons are bad too? Then why did you say the whole unit needed assault cannons if it doesn't matter. You're arguing against your own points again dude.

Since you think I can't read which is adorable all things considered, here's your ideal terminators:

2 wounds, assault cannons for everyone ( even though they are lame ass), and ability to deep strike with no penalty while being able to move shoot and potentially assault.

But hey who cares right. It's all homebrew so how about relax because this isn't the thread for self loathing BA players

"Ah and now Assault cannons are bad too? "

Two of them are. Five of them start to get something done. But are still inferior to scatterbikes. Just like two scatterlasers are pretty weak, but Eldar put them everywhere and mass them up and then they become nightmarish. It's all about massing firepower. Which your proposed squad is not doing, and so it's not getting things done.

"2 wounds, assault cannons for everyone ( even though they are lame ass), and ability to deep strike with no penalty while being able to move shoot and potentially assault. "

Still can't read because I only proposed one of those things.

"P.S. Wind rider jet bikes are only 1 wound"

And they are very good at never getting shot at. And if they do, most Imperial weapons that reach 36" are very ineffectual.

" for self loathing BA players"

I loathe many things, but I don't blame myself for GW's stupidity.

I was working on terminators some time and have some really working ideas:
1) Personal teleporter - something like warp spiders' jump pack, but one model removes by any doubles - doubles of 1 are too nobrain.
2) Rerolls of armor saves from weapon with AP equal or less than 4. Why the terminator can be so easily killed by bunch of guardsmen?
3) Special weapons for any number of models in unit.

"AP equal or less than 4"

Greater than 4. But we know what you meant. This, combined with something to actually shoot back at scat bikes (which I see you addressed), would actually make them not LOLed off the table by scatterbikes.

"1) Personal teleporter - something like warp spiders' jump pack, but one model removes by any doubles - doubles of 1 are too nobrain. "

This is a cool theme, but if they are all packing assault cannons, I will totally have them ride a pod and be happy about it.

Martel732 wrote:
"Ah and now Assault cannons are bad too? "

Two of them are. Five of them start to get something done. But are still inferior to scatterbikes. Just like two scatterlasers are pretty weak, but Eldar put them everywhere and mass them up and then they become nightmarish. It's all about massing firepower. Which your proposed squad is not doing, and so it's not getting things done.

Except I just posted math-hammer in which a squad of 5 drops down within 6" and eliminates 3, forcing a LD test on a points-equivalent number of Bikes. Sure, the Scatterbikes can move away and then they can do an eldar jetbike move, but they're still going to be in range the next turn wherein they'll lose another 2 minimum and require another LD test.

"2 wounds, assault cannons for everyone ( even though they are lame ass), and ability to deep strike with no penalty while being able to move shoot and potentially assault. "

Still can't read because I only proposed one of those things.

I'm inferencing a "dream Terminator" based off of you saying that 1 Wound is too fragile, and Deep Strike isn't safe enough.

"P.S. Wind rider jet bikes are only 1 wound"

And they are very good at never getting shot at. And if they do, most Imperial weapons that reach 36" are very ineffectual.

Hard to avoid getting shot at when Terminators deep strike within 6", no?

" for self loathing BA players"

I loathe many things, but I don't blame myself for GW's stupidity.

Neat, then actually make yourself useful and contribute something instead of just saying "sucks", "lame ass", and other boring non-constructive critique.

"Except I just posted math-hammer in which a squad of 5 drops down within 6" and eliminates 3, forcing a LD test on a points-equivalent number of Bikes. Sure, the Scatterbikes can move away and then they can do an eldar jetbike move, but they're still going to be in range the next turn wherein they'll lose another 2 minimum and require another LD test. "

Unacceptably little damage for suiciding a unit of that cost. Five assault cannons would do so much better. And Wraithknights would have to pretend to pay attention. As would Dreadknights and things like that. MCs in general would have to pretend to care about that squad.

That is my contribution. 7th ed is a dakka edition. Make them have some real dakka, and suddenly they don't need too many other changes.

"I'm inferencing a "dream Terminator" based off of you saying that 1 Wound is too fragile, and Deep Strike isn't safe enough. "

I just want them to squeeze off some meaningful shots before they get owned the next turn. Which they will.

"Hard to avoid getting shot at when Terminators deep strike within 6", no? "

There are so many reasons you may not want to do this, or are unable to do this. Given your mathhammer above, I'd never use this squad as the return on investment is too poor.

Martel732 wrote:
"Except I just posted math-hammer in which a squad of 5 drops down within 6" and eliminates 3, forcing a LD test on a points-equivalent number of Bikes. Sure, the Scatterbikes can move away and then they can do an eldar jetbike move, but they're still going to be in range the next turn wherein they'll lose another 2 minimum and require another LD test. "

Unacceptably little damage for suiciding a unit of that cost. Five assault cannons would do so much better. And Wraithknights would have to pretend to pay attention. As would Dreadknights and things like that. MCs in general would have to pretend to care about that squad.

That is my contribution. 7th ed is a dakka edition. Make them have some real dakka, and suddenly they don't need too many other changes.

My fix is an attempt to work with the Terminator box set as it currently is. If Games Workshop changes the Terminator box set in the future to allow all Assault cannons, I'm for it. Unfortunately, that's not the case right now as it is with the Scatterlaser bikes.

And let's be real here: Even 5 Terminators for 200 points with 5 Assault Cannons would barely Tickle a wraithknight. So let's try and figure something out here, shall we?

"I'm inferencing a "dream Terminator" based off of you saying that 1 Wound is too fragile, and Deep Strike isn't safe enough. "

I just want them to squeeze off some meaningful shots before they get owned the next turn. Which they will.

I'm now seeing an avenue that could work here:

Terminators, as I have suggested them already, with the following wargear alterations:

Up to 2 Terminators may replace their Terminator Storm Bolter one of the following:
Heavy Flamer: Free
Assault Cannon: 10 points

Up to 2 Terminators that didn't take the above option may take a Terminator Cyclone Missile Launcher: 10 points

Terminator Cyclone Missile Launcher - may choose one of the following modes
Range 48"
Frag: Str4 AP5 Assault 2, Blast, Pinning, Concussive
Krak: Str8 AP3 Assault 2, Concussive, Strikedown
Barrage: StrD AP2 Assault 1, Blast, One Use Only (if Barrage is used, CML can't be used for rest of the game)

So in total the cost would be 215 for 2 Assault Cannons and 2 Cyclones, which should spit out enough firepower to actually make a Wraithknight scared.

There are so many reasons you may not want to do this, or are unable to do this. Given your mathhammer above, I'd never use this squad as the return on investment is too poor.

So then the whole Assault portion of Skyhammer is completely useless, or am I wrong based off your own assertion?

There's a big difference between bringing down two assault squads that immediately assault and two dev squads with relentless grav cannons and some terminators with tickle guns. If the target bikers are hanging out next to say some Wraithguard, a Wraithknight or even a serpent of fire dragons, you may not want to just warp on in.


Five assault cannons at BS 4 gets me 3.333 rends, which is damage the Wraithknight at least would feel.

Your proposed squad would generate 1.333 rends, and 1.333 krak missile wounds. That seems like less firepower to me against Wraithknights.

The other thing is that we could give terminators grav cannons as well.

Note that both of our terminator squads are outperformed by the alpha strike of a common grav biker squad, which generates 4 AP 2 wounds vs a Wraithknight, and does even better vs Riptide and DK. The grav biker squad doesn't need special transport and has a threat radius of 30", just like the assault cannon terminators.

Martel732 wrote:
There's a big difference between bringing down two assault squads that immediately assault and two dev squads with relentless grav cannons and some terminators with tickle guns. If the target bikers are hanging out next to say some Wraithguard, a Wraithknight or even a serpent of fire dragons, you may not want to just warp on in.

Five assault cannons at BS 4 gets me 3.333 rends, which is damage the Wraithknight at least would feel.

Your proposed squad would generate 1.333 rends, and 1.333 krak missile wounds. That seems like less firepower to me against Wraithknights.

5 assault cannons at BS4 is 20 shots, which goes to 13.333 hits. That's really only about 2.22 rends, so my suggestion is better plus you get to consider the fact that the suggested Terminator CML with Barrage gives you 2 potential D shots which you can use in a tight situation.

The other thing is that we could give terminators grav cannons as well.

I think that, had Terminators received a new kit, they would have received them. Alas we are stuck with the same weapons that they've had since Rogue Trader.

Note that both of our terminator squads are outperformed by the alpha strike of a common grav biker squad, which generates 4 AP 2 wounds vs a Wraithknight, and does even better vs Riptide and DK. The grav biker squad doesn't need special transport and has a threat radius of 30", just like the assault cannon terminators.

That's more due to the power of Grav than anything, but I definitely see your point.

Oh yeah, for some reason I thought that the 5 dudes had 30 shots. Well that's a math error for the ages. So that gives my squad 2.222 rends vs your squad's 0.88 rends and 1.333 krak missile wounds. That's really close.

"That's more due to the power of Grav than anything, but I definitely see your point."

Yeah, the power of grav that lets marines without silly formations pretend they can win.

Created some dataslate for terminators as I see them.

Martel732 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marik Law wrote:
I don't know why they don't just give Terminators a 4+ invulnerable save. In 2nd they pretty much had a 2+/3++ save and were absolute beasts (they were also far more expensive points-wise, you'd be lucky to fit five into most games).

Because they would still suck.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Come on people. The new reality is scatbikes, decurions, D-scythes and skyhammer grav dev squads. The only hope terminators have is to be able to kill back at range. All assault cannons, all the time. Feth storm bolters; they have always sucked.

Seems to me like you don't want them being balanced, you want them being "broken". Last I checked, those Grav Weapons and D-Weapons (and the like) are going to chew through those Terminators with Toughness 5, the bonus Toughness isn't going to make a difference.

Some of my suggestions:
* Increase Terminator's invulnerable save to 4+.
* Get rid of downsides for assaulting.
* Make it so a model in Terminator armour ignores the Unwieldy special rule (excluding those provided by Chainfists or Thunder Hammers).
* Reduce cost of ranged weapon options.
* Allow standard squad to take combi-weapons.

So Eldar can have troops with 36" ROF 4 S6 weapons that move 12", but marines can't have elites with 24" ROF 4 S6 weapons that move 6"? Really? Really?

The fix is more dakka. Anything else is lipstick on a pig. I never said anything about T5.

BTW, in 2nd loyalist terminators sucked out loud. Why? Their weapon systems sucked. Chaos terminators were amazeballs. Why? Good weapons!

I agree terminators need a buff. But buffing toughness and giving them fnp will make deathwing, nurgle, paladin terminators a right pain in the arse to deal with

storm bolters upgraded to salvo ?

more heavy weapon options?

more attacks for cc terminators

I'm trying to understand here. Are you upset that terminators can't catch and kill eldar jetbikes in assault or that terminators don't shoot like tau?

 Inkubas wrote:
I'm trying to understand here. Are you upset that terminators can't catch and kill eldar jetbikes in assault or that terminators don't shoot like tau?

I'm upset that they really can't do anything. They can't shoot, and they can't get into assault. With anything, not just jetbikes. And if you let terminators not mounted in Land Raiders assault you, you are not a good player imo.

I love terminators (have over 3000 points worth of terminator models) and can appreciate the frustration of them being underwhelming at times, but I'm curious though what do you normally play against and what do you normally use your terminators for?

I haven't used terminators since 5th ed. So I don't use them ever. I usually play against power lists from all codices.

" the frustration of them being underwhelming at times"

That is the most euphemistic way to say "ass terrible" I've heard in a while.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 Gavik Dross wrote:
Eh HOW I can see, maybeeee with a huge grain of salt T5.
What I really think termies could use is to be dropped by 10 or 15 points and gives power swords standard with options for fists and hammers.

You think Terminators should be 20 points with Power Swords? Seriously? No, really?

A wind rider with a scatter laser costs 27pts! Moves 12" Shoots 36" Str6! each rider can carry that special gun!
A 25pt Terminator doesnt sound so unreasonable!

So I wonder if this guy is going to tell me how to use terminators.

Martel732 wrote:
So I wonder if this guy is going to tell me how to use terminators.

On my say I've used them recently is in 30k

Polux- deep strike no scatter
10 catapractii 2+ 4++
Primus medicae for fnp

Done.

Can't remeber last time I see them vanilla because they suck to bad

So this is a bit of a blend of some of the suggestions I read through. Assaulty Termies are more or less fine. Increase the invo save from termy armor to 4+. Re roll armor saves from weapons with ap4 or worse. Stick to one special weapon per 5 models in shooty termys, but give them access to special issue ammo. Different ammo than what sternguard has access to. Maybe similar vengeance and ignores cover types (but with storm bolter stats of course) but then maybe a 12 inch 3-4 shot rapid fire mode? Definitely no long range ammo type like the sternguard has access to however. This is to highlight the termys focus on close quarter fighting, matching their fluff a bit better imho.

They need a considerable boost in survivability.

1) Incrrease invul save to 4++. Thisis far more in line with the capabilities of the suit ( unfortunately it still leaves them susceptability to massed small arms fire). If save were increased to 4++ then storm shields need to be buffed to keep them viable -perhaps conferring hammer of wrath or FNP, in addition to 3++

2) Terminator armour is 3+ 5++ but allows 2 dice to be rolled for saves, both invulnerable and otherwise.

Their mobilty and close combat potential is about where it should be.

Firepower is underwhelming but that is mainly down to the lacklustre stats of storm bolters. Make SB's assault 3. Reduce range or increase points as needed, but they need a higher ROF.

" Make SB's assault 3. Reduce range or increase points as needed, but they need a higher ROF."

Still only S4. Useless on a model this expensive.

Martel732 wrote:
" Make SB's assault 3. Reduce range or increase points as needed, but they need a higher ROF."

Still only S4. Useless on a model this expensive.

3 shots at 12-18" would be cool.

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" Make SB's assault 3. Reduce range or increase points as needed, but they need a higher ROF."

Still only S4. Useless on a model this expensive.

3 shots at 12-18" would be cool.

No, not really. It's still just S4. These models cost more than a scatterbike.

Martel732 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" Make SB's assault 3. Reduce range or increase points as needed, but they need a higher ROF."

Still only S4. Useless on a model this expensive.

3 shots at 12-18" would be cool.

No, not really. It's still just S4. These models cost more than a scatterbike.

We are not going to put scatter lasers on terminators.

please can we move on from the power creep?

 Phiasco II wrote:
So this is a bit of a blend of some of the suggestions I read through. Assaulty Termies are more or less fine. Increase the invo save from termy armor to 4+. Re roll armor saves from weapons with ap4 or worse. Stick to one special weapon per 5 models in shooty termys, but give them access to special issue ammo. Different ammo than what sternguard has access to. Maybe similar vengeance and ignores cover types (but with storm bolter stats of course) but then maybe a 12 inch 3-4 shot rapid fire mode? Definitely no long range ammo type like the sternguard has access to however. This is to highlight the termys focus on close quarter fighting, matching their fluff a bit better imho.

I really like these suggestions. I would have them pick one special ammo type before the game though, no switching on the fly like sternguard, which would keep them a bit unique.

I like rerolling against AP5 and 6 attacks. I think AP4 weapons need a little help, and they aren't that common so I would be willing to seem them negate the reroll.

I'd buff the cyclone and give it split-fire and skyfire. If they can take 2 heavies in a 5 man unit, than that is 4 St 8 AP 3 skyfire shots, which is enough to make almost anything in the game jink.

Give the sergeant a long-range auspex that he can use in addition to his storm bolter. 36" range, otherwise as normal for the auspex.

Make them BS and WS 5. They are the very best veterans, combining the best of both the vanguard and sternguard.

They should be able to forgo movement to get beamed back into ongoing reserves and deepstrike down again like skyleap for swooping hawks.

I'd like to see a heavy flamer guy be able to shoot into close combat instead of making attacks with his fist.

All those buffs would be expensive though, Probably push them up to 55 ppm

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" Make SB's assault 3. Reduce range or increase points as needed, but they need a higher ROF."

Still only S4. Useless on a model this expensive.

3 shots at 12-18" would be cool.

No, not really. It's still just S4. These models cost more than a scatterbike.

We are not going to put scatter lasers on terminators.

please can we move on from the power creep?

Maybe we should. Fair's fair. The game IS power creep. I can't believe people think this is so crazy and then voluntarily line up against armies that have the very thing you consider crazy. If a model can't run with the big dogs, it rides the pine. Most of these proposals keep terminators on the shelf as they will still contribute nothing then die like little overcosted losers.

"All those buffs would be expensive though, Probably push them up to 55 ppm"

That makes them unusable again, though.

Martel732 wrote:


Maybe we should. Fair's fair. The game IS power creep. I can't believe people think this is so crazy and then voluntarily line up against armies that have the very thing you consider crazy. If a model can't run with the big dogs, it rides the pine. Most of these proposals keep terminators on the shelf as they will still contribute nothing then die like little overcosted losers.

"All those buffs would be expensive though, Probably push them up to 55 ppm"

That makes them unusable again, though.

I feel like a Lets just Nerf Eldar thread would be in order.

But within the context of Space marine and the what they bring within them selves, what would need to change to make terminators and all there options all relativity viable. (after which we could probably use that as a base line for what the other factions should be around)

"I feel like a Lets just Nerf Eldar thread would be in order. "

The Eldar players won't accept it.. The Eldar, Necrons and skyhammer exist. People need to accept this. Units need to be balanced against the new 7th ed reality, not the reality we wish existed.

You and I and everyone else are running into the problem of making a T4 W1 model truly "elite" in a game where AP 2 and S6+ is flying everywhere. It's not possible. You need Wraith level durability to live up to terminator fluff, and it's easier to upgun terminators than make all those changes. Giving terminators a little extra durability is meaningless when their offensive output is so terrible.

Even with Sternguard ammo, the actual Sternguard are still better because they get more shots/pt. You simply can't charge this much for a slow model with a S4 gun. You can't.

Martel732 wrote:
" Make SB's assault 3. Reduce range or increase points as needed, but they need a higher ROF."

Still only S4. Useless on a model this expensive.

Well I I would look at it that every race's elites has areas they excel in. With Eldar it's speed and firepower. The forte of terminators shouldn't be their firepower, but unmatched durability. As long as their firepower is adequate I'm happy enough. 3 shots is a considerable upgrade from 2. so I reckon that addresses the issue.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" Make SB's assault 3. Reduce range or increase points as needed, but they need a higher ROF."

Still only S4. Useless on a model this expensive.

Well I I would look at it that every race's elites has areas they excel in. With Eldar it's speed and firepower. The forte of terminators shouldn't be their firepower, but unmatched durability. As long as their firepower is adequate I'm happy enough. 3 shots is a considerable upgrade from 2. so I reckon that addresses the issue.

But their durability is awful for the cost.

I don't know. With my list then you could have a 250 unit that could reliably maim a FMC every turn, forcing it to jink or nearly killing it, could just obliterate hordes with a 2+ rerollable and the ability to fire heavy flamers into combat.

I'm greatly in favor of buffing them into a useable unit than just discounting them into viability.

Having them swing fists at I2 would help. Let's look at 1 unit of them assuming they can all take heavies (but only 2 of each)

Sgt-- Long Range Auspex, Power Sword, Storm Bolter
Dude 1 and 2- CML, Power Fist
Dude 3 and 4- Heavy Flamer, Power fist

So, these guys can hot-drop in and dump 2 heavy flamer and 4 frag missile templates on some poor fool. If they get shot at the following turn, they will probably weather it with their 2+ rerollable or 4+ pretty well. If they get assaulted they can wall of death for the overwatch. In their next turn they can shoot again, tearing up tanks, aircraft, or medium infantry, and then assault.

I'd make each terminator a character, as well, for challenge fun.

Or you can start them in your backline where they are a respectable anti-air unit (4 St 8 AP 3 shots with -1 cover every turn) and walk them forward, or warp them forward if you have a lot of ground to cover.

In the context of a white scars army (still a pretty common one, I think) that's a good deal. It gives you a good anti-flyer defense, excellent horde-management option, and viable assault threat all in one package, covering the weakness of a bike army pretty comprehensively.


Can you imagine running a green horde into that? Wall of death overwatch, then you get to eat 2 heavy flamer templates AFTER everyone has piled in, then every terminator is a character, you challenge, and the nobs can either accept, and get splatted by the I2 powerfists, or decline and do nothing. Same deal against gaunts. Nasty.

Martel732 wrote:

But their durability is awful for the cost.

Indeed it is -I've suggested some improvements on my previous post.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

But their durability is awful for the cost.

Indeed it is -I've suggested some improvements on my previous post.

It's not enough to compete with scatterbikes and Wraiths.

T4 W1 foot troopers need some snazzy stuff to justify fielding them at the price terminators come in at. Without changing their weapons significantly, there's almost nothing anyone can propose that will make them worthwhile.

Martel732 wrote:

It's not enough to compete with scatterbikes and Wraiths.

Maybe not, but rather than drastically up-gun termies, you could look at it in 2 other ways: Either that those units enjoy superior firepower becasue it's their perk as the best units their army can field, or that the firepower of those units are OP' and should be nerfed..

 thegreatchimp wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

It's not enough to compete with scatterbikes and Wraiths.

Maybe not, but rather than drastically up-gun termies, you could look at it in 2 other ways: Either that those units enjoy superior firepower becasue it's their perk as the best units their army can field, or that the firepower of those units are OP' and should be nerfed..

But they won't be nerfed. And so everything has to adjust to that reality.

"it's their perk as the best units their army can field"

Guardian jetbikes get scatterlasers. That's a helluva perk for a non-aspect warrior.

 Silverthorne wrote:

 Phiasco II wrote:
So this is a bit of a blend of some of the suggestions I read through. Assaulty Termies are more or less fine. Increase the invo save from termy armor to 4+. Re roll armor saves from weapons with ap4 or worse. Stick to one special weapon per 5 models in shooty termys, but give them access to special issue ammo. Different ammo than what sternguard has access to. Maybe similar vengeance and ignores cover types (but with storm bolter stats of course) but then maybe a 12 inch 3-4 shot rapid fire mode? Definitely no long range ammo type like the sternguard has access to however. This is to highlight the termys focus on close quarter fighting, matching their fluff a bit better imho.

I really like these suggestions. I would have them pick one special ammo type before the game though, no switching on the fly like sternguard, which would keep them a bit unique.

I like rerolling against AP5 and 6 attacks. I think AP4 weapons need a little help, and they aren't that common so I would be willing to seem them negate the reroll.

I'd buff the cyclone and give it split-fire and skyfire. If they can take 2 heavies in a 5 man unit, than that is 4 St 8 AP 3 skyfire shots, which is enough to make almost anything in the game jink.

Give the sergeant a long-range auspex that he can use in addition to his storm bolter. 36" range, otherwise as normal for the auspex.

Make them BS and WS 5. They are the very best veterans, combining the best of both the vanguard and sternguard.

They should be able to forgo movement to get beamed back into ongoing reserves and deepstrike down again like skyleap for swooping hawks.

I'd like to see a heavy flamer guy be able to shoot into close combat instead of making attacks with his fist.

All those buffs would be expensive though, Probably push them up to 55 ppm

I'm really interested in how it is they come to have so very many rules. This on top of their many USRs and their one unique rule against sweeping, they have like half a page of unique rules for stuff they might not even use.

Most of even the really powerful units like wraiths and scatterbikes use rules either that are army-wide or are from rulebook, then they might have a unique rule and a choice of a unique weapon.

Sternguard, for example, mean one identifying rule to me, which is special issue ammunition. It is pretty clean design. It's memorable, it's simple, it requires no tests or note taking, it's easy to look up if you need to, because it's the only rule on the page.

Then also, eight fleshbane shots for 250 points, that get replaced by flamers anyway?

Heavy flamers you can shoot after pile-in moves in close combat. Against Eldar, Orks, Nids, Dark Eldar, Skittari, Guard, Necrons and Tau that's absolutely devastating. That's the majority of armies in the game. On average rolls, you can easily kill 20 models with that (assuming there are even that many bad guys to kill) Considering you probably nuked 8-10 on the drop the turn before the charge happened, (again this is just with the flamers) in one game turn that's two models accounting for 30 enemy infantry, which really fits their background. That's not even counting all the work the missiles and power fists are doing. Against any xenos or light armored humans other than the green tide formation, that unit just won't exist anymore.

They only have 2 rules unique to them, which is not really out of the ordinary.

The CML buffs would be in the armory. Same with the new Heavy Flamer, and the 'terminator storm bolter' or whatever you would like to call it.

Character is just a USR that you would note in the unit composition, it doesn't even take one line of text.

Terminators
4 Dudemans, Infantry, Character, Bulky
1 Veteran Sergeant Dudeman , Infantry, Character, Bulky

Dudemans have Tactical Dreadnought Warsuit. They can upgrade to Carry a CML (0-2) or Terminator Flamer (0-2) for XX pts

Vet Sarge Dudeman has Tactical Dreadnought Warsuit with a power weapon and long range auspex

Admantium Fist-- A unit of terminators can reroll armor saves against any attack with an AP of worse than 4. Their armor also gives them relentless, but prevents sweeping advances.

From the Warp-- Terms have the Deepstrike special rule. Also, in your movement phase they can return to ongoing reserves and redeploy to the battlefield using deepstrike special rules.

That's it. Only 2 special rules on their unit entry. Seems manageable to me. I have no idea what 'tests and note taking' you are referring to, neither are needed.

 Silverthorne wrote:
Heavy flamers you can shoot after pile-in moves in close combat. Against Eldar, Orks, Nids, Dark Eldar, Skittari, Guard, Necrons and Tau that's absolutely devastating. That's the majority of armies in the game. On average rolls, you can easily kill 20 models with that (assuming there are even that many bad guys to kill) Considering you probably nuked 8-10 on the drop the turn before the charge happened, (again this is just with the flamers) in one game turn that's two models accounting for 30 enemy infantry, which really fits their background. That's not even counting all the work the missiles and power fists are doing. Against any xenos or light armored humans other than the green tide formation, that unit just won't exist anymore.

They only have 2 rules unique to them, which is not really out of the ordinary.

The CML buffs would be in the armory. Same with the new Heavy Flamer, and the 'terminator storm bolter' or whatever you would like to call it.

Character is just a USR that you would note in the unit composition, it doesn't even take one line of text.

Terminators
4 Dudemans, Infantry, Character, Bulky
1 Veteran Sergeant Dudeman , Infantry, Character, Bulky

Dudemans have Tactical Dreadnought Warsuit. They can upgrade to Carry a CML (0-2) or Terminator Flamer (0-2) for XX pts

Vet Sarge Dudeman has Tactical Dreadnought Warsuit with a power weapon and long range auspex

Admantium Fist-- A unit of terminators can reroll armor saves against any attack with an AP of worse than 4. Their armor also gives them relentless, but prevents sweeping advances.

From the Warp-- Terms have the Deepstrike special rule. Also, in your movement phase they can return to ongoing reserves and redeploy to the battlefield using deepstrike special rules.

That's it. Only 2 special rules on their unit entry. Seems manageable to me. I have no idea what 'tests and note taking' you are referring to, neither are needed.

yeah we should totally have a single unit of Terminators killing entire ork squads in a single turn.....makes sense.

Martel732 wrote:


But they won't be nerfed. And so everything has to adjust to that reality.

"it's their perk as the best units their army can field"

Guardian jetbikes get scatterlasers. That's a helluva perk for a non-aspect warrior.

Yeah I know, but when I say best, I don't neccesarily mean elite choices, just that there are obviously a handful of units in each army that shine (and debatably are OP'd), for example Grey Hunters before the last codex. . If they're OP to the point that they're broken then I can see the problem, having to wait at least 2 years or more for a new codex to restore some balance.

So assuming we're talking about implementing non official rules, then I don't see how improving a pile of other units to match a small number of OP'd units is a solution. Particularly as improving them will then have the knock-on effect of making them OP'd compared to other choices. Would it not be a lot simpler to just take the few offending units to begin with, and put them back in line with everything else, whether that's through stat changes, loadout restrictions or points increases? You know what I mean?

" then I don't see how improving a pile of other units to match a small number of OP'd units is a solution. "

If everything is OP, then nothing is OP. If you don't match the current top dog units, then those units will continue to dominate.

"just that there are obviously a handful of units in each army that shine"

Almost every unit in C:Eldar is better than terminators.

Martel732 wrote:
" then I don't see how improving a pile of other units to match a small number of OP'd units is a solution. "

If everything is OP, then nothing is OP. If you don't match the current top dog units, then those units will continue to dominate.

"just that there are obviously a handful of units in each army that shine"

Almost every unit in C:Eldar is better than terminators.

Yes Martel but I reitterate, it's still a relatively small percentage of units in the overall game that is breaking that power curve. So you move the ones back down that are too powerful, not move everything else up to match them. If I have 4 hobs on cooking the same thing, and one of them is set too high, I turn the offending hob down, I don't turn the other 3 up...if only because it's a far simpler solution.

As discussed I am indeed in favour of enhancing termies durability majorly and firepower somewhat, because they're clearly lagging below that power curve for some time, but I don't believe the solution is having to give them all assault cannons as basic, or suchlike (not that I'm saying you suggested that, but I've seen that suggestion and crazier ones crop up on previous threads). Besides if you go that way you end up with a cascading effect, wherein a number of other units will then be poor in comparison to the upgunned terminators...and eventually people will be crying out for grots to get stat increases. And then we'll have come full circle, and it'll all have been pointless...

Actually I did suggest all assault cannons. Which isn't crazy compared to scatter bikes.

See, the problem is that the Eldar players payed 50 bucks to get their codex, and they will NOT play with a toned down scatterbike, at least as far as I can tell. I've already asked my play group if Eldar will self-nerf and they won't.

The sad part is that all-assault cannon terminators are STILL inferior to scatterbikes. That's how bad terminators are. And that's why most of the suggestions on here leave terminators as unusable crap units.

" it's still a relatively small percentage of units in the overall game that is breaking that power curve."

Not true for terminators. They are one of the worst units in the game. And the suggestions on here isn't fixing that fact. Too many points for a slow T4 W1 model, no matter how many bells and whistles you put on it. Doesn't help that unassisted deep strike sucks hard as well.

"And then we'll have come full circle, and it'll all have been pointless.."

Slippery slope fallacy. Math tells you when to stop. This game isn't playtested like Starcraft, so I don't really hold out much hope. Bring on the assault cannons; it's closer to fair than stormbolters. And that's the best we can do here.

Martel732 wrote:
Actually I did suggest all assault cannons. Which isn't crazy compared to scatter bikes.

See, the problem is that the Eldar players payed 50 bucks to get their codex, and they will NOT play with a toned down scatterbike, at least as far as I can tell. I've already asked my play group if Eldar will self-nerf and they won't.

Ok, understand your dilemma. But why do you believe said Eldar players would agree to non-official buffing of non-eldar units any more than they'd agree to non-official toning down their own units -there's an equal weight to both those motions from my point of view -they both result in the same thing -restoration of balance and therefore equally detrimental to the player who has the more powerful codex.

The solution is of course for GW to playtest properly, there's no excuses for some of these imbalances to exist in the first palce. They could at least make a comprehensive attempt to address them in the errata they release for each dex.

It's psychology. Most people are far more willing to have other lists brought up to their level than have their codex get nerfed down.

Martel732 wrote:
It's psychology. Most people are far more willing to have other lists brought up to their level than have their codex get nerfed down.

well that and the fact that nobody ever got there list buffed up to the same level as the eldar...ever

New proposal after thinking over things:

SB to Assault 3 as previouslty suggested.

Invul increase to 4++. While this makes them more resistant than medium tanks against certain weapons, I don't think it'll rock the boat too much. it's necessary to provide some protection against plasma and other cheap AP2 because 5++ just isn't cutting it. To keep the storm shield viable in light of the increased TDA invul save, Storm shield confers hammer of wrath in addition to 3++.

My first thoughts were to increase armour save 2+.but re-roll failed saves. This provides a 100% increase in resistance to small arms, which is fitting. However...it's too OP because it would really screw over autocannon, krak missiles etc, and that's undesirable. Therefore I would suggest. Terminator Armour "Against any weapon of AP 5 or less, a failed armour save may be re-rolled."
Points adjusted as needed. I'm no math-hammerist, so I'll leave it to those who know best...

You realize that rolling 2 dice and picking the highest is mathematically the same as just re rolling failed dice right?

Martel, please stop.
Yes, some might not accept certain nerfs and such but if that's a reason to not bother then that sort of logic could be used to discredit any idea in the this subforum. Honestly it sounds like you're more just looking for an excuse to complain about Eldar...

Any, on-topic!
Well, dropping points cost is always an option. Also I had been thinking it'd be good to let Deep Striking units choose whether they want to Shoot or Assault (either/or and chosen for the entire squad), maybe an additional buff for Terminators specifically would be giving them a rule that lets them do BOTH on Deep Strike?

Onto specifics:
Sergeant should definitely get another attack and be able to replace his Power Sword (either with other Power Weapons, or with anything on the Melee Weapons list, not sure which), along with getting an additional Attack in his profile.
BS5/WS5 would be handy, maybe they should get Strength/Toughness 5 too? (Note: this would make Power Fist./Chainfist/Thunder Hammer attacks S10)
Possibly give them Split Fire like DW Termies get now. DW Termies could then get a better version of it (Maybe they get to just freely split their fire however they want like you apparently could in First Edition? Though that could be OP)
Better invulnerable with Storm Shield buff sounds cool too.
Maybe give them a better array of Heavy Weapons? Perhaps they could keep the current ones and add in Lascannons, Multi-Meltas, Grav Cannons and so on?
Maybe also let the Sergeant replace his Storm Bolter with a Special Weapon, though I'm a little split on that.
2 Heavy Weapons per 5-man squad could be something.

Now, I also had some some rather crazy ideas that would almost certainly be stupidly OP, but might as well post 'em in case they inspire something more reasonable:
2 Wounds!
EVERYONE gets to replace their Storm Bolter with a Special Weapon!
Let them ignore Unwieldy!
EVERYONE gets another Attack (probably meaning +2 for Sarge)!

Well, those could be good to prove a point, I suppose. If someone claims Termies can't be made good no matter what, house-rule in all this gak and they'll probably change their tune (then again that would be a remarkably ignorant thing to say).

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
You realize that rolling 2 dice and picking the highest is mathematically the same as just re rolling failed dice right?

Right, must have been a bit tired when I wrote that post! Ammending now.

Some people really focus on the wrong part of the post. Eldar are a convenient whipping boy but we could look at many units that embarrass terminators.

Yes we can shotgun a bunch of rules onto terminators but the more you add on the harder it is to balance. Increasing their firepower is the simplest and most effective fix.

What if we make the base terminator invul save a 4+ and made stormshields allow to reroll that save instead of boosting it to a 3+?

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
What if we make the base terminator invul save a 4+ and made stormshields allow to reroll that save instead of boosting it to a 3+?

That would work, 4++ rerollable is actually better than 3++ but not quite as good as 2++ so that's about right,
Only issue is it might cause shenanigans with anything that might raise their Invul save higher, maybe add a caveat that the reroll it gives is always 4+ regardless of what the actual save is?

Tactical terminators would still be terrible, even with a 4+ invuln. You are not fixing the fact that they are W1 T4 armed with popguns.

Well, if you're so obsessed with that element, how about my suggestions?
Though by the sounds of it, you wouldn't be satisfied unless it was the really OP ones I put on the end...

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
What if we make the base terminator invul save a 4+ and made stormshields allow to reroll that save instead of boosting it to a 3+?

That's an interesting suggestion, but bear in mind that this ruling presumably applies to all storm shields, including those on non TDA models, so have to keep specific storm shield stats in mind. Also it might make termies a bit too resistant to heavy weaponry.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
Well, if you're so obsessed with that element, how about my suggestions?
Though by the sounds of it, you wouldn't be satisfied unless it was the really OP ones I put on the end...

"EVERYONE gets to replace their Storm Bolter with a Special Weapon! "

This is all that's necessary. And compared to what is in the game right now, it's not OP, just very good. When was the last time loyalist terminators were "very good"? Never. Terminators can gain a lot of durability by being able to actually kill opposing models at range. It also allows them to deep strike in and actually do something that turn.

^That's kinda one of the crazy OP ones, not totally certain it would actually be a reasonable choice, I put it in the second list for a reason.

And I'm surprised that's the one that struck you as opposed to them being T5 W2, considering your complaints about their defensive stats.
Honestly I kinda expected you might've said all my craziest suggestions would've just barely made them usable since you seem to kinda have high expectations for unit power levels.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
^That's kinda one of the crazy OP ones, not totally certain it would actually be a reasonable choice, I put it in the second list for a reason.

And I'm surprised that's the one that struck you as opposed to them being T5 W2, considering your complaints about their defensive stats.
Honestly I kinda expected you might've said all my craziest suggestions would've just barely made them usable since you seem to kinda have high expectations for unit power levels.

T5 W2 is too much like a centurion, and they still would have terrible ranged out put, making them very ignorable. Also, they don't contribute the turn they deep strike . If they all have assault cannons, they are hard to ignore and have an impact the turn they arrive via deep strike. The stormbolter is really the true achilles heel of the terminator, not their staying power.

Frankly, units like Wraiths and TWC annoy me because they are the special snowflake units that get to have durability in a game of making people pick up squads wholesale. Trying to give units durability in this game is too likely to break them like Wraiths and TWC, imo.

And 5 X assault cannons is not crazy OP given that Eldar can TROOPS with 10X scatterlasers for abotu the same price.

The EASIEST thing to do....is BUFF the STORM BOLTER.

Yes...I realize you can mount SB on rhinos and stuff but people don't do that...know why? Cause they are bad. SB in genreal needs a reason to be taken!

What does a SB do for ANY unit that takes it. It allows you to take 1 more shot into an enemy before you assault it! At the cost of a bonus attack in CC! It's hardly a buff! The only thing SB are good at is 24 inch mobile shooting and I'm sorry - str4 mobile shooting doesn't mean a dang thing in this game.

BUFF ALL SB.
A serious buff. Make them 2/4 salvo str 4 ap5 rending 24". THATS RIGHT. That would make them an excellent weapon. Increase vehical upgrade cost to 10 points to compensate.

Martel732 wrote:T5 W2 is too much like a centurion, and they still would have terrible ranged out put, making them very ignorable. Also, they don't contribute the turn they deep strike . If they all have assault cannons, they are hard to ignore and have an impact the turn they arrive via deep strike. The stormbolter is really the true achilles heel of the terminator, not their staying power.

Frankly, units like Wraiths and TWC annoy me because they are the special snowflake units that get to have durability in a game of making people pick up squads wholesale. Trying to give units durability in this game is too likely to break them like Wraiths and TWC, imo.

Fair enough.

Martel732 wrote:And 5 X assault cannons is not crazy OP given that Eldar can TROOPS with 10X scatterlasers for abotu the same price.

I'm not sure it isn't all that OP, it's really pretty potent, considering that your point is only comparing them to a known game-breaker...
It's also more potent than what I actually meant. I literally meant Special Weapons from the Special Weapons list: Plasma Guns, Meltaguns, Grav-Guns and Flamers. I still only meant 1 (maybe raising it to 2) Terminator Heavy Weapons (Plasma Cannons, Assault Cannons, Heavy Flamers and CMLs) per 5 dudes.

Xenomancers wrote:The EASIEST thing to do....is BUFF the STORM BOLTER.

Yes...I realize you can mount SB on rhinos and stuff but people don't do that...know why? Cause they are bad. SB in genreal needs a reason to be taken!

What does a SB do for ANY unit that takes it. It allows you to take 1 more shot into an enemy before you assault it! At the cost of a bonus attack in CC! It's hardly a buff! The only thing SB are good at is 24 inch mobile shooting and I'm sorry - str4 mobile shooting doesn't mean a dang thing in this game.

BUFF ALL SB.
A serious buff. Make them 2/4 salvo str 4 ap5 rending 24". THATS RIGHT. That would make them an excellent weapon. Increase vehical upgrade cost to 10 points to compensate.

I wouldn't be opposed to that, also helps the one on my Vindicator! But are you sure 10 points is enough? Kinda sounds like a massive bargain for Salvo 2/4 Rending, maybe 15 or 20 would be better.

10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

@Crash Gordon
Xenomancers wrote:
The EASIEST thing to do....is BUFF the STORM BOLTER.

Yes...I realize you can mount SB on rhinos and stuff but people don't do that...know why? Cause they are bad. SB in genreal needs a reason to be taken!

What does a SB do for ANY unit that takes it. It allows you to take 1 more shot into an enemy before you assault it! At the cost of a bonus attack in CC! It's hardly a buff! The only thing SB are good at is 24 inch mobile shooting and I'm sorry - str4 mobile shooting doesn't mean a dang thing in this game.

BUFF ALL SB.
A serious buff. Make them 2/4 salvo str 4 ap5 rending 24". THATS RIGHT. That would make them an excellent weapon. Increase vehical upgrade cost to 10 points to compensate.

I wouldn't be opposed to that, also helps the one on my Vindicator! But are you sure 10 points is enough? Kinda sounds like a massive bargain for Salvo 2/4 Rending, maybe 15 or 20 would be better.

5 points isn't worth it for a current SB so doubling it's firepower and adding rending and doubling it's price seems about right. Only issue I see is strike squads having access to them - maybe all GK PA units would need 2 point price increase to compensate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

HB is still techincally better because it comes with AP4 and str 5 and 36" range. It should probably go to salvo 3/5 but thats another debate.

DoomShakaLaka wrote:10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

I liked another topic's suggestion to make the HB Salvo. If the Storm Bolter becomes Salvo 2/4, then how about making the Heavy Bolter Salvo 3/5, Salvo 3/6 or Salvo 4/6? I'd say the first, don't wanna go too crazy.
Also might be handy if Devastators got Heavy Bolters as standard, gives a reason to pick HBs for them and to have more than the minimum squad of Devs (that is, if they additional guys don't get to pick other weapons too).

Xenomancers wrote:5 points isn't worth it for a current SB so doubling it's firepower and adding rending and doubling it's price seems about right. Only issue I see is strike squads having access to them - maybe all GK PA units would need 2 point price increase to compensate.

Okay, I suppose that sounds fair enough.
Maybe more of a raise for the GK units, but that's another discussion I think (or maybe it's this discussion too, I dunno).

" your point is only comparing them to a known game-breaker... "

What else should I compare them to? Bad units? Scatbikes are the new standard by which everything is judged. Or should be judged.

"It's also more potent than what I actually meant."

I literally meant 5 X assault cannons at 45 ppm. Still inferior to scatbikes, and an elite to boot. Completely fair.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CrashGordon94 wrote:

DoomShakaLaka wrote:10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

I liked another topic's suggestion to make the HB Salvo. If the Storm Bolter becomes Salvo 2/4, then how about making the Heavy Bolter Salvo 3/5, Salvo 3/6 or Salvo 4/6? I'd say the first, don't wanna go too crazy.
Also might be handy if Devastators got Heavy Bolters as standard, gives a reason to pick HBs for them and to have more than the minimum squad of Devs (that is, if they additional guys don't get to pick other weapons too).

Xenomancers wrote:5 points isn't worth it for a current SB so doubling it's firepower and adding rending and doubling it's price seems about right. Only issue I see is strike squads having access to them - maybe all GK PA units would need 2 point price increase to compensate.

Okay, I suppose that sounds fair enough.
Maybe more of a raise for the GK units, but that's another discussion I think (or maybe it's this discussion too, I dunno).

There is no good mathematical niche for the stormbolter. It's a weapon with no purpose. That's why I'm ditching them off terminators.

"A serious buff. Make them 2/4 salvo str 4 ap5 rending 24". THATS RIGHT"

Still too weak for the cost of a terminator. S4 is a deal breaker. Rending is cute, but the real gold is S6. S6 is a panacea in this game. Without a ST buff, the stormbolter will remain garbage.

" I'd say the first, don't wanna go too crazy. "

Why not? It's 7th ed 40K. CRAAAAAAAAAZY TIMES!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

Nope. Too weak. Eldar get a scatterlaser for 10 pts.

Martel732 wrote:
What else should I compare them to? Bad units? Scatbikes are the new standard by which everything is judged. Or should be judged.

Compare them to REASONABLE units, ones neither overpowered NOR underpowered. Bad units should be brought UP to that level and game-breakers (like scatterbikes) should be brought DOWN to that level.
Game-breakers are not and should never be the standard that everything is judged to. They are an anomaly that's bad for the game and should be toned down to make it fair. That's just simple game design logic.

Martel732 wrote:
I literally meant 5 X assault cannons at 45 ppm.

I know you meant that, I don't see how you could think I didn't. I was clarifying what I meant when I said it because I'm just trying to give a weak units a buff, not make more game-breakers.

Martel732 wrote:
Still inferior to scatbikes, and an elite to boot. Completely fair.

Something isn't fair just because it's weaker than a game-breaker, no sensible person could possibly come to such a butter-nuts insane conclusion.

I'll stop here because it seems like you're hung up on scatterbikes. GAME-BREAKERS ARE NOT SOMETHING TO AIM FOR, THEY'RE SOMETHING TO AVOID!
That's even assuming you're serious because I legitimately hate to say this but it really sounds like you could be trolling. Either that or you're what they call "butthurt" about the current Eldar units and are just taking it out here. If that's the case, a better idea would be an Eldar nerf thread.

"GAME-BREAKERS ARE NOT SOMETHING TO AIM FOR, THEY'RE SOMETHING TO AVOID!"

Assault cannon armed terminators at 45 ppm are still substantially inferior to scat bikes, and therefore not a game-breaking unit.

"I'll stop here because it seems like you're hung up on scatterbikes"

I think that ignoring them in a balance discussion is a mistake.

"They are an anomaly that's bad for the game and should be toned down to make it fair"

But they're not going to be toned down until the next codex. A codex, I assume, that will make things even worse. It's psychologically easier to get buffs for bad units than get nerfs on scatterbikes.

"Something isn't fair just because it's weaker than a game-breaker, no sensible person could possibly come to such a butter-nuts insane conclusion. "

Lots of people still claim scatterbikes are fine as well.

My thinking is leaning towards T5, 4++ invul, give SB access to special ammunition, which makes them more versatile at shooting.

Rikerwota wrote:
My thinking is leaning towards T5, 4++ invul, give SB access to special ammunition, which makes them more versatile at shooting.

This isn't terrible, but they don't have quite enough shots/pt to make it worthwhile. Their damage output/pt is incredibly low, and while the versatility would be welcome, there's just not enough dice rolling for 35 ppm.

Martel732 wrote:
Assault cannon armed terminators at 45 ppm are still substantially inferior to scat bikes, and therefore not a game-breaking unit.

Maybe they're not game-breakers, but that's not clear when the only metric you're using is saying they're worse than a known game-breaker. That proves nothing.

Martel732 wrote:
I think that ignoring them in a balance discussion is a mistake.

Ignoring a known game-breaker in general is.
Not bringing up a known game-breaker as the gold standard to be compared to when everyone already knows it needs nerfing and it's NOT SOMETHING TO BE ASPIRED TO is just bloody common sense.
Stop using a broken unit as an excuse to break everything else too.

Martel732 wrote:
But they're not going to be toned down until the next codex. A codex, I assume, that will make things even worse. It's psychologically easier to get buffs for bad units than get nerfs on scatterbikes.

You can say that about everything in this subforum. Games Workshop probably aren't prowling here for ideas to implement. And yet, this forum still exists.
So please, put that argument in the toilet where it belongs and FLUSH!

Martel732 wrote:
Lots of people still claim scatterbikes are fine as well.

Fine, how about we discuss that IN ANOTHER BLOODY TOPIC WHERE THE BLOODY THINGS ARE BLOODY RELEVANT?

If you're not going to stop bringing up this one random game-breaker, then please leave. The rest of us are trying to discuss REASONABLE solutions to make an under-powered unit REASONABLE. We don't need to hear about the flying elf-eared alien bug up your ass.

"The rest of us are trying to discuss REASONABLE solutions to make an under-powered unit REASONABLE. We don't need to hear about the flying elf-eared alien bug up your ass"

So am I. GW has redefined "reasonable" for 7th ed. The game is mostly about firepower now. Unless your "reasonable" fix makes their firepower not awful, it's a non-fix. The suggestion above wasn't terrible, but the terminators still don't get enough shots. So rather than mucking around with the stormbolter (an awful weapon), just give them an existing Imperial weapon with no effective platforms: assault cannon.

"You can say that about everything in this subforum."

Except I might get Eldar players to let me use beefed up terminators, but I'm not going to get them to agree to use nerfed scatbikes after they built/painted them.

"Stop using a broken unit as an excuse to break everything else too. "

If everything is "broken" then nothing is.

"If you're not going to stop bringing up this one random game-breaker, then please leave"

I bring it up partially because it's a directly comparable unit to an assault cannon terminator. I could use D-scythe wraithguard, but it's much harder to compare. We could use grav cents, but that's harder too.

Martel732 wrote:
So am I. GW has redefined "reasonable" for 7th ed. The game is mostly about firepower now. Unless your "reasonable" fix makes their firepower not awful, it's a non-fix. The suggestion above wasn't terrible, but the terminators still don't get enough shots. So rather than mucking around with the stormbolter (an awful weapon), just give them an existing Imperial weapon with no effective platforms: assault cannon.

No, they haven't "redefined" anything, they made a badly-balanced unit. That's all. They are not the gold standard. They are not something to be aspired to. They're another problem, one this thread ISN'T about.
SO fething DROP IT!

Martel732 wrote:
Except I might get Eldar players to let me use beefed up terminators, but I'm not going to get them to agree to use nerfed scatbikes after they built/painted them.

Several problems:
1) If they refuse reasonable action against a problem unit, they're just being tools.
1a) Whether TFG types accept it or not isn't the goal we're aiming for.
2) If they have objections to making their stuff weaker, they'd likely object to you making their stuff stronger because the end result is the same: removing or reducing their advantage.
3) You could turn the tables and refuse to play them unless they DO agree to nerfed scatterbikes.
3a) Maybe you just shouldn't play these people altogether if they're causing you such grief.
4) People are wary about house rules over official stuff anyway. These hypothetical people would probably hypothetically suck it up if these hypothetical nerfs made it into the hypothetical next Eldar Codex. Hypoethically.
4a) What hypothetical douchebags do and don't accept isn't the judge of we we should and shouldn't do.
4b) It's also not an excuse to jump on the game-breaker train with no brakes.

Martel732 wrote:
If everything is "broken" then nothing is.

No. If everything is broken then everything is broken and you have an awful game with no balance. Stop trying to sound clever and drop this line of reasoning.

Martel732 wrote:
I bring it up partially because it's a directly comparable unit to an assault cannon terminator. I could use D-scythe wraithguard, but it's much harder to compare. We could use grav cents, but that's harder too.

No, one's a fast-moving basic unit meant for long-range combat and the other is a slow-moving mid-to-high-end unit for both close combat and short-range shooting. The only reason you compare the two is becaue you have a bug up your ass and are using it to screw up an unrelated discussion.
And if those other units are game-breakers too then they're just as invalid because they're in need of a good nerfing too.
If they're not then it still doesn't matter, you didn't use a variety of things to form a groundwork of what would be reasonable for a unit type, you latched onto an over-powered problem unit and used it as an excuse to dismiss anything that doesn't make these guys just as broken and awful because of your stupid agenda.

Now please, shall we drop unrelated crap and get back to reasonably balancing Terminators?

Make storm bolters assault 3 DONE.
Give them back "follow on fire" DONE.
STOP CREATING THESE THEADS

"Now please, shall we drop unrelated crap and get back to reasonably balancing Terminators?"

I never stopped trying to do that. You have the problem. Assault cannons are the fix to fit 7th ed. Everything else I've seen on there is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Terminators are ridiculously costed for T4 W1 models with popguns. It's much easier to get rid of the popguns than try to make them actually live. Which nothing does in this game except for the special snowflake units of certain books.


"Stop trying to sound clever and drop this line of reasoning. "

No? Because I think I'm right. If all units were great and had their niche, then it would be balanced. That's the definition of balance. Like in Starcraft.

"The only reason you compare the two is becaue you have a bug up your ass and are using it to screw up an unrelated discussion. "

No... because the assault cannon and scatterlaser are very similar.

"2) If they have objections to making their stuff weaker, they'd likely object to you making their stuff stronger because the end result is the same: removing or reducing their advantage. "

I have always found people more open to making their opponent a fair match than having their own stuff nerfed down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ConanMan wrote:
Make storm bolters assault 3 DONE.
Give them back "follow on fire" DONE.
STOP CREATING THESE THEADS

Nope. Still far too weak for the points. More useless S4 shots is just that. Useless.

Martel732 wrote:
I never stopped trying to do that. You have the problem. Assault cannons are the fix to fit 7th ed. Everything else I've seen on there is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Terminators are ridiculously costed for T4 W1 models with popguns.

No, all you ever did was get pissy about the Eldar having a broken unit and insisting on one random solution (They aren't "T4 W1 models with popguns" if they have T5 and W2) and dismissing everything else, bringing the discussion to a dead halt every bloody time. Just because better Storm Bolters don't fit you Eldar butthurt agenda or your gatling gun fetish doesn't make them invalid.

Martel732 wrote:
It's much easier to get rid of the popguns than try to make them actually live. Which nothing does in this game except for the special snowflake units of certain books.

If the so-called "popguns" are made solid, then they aren't "popguns" anymore.
But yes, I'll admit it's easier to dump iffy weapons in favor of better ones but that doesn't automatically make it the BETTER choice. Buffing Storm Bolters is better as it gives another weapon that needs a buff a buff (p.s. Termies aren't the only models with them) which gives another viable option rather than just killing some little bit of variety and interest, it allows better fine-tuning of the weapon so that the units with it are better but not by TOO much (like all Assault Cannons would most likely be. I know GW is FAR from perfect but I figure there's a reason that you can only have that particular weapon on 1/5 of your Termies tops...) and as a bonus it's not a completely middle finger to those who already have a bunch of Storm Bolter-equipped Terminators (Hi, I have 8 and I'm only just starting! I wouldn't be happy if I had to chop up all those guys! Imagine how someone with 50 would feel!).

Martel732 wrote:
No? Because I think I'm right. If all units were great and had their niche, then it would be balanced. That's the definition of balance. Like in Starcraft.

And you're thinking wrong. No surprise when you're zeroed in one a random problem unit and are dismissing anything that doesn't fit that unrelated unit's OTT power level.
You are factually wrong. If you have nothing but broken gak, then you have broken gak everywhere and no balance anywhere. Even the most basic logic tells you that!

Martel732 wrote:
No... because the assault cannon and scatterlaser are very similar.

And the Heavy Flamer is very similar to the Burna, clearly we must compare them to Burna Boyz!
And Terminator Armor is very similar to Artificer Armor, we must also compare them to Inquisitor Coteaz!
If you picked this out because the AC has a similar purpose to the Storm Bolter but happens to be better at it, so is a buffed Storm Bolter!
Also, similarity to a random problem unit is irrelevant.

Martel732 wrote:
I have always found people more open to making their opponent a fair match than having their own stuff nerfed down.

1) Random worthless anecdotal evidence.
2) So what? If they have something that needs to be nerfed then them being a crybaby about taking their OP toy away for the Greater Good doesn't change that.
3) That doesn't work! If you balance one thing against that then it's still broken and nothing else is balanced against it.
4) Nerfing something overpowered is better than bringing everything else up to its level. That way you end up with something stuff fixed instead of everything broken.

Martel732 wrote:
Nope. Still far too weak for the points. More useless S4 shots is just that. Useless.

Funny, you're the only one claiming that. Many people sound like they'd be happy with it. Many find use for good S4 and lower stuff.
It's almost as if the only reason you're dismissing it is because it's not on the random problem unit you picked.

Now please, STOP! You keep bringing this topic to a halt. I can make a "Let's nerf Eldar!" thread and take those unrelated issues there. But if you're not going to stop this, please leave us alone to discuss this in peace. I'd rather not have to report anything.

ConanMan wrote:
Make storm bolters assault 3 DONE.
Give them back "follow on fire" DONE.
STOP CREATING THESE THEADS

whats follow on fire?

"It's almost as if the only reason you're dismissing it is because it's not on the random problem unit you picked. "

No. I've played since 2nd and I've watched S4 become more and more worthless in the game.

"Now please, STOP! You keep bringing this topic to a halt. I can make a "Let's nerf Eldar!" thread and take those unrelated issues there. But if you're not going to stop this, please leave us alone to discuss this in peace. I'd rather not have to report anything."

Please report me then. Because I'm justifying my rules suggestions and you're ranting about a "nerf Eldar thread" that has been done more than this one. Other people seem to be posting comments just fine. You're the one that can't let it go. I'm just shooting down other ideas that I don't think addresses the core failing of terminators in 7th.

"Buffing Storm Bolters is better as it gives another weapon that needs a buff a buff "

More S4 shots are useless, as mentioned above. Special ammo is okay, but still not cost effective without a RoF increase. I haven't seen any buffs that are acceptably good. I'm thinking a buff to S6 ROF 4 24" rending. Oh wait, that's an assault cannon.

" Many find use for good S4 and lower stuff. "

Against bad lists, sure.

"anything that doesn't fit that unrelated unit's OTT power level. "

My proposed terminators are still substantially inferior because of reduced dakka/pt and greatly reduced movement. So this is demonstrably untrue. The issue of dakka/pt is one you stubbornly keep ignoring in your terminator proposals.

Martel732 wrote:
No. I've played since 2nd and I've watched S4 become more and more worthless in the game.

And yet people who have played as long, longer or have more specific experience with newer versions of the game are just fine with it and find use for S4 and lower weapons all the time. It's just you who has an issue with this.

Martel732 wrote:
Please report me then. Because I'm justifying my rules suggestions and you're ranting about a "nerf Eldar thread" that has been done more than this one. Other people seem to be posting comments just fine. You're the one that can't let it go. I'm just shooting down other ideas that I don't think addresses the core failing of terminators in 7th.

I will if you don't stop. I'll give you one more chance before I do.
If by "justifying my rules suggestions" you mean "focusing in on an utterly random and unrelated game problem and dismissing anything that doesn't satisfy the drudge caused by it", then absolutely!
I speak about a "nerf Eldar" thread because that's where discussion of stuff like scatterbikes, what to do about them and what it does to the game if they're not dealt with belong. If it's happened before then it should be no problem to take it over there and leave this thread alone!
Because people are NOT commenting just fine, they were before you started killing this discussion with your dismissal of anything that isn't like scatterbikes. And when people quite rightly say that an unrelated problem unit should be nerfed you immediately fob that off by saying that hypothetical TFGs wouldn't like it so the only choice is to make everything else into a stupid game-breaker too. Quite understandably that stops most people commenting because YOU'RE KILLING THE DISCUSSION! They'd be commenting just fine if you left the topic, as long as you're here they can't.

Martel732 wrote:
I haven't seen any buffs that are acceptably good.

And yet many others have found other things suggested here "acceptably good", this shows that the problem isn't that what they're saying isn't good enough, it's just that you in specific have a stupidly high expectation of what a unit's power level should be, not to mentioned a ridiculously specific idea of where that worth should come from. That's YOUR problem and not theirs.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm thinking a buff to S6 ROF 4 24" rending. Oh wait, that's an assault cannon.

Of course are you, because you have a ridiculous tunnel-vision that blocks out anything else, even though many had workable suggestions which AREN'T that.

Martel732 wrote:
Against bad lists, sure.

No, in general. Nobody else adds that caveat but you. People find uses for S4 weapons in general all the time! Even against highly effective lists!
But that's not what scatterbikes do so you and only you don't care.
P.S. If S4 and lower is absolutely 100% useless then many, MANY units and weapons are useless to you with the only way to buff them in your eyes being to give them S6+, and if Grots, Guardsmen, Tactical Marines and various others all had S6+ then that would be utterly insane and ridiculous, plus the sort of crap we're all trying to avoid. So your thought on S4 and less being useless is FACTUALLY incorrect.

Martel732 wrote:
My proposed terminators are still substantially inferior because of reduced dakka/pt and greatly reduced movement.

How many times do I have to tell you that being weaker than a game-breaker doesn't automatically make something balanced before you get it?
Because it doesn't. Game-breakers are known as such because they are overpowered to such an extent that it significantly disrupts game balance. You can be "substantially inferior" to one and still be broken beyond belief.
Saying that something is balanced because it's weaker than a game-breaker is like saying that something must be on the ground if it's below a high-flying airplane when in reality something can be really high up in the air and still be below that airplane.

Martel732 wrote:
The issue of dakka/pt is one you stubbornly keep ignoring in your terminator proposals.

No I haven't. I've mentioned some stuff that would improve their shooting capabilities (which you ignored because I'm not saying to give everyone an Assault Cannon... Also buffing the Storm Bolter ALSO improves "dakka/pt"!), it's just that I've ALSO suggested OTHER things that would make them better, because that's not the only way to make them better.
Let me just give a hypothetical, I'm not seriously suggesting this because it would be OP, I'd just like to prove a point:
Cost remains the same
They now have WS5/BS5/S5/T5/W2
Terminator Armor now gives a 4++ invulnerable and Storm Shields let you re-roll Armor Saves and Invulnerable Saves.
Terminators get a special rule that lets them Deep Strike into base contact with an enemy unit if they land within maximum charge distance. This counts as charging except that it doesn't allow Overwatch.
Terminators get ANOTHER special rule that lets them ignore Unwieldy.
Sergeants may replace their Power Sword with another Power Weapon of their choice.
All Terminators get another attack base, plus Sergeants get ANOTHER on top of that.

There, I just made them legitimate game-breakers without so much as touching their shooting capabilities! Now maybe you can shut up about how everyone needs an Assault Cannon to be worthwhile.

"It's just you who has an issue with this. "

There are other people on these forums who have noticed the same thing.

"I will if you don't stop. I'll give you one more chance before I do. "

How generous of you. Being an internet bully doesn't make your arguments better.

"I speak about a "nerf Eldar" thread because that's where discussion of stuff like scatterbikes, "

It's not just scatter bikes. Why would anyone use terminators with a Skyhammer annihilation force available to them?

"YOU'RE KILLING THE DISCUSSION! They'd be commenting just fine if you left the topic, as long as you're here they can't. "

Now who is factually incorrect? Everyone else is free to comment and talk about my idea or not talk about my idea. Just as I'm free to express my opinion about their proposed buffs. You are the only one throwing a fit here. You yourself had little trouble responding to Doom and Xenomancer's posts on this very page.

"P.S. If S4 and lower is absolutely 100% useless then many, MANY units and weapons are useless to you "

Marines already have all the S4 shooting they could wish for. That's why elites with even MORE S4 shooting are useless. And, yes, S4 shooting itself has steadily grown less and less useful as lists like all IK have become legal and stronger and stronger weapons have become the new standards.

"You can be "substantially inferior" to one and still be broken beyond belief. "

So a slow unit with mediocre defenses with some S6 guns for 45 ppm is broken beyond belief? Really? You are still paying 225 pts for a unit with 5 wounds. If that's your idea of broken beyond belief, I don't think you're paying attention to the game anymore.

"Cost remains the same
They now have WS5/BS5/S5/T5/W2
Terminator Armor now gives a 4++ invulnerable and Storm Shields let you re-roll Armor Saves and Invulnerable Saves.
Terminators get a special rule that lets them Deep Strike into base contact with an enemy unit if they land within maximum charge distance. This counts as charging except that it doesn't allow Overwatch.
Terminators get ANOTHER special rule that lets them ignore Unwieldy.
Sergeants may replace their Power Sword with another Power Weapon of their choice.
All Terminators get another attack base, plus Sergeants get ANOTHER on top of that. "

So it takes you six rule changes to "break" them. Pretty sure I could break any unit with six wishlist rule changes. Since you are intent on being snarky, let me rephrase: upgunning terminators is the SINGLE most effective thing that could be done. I'm going with the assumption that single changes are more desirable than six-pack changes.

Fun fact - on a typical board (6x4), 45ppm AC-toting Termies destroy 27ppm Scatter Bikes. Yes, even considering range.

Bikes can move a lot faster, especially if they opt not to shoot, but are limited in where to go. ACs on Termies have a 30" threat range in all directions. Doesn't take much to threaten everywhere the bikes can go if they want to shoot.

As for dakka, we're talking S6AP6 vs S6AP4 Rending. Outside 6+ saves, or other saves being better than Armor, the AC is substantially better. The 3+ on the bikes is its most inefficient target, but it still kills much more than double the number of Scatter Bikers than Scatter Bikers kill Termies.

As for mobility, Jetbikes win on movement.
But each Termie is a 30" shooting threat range (a little more, counting the base). On a 6'x4' board, a diameter of over 5' on each model is not small.
Furthermore, each Termie has a potential charge range of 18". This bubble - 36" plus base - is over 3' of pure killzone. In CC, Jetbikes are even more boned than shooting. To a rediculous degree. Jetbikes might strike first in CC, but a charging Termie is *nine times* as deadly to a Jetbike as a Jetbike is to a Termie.

As for objectives, Scatter Bikes can flat out to take an objective last turn. In Eternal War, they might have enough left, if they played defensively, and the Termies decided to ignore objectives, to win. But even then, all the Termie player needs to do is clog the objective with Termies you're not trying to kill (a unit of 3+ Termies would be plenty). Real easy when the Eldar player is just running away. So Termies should win 90% of Eternal War missions, even if somehow the Eldar player prevents engagement.

In Maelstrom, Termies win. Scatterbikes would have to sacrifice a unit to take an objective. And then, only if Termies didn't have it guarded (again, with 3+ Termies, Scatter Bikes can't claim the objective).

Scatter Bikes will be shot off the table much faster than Termies. So Termies win there.

Kill points? Termies win by *points*, meaning lower unit count. Once again, advantage Termies.

So head to head, 45ppm AC Termies destroy Jetbikes.

Please don't try to argue Jetbikrs are more versatile. ACs might do less per poiny to 6+ hordes. But much more to almost anything else. Land Raider? An AC is better than a Lascannon. SL does nothing. Guardsmen, Fire Warriors, or Dire Avengers? AC is 50%-100% better than Scatter Lasers. Wraithknight? AC wins. IK? AC. Dreadknight? AC. Taking small arms fire? Termie armor. Get caught in CC? Termies win vs all but the most elite CC units, Jetbikes lose to Tactical Marines of equal number.

So, point of order. 45ppm AC Termies outperform even the obviously-broken Windriders.

(Although I agree that we should be balancing against the center of the pack, not the top. But that's an argument that always goes on for days.)

"So, point of order. 45ppm AC Termies outperform even the obviously-broken Windriders. "

I disagree, but that's cool. The 12" range is incredibly potent. The scat bikes have far more dakka/pt which is what counts in 7th.

"(Although I agree that we should be balancing against the center of the pack, not the top"

This allows the top to remain the top, with no real competition.

Out of curiosity, what's your fix for tactical terminators? And remember that most Eldar players aren't using footdar, so the stormbolters are indeed mostly useless.

Some specific targets the AC Termies have more dakka/pt against
-IKs
-WKs
-Riptides
-DKs
-Necron Warriors
-Terminators
-Land Raiders
-Necron barges
-Necron CCB
-Fire Warriors
-Dire Avengers

Specific targets where Scatter Bikes are less than 15% better dakka per point:
-Windriders
-Skyhammer Marines

Targets where Scatter Bikes are substantially better dakka/pt:
-Kroot hordes
-Grots

Honestly, which list is scarrier?

Oh, and before you complain about ATSKNF and fearless being bad things because you'd rather break, these are Termies. You should be winning combat. I think the numbers say that 10 Wind riders vs 1 Termie in combat still means the Windriders are more likely to lose combat that turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Potential fixes? The first three fixes for Termies:
-Windrider heavy weapon nerf
-Skyhammer nerf
-WK nerf

That said, there are potential ways to bring Termies up to a "reasonable" level. Heck, Vanilla just got a 5ppm drop.

How would this work out:
-Terminator armor - reroll failed *armor saves*.

What do y'all think of that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Don't field Tac Termies for their Storm Bolters. They are incidental, like the SB on Rhinos and Pods. Field them for their 2+/5++, and their CC threat.

@Bharring: Thank you for pointing all this out.
I think we can ignore Martel now.

@Rerolling Armor Saves: That would be solid. Very solid actually, might need a points increase for that, but maybe I'm overstating things. Either way it's a big patch for their weakness against massed weak firepower.
It was suggested earlier that Terminator Armor get 4++ (with Storm Shields rerolling that instead of giving 3++), combining the two would make Deathwing Knights and TH/SS guys real tough nuts to crack!

I still do think the SB should get a bit of a boost since if it sucks you might as well stick to LC, TH/SS or Deathwing Knights (in the case of Dark Angels) and even if it's just a bonus on vehicles most say it's not much of one. Salvo 2/4 and MAYBE Rending would probably be good enough, really.

" Field them for their 2+/5++, and their CC threat."

That makes them terrible for their price. 2+/5++ has very limited utility on the modern 7th battlefield. They are slow, and have terrible delivery systems. It's too hard to get those powerfists where they are going.

If this is your philosophy, why wouldn't you always use assault terminators? That's what I'm trying to address here.

"-Windrider heavy weapon nerf
-Skyhammer nerf
-WK nerf "

Those don't actually make terminators good. Just less bad against those units. They still have less durability against most weapons than a vanilla marine.

"Heck, Vanilla just got a 5ppm drop. "

"Oh, and before you complain about ATSKNF and fearless being bad things because you'd rather break, these are Termies. You should be winning combat. I think the numbers say that 10 Wind riders vs 1 Termie in combat still means the Windriders are more likely to lose combat that turn."

It's basically impossible to get into combat with Windriders. So I think we can drop that comparison. CC is never happening between these two units.

They are still unfieldable, imo.

"-Terminator armor - reroll failed *armor saves*. "

This would make them much better against their main foil (Wound spam) in terms of defense, but they are still miserable on the offense end of things.

"I think we can ignore Martel now. "

You could have done that a long time ago instead of throwing a hissy fit.

" Very solid actually, might need a points increase for that, but maybe I'm overstating things. "

No, because AP 2 is still very common. AP 2 weapons will be used on the terminators and the massed fire will be turned on units that can jink, like bikers.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I agree terminator are fine as is nothing really needs to be "added" to them just be cautious when deep striking!

 zombiekila707 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I agree terminator are fine as is nothing really needs to be "added" to them just be cautious when deep striking!

But deep striking is a terrible delivery system. If you shoot, you are stuck in "rape me" formation.

Martel732 wrote:

 zombiekila707 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I agree terminator are fine as is nothing really needs to be "added" to them just be cautious when deep striking!

But deep striking is a terrible delivery system. If you shoot, you are stuck in "rape me" formation.

Assuming the enemy has templates ready to go.

Bharring wrote:
Some specific targets the AC Termies have more dakka/pt against
-IKs
-WKs
-Riptides
-DKs
-Necron Warriors
-Terminators
-Land Raiders
-Necron barges
-Necron CCB
-Fire Warriors
-Dire Avengers

Specific targets where Scatter Bikes are less than 15% better dakka per point:
-Windriders
-Skyhammer Marines

Targets where Scatter Bikes are substantially better dakka/pt:
-Kroot hordes
-Grots

Honestly, which list is scarrier?

Oh, and before you complain about ATSKNF and fearless being bad things because you'd rather break, these are Termies. You should be winning combat. I think the numbers say that 10 Wind riders vs 1 Termie in combat still means the Windriders are more likely to lose combat that turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Potential fixes? The first three fixes for Termies:
-Windrider heavy weapon nerf
-Skyhammer nerf
-WK nerf

That said, there are potential ways to bring Termies up to a "reasonable" level. Heck, Vanilla just got a 5ppm drop.

How would this work out:
-Terminator armor - reroll failed *armor saves*.

What do y'all think of that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Don't field Tac Termies for their Storm Bolters. They are incidental, like the SB on Rhinos and Pods. Field them for their 2+/5++, and their CC threat.

How do you figure that? on the IK? Not only do the scat bikes have 12" + range - they also do exactly the same amount of dmg vs the side profile of an IK. and they are Still almost 20 points cheaper. I think its fair to say that these weapons have different optimizations but to claim one is better than the other is just nutts. When you are paying almost 20 points less for a scat bike over an AC term - and the option thats 20 points less has greater mobility - the ability to jink for 4+ save compared to a 5++ save and longer range. I think it's pretty clear what option is "better." My suggestion for 2/4 salvo rending storm bolters for 35 point terms I think is a little more realistic and you wouldn't need to change the fluff of terms. They'd still put out decent firepower and have great CC ability. I know I would use them and it would be fun.

Know why CC will never happen with Termies and Wind riders? Because Wind riders would be destroyed. They have the mobility to stay away, sure. But that incredible difference in CC gives Termies great board control.

If you buff Termies up to glass cannon firepower, and retain their durability, how would that be fair?

"But that incredible difference in CC gives Termies great board control. "

Not really, because they die like slime to shooting like most units in this game. They just don't live to get in CC. That's why the power fist is so incredibly overcosted. I'm more of the line of thought of Xenomancers on this topic.

", and retain their durability, how would that be fair"

They are not that durable, especially since getting within 24" puts you within range of all kinds of unpleasantness.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 zombiekila707 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I agree terminator are fine as is nothing really needs to be "added" to them just be cautious when deep striking!

But deep striking is a terrible delivery system. If you shoot, you are stuck in "rape me" formation.

Assuming the enemy has templates ready to go.

You really think that's a wise risk in 7th "dakka everywhere" ed? I have taken advantage of opponents using the deep strike mechanic so many times that I'm very wary of it.

Xenomancers wrote:My suggestion for 2/4 salvo rending storm bolters for 35 point terms I think is a little more realistic and you wouldn't need to change the fluff of terms. They'd still put out decent firepower and have great CC ability. I know I would use them and it would be fun.

I would certainly support it and appreciate it too!

Bharring wrote:If you buff Termies up to glass cannon firepower, and retain their durability, how would that be fair?

I think that's the point he seems to be missing, no surprise for someone who looks up to game-breakers as an example of what to do.

" My suggestion for 2/4 salvo rending storm bolters for 35 point terms I think is a little more realistic and you wouldn't need to change the fluff of terms."

It's better than nothing, but still probably not worth 35 pts. They just aren't generating enough non-rending wounds because of S4 and a low model count.

Also keep in mind that judging from his posts, Bharring seems to play a lot of self-nerfed Eldar. Against Eldar players that aren't holding back, I don't think the assault cannon terminators would even turn the tide of the match up. They would just become the new victims of the D-scythes or what have you.

Aren't IKs 13/13/12? So its 1/6 hurts vs nothing. AC wins by a landslide.

Against AV12+ vehicles, AV13+ SH, or MCs with an armor save better than 5+, ACs do an amazing amount more than Scatter Lasers.

The AC is better against anything but a 6+.

In fact, the AC is more deadly to *land raiders* than lascannons. Its that freaking versatile.

As for salvo 2/4 rending s4 stormbolters, really? Even for 35ppm, that's crazy talk.

Compare them to DAs, about half their points. +6 range. Twice the shots. *actual* rending. Omgwtfbbq that'd be broken.

Look at it this way. A 5-man gets 20 shots. That's 2 pens on a Land speeder or other AV10. Two HP, some of which pen, on Rhinos. It even has a chance to hurt an IK (small but possible). 20 shots for 175 points.

Not as bonkers as the AC suggestion (2 lower S), but still plenty crazy.

IKs are 13/12/11 actually.

Giving Terminators a rerollable 2+ save and a 4+ save with stormshields giving the invul a reroll is incredibly durable and 'about right' for its cost.

You could add in: for 5pts per model each terminator may upgrade their storm bolters with Storm Bolter Special Issue Ammuniton which changes the stormbolters profile to Rg 24" S4 Salvo 2/4 Rending.

"As for salvo 2/4 rending s4 stormbolters, really? Even for 35ppm, that's crazy talk."

It's not crazy, it's still weak.

"Omgwtfbbq that'd be broken. "

Says the Eldar player.

"Look at it this way. A 5-man gets 20 shots. That's 2 pens on a Land speeder or other AV10. Two HP, some of which pen, on Rhinos. It even has a chance to hurt an IK (small but possible). 20 shots for 175 points. "

Why do you think that's so good? That sound pretty pedestrian to me for a slow, expensive elite slot unit.

"Not as bonkers as the AC suggestion (2 lower S), but still plenty crazy."

Bonkers like the last few GW codices? Okay...

 CrashGordon94 wrote:

Xenomancers wrote:My suggestion for 2/4 salvo rending storm bolters for 35 point terms I think is a little more realistic and you wouldn't need to change the fluff of terms. They'd still put out decent firepower and have great CC ability. I know I would use them and it would be fun.

I would certainly support it and appreciate it too!

Bharring wrote:If you buff Termies up to glass cannon firepower, and retain their durability, how would that be fair?

I think that's the point he seems to be missing, no surprise for someone who looks up to game-breakers as an example of what to do.

I think it's fair to point out that jet bikes are not glass cannons...per point they take more dmg to take down the terminators...crazy huh?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
Aren't IKs 13/13/12? So its 1/6 hurts vs nothing. AC wins by a landslide.

Against AV12+ vehicles, AV13+ SH, or MCs with an armor save better than 5+, ACs do an amazing amount more than Scatter Lasers.

The AC is better against anything but a 6+.

In fact, the AC is more deadly to *land raiders* than lascannons. Its that freaking versatile.

As for salvo 2/4 rending s4 stormbolters, really? Even for 35ppm, that's crazy talk.

Compare them to DAs, about half their points. +6 range. Twice the shots. *actual* rending. Omgwtfbbq that'd be broken.

Look at it this way. A 5-man gets 20 shots. That's 2 pens on a Land speeder or other AV10. Two HP, some of which pen, on Rhinos. It even has a chance to hurt an IK (small but possible). 20 shots for 175 points.

Not as bonkers as the AC suggestion (2 lower S), but still plenty crazy.

nope - IK have 12 side armor - Trust me - I've had my IK killed by units of scatter bikes...the eldar guy was even nice and only used them in squads of 3.

Why would I compare them to DA? I already compared them to an eldar troop. If I did - I'd rather chose guardianss. 3.5x less. 18 gardians have 36 pseudo rending shots compared to the "super ultra buffed" terms that have 20 actaul rending shots...effectively half the firepower vs infantry per point....and are slow moving elites that can't even board a transport that cost less than 200 points...

"If you buff Termies up to glass cannon firepower"

Actually, a 45 pt model with a 24" range with T4 W1 2+/5++ IS a glass cannon in 7th ed.

Martel732 wrote:
"If you buff Termies up to glass cannon firepower"

Actually, a 45 pt model with a 24" range with T4 W1 2+/5++ IS a glass cannon in 7th ed.

It's not even that martel - it's simple math to prove that vs standard str 4 firepower that terms are less durable per point than basic marines. Vs AP2 scatter bikes are actually more surviavlable per point EVEN IF YOU PAID 45 points for a scatter bike because they jink for 4+ compared to a 5++ save.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"If you buff Termies up to glass cannon firepower"

Actually, a 45 pt model with a 24" range with T4 W1 2+/5++ IS a glass cannon in 7th ed.

It's not even that martel - it's simple math to prove that vs standard str 4 firepower that terms are less durable per point than basic marines. Vs AP2 scatter bikes are actually more surviavlable per point EVEN IF YOU PAID 45 points for a scatter bike because they jink for 4+ compared to a 5++ save.

The rest of the enemy list doesn't exist in their comparisons. Just like it's no one individual Eldar unit that can't be countered; it's their lists that can't be countered because its a wall of STR D and S 6 high ROF.

The worst part is that even with 45 ppm AC terminators, skyhammer is STILL much better because assault from deepstrike and relentless gravcannons w/amps. It's like people don't even know what's already in the game.

As much as I'm 100% behind increasing their durability big time, regarding termie with shield - s allowing a 4++ with reroll not a little bit too powertful? Just measuring it up, a lascannon hit would now stand a mere 8.3% chance of wounding them, whereas by comparison is stands a 33% chance of damaging a land raider. That doesn't seem right to me. A change like that would really screw over heavy weapons, and I'm not sure that's the desired result here. Thoughts?

 thegreatchimp wrote:
As much as I'm 100% behind increasing their durability big time, regarding termie with shield - s allowing a 4++ with reroll not a little bit too powertful? Just measuring it up, a lascannon hit would now stand a mere 8.3% chance of wounding them, whereas by comparison is stands a 33% chance of damaging a land raider. That doesn't seem right to me. A change like that would really screw over heavy weapons, and I'm not sure that's the desired result here. Thoughts?

As I have stated, putting on additional saves is not my preferred method of handling this. Also, single shot weapons like the lascannon are really poor in 7th ed. The whole 4++ reroll thing is there to survive grav. And grav was implemented to kill 2+ save MCs, which were the original sin of 6th ed imo.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:

ConanMan wrote:
Make storm bolters assault 3 DONE.
Give them back "follow on fire" DONE.
STOP CREATING THESE THEADS

whats follow on fire?

Lol It's the whole point of "storm bolters" what made them different from "bloomin bolters" in the first place!: follow on fire means every wound (note NOT a successful save) generates a free extra shot.

So your 5 storm bolter guys if they are assault 3 means 15 shots.. which say.. 10 hit.. then 6 wound you get to roll 6 more shots to hit and so on

Thats where I think, if Termies get a reroll it should be Armor only.

Also, how are Bikes more resilient than Termies per point?
For AP4+ weapons, they die exactly twice as fast. At 27ppm, thats a lot less than double.
For AP3 weapons, its either 6x as fast (without jinking), or 3x as fast (Jinking).
For AP2 weapons, they can sacrifice 75% of their shooting to get a 4+ cover vs a stock 5++.

They win in survivability *if and only if* its AP2 ("Terminator Killer" weapons), AND they sacrifice 75% of their firepower.

At 27ppm vs 35ppm, even at 27ppm vs 45ppm, they are still much, much less survivable per point.

The math is rather damning there. So its crazy to claim Wind riders are more durable per point.

I take your point about IKs. Assuming you hit side/rear armor, as they are 13/12/11, AC Termies wouldn't be better per point against that threat. That just leaves almost every other scary thing in the game on either the really-close list, or the AC-destroys list.

And comparing salvo 2/4 rending stormbolters to Guardians? Twice the range (funny how that 12" only matters when the favored army doesn't have it?). Affects vehicles. Not APed by boltguns. T4. 5++. Amazing CC vs one of the weakest CCs in the game. Chapter Tactics. Leadership shenanigans. Basically, its a glass cannon that can outperform such Termies, yes. In specific setups.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(I even looked up IKs where I could, but that source said 13/13/12. Not a reliable source aparrently!)

 thegreatchimp wrote:
As much as I'm 100% behind increasing their durability big time, regarding termie with shield - s allowing a 4++ with reroll not a little bit too powertful? Just measuring it up, a lascannon hit would now stand a mere 8.3% chance of wounding them, whereas by comparison is stands a 33% chance of damaging a land raider. That doesn't seem right to me. A change like that would really screw over heavy weapons, and I'm not sure that's the desired result here. Thoughts?

Well, a Storm Shield Termie gets 3++ currently, which has a 1/3 chance to fail.
If it's 4++ rerollable, then that's a 1/4 chance to fail.
To compare easier that mains currently it's 4/12 to fail, being lowered to 3/12 to fail.
Not THAT big a jump.

Might I ask how everyone feels towards the idea of the Sergeant being able to swap his Power Sword for a different Power Weapon?

"Guardians?"

Base guardians aren't good. That's why I never see them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CrashGordon94 wrote:

 thegreatchimp wrote:
As much as I'm 100% behind increasing their durability big time, regarding termie with shield - s allowing a 4++ with reroll not a little bit too powertful? Just measuring it up, a lascannon hit would now stand a mere 8.3% chance of wounding them, whereas by comparison is stands a 33% chance of damaging a land raider. That doesn't seem right to me. A change like that would really screw over heavy weapons, and I'm not sure that's the desired result here. Thoughts?

Well, a Storm Shield Termie gets 3++ currently, which has a 1/3 chance to fail.
If it's 4++ rerollable, then that's a 1/4 chance to fail.
To compare easier that mains currently it's 4/12 to fail, being lowered to 3/12 to fail.
Not THAT big a jump.

Might I ask how everyone feels towards the idea of the Sergeant being able to swap his Power Sword for a different Power Weapon?

You might as well, but it makes little difference as they usually die before they reach CC. Too... slow....

The typical MO for tactical terminators is to deep strike in, shoot ineffectually, and then get crippled by return fire before their "amazing CC" comes into play. This is what needs addressed.

The struggle is whether we want their initial entrance into the battlefield to accomplish something via shooting or for them to somehow magically be able to slog into CC. There are so many units in the game that are done when you get them into CC that I don't think that units with "amazing CC" are necessary. The challenge is to get into CC without being obliterated. Terminators really don't fare well in that department. There is also the issue of units like Windriders that they can never, ever catch.

@ "Guardians?"
Gardians have more firepower than the terminators I am suggesting. with 2/4 slavo rending SB.
Terms 8.5 points per shot.
guardians 5 points per shot.

Obviously it there are other factors to consider here but it's pretty clear that gardians do more dmg per point even after I suggest doubling the shots from a SB.

and guardians aren't even very good. Though - they are better than most think.

To infantry within 12", yes.

To vehicles, or things 13-24" away no.

So your suggestion makes one of the more durable CC units in the game not have quite as much dakka when shooting as one of the least durable shooty units, when in easy assault range?

" of the more durable CC units in the game "

They are not durable at all. That's one of the problems.

Compared to Guardians? Really?

Bharring wrote:
Compared to Guardians? Really?

In the scheme of the game. Why are we talking about guardians again?

And against grav/melta/plasma, the guardian is a LOT more durable.

I'd say give the sergeant 2W and perhaps a few abilities, like the exarchs from Eldar.

The sergeants used to have 2W in rogue traders as well, like somone here mentioned.

That would be enough to make characters wary of being challenged out by them. Would also make the game mor colourfull with "real" charachters instead of these 1W sergeants that you find everywhere.

 triplegrim wrote:
I'd say give the sergeant 2W and perhaps a few abilities, like the exarchs from Eldar.

The sergeants used to have 2W in rogue traders as well, like somone here mentioned.

That would be enough to make characters wary of being challenged out by them. Would also make the game mor colourfull with "real" charachters instead of these 1W sergeants that you find everywhere.

That's an interesting idea and has some merit, but doesn't really fix the underlying problems with the unit.

Against Boltguns, stubbers, lasguns, flamers, grenades, swords, axes, Splinter, Pulse weaponry, etc they arent at all.

Bharring wrote:
Against Boltguns, stubbers, lasguns, flamers, grenades, swords, axes, Splinter, Pulse weaponry, etc they arent at all.

Again, why is this relevant?

Bharring wrote:
To infantry within 12", yes.

To vehicles, or things 13-24" away no.

So your suggestion makes one of the more durable CC units in the game not have quite as much dakka when shooting as one of the least durable shooty units, when in easy assault range?

not "not quite as much" it's almost double. These guys are durable? Lets see em tank 36 psuedo rending shots....nope - they are dead. Average rolls kill over 4 terms. So for their high point cost and being "durable" they can't even take 18 guardians firepower....

There is more to this game than just Plasma Guns.

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Compared to Guardians? Really?

In the scheme of the game. Why are we talking about guardians again?

And against grav/melta/plasma, the guardian is a LOT more durable.

I'm trying to dumb down my argument to prove that the buff i suggested doesn't even bring terms shooting in line with bad shooting squads...

Hoping to prove two points here. #1 - current terms are the most overpriced and terrible units in the game and #2 that doubling their firepower shouldn't even be contested anymore when it still doesn't even elevate them past guardians. At the least with this buff it would make them playable.

Bharring wrote:
There is more to this game than just Plasma Guns.

Yeah, those other guns would be the grav guns or D-weapons. The "regular" weapons are non-sequiturs now. Don't believe me? Try to play a fluffy marine list with lots of bolters. Even my crappy ass BA will run right over you because you can't keep me out of CC.

Well yes. But who let's Guardians stroll up and unload on Termies? Why would you let that happen. You should get two rounds of shots if the footslog. And mounting up more than doubles their cost.

So 18 Guardians kill 4 Termies?

Equal points - 5 Termies - kill, under the upgrade, 10+ Guardians a round. At 24", youre probably killing an EV of 20 of the 18 guardians before they can shoot. And Guardians would be one of their worse targets, whereas Termies is one of Guardians juiciest targets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(And you need what, 2 Termies in CC to beat 18 Guardians?)

Bharring wrote:
Well yes. But who let's Guardians stroll up and unload on Termies? Why would you let that happen. You should get two rounds of shots if the footslog. And mounting up more than doubles their cost.

So 18 Guardians kill 4 Termies?

Equal points - 5 Termies - kill, under the upgrade, 10+ Guardians a round. At 24", youre probably killing an EV of 20 of the 18 guardians before they can shoot. And Guardians would be one of their worse targets, whereas Termies is one of Guardians juiciest targets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(And you need what, 2 Termies in CC to beat 18 Guardians?)

I haven't seen guardians on foot for years. This is not a useful comparison.

I think your idea that the stormbolters are just an after thought sums up your position. But terminators are useless as CC units because of modern 7th list construction. They're not going after guardians on foot. They are going after Skyhammers and scatbikes and WKs. They are such optimal targets for so many weapon systems because I can kill a lot of pts by taking away very few wounds.

Bharring wrote:
Well yes. But who let's Guardians stroll up and unload on Termies? Why would you let that happen. You should get two rounds of shots if the footslog. And mounting up more than doubles their cost.

So 18 Guardians kill 4 Termies?

Equal points - 5 Termies - kill, under the upgrade, 10+ Guardians a round. At 24", youre probably killing an EV of 20 of the 18 guardians before they can shoot. And Guardians would be one of their worse targets, whereas Termies is one of Guardians juiciest targets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(And you need what, 2 Termies in CC to beat 18 Guardians?)

nope - terms will kill a few gards - they fall back and can't be overrun because - term. Then they get shot again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Well yes. But who let's Guardians stroll up and unload on Termies? Why would you let that happen. You should get two rounds of shots if the footslog. And mounting up more than doubles their cost.

So 18 Guardians kill 4 Termies?

Equal points - 5 Termies - kill, under the upgrade, 10+ Guardians a round. At 24", youre probably killing an EV of 20 of the 18 guardians before they can shoot. And Guardians would be one of their worse targets, whereas Termies is one of Guardians juiciest targets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(And you need what, 2 Termies in CC to beat 18 Guardians?)

I haven't seen guardians on foot for years. This is not a useful comparison.

I think your idea that the stormbolters are just an after thought sums up your position. But terminators are useless as CC units because of modern 7th list construction. They're not going after guardians on foot. They are going after Skyhammers and scatbikes and WKs. They are such optimal targets for so many weapon systems because I can kill a lot of pts by taking away very few wounds.

I see foot gardians all the time when eldar players "dumb down" their lists. It's still enough to beat imperials that are trying really hard.

If you want to run something fast down and clobber it in CC, using a unit that exemplifies slow and steady is probably the wrong tool. Your disregard of small arms and discounting of durability sums up yours. Terminators are neither ASMs nor Devestators, and shouldn't become them.

You don't see foot Guardians doing well at tournies often. You do see scout spam, Necron Warrior spam, SM obsec MSU, and Kalabite spam. You also see stuff like IK spam and Windrider spam, but not all good tourny lists ignore small arms.

If Guardians had Termie durability and the suggested firepower, even at Termie prices you'd see them everywhere.

"Terminators are neither ASMs nor Devestators, and shouldn't become them. "

What they are is unusable currently.


And I don't discount durability. I have almost packed up anbd quit against Necron Wraiths before. Terminators just don't have any durability to speak of.

'If you want to run something fast down and clobber it in CC, using a unit that exemplifies slow and steady is probably the wrong tool"

But YOU said above their big deal was their CC ability. So, if they can't use it because they are slow (like I've been saying) what good are they?

" Your disregard of small arms"

GW decided they'd be useless, not I.

If Guardians break, they fall back 2d6, then on their turn they fall back another 2d6 and can't voluntarily move. 4d6 averages 14". Anything over 12", and even if they aren't off the board, they can't shoot said Termies, unless you consolidated into it. If they regroup they can shoot.

Either way, assuming they are lucky and can shoot, it's at 25% accuracy, with whatever is left. So now the Termies are *heavily* out shooting the running Guardians.

(If you're constantly having that problem, try consolidating away from them.)

Honestly, Termies do need a buff, but even as is can handle Guardians rather well. Abuse that 12".



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nobody claims a Wraithlord is not a CC model. It has the same movement.

Place them in front of Berserkers or something else thats CC but doesn't have AP2. Ever seen Banshees try to drop Termies? Its hilarious.

"Nobody claims a Wraithlord is not a CC model. It has the same movement. "

Haven't seen one since the WK came out. Irreleveant model now.

"Ever seen Banshees try to drop Termies? Its hilarious."

Why would you use banshees? Why would get them anywhere near 2+ armor?

"Place them in front of Berserkers"

You mean the berserkers that don't die to shooting? Why buy terminators when I can just shoot all the CC threats to death? Like all the Xeno lists do.

"Honestly, Termies do need a buff, but even as is can handle Guardians rather well. Abuse that 12". "

Glad a marine elite choice can hold its own against the most basic Eldar troop. I feel so much better now. Now try to take on Warp Spiders, an actual Eldar elite.

Of course you don't see Wraithlords in ultra competitive metas much right now. Because the WK is broken. So are you going to buff the WL up to WK levels? I hope not.

Of course an Eldar player won't let Banshees near Termies. That means Termies stop Banshees from touching anything in a large area. Effectively, Termies win.

If most things can't take Termies in CC, for their points, why should Termies also be able to beat them at shooting, for their points?

"If most things can't take Termies in CC, for their points, why should Termies also be able to beat them at shooting, for their points?"

Because CC ability is largely pointless in 7th ed. Skyhammer works because the units effectively teleport straight into CC. Even then, it's more tying up shooters than lethality as the major factor. And CC is doubly pointless for terminators because their delivery systems suck so bad.

CC ability for TWC and Wraiths matter, because they have the speed and durability to make it to CC.

". So are you going to buff the WL up to WK levels? I hope not"

I would, just to see some variety. I don't think you understand my level of despair here.

"That means Termies stop Banshees from touching anything in a large area. Effectively, Termies win. "

Shoot termies to death (you ARE Eldar, still), then use your banshees, if you must have them in your list. Banshees in a vacuum don't win, but Eldar still win.

Bharring wrote:
Of course you don't see Wraithlords in ultra competitive metas much right now. Because the WK is broken. So are you going to buff the WL up to WK levels? I hope not.

Of course an Eldar player won't let Banshees near Termies. That means Termies stop Banshees from touching anything in a large area. Effectively, Termies win.

If most things can't take Termies in CC, for their points, why should Termies also be able to beat them at shooting, for their points?

I'll give you something here - banshees are in worse shape than even terminators. But come on....

Terminators are supposed to take on entire planets dude...They should be able to "take on" anything - even stuff that is faster than them. Kind of like Wraiths and TWC can "take on" anything. As far as I know - if you are giving up a 3++ save for a shooting attack - it better be a good shooting attack - thats the best place to start to fix tactical terminators. They need more firepower and it needs to be free.

(FYI, Spiders are FA, not Elites. Banshees are Elites)

I'm fairly sure it typically takes less dakka to kill Banshees than it does to kill Termies.

If you don't want a slow moving CC unit, don't take one. If they're worthless because the fast moving ones are OP, fix that. If they are worthless because some shooting units are OP, fix that. There are battlefield roles for slow moving durable CC monsters. Termies probably need some help to be that. But that doesn't mean we should shift everything out of that role, just because you can't picture how to use it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its giving up a shooting attack and paying a bunch of points for that 3++.

(Xeno - I think even Banshees are better than they should be now! Look up their points, and reread their rules! But that would be another thread!)


Wraiths and TWC *shouldnt* be able to take on anything. That is probably a bigger part of the problem than the termie rules themselves.

"There are battlefield roles for slow moving durable CC monsters."

Not in a game dominated by shooting. As I said skyhammer ASM are 1,000 times better even though they are way less lethal because they just appear in CC.

" If they're worthless because the fast moving ones are OP, fix that. If they are worthless because some shooting units are OP, fix that"

It's more complicated than that, and I wish more people understood this. Terminators are forced to buy individual components that in theory add up to 35 or 40 pts or whatever, but in practice don't work out at all. It's not because of OP shooters or OP CC units. It's that the tools terminators are given just don't work together well, and never have for the loyalist terminators.

"But that doesn't mean we should shift everything out of that role, just because you can't picture how to use it."

GW has defacto demanded it with the units they have put in the game. I can't picture how to use it with the game that GW has created. That's different than not being able to picture it at all.

"If you want to run something fast down and clobber it in CC"

By the way, Sanguinary Guard should be able to do this with a 2+ save, but they are also miserable because of all the AP 2 in the game. They just die without accomplishing anything.

So the TLDR is:
-GW has made the game only care about glass cannons
-GW has made Termies not be glass cannons
?

And the assumption is #1 is both true and immutable, but #2 is profane?

"GW has made the game only care about glass cannons
-GW has made Termies not be glass cannons "

Not exactly. There ARE units where durability is a thing, but T4 W1 2+/5++ is not one of them. Yes, we can alter those stats but it just seems so much easier and more effective to upgun them. And it's better to be a glass cannon than a glass popgun. Which is what they are right now. Easy to kill and they accomplish nothing before they die.

Martel732 wrote:

As I have stated, putting on additional saves is not my preferred method of handling this. Also, single shot weapons like the lascannon are really poor in 7th ed. The whole 4++ reroll thing is there to survive grav. And grav was implemented to kill 2+ save MCs, which were the original sin of 6th ed imo.

I know, I was responding to some of the others regarding proposed durability fixes.

Yes, they are really poor. I blame it on overly-generous cover saves since 6th , particularly the abundance of area cover that gives 4++ . And becasue of that same imblanace, "ignore cover" weapons are too good. But that's a discussion for another day.

I've been following the thread, and while I can see your logic in that the assault cannon upgrade is the simplest solution, I don't think the overall power of everything needs to be measured on the same scale. A terminator's forte should be unmatched durability among heavy infantry, and very good close combat ability. If I wanted pure firepower for my points, I look to long fangs and tanks. I would be more concerned about the effectiveness of other bike / fast attack units vs scatterbikes rather than a unit which has a completely different battlefield role.

By all means termies overall effectiveness per points does need to be remedied, but this doesn't neccessarily have to be done via a massive firepower increase. As mentioned I would suggest moderate firepower increase, big durability increase, and if needs be a points adjustment to make them viable. So they're not as shooty as scatterbikes point for point, but as long as they're effective in their own area -close range firefights, melee and extreme resiliance, then I'd say they're exactly what they should be.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

As I have stated, putting on additional saves is not my preferred method of handling this. Also, single shot weapons like the lascannon are really poor in 7th ed. The whole 4++ reroll thing is there to survive grav. And grav was implemented to kill 2+ save MCs, which were the original sin of 6th ed imo.

I know, I was responding to some of the others regarding proposed durability fixes.

Yes, they are really poor. I blame it on overly-generous cover saves since 6th , particularly the abundance of area cover that gives 4++ . And becasue of that same imblanace, "ignore cover" weapons are too good. But that's a discussion for another day.

I've been following the thread, and while I can see your logic in that the assault cannon upgrade is the simplest solution, I don't think the overall power of everything needs to be measured on the same scale. A terminator's forte should be unmatched durability among heavy infantry, and very good close combat ability. If I wanted pure firepower for my points, I look to long fangs and tanks. I would be more concerned about the effectiveness of other bike / fast attack units vs scatterbikes rather than a unit which has a completely different battlefield role.

By all means termies overall effectiveness per points does need to be remedied, but this doesn't neccessarily have to be done via a massive firepower increase. As mentioned I would suggest moderate firepower increase, big durability increase, and if needs be a points adjustment to make them viable. So they're not as shooty as scatterbikes point for point, but as long as they're effective in their own area -close range firefights, melee and extreme resiliance, then I'd say they're exactly what they should be.

My concern is that they will end up being strictly inferior to the grav cent still. If you give them cent-like durability, but melee capability instead of ranged, you have a variation on the assault cent, which is never used. In theory, I agree with your assessment, but this game is very hard on slow CC units. How much durability are we talking here? On a unit w/o a storm shield? I just don't know how that shakes out.

GW has really painted terminators into a tight corner. They were never that great to begin with, but now with all the anti-2+ armor MC weapons out there, they are total gak.

 Xenomancers wrote:
@ "Guardians?"
Gardians have more firepower than the terminators I am suggesting. with 2/4 slavo rending SB.
Terms 8.5 points per shot.
guardians 5 points per shot.

Obviously it there are other factors to consider here but it's pretty clear that gardians do more dmg per point even after I suggest doubling the shots from a SB.

and guardians aren't even very good. Though - they are better than most think.

Are you joking? You need to play good players more! 2 squads of 10 guardian defenders dropped from 2 wave serpents are hands down the best cheap slaughter volley in the game.. 40 shots.. always wounds on 6.. 5 sixes on a average day plus all the regular bumpf shots are better than most.. no army can match them point for point for destruction.. PS they don't need a save they have no one left to hurt them

"PS they don't need a save they have no one left to hurt them"

Truly the best defense in 7th ed is to leave no models left within range to shoot back.

Martel is completely right in regards to this, unfortunately I disagree with him on the more dakka thing. It is actually the opposite. .....Kinda. Terminators need a buff in what they can carry, I would be fine with them being able to purchase AC's. However, GW needs to remove A LOT of the dakka in this game. Everything these days has AP2 or Ignores Cover and is usually S6 or better. I wont field Eavy Armor Boyz because I know for a solid fact that the 4pts per model increase isn't worth i because they will get shredded by the hundred things in this game with a better AP value then 4.

Bharring wrote:

Of course an Eldar player won't let Banshees near Termies. That means Termies stop Banshees from touching anything in a large area. Effectively, Termies win.

Banshees are terrible in the first place, and even then can easily tarpit the Terminators. On average you'll hit them with 4 Power Fist attacks and 1 Power Sword attack, with one Power Fist failing every other round and the Sword failing 1/3. They're also attacking 15 Howling Banshees for the cost. They also have 15 pseudo Rending shots and can't be shot at for Overwatch. So if you're talking about Terminators scaring away Banshees, nope. They'll probably kill two Terminators from shooting and then probably two Terminators in combat.

Effective at melee? Not even close...

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Martel is completely right in regards to this, unfortunately I disagree with him on the more dakka thing. It is actually the opposite. .....Kinda. Terminators need a buff in what they can carry, I would be fine with them being able to purchase AC's. However, GW needs to remove A LOT of the dakka in this game. Everything these days has AP2 or Ignores Cover and is usually S6 or better. I wont field Eavy Armor Boyz because I know for a solid fact that the 4pts per model increase isn't worth i because they will get shredded by the hundred things in this game with a better AP value then 4.

I understand your sentiment, but I'm coming from the angle of the dakka cat is already out of the bag. The whole situation sucks.

Martel732 wrote:

 triplegrim wrote:
I'd say give the sergeant 2W and perhaps a few abilities, like the exarchs from Eldar.

The sergeants used to have 2W in rogue traders as well, like somone here mentioned.

That would be enough to make characters wary of being challenged out by them. Would also make the game mor colourfull with "real" charachters instead of these 1W sergeants that you find everywhere.

That's an interesting idea and has some merit, but doesn't really fix the underlying problems with the unit.

Maybe, if one of the abilities is "can charge out of deepstrike" or a double set of flamers? Or even fleet or "lets squad attack on initative, even with power fists?


Anyway, I dont think they can be given more durability without taking more ap2 weapons out of the game. A FnP would just add to the inflation...

I'm afraid I have to question your banshee numbers.

1) Banshees kill 1/9 Termies per shot, with 1 shot each. Termies kill 2/9 Banshees with 2 shots each. So a Termie is *four times* as deadly to Banshees as Banshees are to Termies. Once Banshees get with 12", and somehow avoid the charge, of course.

2) In CC, a Banshee kills 2x(1/2)(1/3)(1/6) Termies a round. That's 1/18. So 15 banshees average *less* than 1 dead Termie a round. A Termie (2 attacks base) kills 2x(1/2)(5/6)(1) Banshees a round. That's 10/12. Even assuming 15 Banshees kill 1 Termie before he swings, that's still 40/12 dead Banshees. Notably over 3. So even 15:5, Termies destroy Banshees.

So Banshees lose at range. And Banshees lose at CC. And Banshees lose at claiming ground.

And those numbers are for Termies as they are now, not the proposed bonkers versions.

"not the proposed bonkers versions."

It's so bonker for the Eldar to have to face units that they might actually lose to.

Because everyone auto-losing to Termies would somehow make the game better?

Seriously?

ConanMan wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
@ "Guardians?"
Gardians have more firepower than the terminators I am suggesting. with 2/4 slavo rending SB.
Terms 8.5 points per shot.
guardians 5 points per shot.

Obviously it there are other factors to consider here but it's pretty clear that gardians do more dmg per point even after I suggest doubling the shots from a SB.

and guardians aren't even very good. Though - they are better than most think.

Are you joking? You need to play good players more! 2 squads of 10 guardian defenders dropped from 2 wave serpents are hands down the best cheap slaughter volley in the game.. 40 shots.. always wounds on 6.. 5 sixes on a average day plus all the regular bumpf shots are better than most.. no army can match them point for point for destruction.. PS they don't need a save they have no one left to hurt them

I agree with you man - look at what I've been saying!

Footdar never sees the light of day because serpents were OP and now Scatbikes are also OP. but Gardians are still above the curve.

60 gardians is 600 points (Theres also silly formations to make them bs5)
Puts out more firepower than most armies. (oh but they die easy) really? cause everyone is taking grav cannons....not really sure how thats gonna help vs 60 gardians....plus you still got 1250 points of OP eldar behind them.

I like T5 with 5+ FnP idea

steelreign wrote:
I like T5 with 5+ FnP idea

This certainly would make them tough enough to live to CC. With a 5++ and FNP they would be hard as nails to kill.

Well, clearly defining the goal might help.

Which one of these is most desirable?
-Make Termies more durable vs everything
-Make Termies more durable mostly vs AP2/1
-Make Termies more durable mostly vs AP3+

Another choice:
-Make Termies more durable vs CC
-Make Termies more durable vs Shooting

Depending on the answers to those questions, the resolution differs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Another note - reread the formation that gives Guardians BS5. It doesn't. That should help. And if they keep destroying you, try small arms. You'd be surprised how much a boltgun does to them.)

Bharring wrote:
Because everyone auto-losing to Termies would somehow make the game better?

Seriously?

Exaggeration.

"Well, clearly defining the goal might help."

That's its own thread.

" And if they keep destroying you, try small arms"

They are a meta counter, as small arms are a total fail against so many other army builds.

I noticed that more firepower wasn't even on your list.

So TEQs not being as good as GEQs against lists built specifically to stop TEQs is a problem? Really?

I can agree that Tac Termies are kinda on the low end for TEQs, and Eldar OP, but shouldnt a GEQ horde do OK against weapons designed to kill TEQs?

And what do you think would reasonably counter 45ppm Termies with free Assault Cannons on each one? Maybe Skyhammer grav spam, but what else? I would think most lists would be auto-lose against that. So no, not an exageration, I think.

Isn't clearly defining the goal of "What to do about Terminators", not only in scope, but absolutely critical to deciding "What to do about Terminators"?

This isn't supposed to be another "Screw all Xenos because Eldar - and some IoM - OP!" thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(More firepower is an option. The most recent responses had been about durability.)

If you want more firepower for Termies, how's this:
-Get some larger bases, elevated would be a plus
-Mount a pair of Termies on each base. Armed with HBs or Gravs and/or CML as appropriate
-Begin each game with "This unit of Dev Termies are Dev Cents counts-as"
-Enjoy gak that GW has *already* added to the game, without ruining everyone's Termies.

"If you want more firepower for Termies, how's this: "

So you are completely not open to this at all. Wow. That's incredibly close minded. Especially for a player whose codex got scatterlasers on their TROOPS. Think about that for a minute before unilaterally decided that marine elites should be relegated to popguns.

"And what do you think would reasonably counter 45ppm Termies with free Assault Cannons on each one?"

Taking the medicine for one turn, and then shooting them off the table. Same thing as everything else in this game. How do I counter D-scythe wraithguard? Lose a unit and then try to shoot them off the table. How do I counter TWC? Sacrifice a unit to them and then try to shoot them off the table. How do I counter Wraiths? I don't, because I'm BA. Get the idea? I'm really having a hard time imaging how your games go given your philosophy about things.

I'd be more than happy to settle for the heavy bolter if ROF 3 S5 wasn't so damn weak in the current game. Can't glance out AV 12, and can't put enough wounds on the godly T6 MCs running around. The heavy bolter is trash, and that's another imperial problem that propagates through IoM lists.

Funny that, BA don't even get the centurions you are talking about. Eldar are currently an autowin button against BA. So I'm really having a hard time with your idea of keeping the tactical terminator in the dirt. Maybe you're willing to self-nerf, but most Eldar players aren't where I play and I suspect that's true in general given the nerfs tourney organizers have handed down. Even with those nerfs, they beat BA easily.

"This isn't supposed to be another "Screw all Xenos because Eldar - and some IoM - OP!" thread."

I'm not trying to screw anyone. And even if I were, I'm an amateur compared to what GW has already done.

"I can agree that Tac Termies are kinda on the low end for TEQs"

This is where you fail to grasp the futility. Tac terminators are the worst unit in the BA codex, which by extension, almost certainly makes them the worst unit in the marine codex. Even at 35 ppm. This is out of a pair of books with plenty of bad units you never see.

"without ruining everyone's Termies."

GW has already been doing that for 20 years.

Terminators are fluff wise supposed to be the ELITE of the Space Marine Armies. They are supposed to eat up firepower that would kill lesser marines and in return devastate their opponents with return fire. The current problem with them is that they are ignorable.

In every game I have EVER played against a SM or Chaos SM player who fielded any number of Terminators it was easy to win. They are slow, costly and don't have enough firepower to thin out my ranks before I assault them and swamp them in numbers.

5 terminators costs roughly the same amount as my Ork Horde (29 boyz, Nob BP/PK) 220pts ish.

at 24 inches the termies can kill 4-5 boyz my turn i move, and run and soak up the fire for another turn. turn two the terminators kill another 4-5 so lets say 9 dead orks at this point. On my turn I move, shoot and assault and beat the terminators by sheer numbers. 20 orks = 80 CC attacks. 40 hits 20 wounds and 3ish dead terminators, combat is basically over and that is before my Nob gets to swing with his PK and kill the remaining 2 Terminators.

They definitely need an upgrade in firepower, I think giving them all access to special weapons would be fine. I am perfectly ok with 5 terminators running around with AC's so long as they have to pay a points cost for them. (not full cost as that is Over Priced as it is)

Bharring wrote:
Of course you don't see Wraithlords in ultra competitive metas much right now. Because the WK is broken.

This is odd, I am taking 3 wraithlords ( and no wraithknights) to a tourney soon. I expect to do well.

Mind you they are banning LoW and Formations

Bharring wrote:
Well, clearly defining the goal might help.

Making them slightly more durable vs >AP4
Making them much more durable vs AP<4

I'm not completely closed minded about more dakka. I'm just resistant to it. I don't like the idea of losing my Tac Termies in all but name because another player wants to field his Tac Termies as Dev Cents. That said, I'd love a Dev Termie unit, perhaps with 2-3 Heavies per 5.

Sure, the CWE codex gets SL on troops. One codex I play gets that. I've never said they should have them the way they do. In fact, I regularly spout against it. But that should be a different thread.

None of my other codicies get it. SM, Tau, Harlies, DE, Corsairs. Not everyone just plays one Dex.

My SM Tac Termies aren't fielded for their storm bolter. They are better at CC than almost any unit in any of my other codexes. So why should they *also* be better at shooting than said units? Termies need help, but let's not just make them the new Scatter Bikes.

As for taking the medicine for one turn, then shooting them off the table, what can do that to 45ppm AC toting Termies? As shown, Scatter Bikes can't. Both better firepower and more survivability per point than Scatter Bikes is crazy. Throw in great CC, and things get silly.

Wraiths, TWC, and WWP Scytheguard are problems. Those are things that need fixing. Just adding things more broken than them just makes everything except this new godmode more pointless than you find them now.

I'm not saying keep the Tac Termies in the dirt. I'm saying don't one-up GW's Grav Cents. Especially not in the same breath you malign them for that crap.

What you fail to grasp is that your intended template has already been implemented. And most of us hate it. Grav Cents.

Also see no harm coming of allowing them 2 heavy weapons per 5 man squad, or failing that 2 per 7 man squad. Am I correct in saying they used to be allowed take 2 per 5 in previous codexes, or was that just wolf guard?

At 35 points terminators are fairly well balanced.
They are comparable to both ogryns and mega armored orks.
They are not great and they don't suck.
A decent formation bonus and they are great.

I think the biggest native buff they should get is 2w this makes them comparable to ork mega nobs and significantly cheaper but mega nobs are still overpriced. while increasing resiliency vs small arms fire or massed low str atks. But still makes them die to str8+ or mass ap2 Atks. Fnp, increased invul saves, or t5 makes them significantly stronger then they should be at 35pts.

Bharring wrote:
I'm afraid I have to question your banshee numbers.

1) Banshees kill 1/9 Termies per shot, with 1 shot each. Termies kill 2/9 Banshees with 2 shots each. So a Termie is *four times* as deadly to Banshees as Banshees are to Termies. Once Banshees get with 12", and somehow avoid the charge, of course.

2) In CC, a Banshee kills 2x(1/2)(1/3)(1/6) Termies a round. That's 1/18. So 15 banshees average *less* than 1 dead Termie a round. A Termie (2 attacks base) kills 2x(1/2)(5/6)(1) Banshees a round. That's 10/12. Even assuming 15 Banshees kill 1 Termie before he swings, that's still 40/12 dead Banshees. Notably over 3. So even 15:5, Termies destroy Banshees.

So Banshees lose at range. And Banshees lose at CC. And Banshees lose at claiming ground.

And those numbers are for Termies as they are now, not the proposed bonkers versions.

1. That's three banshees per Terminator though. SO that's more like 3/9 compared to the 2/9 for the Terminator. You're looking at single models, not point values. I did the same for Terminators and gave them Imperial Fists for better shooting. In the regular codex, that's about 2.5 dead Banshees at any range. For SoT, at half range that's about 3 dead.
2. They have WS5 in that formation. That's 3+ to hit, 5+ to wounds. That's at I5 with 30 attacks base, 45 on the charge for the comparable price point (15 Banshees is 195). This comes to about 1.5 dead Terminators. Factoring in what was probably 1.5 dead Terminators from shooting, I'd say that the Terminators are going to lose combat.

So let's say Terminators get the first round of shooting off, and the Imperial Fists kill 2.5 (we'll be generous with 3). We still have 12 Banshees, which leads into this:
1. 1.5 Terminators dead from shooting (guesstimate in my head, I don't have a calculator)
2. 1 Terminator dead on the charge.
So we'll be generous again and just say 2 died total, and we'll kill off the Sergeant because the Power Sword sucks, it won't be hitting soon enough to matter, and Power Fists wound easier. On their turn, they kill 2.5 Banshees.

See the issue here? Even when factoring in a Chapter Tactic that SHOULD be suited for them, it isn't working out. For comparison:
1. Ultramarines are basically doing the same for shooting. I haven't done calculations for melee.
2. With those casualties, Black Templars get Counter Attack, which is almost 4 dead Banshees. That's a significant improvement, but Terminators had to die for that to happen. Blech.
3. Iron Hands negate 1/6 of their deaths. Whether or not that's significant I don't know since I didn't do math for it yet.
4. LOLRavenGuard
5. LOLSalamanders (unless you think the Master Crafted Power Sword will do much. It doesn't. Exactly one dead Banshee a round isn't impressing me).
6. I did the Imperial Fist numbers.
7. Hit And Run is decent actually thanks to White Scars. You're only doing another 6 Storm Bolter shots though and the few more Power Fist attacks is comparable to the Counter Attack from Black Templars. You just merely add about one dead Banshee into the mix. VERY meh.

That's not even going over the FW tactics either.
1. Carcharodons might give them WS1, and if they killed something earlier they have Rage. Actually not bad. I will do the math for that later.
2. Star Phantoms get TL for a turn. Comparable to SoT math earlier, except only for one turn and can be at a further range.
3. I don't think Mantis Warriors get the HoW buff for their Terminators, but charging out of cover for Furious Charge does basically nothing for the Power Fists.
That about covers everything.

SOOOOO don't you think there's a bit of a problem?

"At 35 points terminators are fairly well balanced."

No, they're not. They're still easy-mode for your opponent.


" And most of us hate it. Grav Cents. "

Grav cents aren't that bad; it's the invisibility buff and the Draigo buff and the gate of infinity buff. 24" range is still all kinds of bad without those buffs.

"They are better at CC than almost any unit in any of my other codexes"

Too bad they never live to get there. You keep acting like CC is a thing. It isn't unless you are rocking Skyhammer or Wraiths or TWC.

" what can do that to 45ppm AC toting Termies?"

Pretty sure my BA can, given that I've killed 2.5 DK in one turn before. They are gonna hose down a unit and then I punish them, just like everything else in this game. Except for the special snowflake units. In the case of scatterbikes, the Eldar have multiple solutions for 2+ armor. Terminators don't last long against Eldar.

" That said, I'd love a Dev Termie unit, perhaps with 2-3 Heavies per 5. "

I would never use tactical terminators over this unit. Ever. That's my point.

"Wraiths, TWC, and WWP Scytheguard are problems. "

No, they are not. They are examples of what a unit has to be to be a CC unit in 7th ed. You perceive them as a problem because you just can't shoot them off the board trivially with Xeno firepower.

"I'm saying don't one-up GW's Grav Cents"

You think AC terminators one-up grav cents? That's T-totally crazy.

"Making them slightly more durable vs >AP4
Making them much more durable vs AP<4"

The problem is that THIS already exists as well: assault centurions.

1) Its 3/9 for 3 banshees. Its 2/9 per shot, or 4/9 per Termie. So at points parity, its 3:4, in Termies favor. Before CT or Formation bonuses.

2) Banshees need to get the charge to get 45 total attacks. Normal combat is 30. So let's see what happens if they run in:
T1, Termies get first salvo, obviously. Kills 4/9 per Termie, so 2+ eat it. At 15 Banshees (2-3 units), at least one unit now needs an LD check
Banshees? They need to cross 12" by BFing *towards* the Termies in order to shoot. 13 Banshees kill 1.5 Termies.
3.5 Termies move up and shoot back. Kill nearly 2. In total, EV of 11 left. Now they have a < 6" charge. Odds are small that Overwatch does anything, but we'll claim only 3 make it.
Banshees strike first. 11x2x(2/3)(1/3)(1/6). 22 attacks, killing 1 for every 27 attacks (assuming formation). Let's say one bites it.
2 Termies have 6 attacks on the charge. 2x3x(1/2)(5/6)(1). 6 attacks at 5/12 kills/attack. 2.5 Banshees bite it.

Even with CWE Formation, no CT or formation for Termies, Termies win combat by 2.5: <1.

But wait! Eldar Shenanigans! Of course, Banshees could ensure they get the charge! Sure, but it means giving Termies at least 2 rounds of shooting before they even get to shoot. So:
T1 - 5 Termies kill 2+
T2 - 5 Termies kill 2+
T3 - 10 Banshees kill 1
-CC - 3x10x(2/3)(1/3)(1/6) = 30/27 dead Termies. 1 more dies.
-Rebuttle - 3x2x(1/2)(5/6)(1) = 30/12, or 2.5 dead Banshees.

Oddly the same numbers either way.

But 5 Termies beat 15 Banshees.

(14 Banshees are a few more points than 5 Termies.)

So if we stock things in Banshees favor, Termies still win.

Bharring wrote:
1) Its 3/9 for 3 banshees. Its 2/9 per shot, or 4/9 per Termie. So at points parity, its 3:4, in Termies favor. Before CT or Formation bonuses.

2) Banshees need to get the charge to get 45 total attacks. Normal combat is 30. So let's see what happens if they run in:
T1, Termies get first salvo, obviously. Kills 4/9 per Termie, so 2+ eat it. At 15 Banshees (2-3 units), at least one unit now needs an LD check
Banshees? They need to cross 12" by BFing *towards* the Termies in order to shoot. 13 Banshees kill 1.5 Termies.
3.5 Termies move up and shoot back. Kill nearly 2. In total, EV of 11 left. Now they have a < 6" charge. Odds are small that Overwatch does anything, but we'll claim only 3 make it.
Banshees strike first. 11x2x(2/3)(1/3)(1/6). 22 attacks, killing 1 for every 27 attacks (assuming formation). Let's say one bites it.
2 Termies have 6 attacks on the charge. 2x3x(1/2)(5/6)(1). 6 attacks at 5/12 kills/attack. 2.5 Banshees bite it.

Even with CWE Formation, no CT or formation for Termies, Termies win combat by 2.5: <1.

But wait! Eldar Shenanigans! Of course, Banshees could ensure they get the charge! Sure, but it means giving Termies at least 2 rounds of shooting before they even get to shoot. So:
T1 - 5 Termies kill 2+
T2 - 5 Termies kill 2+
T3 - 10 Banshees kill 1
-CC - 3x10x(2/3)(1/3)(1/6) = 30/27 dead Termies. 1 more dies.
-Rebuttle - 3x2x(1/2)(5/6)(1) = 30/12, or 2.5 dead Banshees.

Oddly the same numbers either way.

But 5 Termies beat 15 Banshees.

(14 Banshees are a few more points than 5 Termies.)

So if we stock things in Banshees favor, Termies still win.

They both lose because they are CC units in a dakka edition. A real Eldar list will shoot the terminators to death from a safe distance, just as most marine lists will shoot the Banshees to death from a safe distance.

As Terminators aren't going to be changed anytime soon (unless the next codex does something drastic) what would you propose as constructive way of fielding them? if the answer is "none" then maybe they can hang out on the shelf.
I like assault terminators too but I don't think it's constructive to day dream of alternative rules to change the entire meta and the opposing meta that your opponents bring to fit a play style/unit you like. It's entirely possible that the age of using your terminators competitively is long dead. Maybe you can use them for narrative games or ask your friends to make friendly alterations to their lists.

I like basilisk as well but I wouldn't lament the fact that I can't tank shock effectively against my opponents dreadnought, run to the forums and then look for hypothetical rules where I can run a basilisk list to deal with my friends dreads. Which is what I feel this thread is basically.

^Going "oh, they can't be used" is what isn't constructive. Trying to "day dream of alternative rules to change the entire meta and the opposing meta that your opponents bring to fit a play style/unit you like" is the whole point of this subforum and if you don't like it you're free to go elsewhere.
This IS constructive, it can help figure out how to make things better and if a particularly good solution is reached, it can potentially be house-ruled.
And your example is odd, they're trying to fix a unit that it doing very well in its particular role, not trying to shove them into doing a particular thing against a particular unit regardless of any logic to the contrary. Totally fits Martel's arguments, but not anyone else's.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
^Going "oh, they can't be used" is what isn't constructive. Trying to "day dream of alternative rules to change the entire meta and the opposing meta that your opponents bring to fit a play style/unit you like" is the whole point of this subforum and if you don't like it you're free to go elsewhere.
This IS constructive, it can help figure out how to make things better and if a particularly good solution is reached, it can potentially be house-ruled.
And your example is odd, they're trying to fix a unit that it doing very well in its particular role, not trying to shove them into doing a particular thing against a particular unit regardless of any logic to the contrary. Totally fits Martel's arguments, but not anyone else's.

Terms are still viable out of a land raider - problem is land raiders aren't that viable. If we saw a 50 point reduction to LR - I think you'd start seeing terms and assault centurions more often.

 Inkubas wrote:
As Terminators aren't going to be changed anytime soon (unless the next codex does something drastic) what would you propose as constructive way of fielding them? if the answer is "none" then maybe they can hang out on the shelf.
I like assault terminators too but I don't think it's constructive to day dream of alternative rules to change the entire meta and the opposing meta that your opponents bring to fit a play style/unit you like. It's entirely possible that the age of using your terminators competitively is long dead. Maybe you can use them for narrative games or ask your friends to make friendly alterations to their lists.

I like basilisk as well but I wouldn't lament the fact that I can't tank shock effectively against my opponents dreadnought, run to the forums and then look for hypothetical rules where I can run a basilisk list to deal with my friends dreads. Which is what I feel this thread is basically.

They currently fit the description of "unfieldable crap". Assault terminators look good on paper until you actually try to get them into CC.

I find the proposed rules threads interesting though experiments, even though no one where I play will ever agree to anything in here. I suspect many are in the same boat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
^Going "oh, they can't be used" is what isn't constructive. Trying to "day dream of alternative rules to change the entire meta and the opposing meta that your opponents bring to fit a play style/unit you like" is the whole point of this subforum and if you don't like it you're free to go elsewhere.
This IS constructive, it can help figure out how to make things better and if a particularly good solution is reached, it can potentially be house-ruled.
And your example is odd, they're trying to fix a unit that it doing very well in its particular role, not trying to shove them into doing a particular thing against a particular unit regardless of any logic to the contrary. Totally fits Martel's arguments, but not anyone else's.

Terms are still viable out of a land raider - problem is land raiders aren't that viable. If we saw a 50 point reduction to LR - I think you'd start seeing terms and assault centurions more often.

Land Raiders. LOL. With two of the most powerful codices packing Gauss and Strength D, this tank just became complete garbage.

I agree with the "Thought Experiment" reasons.

Zagman's Erratas attempt to be more (haven't followed those lately), but otherwise most of these threads are too toy around with ideas and refine our understandings.

I rejoined the thread actively because there were some factual inaccuracies. I'm sure the player(s) getting destroyed by BS5 Guardians are better off knowing that that isn't actually a thing, for instance.

And thought experiments are more useful when the assumptions are closer to reality, so challenging things like "Windrider more durable/pt than Termie" should be useful.

Odds of rules coming up in this thread becoming rules due to this thread is near zero. But that doesn't make it useless.

I'm still curious: does anyone here NOT see terminators just get shot to death? Like every game? Are people playing bad lists? Are people forgetting that the terminators are on the board?

I am taking 65-100 S6 shots from Eldar every turn, and that doesn't include the Str D weapons. If they have D-scythes, forget it. There's no way for terminators to close against that. Against Necrons, they'll get shot and then fight Wraiths. Against marines, it's grav cannons to the face. I just don't see how anyone thinks that the powerfist/stormbolter combination will ever accomplish anything with the current profiles.

Keep the points the same but allow them 2 heavies per 5 (Like Sternguard) and combi weapons. Then they're worth something, right now they can't kill enough.

demontalons wrote:
Keep the points the same but allow them 2 heavies per 5 (Like Sternguard) and combi weapons. Then they're worth something, right now they can't kill enough.

This makes them more like chaos terminators for sure, but the are still overpaying for that powerfist. But it's one of the better ideas on here. They can deep strike in, and actually do something. I'd probably forget the heavies and go all combis just like Chaos, though.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
^Going "oh, they can't be used" is what isn't constructive. Trying to "day dream of alternative rules to change the entire meta and the opposing meta that your opponents bring to fit a play style/unit you like" is the whole point of this subforum and if you don't like it you're free to go elsewhere.
This IS constructive, it can help figure out how to make things better and if a particularly good solution is reached, it can potentially be house-ruled.
And your example is odd, they're trying to fix a unit that it doing very well in its particular role, not trying to shove them into doing a particular thing against a particular unit regardless of any logic to the contrary. Totally fits Martel's arguments, but not anyone else's.

Terms are still viable out of a land raider - problem is land raiders aren't that viable. If we saw a 50 point reduction to LR - I think you'd start seeing terms and assault centurions more often.

That sounds fair, since Land Raiders seem to be another problem unit.
Also maybe the normal Land Raider needs a bigger points drop than the Crusader and Redeemer, since it's seems a lot of people diss the normal one in particular for being "schizo".

Though another thing is that maybe in general Deep Strike should be "you can Shoot or Assault on the turn you Deep Strike - pick one", but that's a different discussion. And Terminators in specific could have a rule that says that should get both.
It seems like making Termies viable in general isn't too tricky, just a good all around buff is what's needed but while Martel's "give them all Assault Cannons or it's pointless because Scatterbikes" attitude is obviously faulty, their firepower does need SOME specific attention because if it's just stuff like improved stats, Assault on Deep Strike, rerollable Armor Save, 4++ that the Storm Shield rerolls instead and so on you'd have lots of people going "Cool, I'll take some now - the TH/SS and LC versions, of course!". Their ranged power needs a bit of a boost to be worth picking over the strictly CC version.
The Salvo 2/4 Rending Storm Bolter is a good idea and not just for Termies, 2 Heavy Weapons per 5 dudes seems reasonable enough, seeing this talk of Combis makes me consider my earlier "crazy suggestion" of Special Weapons (Meltagun, Plasma Gun, Flamer and Grav-Gun) being options to replace the Storm Bolter for everyone, though that would have to be reasonably pricey. Also this is where the thought of letting them Shoot AND Assault on Deep Striking came from, an incentive to pick the shooty ones because they'll get to do both whereas the strictly choppy ones would still only get to do one.

Also small things but I want to mention them:
1) Once again, letting the Sergeant replace his Power Sword with a different Power Weapon. The Power Axe would fit a lot better with Power Fists.
1a) We could also consider letting him take a Heavy Weapon without it counting towards the 2 per 5 guys limit, if needed.
2) Getting rid of the distinction between "Tactical Terminators" and "Assault Terminators", just having the Lighting Claws and Thunder Hammer/Storm Shield be options to replace the Storm Bolter/Power Fist default combo like how the Dark Angels Codex does it.

"an incentive to pick the shooty ones because they'll get to do both whereas the strictly choppy ones would still only get to do one. "

Something assaulted by assault terminators generally don't need to be shot first. That's the issue with this proposal. Plus, no one cares if they get shot by stormbolters. Especially if it's followed up by power fist attacks immediately.

"Their ranged power needs a bit of a boost to be worth picking over the strictly CC version. "

I don't think there's a way to do with a stormbolter-based terminator. The firepower incentive just will never be there.

" their firepower does need SOME specific attention because if it's just stuff like improved stats, Assault on Deep Strike, rerollable Armor Save, 4++ that the Storm Shield rerolls instead and so on you'd have lots of people going "Cool, I'll take some now - the TH/SS and LC versions, of course!"."

If you don't give them the assault cannons, this is what's going to happen. The stormbolter has them in too much of a firepower hole. Even a salvo 2/4 rending stormbolter is still a "pray for 6's" weapon. Buying expensive models like terminators and then praying for "6's" is a fast way to lose. Necrons pray for 6's, but on their schmuckos, Eldar pray for 6's but also on their schmuckos. Expensive marine elites should not be praying for 6's. The S6 is the key part of the assault cannon; S4 causes too few regular aggregate wounds. If I lived close enough to play you, you could field 20 tac terminators and I'd show this to you over and over as I ignored their shooting capabilities.

If you understood this problem from the beginning, it would have saved a lot of time if you had said so. My assault cannon proposal is to address this exact problem. Tac terminators need to be able to do something when not in base to base contact with the enemy to make them remotely worth fielding. Otherwise, I'll just take more grav bikes. That's the reality you are up against.

"It seems like making Termies viable in general isn't too tricky"

It's actually proving to be nearly impossible if we work within the constraints of the existing modeled terminators.

Oh boy, more Assault Cannon fetish from you!
Yeah, they need more firepower, which is why we''re talking about buffing the Storm Bolter to make it worthwhile, instead of giving up like little wimps

Martel732 wrote:
It's actually proving to be nearly impossible if we work within the constraints of the existing modeled terminators.

Nah, it's simple, you're just dismissing everything because you use a game-breaker as the standard, which is why you'll never have anything to contribute to this thread and should just stop posting in it.

What about:
-40ppm
-2 Heavies per 5
-Sarge has Power Weapon
-Termie Armor gains - Armor Saves do not count towards the limit of only taking one save.

Storm Shields (including Shield Eternal) would certainly have to go up in price.

Can be configured with several different substantial weapon options.
Can soak a lot more AP3+ firepower.

Storm bolters stay Storm Bolters. No models need to change. Termies retain their intended role, but can do it better now.

Thoughts?

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
Oh boy, more Assault Cannon fetish from you!
Yeah, they need more firepower, which is why we''re talking about buffing the Storm Bolter to make it worthwhile, instead of giving up like little wimps

Martel732 wrote:
It's actually proving to be nearly impossible if we work within the constraints of the existing modeled terminators.

Nah, it's simple, you're just dismissing everything because you use a game-breaker as the standard, which is why you'll never have anything to contribute to this thread and should just stop posting in it.

I suspect that most people would disagree with you about that, given all the posts I have made and the reasons I have stated. It's not a fetish, I outlined very good reasons, which were in fact your same reasons. My challenge to you is to make the S4 stormbolter worthwhile. I don't think you can given the price point on terminators.

Bharring wrote:
What about:
-40ppm
-2 Heavies per 5
-Sarge has Power Weapon
-Termie Armor gains - Armor Saves do not count towards the limit of only taking one save.

Storm Shields (including Shield Eternal) would certainly have to go up in price.

Can be configured with several different substantial weapon options.
Can soak a lot more AP3+ firepower.

Storm bolters stay Storm Bolters. No models need to change. Termies retain their intended role, but can do it better now.

Thoughts?

Ehh. Can we just have Terminators be able to take there nat 5++ as ward save ala fantasy? only specific to terminator armor. thats a 2+ 5++ against most things + FNP if you need. or a 3++ 5++ against AP2. (with a Storm shield)

It increases there survivability a little bit without going overboard

Bharring wrote:
What about:
-40ppm
-2 Heavies per 5
-Sarge has Power Weapon
-Termie Armor gains - Armor Saves do not count towards the limit of only taking one save.

Storm Shields (including Shield Eternal) would certainly have to go up in price.

Can be configured with several different substantial weapon options.
Can soak a lot more AP3+ firepower.

Storm bolters stay Storm Bolters. No models need to change. Termies retain their intended role, but can do it better now.

Thoughts?

So they get 2+ and 5++ vs small arms. But they are still are a very ignorable unit in terms of ranged firepower, even with two assault cannons. I don't know about you, but I can't afford to pay so many points for a unit that can be ignored until they get in assault range.

I feel this hurts lists like IG worse than most, because any list with mobile AP 2 doesn't care about the buff. Eldar will shoot scatterlasers at a juicer target (A squad of scatterbikes still wipes half the squad!) and then use AP2 or pseudo rending against these guys. Likewise, grav bikers say "HI!".

Whatever you think their intended role is, they still won't be able to do it, especially since you increased the price again. They are paying WAY too much for that they have right now. You are giving them something, but making them pay. It will be the same story. Oh, some powerfists might get close to me? Die.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another way to look at this is that tac terminators directly compete with Sternguards. For the same price I can even get combi-weapon Sternguard that ride a pod. These guys have an immediate turn 1 impact because they don't roll for reserves and actually are dangerous in shooting. Compare to terminators that don't arrive till turn 2 and accomplish nothing the turn they arrive.

Even without combis, the sternguard have better firepower/pt because the special ammo can mimic S6 against T4 models and have the option for ignoring cover against poorly armored units.

The only thing Terminators have over them is a save that is ignored by a huge number of weapons in the game now and additional CC ability. The CC ability is a joke, because there aren't that many units that terminators would beat that Sternguard wouldn't.

Immunity to weapons of S4 and lower. To me that is the thing that utterly kills them off. People pouring massed low strengt shots at them.

This way they would be really scary and also perhaps worth their outrageous price. I've even stopped using them because even though I love them they only ever disappoint me.

 Bonesnapper wrote:
Immunity to weapons of S4 and lower. To me that is the thing that utterly kills them off. People pouring massed low strengt shots at them.

This way they would be really scary and also perhaps worth their outrageous price. I've even stopped using them because even though I love them they only ever disappoint me.

That hits the IG really hard, though. Their best anti-terminator weapon is the lasgun

Martel732 wrote:
I suspect that most people would disagree with you about that, given all the posts I have made and the reasons I have stated.

Considering you're the only one pushing this ridiculous angle... Nope, you're alone!
All those posts in which you push the same ridiculous OP solution and disregard everything else? Yep you made loads of those and all it does and royally screw over the reasonable points of the dicussion!

Martel732 wrote:
It's not a fetish

You're right, it could be trolling instead.

Martel732 wrote:
I outlined very good reasons

Nope, you dismissed everyone else's good reasons because the result isn't OP enough for your (WAAC, TFG, etc.) tastes.

Martel732 wrote:
which were in fact your same reasons.

Nope. I want them to have a general overall buff, which includes some firepower buffs so LC and TH/SS won't be an auto-take. You just want to make them stupidly shooty because of an unrelated problem unit.

Martel732 wrote:
My challenge to you is to make the S4 stormbolter worthwhile.

Salvo 2/4 Rending, maybe changing the range, maybe special ammo. Everyone else finds that fine.
Though I suppose S5 could be a possibility, since that's what the Heavy Bolter has (then it would definitely need to be Salvo 3/6 Rending or similar itself, which wouldn't be a bad idea). Doesn't need to be S6 though.
And the second part is optional, I'd need input from someone reasonable (i.e. NOT YOU) first.

Martel732 wrote:
I don't think you can given the price point on terminators.

If the price is the problem, it can be deceased easy-peasy. In fact that's the most simple and obvious solution, more than "ASSAULT CANNONS FOR EVERYONE!".

In conclusion:

I'd actually rather have heavy bolters than assault cannons - less OP, while also having a greater threat range. Now yes, heavy bolters usually stink on ice, but recall what makes scatterbikes stronger than shuricannon bikes: it's as much about the range and the volume as anything else.

So, dial down the volume and the strength, so it's not quite so OP, but dial up the range, and now your Terminators are dangerous most anywhere.

Given that, I think Rending might be overkill (and stealing the thunder of Retributors, though I suppose only Sororitas players would care) - but special issue ammo seems just fine by me. You could always load vengeance rounds and polish off MEQs with gusto: is Gets Hot really especially scary with a 2+ armor save? (Iron Hands termies led by a libby with Prescience can pretend it doesn't even exist).

Now S5 isn't quite as nasty as S6, to be sure. You won't be picking Falcons apart, and yes, their guns will be dishing out some pain in exchange, but come on, you have ways to deal with AV12. You're wounding T3 on 2+, T4 on 3+, which helps quite a bit relative to stormbolters. AP4 isn't totally worthless, either - Necron warriors get quite a bit less annoying when you can get around their armor with enough volume to matter.

jade_angel wrote:
I'd actually rather have heavy bolters than assault cannons - less OP, while also having a greater threat range. Now yes, heavy bolters usually stink on ice, but recall what makes scatterbikes stronger than shuricannon bikes: it's as much about the range and the volume as anything else.

So, dial down the volume and the strength, so it's not quite so OP, but dial up the range, and now your Terminators are dangerous most anywhere.

Given that, I think Rending might be overkill (and stealing the thunder of Retributors, though I suppose only Sororitas players would care) - but special issue ammo seems just fine by me. You could always load vengeance rounds and polish off MEQs with gusto: is Gets Hot really especially scary with a 2+ armor save? (Iron Hands termies led by a libby with Prescience can pretend it doesn't even exist).

Now S5 isn't quite as nasty as S6, to be sure. You won't be picking Falcons apart, and yes, their guns will be dishing out some pain in exchange, but come on, you have ways to deal with AV12. You're wounding T3 on 2+, T4 on 3+, which helps quite a bit relative to stormbolters. AP4 isn't totally worthless, either - Necron warriors get quite a bit less annoying when you can get around their armor with enough volume to matter.

Rending is never overkill, since it is literally praying for 6's.

I see your points about the heavy bolters. And your're right: AP4 is not as ass terrible as it used to be in the game. I still don't think assault cannons are that OP, given other units in the game, but massed up heavy bolters on a terminator platform is something I would at least consider fielding. Heavy bolters can at least shoot back at scatbikes, unlike assault cannons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"royally screw over the reasonable points of the dicussion! "

How?

" dismissed everyone else's good reasons"

Nobody ever explained why S4 is good. They just gave proposals that left the terminator with a S4 shooting attack. Unacceptable.

"which includes some firepower buffs"

Then you need to actually make changes that buff their firepower, not put bells and whistles on the crappy ass stormbolter.

"Salvo 2/4 Rending, maybe changing the range, maybe special ammo. Everyone else finds that fine. "

Still S4. Won't generate enough wounds for a 35-40 pt model. You might be right that everyone else thinks its fine, but no one has explained WHY S4 shooting is okay on such an expensive model. Because it isn't, as outlined by my sternguard example above.

"If the price is the problem, it can be deceased easy-peasy. In fact that's the most simple and obvious solution,"

They already did that, and the terminator is still unfieldable. As it stands, I wouldn't pay more than 28 pts for a current tac terminator.

Crash, you've wasted more time by telling me not to post than I have with my proposals. You can't stop me from posting on-topic comments that don't insult anyone. Arguably, you've been more insulting by posting all-caps comments. So please quit posting messages that tell me not to post. Mathematically speaking, and based off what units are already in the game, the assault cannon thing is not that crazy. It just isn't.

Martel732 wrote:

jade_angel wrote:
I'd actually rather have heavy bolters than assault cannons - less OP, while also having a greater threat range. Now yes, heavy bolters usually stink on ice, but recall what makes scatterbikes stronger than shuricannon bikes: it's as much about the range and the volume as anything else.

So, dial down the volume and the strength, so it's not quite so OP, but dial up the range, and now your Terminators are dangerous most anywhere.

Given that, I think Rending might be overkill (and stealing the thunder of Retributors, though I suppose only Sororitas players would care) - but special issue ammo seems just fine by me. You could always load vengeance rounds and polish off MEQs with gusto: is Gets Hot really especially scary with a 2+ armor save? (Iron Hands termies led by a libby with Prescience can pretend it doesn't even exist).

Now S5 isn't quite as nasty as S6, to be sure. You won't be picking Falcons apart, and yes, their guns will be dishing out some pain in exchange, but come on, you have ways to deal with AV12. You're wounding T3 on 2+, T4 on 3+, which helps quite a bit relative to stormbolters. AP4 isn't totally worthless, either - Necron warriors get quite a bit less annoying when you can get around their armor with enough volume to matter.

Rending is never overkill, since it is literally praying for 6's.

I see your points about the heavy bolters. And your're right: AP4 is not as ass terrible as it used to be in the game. I still don't think assault cannons are that OP, given other units in the game, but massed up heavy bolters on a terminator platform is something I would at least consider fielding. Heavy bolters can at least shoot back at scatbikes, unlike assault cannons.

<snippity>

Well, Rending is praying for 6's, but if you get them, you not only get AP2 - now your S5 gun can glance AV14 and pen AV13 or less (admittedly, those are some long odds, but 15-30 shots gives a fair chance to see it) and you can wound T9-10 on the rare occasions that comes up. So it's pretty strong, actually, at least on things that get good volume of fire. If you mathhammer it out, pseudo-Rending is why shuricannon bikes are actually nastier to MEQ/TEQ than scatterbikes, at least if you take the extra 12" of range out of the equation.

Assault cannons won't be OP relative to scatterbikes - deadlier shooting (S6/AP4/Heavy4/Rending vs S6/AP6/Heavy4) but with shorter range on a slower but debatably more durable platform - but is edging up on it relative to other things. Recall that the general consensus is that scatterbikes are, themselves, OP. But, I think heavy bolters plus special issue ammo, or at least some special issue ammo, are a reasonable compromise.

Maybe profiles as follows:

Kraken bolts: S5 AP4, 48", Pinning (to compensate for the regular ones getting AP4, while these don't get better AP)
Dragonfire bolts: S5 AP4, 36", Ignores Cover
Hellfire bolts: S1 AP4, 36", Poisoned (2+)
Vengeance bolts: S5 AP3, 30", Gets Hot

Then you'd get one of those for free, and any of the others for 1 ppm each. Not all for free, or else why bother with Sternguard?

On the subject of assault cannon, that's another thing that needs addressing -they're too too overpowered in the anti-vehicle department. From what I recall of reading some mathhammer threads, they're statistically Better than a lascannon against most armour values. Something's not right there. Maybe they should go down to 3 shots, or lose a point of strength.