Hey guys. I'm a long time Dark Angels player and love my Deathwing. I haven't used the models in a looooonnnnngggg time though. Same goes with my dreadnoughts. There are just so many other places that I'd rather put points that are way more cost efficient I can't bring myself to play them. At least not in competitive games. Here's the issues/reasons I have for not playing them:
Terminators
- 2+ save isn't what it used to be with so much AP2/Grav/D running around
- 5++ again isn't what it used to be. 1 volley from a grav dev squad will pretty much wipe them out
- Mobility - it's pretty terrible.
- Transports - Drop pods aside, we have Land Raiders - not a fan of these either. It's not terrible but not great . Plus its a huge amount of points to sink into one unit (once you through terminators inside of it) that can honestly be killed pretty easily.
- Points - I feel like most terminator units are over costed once you consider what they bring to the table. I mean 200 points for some storm bolters and power fist? You can give them the TH/SS but other than stuff like the AOIF the BA have, getting them into combat is still an issue
Dreadnoughts
- Fragile - I don't understand how terminators where Tactical Dreadnought armor and have a 2+/5++ when a Dreadnought with the SAME armor has no save whatsoever? AND their armor can be glanced to death by boltguns from behind.
- Vehicle - why?
- Mobility - Same problems that Terminators have but no deep strike outside of drop pods.
- Weapons - they are still using standard imperial weapons when the rest of 40K has moved on
For terminators, I'm not really sure how to fix them. Maybe lower the points cost? Give them a slightly better invul save? Allow them to charge the turn the arrive? Give them grav cannons? I don't know where viable becomes op here. I mean, I get that the fluff can't always match up to the game but terminators are pretty easy to kill now days which I hate considering when you read the lore they are damn near unstoppable.
For Dreadnoughts, I really wish they'd make them a MC with a toughness value and an armor save. Maybe 2+/5++ and FnP? At the very least I feel like they should have a 2+/5++ like terminators and maybe a grav option with an option to give it FnP for x amount of points. I could easily get behind that.
Neither of these really solves the mobility issues though. I'm also not trying to make the answer "GRAV" for everything, I just want to be able to use all the cool models I have collecting dust without getting ROFL stomped on the tabletop.
I do feel like GW may be trying with stuff like the AOIF the BA just got but thats just one faction. I want something that all SM can use, regardless of chapter.
So Dakkanites! What's your thought, ideas, concerns?
There are not many viable fixes, as the crappiness of the stormbolter is one of the roots of their problems. The other problems being lack of speed and durability vs critical weapon types.
the problem with terminators is they're defensive units in an offensive game. 40k on a whole rewards big firepower brought in as fast and cheaply as possiable, TDA however is heavy defences (for infantry) with firepower not a whole lot better then a tatical squad.
if 8th edition somehow made it more important to be able to take hits then dish em out (don't ask me how. short of turning almost all the AP 2 S8+ weapons to AP3 S7 or something not sure how that'd happen) then terminators might be useful.
that said termies are likely going to have some situational uses, a codex that can get cheap OS termies is apt to be able to make some use of em.
There are not many viable fixes, as the crappiness of the stormbolter is one of the roots of their problems. The other problems being lack of speed and durability vs critical weapon types.
I agree with the stormbolter bits. I want to say maybe increase its RoF but then again it's still just a boltgun with a few more shots. I don't know how to increase the duribility with saves. If you bump it down it kind of defeats the purpose of a storm shield. Each model having 2 wounds and a higher toughness could help.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: the problem with terminators is they're defensive units in an offensive game. 40k on a whole rewards big firepower brought in as fast and cheaply as possiable, TDA however is heavy defences (for infantry) with firepower not a whole lot better then a tatical squad.
if 8th edition somehow made it more important to be able to take hits then dish em out (don't ask me how. short of turning almost all the AP 2 S8+ weapons to AP3 S7 or something not sure how that'd happen) then terminators might be useful.
that said termies are likely going to have some situational uses, a codex that can get cheap OS termies is apt to be able to make some use of em.
I hate that. In fluff they are a major offensive unit. Send them in to crack the wall so that everyone else can flood in behind them.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, i found some batreps over at Spikey Bits where they made up rules giving Dreadnoughts a toughness value, armor saves and more wounds. They seemed to be completely usable after that. They weren't game breaking but at least it didn't feel like a total waste having one.
What we've been asking for for forever: Either have TDA increase toughness or add a wound. Hell, GK got an extra wound for (some of) theirs... Seriously, a marine just sitting on a motorcycle instantly gets increased toughness, but the marine that dons TDA, super actual armor, gets... nothing.
What Vanilla Marines got: A points reduction... yawn...
Agreed with the previously stated Storm Bolter problem as well. Don't know exactly what I would give them in place (assault cannons ha!), but Storm Bolters are very lackluster.
Marines are 14 ppm (before you take free transports into consideration) for 1W 3+.
Terminators are 35ppm for 1W 2+/5++, so a marine is more resiliant to small arms fire (the bane of terminators) per point. Now, granted, the extra 3.5 ppm model pays for a fist, 5++, deepstrike, relentless and +1Ld, but when you've got the same or half the damage output as tacticals for the points, having a fist and a token save against ap2 just isn't worth it, especially when you're giving up ObSec and free drop pods/razors/rhinos against tacticals.
Centurions have made it almost impossible to balance terminators since the best solution would have been to give them a second wound at their old points cost, but now Cents do the same thing but with T5 and grav. Their (Tactical Termies) firepower is still terrible however, but allowing them to take 2 heavy weapons per 5 would have been an OK solution (though I think I would have dropped all weapon options by 5 points too at their old cost).
Assault Cannons baseline at no additional points cost. If they can't kill things they will never be worthwhile. All this talk about +1 wound or toughness is missing the point of what 40k is about now.
As stated Centurions were the Deathknell of Terminators.
Swing an unweildly power weapon at initiative? Check.
Bring more firepower? Check.
Better toughness AND an extra wound for wearing 'super' armor? Check.
There's no room left for Terminator armor to be improved.
They still have relentless, while weilding assault profile weapons (minus the ones that can be purchased), deep strike/teleport, but make sure you don't try to assault and that's about it.
Oppressor wrote: As stated Centurions were the Deathknell of Terminators.
The Centurion models are cool, but yeah they seem to be a "fix" for both Terminators and Dreadnoughts while leaving both of those classic units out in the cold.
Maybe if 8th is more AOS-like with things tending to have more wounds Terminators could be a middle-ground between regular Marines and Centurions? Like, regular Marine one wound, Terminator two wounds, Centurion three wounds? Plus a few other things to differentiate them from each other, like Deep Strike.
Centurions, Grav, Plasma, Scatterlasers and such were not what killed Loyalist Terminators. They weren't good to begin with at all. Full stop. They weren't good at being defensive, they weren't good at being offensive, and they weren't good at being bodyguards.
The only way to really separate the Centurions and Terminators from each other is making Terminators actually fulfill the role they were supposed to. People here (especially here) LIKE to think Terminators were meant for a defensive role, even though they weren't good at it to begin with. Hence why I always make literally the same suggestions every time: boost the offensive power for their points.
1. Make Storm Bolters S5. This fits more in line with what Terminators want to hit and shoot with their heavy weapons.
2. Let them take two Heavy Weapons per five guys. Maybe do the Skitarii thing and let them take another at 10 dudes.
3. Assault Cannon is 15 points. With S5 Storm Bolters you want more a reason to take it compared to a Cyclone + Bolter.
4. Lightning Claw Terminators are 30 points base and the TH/SS variant is 5 points extra. Honestly otherwise I'd have no reason to take them compared to Assault Centurions, Vanguard, and Honour Guard.
Terminators need the following to be, in my opinion, viable.
First, they need ONE of the two options (not both):
+1 Toughness for wearing Terminator Armor (Across the board)
OR
+1 Wound for wearing Terminator Armor (Standard increase for any characters that purchase it)
I personally prefer the second option.
This would allow for people to actually choose it as an option for an HQ choice instead of Artificer Armor + Bike or Artificer Armor + Jump Pack.
Lastly, I would like to see standard Terminator Armor confer a better invulnerable save if there are three (or more) terminators standing in coherency with each other. Basically standard terminator armor confers a 5++ save, if you have 3 or more terminator armored models in coherency with each other the invulnerable save improves to a 4++. The save cannot be improved beyond a 4++ with this effect, however this does not apply to wargear (Storm Shields) which can confer a better invulnerable save.
The solution to fixing terminator has to keep in mind that Chaos Terminators exist as well. So while making Storm Bolters assault 3 may help, it doesn't do anything to help Chaos. Similarly, granting +1 toughness also can get excessive when you factor in Mark of Nurgle.
Problems to solve:
-Expensive.
-Too weak against massed fire.
-Too weak against the AP2 spam of the current game.
-Poor assault unit.
-Poor ranged unit.
Solution:
-Change Terminator Armor rules to grant you a 2+ save, a 5++ invulnerable save, +1 wound, and FNP.
This will make them more worth their cost, solve the weaknesses to weight of fire without overpowering them due to MoN T6 terminators and make them better against AP2 weapons.
-Changed all units in the game to simply have an option to purchase a transport if they do today. Introduce the Dedicated Transport special rule that allows specific units (like Terminators and Land Raiders) to take their specific transport at a points reduction.
This will solve some of the assault terminator problems.
-Change Terminators in general to allow 1 in 2 upgrade to an assault cannon/auto cannon for 10/5pts. That should solve some of the ranged problems.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
This could make sense as IIRC in the fluff they talk about Terminators being able to mount Assault Cannons because of their heavy armor, but even still it was a toned down Assault Cannon with a lower rate of fire. Maybe the same reasoning could mean that Terminators can handle a Stormbolter with a higher rate of fire?
Would making a Terminator Stormbolter some combination of Assault 3, Shred, and/or Twin-Linked (probably not all three) be as good as S5?
And promptly lead to more 2+invul ignoring weapons, thus renewing the cycle. I'd rather them just have FNP and paladins have eternal warrior. Or all of them go up to toughness 5 or 6.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Red__Thirst wrote: Terminators need the following to be, in my opinion, viable.
First, they need ONE of the two options (not both):
+1 Toughness for wearing Terminator Armor (Across the board)
OR
+1 Wound for wearing Terminator Armor (Standard increase for any characters that purchase it)
I personally prefer the second option.
This would allow for people to actually choose it as an option for an HQ choice instead of Artificer Armor + Bike or Artificer Armor + Jump Pack.
Lastly, I would like to see standard Terminator Armor confer a better invulnerable save if there are three (or more) terminators standing in coherency with each other. Basically standard terminator armor confers a 5++ save, if you have 3 or more terminator armored models in coherency with each other the invulnerable save improves to a 4++. The save cannot be improved beyond a 4++ with this effect, however this does not apply to wargear (Storm Shields) which can confer a better invulnerable save.
Just my opinion on that. Take it easy.
-Red__Thirst-
And then you're failing to take into consideration Paladins and MegaNobz and Chaos Terminators (Death Guard Terminators would be 2 Wounds with FNP). Seriously, what are you going to do to fix those issues?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nvs wrote: The solution to fixing terminator has to keep in mind that Chaos Terminators exist as well. So while making Storm Bolters assault 3 may help, it doesn't do anything to help Chaos. Similarly, granting +1 toughness also can get excessive when you factor in Mark of Nurgle.
Problems to solve:
-Expensive.
-Too weak against massed fire.
-Too weak against the AP2 spam of the current game.
-Poor assault unit.
-Poor ranged unit.
Solution:
-Change Terminator Armor rules to grant you a 2+ save, a 5++ invulnerable save, +1 wound, and FNP.
This will make them more worth their cost, solve the weaknesses to weight of fire without overpowering them due to MoN T6 terminators and make them better against AP2 weapons.
-Changed all units in the game to simply have an option to purchase a transport if they do today. Introduce the Dedicated Transport special rule that allows specific units (like Terminators and Land Raiders) to take their specific transport at a points reduction.
This will solve some of the assault terminator problems.
-Change Terminators in general to allow 1 in 2 upgrade to an assault cannon/auto cannon for 10/5pts. That should solve some of the ranged problems.
Chaos Terminators are fine as is, but the Combi-Bolter should be Rapid Fire 2 as it is literally two Bolters strapped together.
What has always killed me was when you buy a blister it always came with more special weapons than any list was going to let you use.
I'd like to see a bit more staying power. Toughness maybe or a wound or something.
Then I want every one (or at least a much greater density than today) to be able to come with whatever weapon you want. Assault cannons, chainfists,etc. And give them special ammo if the stick with bolter types. It'd also be nice if the removed unwieldy and other melee weapon hinderances.
spiralingcadaver wrote: They become a lot stronger against light vehicles? It might do some abusive things in Sternguard vet units?
You think S5 Storm Bolters would be abusive In Sternguard squads?
I literally laughed out loud at work at the mere thought of that being an issue. Also, if Pulse Rifles aren't an issue to rhinos, ya know the guns on a basic troop, they won't be an issue on a 175 point Terminator squad.
What about giving terminators a tactical teleport option, such as in Dawn of War 2? Would let them get to objectives or to enemies to attack much easier.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also-- I don't object to Storm Bolters being made BETTER than they currently are. But I think it'd be better to up their shots per model rather than their strength. They're just really rapid fire boltguns, not heavy boltguns. 24" S4 AP5 Assault 2 Twin Linked, or Assault 3, either one would make htem better without necessarily requiring them to have a points increase IMO. I like the TL option much better but I know a lot of people really hate TL weapons right now (which is fair, but it's still better than the current statline).
And then you're failing to take into consideration Paladins and MegaNobz and Chaos Terminators (Death Guard Terminators would be 2 Wounds with FNP). Seriously, what are you going to do to fix those issues?
Paladins already have the +1 wound profile. They would just become more standardized. Just leave the stats as-is with additional other benefits (Feel no Pain, additional attacks, etc.) they already have.
Same thing for Meganobz. They already have a 2 wound profile. Just leave them as is.
The +1 wound would only come in to play if you purchase the terminator armor for a character or model that doesn't have it as standard. Simple.
It's just changing the stat lines for models/units that have terminator armor on as standard.
I also fail to see the issue with Chaos Terminators, or death guard terminators, having 2 wounds (and FnP for death guard). They don't have eternal warrior, and will still die to enough concentrated firepower, but won't get picked up as soon as they land.
I fail to see an issue that needs to be fixed? Seriously. The sky isn't falling man. Just saying.
Melissia wrote: What about giving terminators a tactical teleport option, such as in Dawn of War 2? Would let them get to objectives or to enemies to attack much easier.
That would be pretty cool, as long as they had the ability to do damage when they get there.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You think S5 Storm Bolters would be abusive In Sternguard squads?
I literally laughed out loud at work at the mere thought of that being an issue. Also, if Pulse Rifles aren't an issue to rhinos, ya know the guns on a basic troop, they won't be an issue on a 175 point Terminator squad.
It could change internal faction balance in unforeseen ways and might boost something else over actually helping terminators, for whatever that's worth in 40k's pile of imbalanced stuff. No reason to be a jerk about it, I was just making a suggestion.
There's just too much stuff that gets around their 2+ armor. Deep strike isn't all that anymore, there are much better ways for other units to get around. They're suppose to be slow but tough, but in reality they're no longer hard to take down.
I guess you can either make them cheaper, either lower cost or give them their heavy weapon options at a big discount... or something would have to change with the core rules where a 2+ armor save and their invul save was actually worth more than double the cost of a vanilla marine.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You think S5 Storm Bolters would be abusive In Sternguard squads?
I literally laughed out loud at work at the mere thought of that being an issue. Also, if Pulse Rifles aren't an issue to rhinos, ya know the guns on a basic troop, they won't be an issue on a 175 point Terminator squad.
It could change internal faction balance in unforeseen ways and might boost something else over actually helping terminators, for whatever that's worth in 40k's pile of imbalanced stuff. No reason to be a jerk about it, I was just making a suggestion.
I have to be a jerk about it because you made a knee jerk reaction.
In what manner would a S5 Storm Bolter cause internal Balance anyway? Did you know a Storm Bolter at BS4 is worse than a Heavy Stubber at BS3 in every situation and equal at a target with a 5+? It is ridiculous.
External Balance? It fixes a primary issue with Grey Knights. That's about it.
And then you're failing to take into consideration Paladins and MegaNobz and Chaos Terminators (Death Guard Terminators would be 2 Wounds with FNP). Seriously, what are you going to do to fix those issues?
Paladins already have the +1 wound profile. They would just become more standardized. Just leave the stats as-is with additional other benefits (Feel no Pain, additional attacks, etc.) they already have.
Same thing for Meganobz. They already have a 2 wound profile. Just leave them as is.
The +1 wound would only come in to play if you purchase the terminator armor for a character or model that doesn't have it as standard. Simple.
It's just changing the stat lines for models/units that have terminator armor on as standard.
I also fail to see the issue with Chaos Terminators, or death guard terminators, having 2 wounds (and FnP for death guard). They don't have eternal warrior, and will still die to enough concentrated firepower, but won't get picked up as soon as they land.
I fail to see an issue that needs to be fixed? Seriously. The sky isn't falling man. Just saying.
Take it easy.
-Red__Thirst-
And that's why I'm saying you're not taking into consideration other codices.
Paladins are 55 points a piece. A lot of that is coming from paying for the extra wound and extra WS. And then they have the option for an Apothecary. What goes on with that when you add FNP standard?
Meganobz have that 2 wound profile to differentiate them from having a 5++ instead. So you'd be giving the Terminators even more benefits compared to them, so what ELSE needs to be given to Meganobz?
Also Death Guard Terminators would be 2+/5++/5+++ T5 for less than 40 points.
Yoyoyo wrote: S5 is just not fluffy. Bolters are S4.
This is not really arguable.
1. It isn't a Bolter. It is a Storm bolter. It operates differently.
2. Don't use the fluff argument. Space Marines would be 6 across the board for stats, Eldar would dodge bullets, and Guardsmen would be like 1 point each.
Paladins are 55 points a piece. A lot of that is coming from paying for the extra wound and extra WS. And then they have the option for an Apothecary. What goes on with that when you add FNP standard?
Meganobz have that 2 wound profile to differentiate them from having a 5++ instead. So you'd be giving the Terminators even more benefits compared to them, so what ELSE needs to be given to Meganobz?
Also Death Guard Terminators would be 2+/5++/5+++ T5 for less than 40 points.
We're not talking about Paladins here. Nor are we talking about Meganobz, or anything else that's not the actual topic of this thread's conversation. We're actually discussing standard space marine terminators and what to do to them to make them viable. If you want to make Paladins even more tough, give them better FNP (4+) with the Apothecary if purchased. They're also already psykers and have higher WS/BS as you already noted. The whole ork codex needs an overhaul so I'm not going to go into Meganobz as that's a discussion for another thread.
Comparing apples to oranges here in this discussion accomplishes nothing.
If you leave the points cost alone on Terminators, you add one wound to them and call it a day. Makes sense that a marine that is able to move and fire any weapon he can physically carry would be harder to take down, to include Centurions.
I prefer making the terminators tougher to kill. That's one reason why TH/SS assault terminators are universally viewed as the best, because they are the hardest to kill and perform their function the best by being able to survive long enough to actually accomplish what they're designed to do. By improving the survival rate of terminators in general (By increasing the wound count per model to 2) and introducing a mechanic to improve their invulnerable save (without wargear such as a storm shield upgrade) to a 4++ by, for example, having there be 3 or more terminator armored models in a squad, you at least accomplish making the squads effective without being overpowered.
now granted it'd be easier to increase the stormbolters rate of fire, I mean assault 4'd begin to get scary. or Maybe take the "two bolt guns stuck together" literally and give it approperate stats to reflect that, in this case Salvo 2/4
Yeah, Terminator Armour is impractical in the game for exactly the same reasons as it is in the fluff: it's too expensive for what it does, isn't available in sufficient numbers to acheive its original goals, and is superceded by other units. Still, there's no reason not to take it for fluff reasons, and it still looks cool.
Dreadnoughts, on the other hand, will always have a place in my armies. If you can get them into combat with the right units, (which is a challenge, I admit), they more than pay for themselves, and can bring heavy weapons which can keep pace with infantry, while also being more compact than other vehicles of equivalent cost.
Spineyguy wrote: Yeah, Terminator Armour is impractical in the game for exactly the same reasons as it is in the fluff: it's too expensive for what it does, isn't available in sufficient numbers to acheive its original goals, and is superceded by other units. Still, there's no reason not to take it for fluff reasons, and it still looks cool.
Yeah, but in the fluff aren't they also supposed to excel in close quarters fighting against really dangerous enemies that can tear up regular marines? Clearing space hulks, going through the breach into the enemy keep, that sort of thing. So they're supposed to be really durable but also more of an aggressive close-in option. Not something you'd send on a regular patrol, but something that's ideal for a Zone Mortalis situation.
Jaxler wrote: What happens to paladins once all terminators get 2 wounds or whatever?
they can eaither be changed with a knew paladin specific kit (perhaps let them take storm shields in addition to a sword and bolter, basicly the way way Dragio is) or given differant stats (give em +1 to WS and BS) given another wound, for 3 wound termies... or just removed. lot's of options. givbing em +1WS and BS would be a very minor change that'd proably be welcome.
The current meta is decided by all the things that Termie Armour just crumbles to.
Under the current statlines there's no way Terminators can work, with a more open statline - Guard cost 1ppm - Eldar can dodge bullets - type statlines maybe.
1st off, dreadnoughts are actually quite good. Not great, but still good. And 2nd, the leviathan dread, while expensive, is an absolute killing machine. And very tough to kill.
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: 1st off, dreadnoughts are actually quite good. Not great, but still good. And 2nd, the leviathan dread, while expensive, is an absolute killing machine. And very tough to kill.
I believe people in this thread are speaking of terminators or 'tactical dreadnought armour', not casterferrum, contemptor, deredeo etc. dreadnoughts.
Paladins are 55 points a piece. A lot of that is coming from paying for the extra wound and extra WS. And then they have the option for an Apothecary. What goes on with that when you add FNP standard?
Meganobz have that 2 wound profile to differentiate them from having a 5++ instead. So you'd be giving the Terminators even more benefits compared to them, so what ELSE needs to be given to Meganobz?
Also Death Guard Terminators would be 2+/5++/5+++ T5 for less than 40 points.
We're not talking about Paladins here. Nor are we talking about Meganobz, or anything else that's not the actual topic of this thread's conversation. We're actually discussing standard space marine terminators and what to do to them to make them viable. If you want to make Paladins even more tough, give them better FNP (4+) with the Apothecary if purchased. They're also already psykers and have higher WS/BS as you already noted. The whole ork codex needs an overhaul so I'm not going to go into Meganobz as that's a discussion for another thread.
But you cannot ignore everything else and just look at one unit and think it's done. That attitude is precisely why GW rules suck. We wouldn't BE in this mess with terminators if GW wouldn't have just looked at stuff in isolation!
Making terminators good would require a complete redesign of 40k. They really have no viable niche to fill as the game is. The ridiculous scale of the game right now means that there's just way too much firepower going around right now to make their resilience even remotely worth it.
nudibranch wrote:
I believe people in this thread are speaking of terminators or 'tactical dreadnought armour', not casterferrum, contemptor, deredeo etc. dreadnoughts.
Oops, sorry.
Fafnir wrote:Making terminators good would require a complete redesign of 40k. They really have no viable niche to fill as the game is. The ridiculous scale of the game right now means that there's just way too much firepower going around right now to make their resilience even remotely worth it.
The game scale is as large or small as you and your friends want it to be.
While the rules and model line are slanted now to larger games, that's not a bad thing in and of itself. If you prefer smaller or skirmish scale games, that's just personal preference. The larger scale games aren't inherently ridiculous.
I think AP in general needs a rework if it's going to be as prevalent as it is currently. Reducing armour saves a la old school 40k and AoS would be preferable and would still give high armour values an edge. If we keep AP the way it is amd want terminators to be useful, we would need to reduce the amount of AP2 in the game and I feel the damage has already been done in regards to that. Honestly, I'm going to echo what's been said above: 40K badly needs a reboot, not something as drastic as AoS, but it definitely needs an large overhaul.
The game scale is as large or small as you and your friends want it to be.
While the rules and model line are slanted now to larger games, that's not a bad thing in and of itself. If you prefer smaller or skirmish scale games, that's just personal preference. The larger scale games aren't inherently ridiculous.
This is, to an extent, true. Which is why I pretty much play exclusively killteams at this point (where Terminators can't be used anyway, so that point's pretty irrelevant). Even in smaller games, terminators won't be getting their mileage, it's just that they become less and less efficient the bigger you get, and GW's intentions for the game just keep getting bigger and bigger. Hell, even the idea that Marines can be remotely horde-y these days is ridiculous.
The game scale is as large or small as you and your friends want it to be.
While the rules and model line are slanted now to larger games, that's not a bad thing in and of itself. If you prefer smaller or skirmish scale games, that's just personal preference. The larger scale games aren't inherently ridiculous.
This. I always think it's weird when people behave as though they're somehow compelled to play a very open-ended game system in a very narrowly-defined way.
I think a look back to 4th might hold a simpler solution than what people get so heated about here.
Back in the day black templars had their old dex, with2 heavy weapons for 5man squads and veteran skills. And they were good, even competitive.
My suggestion would be to leave them as is, add that second weapon for 5 man (maybe a third for 10man as was suggested above ) and give special ammo to standards. Assaulttermies might get a proper special rule in comparison (monster hunter/ tank hunter i suppose, maybe PE) to keep up. This would also leave external balance as is, allowing different codices their own fluffy ways to get good terminators.
Now i would also like a survivability buff (always found it wierd, that tau suits improve toughnes and wounds while imperial suits of armor wouldn't...) but as this thread shows it would be hard to pull off without making them uber or irrelevant thanks to subpar damageoutput.
Jeez what a well of text... sorry
Jaxler wrote: What happens to paladins once all terminators get 2 wounds or whatever?
Make them cheaper or given them an extra wound. It is not like they are a great unit ATM they cost 55 a pop and come with a force sword and storm bolter. I mean that is only 10 points less then a lib who gets to pick their powers.
Older editions gave Terminators a 3+ save...on 2d6. That's a bit too much dice management though, so instead just give terminator armor a natural rerollable armor save. It's supposed to be practically immune to small arms fire, instead of that being its biggest weakness. Rerollable armor keeps the immunity to normal weaponry with a small chance of cracking through a lens or joint while anti armor guns remain its natural weakness.
Terminators being able to use their teleporters offensively is a good idea too. Make them able to use teleportation to smash into the enemy line akin to jump infantry. Instead of the faster movement though, make terminator assaults automatically pass up to 12" charges with no reduction for difficult terrain, with AP3 hammer of wraths to represent Terminators literally teleporting into your midst and tearing people apart inside out from displaced matter.
As far as ranged Terminators, they're supposed to be akin to walking tanks. Give them all 2 weapons that they can fire simultaneously, have specialized anti-air Terminators and dedicated fire support Terminators with dual assault cannons in both hands. Massive exoskeletons can support more than just a stormbolter!
There are a few ways they can make them better but first and formost, the storm bolter needs to be a better weapon, tossing rapid fire and rending on it would be a damn good start Next, they should get 2 heavy weapon choices
Now to make them not laughable and die they should have either
2 wounds / T5 / Sv 1+ (they still fail armor on a roll of 1 but still get an armor save of 2+ against ap 2)
The other thing, make it so terminators equipped with all melee weapons can charge out of deep strike with out getting the charge bonus attack. Nothing sucks more then deep striking knights, standing there like a jack ass and getting gunned down. Terminators are menat to be shock troopers, not teleport it and pick your nose oh look there is a fight models.
Paladins are 55 points a piece. A lot of that is coming from paying for the extra wound and extra WS. And then they have the option for an Apothecary. What goes on with that when you add FNP standard?
Meganobz have that 2 wound profile to differentiate them from having a 5++ instead. So you'd be giving the Terminators even more benefits compared to them, so what ELSE needs to be given to Meganobz?
Also Death Guard Terminators would be 2+/5++/5+++ T5 for less than 40 points.
We're not talking about Paladins here. Nor are we talking about Meganobz, or anything else that's not the actual topic of this thread's conversation. We're actually discussing standard space marine terminators and what to do to them to make them viable. If you want to make Paladins even more tough, give them better FNP (4+) with the Apothecary if purchased. They're also already psykers and have higher WS/BS as you already noted. The whole ork codex needs an overhaul so I'm not going to go into Meganobz as that's a discussion for another thread.
But you cannot ignore everything else and just look at one unit and think it's done. That attitude is precisely why GW rules suck. We wouldn't BE in this mess with terminators if GW wouldn't have just looked at stuff in isolation!
THANK you for saying it before I could. Red Thirst doesn't understand how this issue goes beyond just fixing Loyalist Terminators.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
Also Heavy Bolters need to be fixed with Salvo 2/4 or being Heavy 4. Everyone already knows the Heavy Bolter is bad so I don't see how this really helps defend your point.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yoyoyo wrote: The Storm Bolter has fluff going back to the 80's. It's a double barreled bolter. That's it.
Designers need to respect fluff. Aesthetics and theme are without a doubt why 40k has survived until 2017.
Pointing out a few flaws in "fluff logic" doesn't mean abandoning it completely. Rather it's a chance to fix what's possible.
It is a different weapon compared to the Combi-Bolter. That acts more like a double barreled Bolter.
Actually I think it would be. I mean, the only T3 army that is actually rather competitive right now is Eldar, and making the other T3 armies more vulnerable to the supreme firepower of other armies would be pretty bad.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And that says nothing about how much more powerful GK would become against vehicles with that...
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this.
Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
Melissia wrote: Actually I think it would be. I mean, the only T3 army that is actually rather competitive right now is Eldar, and making the other T3 armies more vulnerable to the supreme firepower of other armies would be pretty bad.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And that says nothing about how much more powerful GK would become against vehicles with that...
If frickin Pulse Rifles are not an issue to Rhinos, Grey Knights with S5 Storm Bolters will not be.
Also you're talking about other armies that don't function already when we are talking about stuff that doesn't function already. I don't really care because I'm sticking mostly to the topic on hand. If you want to make a thread about how to rebalance Tyranids or AM I'll gladly contribute as I have many ideas about those.
Badablack wrote: Older editions gave Terminators a 3+ save...on 2d6. That's a bit too much dice management though, so instead just give terminator armor a natural rerollable armor save. It's supposed to be practically immune to small arms fire, instead of that being its biggest weakness. Rerollable armor keeps the immunity to normal weaponry with a small chance of cracking through a lens or joint while anti armor guns remain its natural weakness.
Terminators being able to use their teleporters offensively is a good idea too. Make them able to use teleportation to smash into the enemy line akin to jump infantry. Instead of the faster movement though, make terminator assaults automatically pass up to 12" charges with no reduction for difficult terrain, with AP3 hammer of wraths to represent Terminators literally teleporting into your midst and tearing people apart inside out from displaced matter.
I like a lot of this. I'd keep stormbolters where they are but increase their rate of fire. For DA this could actually get kind of scary, Assult 4 and twin linked when deep striking? I could work with that better than what they are now. Removing the negative bonuses to charging through difficult terrain makes since, I mean if they are running forwards shear mass and momentum means there isn't going to be a whole lot that can stop them short of ship blast door. A rotting copse of trees or some dilapidated ruin isn't stopping gak. I'm not sure i'd go with rending. Like people have said, they are still just 2 bolt guns tapped together. Hammer of wrath should be universal for all termies to I think. AP3 might be a little much and charging from DS would do a lot. Through in a 2+ re-rollable and I'd be content I think.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this.
Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
What toes? The Heavy Bolter HAS nothing going for it anyway. Besides, everyone already knows they should be Heavy 4 or Salvo 2/4.
Backspacehacker wrote: There are a few ways they can make them better but first and formost, the storm bolter needs to be a better weapon, tossing rapid fire and rending on it would be a damn good start
Next, they should get 2 heavy weapon choices
Now to make them not laughable and die they should have either
2 wounds / T5 / Sv 1+ (they still fail armor on a roll of 1 but still get an armor save of 2+ against ap 2)
The other thing, make it so terminators equipped with all melee weapons can charge out of deep strike with out getting the charge bonus attack. Nothing sucks more then deep striking knights, standing there like a jack ass and getting gunned down. Terminators are menat to be shock troopers, not teleport it and pick your nose oh look there is a fight models.
Yes. First time I played Deathwing Knights they got mauled pretty bad just from the amount of shots coming their way. Complete waste of points. Again, a charge with no extra attacks, etc., would do wonders for them.
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: 1st off, dreadnoughts are actually quite good. Not great, but still good. And 2nd, the leviathan dread, while expensive, is an absolute killing machine. And very tough to kill.
I believe people in this thread are speaking of terminators or 'tactical dreadnought armour', not casterferrum, contemptor, deredeo etc. dreadnoughts.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this.
Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
What toes? The Heavy Bolter HAS nothing going for it anyway. Besides, everyone already knows they should be Heavy 4 or Salvo 2/4.
So why not then just give all the terminators heavy bolters since they have relentless? At least they did last time I checked.
Fixing terminators is quite easy. Make centurions walkers (they are basically space marine warwalkers) Give terms their stat lines and point cost but give terms access to heavy weapons on every model like ceturions - except they take from terminator weapons. Storm shields and assault cannons on every model? Sure if you are willing to pay 85 points per model. Make storm bolters salvo 2/4 when taken in combination with TDA.
That is the kind of unit people need them to be. A tough and flexible fire-base.
To be fair to centurians - make them armor 11/11/10 2 hull points walkers with the same upgrade options they have now but let them be fielded in units of 1-3 and give them the split-fire special rule for 75 points + weapons.
Then to be fair to dreadnoughts. Give them 4 hp and ignore all damage result other than weapon destroyed, and explosion - at no additional point cost.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this.
Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
What toes? The Heavy Bolter HAS nothing going for it anyway. Besides, everyone already knows they should be Heavy 4 or Salvo 2/4.
So why not then just give all the terminators heavy bolters since they have relentless? At least they did last time I checked.
Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this.
Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
What toes? The Heavy Bolter HAS nothing going for it anyway. Besides, everyone already knows they should be Heavy 4 or Salvo 2/4.
So why not then just give all the terminators heavy bolters since they have relentless? At least they did last time I checked.
Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
Grav is a newer type weapon. TDA is old. I think whatever changes are made to terms their weapon options need to remain the same. See my post above I think it's a nice way to adress both units and give them each a viable roll.
Xenomancers wrote: Fixing terminators is quite easy. Make centurions walkers (they are basically space marine warwalkers) Give terms their stat lines and point cost but give terms access to heavy weapons on every model like ceturions - except they take from terminator weapons. Storm shields and assault cannons on every model? Sure if you are willing to pay 85 points per model. Make storm bolters salvo 2/4 when taken in combination with TDA.
That is the kind of unit people need them to be. A tough and flexible fire-base.
To be fair to centurians - make them armor 11/11/10 2 hull points walkers with the same upgrade options they have now but let them be fielded in units of 1-3 and give them the split-fire special rule for 75 points + weapons.
Then to be fair to dreadnoughts. Give them 4 hp and ignore all damage result other than weapon destroyed, and explosion - at no additional point cost.
I don't play with centurions but i'm not a fan of most walker rules as is. I think making them 11/11/10 would be a huge nerf without an armor save to go along with it, otherwise they will be as fragile as dreadnoughts are now. Not sure 4 HP and ignoring all damage - weapons destoryed/explode would work for dreadnoughts anyways. I still like Spikey Bits idea of giving dreadnoughts a T value and armor save. If you changed centurions i'd say do the same for them.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this.
Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
What toes? The Heavy Bolter HAS nothing going for it anyway. Besides, everyone already knows they should be Heavy 4 or Salvo 2/4.
So why not then just give all the terminators heavy bolters since they have relentless? At least they did last time I checked.
Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
Grav is a newer type weapon. TDA is old. I think whatever changes are made to terms their weapon options need to remain the same. See my post above I think it's a nice way to adress both units and give them each a viable roll.
And that's a fair point if say, they can't retro fit grav to terminator armor for a grav cannon. Still wouldn't explain why they couldn't strap to grav guns together to replace the storm bolter though.
Melissia wrote: Let's just give everyoen grav guns and be done with it. Slap 'em on the guardsmen even.
Yep, pretty much were I'm at. I don't think Grav is going anywhere at this point and feel like it's fighting an uphill battle asking for less. I'd rather just let everyone have access to it and move on.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ZebioLizard2 wrote: I'd rather just have the nerf to Grav Guns rather then slapping them on every single thing in existence to make things work.
I'm seriously sure I saw an IG improvement to make grav tanks and grav sponsons at this point.
Would be a reason to get old players to buy more if they re-cut the dread kit (which needs it). Sort of like the only reason most older player picked up new tac/dev squads was the grav weapons they added to them with the latest revision. It’s not like I needed more power armored bodies.
Well grav is that rare weapon for the most trusted people in the Imperium, and I think dreads / terms should get it too if devastators do.
Also grav's the only answer to all these opmcs.
As for terminators, the solution is to make them each have a heavy weapon option, add grav-cannons in there, increase T to 5 so they aren't butchered by grots, and personal teleporters gk-style (jump). Then there will be a point to take them in current meta.
I don't know why the let dreadnoughts and terminators get to the point they're at anyways. They were some of the first models I had back in like 3rd edition and the biggest reason I got into 40k. Kind of like how I hear so many people say they start playing because they loved CSM and, until recently, they've been pretty lackluster.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sonic Keyboard wrote: Well grav is that rare weapon for the most trusted people in the Imperium, and I think dreads / terms should get it too if devastators do.
Also grav's the only answer to all these opmcs.
As for terminators, the solution is to make them each have a heavy weapon option, add grav-cannons in there, increase T to 5 so they aren't butchered by grots, and personal teleporters gk-style (jump). Then there will be a point to take them in current meta.
Why not at least let Venerable dreads have it? I've thought about the personal teleporter thing and that feels to much like a GK thing to me. Plus that's one of the few things GK have going for them. On the same topic though i'm really not sure how else you can fix their mobility issues.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
TBH having storm bolters be str 5 isn't that big of a problem when taking into account grey Knights only get like, 20 models base. TBH having this would probably be a healthy change for grey Knights, and making force turn weapons into ap 2 would be nice too. Even then strike teams may still suck.
Jaxler wrote: What happens to paladins once all terminators get 2 wounds or whatever?
they can eaither be changed with a knew paladin specific kit (perhaps let them take storm shields in addition to a sword and bolter, basicly the way way Dragio is) or given differant stats (give em +1 to WS and BS) given another wound, for 3 wound termies... or just removed. lot's of options. givbing em +1WS and BS would be a very minor change that'd proably be welcome.
Frankly paladins shouldn't be removed, they're important for grey Knights IMO who've so few models/units. I'd either make them 3 wounds or make them get the bonus bs/ws.
To be frank, the entire Grey Knights codex should be removed in favor of a leaner more streamlined 8th edition. But that's neither here nor there.
There's no reason a Paladin having 2 wounds should preclude all terminators getting 2. They could just give Paladins Eternal Warrior to prevent instant death to compensate. They could give all terminators a FNP and make Paladins 1 better. Tons of options really.
The only thing that would really get carried away imo is the base 5 toughness being turned to 6 with MoN.
Nvs wrote: To be frank, the entire Grey Knights codex should be removed in favor of a leaner more streamlined 8th edition. But that's neither here nor there.
There's no reason a Paladin having 2 wounds should preclude all terminators getting 2. They could just give Paladins Eternal Warrior to prevent instant death to compensate. They could give all terminators a FNP and make Paladins 1 better. Tons of options really.
The only thing that would really get carried away imo is the base 5 toughness being turned to 6 with MoN.
I don't play CSM so just asking, would it be possible to give a slight points increase to termies with MoN to compensate?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Actually i'm not sure this would work unless they had Nurgle termies instead of MoN. Increasing MoN period would effect to much other stuff.
Nvs wrote: To be frank, the entire Grey Knights codex should be removed in favor of a leaner more streamlined 8th edition. But that's neither here nor there.
There's no reason a Paladin having 2 wounds should preclude all terminators getting 2. They could just give Paladins Eternal Warrior to prevent instant death to compensate. They could give all terminators a FNP and make Paladins 1 better. Tons of options really.
The only thing that would really get carried away imo is the base 5 toughness being turned to 6 with MoN.
I don't play CSM so just asking, would it be possible to give a slight points increase to termies with MoN to compensate?
You'd just have to increase the cost of the MoN upgrade for the Terminators.
Reduce AP2 of Imperial Plasma Guns/Plasma Pistols and their Xenos versions to AP3. Add a special rule to Terminator armour to improve the survivability vs. small arms fire:
Tactical Dreadnought Armour: You may reroll failed armour saves.
Ork Mega armour could also benefit from this special rule.
Gravguns are also supposed to be an issue but I am not familiar with their rules. You could reduce their AP value as well, restrict their proliferation or just abolish them.
If Terminators still suck in your opinion, keep in mind they were built for battles in confined spaces. So grab a copy of Space Hulk and have a blast shooting Genestealers to slimy bits.
II'm not too thrilled by the idea of major stormbolter buffs, though admittedly that's because if they get stronger they're likely to remain a terminator only weapon, and I'm hoping they'll eventually be something that regular tac sqauds can take as upgrades.
I'd lean more toward either an extra wound/toughness point (think wounds might the better one so centurions have their own role), or some serious price drops on terminators and their upgrades, and perhaps wider availability. Maybe not to deathwatch "you get an assault cannon, you get an assault cannon, everyone get's an assault cannon...oh, and some missiles" level (though that on a cheaper model or the same model with cheaper weapons would rock), but it's annoying how rare they are currently, at least outside of vehicles and aircraft (and even still you can only take it on two vehicles).
I wouldn't use grav as the barometer for balance. It fits a very specific purpose, it is an anti-terminator and anti-mc weapon. Scissors is strong against paper. If grav suddenly stopped existing, plasma would still ruin terminators days. 4 plasma shots from a 5 man tac squad will hurt you.
Personally I wouldn't mind seeing terminators go from a 2+/5++ to a 3+/5++ with 2 wounds and 5 toughness.
Because it's not just grav that makes them struggle.
1) They have low initiative in melee relative to other melee units. For example, A death company throwing out 40 attacks on charge at I5 will handle your 2+ save termies no problem.
2) Their mobility is terrible, and they can only take dedicated transports that themselves are overcosted and very vulnerable.
3) Their shooting options are meh. They have no way to take advantage of their relentless platform, really. Allow them to ALL have a power fist and a heavy flamer as stock options and we'll talk. Or, something better than a storm bolter. At least a hurricane bolter.
Basically they can't out-shoot shooty units, they can't out-melee squads designed for it, and they can't tank any sustained fire because there's so much AP2, or mass fire, that 1 wound and weak toughness means they're dropping too fast.
Hopefully some of those issues will be resolved in 8th edition. If GW doesn't do something about the buckets of dice and proliferation of AP2 then the entire update will be a failure imo.
I don't recall if it was discussed on this forum or another so it wasn't my idea and I'm not trying to steal anyone's thunder. But what impact would simply making invulnerable saves being rolled after normal saves do? Especially as a global rule system wide and not just for terminators?
For example, you take a bucket of dice and fail 7 2+ armor saves. You then would roll those 7 against your invulnerable save.
Nvs wrote: Hopefully some of those issues will be resolved in 8th edition. If GW doesn't do something about the buckets of dice and proliferation of AP2 then the entire update will be a failure imo.
I don't recall if it was discussed on this forum or another so it wasn't my idea and I'm not trying to steal anyone's thunder. But what impact would simply making invulnerable saves being rolled after normal saves do? Especially as a global rule system wide and not just for terminators?
For example, you take a bucket of dice and fail 7 2+ armor saves. You then would roll those 7 against your invulnerable save.
A better answer would be making some fnp style save that would be able to be taken after saves. TBH rerolls are the best way to circumvent the problems of a 1-6 dice scale if done well, IMO.
Terminators are supposed to be elite operators who can take on both masses and other elite troops because of their experience, training, and skill. They do have things on their profiles that are better than centurions' and those are their +1 A and +1 Ld. Those things don't count for anything atm. People say don't upgrade Vanguard vets, they die like normal MEqs, don't take chosen, they die like normal MEqs.
If your model has a greater number of base attacks than the models shooting it and is in cover/half obscures, the shooting model should be at -1 BS. We are talking about elite units, veteran officers, wily loota boys, they all need a mechanism to outwit and out survive the lesser units they face off against in a fire fight.
Beyond that, yes there need to be lots of improvements.
The first heavy weapon in a basic shooty squad should be free, to make up for the sergeant's power weapon that is required by the kit and just good practice. The second upgrade weapon should also be just five points, but it should have to be a different weapon. You could say that mixing heavy weapons is not good, but one of them is free and the other one is 20 points cheaper than currently. It's also got the upside of looking good and making sense. A military fire team has one guy with a machine gun, one guy with a missile tube, and one guy with a grenade launcher. Terminators are professional, they would carry more than one type of gun. You could even have all three guns in one squad, one for free and the others for five points. They'd be able to use a weapon for any situation, and they'd still be cheaper than a current single weapon squad.
Then they have to be five models max, that's just what the background says and it doesn't make any sense to have giant units of elite tunnel fighters. If they are variable they should be 3 - 5 in size and unlock the extra heavies a size 5.
Any solution that has Salvo has to be at least salvo 3/3. Salvo 2/3 is crazy and doesn't make any sense for non relentless models. I think power wise salvo 3/3 and shred is minimum - assuming that you can get your opponents to rely heavily on t3 or t4 infantry models so that your crappy s4 shooting even means anything.
As far as defense, the 5++ should become a ward save that you can take if you fail armor or other iron halo/storm shield save. It doesn't help against ap2, it's true, but that's why you have that attacks-based shooting modifier. If the shooting player has both grav and more attacks than you do, then he might be getting what he paid for.
Attacks Characteristic in Shooting
When a model is shooting at a model that is at least 25% obscured and is the same size or smaller, compare the numbers of attacks on the models' profiles. If the shooting model has the same or fewer attacks on it profile, resolve the shooting at bs - 1.
When a model is shooting at a model that is at is the same size, compare the number of attacks on the models' profiles. If the shooting model has more attacks, resolve the shooting at +1 bs.
Models without attacks are unaffected.
Size
Size is indicated by unit type - e.g. models that are bulky are larger than infantry that are not. Vehicles are larger than extra bulky models; tanks, flyers, and monstrous creatures are larger than vehicles.
When shooting at a model that is smaller and is at least 25% obscured, shooting is resolved at bs - 1.
Tactical Dreadnought Armor
Models with this wargead have a 2+ armor save as well as the relentless and deep strike special rules. These models may make a 5+ invulnerable save after failing any other type of save. Models with this wargear may not sweeping advance.
Marmatag wrote: I wouldn't use grav as the barometer for balance. It fits a very specific purpose, it is an anti-terminator and anti-mc weapon. Scissors is strong against paper. If grav suddenly stopped existing, plasma would still ruin terminators days. 4 plasma shots from a 5 man tac squad will hurt you.
Personally I wouldn't mind seeing terminators go from a 2+/5++ to a 3+/5++ with 2 wounds and 5 toughness.
Because it's not just grav that makes them struggle.
1) They have low initiative in melee relative to other melee units. For example, A death company throwing out 40 attacks on charge at I5 will handle your 2+ save termies no problem.
2) Their mobility is terrible, and they can only take dedicated transports that themselves are overcosted and very vulnerable.
3) Their shooting options are meh. They have no way to take advantage of their relentless platform, really. Allow them to ALL have a power fist and a heavy flamer as stock options and we'll talk. Or, something better than a storm bolter. At least a hurricane bolter.
Basically they can't out-shoot shooty units, they can't out-melee squads designed for it, and they can't tank any sustained fire because there's so much AP2, or mass fire, that 1 wound and weak toughness means they're dropping too fast.
I'm a little opposite from you. I like 2+/4++ or maybe 2+ re-rolling and a 5++ with 2 wounds and T5. I think i'm ok with that even considering that CSM Termies with MoN would be T6. Even with all the new stuff CSM have gotten i think they may still need a little love from GW just because they've been pretty bad for a while.
40 DC would still be a problem and giving them grav would help their shooting out put some and, at least for DA, could help with meq assault units. Just one gravcannon could make them a little more appealing. Deepstrike with a gravcannon that is twin-linked that turn, with relentless, and re-rolling to wound because of gravamps. With the profile I just mentioned, maybe a small points reduction, I could make that work for something. For example, deepstrike next to that DC squad and open up. With 5 grav shots alone, re-rolling to hit/wound, good chance you'll do some damage with that grav leaving them with just a 5+ FnP. Not to mention DA have grimresolve so they fire overwatch at BS 2 and at full BS in a lion's blade. You could really weaken a 10 man DC squad with that before they even had a chance to charge and actually have the wounds and/or saves to hold up long enough for the PF to do some damage.
Dakka Flakka Flame wrote: Yeah, but in the fluff aren't they also supposed to excel in close quarters fighting against really dangerous enemies that can tear up regular marines? Clearing space hulks, going through the breach into the enemy keep, that sort of thing. So they're supposed to be really durable but also more of an aggressive close-in option. Not something you'd send on a regular patrol, but something that's ideal for a Zone Mortalis situation.
Of course, which is precisely what Terminators still are. However, as armies and games get bigger, as the number of units that can challenge Terminators increases and broadens in variety, their application on the battlefield lessens. I'd much rather have three Land Speeders with all the trimmings than five vanilla Terminators, and could realistically use them to challenge pretty similar targets.
So increasingly Terminators should become specialists, reserved for Zone Mortalis, extraordinary scenarios and games under 1000pts. I don't have a problem with this; it more properly reflects the Armour's original purpose, promotes that style of gameplay (which has been sorely lacking for a long time), and allows more modern innovations such as the Centurion Warsuit to handle the heavy lifting, so to speak.
giving them grav would help their shooting out put some and, at least for DA, could help with meq assault units. Just one gravcannon could make them a little more appealing. Deepstrike with a gravcannon that is twin-linked that turn, with relentless, and re-rolling to wound because of gravamps. With the profile I just mentioned, maybe a small points reduction, I could make that work for something.
.
You still have people asking why their units aren't good. The models, artwork, and background all have terminators carrying assault cannons or flamers, so people go out and build squads with assault cannons then come make threads like this one saying that their assault cannon terminators need some buffs. You also still have assault terminators being bad and chaos terminators being bad. Maybe if loyalist terminators had the option to replace one of their models with a grab cannon terminator that would be useful, but for assault terminators, chaos terminators, and people who have any other weapon in their unit, that is like giving terminator squads the option to replace all of their members with scatter bikes, or for twenty points one of the members may be replaced by playing Flames of War.
giving them grav would help their shooting out put some and, at least for DA, could help with meq assault units. Just one gravcannon could make them a little more appealing. Deepstrike with a gravcannon that is twin-linked that turn, with relentless, and re-rolling to wound because of gravamps. With the profile I just mentioned, maybe a small points reduction, I could make that work for something.
.
You still have people asking why their units aren't good. The models, artwork, and background all have terminators carrying assault cannons or flamers, so people go out and build squads with assault cannons then come make threads like this one saying that their assault cannon terminators need some buffs. You also still have assault terminators being bad and chaos terminators being bad. Maybe if loyalist terminators had the option to replace one of their models with a grab cannon terminator that would be useful, but for assault terminators, chaos terminators, and people who have any other weapon in their unit, that is like giving terminator squads the option to replace all of their members with scatter bikes, or for twenty points one of the members may be replaced by playing Flames of War.
I don't see how giving one terminator the option to take a grav cannon is the same as being able to replace all its members with scat bikes? It also doesn't make since considering they're pretty much the only space marines that can't take them (barring vehicles). Besides, assault terminators with 2+ re-roll/3++ (with shield), T5, and 2 wounds would still be a lot better then they are now. CSM would still benefit from the the same stats and MoN would make them T6 so how would it not make terminators better across the board?
Automatically Appended Next Post: And since when did art work and the way people modeled their stuff based on that ever stop GW from adding or taking something away from a model?
Same thing for Meganobz. They already have a 2 wound profile. Just leave them as is.
you take a look at how much meganobz cost compared to termies lately?
They're 5 points more. And you guys want to make Terminators tougher while ignoring them. Once again you guys think in a vacuum when YOU NEED TO LOOK IN THE VACUUM, OTHER CODICES, AND OVERALL RIPPLE EFFECT.
It really shouldn't be that difficult but it is for you people. Terminator armor was never tough to begin with and Centurions proved that by doing the role you keep trying to put on Terminators when they never frickin did it to begin with.
-Toughness 5
-Strength 5 Storm Bolter
-1 in 3 Terminators can have a heavy weapon, or jut 2 at 5 and 4 at 10 man squads.
-Have a Warp Shunt Move like Grey Knight Interceptors
-Hammer of Wrath
Creating a fix built around stormshields though leaves grey knights (and other non-shield units) in the dark.
I'm not convinced more rerolling is necessary.
Upping the Toughness to 5 and the Wounds by 1 for terminator armor, and reducing the save to 3+ would have the following effect:
The last 2 columns are the number of expected shots to kill 1 Terminator
So against anything >AP3, or equal to AP2, the 3+, 5T, 2W termies win out handily. Against AP3, the current setup is better. However, it's much easier to improve on a 5++ save, such as a stormshield. Additionally, you have to look at the availability of weapons you'd be facing. AP3 would be better in this scenario, but your options of taking AP3 are actually more limiting than AP2. To trace "grav" onto this chart, against the 3+ guys it would be equivalent to 5strAP2/3 (09 shots) and against 2+ it would be 6+strAP2 (03 shots). So with this layout terminators actually live 3x as long against grav (expected).
Also, this is to kill. if your terminators are under sustained fire you could adjust them on your turn so the wounded terminators are in the back, allowing them to continue the fight.
It also means termies with 3++ stormshields would do a fairly good job tanking grav weaponry. To trace that, Look at strength 5, Ap4. 18 grav dice shots kill 1 termie. (not factoring in rerolls from grav amp).
ILegion wrote: Wow. That's a hell of a difference even with only a 3+ save.
Coincidentally this also shows why people are doing well with Thunderwolf Cavalry and Wulfen. You put Stormshields on them, and their toughness and wounds make them pretty hardy.
I think that outside of a major rules change and a shake up of everything, there will never be a fix. Personally I'd do something like this in terms of power level, cost and firepower.
Marines - Terminators - Centurions - Dreadnoughts
2 Wound - 3 Wound - 3 Wound - 6 wounds
100 per 5 - 150 per 5 - 200 per 3 - 150 per dread
4+ - 3+/5++ - 3+ - 3+/4++
Idea being Terminators would just be 'elite infantry' in the kind of way AoS Skullreapers are compared to Blood Warriors.
Except they're really not as good as sternguard at the moment. If you want to put them on that level you'd think they'd be equivalent for internal balance purposes.
Melissia wrote: Except they're really not as good as sternguard at the moment. If you want to put them on that level you'd think they'd be equivalent for internal balance purposes.
Good point but it's half the story until we ask how they stack up against Vanguard.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this. Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
What toes? The Heavy Bolter HAS nothing going for it anyway. Besides, everyone already knows they should be Heavy 4 or Salvo 2/4.
So why not then just give all the terminators heavy bolters since they have relentless? At least they did last time I checked.
Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
Grav is a newer type weapon. TDA is old. I think whatever changes are made to terms their weapon options need to remain the same. See my post above I think it's a nice way to adress both units and give them each a viable roll.
Graviton guns were in RT. They were weird then, and looking at the profile probably very annoying too.
ILegion wrote: Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
The point was with 2 S5 stormbolter shots base on a terminator, the HB is only a tiny bit extra on top of that. The HB would likely need even more readjusting than it needs at the moment. Which in turn could see the assault cannon needing a little work as well. The main issue is power creep and adding yet more power creep only prolongs the problem.
Yeah I'm really not in to this S5 stuff. The Stormbolter is an evolution of the twin-linked boltgun which was almost literally two boltguns slapped together. It should have roughly the same statline as a boltgun but faster firing.
There are already ways to make terminators durable if that is what you think they lack, across all codex versions no less (death guard/1k sons for chaos, psychic powers for all and super friends for the imperials). I cant be the only one who has noticed that no one is rushing to field paladins, deathwing command, iron hands + endurance etc?
What terminators need more than anything else is the ability to cause damage fitting their position - especially when every new released unit just makes them worse by comparison - compare assault terminators to wulfen or tac terminators to assault(!) centurions, then think about dev cents and die a little inside.
My thoughts on potential ways to buff damage output:
Imperial only:
Finally making sternguard ammo compatible with stormbolters (buffing while avoiding conflict with other stormbolter platforms)
Allow sarge wargear; 1st co vet sarge is meant to be the highest position a non-officer can hold yet he has way less options than a 10th co sarge.
Chaos only:
Mark of chaos unlocks wargear (sonic weapons/slaanesh, poison/nurgle, ap3/tzeentch, axe of khorne or a double handed chainaxe like the wulfen great axe)
VotLW unlocks heresy era wargear (volkites, plasma blasters)
Bring back 2nd edition bayonets, +1 attack if carrying a gun
Universal:
HoW More reliable deepstrike - not necessarily scatter reduction but instead the ability to mishap back into ongoing reserves instead of auto death options
2 heavy weapons always allowed
Different heavy weapons than flamer or (insert name here) cannon.
Unwieldly weapons give -1I instead of I1
Pinning on all shooting attacks representative of a terminators unrelenting assault (they don't duck and cover)
Finally, terminators cant sweep due to how big they are. Surely there should be an upside to their huge stature? The ability to overwatch whilst in combat, or simply hammer of wrath out of combat isn't too hard to imagine.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this.
Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
What toes? The Heavy Bolter HAS nothing going for it anyway. Besides, everyone already knows they should be Heavy 4 or Salvo 2/4.
So why not then just give all the terminators heavy bolters since they have relentless? At least they did last time I checked.
Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
Grav is a newer type weapon. TDA is old. I think whatever changes are made to terms their weapon options need to remain the same. See my post above I think it's a nice way to adress both units and give them each a viable roll.
Graviton guns were in RT. They were weird then, and looking at the profile probably very annoying too.
ILegion wrote: Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
The point was with 2 S5 stormbolter shots base on a terminator, the HB is only a tiny bit extra on top of that. The HB would likely need even more readjusting than it needs at the moment. Which in turn could see the assault cannon needing a little work as well. The main issue is power creep and adding yet more power creep only prolongs the problem.
But the Assault Cannon never needed reworking. The only issue with it is lack of presence. Nobody has ever complained about the profile of it outside Martel, and his complaint does feel almost legit when you consider the fact that Eldar are an army that was made.
Terminators were introduced to the game to do one thing: Close quarters assault on spacecrafts (Space Hulks, to be specific). Their weapons somewhat reflect this: Assault shooting and power fists for ripping open bulkheads and killing things very dead up close.
What terminators were not intended to do is fight on the open battlefield. Terminators do not need to be buffed to be able to do this. Terminators should not be doing this.
To me, every army contains units that are situational and probably shouldn't be deployed unless you know they'll be useful. Want to deploy terminators? Set up a game of urban combat and tell your opponent to come equipped for it.
Terminators were introduced to the game to do one thing: Close quarters assault on spacecrafts (Space Hulks, to be specific). Their weapons somewhat reflect this: Assault shooting and power fists for ripping open bulkheads and killing things very dead up close.
What terminators were not intended to do is fight on the open battlefield. Terminators do not need to be buffed to be able to do this. Terminators should not be doing this.
To me, every army contains units that are situational and probably shouldn't be deployed unless you know they'll be useful. Want to deploy terminators? Set up a game of urban combat and tell your opponent to come equipped for it.
Okay, but they really suck for that too, and can't be used for Killteam, which might reflect the first situation.
Terminators were introduced to the game to do one thing: Close quarters assault on spacecrafts (Space Hulks, to be specific). Their weapons somewhat reflect this: Assault shooting and power fists for ripping open bulkheads and killing things very dead up close.
What terminators were not intended to do is fight on the open battlefield. Terminators do not need to be buffed to be able to do this. Terminators should not be doing this.
To me, every army contains units that are situational and probably shouldn't be deployed unless you know they'll be useful. Want to deploy terminators? Set up a game of urban combat and tell your opponent to come equipped for it.
I agree with a lot of this. Id'd still like to see the RoF for the storm bolter boosted though.
Bit of a side note, but related to storm bolters. If the thing is two bolters strapped together more or less, why does it not get rapid fire or at least the ability to reroll misses like twin linked? I know it would be pointless for some groups of termies, but it's always just confused me.
mmzero252 wrote: Bit of a side note, but related to storm bolters. If the thing is two bolters strapped together more or less, why does it not get rapid fire or at least the ability to reroll misses like twin linked? I know it would be pointless for some groups of termies, but it's always just confused me.
I think the issue is that, essentially, storm bolters have been somewhat left behind as the rapid fire rules, introduced in 3rd edition, have evolved. It used to be that, under the majority of circumstances, bolters only got one shot. Storm bolters always got two. Nowadays, bolters get two shots more frequently, meaning the step up to an SB is less impressive. Personally, I'd like to see them get Assault 3 (or maybe even 4, if that's not overdoing it), maybe pop the range down to 18" – after all, they are designed for close-quarters fighting.
mmzero252 wrote: Bit of a side note, but related to storm bolters. If the thing is two bolters strapped together more or less, why does it not get rapid fire or at least the ability to reroll misses like twin linked? I know it would be pointless for some groups of termies, but it's always just confused me.
I think the issue is that, essentially, storm bolters have been somewhat left behind as the rapid fire rules, introduced in 3rd edition, have evolved. It used to be that, under the majority of circumstances, bolters only got one shot. Storm bolters always got two. Nowadays, bolters get two shots more frequently, meaning the step up to an SB is less impressive. Personally, I'd like to see them get Assault 3 (or maybe even 4, if that's not overdoing it), maybe pop the range down to 18" – after all, they are designed for close-quarters fighting.
I think some form of salvo would be nifty. 3 shots base with a 4th within half range or something. Honestly I only take them on blobs of sisters because they tend to be bubble wrap for someone more important. Can't risk that flamer range.
mmzero252 wrote: Bit of a side note, but related to storm bolters. If the thing is two bolters strapped together more or less, why does it not get rapid fire or at least the ability to reroll misses like twin linked? I know it would be pointless for some groups of termies, but it's always just confused me.
I think the issue is that, essentially, storm bolters have been somewhat left behind as the rapid fire rules, introduced in 3rd edition, have evolved. It used to be that, under the majority of circumstances, bolters only got one shot. Storm bolters always got two. Nowadays, bolters get two shots more frequently, meaning the step up to an SB is less impressive. Personally, I'd like to see them get Assault 3 (or maybe even 4, if that's not overdoing it), maybe pop the range down to 18" – after all, they are designed for close-quarters fighting.
I think some form of salvo would be nifty. 3 shots base with a 4th within half range or something. Honestly I only take them on blobs of sisters because they tend to be bubble wrap for someone more important. Can't risk that flamer range.
Hmm maybe. I'm still adjusting to the existence of Salvo as I dropped out of 40K around 4th and only came back during 7th and, being an old, new things are scary and confusing.
mmzero252 wrote: Bit of a side note, but related to storm bolters. If the thing is two bolters strapped together more or less, why does it not get rapid fire or at least the ability to reroll misses like twin linked? I know it would be pointless for some groups of termies, but it's always just confused me.
I think the issue is that, essentially, storm bolters have been somewhat left behind as the rapid fire rules, introduced in 3rd edition, have evolved. It used to be that, under the majority of circumstances, bolters only got one shot. Storm bolters always got two. Nowadays, bolters get two shots more frequently, meaning the step up to an SB is less impressive. Personally, I'd like to see them get Assault 3 (or maybe even 4, if that's not overdoing it), maybe pop the range down to 18" – after all, they are designed for close-quarters fighting.
I think some form of salvo would be nifty. 3 shots base with a 4th within half range or something. Honestly I only take them on blobs of sisters because they tend to be bubble wrap for someone more important. Can't risk that flamer range.
Hmm maybe. I'm still adjusting to the existence of Salvo as I dropped out of 40K around 4th and only came back during 7th and, being an old, new things are scary and confusing.
I do relatively know how you feel. I started within 12 months ago, but I main an army with rules from basically 15 years ago. I still don't get any fancy new toys. Heck, a necron opponent was shocked my vehicles didn't have "Primary Weapon" or anything like it...but that all DIDN'T EXIST when Sisters were last updated.
Hmm maybe. I'm still adjusting to the existence of Salvo as I dropped out of 40K around 4th and only came back during 7th and, being an old, new things are scary and confusing.
I know what you mean. I stopped in 5th and while looking to come back I don't know wtf is going on anymore because of how many rules there are and how much has changed. The game really suffers from power creep and rules bloat, it needs to be redone and AoS-ified. As much as people bitch about it the rules are easy to pick up and understand while still having enough depth in the gameplay.
When a game is deeper in rules than it is gameplay something has messed up somewhere.
I don't know about all of you but I really struggle when I try to think of 'Oh this unit as a 3 up armor save, but it has the one special rule that lets it re-roll failed saves, then another rule that increases it, then another unit has this other rule that affects the first units rule, and it's all encompassed by that one item that one other dude took that has a special rule on the item and on the character that also affects the unit and the special rule that affects the army'
mmzero252 wrote: Bit of a side note, but related to storm bolters. If the thing is two bolters strapped together more or less, why does it not get rapid fire or at least the ability to reroll misses like twin linked? I know it would be pointless for some groups of termies, but it's always just confused me.
I think the issue is that, essentially, storm bolters have been somewhat left behind as the rapid fire rules, introduced in 3rd edition, have evolved. It used to be that, under the majority of circumstances, bolters only got one shot. Storm bolters always got two. Nowadays, bolters get two shots more frequently, meaning the step up to an SB is less impressive. Personally, I'd like to see them get Assault 3 (or maybe even 4, if that's not overdoing it), maybe pop the range down to 18" – after all, they are designed for close-quarters fighting.
I think some form of salvo would be nifty. 3 shots base with a 4th within half range or something. Honestly I only take them on blobs of sisters because they tend to be bubble wrap for someone more important. Can't risk that flamer range.
Hmm maybe. I'm still adjusting to the existence of Salvo as I dropped out of 40K around 4th and only came back during 7th and, being an old, new things are scary and confusing.
For what it's worth, Salvo is basically a callback to the original Psycannons of the 3rd edition Daemonhunters codex.
Although everything that uses salvo weapons seems to have relentless, so it doesn't really matter.
Terminators were introduced to the game to do one thing: Close quarters assault on spacecrafts (Space Hulks, to be specific). Their weapons somewhat reflect this: Assault shooting and power fists for ripping open bulkheads and killing things very dead up close.
What terminators were not intended to do is fight on the open battlefield. Terminators do not need to be buffed to be able to do this. Terminators should not be doing this.
To me, every army contains units that are situational and probably shouldn't be deployed unless you know they'll be useful. Want to deploy terminators? Set up a game of urban combat and tell your opponent to come equipped for it.
The problem is partially that terminators aren't described as specialists trained and equipped for very particular scenarios but the absolute elite of the chapter sent in when nothing but the very best will do the trick. If terminator armour was simply another piece of equipment like bikes or jump packs and if they maybe had slightly revamped base weaponry we wouldn't be having the current problem to the same degree.
Terminators were introduced to the game to do one thing: Close quarters assault on spacecrafts (Space Hulks, to be specific). Their weapons somewhat reflect this: Assault shooting and power fists for ripping open bulkheads and killing things very dead up close.
What terminators were not intended to do is fight on the open battlefield. Terminators do not need to be buffed to be able to do this. Terminators should not be doing this.
To me, every army contains units that are situational and probably shouldn't be deployed unless you know they'll be useful. Want to deploy terminators? Set up a game of urban combat and tell your opponent to come equipped for it.
THANK you for actually pointing out that their role wasn't ever being durable.
Look at their rules. They're a shock trooper.
Terminators were introduced to the game to do one thing: Close quarters assault on spacecrafts (Space Hulks, to be specific). Their weapons somewhat reflect this: Assault shooting and power fists for ripping open bulkheads and killing things very dead up close.
What terminators were not intended to do is fight on the open battlefield. Terminators do not need to be buffed to be able to do this. Terminators should not be doing this.
To me, every army contains units that are situational and probably shouldn't be deployed unless you know they'll be useful. Want to deploy terminators? Set up a game of urban combat and tell your opponent to come equipped for it.
THANK you for actually pointing out that their role wasn't ever being durable.
Look at their rules. They're a shock trooper.
Given that when they were in 2nd edition they had a higher defense then Artificer Armor and Power Armor, (3+ to save on a 2D6) I think its safe to say they were meant to be of a higher durability then what they would have had today.
Terminators were introduced to the game to do one thing: Close quarters assault on spacecrafts (Space Hulks, to be specific). Their weapons somewhat reflect this: Assault shooting and power fists for ripping open bulkheads and killing things very dead up close.
What terminators were not intended to do is fight on the open battlefield. Terminators do not need to be buffed to be able to do this. Terminators should not be doing this.
To me, every army contains units that are situational and probably shouldn't be deployed unless you know they'll be useful. Want to deploy terminators? Set up a game of urban combat and tell your opponent to come equipped for it.
THANK you for actually pointing out that their role wasn't ever being durable.
Look at their rules. They're a shock trooper.
Nope. It was designed because boarding operations were too dangerous. It's supposed to turn a marine into a walking tank.
They aren't supposed to be tanky, they're supposed to be assault troops.
Being an assault troop is a hard job.
Because being an assault troop is a hard job, they needed to be more tanky.
At the end of the day, they're a highly durable unit meant to be dropped into harms way without backup or support and survive long enough to complete the mission or clear a large enough path for others to follow.
In tabletop terms, they are killy enough. I mean the whole unit is nothing but powerfist or power weapon attacks. Something no other unit can do for Marines. The problem is they don't have the survivability or deployment potential to get the job done.
Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
They aren't supposed to be tanky, they're supposed to be assault troops.
Being an assault troop is a hard job.
Because being an assault troop is a hard job, they needed to be more tanky.
At the end of the day, they're a highly durable unit meant to be dropped into harms way without backup or support and survive long enough to complete the mission or clear a large enough path for others to follow.
In tabletop terms, they are killy enough. I mean the whole unit is nothing but powerfist or power weapon attacks. Something no other unit can do for Marines. The problem is they don't have the survivability or deployment potential to get the job done.
Besides Honour Guard and Vanguard doing that for cheaper and being more mobile in their own ways.
Terminators were introduced to the game to do one thing: Close quarters assault on spacecrafts (Space Hulks, to be specific). Their weapons somewhat reflect this: Assault shooting and power fists for ripping open bulkheads and killing things very dead up close.
What terminators were not intended to do is fight on the open battlefield. Terminators do not need to be buffed to be able to do this. Terminators should not be doing this.
To me, every army contains units that are situational and probably shouldn't be deployed unless you know they'll be useful. Want to deploy terminators? Set up a game of urban combat and tell your opponent to come equipped for it.
The problem is partially that terminators aren't described as specialists trained and equipped for very particular scenarios but the absolute elite of the chapter sent in when nothing but the very best will do the trick. If terminator armour was simply another piece of equipment like bikes or jump packs and if they maybe had slightly revamped base weaponry we wouldn't be having the current problem to the same degree.
Well that begs the question, though, subtracting the lore, where should they fit into the game?
In Horus Rising (might have been False Gods) the Luna Wolves used their terminators as a combination of a spearhead, a distraction, and simply as mobile cover. They marched the Terminators straight into the teeth of the enemy guns, which apparently was very effective.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
Well, that's kind of a typical GW problem: a major issue of one instance of horrible game design warring with a other instance of horrible game design, ain't it?
Unfortunately, Terminators are a glaring example of GW's constant escalation of their material, because Centurions showing up as the new hotness sold a helluva lot more models than upgrading the rules for models a lot of people already owned.
I was always fine with the idea of TDA and other equivalents like Mega Armor giving +1 toughness like a bike, and Mark of Nurgle giving +1 wound, so Nurgle Terminators would stack. Then leave their ranged weapons alone, but make their Power Fists strike at Initiative. Armor saves could have stayed the same, if not for the fact that the arms race outpaced them.
NivlacSupreme wrote: Nope. It was designed because boarding operations were too dangerous. It's supposed to turn a marine into a walking tank.
I think the idea was that during boarding operations you don't have dozens of people firing at you at once, and it's dangerous to yourself to deploy really heavy weapons aboard your own ship. So, resilient to small arms fire (above a regular Space Marine) with higher offensive potential, and an invulnerable save to keep them (sorta) alive against stuff that ignores armor in close combat (guys with power weapons).
The problem isn't TDA being bad. The problem is that a ton of other stuff has sprung up around it to be better, without any consequences. For example, Centurions can pretty much go anywhere on the table, though their sheer bulk should preclude them even thinking about going inside a building, or into a forest, or through a swamp. Space Marine IC can buy artificer armor and iron halos to be tougher than the supposedly 'best' Space Marine armor.
Maybe stuff needs to be dialed back. Continual escalation of power levels isn't good for the game. If Plasma and Grav dropped to AP3 (leaving Melta and Lascannons as your source of defeating 2+ armor), Terminators would seem a lot better without otherwise affecting the game very much. Centurions should be Walkers (along with a bunch of other stuff), and 2+ armor shouldn't be easy to acquire without upgrading to a Terminator suit.
John hit it on the head. Terminator armour didn't get worse...everything else in the game became more and more absurd (something which has outpaced MANY older units which were, at one point, viable).
Elbows wrote: John hit it on the head. Terminator armour didn't get worse...everything else in the game became more and more absurd (something which has outpaced MANY older units which were, at one point, viable).
Terminator armor was fragile in 2nd ed. I don't know why people are pretending it wasn't.
Elbows wrote: John hit it on the head. Terminator armour didn't get worse...everything else in the game became more and more absurd (something which has outpaced MANY older units which were, at one point, viable).
Terminator armor was fragile in 2nd ed. I don't know why people are pretending it wasn't.
Less fragile then power armor, but then again everything was equal before the power of Shuriken Weapons.
Elbows wrote: John hit it on the head. Terminator armour didn't get worse...everything else in the game became more and more absurd (something which has outpaced MANY older units which were, at one point, viable).
Terminator armor was fragile in 2nd ed. I don't know why people are pretending it wasn't.
Doesn't matter. It was expensive and didn't protect. That's what matters. Power armor was worthless in 2nd ed. Not exactly a great standard. -3 armor save was everywhere, making power armor only function on a 6+ and terminators were failing 28% of the time, which, against dozens of wounds was hopeless at 2nd ed unit costs.
Just like now, people in 2nd figured out that boltguns are crap and started using weapons that cut to the chase instead of wasting their time.
NivlacSupreme wrote: Nope. It was designed because boarding operations were too dangerous. It's supposed to turn a marine into a walking tank.
I think the idea was that during boarding operations you don't have dozens of people firing at you at once, and it's dangerous to yourself to deploy really heavy weapons aboard your own ship. So, resilient to small arms fire (above a regular Space Marine) with higher offensive potential, and an invulnerable save to keep them (sorta) alive against stuff that ignores armor in close combat (guys with power weapons).
The problem isn't TDA being bad. The problem is that a ton of other stuff has sprung up around it to be better, without any consequences. For example, Centurions can pretty much go anywhere on the table, though their sheer bulk should preclude them even thinking about going inside a building, or into a forest, or through a swamp. Space Marine IC can buy artificer armor and iron halos to be tougher than the supposedly 'best' Space Marine armor.
Maybe stuff needs to be dialed back. Continual escalation of power levels isn't good for the game. If Plasma and Grav dropped to AP3 (leaving Melta and Lascannons as your source of defeating 2+ armor), Terminators would seem a lot better without otherwise affecting the game very much. Centurions should be Walkers (along with a bunch of other stuff), and 2+ armor shouldn't be easy to acquire without upgrading to a Terminator suit.
Except Loyalist Terminators aren't good to begin with. So why are we dialing down everything else for a unit that wasn't good to try and make a unit good when it wasn't good to begin with? What is the line of logic here? Seriously?
As a CSM player I don't complain about MY Terminators. The issue is how the Loyalist ones are handled.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
See, that's another problem that's a sign of the nature of the game itself. Invulnerable saves are just thrown around like candy these days. The Terminators' 5++ means nothing in comparison. Invulnerable saves should be a lot rarer and a lot worse, with a 4+ being a pretty big deal.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
First, because Wulfen are an extremely rare mutation from a specific Chapter which amounts to only slightly more than 1% of 1% of the Space Marines in the universe (themselves rare to the point of being roughly 1 per world in the Imperium). There simply aren't enough Wulfen around to be available whenever boarding actions would be required, and while Terminators would also be rare, they would be hundreds of times more common than Wulfen.
Second, because Wulfen are exposed in myriad ways, and boarding actions can sometimes force exposure to a lot of destructive things - Wulfen would die (or at least be harmed/reduced in effectiveness) by gas leaks, radiation leaks, extended exposure to the void, extended exposure to extremely low temperatures, extended exposure to extremely high temperatures, biological contaminations, etc., all of which would at least not be uncommon to the sort of boarding actions you'd need Terminators for, particularly Space Hulk exploration.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
First, because Wulfen are an extremely rare mutation from a specific Chapter which amounts to only slightly more than 1% of 1% of the Space Marines in the universe (themselves rare to the point of being roughly 1 per world in the Imperium). There simply aren't enough Wulfen around to be available whenever boarding actions would be required, and while Terminators would also be rare, they would be hundreds of times more common than Wulfen.
Second, because Wulfen are exposed in myriad ways, and boarding actions can sometimes force exposure to a lot of destructive things - Wulfen would die (or at least be harmed/reduced in effectiveness) by gas leaks, radiation leaks, extended exposure to the void, extended exposure to extremely low temperatures, extended exposure to extremely high temperatures, biological contaminations, etc., all of which would at least not be uncommon to the sort of boarding actions you'd need Terminators for, particularly Space Hulk exploration.
None of which is relevant on the tabletop. Tabletop wise, there are as many Wulfen as necessary as long as the player pays the points.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
First, because Wulfen are an extremely rare mutation from a specific Chapter which amounts to only slightly more than 1% of 1% of the Space Marines in the universe (themselves rare to the point of being roughly 1 per world in the Imperium). There simply aren't enough Wulfen around to be available whenever boarding actions would be required, and while Terminators would also be rare, they would be hundreds of times more common than Wulfen.
Second, because Wulfen are exposed in myriad ways, and boarding actions can sometimes force exposure to a lot of destructive things - Wulfen would die (or at least be harmed/reduced in effectiveness) by gas leaks, radiation leaks, extended exposure to the void, extended exposure to extremely low temperatures, extended exposure to extremely high temperatures, biological contaminations, etc., all of which would at least not be uncommon to the sort of boarding actions you'd need Terminators for, particularly Space Hulk exploration.
None of which is relevant on the tabletop. Tabletop wise, there are as many Wulfen as necessary as long as the player pays the points.
Boarding actions aren't really relevant to the Tabletop either. Ask a question unrelated to the tabletop, and you'll get an answer unrelated to the tabletop.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
See, that's another problem that's a sign of the nature of the game itself. Invulnerable saves are just thrown around like candy these days. The Terminators' 5++ means nothing in comparison. Invulnerable saves should be a lot rarer and a lot worse, with a 4+ being a pretty big deal.
Making invulnerable saves rarer dose not make Terminators better. It just makes grav better because less stuff is resistant to it then.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
See, that's another problem that's a sign of the nature of the game itself. Invulnerable saves are just thrown around like candy these days. The Terminators' 5++ means nothing in comparison. Invulnerable saves should be a lot rarer and a lot worse, with a 4+ being a pretty big deal.
Making invulnerable saves rarer dose not make Terminators better. It just makes grav better because less stuff is resistant to it then.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
First, because Wulfen are an extremely rare mutation from a specific Chapter which amounts to only slightly more than 1% of 1% of the Space Marines in the universe (themselves rare to the point of being roughly 1 per world in the Imperium). There simply aren't enough Wulfen around to be available whenever boarding actions would be required, and while Terminators would also be rare, they would be hundreds of times more common than Wulfen.
Second, because Wulfen are exposed in myriad ways, and boarding actions can sometimes force exposure to a lot of destructive things - Wulfen would die (or at least be harmed/reduced in effectiveness) by gas leaks, radiation leaks, extended exposure to the void, extended exposure to extremely low temperatures, extended exposure to extremely high temperatures, biological contaminations, etc., all of which would at least not be uncommon to the sort of boarding actions you'd need Terminators for, particularly Space Hulk exploration.
None of which is relevant on the tabletop. Tabletop wise, there are as many Wulfen as necessary as long as the player pays the points.
When has boarding ever mattered on the tabletop?
If you're playing a game like Space Hulk throw down a few house rules using the Fluff -
If it doesn't wear a helmet or at least a breather mask it can't be fielded, no more Wulfen for anybody, takes TWC out of the equation as well.
Declare that most passages are simply too small for bigger models to use; Nothing bigger than a marine in Tactical Dreadnought Armour - they're welcome to take bigger models but more often than not they'll get left behind anyway.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
See, that's another problem that's a sign of the nature of the game itself. Invulnerable saves are just thrown around like candy these days. The Terminators' 5++ means nothing in comparison. Invulnerable saves should be a lot rarer and a lot worse, with a 4+ being a pretty big deal.
Making invulnerable saves rarer dose not make Terminators better. It just makes grav better because less stuff is resistant to it then.
Grav is also a symptom of the problem.
Grav had nothing to do with Terminators being bad.
Martel732 wrote: Why ever use terminators for boarding when you can have Wulfen now? Twice the wounds, and either a storm shield or AP 2 that goes on initiative. Oh, and layered saves!
See, that's another problem that's a sign of the nature of the game itself. Invulnerable saves are just thrown around like candy these days. The Terminators' 5++ means nothing in comparison. Invulnerable saves should be a lot rarer and a lot worse, with a 4+ being a pretty big deal.
That's because AP2 is thrown about like candy, good examples would be GMCs that strike at i5, MCs that fire ap1 at 60" have a ++ save and cost less than a Carnifex.
I am hoping that 8th edition has something similar to the Age of Sigmar rending system instead of AP. That would solve some of the issues with 2+ saves. What would be nice is if TDA lets you roll the 5++ after you fail a 2+.
NivlacSupreme wrote: With these people talking about boarding not mattering I have a question.
Am I the only person anywhere who plays zone mortallis?
No, and Terminators suck there too.
I didn't say they didn't. The only terminators I have are in Catarphractii plate and I've never used them in a ZM. I usually use a huge mob of a primus medicae, an apothecary, a centurion and a 15 man tactical squad.
NivlacSupreme wrote: With these people talking about boarding not mattering I have a question.
Am I the only person anywhere who plays zone mortallis?
No, and Terminators suck there too.
I didn't say they didn't. The only terminators I have are in Catarphractii plate and I've never used them in a ZM. I usually use a huge mob of a primus medicae, an apothecary, a centurion and a 15 man tactical squad.
I can count on one hand how much I played 30k. Pretty fun but you got some people that give you a dirty look for using whatever 40k models you got and aren't painted correctly.
NivlacSupreme wrote: With these people talking about boarding not mattering I have a question.
Am I the only person anywhere who plays zone mortallis?
No, and Terminators suck there too.
I didn't say they didn't. The only terminators I have are in Catarphractii plate and I've never used them in a ZM. I usually use a huge mob of a primus medicae, an apothecary, a centurion and a 15 man tactical squad.
I can count on one hand how much I played 30k. Pretty fun but you got some people that give you a dirty look for using whatever 40k models you got and aren't painted correctly.
My armies not even half painted but it's all organized right and uses period accurate models.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: As a CSM player I don't complain about MY Terminators. The issue is how the Loyalist ones are handled.
To be fair though, that's more because everything in our codex is on par with them at being bad, or that some units are just flat out worse while sharing the same slot (Mutilators/Possessed).
The fact that no one uses them out side of 3 man suicide missions is a bit worrying, because they should be able to do at least a little bit more (even if that 'more' is requiring the enemy to pump more firepower into them.
Also we have Death Guard Terminators, which is the Terminator every other Terminator wishes they were.
casvalremdeikun wrote: I am hoping that 8th edition has something similar to the Age of Sigmar rending system instead of AP. That would solve some of the issues with 2+ saves. What would be nice is if TDA lets you roll the 5++ after you fail a 2+.
I like the rending system. I don't know that it will necessarily solve the problem, as if there are lots of rending weapons Terminators will still get overwhelmed and killed. Giving them a 0+ save might help (using the old HFB rules for saves better than 2+) but even so.
Part of the problem with Terminators might have to do with their wargear. They have power fists and storm bolters, which are expensive. They are already getting all their stuff at a steeply discounted rate. Kind f like with Meganobz being 40 points while a regular nob with a klaw and TL shoota being 46 points (meganobz do have a minor hindrance in that they're slow).
Would changing the minimum unit size to three help? That way they would be less of a points investment and it would also effectively give them one assault cannon in three instead of five.
Zone Mortalis looks really fun. I've got Flash Gitz that need assembling and am thinking about ordering some pirate heads for my slugga boyz.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: As a CSM player I don't complain about MY Terminators. The issue is how the Loyalist ones are handled.
To be fair though, that's more because everything in our codex is on par with them at being bad, or that some units are just flat out worse while sharing the same slot (Mutilators/Possessed).
The fact that no one uses them out side of 3 man suicide missions is a bit worrying, because they should be able to do at least a little bit more (even if that 'more' is requiring the enemy to pump more firepower into them.
Also we have Death Guard Terminators, which is the Terminator every other Terminator wishes they were.
However, it isn't just Death Guard Terminators.
1. Black Legion are troops and have a generic Hatred.
2. Emperor's Children have 6+++ and Combat Drugs.
3. The World Eaters got Furious Charge for free and have that formation to make them run up the field super quickly.
On top of having a cheaper investment cost and therefore not needing to buy a frickin power fist on everything, they're simply better, AND they don't even have Deep Strike mitigation like the Loyalists.
Yeah the Reaper Autocannon is bad but oh well. It either needs to be 15 points or have an extra shot. It makes mildly more sense in the Formation but still not worth it
Grav had nothing to do with Terminators being bad.
Grav made Terminators less viable than ever before.
If they weren't good to begin with does it matter?
Given this thread is about Terminator viability, I'd say it does. Did Space Marines need Grav at all?
Kinda, but the issue is with how the mechanic works rather than the weapon itself. I've proposed before it should be wounding based off the size of the models rather than the Armor Save. It wouldn't be a nerf but rather making the weapon really function as intended.
Also no it doesn't matter. We are talking about viability of Terminators. There was never any viability to begin with. Ergo, don't complain about Grav. Save it for a different thread.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: As a CSM player I don't complain about MY Terminators. The issue is how the Loyalist ones are handled.
To be fair though, that's more because everything in our codex is on par with them at being bad, or that some units are just flat out worse while sharing the same slot (Mutilators/Possessed).
The fact that no one uses them out side of 3 man suicide missions is a bit worrying, because they should be able to do at least a little bit more (even if that 'more' is requiring the enemy to pump more firepower into them.
Also we have Death Guard Terminators, which is the Terminator every other Terminator wishes they were.
However, it isn't just Death Guard Terminators.
1. Black Legion are troops and have a generic Hatred.
2. Emperor's Children have 6+++ and Combat Drugs.
3. The World Eaters got Furious Charge for free and have that formation to make them run up the field super quickly.
On top of having a cheaper investment cost and therefore not needing to buy a frickin power fist on everything, they're simply better, AND they don't even have Deep Strike mitigation like the Loyalists.
Yeah the Reaper Autocannon is bad but oh well. It either needs to be 15 points or have an extra shot. It makes mildly more sense in the Formation but still not worth it
Even EC doesn't run Terminators because they have no use for them, same with WE who would prefer more bodies with CSM leading the charge, BL is the only one that would run terminators due to the alpha deep strike and formations that buff them further.
Heck, for the longest time the only use for our Terminators was 'Termicide'. The idea of dropping combi-melta terminators to drop down, melta a vehicle, and either die or try to stab things before going. Certainly not what one pictures for Terminators, especially for CSM where one tends to have to kill the previous owner to get it.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: As a CSM player I don't complain about MY Terminators. The issue is how the Loyalist ones are handled.
To be fair though, that's more because everything in our codex is on par with them at being bad, or that some units are just flat out worse while sharing the same slot (Mutilators/Possessed).
The fact that no one uses them out side of 3 man suicide missions is a bit worrying, because they should be able to do at least a little bit more (even if that 'more' is requiring the enemy to pump more firepower into them.
Also we have Death Guard Terminators, which is the Terminator every other Terminator wishes they were.
However, it isn't just Death Guard Terminators.
1. Black Legion are troops and have a generic Hatred.
2. Emperor's Children have 6+++ and Combat Drugs.
3. The World Eaters got Furious Charge for free and have that formation to make them run up the field super quickly.
On top of having a cheaper investment cost and therefore not needing to buy a frickin power fist on everything, they're simply better, AND they don't even have Deep Strike mitigation like the Loyalists.
Yeah the Reaper Autocannon is bad but oh well. It either needs to be 15 points or have an extra shot. It makes mildly more sense in the Formation but still not worth it
Even EC doesn't run Terminators because they have no use for them, same with WE who would prefer more bodies with CSM leading the charge, BL is the only one that would run terminators due to the alpha deep strike and formations that buff them further.
Heck, for the longest time the only use for our Terminators was 'Termicide'. The idea of dropping combi-melta terminators to drop down, melta a vehicle, and either die or try to stab things before going. Certainly not what one pictures for Terminators, especially for CSM where one tends to have to kill the previous owner to get it.
You clearly haven't been testing the TL supplement a lot if you made those remarks about those four Legions.
Also it doesn't matter what YOU or other people are picturing as the role for those Terminators. I've exclusively used them as Termicide since I started using them in the 6th edition codex. I liked it then, and it is even more remarkable now thanks to these buffs.
What you pictured? Use the unit entry not fluff and maybe you won't be disappointed, just like the people in this thread that keep justifying that Terminators should be super tough. Seriously. It is old at this point. Based off the wargear options and rules they were clearly meant to be shock troopers. The issue is that they aren't doing it good at all.
basically the only way to fix tda would be to either go back and basically delete them from the game, remake them into something more practical to the game. OR we move the game around them radically altering the way basically everything works and we gut the fast attack slot units of wargear and special rules packages until stuff like bikes and cavalry are basically worthless.
then we lock up lord of war back into APOC and maybe just maybe terminators become viable again.
one way i thought they could bring them back into viability is to grant you some kind of outrageous imperial wide formation where you take so many terminators and you get a fortress of redemption with any upgrades you want for free. because i mean.. its a free fortress of redemption with free upgrades there has to be some kind of application for that on table its like a 300 point fortification
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: As a CSM player I don't complain about MY Terminators. The issue is how the Loyalist ones are handled.
To be fair though, that's more because everything in our codex is on par with them at being bad, or that some units are just flat out worse while sharing the same slot (Mutilators/Possessed).
The fact that no one uses them out side of 3 man suicide missions is a bit worrying, because they should be able to do at least a little bit more (even if that 'more' is requiring the enemy to pump more firepower into them.
Also we have Death Guard Terminators, which is the Terminator every other Terminator wishes they were.
However, it isn't just Death Guard Terminators.
1. Black Legion are troops and have a generic Hatred.
2. Emperor's Children have 6+++ and Combat Drugs.
3. The World Eaters got Furious Charge for free and have that formation to make them run up the field super quickly.
On top of having a cheaper investment cost and therefore not needing to buy a frickin power fist on everything, they're simply better, AND they don't even have Deep Strike mitigation like the Loyalists.
Yeah the Reaper Autocannon is bad but oh well. It either needs to be 15 points or have an extra shot. It makes mildly more sense in the Formation but still not worth it
Even EC doesn't run Terminators because they have no use for them, same with WE who would prefer more bodies with CSM leading the charge, BL is the only one that would run terminators due to the alpha deep strike and formations that buff them further.
Heck, for the longest time the only use for our Terminators was 'Termicide'. The idea of dropping combi-melta terminators to drop down, melta a vehicle, and either die or try to stab things before going. Certainly not what one pictures for Terminators, especially for CSM where one tends to have to kill the previous owner to get it.
You clearly haven't been testing the TL supplement a lot if you made those remarks about those four Legions.
Also it doesn't matter what YOU or other people are picturing as the role for those Terminators. I've exclusively used them as Termicide since I started using them in the 6th edition codex. I liked it then, and it is even more remarkable now thanks to these buffs.
What you pictured? Use the unit entry not fluff and maybe you won't be disappointed, just like the people in this thread that keep justifying that Terminators should be super tough. Seriously. It is old at this point. Based off the wargear options and rules they were clearly meant to be shock troopers. The issue is that they aren't doing it good at all.
Been using them as Termicide since 5th, that does not mean however I have to enjoy it, and given how wargear and rules can change between editions one can barely attempt to say what things are clearly meant to be when it comes to their rule writers.
But given that they are meant to be Shock Troopers, piercing into the backline I'm pretty sure the intention isn't for them to drop in shoot and die afterwords.
n0t_u wrote: Stormbolters S5 causes more issues though, they need their own version of the thing and that can be S5.
Literally ZERO issues are caused by a S5 universal Storm Bolter. Name one. Please. I insist.
Here's a starter.
Also makes heavy bolters even worse. A stormbolter, if it's getting any changes, should get more shots and/or shred maybe.
So Grey Knights having S5 shooting is an issue? LOL k
Because the codex is super strong as is? Even the 5th edition was designed for 6th anyway and look how powerful it was in 6th. Bad answer but I give you credit for trying.
I was going for the more amusing answer cause like I wasn't quite sure anyway but went with it cause daemons. I think the issues with the terminators likely only got worse with the release of the centurions as they're kind of like pushed out of what seemed like their role leaving them as expensive glorified tacticals now and last time I checked those sucked too. I don't know, they're meant to be the sledgehammer of the marines but instead we get this.
Still at the same time I don't want to see the stormbolter start stepping on the toes of the heavy bolter as yet another issue is created where the heavy bolter is even worse. Given its rate of fire the stormbolter should more likely be looked at as like a possible smaller version of the assault cannon and perhaps 4 shots at s4 ap4 with rending would work. However then we get back to the grey knights and if that's a good idea on a larger scale. So that's kind of why I think they should just give terminators a different version of the stormbolter rather than a global change to stormbolters cause we all know GW won't look at things outside of a vacuum and thus likely screw that up too.
What toes? The Heavy Bolter HAS nothing going for it anyway. Besides, everyone already knows they should be Heavy 4 or Salvo 2/4.
So why not then just give all the terminators heavy bolters since they have relentless? At least they did last time I checked.
Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
Grav is a newer type weapon. TDA is old. I think whatever changes are made to terms their weapon options need to remain the same. See my post above I think it's a nice way to adress both units and give them each a viable roll.
Graviton guns were in RT. They were weird then, and looking at the profile probably very annoying too.
ILegion wrote: Why HB when they could all take Assault Cannons? Its waaaayyyy better. And another question for dakka, do they HAVE to keep the storm bolter/AC? Why not give them a grav option. They are relentless after all and there aren't a whole lot of marines that can't take this anyways. Seems kinda silly that the elite 1st company can't take the best weapons while my scout sergeant can run around with a grav pistol all day.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm not saying this would fix everything or make them even remotely close to as good as centurions but it could help.
The point was with 2 S5 stormbolter shots base on a terminator, the HB is only a tiny bit extra on top of that. The HB would likely need even more readjusting than it needs at the moment. Which in turn could see the assault cannon needing a little work as well. The main issue is power creep and adding yet more power creep only prolongs the problem.
But the Assault Cannon never needed reworking. The only issue with it is lack of presence. Nobody has ever complained about the profile of it outside Martel, and his complaint does feel almost legit when you consider the fact that Eldar are an army that was made.
I was trying to keep an open mind towards any ripple effect basically.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: As a CSM player I don't complain about MY Terminators. The issue is how the Loyalist ones are handled.
To be fair though, that's more because everything in our codex is on par with them at being bad, or that some units are just flat out worse while sharing the same slot (Mutilators/Possessed).
The fact that no one uses them out side of 3 man suicide missions is a bit worrying, because they should be able to do at least a little bit more (even if that 'more' is requiring the enemy to pump more firepower into them.
Also we have Death Guard Terminators, which is the Terminator every other Terminator wishes they were.
However, it isn't just Death Guard Terminators.
1. Black Legion are troops and have a generic Hatred.
2. Emperor's Children have 6+++ and Combat Drugs.
3. The World Eaters got Furious Charge for free and have that formation to make them run up the field super quickly.
On top of having a cheaper investment cost and therefore not needing to buy a frickin power fist on everything, they're simply better, AND they don't even have Deep Strike mitigation like the Loyalists.
Yeah the Reaper Autocannon is bad but oh well. It either needs to be 15 points or have an extra shot. It makes mildly more sense in the Formation but still not worth it
Even EC doesn't run Terminators because they have no use for them, same with WE who would prefer more bodies with CSM leading the charge, BL is the only one that would run terminators due to the alpha deep strike and formations that buff them further.
Heck, for the longest time the only use for our Terminators was 'Termicide'. The idea of dropping combi-melta terminators to drop down, melta a vehicle, and either die or try to stab things before going. Certainly not what one pictures for Terminators, especially for CSM where one tends to have to kill the previous owner to get it.
You clearly haven't been testing the TL supplement a lot if you made those remarks about those four Legions.
Also it doesn't matter what YOU or other people are picturing as the role for those Terminators. I've exclusively used them as Termicide since I started using them in the 6th edition codex. I liked it then, and it is even more remarkable now thanks to these buffs.
What you pictured? Use the unit entry not fluff and maybe you won't be disappointed, just like the people in this thread that keep justifying that Terminators should be super tough. Seriously. It is old at this point. Based off the wargear options and rules they were clearly meant to be shock troopers. The issue is that they aren't doing it good at all.
Been using them as Termicide since 5th, that does not mean however I have to enjoy it, and given how wargear and rules can change between editions one can barely attempt to say what things are clearly meant to be when it comes to their rule writers.
But given that they are meant to be Shock Troopers, piercing into the backline I'm pretty sure the intention isn't for them to drop in shoot and die afterwords.
Honestly I don't care about whether you enjoy it. Given the unit profile and wargear selection, Chaos Terminators operate more closely to how theoretically the Loyalist Terminators should act. The main difference is how suicidal each one is of course. And of course Shock Troopers are going to die. That's how they all are in Warhammer.
My thought has always been to give them "BS7" armor save for plain terminator armor losing the added roll against ap2/1. So vs bolters 2+/5+. Plasma would be just 2+. Any wargear that increases the invuln save increases the reroll.
I've been playing since 3rd edition, and in that time Terminators have never really been worth their points. They don't have either the damage output or the durability their investment in points suggests they should have.
Improving their invulnerable save doesn't really help much, nor does nerfing grav. Their big problem is that volume of fire takes them down too easily. They'd either need two wounds each, or they need to re-roll their armor saves. The former would be better, I think. Makes them more durable vs grav and plasma, but a lascannon still puts one down.
That leaves damage output. Their firepower is underwhelming, even with an assault cannon or cyclone. Their base firepower needs to improve. Either that, or they need to be able to assault out of deep strike.
Right, if you deep strike them onto the field, what do they do that you wouldn't rather have another unit for? Could any amount of increased durability fix it? There is no reason to take them for DS firepower, because sternguard do it better, even non-DS things like bikers are more likely to do the same job better. There is no reason to take them just to have a big footprint and take up an objective, because tactical squads do it better and it isn't that useful. Terminators don't even really have a role unless they are chaos.
+1 W
FNP 2 heavies per 5 Terminators.
Give them the option to swap PF for other power weapons.
Maybe give Terminator storm bolters Rending and/or PE Xenos.
This would make them a viable, fluffy unit at the same time. Powerful, not really, durable absolutely. However durability is supposed to be their schtick.
IMO centurions are IOMs attempt at creating battlesuits. Being able to field heavier, more potent weapons in exoskeletons that give them a better resiliency.
Termies are supposed to be the shock troops to crack open the enemy lines or possibly a reserve unit for SHTF scenarios. They're lacking durability and lethality and the above proposed changes would greatly help out both. Compared to what some other units of equal points cost can do, I don't think they're unreasonable at all.
Dantes_Baals wrote: +1 W
FNP 2 heavies per 5 Terminators.
Give them the option to swap PF for other power weapons.
Maybe give Terminator storm bolters Rending and/or PE Xenos.
This would make them a viable, fluffy unit at the same time. Powerful, not really, durable absolutely. However durability is supposed to be their schtick.
IMO centurions are IOMs attempt at creating battlesuits. Being able to field heavier, more potent weapons in exoskeletons that give them a better resiliency.
Termies are supposed to be the shock troops to crack open the enemy lines or possibly a reserve unit for SHTF scenarios. They're lacking durability and lethality and the above proposed changes would greatly help out both. Compared to what some other units of equal points cost can do, I don't think they're unreasonable at all.
Except durability isn't their gimmick. Just because in fluff it is more durable than Power Armor doesn't mean it is the most durable armor ever. I have no clue why people keep thinking this.
You're also trying to make them more durable than Centurions for the points.
I still maintain that the solution is +1 Wound, +1 Toughness, with a reduced regular save to 3+. The math supports that this is a significant improvement in survivability, but not to the point where it's obscene. It also requires no rerolling.
You wouldn't even need to call it a "wound," you could call it "Ablative Shielding," and the rule reads: "Tactical dreadnought armor generates a field around the user. When an unsaved wound is suffered, the shielding is permanently destroyed and the wound is prevented." (or something like that. i'm not a technical writer.)
This way you couldn't restore wounds to terminators, in case that would be too strong. Also This would not apply to Cataphractii terminator armor, since those guys are solid as hell with their access to 3++ and their ability to reroll 1s. Also, they confer slow & purposeful, so there are benefits to bring them over regular terminators situationally.
Except durability isn't their gimmick. Just because in fluff it is more durable than Power Armor doesn't mean it is the most durable armor ever. I have no clue why people keep thinking this.
When the inv save was introduced in 3rd edition it was accompanied by a short story involving a terminator accidentally getting trod on by a titan and surviving because of the legendary protection of his armour. Terminator armour being the ultimate in personal protection has been established for decades.
No need to write fancy rules around the extra wound, if that's the method you go for. Extra wounds for durable armoring is pretty well established at this point.
Except durability isn't their gimmick. Just because in fluff it is more durable than Power Armor doesn't mean it is the most durable armor ever. I have no clue why people keep thinking this.
You really are into denying this without any sort of facts.
Except durability isn't their gimmick. Just because in fluff it is more durable than Power Armor doesn't mean it is the most durable armor ever. I have no clue why people keep thinking this.
You really are into denying this without any sort of facts.
Well there was them being scooped up en masse by 3rd ed starcannons, and them being scooped up en masse by modern ion accelerators.
Well there was them being scooped up en masse by 3rd ed starcannons, and them being scooped up en masse by modern ion accelerators.
Part of the entire point of this thread is that the rules for terminator armour don't match the durability it's supposed to have in the background. Pointing out that they have never been super tough in the game is not a counterargument to claims that they're meant to be super tough in the fluff.
Despite their 5++, I find Tataros Termie Armour to be quite viable, due to the Sweeping Advance bonus as it will allow you to win most combats without Being Tarpitted
Im not sure if they can take Storm Shields but if they can that will make them AMAZING
This is important to think about. Terminators are elite marines that because of their supposed skills, are sent on dangerous missions. Since they get sent on dangerous, specialized missions, they get specialized armor. Their gimmick in background is being elite, and secondary to that is being durable. In gameplay they have never been very durable.
Unusual Suspect wrote:No need to write fancy rules around the extra wound, if that's the method you go for. Extra wounds for durable armoring is pretty well established at this point.
It's true, it's very unnecessary to have an alternate version to +1 wound when +1 wound is possible.
However, I need a more specific attribution for equipment boosts. Wounds appear to come from a different quality of armor than durability. It's very clear that durable armor improves the saving throw. The 5++ save for terminators even comes from the durability of armor - the crux terminatus has conflicting provenance, although the two do not exclude each other. Wounds from war gear would be a different effect.
The wounds conferred by tau and marine battle suits seem to have more to do with the functional attributes of the models. If you shoot off the lower 75% of these units arms, it will impair their ability to fight, by impairing the weapon system, (the standard for wounding or removing a model is causing a casualty, not always a death), however since this does not affect the pilot's circulation he does not suffer the same loss of function in other limbs or the same cognitive deficits as if his own arm had been shot off. Conversely, causing concussion or blood loss in the pilot doesn't cause the suit to lose strength in its limbs.
I won't say this is right, it just gives me a more substantial model than hand waving it.
Marmatag wrote:I still maintain that the solution is +1 Wound, +1 Toughness, with a reduced regular save to 3+. The math supports that this is a significant improvement in survivability, but not to the point where it's obscene. It also requires no rerolling.
You wouldn't even need to call it a "wound," you could call it "Ablative Shielding," and the rule reads: "Tactical dreadnought armor generates a field around the user. When an unsaved wound is suffered, the shielding is permanently destroyed and the wound is prevented." (or something like that. i'm not a technical writer.)
This way you couldn't restore wounds to terminators, in case that would be too strong. Also This would not apply to Cataphractii terminator armor, since those guys are solid as hell with their access to 3++ and their ability to reroll 1s. Also, they confer slow & purposeful, so there are benefits to bring them over regular terminators situationally.
If the whole squad is hit by a battle cannon, then none of the models have to be removed unless they are previously wounded. This is a pretty nice thing. What do you maintain this against? Between this post and one you made previous, there are people saying that a lesser durability boost that is accompanied by 2x grab cannons and assault3 TL shred storm bolters is better than a boost at your level. How is your level of boost with or without offensive boosts better than a lesser boost, when presumably there are different points expenditures and balance consequences?
Well there was them being scooped up en masse by 3rd ed starcannons, and them being scooped up en masse by modern ion accelerators.
Part of the entire point of this thread is that the rules for terminator armour don't match the durability it's supposed to have in the background. Pointing out that they have never been super tough in the game is not a counterargument to claims that they're meant to be super tough in the fluff.
Due to its arbitrary nature, the fluff is largely irrelevant to the issue of terminators being viable on the table top, however.
If the whole squad is hit by a battle cannon, then none of the models have to be removed unless they are previously wounded. This is a pretty nice thing. What do you maintain this against? Between this post and one you made previous, there are people saying that a lesser durability boost that is accompanied by 2x grab cannons and assault3 TL shred storm bolters is better than a boost at your level. How is your level of boost with or without offensive boosts better than a lesser boost, when presumably there are different points expenditures and balance consequences?
I was speaking specifically regarding durability, operating under the tacit unilateral agreement that (a) terminators are overcosted and (b) not survivable enough. If those points are contested then we'd have to argue that, before my suggestion would hold any weight.
In regards to the rest, I would say allowing 1 terminator in 5 to take a heavy weapon would do a lot, but that would have to be in addition to the survivable change, because they would still be far too easily killed to merit investing 200+ points into 1 heavy relentless weapon that can't ride in a rhino. Improving the storm bolter would be meh, extra shots from a str4 ap5 weapon really won't make them any more viable in the meta. Give their storm bolters rending and we're in business.
I think terminators are more undergunned than not survivable enough. 40K is about offense unless you are a deathstar or layered save MC. Everyone else might as well be wearing tissue paper in 7th. I know, for example, that my entire army is functionally a grot in the face of the ion accelerator, terminators included.
Martel732 wrote: I think terminators are more undergunned than not survivable enough. 40K is about offense unless you are a deathstar or layered save MC. Everyone else might as well be wearing tissue paper in 7th. I know, for example, that my entire army is functionally a grot in the face of the ion accelerator, terminators included.
Yeah I suppose that's true, but if you could deep strike terminators and expect them to survive for a round, that might change things a bit. High strength AP2 weapons will always have a use in melee.
And again, I'm not advocating that survivability is the only problem here, just pointing out that if you up their guns, you still face similar problems as they're not too hard to pop.
Martel732 wrote: I think terminators are more undergunned than not survivable enough. 40K is about offense unless you are a deathstar or layered save MC. Everyone else might as well be wearing tissue paper in 7th. I know, for example, that my entire army is functionally a grot in the face of the ion accelerator, terminators included.
Yeah I suppose that's true, but if you could deep strike terminators and expect them to survive for a round, that might change things a bit. High strength AP2 weapons will always have a use in melee.
That gives your enemy a turn to react. You beam down, shoot me ineffectually, and then on my turn, I park a free Rhino in your squad's path. You aren't assaulting anything other than what I want you to. I don't care if you survive or not at that point. You spent 1 turn in reserve, 1 turn shooting effectually, and then another turn being cockblocked by a Rhino. And the game is half over now. Good job terminators.
Dead units don't shoot back. Ask scatterbikes about that.
Martel732 wrote: I think terminators are more undergunned than not survivable enough. 40K is about offense unless you are a deathstar or layered save MC. Everyone else might as well be wearing tissue paper in 7th. I know, for example, that my entire army is functionally a grot in the face of the ion accelerator, terminators included.
Yeah I suppose that's true, but if you could deep strike terminators and expect them to survive for a round, that might change things a bit. High strength AP2 weapons will always have a use in melee.
That gives your enemy a turn to react. You beam down, shoot me ineffectually, and then on my turn, I park a free Rhino in your squad's path. You aren't assaulting anything other than what I want you to. I don't care if you survive or not at that point. You spent 1 turn in reserve, 1 turn shooting effectually, and then another turn being cockblocked by a Rhino. And the game is half over now. Good job terminators.
Dead units don't shoot back. Ask scatterbikes about that.
Well let's pause then for a minute - what do you think the use case for terminators should be?
I don't know anymore. Personally, I'd advocate for making them feared by mounting assault cannons on all tactical terminators and throw storm bolters and missile launchers in the garbage. Why should only Xenos have mass S 6/7? At that point, rending becomes a little useful, actually. 20 rending shots generate 2.22 rends. I realize that base Eldar units can do this, but we have to take what we can get here.
Except durability isn't their gimmick. Just because in fluff it is more durable than Power Armor doesn't mean it is the most durable armor ever. I have no clue why people keep thinking this.
You really are into denying this without any sort of facts.
Outside the fact that the fluff is that they're super elite, and that they're sent on dangerous missions, which Terminator Armor is made for. Like I said, just because it is more durable doesn't mean you guys need to make them more durable than a Carnifex for the points, which is literally almost all the suggestions here because you guys are blind to what the Terminators are. You see the 2+ which was rare and now you've blown it put of proportion.
I'm simply suggesting fixes to make them fit in line with the storming role they actually have based off their wargear and options and rules (STORM Bolter, Deep Strike, Land Raiders, etc). You guys, however, want to make them Centurions instead of making them unique.
Martel732 wrote: I think terminators are more undergunned than not survivable enough. 40K is about offense unless you are a deathstar or layered save MC. Everyone else might as well be wearing tissue paper in 7th. I know, for example, that my entire army is functionally a grot in the face of the ion accelerator, terminators included.
Yeah I suppose that's true, but if you could deep strike terminators and expect them to survive for a round, that might change things a bit. High strength AP2 weapons will always have a use in melee.
And again, I'm not advocating that survivability is the only problem here, just pointing out that if you up their guns, you still face similar problems as they're not too hard to pop.
Therefore, if you want something hard to pop, grab Centurions.
Basically. I prefer the route of more survivable, strong in melee units. For a drop pod ranged platform, there are already solid well defined rolls for this (Centurions, Skyhammer, Cataphractii Captain + Devs).
Outside the fact that the fluff is that they're super elite, and that they're sent on dangerous missions, which Terminator Armor is made for. Like I said, just because it is more durable doesn't mean you guys need to make them more durable than a Carnifex for the points, which is literally almost all the suggestions here because you guys are blind to what the Terminators are. You see the 2+ which was rare and now you've blown it put of proportion.
I started in 2nd edition, what I saw was a 3+ on a 2D6, the only armor type in the game to do so, which 3rd edition ground to a 2+, the same as artificer armor for some reason, storm bolters had a higher potential rate of fire, the assault cannon had a potential rate of 9 hits if you were lucky
You keep saying we are blind to what Terminators are, but honestly it just sounds like you've seen them in one or two editions and thus based your idea on those stats.
Outside the fact that the fluff is that they're super elite, and that they're sent on dangerous missions, which Terminator Armor is made for. Like I said, just because it is more durable doesn't mean you guys need to make them more durable than a Carnifex for the points, which is literally almost all the suggestions here because you guys are blind to what the Terminators are. You see the 2+ which was rare and now you've blown it put of proportion.
I started in 2nd edition, what I saw was a 3+ on a 2D6, the only armor type in the game to do so, which 3rd edition ground to a 2+, the same as artificer armor for some reason, storm bolters had a higher potential rate of fire, the assault cannon had a potential rate of 9 hits if you were lucky
You keep saying we are blind to what Terminators are, but honestly it just sounds like you've seen them in one or two editions and thus based your idea on those stats.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Speaking of Chaos Terminators, Combi-Bolters need to be Rapid Fire 2.
Rapid Fire 2 is not a meaningful weapon profile.
Do you mean something like "2 shots at max range, 4 shots at half range"?
Salvo 2/4?
Sorta, though Salvo reacts based on movement, rather than the range to the target.
I wouldn't mind seeing All Terminators get "Terminator Stormbolter: Treat as a Bolter, but may fire twice in the same shooting phase" or the like.
That would basically be what I presume was meant by "Rapid Fire 2".
Heck, I wouldn't mind seeing Rapid Fire changed to allow exactly those sorts of representations. I'm just saying that, as is, a number of shots after the Rapid Fire type has no meaning in the current ruleset.
Str 4 was never meant to be scary and indeed the Storm Bolters are not their main armament, their power fist is.
I know you ignore the fluff Martel and give 0 gaks about it, but the fact remains that in the fluff the Storm Bolter is their side arm.
Tactical Terminators aren't meant to be a shooty unit, their a mixed unit with a focus on CC to deal heavy damage. Unfortunately CC is terrible this edition for the most part, especially if you have no way to get there.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Str 4 was never meant to be scary and indeed the Storm Bolters are not their main armament, their power fist is.
I know you ignore the fluff Martel and give 0 gaks about it, but the fact remains that in the fluff the Storm Bolter is their side arm.
Tactical Terminators aren't meant to be a shooty unit, their a mixed unit with a focus on CC to deal heavy damage. Unfortunately CC is terrible this edition for the most part, especially if you have no way to get there.
Then they are a true failure that can't be helped if they are counting on an init 1 melee weapon with only a 5++ invuln save. That's never going to work when the lowliest Eldar guy ignores the 2+ 16% of the time and MCs just lulz.
These losers can't even sweep a combat. They are crap CC units.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Speaking of Chaos Terminators, Combi-Bolters need to be Rapid Fire 2.
Rapid Fire 2 is not a meaningful weapon profile.
Do you mean something like "2 shots at max range, 4 shots at half range"?
Have you never seen Hurricane Bolters?
Well, yes, I have. They're described in the way I was asking (and presumed you meant), but they aren't represented by "Rapid Fire X" to my knowledge. It was your nomenclature I was mostly confused by.
Soteks Prophet wrote: Give terminators a 1+ save, they a still fail on a 1 but only ap1 weapons ignore it completely. Storm shield gives 4++ with a reroll to all saves.
Storm bolters become salvo 2/4
This is flat out insane.
A 2+ rerollable against AP2 would be insane. 36 shots would expect 1 wound.
Anyone who took a storm bolter when they could have a stormshield at that point would be crazy, or a Grey Knight.
Keep in mind, Scarab Occult Terminators can already reroll 1's using formation bonuses. They perform well, also having easy access to a 3++.
When we get Deathshroud Terminators in 40k (Nurgle Cult), 2W, T5 and FNP will make perfect sense.
I think they will both be situated well, but they're also supposed to be significantly tougher than regular Terminators. So vanilla types really shouldn't have equal durability.
I always say in these situations that 40k itself would need to be fixed before any unit can be fixed but I'll offer some suggestions anyway.
First off, did anyone suggest giving terminators sternguard special ammunition? I know that storm bolters can't take it but this could be changed. Now of a sudden those Storm bolters are ignoring cover or functioning as plasma guns.
Second of all, give them a toughness and wound boost. T5 and 2W at the very least, but personally I'd favour either T6 2W or T5 3W. Actually to hell with it, let's make them like little mini MCs. Give them T7 and 2W. That'll help with plasma a bit (going from 2+ to 4+ for wounding), will make them immune to some small arms fire (as they should be), and will also ease up the instant death. Price them accordingly afterwards of course.
These suggestions are on the extreme side I know but desperate times call for desperate measures, and it's truly desperate how crap Terminators are compeared to what they're supposed to be.
EDIT:
Nah, here's a better way to look at it. Regulars marines are T4 with 1W? And Centurions are T5 with 2Ws? Well, Terminators should be T6 with 3Ws.
I'm going to say 50pts each, with a 5pt "tax" for the the sergeant. So at a minimum 255pts for 5. This would be without the special ammo boost, because I'm not sure about that one.
You can't get their save any better (normal or invulnerable) so it's about reducing the score needed to wound.
How about 70pts each then? Double their current price. That's 355pts minimum. With upgrades that would probably hit 400pts (I'm not sure, I don't have my codex to hand).
Although it sounds like the Bloodthirster could use a boost too. But then again, I've never fought demons ever, in my 20 years of doing this so I'm probably wrong.
We could fine tweak it but am I on the right course?
Future War Cultist wrote: How about 70pts each then? Double their current price. That's 355pts minimum. With upgrades that would probably hit 400pts (I'm not sure, I don't have my codex to hand).
Although it sounds like the Bloodthirster could use a boost too. But then again, I've never fought demons ever, in my 20 years of doing this so I'm probably wrong.
We could fine tweak it but am I on the right course?
I think you just nerfed them by maing them 70 a pop it means your head count will be so low even grey knights or death watch will have you out numbered if you feild more then 3 or 4
Bikes no longer grant +1T, they instead grant +1W.
A space marine simply sitting on a mortorcycle does absolutely nothing to make damaging him harder. However, it does make it harder to hit him specifically, and not just the motorcycle, hence the extra wound as it's an extra seperate target.
TDA grants a 2+/5++ and +1T.
A space marine wearing TDA does not present two possible targets, therefore there should not be multiple wounds. You either hit the TDA wearing marine or not. A TDA wearing marine is wearing superior and thicker armor, and while they have a good save, small arms should be relatively ineffectual against it, even en masse, hence the extra toughness we've been asking for for forever. FnP is pointless as a 5+ roll that can be denied by ID weapons negates it, and TDA should always have a chance to shrug off a particularly deadly shot/blow.
Points cost remains the same for TDA.
Points cost for Bikes goes up to 15 pts. for NON ICs as it effectively doubles the model count as well as a point extra for the movement bonus and Jink.
Points cost for ICs wanting to ride a bike remain the same as they do not benefit as much from another wound and can now be ID'd by STR 8.
Tactical Termies continue to cost 35pts for the traditional Storm Bolter/PF loadout.
Any Terminator may replace their Storm Bolter with a Heavy Flamer for 5pts.
Any Terminator may replace their Storm Bolter with an Assault Cannon for 10pts.
Any Terminator may replace their Storm Bolter with a Plasma Cannon for 15 pts.
The Sgt can be upgraded to Veteran for 10 pts.
The SGT and/or Veteran SGT may replace his Power Sword with a Power Fist for 10pts. That's the difference in cost between the two as of this edition/posting.
The Veteran SGT may replace his Power Sword with a Lightning Claw, Power Axe or Power Maul for free. You're already paying for Veteran status, why pay more for a points 'sidegrade'? Plus, a SGT that's been in the Company/Chapter for a few centuries will more than likely be able to walk into S3 and get something different.
TDA grants +1 Initiative to Unweildly Weapons.
TDA now grants sweeping advance as it is not Slow and Purposeful.
TDA continues to allow Teleport/Deep Strike as well as count as two models for the purposes of transports' capacity.
No more Cyclone Missile Launcher, long range is Devastator (of whatever flavor) stuff, not 'uparmored' shock troops/boarding party troops.
Any Terminator may replace their Storm Bolter with a Plasma Cannon for 15 pts.
No more Cyclone Missile Launcher, long range is Devastator (of whatever flavor) stuff, not 'uparmored' shock troops/boarding party troops.
The Sgt can be upgraded to Veteran for 10 pts.
All terminators are already veterans.
Also I don't see why restrict cyclone but allow plasmacan if you don't want them to do devastators job, and what with all the people's models already built with CMLs?
i think a better way would be to just give them rules changes
TDA for GK and DA players grants just default charge from DS however the upgrade for TDA goes up on characters by 5 pts from its current cost to 40pts this makes their "elite of the elite" terminators genuinely elite. and improves their tactical felxibility over others
on top of that specialist TDA units like paladins, deathwing knights, blood angels/da/GK commands and the WGT's all can take their land raider for free if they purchase an SB. chaos space marines share this bonus with mutes and get it on all their CSM termites (scarabs dont get this). to offset this we put a hard cap back on command squads to 1 per HQ in your army and DWK's cannot buy extra models if they take the free raider (so their capped at 5). WGT's can take a storm fang instead of a raider at a reduced cost
one of the biggest problems is that terminators cannot get around and their value is often determined in their first combat action a free land raider on their cost effectively halves their cost without actually halving their costs while dramatically improving their value. this effectively means a 1250pts list with 1 squad of terminators is now a 1500pts list and if the gladius and lions balde showed us anything its that if you give us free gak the army lists will come out in force. and a land raider is certainly a very enticing lure. this also solves the problem of mobility of terminators to an extent.
you could on top of this add a formation to stronghold assault that lets an imperial player who takes so many squads of terminators get to pick a free fortification off a roster of them. so now on top of a raider you have a free building which if nothing more is a conversation piece to park couts into and get sick cover saves
essentially we fight the ridiculous rules packages of cheaper units and tougher opponents that exist in their own points bracket of 250ish with raw value and eventually somewhere in there the terminator carves his own niche and we keep piling that value on until we achieve a balance where if you take him and can take advantage of the perks if only situational, are making up for their shortcomings to the point where you scarcely care if they kill anything at all.
if i throw enough free bastions at you.. youll eventually put down the imperial knight and take some terminators
Any Terminator may replace their Storm Bolter with a Plasma Cannon for 15 pts.
No more Cyclone Missile Launcher, long range is Devastator (of whatever flavor) stuff, not 'uparmored' shock troops/boarding party troops.
The Sgt can be upgraded to Veteran for 10 pts.
All terminators are already veterans.
My apologies, I did overlook that, the intent was to provide another melee attack usually granted by Veteran status as of this codex for the Sgt as well as his new ability to choose from all the Power Weapon options. I just couldn't/didn't think of a better way to quickly and easily represent that.
Also I don't see why restrict cyclone but allow plasmacan if you don't want them to do devastators job, and what with all the people's models already built with CMLs?
Honestly, I did debate this one very much. My personal reasoning was that 36" was a nice 'go between' to still offer a bit of range, as well as destructive power to massed Troops, MCs, other 'Elite' Troops and light(er) Vehicle armor while still not offering 'full battlefield range' of a missile as well as the lack of the ability to shoot at fliers. Also, no overwatch.
As far as models already equiped with CMLs, well, yes, that does stink for them, but it's placement makes it's removal rather easy tbh, as well as now selling a ton MORE terminators (or at least bits, because afterall, who's NOT going to want to upgrade their Storm Bolters, which again means either remodelling or purchasing new Terminators). That's more sales for GW using an existing product line which means less money spent by them to produce it.
Let's be honest, a new codex does usually come with new/different weapon options and points costs. We all have armies that must be changed because of this. It's not some new unexpected slap in the face and the benefits surely outweigh the dissadvantages.
I simply LOVE that someone just suggested out of the blue that Bikers gain a wound rather than toughness and totally didn't think of any consequences that could possibly happen.
This thread really brought out the stupid in some people.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I simply LOVE that someone just suggested out of the blue that Bikers gain a wound rather than toughness and totally didn't think of any consequences that could possibly happen.
This thread really brought out the stupid in some people.
Stupidity like insulting other users because you don't like their ideas?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I simply LOVE that someone just suggested out of the blue that Bikers gain a wound rather than toughness and totally didn't think of any consequences that could possibly happen.
This thread really brought out the stupid in some people.
Rather than post vitriol, please explain the fault in the logic I used to describe the change. Also, they would still be ID'd by double STR attacks (particularly devastating damage that is too powerful to simply 'graze' off a 'wound') while remaining more able to be whittled down by small arms fire.
I actually believe this change should affect all mounts like Thunderwolf mounts, it's another wound/target/thing to hit, not simply tougher to damage as a whole.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: I simply LOVE that someone just suggested out of the blue that Bikers gain a wound rather than toughness and totally didn't think of any consequences that could possibly happen.
This thread really brought out the stupid in some people.
Stupidity like insulting other users because you don't like their ideas?
That's because it is a stupid idea. It makes Bikers more immune to small arms and still more durable compared to Terminators because jink > 5++ when you get more for cheaper.
Like, that shouldn't have been up for debate at all. Anything on a bike gaining a wound means 2 wound Scatterbikes and Tomb Blades AND Ork Bikers. Then I'm sure someone might suggest just Marines getting it and I have to ask why they're the only exception to the rule just so you can try and justify T5 Terminators.
It is a bad idea and you should feel bad for defending them.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:That's because it is a stupid idea. It makes Bikers more immune to small arms and still more durable compared to Terminators because jink > 5++ when you get more for cheaper.
Like, that shouldn't have been up for debate at all. Anything on a bike gaining a wound means 2 wound Scatterbikes and Tomb Blades AND Ork Bikers. Then I'm sure someone might suggest just Marines getting it and I have to ask why they're the only exception to the rule just so you can try and justify T5 Terminators.
It is a bad idea and you should feel bad for defending them.
And yet in previous editions didn't we have 2 wound bikers, that somehow didn't destroy all balance? Or factions where one unit had a rule that similar units in others didn't? You could totally give marine bikers 2 wounds and not everyone else, with the rational of "because I wrote the rulebook and I say so". That is not to say it's a good idea, but it doesn't justify your attitude either.
Make Terminators T5, give them a 4+ invuln and buff Terminator Stormbolters to Salvo 2/3 36" shred. That way they are actually worth 50 points a model.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:That's because it is a stupid idea. It makes Bikers more immune to small arms and still more durable compared to Terminators because jink > 5++ when you get more for cheaper.
Like, that shouldn't have been up for debate at all. Anything on a bike gaining a wound means 2 wound Scatterbikes and Tomb Blades AND Ork Bikers. Then I'm sure someone might suggest just Marines getting it and I have to ask why they're the only exception to the rule just so you can try and justify T5 Terminators.
It is a bad idea and you should feel bad for defending them.
And yet in previous editions didn't we have 2 wound bikers, that somehow didn't destroy all balance? Or factions where one unit had a rule that similar units in others didn't? You could totally give marine bikers 2 wounds and not everyone else, with the rational of "because I wrote the rulebook and I say so". That is not to say it's a good idea, but it doesn't justify your attitude either.
We're not in previous editions. We are in 7th edition and going into 8th soon. That's not a good argument. Also ask people how much fun they thought Nob Bikers were. They needed the nerf bat (though not as hard as the one they got).
And no you can't, because you're not being consistent. Bikes have always been consistently an additional Toughness point, only now conflicting with Instant Death. And you'd still have not fixed the core issue with Terminators, because why take Terminators at that price point when I can still get more Bikers and special weapons instead?
Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.
Bikes adding a wound would not break anything, the ar.or savs remains the same along with the toughness which means you're effectively adding one additional marine. The math hammer for the statistical probabilities to kill a marine chasing butterflies in an open field with every weapon in the game have been done. It's not difficult to kill a T4 3+ model, much less effectively 2. The end result is that's it's not very difficult at all.
Jink, while I am not a fan of it, is simply a cover save, one which terminators as well as regular power armored marines can also get through terrain/effects.
Orks are a completely different codex. Personally, I don't play as or against Orks, so I would not rule out their ability to gain a wound from a bike as well, but if it ends up being too beneficial through playtesting, then simply say that their bikes, like their vehicles, are too ramshackle to be able to take a hit for the team and not grant Nobs on bikes the additional wound.
Arguing that GW can't bring back an older rule, model or profile just doesn't hold any water, as they have made what was once old new again before and with an edition change comes change in general as always.
Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.
Tau Broadsides are basically 2-wound Terminators (with no invuln save unless you purchase one for significant points), and are fairly squishy for their points (roughly twice the cost of a Terminator) as a result... while Wraithguard do have T6 but only a 3+ save (and no invulnerable save), and are thus relying entirely on the T6 for protection.
Making Terminators as tough as Wraithguard (T6) but with their significantly better level of protection (2+/5++) would be going too far. IMO.
Bikes getting +1 W instead of +1 T would be a mixed bag for most bikes, I'd imagine - for the rank and file, it would increase durability slightly (moreso against small-arms fire than high S (6+ for Eldar, 8+ for most Marines/Orks), but for Characters, the extra W would not be nearly as beneficial as the extra resistance to being ID'd.
Up their toughness to 5.
Up their wounds to 2.
Give them rending on their profile, not to the storm bolter itself.
Reduce their armor save to 3+.
This massively increases their longevity, with minor adjustments that are fluff appropriate. It keeps their use cases the same, and just makes them better overall at those things.
This subject seems like it belongs in proposed rules with all of the content..
That said while point for point tactical terminators are not the most efficient unit I would argue that they are points efficient for the model itself, especially as you can swap for catchatari terminator armor for free and get the 2+ 4++. My proposed fix is they just suffer from being in the wrong slot , require to many in a unit mandatory and limited weapons. move them to troops, min model count 3, 1 heavy weapon per 3. Now for 105 points you get 3 models, 2+ armor, objective secured and they get a nice long range weapon of choice that presents a reasonable threat in cc (ps @ i4 2 power fists i1)
Terminators should not be troops, honestly they are the definition of 'the elite' section in the fluff sense.
If they make a change to stormbolters imo they should work like two boltguns fired as a single weapon.
Even Tactical Terminators are primarily melee units, that's why they're packing powerfists.
I'd like +1T for Termies, they certainly deserve it more than bikers do.
I always associate Terminators with Space Hulk, high close range damage output and input.
kirotheavenger wrote: Terminators should not be troops, honestly they are the definition of 'the elite' section in the fluff sense.
If they make a change to stormbolters imo they should work like two boltguns fired as a single weapon.
Even Tactical Terminators are primarily melee units, that's why they're packing powerfists.
I'd like +1T for Termies, they certainly deserve it more than bikers do.
I always associate Terminators with Space Hulk, high close range damage output and input.
I know the fluff, but on the table tactical terminators compared to assault terminators are just lacking. how would adding one toughness still make the competing assault terminators look less appealing? also lighting claws and TH/SS beat the heck out of power fists. and a power sword... though I suppose the ability to mix and match might not be bad just combine them all into one entry "terminator. may exchange storm bolter and power fist for lightning claws, 10 points for TH/SS" but I still doubt anybody would take the normal terminator unless that was the only one able to take a heavy weapon.
The argument for troops is they now compete with tac marines and scouts and comparatively if the squad size were reduced they would fit there and be competitive. heck even in the fluff terminators fight along side their brothers and usually not more than a few mentioned at a time when they are directly referred to so at least the squad size seems appropriate.
Off topic slightly, but I love the tactical terminator models, and have more than 50 of them myself. I have and do field them though usually in apocalypse style games. They are still better than a lot of things non Imperium armies get for the points.
Another thought is that most everybody already has Tactical terminators and that most boxed sets include them, so GW may have less incentive to make them great as they want you to get more models on top of that starter set.
Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.
Tau Broadsides are basically 2-wound Terminators (with no invuln save unless you purchase one for significant points), and are fairly squishy for their points (roughly twice the cost of a Terminator) as a result... while Wraithguard do have T6 but only a 3+ save (and no invulnerable save), and are thus relying entirely on the T6 for protection.
Making Terminators as tough as Wraithguard (T6) but with their significantly better level of protection (2+/5++) would be going too far. IMO.
Bikes getting +1 W instead of +1 T would be a mixed bag for most bikes, I'd imagine - for the rank and file, it would increase durability slightly (moreso against small-arms fire than high S (6+ for Eldar, 8+ for most Marines/Orks), but for Characters, the extra W would not be nearly as beneficial as the extra resistance to being ID'd.
Broadside Suits also have actual damage output, which is the thing Terminators lack. If you want durable, the Centurion now exists to get your fix.
Also by making Bikers 2 wounds instead of T5 you actually made them more durable to everything, as anything IDing them will be inflicting the wound on the same roll it would a T5 model. You can look at the math if you want.
Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.
Tau Broadsides are basically 2-wound Terminators (with no invuln save unless you purchase one for significant points), and are fairly squishy for their points (roughly twice the cost of a Terminator) as a result... while Wraithguard do have T6 but only a 3+ save (and no invulnerable save), and are thus relying entirely on the T6 for protection.
Making Terminators as tough as Wraithguard (T6) but with their significantly better level of protection (2+/5++) would be going too far. IMO.
Bikes getting +1 W instead of +1 T would be a mixed bag for most bikes, I'd imagine - for the rank and file, it would increase durability slightly (moreso against small-arms fire than high S (6+ for Eldar, 8+ for most Marines/Orks), but for Characters, the extra W would not be nearly as beneficial as the extra resistance to being ID'd.
Broadside Suits also have actual damage output, which is the thing Terminators lack. If you want durable, the Centurion now exists to get your fix.
This is why I and others have suggested either increasing their damage output via buffing (theirs at least if not all) Storm Bolters, replacing Storm Bolters altogether and/or allowing them to take more than one alternate weapon (as I had suggested, at a small points cost no less so it's not horribly imbalanced).
Also by making Bikers 2 wounds instead of T5 you actually made them more durable to everything, as anything IDing them will be inflicting the wound on the same roll it would a T5 model. You can look at the math if you want.
Bolters, Lasguns and other small arms have a better chance of actually wounding a T4 3+ model than a T5 3+ model. That's simply undeniable. However, as I suggested, as the bike is another component to be able to hit, aside from the marine atop it alone, that is the reasoning in granting them an additional wound rather than better toughness.
Also, as mentioned, Multi-Wound characters gain less of a benefit than the average marine, as they can now be ID'd by STR 8 weapons. This is offset by their fantastic movement ability and Jink (if they're being attacked by something that allows a cover save).
Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.
Tau Broadsides are basically 2-wound Terminators (with no invuln save unless you purchase one for significant points), and are fairly squishy for their points (roughly twice the cost of a Terminator) as a result... while Wraithguard do have T6 but only a 3+ save (and no invulnerable save), and are thus relying entirely on the T6 for protection.
Making Terminators as tough as Wraithguard (T6) but with their significantly better level of protection (2+/5++) would be going too far. IMO.
Bikes getting +1 W instead of +1 T would be a mixed bag for most bikes, I'd imagine - for the rank and file, it would increase durability slightly (moreso against small-arms fire than high S (6+ for Eldar, 8+ for most Marines/Orks), but for Characters, the extra W would not be nearly as beneficial as the extra resistance to being ID'd.
Broadside Suits also have actual damage output, which is the thing Terminators lack. If you want durable, the Centurion now exists to get your fix.
This is why I and others have suggested either increasing their damage output via buffing (theirs at least if not all) Storm Bolters, replacing Storm Bolters altogether and/or allowing them to take more than one alternate weapon (as I had suggested, at a small points cost no less so it's not horribly imbalanced).
Also by making Bikers 2 wounds instead of T5 you actually made them more durable to everything, as anything IDing them will be inflicting the wound on the same roll it would a T5 model. You can look at the math if you want.
Bolters, Lasguns and other small arms have a better chance of actually wounding a T4 3+ model than a T5 3+ model. That's simply undeniable. However, as I suggested, as the bike is another component to be able to hit, aside from the marine atop it alone, that is the reasoning in granting them an additional wound rather than better toughness.
Also, as mentioned, Multi-Wound characters gain less of a benefit than the average marine, as they can now be ID'd by double STR wounds taken. This is offset by their fantastic movement ability and Jink (if they're being attacked by something that allows a cover save).
Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.
Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.
As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?
Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.
Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.
As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?
Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?
Bikes are cheaper for IC's because they're not coming with weapons and theoretically the Terminator Armor has a Invul assuming the character doesn't have one to begin with, making it a no brainer for foot Librarians.
Also you got the issue of Terminators having to be the elite of the elite, yet they don't have the offensive capability to do that. We got Centurions that are already durable, and maybe in a universe where they don't exist I might understand the arguments for making Terminators more of a wall.
However, Centurions DO exist, and they're doing the job you were originally wanting Terminators to do, even though they never did it well to begin with.
The problem with terminators 2+ saves is it only benefits you vs AP3 weapons. Against AP4 and worse you are paying 2.5 times a tactical marine for only double the protection. Against AP2 you only get a 50% more protection and having 150% more bodies is clearly better (and some cover is as good as a 5+ invul).
Against AP3 a Terminator is suddenly as resilient as 6 tactical marines (4 if they have a cover save). The thing is though your opponent knows this and will therefore aim their AP3 weaponry elsewhere.
In terms of shooting again the storm bolter is not as good as 2.5 bolters. It becomes dramatically worse if you get into 12 inches.
The powerfist is okay but it is on a unit which will struggle to get into assaults and isn't that much of a blender unless they get there without taking casualties (which you can't expect to happen).
You can give them a higher toughness, wounds and different guns but at what point do you accept you are just making them into centurions?
Here's another idea -- Terminators are immune to effects like Rending and Bladestorm.
It doesn't change their statline, but their armor will be more effective and actually outperform Centurions.
G00fySmiley wrote: also lighting claws and TH/SS beat the heck out of power fists. and a power sword...
The tradeoff here should be firepower. If Tac Terminators can fire 20x SB shots within 12", let's say they kill six Daemonettes who would otherwise strike first at Initiative 5. I do think they take less casualties this way.
There needs to be a rate of fire fix like psuedo-rapidfire, but that's a change which I think would be welcomed.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.
Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.
As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?
Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?
Bikes are cheaper for IC's because they're not coming with weapons and theoretically the Terminator Armor has a Invul assuming the character doesn't have one to begin with, making it a no brainer for foot Librarians.
Also you got the issue of Terminators having to be the elite of the elite, yet they don't have the offensive capability to do that. We got Centurions that are already durable, and maybe in a universe where they don't exist I might understand the arguments for making Terminators more of a wall.
However, Centurions DO exist, and they're doing the job you were originally wanting Terminators to do, even though they never did it well to begin with.
Assault Squads were not 'Squated' with the advent of Vanguard Vets. Tac Squads were not 'Squated with the advent of Sternguard. Etc... Also, with my proposed changes, they still fit their role perfectly, without stepping on anyone else's toes. Dev Cents have longer range as their advantage as well as more firepower at that range. Terminators are closer ranged (36" max if using my suggestions) but better at 24" and under.
Bikes are 7ppm for anyone other than an IC. TDA is 19ppm for anyone other than an IC.
Bikes are 20ppm for ICs. TDA is 30ppm for ICs.
Bikes granting +1W (instead of +1T) will therefore be changed to 15ppm for NON ICs, and remain the same for ICs as they do not benefit as much.
This is in keeping with effectively doubling the model count for NON ICs as well as paying a little extra for the movement bonus and Jink.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.
Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.
As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?
Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?
Bikes are cheaper for IC's because they're not coming with weapons and theoretically the Terminator Armor has a Invul assuming the character doesn't have one to begin with, making it a no brainer for foot Librarians.
Also you got the issue of Terminators having to be the elite of the elite, yet they don't have the offensive capability to do that. We got Centurions that are already durable, and maybe in a universe where they don't exist I might understand the arguments for making Terminators more of a wall.
However, Centurions DO exist, and they're doing the job you were originally wanting Terminators to do, even though they never did it well to begin with.
Assault Squads were not 'Squated' with the advent of Vanguard Vets. Tac Squads were not 'Squated with the advent of Sternguard. Etc... Also, with my proposed changes, they still fit their role perfectly, without stepping on anyone else's toes. Dev Cents have longer range as their advantage as well as more firepower at that range. Terminators are closer ranged (36" max if using my suggestions) but better at 24" and under.
Bikes are 7ppm for anyone other than an IC. TDA is 19ppm for anyone other than an IC.
Bikes are 20ppm for ICs. TDA is 30ppm for ICs.
Bikes granting +1W (instead of +1T) will therefore be changed to 15ppm for NON ICs, and remain the same for ICs as they do not benefit as much.
This is in keeping with effectively doubling the model count for NON ICs as well as paying a little extra for the movement bonus and Jink.
Does that seem better?
The difference being that those are completely different roles and you're trying to hamfistedly make Terminators into Centurions. That isn't a matter of units being squatted and that was a bad claim on your end.
All I'm saying is that you should read the post that is two above you. How far are you going just to make them Centurions? They're the wall you want. Terminators needed a more defined role, and I explained it/gave rules how to make them fit that role.
What is it we are trying to accomplish here anyway? I've already got my vanguard vets and honor guard for assaults, and centurions and bikes for shooting. I have drop pods for deep striking... well pretty much anything. Dreads are actually pretty decent now at running up and power fisting things to death, and at full initiative.
Terminators pay a bunch of points for stuff that just isn't that good anymore, particularly since their preferred transport is in the same boat, and buffing them up just makes them or other units redundant.
They need to more specialized so they fill a niche in the army. Trying to make them great at everything just means they will always be overcosted or underperforming, or stupidly OP.
So.... what is it terminators should be doing that other units don't already have on lockdown?
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.
Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.
As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?
Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?
Bikes are cheaper for IC's because they're not coming with weapons and theoretically the Terminator Armor has a Invul assuming the character doesn't have one to begin with, making it a no brainer for foot Librarians.
Also you got the issue of Terminators having to be the elite of the elite, yet they don't have the offensive capability to do that. We got Centurions that are already durable, and maybe in a universe where they don't exist I might understand the arguments for making Terminators more of a wall.
However, Centurions DO exist, and they're doing the job you were originally wanting Terminators to do, even though they never did it well to begin with.
Assault Squads were not 'Squated' with the advent of Vanguard Vets. Tac Squads were not 'Squated with the advent of Sternguard. Etc... Also, with my proposed changes, they still fit their role perfectly, without stepping on anyone else's toes. Dev Cents have longer range as their advantage as well as more firepower at that range. Terminators are closer ranged (36" max if using my suggestions) but better at 24" and under.
Bikes are 7ppm for anyone other than an IC. TDA is 19ppm for anyone other than an IC.
Bikes are 20ppm for ICs. TDA is 30ppm for ICs.
Bikes granting +1W (instead of +1T) will therefore be changed to 15ppm for NON ICs, and remain the same for ICs as they do not benefit as much.
This is in keeping with effectively doubling the model count for NON ICs as well as paying a little extra for the movement bonus and Jink.
Does that seem better?
The difference being that those are completely different roles and you're trying to hamfistedly make Terminators into Centurions.
No idea what you're on about as I have made it perfectly clear that that was neither my intent nor my result.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:That isn't a matter of units being squatted and that was a bad claim on your end.
I let the Doom and Gloom I had from page one get the better of me again, the point remains the same though, those units are not superflouos.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:All I'm saying is that you should read the post that is two above you.
How far are you going just to make them Centurions? They're the wall you want. Terminators needed a more defined role, and I explained it/gave rules how to make them fit that role.
All I have been saying is that there is now a niche, their original niche, for them to fill again, with my changes, while not stepping on anyone else's toes. If you are going to reply to me, then do it based on what I have posted, not others.
Let the rage go.
Dev Cents want nothing to do with combat and are horrid at it. Tactical Terminators have no issue with running into melee.
Dev cents are better at longer range than Terninators, as they should be.
Dev Cents are the guys you want to stand basically out in the open shooting every/anything as that's what they're made for.
Just pray they don't get into melee.
I am sick and tired of the 'If it's not specialized it sucks' mentality and crowd. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a 'Jack of all Trades'. You don't like that, fantastic, good for you, stop assuming that no one else should either and therefore it should not exist.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You're still only looking at Devastator Centurions. You keep forgetting how inferior both versions of Terminators are to Assault Centurions.
I have not forgotten about Ass Cents.
Ass Cents have at best 24" range with Hurricane Bolters. Otherwise it's 12" with a TL Melta. They are melee specialists first and foremost with the ability to deal with something directly in front them at best. They want to charge. They have to charge. They do NOT have impressive firepower.
AssCents want to be in melee.
AssCents do NOT want to be standing around between targets.
AssCents swing two STR10 AP2 unwieldly power weapons at initiative each.
They are for wrecking face, face to face, with some possible shooting at best.
They are Slow and Purposeful, so you better have a garaunteed way to get them to where they need to be for the rest of the game, because they are not going to be able to redeploy and/or offer any help anywhere else on the board anytime soon.
My proposed change allows Tactical Terminators to be able to stand and shoot, with impressive if not effective firepower, should that be all they can do.
Terminators are not Slow and Purposeful, so even if you teleported them in, they could at least Run somewhere to get in better range.
Total wounds at this point : Wraiths have inflicted ~2.8 wounds, Tac Terminators stand at ~6.5. If the Terminators get the charge, or remove a Wraith with ranged fire, they're almost certain to win decisively. Without Rending immunity and the firepower buff, Wraiths have the advantage and are almost certain to wipe the Terminators in 6x rounds of CC, losing around 2x models.
Facing the new changes, Necrons can try to use other units, or lean on Harvest bonuses to get an advantage. But you can no longer simply push a Rending CC unit into combat with Terminators and expect the win. Likewise, TH/SS aren't automatically superior in this situation since Tacs are less likely to lose their armor save.
Everyone likes their own ideas, but I would argue two things. 1st, I think the increased ROF reflects how Tac Terminators are supposed to concentrate a lot of firepower among a few models. 2nd, while they rely on a marine statline, TDA is now far superior to the average 2+ save and it shows.
Centurions might still be better at shaking off Lasguns, but that's ok. Terminators are already better versus AP1/AP2.
A storm bolter counts as two bolters. Both may be fired at the same time.
It wouldn't fix everything but it would probably make their guns better.
I feel like the only way to fix the armor would be to keep it at 2+ but move to a d10 system so that you can properly represent its toughness.
A storm bolter counts as two bolters. Both may be fired at the same time.
It wouldn't fix everything but it would probably make their guns better.
I feel like the only way to fix the armor would be to keep it at 2+ but move to a d10 system so that you can properly represent its toughness.
Make them T5, make the storm bolter either rapid fire rending, or shred.
Assault terminators or terminators equipped in full melee gear, may charge out of deep strike as if it was a disordered charge.
Terminators are meant to me the shock troopers, so give them some shock.
Where do you get this idea that they're meant to be shock troopers? They're meant to be walking tanks.
Lore wise they are heavily armored shocked tools because of their teleporters. They were utilized by teleporting behind or into the enemy and breaking them. IE a shock trooper, hit hard and fast from no where.
The other issue is, unless you give them a niche role like that they will remain worthless becuase the walking tank role is already filled by other units and better. The only hope terminators have is if they are put into a shock trooper role
Sounds like the answer is "no". I blame the stormbolter. It has always been the weak link. That and being unable to sweep. Csm terminators with reaper autocannon and blastmasters were dope in the day. Loyalist terminators have pretty much always been failures.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You're still only looking at Devastator Centurions. You keep forgetting how inferior both versions of Terminators are to Assault Centurions.
I have not forgotten about Ass Cents.
Ass Cents have at best 24" range with Hurricane Bolters. Otherwise it's 12" with a TL Melta. They are melee specialists first and foremost with the ability to deal with something directly in front them at best. They want to charge. They have to charge. They do NOT have impressive firepower.
AssCents want to be in melee.
AssCents do NOT want to be standing around between targets.
AssCents swing two STR10 AP2 unwieldly power weapons at initiative each.
They are for wrecking face, face to face, with some possible shooting at best.
They are Slow and Purposeful, so you better have a garaunteed way to get them to where they need to be for the rest of the game, because they are not going to be able to redeploy and/or offer any help anywhere else on the board anytime soon.
My proposed change allows Tactical Terminators to be able to stand and shoot, with impressive if not effective firepower, should that be all they can do.
Terminators are not Slow and Purposeful, so even if you teleported them in, they could at least Run somewhere to get in better range.
You clearly never read the codex in explicit detail.
1. No they don't have impressive firepower. Neither do either Terminator variants. 9 TL Bolter Shots with 3 TL Melta Guns is better than 8-10 regular Bolter shots with either 4 S6 Rending or 2 S8 AP3. You made mention of an effective range, but Terminators aren't any more effective from outside 12"? Ergo, they want to charge too. The Tactical variant is simply worse at it than the Assault variant.
2. They have the same guaranteed ways to get to combat that Terminators do. They have Land Raiders as transports, can be Deep Striking with a simple Pod, or have Psyker powers getting them around. They simply survive better and handle combat better, so to say they're any slower is dishonesty to yourself. This is do to the fact that:
3. They're shooting a ton more and only have a few less attacks for the cost of either squad. When you buy the Omni-Scope and Sergeant upgrade (latter isn't necessary but nice), you have 7 S10 attacks with an overkill Armorbane. Adding a Pod and Melta Guns is a squad that costs 210 points, or 225 with a Deathwind Launcher. For near these same costs, you're getting Hammernators or a Tactical Terminator squad with a range upgrade and Chainfist.
That's why MY fixes are all about fixing their offensive output for their cost, all while fixing other lacking parts of the game.
1. Lightning Claw Terminators are 30 points base, with the TH/SS upgrade being either 5 or the new 10 points.
2. Storm Bolters are S5 (fixing several issues with the weapon itself and how garbage it is anyway).
3. 2 Heavy Weapons at the minimum squad and an extra one at 10 men. This, along with the cheaper cost of the assault variant, makes combat squad an actually appealing rule.
4. Assault Cannons are 15 points
5. All Land Raider variants are 190 points base.
Suddenly they have a true all-out assault capability which was meant to be reflected in their rules but never quite got there.
Yoyoyo wrote: Here's another idea -- Terminators are immune to effects like Rending and Bladestorm.
It doesn't change their statline, but their armor will be more effective and actually outperform Centurions.
G00fySmiley wrote: also lighting claws and TH/SS beat the heck out of power fists. and a power sword...
The tradeoff here should be firepower. If Tac Terminators can fire 20x SB shots within 12", let's say they kill six Daemonettes who would otherwise strike first at Initiative 5. I do think they take less casualties this way.
There needs to be a rate of fire fix like psuedo-rapidfire, but that's a change which I think would be welcomed.
10 termies get 20 shots the same as at 24 as at 12. they are not rapid fire weapons instead only firing 2 shots always at range. 5 termies net 10 shots unless another weapon is taken
Plus they are S4 shots, which are basically irrelevant. I know, queue up T3 army players to complain, but really, is the Tau army a T3 army anymore? No, it's T6. Because Gundam.
G00fySmiley wrote: 10 termies get 20 shots the same as at 24 as at 12. they are not rapid fire weapons instead only firing 2 shots always at range. 5 termies net 10 shots unless another weapon is taken
Yes, I know. It's a change which I think would help. Being able to keep up with Wraiths is good IMO.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Plus they are S4 shots, which are basically irrelevant. I know, queue up T3 army players to complain, but really, is the Tau army a T3 army anymore? No, it's T6. Because Gundam.
If you want Terminators to be a popular netlist unit, they have to be broken to keep up.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: You're still only looking at Devastator Centurions. You keep forgetting how inferior both versions of Terminators are to Assault Centurions.
I have not forgotten about Ass Cents.
Ass Cents have at best 24" range with Hurricane Bolters. Otherwise it's 12" with a TL Melta. They are melee specialists first and foremost with the ability to deal with something directly in front them at best. They want to charge. They have to charge. They do NOT have impressive firepower.
AssCents want to be in melee.
AssCents do NOT want to be standing around between targets.
AssCents swing two STR10 AP2 unwieldly power weapons at initiative each.
They are for wrecking face, face to face, with some possible shooting at best.
They are Slow and Purposeful, so you better have a garaunteed way to get them to where they need to be for the rest of the game, because they are not going to be able to redeploy and/or offer any help anywhere else on the board anytime soon.
My proposed change allows Tactical Terminators to be able to stand and shoot, with impressive if not effective firepower, should that be all they can do.
Terminators are not Slow and Purposeful, so even if you teleported them in, they could at least Run somewhere to get in better range.
You clearly never read the codex in explicit detail.
1. No they don't have impressive firepower. Neither do either Terminator variants. 9 TL Bolter Shots with 3 TL Melta Guns is better than 8-10 regular Bolter shots with either 4 S6 Rending or 2 S8 AP3. You made mention of an effective range, but Terminators aren't any more effective from outside 12"? Ergo, they want to charge too. The Tactical variant is simply worse at it than the Assault variant.
2. They have the same guaranteed ways to get to combat that Terminators do. They have Land Raiders as transports, can be Deep Striking with a simple Pod, or have Psyker powers getting them around. They simply survive better and handle combat better, so to say they're any slower is dishonesty to yourself. This is do to the fact that:
3. They're shooting a ton more and only have a few less attacks for the cost of either squad. When you buy the Omni-Scope and Sergeant upgrade (latter isn't necessary but nice), you have 7 S10 attacks with an overkill Armorbane. Adding a Pod and Melta Guns is a squad that costs 210 points, or 225 with a Deathwind Launcher. For near these same costs, you're getting Hammernators or a Tactical Terminator squad with a range upgrade and Chainfist.
That's why MY fixes are all about fixing their offensive output for their cost, all while fixing other lacking parts of the game.
1. Lightning Claw Terminators are 30 points base, with the TH/SS upgrade being either 5 or the new 10 points.
2. Storm Bolters are S5 (fixing several issues with the weapon itself and how garbage it is anyway).
3. 2 Heavy Weapons at the minimum squad and an extra one at 10 men. This, along with the cheaper cost of the assault variant, makes combat squad an actually appealing rule.
4. Assault Cannons are 15 points
5. All Land Raider variants are 190 points base.
Suddenly they have a true all-out assault capability which was meant to be reflected in their rules but never quite got there.
Yes, I have read the codex thoroughly, thank you for the vote of confidence.
I had a retort, but at this point, I feel we are at an impass. I no longer wish to partake in what is effectually an exercise in futility that may devolve (further, and yes, I hold myself accountable as well).
G00fySmiley wrote: 10 termies get 20 shots the same as at 24 as at 12. they are not rapid fire weapons instead only firing 2 shots always at range. 5 termies net 10 shots unless another weapon is taken
Yes, I know. It's a change which I think would help. Being able to keep up with Wraiths is good IMO.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Plus they are S4 shots, which are basically irrelevant. I know, queue up T3 army players to complain, but really, is the Tau army a T3 army anymore? No, it's T6. Because Gundam.
If you want Terminators to be a popular netlist unit, they have to be broken to keep up.
In which case, any fix is going to be ugly.
This is why my vote for the thread is "no". They will NEVER be viable. Especially with grav and centurions in the game. Much less grav centurions lol. No matter how many S4 shots you give them, they aren't worth their points and an elite slot. Riptide just don't care about that.
Yoyoyo wrote: There's certainly been some interesting ideas. You don't really need a 2+ armour save either when its so easy to stack Shrouded and Jink.
That's also relevant for sure.
This thread is why MY fix revolves around a migration to a D10 system. But that's a huge topic in and of itself. But it gives the granularity needed to differentiate terminator armor.
G00fySmiley wrote: 10 termies get 20 shots the same as at 24 as at 12. they are not rapid fire weapons instead only firing 2 shots always at range. 5 termies net 10 shots unless another weapon is taken
Yes, I know. It's a change which I think would help. Being able to keep up with Wraiths is good IMO.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Martel732 wrote: Plus they are S4 shots, which are basically irrelevant. I know, queue up T3 army players to complain, but really, is the Tau army a T3 army anymore? No, it's T6. Because Gundam.
If you want Terminators to be a popular netlist unit, they have to be broken to keep up.
In which case, any fix is going to be ugly.
Ah I see your meaning now, my mistake
it might help a bit, though rapid fire storm bolters would not make me think they can stand up to other elite offerings for the points
If Terminators had Smash or something like it, that would allow them to fight at their regular initiative whilst still packing a low AP. Maybe they should have Hammer Of Wraith too.
Would special ammo help too? I feel like now, special ammo should be standard issue for all the bolt pistols, bolters, combi bolters and storm bolters of veteran squads. That's vanguard, sternguard and terminators. If terminators could ignore cover or wound on a 2+ with their storm bolters they'd be a hell of a lot more useful.
Special Ammo should be reserved for Sternguard and any Storm Bolters they wish to purchase.
They SHOULD be on Deathwatch Terminators but that's an entirely different topic. Those guys can also get all Heavy Weapons for all 5 guys in a squad though so...
Martel732 wrote: I don't know. I think terminators are more elite than sternguard.
And it is this type of thinking that has people in here suggesting to fix Terminators by upping their defense a ridiculous amount because they "think" that's how it should be.
Leave things to the roles they were meant to have. Special Ammo is a Sternguard thing; if you give Special Ammo to Terminators you'd need to figure out a way to differentiate Sternguard even more.
Martel732 wrote: I don't know. I think terminators are more elite than sternguard.
And it is this type of thinking that has people in here suggesting to fix Terminators by upping their defense a ridiculous amount because they "think" that's how it should be.
Leave things to the roles they were meant to have. Special Ammo is a Sternguard thing; if you give Special Ammo to Terminators you'd need to figure out a way to differentiate Sternguard even more.
Funnily enough Sternguards are a good example of it. SM used to have C:SM Veterans instead of Sternguard, which mostly just had more units that could take special weapons. Then they gave then the Tyrannic War Veteran Special Ammo and that made them more unique.
I tend to think 40k needs a rewrite, and part of that rewrite would be to either downgrade a lot of weapons or upgrade the resilience of a lot of troops.
You could make Terminators T5, give them a 2+ followed by a 4+ invulnerable (ie. remove the "only gets 1 save" rule), I'd rewrite the AP system back to a modifier system like it was in 2nd though with much reduced modifiers and Terminators could have a rule where they halve the modifier of the weapon shooting at them, rounding down. Make Storm Bolters stronger and/or more shots. Terminator armour could make an unwieldy weapon be not unwieldy.
You could do a combination of a few of those things then adjust points accordingly.
While we're at it give my Tyranid Warriors T5, or just feth off the "instant death" rule.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I tend to think 40k needs a rewrite, and part of that rewrite would be to either downgrade a lot of weapons or upgrade the resilience of a lot of troops.
You could make Terminators T5, give them a 2+ followed by a 4+ invulnerable (ie. remove the "only gets 1 save" rule), I'd rewrite the AP system back to a modifier system like it was in 2nd though with much reduced modifiers and Terminators could have a rule where they halve the modifier of the weapon shooting at them, rounding down. Make Storm Bolters stronger and/or more shots. Terminator armour could make an unwieldy weapon be not unwieldy.
You could do a combination of a few of those things then adjust points accordingly.
While we're at it give my Tyranid Warriors T5, or just feth off the "instant death" rule.
Martel732 wrote: I don't know. I think terminators are more elite than sternguard.
And it is this type of thinking that has people in here suggesting to fix Terminators by upping their defense a ridiculous amount because they "think" that's how it should be.
Leave things to the roles they were meant to have. Special Ammo is a Sternguard thing; if you give Special Ammo to Terminators you'd need to figure out a way to differentiate Sternguard even more.
Not really. Sternguard will still have much more firepower than Terminators thanks to their combi bolters and heavy weapons. And they'll be cheaper, won't be able to teleport and won't be as hard in close combat. There's enough differences there. Tactical Marines and Scout Marines both have bolt guns, but they're very different from each other in their tactical applications.
And I still think that Terminators should have their Toughness and Wounds increased. I'm just not so sure to what level.
You can take your armor -or- your invuln -or- your cover save Then any wound negate stuff, like Feel No Pain And then any other shenanigans the work outside the normal system.
It’s one reason I like the idea of changing the TDA invuln to a FNP save. Or just give them FNP straight up on top of their invuln. Layered saves is pretty much the only way to stay alive out there.
) and give special ammo to standards. Assaulttermies might get a proper special rule in comparison (monster hunter/ tank hunter i suppose, maybe 
