Apologies if there is a thread about this.

I haven't had a 40K battle in a long time. So, I decided to see if I could get back in. However I've been digesting the new rules, new format and such forth. Is it just me or has Eighth Edition broke Terminators? See I am an Ordo Malleus / Farsight Enclave gamer, I loved their small but ultra-elite format, it suited me down to the ground as I'm not fond of large, spam forces. I like to take time with models and put a lot of attention to detail into them.

But, the new format seems to have killed the elite, small force format. Terminators in particular seem to be REALLY weak, Knight Terminators even more so. The whole point in a Terminator was to stroll through a hail of fire and still reach the line, slow, purposeful but viable but with the new Armour Penetration rules that just doesn't seem viable. Are Terminators even useable in the game as it is right now? Which sucks given how Terminators were the strongest arm of the Ordo Malleus. What was the point in cutting up the old rule format that no-one ever complained about, no-one ever said 'Grey Knight Terminators...I refuse to have this battle', it was a challenge for them. But now, it's like 'Terminators, fodder'.

Apologies if this seems like a rant.

Terminators are bad because 2 Damage weapons are so prevalent.

It's to the point where having 2 wounds actually makes you LESS durable than having 1 wound.
If Terminators had a 1+ save or 3 wounds they would be viable.

Terminators are actually more durable than any edition so far. There are only a few weapons they're more vulnerable to (Autocannons and some Gauss weapons, for example), and otherwise are at the same durability (S4-5 AP-1 D1) or are more durable to several more weapons, including weapons that would want to be pointed at them (Tau Plasma, Starcannons, any random damage weapon like Lascannons and Melta).

Their problem is solely what they're capable of offensively.

But more durable isn't sufficient. They were so poor before, that the present increase falls short. Any old -1 AP halves the effectiveness of their armor. That kills them. And yes, two damage weapons are super common.

I would say rate of fire is what kills them as well. I remember back when I used to run terminators in 4th/5th and the only weapons capable of removing their save was also the same few weapons capable of hurting my land raider or dreadnoughts. Not many lists had that much long range shooting that could shoot at turn 1 on my units. More abstract LoS rules and harsher penalties for moving made it so you only got a fraction of the anti tank firepower shots your way compared to now. And no moving and rapidfire(nor orders/stratagems/rules that double shots) or rerolls/modifiers to help with hitting so even if terminators were more vulnerable to weak guns when they only had 1 wound they had to take less than half the saves as well. And you could always use a Character to tank some of those weaker shots as well.

They could at least have something like Rubrics, where any AP -1 is ignored or so, maybe degrade all AP by 1 to a minimum of 1/0. That would help out a little bit. Otherwise they suffer the same cost conundrum that such units usually do. You pay for ranged and melee options when you practically can only really use either one. Or (re-)introduce different armour marks to get more granularity.

Martel732 wrote:
But more durable isn't sufficient. They were so poor before, that the present increase falls short. Any old -1 AP halves the effectiveness of their armor. That kills them. And yes, two damage weapons are super common.

They're actually the same durability to most S4-5 AP-1 weapons, which wasn't a problem for their durability to begin with so I wouldn't really say that's a complaint.

It's 44 points (unless it's been amended in Chapter Approved or the likes) for a single GK Terminator. A random example:

This Terminator has 4 toughness, 2 wounds and 2+ armour save with a Rapid Fire 2 weapon with no AP value.

For the same points (less even) one could face five Necron Immortals, which (the Necrons) I've heard are one of the worse performing armies in 8th Edition.

There is NO CHANCE that Terminator can beat those Immortals, who all have a 3+ armour save (which remains 3+ due to the lack of AP on the Stormbolter) and Rapid Fire weapons with - 2AP. That's at maximum range, five - 2AP, S5 shots vs. two (unless Bolter Discipline has changed) 0AP, S4 shots. What is the changes the Terminator will keep rolling 4+ until reaching close combat? Zero. So what is the use of this super expensive armour, if it's armour save is now pointless.

Back in previous editions, the Terminator MIGHT well have made it to close combat, where it can compete. 84% chance of rolling a 2+ vs. 50% chance of rolling 4+. I used to fight a Necron force, but now I reckon chances of competing would be zero because the dude in question fielded a fair few Immortal squads. His force isn't tailored to be an anti-marine force, it was because Immortals are cool and he liked them as miniatures.

That being said, how are Necrons so weak now? Their general weapons are rather decent, I mean ALL of them seem to have armour debuffs, even most basic gauss weapon turns a 3+ power armour save into a 4+ Xenos save, and Necrons can come back from the dead and HPS wielding models as troops with their -3AP. Do Necrons have some fatal flaw I haven't encountered?

Gary_1986 wrote:
What was the point in cutting up the old rule format that no-one ever complained about, no-one ever said 'Grey Knight Terminators...I refuse to have this battle', it was a challenge for them. But now, it's like 'Terminators, fodder'.

Apologies if this seems like a rant.

Sorry, I had to respond to this part of your rant, and I know where you're coming from...but Deathstars were absolutely miserable to play against, and people did complain about that concept. So there were problems in the previous edition and the old rule format. I'm not sure GK termies were the real root of it, but blobs of 2++ with rerolls etc absolutely included them.

I love the terminator concept. I'm with others. They need more firepower for what they do, and an extra wound. I am a fan of the 1+ save. I am totally opposed to increasing invulns etc.
Primarisise them to 3 wounds, 3 attacks base, 1+/4++ and open up shooting options for more shots and I would like them better.

It's a tough balance I'll agree, but I wouldn't know where to begin with GK Terminators, went from God Tier in third edition) Shrouding, Holocaust (I think that's the name) and 6S power weapons as their default close combat weapons to bottom of the pecking order with cardboard armour, gutless ranged weapons and the debuffed Nemesis Force Weapons. To be fair, losing the Shrouding hurt the Knights more than most other debuffs over the editions. It was a VERY unique rule, bespoke to them as far as Astartes chapters went. Shame it had to go.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Infact in third edition, GK Terminators were so insane overpowered I once had a five man squad of them Deep Strike and wipe out half a Tau battle force it was that bad. Even had someone refuse to let me table Ordo Malleus force on the grounds it was overpowered so I fielded Necrons instead and he still lost, We'll Be Back plus Resurrection Orb.

The GK shoting isn't that bad, at least as long the unit is 10 men strong and you spend 2CP. Although by the time you take 10 termintors, you may as well start thinking about taking paladins.

I don't know what could fix termintors. Offensivily they aren't that bad, in a point void at least, if they could get in to melee it would be even better. Their resiliance is horrible though. ~40pts can give you almost 2 intercessors, they come with twice times the wounds. Number of shots is the same and GK termins can get blessed ammo, but intercessors get doctrins, re-rolls and different bonuses.

Maybe termintors should be costed like intercessors?

I dunno, but there needs to be something to encourage their use. Their biggest selling point, from a fluff point of view is armour protection and firing on the move. But armour protection for them is a little lacking and firing on the move is cool but Bolters have no real power to them.

Perhaps something like reduce an attacks AP value 50% rounding down (2AP becomes 1, 3AP becomes 1, 4AP becomes 2). That would make them a fair bit tankier (given how their minimum armour save would be 4+), or give them a better invulnerable save, or more wounds. Wouldn't turn down a close combat buff to be honest either, I mean a suit of Tactical Dreadnought armour stomping into someone should at the bare minimum stagger.

They also got a downgrade with the loss of Relentless (No penalty to moving and shooting in 7th ed). Sadly, Terminators aren't getting rule changes anytime soon, only point adjustments, just because changing rules would step on the toes of other, related, units.

Well, they're better than in 6th and 7th Edition, but aside from Blightlords still not great, just middle of the road. A bit slow, a bit unreliable with deep strike, and don't actually hit as hard as they probably should, even in melee. And their Landraider also has a hard time, he also got better than in previous editions, but is still quite a points sink since he can be nullified by a grot when he's close to the enemy where he wants to be when transporting Termis.

So, there's a couple of things here that confuse me.

Wade through a hail of fire - Terminators that walk? Since I've played, Terminators have always been a deep strike unit. Generally, in past editions they've been bad because you've got SOMETHING in your army that's AP2, and the terminators would drop in, shoot their boltguns that were at the time effectively just regular boltguns (Deep strike kind of made their only use pointless) and then you'd just shoot them with any AP2 you had, and they'd be dead.

Currently their big struggle in 8th is leveraging their "They do everything" loadouts. The best terminators are those that have ways to get in to combat reliably, and pay NO points for shooting, or those that don't care about combat at all, and put almost ALL their points into guns.

Grey Knights have their own can of worms in a game where they have only a single psychic power list. I highly expect that to change in the upcoming psychic awakening book, where GK are supposed to feature. They need AT LEAST 12 powers, ideally 18, because in 8th you cannot cast the same power twice, so you very quickly run out of powers you can take on your grey knights.

Couple that with Grey Knights being totally deep strike based, but having only one single way to increase their odds of a charge out of deep strike, and you can pretty much understand their struggle. They also distinctly lack any real anti-tank power, since they dont have the usual marine weapon list that has some anti tank options. Unless you like Land Raiders and Dreadnoughts, that's what you've got!

During 3rd through 7th editions, the various incarnations of the current 2+/5++ terminator armour generally worked ok due to the all or nothing AP system (by which I mean the armour durability was reasonably represented, not that the units equipping it were great). Now that 8th is back to 2nd edition style AP modifying all saves, the general trends are that light armoured units are getting some form of save more often (i.e. boltguns don't ignore guardsmen armour), but heavy armoured units can expect to have small arms reduce their saving throw, and are paying points for an 5++ they likely wont ever use.

With 2nd edition AP in effect, it's probably about time 2nd edition armour saves are resurrected, either in the original form of making your save on 2D6, or perhaps in the new apocalypse style of rolling on a single D10 (as AP in general isn't as extreme as it was in 2nd, such as the AP-6 lascannon).

Gary_1986 wrote:
It's 44 points (unless it's been amended in Chapter Approved or the likes) for a single GK Terminator. A random example:

This Terminator has 4 toughness, 2 wounds and 2+ armour save with a Rapid Fire 2 weapon with no AP value.

For the same points (less even) one could face five Necron Immortals, which (the Necrons) I've heard are one of the worse performing armies in 8th Edition.

This is straight-up nonsense.

Necron Immortals are 15pts apiece. You can't even get 3 of them for 44pts, let alone 5.

The issue with Terminators has more to do with the vast increase in special/heavy firepower starting in 5th Edition. Squads that can loadout with ALL high-AP weapons, and/or just much bigger units with even huger guns.

Insufficient terrain rules also hurt them, as well as the grinding down of their heavy weapons/use of them. Back in the day they had a base 1+ to hit (a bonus of 2 over normal marines), and ignored the penalty for heavy weapons. In effect this has made their damage output less, while anti-Terminator weapons are given out like candy.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
But more durable isn't sufficient. They were so poor before, that the present increase falls short. Any old -1 AP halves the effectiveness of their armor. That kills them. And yes, two damage weapons are super common.

They're actually the same durability to most S4-5 AP-1 weapons, which wasn't a problem for their durability to begin with so I wouldn't really say that's a complaint.

Except volume of fire has gone up. Before there wasn't hundreds dices thrown up. And enemy can also bombard with d2 -2 rof weapons as well

 vipoid wrote:

Gary_1986 wrote:
It's 44 points (unless it's been amended in Chapter Approved or the likes) for a single GK Terminator. A random example:

This Terminator has 4 toughness, 2 wounds and 2+ armour save with a Rapid Fire 2 weapon with no AP value.

For the same points (less even) one could face five Necron Immortals, which (the Necrons) I've heard are one of the worse performing armies in 8th Edition.

This is straight-up nonsense.

Necron Immortals are 15pts apiece. You can't even get 3 of them for 44pts, let alone 5.

Was about to say the same thing. Presumably he has just looked at the base cost of the model, and not realised that you also have to pay for the weapon, which almost doubles it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
But more durable isn't sufficient. They were so poor before, that the present increase falls short. Any old -1 AP halves the effectiveness of their armor. That kills them. And yes, two damage weapons are super common.

They're actually the same durability to most S4-5 AP-1 weapons, which wasn't a problem for their durability to begin with so I wouldn't really say that's a complaint.

I'm complaining about it. -2 is now really common as well thanks to doctrines. That completely wrecks them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:
The issue with Terminators has more to do with the vast increase in special/heavy firepower starting in 5th Edition. Squads that can loadout with ALL high-AP weapons, and/or just much bigger units with even huger guns.

Insufficient terrain rules also hurt them, as well as the grinding down of their heavy weapons/use of them. Back in the day they had a base 1+ to hit (a bonus of 2 over normal marines), and ignored the penalty for heavy weapons. In effect this has made their damage output less, while anti-Terminator weapons are given out like candy.

What increase? -3 to -6 was everywhere in 2nd ed. Once the starcannon was introduced in 3rd, it was all over for them in that edition, too. Also, the stormbolter was awful in 2nd. So I really don't agree with any part of this.

Terminators were only good in 2nd because of their extraordinary good save. Since 3rd they die in droves to lasgun and bolter fire which is pretty stupid. You like Terminators? Fine, play Space Hulk. At least in this game they kick as.

Terminators are stuck in this weird place of elite units, where they are not and have not been for a very long time been elite.

They are only really tough in one way, and that is there luck and how far that luck can be pushed.
But as soon as that luck breaks, they do not have the wounds to wither damage.

They are designed where ether they die or you failed to kill them that shot.
they probably should have had a redesign years ago, more wounds so they actuly had a buffer to there fail state as a tough unit should. Rather than pushing against bad luck with things like re rolls, buffs to saves and Debuff to how they are hit.
Now that GW is finally catching on to wounds being a real way to add durability it’s in a extreme lethality that makes even that nearly worthless.

Terms should just be like wraiths and have 3++ saves. Limit squad size to 5 man and improve their damage output a little bit. Cost appropriate.

I think something simple like them adding -1AP to all weapons that hit them. That way a lot of the "small arms" that have a low AP value would still allow them to retain their 2+ save.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Terms should just be like wraiths and have 3++ saves. Limit squad size to 5 man and improve their damage output a little bit. Cost appropriate.

No. Nothing in this game should have 3++. Its one of the lasting legacy problems. 66% chance of failure after plowing through hit and wound rolls is just a ridiculous cap on the wacky dice game.

Voss wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Terms should just be like wraiths and have 3++ saves. Limit squad size to 5 man and improve their damage output a little bit. Cost appropriate.

No. Nothing in this game should have 3++. Its one of the lasting legacy problems. 66% chance of failure after plowing through hit and wound rolls is just a ridiculous cap on the wacky dice game.

Cool, but then termintor based armies have the problem of ap 1-2 being spamed everywhere, which means that awesome +2sv is not that awesome. Plus they cost a ton of points, for little to no gains. 2 intercessors cost less then 1 termintor. have double the wounds, better shoting, more attacks in melee, all they don't have is the 1MW power and the no ap on the melee weapons, which stops to matter when we no longer look at the units in void, but how they look in game, because then the intercessor squads can have a sgt hiting as strong as a captin with a first or thunder hammer.

The complaint about the prevalence of D2 weapons has been going around for a while, but since this came up recently in another thread I have to point it out:

5 Terminators, 165 points, unsaved shots to wipe out:
- D1: 10
- D2: 5
- D3+: 5

3 Aggressors, 111 points, unsaved shots to wipe out:
- D1: 9
- D2: 6
- D3+: 3

Considering that most of the D2 weapons are S6-7 so the wound rolls are the same and the Termies have at least a marginally better save regardless those are actually pretty similar.

On top of that the Termies are 4 shots per model at 29" while the Aggressors are 9.5 shots at 26.5" * average. With that in mind the 165 vs 111 price tag is seriously out of round. The issue is less that Terminators are bad under the current rules and more that they're bafflingly over-priced. **

* - If you don't have a way to bypass the stationary requirement on Fire Storm they might as well Advance since they don't suffer the to-hit penalty.
** - Or the Aggressors are bafflingly under-priced. Or both.

3 wounds is magic in 8th ed.

Karol wrote:
Plus they cost a ton of points, for little to no gains. 2 intercessors cost less then 1 termintor. have double the wounds, better shoting, more attacks in melee, all they don't have is the 1MW power and the no ap on the melee weapons, which stops to matter when we no longer look at the units in void, but how they look in game, because then the intercessor squads can have a sgt hiting as strong as a captin with a first or thunder hammer.

Terminators are priced as if they still existed under the all-or-nothing save system, where AP2 was rare.

In 8th, a 2+ save is just incrementally more durable than 3+ (IMO, as it should be), rather than twice as good against anything short of a lascannon as it used to be.

I should also point out that Terminators are already twice as hard to kill with lasguns, bolters, and the like as they used to be, so they're actually in a position now where they're less vulnerable to small arms but more vulnerable to light anti-tank weapons, which IMO is more logical than how it used to be where Heavy Bolters were better at killing Terminators than Missile Launchers.

One of three things needs to happen to make Terminators viable:

1. Significant points drops, which compromises their 'elite' status.
2. Across-the-board AP revisions to reduce armor save modifiers in general. Not likely, especially given how GW's current approach to balance is apparently to hand out AP modifiers like candy.
3. Give them a 1+ save, which is functionally equivalent to 'reduce incoming AP by 1', except without requiring yet another bespoke special rule.

I think #3 is thematically fitting and probably the most useful in the current AP environment.

AP2 wasn't rare. That's why they were bad.

The rules regarding armor saves are still fethed up so a 1+ save is still functionally a 2++. Every time GW has missed a combo that allows a unit to get to a 1+ they've fixed the combo and left the rule alone, so obviously that's how they want it to work.

No, it's an absurd result and is to be ignored. That can't be RAI.

Martel732 wrote:
No, it's an absurd result and is to be ignored. That can't be RAI.

If they keep adjusting the combos that run afoul of it instead of the rule itself then it very clearly can be RAI.

The Newman wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No, it's an absurd result and is to be ignored. That can't be RAI.

If they keep adjusting the combos that run afoul of it instead of the rule itself then it very clearly can be RAI.

I don't think so. They have been taking 2++ out of the game methodically.

I remember when Plasma Cannons were the optimal Terminator Killing Weapon rather than Bolters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
No, it's an absurd result and is to be ignored. That can't be RAI.

It is RaI. The FAQ is explicit on how modifiers work.

I find that unlikely.

Just make the the Crux always add 1 to their save. We still have to roll those dice for armour saves even if it's 1+ and it gives the Crux a purpose again. Even at - 4 it'll still have a 5+ armour save.

The net result is the same but they wouldn't have an invuln save anymore which could arguably lower their cost

 fraser1191 wrote:
Just make the the Crux always add 1 to their save. We still have to roll those dice for armour saves even if it's 1+ and it gives the Crux a purpose again. Even at - 4 it'll still have a 5+ armour save.

The net result is the same but they wouldn't have an invuln save anymore which could arguably lower their cost

That's actually not a bad idea. How would the 4++ variants be dealt with though?

Terminators are terrible for 2 main reasons. They are slow and they are expensive. Yes there are a lot of D2 weapons but the real weakness is the same as 7th - massed shooting. Aggressors are far better.

To my mind 'fixing' Terminators isn't a thing that's going to happen because GW is committed to deleting the classic Marine line in favour of making them all Primaris, and as we've learned from AoS and the recent announcements about the possible return of WHFB and square bases in a few years' time GW is a very large boat with a very small rudder. 9e is going to come out next summer, old-Marines are going to become 'Legends'-only, and Terminators won't get any attention of any kind from the studio until someday five years from now someone at the design studio looks back and says "You know, we've sold everyone all these Primaris Marines and told them old-Marines are dead so they go dump or sell their armies, and now sales are stagnating, maybe we need to resurrect some of the old stuff so people feel compelled to go out and buy an all-new army again," and then the old-Marines will be back in all their mixed-weapons glory with squads that can mix-and-match a bunch of special weapons despite the kits only coming with one of each upgrade gun, and rules that are somehow more OP than the Primaris, and people will be grumbling about how somehow the Primaris are newer and shinier but they're getting shown up by the folks they supposedly replaced, and the cycle will begin anew.

(Disclaimer: This post represents griping based on hypotheticals and doesn't constitute a prediction of the future or any kind of insider knowledge.)

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Just make the the Crux always add 1 to their save. We still have to roll those dice for armour saves even if it's 1+ and it gives the Crux a purpose again. Even at - 4 it'll still have a 5+ armour save.

The net result is the same but they wouldn't have an invuln save anymore which could arguably lower their cost

That's actually not a bad idea. How would the 4++ variants be dealt with though?

They should just be consolidated into one entry period. There's no reason to have a different entry for each Mk of Termonator armor.

What I have personally always wondered about is why the standard armament for Terminators has always been a measly Storm Bolter. I mean, they're the elite soldiers of an already incredibly elite organization (A Space Marine chapter) , there's at most 100.000 of them in the ENTIRE GALAXY, and all they get is a... Storm Bolter?

So, let's see here. They're super-elite soldiers in superheavy armor and tend to teleport straight onto the frontline. Why don't we give them a Frag Cannon as a standard shooting armament? I know that sometimes they're also used as kind of assassins to snipe enemy commanders but since we have Eliminators for that now Terminators would be the ideal "I teleport straight in front of the heaviest concentration of enemy forces and blow a giant hole in it" unit. I'd say give them a Frag Cannon, +1W and +1T (and maybe no penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons?) to represent they're man-sized Dreadnoughts, price them apporpriately (about 60 points for a Power Fist + Frag Cannon loadout? 55 for Power Sword + Frag Cannon) and poof, Terminators as they SHOULD be.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Just make the the Crux always add 1 to their save. We still have to roll those dice for armour saves even if it's 1+ and it gives the Crux a purpose again. Even at - 4 it'll still have a 5+ armour save.

The net result is the same but they wouldn't have an invuln save anymore which could arguably lower their cost

That's actually not a bad idea. How would the 4++ variants be dealt with though?

They should just be consolidated into one entry period. There's no reason to have a different entry for each Mk of Termonator armor.

I suppose keeping the same idea in mind I'd say add 2 to The save, but then how about the cataphract captain? Add 2 to the armour save while he already has a 3++? You'd need - 3 just to bump him to his invuln which I guess having only a move of 4 is the trade off

Its a bit of a conundrum really and this is probably one of the points where I need to agree with Slayer. But at the same time most of these things are established. It's kinda like Breachers and strikes for Tau, not much difference other than wargear, but you could say that about most things in 40k.....

Pandabeer wrote:
What I have personally always wondered about is why the standard armament for Terminators has always been a measly Storm Bolter. I mean, they're the elite soldiers of an already incredibly elite organization (A Space Marine chapter) , there's at most 100.000 of them in the ENTIRE GALAXY, and all they get is a... Storm Bolter?

So, let's see here. They're super-elite soldiers in superheavy armor and tend to teleport straight onto the frontline. Why don't we give them a Frag Cannon as a standard shooting armament? I know that sometimes they're also used as kind of assassins to snipe enemy commanders but since we have Eliminators for that now Terminators would be the ideal "I teleport straight in front of the heaviest concentration of enemy forces and blow a giant hole in it" unit. I'd say give them a Frag Cannon, +1W and +1T (and maybe no penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons?) to represent they're man-sized Dreadnoughts, price them apporpriately (about 60 points for a Power Fist + Frag Cannon loadout? 55 for Power Sword + Frag Cannon) and poof, Terminators as they SHOULD be.

A storm bolter is not supposed to be measly, They are supposed to be quite effective solder class weapons, Classed up there with other specialist weapons in the game. Its just very very lopsided at this point.
That they never really fix as a whole and kinda just shift around each edition.
And i do not think that will change until the whole design of 40k is really looked at. I feel like Terminators could probably be pushed up to 4 or 5 wounds base. If they where shifting other things around in the game, I feel there is already enough firepower in the game. Few other things in the game could go up as well.
But i think they need to overhall how they work out getting to a wound in the system, rather than just adding on stats to some units endlessly.

 fraser1191 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Just make the the Crux always add 1 to their save. We still have to roll those dice for armour saves even if it's 1+ and it gives the Crux a purpose again. Even at - 4 it'll still have a 5+ armour save.

The net result is the same but they wouldn't have an invuln save anymore which could arguably lower their cost

That's actually not a bad idea. How would the 4++ variants be dealt with though?

They should just be consolidated into one entry period. There's no reason to have a different entry for each Mk of Termonator armor.

I suppose keeping the same idea in mind I'd say add 2 to The save, but then how about the cataphract captain? Add 2 to the armour save while he already has a 3++? You'd need - 3 just to bump him to his invuln which I guess having only a move of 4 is the trade off

Its a bit of a conundrum really and this is probably one of the points where I need to agree with Slayer. But at the same time most of these things are established. It's kinda like Breachers and strikes for Tau, not much difference other than wargear, but you could say that about most things in 40k.....

Well Breachers and Fire Warriors are in the same exact troop slot with no differences. Just do it like Intercessors do their weapons, where it's either/or for a squad. Bam, done.

It's stupid simple but GW is gonna GW.

IMO, all Termies need to be a good unit (not great, just good enough) if for the Crux Terminatus to also have this ability in addition to the 5++: Attacks against this model are -1 Damage to a minimum of 1.
That would make D:2 weapons far less effective against them without the need to give them 3W (which I wish was the case, but GW is very adamant that only Primaris models are getting extra wounds this edition)

That would fix their durability issued, IMO and all you'd need to fix their damage out put is a rule to ignore -1 to hit penalties from moving with Heavy Weapons or Melee weapons. (Again, the ideal solution would be to give them WS/BS2+, but GW seems very uninterested in datasheet revisions on a blanket basis). Shock Assault and Bolter Discipline are ok, but they need a bit more of a nudge.

-

The thing that GW seems to be confusing with regard to Terminators is whether they're supposed to be a hardcore shock-troop squad fielded in numbers that goes through first but isn't fundamentally that much bigger than the basic troops, or whether they're a 'tier above' where things like Custodians, Ogryn, and Aggressors (the T5/3W things) live.

If you run with the assumption that as Terminators were designed as a successor to Breachers (the 30k riot-shield troopers) and should be big squads running into the point first they could almost keep their current statline and rules if you drop them to ~25-30pts/model (with equipment). If you run with the assumption that they're supposed to be 'bigger' they might need T5/3W to keep up with all the other stuff that's supposed to be 'bigger' we keep comparing them to.

 Galef wrote:

That would make D:2 weapons far less effective against them without the need to give them 3W (which I wish was the case, but GW is very adamant that only Primaris models are getting extra wounds this edition)

-

Shadowspear bumped Oblits to 4 wounds, didn't it? I also don't see why Termies shouldn't all just be given a 3++. Loyalists get it with a storm shield if they want it, Necron Wraiths have a 3++. That way, Termies would be defined by their incredible durability and you wouldn't really need to buff their damage output. Their role would be to simply not die, no matter what. Like a steadfast unit to rally around, sort of thing. Chaos Termies would certainly say thank you

 Galef wrote:
IMO, all Termies need to be a good unit (not great, just good enough) if for the Crux Terminatus to also have this ability in addition to the 5++: Attacks against this model are -1 Damage to a minimum of 1.
That would make D:2 weapons far less effective against them without the need to give them 3W (which I wish was the case, but GW is very adamant that only Primaris models are getting extra wounds this edition)

That would fix their durability issued, IMO and all you'd need to fix their damage out put is a rule to ignore -1 to hit penalties from moving with Heavy Weapons or Melee weapons. (Again, the ideal solution would be to give them WS/BS2+, but GW seems very uninterested in datasheet revisions on a blanket basis). Shock Assault and Bolter Discipline are ok, but they need a bit more of a nudge.

-

I prefer to be more restrictive. Treat D:2 as D:1 and only D:2. 3 damage is still 3 damage.

Martel732 wrote:
I prefer to be more restrictive. Treat D:2 as D:1 and only D:2. 3 damage is still 3 damage.

That was my original idea as well. Don't remember why I changed it.

-

D:2 is the real culprit. Autocannon, overcharge plasma etc. IF some poor sop rolls 3 on their D3, they should keep it

Martel732 wrote:
D:2 is the real culprit. Autocannon, overcharge plasma etc. IF some poor sop rolls 3 on their D3, they should keep it

Autocannons really aren't killing that much at a higher rate though, and the only culprit is Imperial Plasma, as Tau Plasma and Starcannons wound less and do less damage on average.

Dissie Soam can help be solved with the consolidated profile just having straight up 4++, but I don't like greater invul saves in the game.

Autocannons remove more points of terminators than almost anything else. So yeah, d2 -1 or better is the problem.

Martel732 wrote:
Autocannons remove more points of terminators than almost anything else. So yeah, d2 -1 or better is the problem.

Have you looked at the math compared to last edition or no? It's really not that big a difference.

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
The issue with Terminators has more to do with the vast increase in special/heavy firepower starting in 5th Edition. Squads that can loadout with ALL high-AP weapons, and/or just much bigger units with even huger guns.

Insufficient terrain rules also hurt them, as well as the grinding down of their heavy weapons/use of them. Back in the day they had a base 1+ to hit (a bonus of 2 over normal marines), and ignored the penalty for heavy weapons. In effect this has made their damage output less, while anti-Terminator weapons are given out like candy.

What increase? -3 to -6 was everywhere in 2nd ed. Once the starcannon was introduced in 3rd, it was all over for them in that edition, too. Also, the stormbolter was awful in 2nd. So I really don't agree with any part of this.

A -3 Save in 2nd still gave Terminators a 6+ on 2D6, which is still roughly a 3+ on a D6. A little better than a 3+ actually, 2.7 ish.

With the modifiers to-hit in 2nd, having a base of 1+ to-hit was pretty good. Storm Bolters with a 1+ are better than Shuriken Catapults at a 4+ (Eldar Guardians), especially in an edition that pushes a 4+ to a 6+ with Hard Cover.

Starcannon Aside, AP2 was pretty rare in 3rd and 4th Ed, and the Starcannon got nerfed in 4th ed. anyways. Plasma Cannons weren't even available to most SM units at the beginning of 3rd, iirc, and only started being given out later, starting with the Dark Angels. In 5th Ed we saw the inflation of Specials, with an obvious case being the creation of Sternguard to replace the old Veterans Squads. Vet Squads were originally just Tactical Squads with higher Leadership and Attacks, Sternguard could all of a sudden all be given Combi-weapons. (Command Squads iirc, too)

How about just stating that Terminator doesn't suffer debuffs against AP weapons? So, their 2+ save applies across the board unless the weapons AP is 3 or higher their armour save value. So AP3 still renders their armour useless (what used to be AP2 weapons, like Las cannons) but nothing short of the absolute most brutal weapons do, and even then still get their 5+ Crux Terminatus invulnerable save.

It would mean in the example I gave, the Necrons would four Immortals against a Terminator but it would retain its 2+ armour save and multiple wounds (I'd still make a case to increase this to 3). At least then the slow, cumbersome Terminator MIGHT make it into close combat where it'll junk the Necrons. But as it is now, there is no real chance the Terminator can win unless it has STELLAR luck with rolls.

I'm having a little sortie against a Necron force this weekend, and he is bringing a squad of Immortals opposite the Knight Terminators I field. I am thinking the sole hope I have is Deep Strike and get into combat with them, or at least close enough to be able to rapid fire storm bolters. See I'm thinking of fielding a Brother Captain, a pair of Strike Squads, Terminators, Interceptors and Purgation Squad.

It's gonna be first 40K Eighth Edition for either of us so I expect it to be reasonable. I think if I can get into close combat I'm sorted because the Terminators will mince his Warriors and Immortals, as will generic Strike Squads thanks to those Nemesis weapons. Its being shot at I'm concerned about. All of his guns have an AP value, so the best save I'm looking at is a 4+ for Marines, 3+ for Terminators and most of the ranged weapons Knights field have no AP value. Granted Storm Bolters will put down a fair bit of fire at close range.

So I'll see how the Terminators fare.

That's basically the old AP system lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Autocannons remove more points of terminators than almost anything else. So yeah, d2 -1 or better is the problem.

Have you looked at the math compared to last edition or no? It's really not that big a difference.

I don't care about last edition. They weren't good then, either. There needs to be a big difference. I'm looking at what rips them apart THIS edition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
The issue with Terminators has more to do with the vast increase in special/heavy firepower starting in 5th Edition. Squads that can loadout with ALL high-AP weapons, and/or just much bigger units with even huger guns.

Insufficient terrain rules also hurt them, as well as the grinding down of their heavy weapons/use of them. Back in the day they had a base 1+ to hit (a bonus of 2 over normal marines), and ignored the penalty for heavy weapons. In effect this has made their damage output less, while anti-Terminator weapons are given out like candy.

What increase? -3 to -6 was everywhere in 2nd ed. Once the starcannon was introduced in 3rd, it was all over for them in that edition, too. Also, the stormbolter was awful in 2nd. So I really don't agree with any part of this.

A -3 Save in 2nd still gave Terminators a 6+ on 2D6, which is still roughly a 3+ on a D6. A little better than a 3+ actually, 2.7 ish.

With the modifiers to-hit in 2nd, having a base of 1+ to-hit was pretty good. Storm Bolters with a 1+ are better than Shuriken Catapults at a 4+ (Eldar Guardians), especially in an edition that pushes a 4+ to a 6+ with Hard Cover.

Starcannon Aside, AP2 was pretty rare in 3rd and 4th Ed, and the Starcannon got nerfed in 4th ed. anyways. Plasma Cannons weren't even available to most SM units at the beginning of 3rd, iirc, and only started being given out later, starting with the Dark Angels. In 5th Ed we saw the inflation of Specials, with an obvious case being the creation of Sternguard to replace the old Veterans Squads. Vet Squads were originally just Tactical Squads with higher Leadership and Attacks, Sternguard could all of a sudden all be given Combi-weapons. (Command Squads iirc, too)

Except terminators cost a fortune and eldar could spam the gak out of -3. How many 6+ can you make? Not enough. Terminators didn't work primarily because of their cost and the cost of their screens. As I said, marines were losing their entire army by turn 2 consistently in my group. If pulsa rokkit spam, sometimes the marines didn't get to do much of anything other than shoot a few orks.

Last eddition there was something called a riptides that destroyed entire units of terms in 1 shot. A lot of times on your own turn. Also these things called monsters that all got ap2 just for being monsters. Terms are actually a lot better this eddition there are just much better units taking their place.

Martel732 wrote:

Except terminators cost a fortune and eldar could spam the gak out of -3. How many 6+ can you make? Not enough. Terminators didn't work primarily because of their cost and the cost of their screens. As I said, marines were losing their entire army by turn 2 consistently in my group. If pulsa rokkit spam, sometimes the marines didn't get to do much of anything other than shoot a few orks.

In your group.

Gary_1986 wrote:
How about just stating that Terminator doesn't suffer debuffs against AP weapons? So, their 2+ save applies across the board unless the weapons AP is 3 or higher their armour save value. So AP3 still renders their armour useless (what used to be AP2 weapons, like Las cannons) but nothing short of the absolute most brutal weapons do, and even then still get their 5+ Crux Terminatus invulnerable save.

It would mean in the example I gave, the Necrons would four Immortals against a Terminator but it would retain its 2+ armour save and multiple wounds (I'd still make a case to increase this to 3). At least then the slow, cumbersome Terminator MIGHT make it into close combat where it'll junk the Necrons. But as it is now, there is no real chance the Terminator can win unless it has STELLAR luck with rolls.

I'm having a little sortie against a Necron force this weekend, and he is bringing a squad of Immortals opposite the Knight Terminators I field. I am thinking the sole hope I have is Deep Strike and get into combat with them, or at least close enough to be able to rapid fire storm bolters. See I'm thinking of fielding a Brother Captain, a pair of Strike Squads, Terminators, Interceptors and Purgation Squad.

It's gonna be first 40K Eighth Edition for either of us so I expect it to be reasonable. I think if I can get into close combat I'm sorted because the Terminators will mince his Warriors and Immortals, as will generic Strike Squads thanks to those Nemesis weapons. Its being shot at I'm concerned about. All of his guns have an AP value, so the best save I'm looking at is a 4+ for Marines, 3+ for Terminators and most of the ranged weapons Knights field have no AP value. Granted Storm Bolters will put down a fair bit of fire at close range.

So I'll see how the Terminators fare.

I'm confused - why do you keep saying that the terminator is like lumbering across the board here? Wouldn't the terminator either A, stand at 24" in cover and use bolter drill to shoot 4 shots per turn at the Immortals or B, deep strike in right next to them to try and get to melee combat?

What's an immortal do - 15ppm for 2 shots S5 Ap- D1 at 24", right? so 1 term vs 3 immortals would be them having a 50/50 chance of dealing 1 wound per turn to the terminator, and the terminator would have about a 50/50 chance of killing an immortal per turn. That's not great odds to fight at range, but it would still take 4 turns for the immortals to kill him at full strength. If he deep strikes in, he might get in the first turn, and he's likely to get in the second.

I dont think you would have fared any better.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Except terminators cost a fortune and eldar could spam the gak out of -3. How many 6+ can you make? Not enough. Terminators didn't work primarily because of their cost and the cost of their screens. As I said, marines were losing their entire army by turn 2 consistently in my group. If pulsa rokkit spam, sometimes the marines didn't get to do much of anything other than shoot a few orks.

In your group.

Honestly I would have loved to have played in your group for all of 8th up till the new codex. The only time I wasn't tabled on turn 2 with marines was when I played Admech

In 2nd ed?

The problem with small model count, elite armies is that you don't buy many models.

Terminators just suffer from having too much competitiion for their role. Imperium can have 300+ datasheets, so if you want tough elites that hit hard just take custodes. SW have wulfen, etc... If you want shooty termies, well, there are even more units that do the same job.

It's basically the same issue that ork units like nobz or warbikers have: there's other stuff that does the same things but more efficiently, period, even if they aren't really trash, like terminators.

Yes, but that is for regular marines. A regular marine player can decide that terminators don't work, so he is just going to have to use intercessors or scouts as his infantry.

Karol wrote:
Yes, but that is for regular marines. A regular marine player can decide that terminators don't work, so he is just going to have to use intercessors or scouts as his infantry.

A regular Marine player who decides Terminators don't work isn't going to replace them with Intercessors or Scouts. He's going to look at Aggressors or Centurions, unless all he's after is deep striking onto objectives turn 2 for scenario play. Then he might look at Reivers since they do that job for half the points.

Regarding damage, might it help to have a Stratagem similar to the new Unyielding Chitin Stratagem for Tyranids?

Basically, when someone shoots at a unit of Terminators, you could pay 1CP to reduce all damage to them by 1 (to a minimum of 1) for the rest of the phase.

Nah, just treat D:2 as D:1. Leave higher damage alone.

The problem of Terminators is that they cannot have rules that might overshadow Primaris, so GW keep them subpar.

GW well know how to do good and powerful rules and give them to primaris units, discounting a handful of points on top of that.
Primaris must be sold, not oldmarines.

The Deer Hunter wrote:
The problem of Terminators is that they cannot have rules that might overshadow Primaris, so GW keep them subpar.

GW well know how to do good and powerful rules and give them to primaris units, discounting a handful of points on top of that.
Primaris must be sold, not oldmarines.

Yeah I keep forgetting Primaris existed before 8th

I think the problem with terminators is Centurions. I've always thought that the terminators should have the statline the centurions have got. It means that they don't really have any room to improve the terminators because they would have too much overlap with Centurions.

Chaos Terminators seem pretty alright. 23 points base and 26 points for their cheapest loadout isn't too terrible.

The Deer Hunter wrote:
The problem of Terminators is that they cannot have rules that might overshadow Primaris, so GW keep them subpar.

GW well know how to do good and powerful rules and give them to primaris units, discounting a handful of points on top of that.
Primaris must be sold, not oldmarines.

Until the eventual Primaris Terminators are released replacing normal termies entirely. (comes fully equipped with a semi latin trademarkable name as well!)

Terminators got better with Shock Assault, then immediately got worse with what doctrines do to them (not what they do with it). -1 and -2AP bolters. They have no chance.

Just have them ignore -1 or -2AP (so basically unmodified 2+ save vs those weapons) and then when -3 kicks in, they go to their 5+ invuln. In which case, just get rid of invuln and state that they ignore -1 and -2AP. Hvy weapons should punch through, and will do so. Massed lower AP fire will also do the trick.

In that respect, are Salamanders players even using Terminators? I'm holding out that Deathwing get some love in next PA book, mostly from strats, but ust getting to use Transhuman Physiology on Deathwing Knights looks fun.

To be fair, I just had first game of Eighth Edition this afternoon.

Knights vs. Necrons. It went better than I hoped it would to be fair. I was worried about his Immortals and their -2AP but in the grand scheme of things the Immortals didn't accomplish much, I had a good game with dice. Deep Striking Terminators is 100% the direction to go, once I was in Close Combat it was game over to be fair.

I had a flick through his Chapter Approved 2019 book and the Knight point reductions helped a ton. Meant I could field another HQ and two Razorbacks, which earned their keep twice over.

They arent as good as they used to be, but I love them so much I camt help using them.

 thepowerfulwill wrote:
They arent as good as they used to be, but I love them so much I camt help using them.

this ^^^
The Terminator design is so iconic and awesome. I even went out of my way to make a banner despite not intending to actually use any in game terms.
I will go out of my way to try and include them somehow.

To be fair, the Terminators were incredibly effective paired with Sanctuary. 2+ with 4+ invulnerable was rather useful and I didn't fail the roll to do it once.

See since it's first game in an age I took a fair few different powers, kept Strike Squads down to as small as possible to accomplish that. Hammerhand is a useful power too.

When boosted with Hammerhand the teleporter squad was rather useful at killing his FLAYED ONES.

Haven't tried Vortex or Gate mind, but I was surprised how much the PSYCHIC powers boosted the overall potential and those Nemesis Force Weapons are brutal against multi-wound enemies.

 Roknar wrote:

 thepowerfulwill wrote:
They arent as good as they used to be, but I love them so much I camt help using them.

this ^^^
The Terminator design is so iconic and awesome. I even went out of my way to make a banner despite not intending to actually use any in game terms.
I will go out of my way to try and include them somehow.

It is true, they are supremely iconic and cool and it hurts to not take them.

I think at this point if I was bringing gk, it'd be terminators over strikes. I'd bring a small force with an HQ and a large troop squad and add them in to my inquisition army. Captain gets the retool charges wl trait, and they get both sanctuary and hammerhand, making sure to have a couple of warding staves in the squad to get a 3++ with sanctuary.

If I played terminators it would be to do it while playing stoned* which is to say any pretense of taking the game seriously would be thrown out the window.

*Don't worry its legal here.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
If I played terminators it would be to do it while playing stoned* which is to say any pretense of taking the game seriously would be thrown out the window.

*Don't worry its legal here.

I hear Congress is trying to legalize it at the federal level, which is all I'm going to say about it so I don't go off on a rant.

I honestly think if you're taking 40k seriously on any level you're probably doing it wrong. The point is to have fun after all, and if you can't laugh at having your army blown of the table by turn two you're not going to be having fun.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Terminators are bad because 2 Damage weapons are so prevalent.

It's to the point where having 2 wounds actually makes you LESS durable than having 1 wound.
If Terminators had a 1+ save or 3 wounds they would be viable.

I run 2 squads of 5 in my Black Legion force and have no problem with them. They're fantastic for parking on Objectives from DS or using as a scaple to axe some powerful pain in my ass.

the_scotsman wrote:
I think at this point if I was bringing gk, it'd be terminators over strikes. I'd bring a small force with an HQ and a large troop squad and add them in to my inquisition army. Captain gets the retool charges wl trait, and they get both sanctuary and hammerhand, making sure to have a couple of warding staves in the squad to get a 3++ with sanctuary.

The problem I found when making the list was, with the Chapter Approved point revisions we can get two Strikes for one Terminator. Almost the entire Knight army can Deep Strike, the Strike Squad would have more Storm Bolter fire however it wouldn't be able to use that on the move as effectively, and that Crux Terminatus save boosted with Sanctuary is something worth considering, makes making a save 16% or so more probable.

I do however prefer the look of Terminators, so I take them most games and I love their ability to fire on the move.

While it wouldn't address much about Terminators lack of survivability, you could take a page from 2nd edition and allow their Deep Strike to cost points. Meaning you could knock X points off a model if you were planning on deploying it on the ground or in a Land Raider. Pay extra points if you wanted to put them into Deep Strike.

That's an option mind, but I think it Deep Strike is an integral part of what Terminators are, it encourages people to use Deep Strike.

 thepowerfulwill wrote:
They arent as good as they used to be, but I love them so much I camt help using them.

They aren't as good as they used to be? Sure, if you can't do math.

Gary_1986 wrote:
That's an option mind, but I think it Deep Strike is an integral part of what Terminators are, it encourages people to use Deep Strike.

Sure, but it's also completely wasted if you don't use it...and I'd imagine some tiny amount of their value is predicated on their ability to Deep Strike. Picture it as paying for jump packs for your assault marines...or not, if you want them on foot (for some reason). I don't think it's a magic solution, but it's something.

 Elbows wrote:

Gary_1986 wrote:
That's an option mind, but I think it Deep Strike is an integral part of what Terminators are, it encourages people to use Deep Strike.

Sure, but it's also completely wasted if you don't use it...and I'd imagine some tiny amount of their value is predicated on their ability to Deep Strike. Picture it as paying for jump packs for your assault marines...or not, if you want them on foot (for some reason). I don't think it's a magic solution, but it's something.

I don't think it'd affect their cost very much. I think the DS is better implemented as a package deal.

1cp strats that give terminators +2 to charge rolls out of deepstrike.