Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

To make them more viable, make them cheaper, able to be taken as troops, deep strike then move d6" or make them harder to wound.
A straight up toughness buff may do the trick, but more unconventional method may give them a niche back.
A terminator suffers half the wounds (rounded down) allocated to it.
-or-
Wound rolls vs terminators suffer a -1 penalty to wound.

Do wonder if terminators would be more worthwhile with better terrain rules.

they appear designed for fighting in very dense terrain where an enemy cannot bring weight of numbers of heavy weapons in any quantity to the fight, then allowing them to play the odds over a much smaller number of much less well equipped models.

perhaps their day will come if 40k ever gets decent workable terrain rules?

I've just built a squad of the normal ones, without huge hopes for them but I like the models, the "plan" such as it is, is to use them to try and take terrain, ideally about as far from heavy artillery as possible.

and no doubt they will still die, but they will look good while doing it.

Do think they should reduce incoming damage by one, to a minimum of one (so D2 weapons become D1 against them) and a 1+ save to ignore the first point of AP would be nice.

the role as I see it is dense urban fighting, on an open field anti tank weapons should make a mockery of them and rightly do, give then terrain that blocks line of sight and the "Yahtzee" effect with a bit of luck is diluted as well.

one Idea I wonder on is allowing them to teleport closer to the enemy, say 9"+ as usual, but able to drop at 6"+ at a cost of a mortal wound on say a 5+, one dice per model - call it something to do with the way their armour allows a much more powerful teleport to be used or something - in effect give terminators, and just terminators something different so they get that drop - shoot - charge a bit more often, even if they die the turn after

Martel732 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Why should Terminators get something that's a gimmick for another army?

Because its a good gimmick whose access should be increased, imo. SIA basically solves the bolter problem without introducing more wacky new crap. It also provides way more utility than merely BS 2+. Give Deathwatch some extra gimmicks beyond SIA to compensate. Perhaps a defensive gimmick?

So basically:
1. Give a gimmick for one army to a unit because you think it should be totally generic
2. Not consider Assault Terminators, Blightlords, Scarabs, Paladins, and Deathshroud
3. THEN to compensate you want to give Deathwatch another mechanic to compensate for their mechanic being more generic

Don't you see how terribly long-winded that is? Not even Custodes get Special Ammunition, and I certainly haven't suggested ANYTHING wacky.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gealgain wrote:
To make them more viable, make them cheaper, able to be taken as troops, deep strike then move d6" or make them harder to wound.
A straight up toughness buff may do the trick, but more unconventional method may give them a niche back.
A terminator suffers half the wounds (rounded down) allocated to it.
-or-
Wound rolls vs terminators suffer a -1 penalty to wound.

Then a Lascannon wouldn't kill a Terminator half the time. Terrible idea.

 skchsan wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Why should Terminators get something that's a gimmick for another army?

Because its a good gimmick whose access should be increased, imo. SIA basically solves the bolter problem without introducing more wacky new crap. It also provides way more utility than merely BS 2+. Give Deathwatch some extra gimmicks beyond SIA to compensate. Perhaps a defensive gimmick?

Or just cost them appropriately and not just slap on "double the price of 1W model because it has 2W" mentality.

Or that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Why should Terminators get something that's a gimmick for another army?

Because its a good gimmick whose access should be increased, imo. SIA basically solves the bolter problem without introducing more wacky new crap. It also provides way more utility than merely BS 2+. Give Deathwatch some extra gimmicks beyond SIA to compensate. Perhaps a defensive gimmick?

So basically:
1. Give a gimmick for one army to a unit because you think it should be totally generic
2. Not consider Assault Terminators, Blightlords, Scarabs, Paladins, and Deathshroud
3. THEN to compensate you want to give Deathwatch another mechanic to compensate for their mechanic being more generic

Don't you see how terribly long-winded that is? Not even Custodes get Special Ammunition, and I certainly haven't suggested ANYTHING wacky.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

gealgain wrote:
To make them more viable, make them cheaper, able to be taken as troops, deep strike then move d6" or make them harder to wound.
A straight up toughness buff may do the trick, but more unconventional method may give them a niche back.
A terminator suffers half the wounds (rounded down) allocated to it.
-or-
Wound rolls vs terminators suffer a -1 penalty to wound.

Then a Lascannon wouldn't kill a Terminator half the time. Terrible idea.

I personally don't think they can be truly 'fixed' under the current rule set. I don't think WS 2+ BS 2+ is appropriate looking at units throughout the game, nor do I think those changes really addresses the true problems. Custodes, btw, should probably get SIA as well. I don't like how one little minor breakoff of an already tiny faction (marines) is the only one with effective ammunition. One city on one forgeworld could probably make enough SIA for every marine chapter, even if they were expanded back into legions. Marine chapters are TINY. I offered a reasonable thing other than a points drop. But the closest thing to something that would actually happen is a points drop. A big one, to reflect the reality of 8th ed firepower.

If you think Custodes could get Special Ammo as well, you should probably just leave the thread.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
If you think Custodes could get Special Ammo as well, you should probably just leave the thread.

...Are you suggesting that giving Custodian infantry the ability to do almost nothing instead of just straight-up nothing in the Shooting phase is somehow unbalancing?

(Before you say "but bikes..." SIA doesn't apply to hurricane bolters in the Deathwatch book, and turning this into a "what would I like SIA on?" wishlist seems like going a bit off-topic.)

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
If you think Custodes could get Special Ammo as well, you should probably just leave the thread.

Why is that? I'd argue all marines should have SIA on everything, actually. Including inceptors and aggressors, which currently don't have it even in DW.

Discussing hapless terminators always spills over to the larger problem.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
If you think Custodes could get Special Ammo as well, you should probably just leave the thread.

...Are you suggesting that giving Custodian infantry the ability to do almost nothing instead of just straight-up nothing in the Shooting phase is somehow unbalancing?

(Before you say "but bikes..." SIA doesn't apply to hurricane bolters in the Deathwatch book, and turning this into a "what would I like SIA on?" wishlist seems like going a bit off-topic.)

The basic Custodes has a -1AP D2 shooting attack.
So imagine the Watchmaster shooting except you get 2 shots to 1 of his. They kill just fine in the shooting phase the moment they have 2 or more wounds.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
If you think Custodes could get Special Ammo as well, you should probably just leave the thread.

Why is that? I'd argue all marines should have SIA on everything, actually. Including inceptors and aggressors, which currently don't have it even in DW.

Discussing hapless terminators always spills over to the larger problem.

And your blanket fix is garbage and you should feel bad about even suggesting it. You proven you cannot scale. At all. Aggressors are already one of the only mathematically okay units. You just put them over the top.

Funnily enough, I don't feel bad at all. Someone is a bit too high on their high horse.

I'm sure Xenos would continue to murder aggressors outside of their range just fine. But please continue the meltdown.

Martel732 wrote:
Funnily enough, I don't feel bad at all. Someone is a bit too high on their high horse.

I'm sure Xenos would continue to murder aggressors outside of their range just fine. But please continue the meltdown.

That's a few specific weapons. We get it: you hate Disintegrators. Those probably need to be fixed you know?

Still think for termies they should get -1 damage to a minimum of 1. If that isn't enough they should get a 1+ save.

Then overall Astartes bolt pistol, bolter and storm bolter should get -1ap to account for better training and bigger caliber than the ones carried by human baseline troops.

Give terminators the option to carry an assault cannon in each hand, and a twin linked assault cannon mounted on their shoulders.

"so you mean centurions"

"No...my idea sounds cooler..."

"thats stupid"

"i know..."

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Still think for termies they should get -1 damage to a minimum of 1. If that isn't enough they should get a 1+ save.

Then overall Astartes bolt pistol, bolter and storm bolter should get -1ap to account for better training and bigger caliber than the ones carried by human baseline troops.

I already explained why -1 to damage scales horribly. Terminator Captains now automatically survive being sawed in half by an Imperial Knight.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Still think for termies they should get -1 damage to a minimum of 1. If that isn't enough they should get a 1+ save.

Then overall Astartes bolt pistol, bolter and storm bolter should get -1ap to account for better training and bigger caliber than the ones carried by human baseline troops.

I already explained why -1 to damage scales horribly. Terminator Captains now automatically survive being sawed in half by an Imperial Knight.

So does a Rhino, so I'm not seeing the point here. Also, that's assuming only 1 wound gets through. If 2 attacks successfully hit, wound and get through the armour, that Termie Cap is just as dead regardless of it being -1 damage.
But if -1 damage isn't palatable for you, then give Termies 1+ armour. It makes their invul save completely pointless, but at least it "scales well"

-

 Galef wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Still think for termies they should get -1 damage to a minimum of 1. If that isn't enough they should get a 1+ save.

Then overall Astartes bolt pistol, bolter and storm bolter should get -1ap to account for better training and bigger caliber than the ones carried by human baseline troops.

I already explained why -1 to damage scales horribly. Terminator Captains now automatically survive being sawed in half by an Imperial Knight.

So does a Rhino, so I'm not seeing the point here. Also, that's assuming only 1 wound gets through. If 2 attacks successfully hit, wound and get through the armour, that Termie Cap is just as dead regardless of it being -1 damage.
But if -1 damage isn't palatable for you, then give Termies 1+ armour. It makes their invul save completely pointless, but at least it "scales well"

-

A +1 Armor Save would scale better, but don't you think it makes SLIGHTLY more sense for a Rhino to survive being cleaved by a Knight than a little dude?

Hell, the damage rules for Calgar and Abigail scale terribly for that reason. They can both survive the Harpoon from a Knight!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Still think for termies they should get -1 damage to a minimum of 1. If that isn't enough they should get a 1+ save.

Then overall Astartes bolt pistol, bolter and storm bolter should get -1ap to account for better training and bigger caliber than the ones carried by human baseline troops.

I already explained why -1 to damage scales horribly. Terminator Captains now automatically survive being sawed in half by an Imperial Knight.

So does a Rhino, so I'm not seeing the point here. Also, that's assuming only 1 wound gets through. If 2 attacks successfully hit, wound and get through the armour, that Termie Cap is just as dead regardless of it being -1 damage.
But if -1 damage isn't palatable for you, then give Termies 1+ armour. It makes their invul save completely pointless, but at least it "scales well"

-

A +1 Armor Save would scale better, but don't you think it makes SLIGHTLY more sense for a Rhino to survive being cleaved by a Knight than a little dude?

Hell, the damage rules for Calgar and Abigail scale terribly for that reason. They can both survive the Harpoon from a Knight!

Actually, the Harpoon deals an extra d3 mortal wounds. So unless they have 7 wounds... (Which they might-I'm AFB at the moment. If they do, they survive it 1/3 times.)

 JNAProductions wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Still think for termies they should get -1 damage to a minimum of 1. If that isn't enough they should get a 1+ save.

Then overall Astartes bolt pistol, bolter and storm bolter should get -1ap to account for better training and bigger caliber than the ones carried by human baseline troops.

I already explained why -1 to damage scales horribly. Terminator Captains now automatically survive being sawed in half by an Imperial Knight.

So does a Rhino, so I'm not seeing the point here. Also, that's assuming only 1 wound gets through. If 2 attacks successfully hit, wound and get through the armour, that Termie Cap is just as dead regardless of it being -1 damage.
But if -1 damage isn't palatable for you, then give Termies 1+ armour. It makes their invul save completely pointless, but at least it "scales well"

-

A +1 Armor Save would scale better, but don't you think it makes SLIGHTLY more sense for a Rhino to survive being cleaved by a Knight than a little dude?

Hell, the damage rules for Calgar and Abigail scale terribly for that reason. They can both survive the Harpoon from a Knight!

Actually, the Harpoon deals an extra d3 mortal wounds. So unless they have 7 wounds... (Which they might-I'm AFB at the moment. If they do, they survive it 1/3 times.)

Didn't it only do the extra D3 Mortal Wounds to vehicles?

Either way, that's still a case of horrible scaling and you know it.

How about we add toughness and Feel No Pain and reduce the cost to like an arbitrary 31pts and allow groups of 3 minimum instead of 5.

 CadianGateTroll wrote:
How about we add toughness and Feel No Pain and reduce the cost to like an arbitrary 31pts and allow groups of 3 minimum instead of 5.

And then add more toughness and a better FNP to Blightlords and Deathshroud, and apply these supposed changes to Scarab Occult?

Once again you forgot the whole scaling thing huh?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Still think for termies they should get -1 damage to a minimum of 1. If that isn't enough they should get a 1+ save.

Then overall Astartes bolt pistol, bolter and storm bolter should get -1ap to account for better training and bigger caliber than the ones carried by human baseline troops.

I already explained why -1 to damage scales horribly. Terminator Captains now automatically survive being sawed in half by an Imperial Knight.

Well they are wearing tactical dreadnought armour, tougher than most imperial vehicles, can survive in plasma reactors etc. That seems fine and is hardly a new rule, Genestealer abominations have it as well.

Plasma Reactors aren't the same thing as a projected plasma weapon, which is typically designed to KILL Terminators.

Also just because one unit has it doesn't mean it's a good idea. Abominations probably scale horribly for all I know too

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Plasma Reactors aren't the same thing as a projected plasma weapon, which is typically designed to KILL Terminators.

Also just because one unit has it doesn't mean it's a good idea. Abominations probably scale horribly for all I know too

Are you honestly insinuating that the reactor has less energy and power compared to a plasma bolt that flys through the air and therefore cooles?

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Plasma Reactors aren't the same thing as a projected plasma weapon, which is typically designed to KILL Terminators.

Also just because one unit has it doesn't mean it's a good idea. Abominations probably scale horribly for all I know too

Are you honestly insinuating that the reactor has less energy and power compared to a plasma bolt that flys through the air and therefore cooles?

To be fair, I think he's pointing out that a Plasma reactor has dispersed energy, while a plasma weapon is focused. While the reactor obviously has more energy, it's in a less concentrated area, while a plasma weapon is designed to punch its energy through at velocity

-

 Galef wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Plasma Reactors aren't the same thing as a projected plasma weapon, which is typically designed to KILL Terminators.

Also just because one unit has it doesn't mean it's a good idea. Abominations probably scale horribly for all I know too

Are you honestly insinuating that the reactor has less energy and power compared to a plasma bolt that flys through the air and therefore cooles?

To be fair, I think he's pointing out that a Plasma reactor has dispersed energy, while a plasma weapon is focused

A reactor? Directly inbuilt a ship? Multiple times as big and powerfull?

I know logic does not correctly apply to 40k but logic of scale is still relevant for cohesive background from which we derive the game itself.
So assuming that a pg is stronger than a plasma reactor going haywire is in said context more then, excuse me, silly, no?

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Plasma Reactors aren't the same thing as a projected plasma weapon, which is typically designed to KILL Terminators.

Also just because one unit has it doesn't mean it's a good idea. Abominations probably scale horribly for all I know too

Are you honestly insinuating that the reactor has less energy and power compared to a plasma bolt that flys through the air and therefore cooles?

To be fair, I think he's pointing out that a Plasma reactor has dispersed energy, while a plasma weapon is focused

A reactor? Directly inbuilt a ship? Multiple times as big and powerfull?

I know logic does not correctly apply to 40k but logic of scale is still relevant for cohesive background from which we derive the game itself.
So assuming that a pg is stronger than a plasma reactor going haywire is in said context more then, excuse me, silly, no?

Think of the equivalent of a room filled with nails (where stepping around might not hurt) compared to someone shooting at your feet with a nail gun.

Terrible analogy slayer,
A better one would be the comparison of ground zero between a bomb and a nuclear bomb.

Also would -2 on AP really be that devastating? I think not and mind you that would only be reached by rubric terminators.

At the end I think that a 1+ save (removing the redundant 5+ invulnerable save) may be enough (eventually with a small price cut). Keep in mind that, in cover /off cover, those "New" Termys save a Lascannon on 3+/4+... it seems fine to me.

Plus, they need to field 2 heavy weapons any 5 models, to recover for the (relative) lack of options available on the Sergeant. That's the less cascading bonus you can give, because will be applied only to standard terminator.

Finally, a 2+ to hit in close combat for Assault Terminator will be fine, I think... see the Gallant Knight: with 2+ is a good model, with 3+ it will be lacklustre.

I know that, with this little changes (double Heavy specifically) I'll start using my Deathwing again, instead of being always relying on the Deathwing Knight.

 Cybtroll wrote:
Plus, they need to field 2 heavy weapons any 5 models, to recover for the (relative) lack of options available on the Sergeant. That's the less cascading bonus you can give, because will be applied only to standard terminator.

I like this, but an alternative option would be to make Termies min size 3 models and allow 1 heavy weapon per 3. Then you give the Sgt the option for combi-weapons (like every other Sgt). So a full unit of 10 could have 3 Heavy weapons and a Combi-weapon (fun shenanigans for Combat Squads), or you could have a few min 3 units with 1 Heavy weapon each.
This, I feel, gives the unit the utility it so desperately needs.

-

Just realized there's 16 pages of details on this topic, thats pretty intense. What I came here to say was this - I think the extra wound would be favorable for termies, but also maybe something in line with the SlabShield rule that Ogryn Bodyguards have. They add 2 to any save rolls for a model equipped accordingly. The big problem imo with termies in 8th, is that awesome 2+ save isn't so awesome anymore when you realize that most everything has AP would very quickly chews away at what makes termies awesome.

eternalxfl wrote:
The big problem imo with termies in 8th, is that awesome 2+ save isn't so awesome anymore when you realize that most everything has AP would very quickly chews away at what makes termies awesome.

Which is exactly why having a 1+ armour makes perfect sense and scales easily for all TEQs across all factions. 1s still fail, but having the extra little buffer helps when over 50% of the weapons being used have AP modifiers.
In previous editions, the AP system only allowed for a small handful of weapons to affect Termies, who still had a 5++ to fall back on (but only 1 wound, so they died a lot still). But now even Heavy Bolters turn Termies into MEQs
1+ amour is really the 2nd most obvious solution (a dramatic points decrease being the 1st most obvious)

And GW could make the change easily enough in CA by listing out the names of every datasheet that is a TEQ and saying to change their datasheet to reflect a 1+ armour save.

-