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.

+1 wound is the obvious thing but makes them to resilient vs plasma etc.

I think a better proposal would be:

Normal Terminators: 24
Deathwatch Terminators: 27
Grey Knight Terminators: 37

This makes them better than 2 marines but cause special voltron rules. also easiest fix. Idk if said before but I hope what get in new chapter approved

+1 wound and negate 1 AP and ignore -1 to hit on pfist/cfist and hammers.

Done

What I'd do:

- The "take 1 less damage down to a minimum of 1" rule is the best way to increase the toughness of Terminators IMO. It is a direct fix to what feths over Termies the most at the moment (overcharged plasma) without also increasing their survivability against small arms fire (Termies are survivable enough against that IMO). The +1 wound thing could work as well though.

- Allow more heavy weapons in the squad. At the moment Terminator equipment options are... lacking, in the ranged department. A Storm Bolter doesn't cut it on a model that costs at the very least 30+ points, Flamers can't be used from Deepstrike range so are out automatically and Plasma's are nice in theory but require deepstriking a pricey Captain alongside the Terminators to safely overcharge (I once wiped out an entire Hellblaster squad with a single overcharged volley from my Blightlord Termies + Termie Chaos Lord, but that was more luck than anything else ). The only thing I could personally see them using from deepstrike is Melta really, even if the price of the gun should probably come down a little. Allowing 3 heavy weapons per squad (like Deathwatch Terminators) allows a lot more customization and firepower, which is needed if the base cost for the model is as high as it is for Terminators. It's also very fluffy, in the fluff Terminators are depicted as being man-sized Dreadnoughts, allow them to equip themselves as such. It'll raise the points price on the unit because heavy weapons are expensive but it'll allow Terminators to be what they are supposed to be: The most elite unit a Space Marine army can field (that isn't a high-ranking officer), whose task it is to rip the proverbial heart out of the opposing army through precise deployment and overwhelming firepower.

- As for Assault Terminators, give them some kind of bonus on their charge rolls so they can make it in from Deepstrike more reliably. I'm not sure about giving them more attacks baseline, Thunder Hammers hit harder than a Krak Missile and they get 2 attacks at 1/3rds the price of a Cyclone Missile Launcher. Maybe ignoring the normal -1 to hit would be a good buff, this also represents their "man-sized Dreadnought" nature nicely.

- What I would most certainly NOT do is lowering the points costs of Terminators. They are supposed to be few yet very strong, let them be represented as such on the battlefield. For most Marine armies 2 5-man squads or 1 10-man squad should be the maximum they can feasably field in a standard 2000 points match without massively overspecializing.

Anyway, I thought I read somewhere that GW said that "there would be something nice for Marine players" in CA, let's hope that means some Terminator buffs (I'd love to field them more viably and more often because I have 3 Death Guard and 2 Space Wolves squads ).

Pandabeer wrote:
What I'd do:

- The "take 1 less damage down to a minimum of 1" rule is the best way to increase the toughness of Terminators IMO. It is a direct fix to what feths over Termies the most at the moment (overcharged plasma) without also increasing their survivability against small arms fire (Termies are survivable enough against that IMO). The +1 wound thing could work as well though.

I agree with this (the reduction of wounds taken by a weapon by 1). Termies need that I think and is totally fluffy. A +1 wound increase meh makes them to much like custodes. More heavy weapons, kinda crunches on the deathwatch theme.

A reduction in points for basic terminators across all SM chapters and the armour reduces all damage taken (depends how word it, per weapon like on eldar vehicles or a plain 1 would be pertinent) by +1 would be a good fix in Chapter approved to trial and see (you don't want a unit to have 20 changes at once, better to have a few then see if need more or less).

Pandabeer wrote:
- As for Assault Terminators, give them some kind of bonus on their charge rolls so they can make it in from Deepstrike more reliably.

I think increasing offensive capabilities on a deepstrike is a poor balance mechanics.

By nature of the rule itself, deepstrike offers incredible (by incredible, I mean INVULNERABLE) defensive capabilities and incredible ranged offensive potentials.

You can't give EVERYTHING to deepstrikers. The game already operates primarilly on how to maximize reserves potential and how to screen to deny best positions.

 skchsan wrote:

Pandabeer wrote:
- As for Assault Terminators, give them some kind of bonus on their charge rolls so they can make it in from Deepstrike more reliably.

I think increasing offensive capabilities on a deepstrike is a poor balance mechanics.

By nature of the rule itself, deepstrike offers incredible (by incredible, I mean INVULNERABLE) defensive capabilities and incredible ranged offensive potentials.

You can't give EVERYTHING to deepstrikers. The game already operates primarilly on how to maximize reserves potential and how to screen to deny best positions.

Then what is your solution for making Assault Terminators viable? You can't say "Tactical Terminators deepstriking is fine but if you want to use your Assault Terminators you'll have to invest in a 300+ points Land Raider as well and hope it survives until it can drop them off next to their target".

Besides that, shooting in general already is better than CC in 8th edition. Why is it ok for shooty deepstrikers to be able to deliver a guaranteed alpha strike from complete safety but is it not ok for choppy deepstrikers to have a decent chance (around 50-60%) of making their charge? Because at this point they are stuck with a slightly above 25% chance of making a 9" charge without modifiers and rerolls. Besides that, shooty deepstrikers also have more freedom in where they deploy. If you want to rapid fire Plasma, you can deploy up to 12" away without losing efficiency, choppy deepstrikers HAVE to deploy at that 9" spot or see their chances of making it in become exponentially smaller.

As they are armed right now. They are worth about 26-28 points.

They still wouldn't be very good at these points without some new special rules ether. + 2 Heavies per 5 guys.

I'd say - Ignore powerfist -1 to hit and a 6+ FNP would make them desirable.

Add Effect: Terminator Armor "Halve all incoming damage to a minimum of 1"

Allow SGTs with Storm Shields to "spread the shields range, add +1 to a maximum of 3++ to the rest of the squads Invulnerable saves for the remainder of the turn."

Allow them to ignore the penalties for moving and firing combi-weapons. Remove the senseless penalty for using a power fist in cc, or Make them BS2 so that it hurts way less.

I've actually played games where my opponent agreed to let me ignore the power fist penalty, it wasn't any more op and it made the terminators so much more useful and fun.

Pandabeer wrote:
Then what is your solution for making Assault Terminators viable? You can't say "Tactical Terminators deepstriking is fine but if you want to use your Assault Terminators you'll have to invest in a 300+ points Land Raider as well and hope it survives until it can drop them off next to their target".

Besides that, shooting in general already is better than CC in 8th edition. Why is it ok for shooty deepstrikers to be able to deliver a guaranteed alpha strike from complete safety but is it not ok for choppy deepstrikers to have a decent chance (around 50-60%) of making their charge? Because at this point they are stuck with a slightly above 25% chance of making a 9" charge without modifiers and rerolls. Besides that, shooty deepstrikers also have more freedom in where they deploy. If you want to rapid fire Plasma, you can deploy up to 12" away without losing efficiency, choppy deepstrikers HAVE to deploy at that 9" spot or see their chances of making it in become exponentially smaller.

1. Make LR's cheaper - currently, they're priced at LoW grade units with 3 base weapons, with upgradable MM and HKM. Most Superheavies rock minimum 4 weapons, few of which are weapon exclusive (which are mostly near-one-shot killy) to LoW grade (unlike LR's flamestorm, hurricane bolter, lascannon, assault cannon, heavy bolter, MM), with base 24+ wounds. At BEST, LR's are 1.75x preds and they should be priced accordingly so. So, we should be looking at about 160~200 base + weapons.
1 armiger can pull the offensive capability of a LR at fraction of cost. 2 armigers more or less are equally durable as a single LR (which meas twice the fire power of a LR).

2. Melee deepstrike has already been buffed by being allowed to charge after deepstriking. This may not look like it, but this is HUGE.

3. Shooty deepstrike is not OK, and this has been/is currently being addressed multiple times via nerf to tactical reserves through beta rules.

4. Assault termies, and all temies variants need point reduction.

Essentially, assault termies are big bad scarecrows as far as their in game functionality goes - them actually getting into assault is a plus.

Once you deepstrike in assault termies within 9" of something, they either have to spend their shooting taking the termies down or reposition, else they are blown to kingdom come (as long as you came in with the right equipment) come your next turn. They are pseudo-offensive units that force your opponent to play defensively instead of being able to focus down your heavy hitters (because once they get in range, they're the heavy hitters). The main problem now is that they cost too darn much to be used for such use.

1+ armour
no penalty to hit with Melee Weapons
Mix and match Assault and Ranged weapons at will, 1 Heavy per 5
6+ FNP

honestly, I'm beginning to think that keeping it simple is the best option.
1. squad size them down to 3 and 5 models per unit, with a heavy weapon option at 3 and 5.
2. reduce them down to 16ppm, their weapon options more than inflate their price to keep them from crowding in on any other units roll space.
3. Make them T6.
with that, no need for special rules and makes them playable but not OP, imo.

Djangomatic82 wrote:
honestly, I'm beginning to think that keeping it simple is the best option.
1. squad size them down to 3 and 5 models per unit, with a heavy weapon option at 3 and 5.
2. reduce them down to 16ppm, their weapon options more than inflate their price to keep them from crowding in on any other units roll space.
3. Make them T6.
with that, no need for special rules and makes them playable but not OP, imo.

T6.

T6!

What are you smoking? That's one point less tough than a DREADNOUGHT. That's tougher than Custodes! That's as tough as a Daemon Prince!

That is more than fine. most of the other suggestions would boost their survivabiliity to greater levels than a simple T6. the actual practical applications are more important. all it does is move the wounding bracket up 1 level for most weapons that are already agreed upon as being too effective against terminators.

Thus far, our groups' change of +1 Wound, and -8 Points (for models in a Terminator squad only - does not apply to characters) has been pretty good. Not enough games to really lay a heavy opinion, but people are taking them. 40 points less per squad, and three wounds makes them far more palatable, without adding any special rules or fancy tricks.

They still die to massed fire, etc...but they do more work.

They didn't die to mass fire at all this edition. Like, at all. You have this bizarre disconnect from the math on it.

What's about a +5 FnP ?

psipso wrote:
What's about a +5 FnP ?

What do Blightlords get, then? They already have a 5+ FNP.

 JNAProductions wrote:

psipso wrote:
What's about a +5 FnP ?

What do Blightlords get, then? They already have a 5+ FNP.

Exactly. These fixes need to be universal as a whole. So that's keeping in mind:
Tactical Terminators
Assault Terminators
Cataphractii Armor Terminators
Tartaros Armor Terminators
Chaos Terminators
Blightlord Terminators
Deathshroud Terminators
Deathwing Knights
Paladins
Space Wolves Terminators
Scarab Occult Terminators
The eventual World Eaters and Emperors Children Terminator variants

That's why I'm always going for the WS/BS2+ and possibly an additional attack.

Making them ignore the -1 on weapons isn't a good fix. It would do nothing for the lightning claw versions, and for all those without a penalty on the snowflake weapon like DW knights. I would say that we keep the current cost and give one more attack to all varaints. Then the crux terminatus changes to reduce incoming damage by 1 (minimum 1). That 5++ was useless in any case.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

psipso wrote:
What's about a +5 FnP ?

What do Blightlords get, then? They already have a 5+ FNP.

Exactly. These fixes need to be universal as a whole. So that's keeping in mind:
Tactical Terminators
Assault Terminators
Cataphractii Armor Terminators
Tartaros Armor Terminators
Chaos Terminators
Blightlord Terminators
Deathshroud Terminators
Deathwing Knights
Paladins
Space Wolves Terminators
Scarab Occult Terminators
The eventual World Eaters and Emperors Children Terminator variants

That's why I'm always going for the WS/BS2+ and possibly an additional attack.

Well, i can see your argument for that, but what are you doing then with Chosen, Sternguard etc.

problem with removing the 5++ is it'd downgrade cataphracti plate to a 5++, which would be kinda meh. I think with improving termies the first step is to ask "what is their role? Do the fill that role? Is a weakness in the rules preventing them from filling their role?"

The role of terminators is to be super heavy infantry, infantry able to tank anti-personal weapons to a point you NEED heavy weapons to take them down. So, are people forced to devote heavy weapons to termies? is their surviability issue purely because people take a LOT of Lascannons? no, most of the issues seems to be a high volume of 2D weaponry, not a LOT of this stuffs job is to take down termies. perhaps add the following rule: Reduce each weapon damage by 1 to a minimum of 1. if the weapon only deals 1 damage, you may re-roll your armor or invul score.

So... If I shoot you with a plasma gun super charged I'll only deal 1 damage, but if I DON'T over charge my plasma, vs a terminator, rthat termy gets to re-roll it's save.

these rules taken together would pretty much make terminators something that you realisticly need anti-tank weaponry for

Not to hi-jack the thread from the starter but if read a few pages of this thread the most wanted/suggested are:

1. Reduced points cost
2. Termies take 1 less damage from all weapons (to a minimum of 1)

These 2 will be what happens I think in CA (least amount of stuffing around for the rules and is easy to implement)

Other mentions:

3. +1 wound (personally I think makes them to much like custodes)
4. Increased charge, no minus to hit from weaps if assault etc, re-roll charge, etc etc
5. A feel no pain equivalent
6. Increase movement and invul
7. A few other very complicated changes

A lot of others. Just I think if going to be in a chapter approved they are not going to change it to much (not 1 million special rules or changes cause affects many armies). The first 2 seem easy.

Just was my summation/skim read of the many pages.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

psipso wrote:
What's about a +5 FnP ?

What do Blightlords get, then? They already have a 5+ FNP.

Exactly. These fixes need to be universal as a whole. So that's keeping in mind:
Tactical Terminators
Assault Terminators
Cataphractii Armor Terminators
Tartaros Armor Terminators
Chaos Terminators
Blightlord Terminators
Deathshroud Terminators
Deathwing Knights
Paladins
Space Wolves Terminators
Scarab Occult Terminators
The eventual World Eaters and Emperors Children Terminator variants

That's why I'm always going for the WS/BS2+ and possibly an additional attack.

Well, i can see your argument for that, but what are you doing then with Chosen, Sternguard etc.

That's for a different thread, but:
1. Vanguard get WS2+ and Sternguard get BS2+, and their Bolters become 1 point and Vanguard have special Chainswords with AP-1. This basically gives them a defined role compared to Command Squads, which can be equipped however and basically do everything better besides not being able to take Jump Packs. Whether that needs a point increase is a different conversation.
2. Chosen need to go down a point, but more importantly I feel they truly represent the basic Chaos Marine as a pissed Vet of the heresy. I would remove the basic Chaos Marine entry entirely and Chosen are now the Troop choice instead. Then Cultists would get a rule that they treat Chaos Infantry and Bikers like Characters, and you gotta shoot them to get at the meaty Marines. So at minimum the Chaos Marines all need Vet stats (+1A and LD). That's a fix for the codex in one fell swoop.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

psipso wrote:
What's about a +5 FnP ?

What do Blightlords get, then? They already have a 5+ FNP.

Exactly. These fixes need to be universal as a whole. So that's keeping in mind:
Tactical Terminators
Assault Terminators
Cataphractii Armor Terminators
Tartaros Armor Terminators
Chaos Terminators
Blightlord Terminators
Deathshroud Terminators
Deathwing Knights
Paladins
Space Wolves Terminators
Scarab Occult Terminators
The eventual World Eaters and Emperors Children Terminator variants

That's why I'm always going for the WS/BS2+ and possibly an additional attack.

Well, i can see your argument for that, but what are you doing then with Chosen, Sternguard etc.

That's for a different thread, but:
1. Vanguard get WS2+ and Sternguard get BS2+, and their Bolters become 1 point and Vanguard have special Chainswords with AP-1. This basically gives them a defined role compared to Command Squads, which can be equipped however and basically do everything better besides not being able to take Jump Packs. Whether that needs a point increase is a different conversation.
2. Chosen need to go down a point, but more importantly I feel they truly represent the basic Chaos Marine as a pissed Vet of the heresy. I would remove the basic Chaos Marine entry entirely and Chosen are now the Troop choice instead. Then Cultists would get a rule that they treat Chaos Infantry and Bikers like Characters, and you gotta shoot them to get at the meaty Marines. So at minimum the Chaos Marines all need Vet stats (+1A and LD). That's a fix for the codex in one fell swoop.

I mean Im kind drunk but what the hell are you talking about in regardes to terminators?

EDIT: THREAD says HOW TO MAKE TERMINATORS BETTER???

Someone asked what I'd do to those units so I answered them.

BrianDavion wrote:
problem with removing the 5++ is it'd downgrade cataphracti plate to a 5++, which would be kinda meh. I think with improving termies the first step is to ask "what is their role? Do the fill that role? Is a weakness in the rules preventing them from filling their role?"

The role of terminators is to be super heavy infantry, infantry able to tank anti-personal weapons to a point you NEED heavy weapons to take them down. So, are people forced to devote heavy weapons to termies? is their surviability issue purely because people take a LOT of Lascannons? no, most of the issues seems to be a high volume of 2D weaponry, not a LOT of this stuffs job is to take down termies. perhaps add the following rule: Reduce each weapon damage by 1 to a minimum of 1. if the weapon only deals 1 damage, you may re-roll your armor or invul score.

So... If I shoot you with a plasma gun super charged I'll only deal 1 damage, but if I DON'T over charge my plasma, vs a terminator, rthat termy gets to re-roll it's save.

these rules taken together would pretty much make terminators something that you realisticly need anti-tank weaponry for

They would also make them stupidly OP. 2+ re-rollable was removed for a reason. If you kill four of your Terminators with Tau Pulse Rifles you could have killed 3 Dreadnoughts, three Terminators by lasguns becomes two Dreadnoughts. This is not because Dreadnoughts are absurdly UP and easy to kill, but because your suggestion is insane. There is already at least one viable Terminator unit in the game, that unit has a 4++ and a 5+ FNP, that's a 50% increase in durability, but they also have a 25% increased cost. A better option would be to give them M20, at least you can still kill them.

Spectral Ceramite wrote:
Not to hi-jack the thread from the starter but if read a few pages of this thread the most wanted/suggested are:

1. Reduced points cost
2. Termies take 1 less damage from all weapons (to a minimum of 1)

These 2 will be what happens I think in CA (least amount of stuffing around for the rules and is easy to implement)

Other mentions:

3. +1 wound (personally I think makes them to much like custodes)
4. Increased charge, no minus to hit from weaps if assault etc, re-roll charge, etc etc
5. A feel no pain equivalent
6. Increase movement and invul
7. A few other very complicated changes

A lot of others. Just I think if going to be in a chapter approved they are not going to change it to much (not 1 million special rules or changes cause affects many armies). The first 2 seem easy.

Just was my summation/skim read of the many pages.

-1 damage is such a stupid idea, it makes every anti-Terminator melee unit in the game horrible at killing Terminators, these units are already bad, do they get -1 damage as well? Letting Terminators DS T1 would be a much better solution, especially since the Beta DS change is going to be printed in the next CA anyways. I don't get why you people are so obsessed with making anti-Terminator weapons bad at killing Terminators. If Terminators get -1 damage and Monoliths don't get buffed through the roof I'm quitting.

Actually, the real reason why -1damage is a bad idea is because you can't do with without giving it to all terminator HQs too (as it would make zero sense), and some of them would quickly spin out of control (abbadon and celgar jump first to mind)
It also makes overcharging plasmas almost pointless against termies, and overcharging plasmas is supposed to be exactly FOR killing termies.

And letting them DS on T1 will undermine the entire reasoning WHY T1 DS gets phased out, its just TOO un-interactive. you are literally invulnerable on T1, and you get to deploy further up the field as an added bonus.



Whatever the change is, it needs to follow these rules:
1-applies to all terminator squads, and if introducing a new rule applies to HQs too, including characters.
2-does not replicate an already existing "special termi" ability (like all is dust or DR) because then the special termi becomes...not special.
3-does not make terminators not terminators. termis are sluggish juggernauts who are nearly impervious to small arms and require specialized gear to take down.

So, -1Damage breaks rule 1, as you can't apply it to HQs without getting absurd as most of them has 4 or more wounds, some even have 6 (before letting warlord traits and special chars come into play). it also only helps against heavy weapons and not against light fire, and that's the opposite of the direction you'd want.

Giving FnP breaks rule 2, because that's the DG terminator's "thing", give it to everyone and suddenly DG termis are boring as hell.

Adding movement speed or other maneuverability options breaks rule 3, because termies are supposed to be slow, heavy units-if you take that away you lose the termi flavor.


The "easy" solutions:

1-The statline field, like improved WS/BS/A or a combo thereof. honestly a rather boring idea, and while it adds some nice lethalty, does not make them any more durable (the main issue), and most termies hit hard enough if they dont drop quickly.

2-The point costs, however they are honestly a bit cheap already. making things cheaper is a never ending spiral that leads to bigger and bigger games and its a bad solution.
3-unit composition, making minimal squads smaller is nice for allowing to take a few easier, but does not make most termis actually better. letting you "mix and match" only helps codex termis, not everyone else and thus solves nothing.

All of these, are bad.
The better, yet more complicated solutions.

1-the inderect buff. one of the main issues of termis is that plasma is perfect againt them, yet is universally so good everyone spams it anyway. (except tau who has gimped plasma). nerfing plasma is a need of the game anyway, and will help termis a bit.

2-a special rule that isn't breaking HQs. now, my idea for one is honestly sounding a bit risky, but hear it out. reroll saves of 1.
Yes, its 2+ rerollable, and that got removed from the game for a good reason. but this is only against non-rending weapons. it makes termis virtually immune to small arms, yet makes them not all that much more durable against actual heavy weapons.
It makes it that you NEED specialized weapons, but if you got them-you'll be just fine.

I think rerolling saves of 1 (and only 1) is the best way to fix termies within the current system (the D6 just does not leave enough wiggle room)
Though a few HQs might need a price bump if you give the termies added durability like that.

Terminators are already basically immune to small arms. They're twice as durable from last edition to them. Only a select few weapons are actually more effective against them.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Actually, the real reason why -1damage is a bad idea is because you can't do with without giving it to all terminator HQs too (as it would make zero sense), and some of them would quickly spin out of control (abbadon and celgar jump first to mind)
It also makes overcharging plasmas almost pointless against termies, and overcharging plasmas is supposed to be exactly FOR killing termies.

And letting them DS on T1 will undermine the entire reasoning WHY T1 DS gets phased out, its just TOO un-interactive. you are literally invulnerable on T1, and you get to deploy further up the field as an added bonus.



Whatever the change is, it needs to follow these rules:
1-applies to all terminator squads, and if introducing a new rule applies to HQs too, including characters.
2-does not replicate an already existing "special termi" ability (like all is dust or DR) because then the special termi becomes...not special.
3-does not make terminators not terminators. termis are sluggish juggernauts who are nearly impervious to small arms and require specialized gear to take down.

So, -1Damage breaks rule 1, as you can't apply it to HQs without getting absurd as most of them has 4 or more wounds, some even have 6 (before letting warlord traits and special chars come into play). it also only helps against heavy weapons and not against light fire, and that's the opposite of the direction you'd want.

Giving FnP breaks rule 2, because that's the DG terminator's "thing", give it to everyone and suddenly DG termis are boring as hell.

Adding movement speed or other maneuverability options breaks rule 3, because termies are supposed to be slow, heavy units-if you take that away you lose the termi flavor.


The "easy" solutions:

1-The statline field, like improved WS/BS/A or a combo thereof. honestly a rather boring idea, and while it adds some nice lethalty, does not make them any more durable (the main issue), and most termies hit hard enough if they dont drop quickly.

2-The point costs, however they are honestly a bit cheap already. making things cheaper is a never ending spiral that leads to bigger and bigger games and its a bad solution.
3-unit composition, making minimal squads smaller is nice for allowing to take a few easier, but does not make most termis actually better. letting you "mix and match" only helps codex termis, not everyone else and thus solves nothing.

All of these, are bad.
The better, yet more complicated solutions.

1-the inderect buff. one of the main issues of termis is that plasma is perfect againt them, yet is universally so good everyone spams it anyway. (except tau who has gimped plasma). nerfing plasma is a need of the game anyway, and will help termis a bit.

2-a special rule that isn't breaking HQs. now, my idea for one is honestly sounding a bit risky, but hear it out. reroll saves of 1.
Yes, its 2+ rerollable, and that got removed from the game for a good reason. but this is only against non-rending weapons. it makes termis virtually immune to small arms, yet makes them not all that much more durable against actual heavy weapons.
It makes it that you NEED specialized weapons, but if you got them-you'll be just fine.

I think rerolling saves of 1 (and only 1) is the best way to fix termies within the current system (the D6 just does not leave enough wiggle room)
Though a few HQs might need a price bump if you give the termies added durability like that.

It isn't much better on HQs than it is on regular Terminators. Characters that are near-unkillable are much less toxic than units that are near unkillable. The more likely a unit is to die the more important a buff to durability is for that unit, Terminator HQs are less likely to die in the first place, so even though they would also benefit against D3 weapons, D6 weapons and more against random damage weapons, D4 and D5 would continue to do the same damage and you're less likely to get attacked in the first place. A Terminator Captain is much easier to ignore than a squad of Terminators.

DS is not uninteractive, DS with long-ranged shooting units is, the more range the more uninteractive. You can't hide, you can't screen. There less range, the more counterplay, you get to screen which limits the options of your opponent and makes it a good option to maybe wait and come in later. Outflanking Shadowsword. How do you counterplay that? No hiding because you don't know where it'll arrive, no screening because of its long range. Terminators weren't unfun to play against back when we all had indexes, CSM warptime Terminator bomb was even pretty fun, you still had counterplay and when it was your turn you got to rapid-fire at them and kill them.

2- https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

Re-rollable 2+ is gak. You're just making them rock-paper scissors units because you've decided that pts can't be changed for no reason, you've decided feth you to anyone who hasn't brough the neccessary amount of anti-tank. Pts can and should be changed when a unit is bad, it's not powercreep unless the unit you are buffing becomes meta, if all we're buffing is gak units to become not gak then it's fine. It's only a problem when decent units get buffed to become OP so they compete with other OP units. Terminators are perfectly fine rules-wise, giving them WS/BS 2+ cheapens characters and it's not like Terminator characters are being taken in droves right now, because as I if they don't get targeted they only need 1 W, so Terminator characters actually need as much of a buff as all other Terminators do. How you come to the conclusion that a 40+ pt model is cheap is beyond me. That's more than half the cost of a barebones Captain. They are infantry, not vehicles and there needs to be room for things like Centurions as well, which I imagine you've all forgotten about. Remember the super-Terminators that are also, if not even more atrocious?

Nerfing plasma is a good idea though. Kudos.

Giving them WS/BS2+ doesn't cheapen Characters, it makes them less dependent on them. MAJOR difference.