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.

Bharring wrote:
It isn't just IoM Plasma, but it isn't all plasma.

T'au Plasma is only D1, but DE plasma is D2, and some CWE Plasma is D2, too.

A third wound does a lot. Takes 50% more small arms to kill one. 100% more for most plasma.

Compare them to some other units: WraithGuard have T6 but only a 3+, and their TH/SS equivelents are a 3+/4++. They have 3 wounds. How much do they cost, and how effective are they?

The Tau equivalent for plasma is the Ion weapons, not the plasma weaponry. Specifically the Cyclic Ion Blaster. Same mechanics, overcharge with self damage and D2.

In that sense, most armies have reasonable(or better)-volume D2 weapons.

If I had my way, many of those D2 weapons would be D1, to help fix much more than just Termies (although that alone wouldn't make Termies good). But that kind of change is out of scope of what people want here.

I return to "What role should Termies play?" mixed with "WHat units do that well?"

The roles I see for Termies aren't done well by any units right now.

Martel732 wrote:
Broken record time. A third wound fixes the majority of their issues. Not ws/bs 2.

And then Meganobz should be 4W, grotesques should get +1W as well, all the bikes, etc....

Termies are fine with 2W considering other units' profiles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
The dissy cannon is still my bar for everything.

Lol, diss cannons are an option that only a single army has. Plasma, missiles or lascannons should be the bar of everything since they're way more common and have some sort of equivalents among different armies. With orks and SW I don't have anything similar to a diss cannon.

Bharring wrote:
...Compare them to some other units: WraithGuard have T6 but only a 3+, and their TH/SS equivelents are a 3+/4++. They have 3 wounds. How much do they cost, and how effective are they?

45pts compared to 41pts for a TH/SS Terminator, for that you get the aforementioned one worse save, T6, W3, two attacks at 4+ S7/AP-3/Dd3 and +1A for charging instead of two at 4+ S8/AP-3/D3, and no Deep Strike. They're marginally tougher, less killy, and require more effort to get into combat.

As to how they perform on the tabletop I couldn't tell you, I've never seen anyone use Wraithblades in 8e.

On the whole, Wraithblades and Termies look about fair,compared to eachother.

So any buff you think Termies should get, imagine facing Wraithblades(/meganobs/etc) with the same buff.

W3 Termies? W4 Wraithblades seems a bit much.

Get-into-CC-free trick for Termies? Imagine if Wraithblades could do it too.

Bharring wrote:
In that sense, most armies have reasonable(or better)-volume D2 weapons.

If I had my way, many of those D2 weapons would be D1, to help fix much more than just Termies (although that alone wouldn't make Termies good). But that kind of change is out of scope of what people want here.

I return to "What role should Termies play?" mixed with "WHat units do that well?"

The roles I see for Termies aren't done well by any units right now.

I'm down for a complete rewrite. Which is basically what you propose.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
On the whole, Wraithblades and Termies look about fair,compared to eachother.

So any buff you think Termies should get, imagine facing Wraithblades(/meganobs/etc) with the same buff.

W3 Termies? W4 Wraithblades seems a bit much.

Get-into-CC-free trick for Termies? Imagine if Wraithblades could do it too.

Why? Grotesques are 4 wounds, and cost a pack of skittles.

Bharring wrote:
On the whole, Wraithblades and Termies look about fair,compared to eachother.

So any buff you think Termies should get, imagine facing Wraithblades(/meganobs/etc) with the same buff.

W3 Termies? W4 Wraithblades seems a bit much.

Get-into-CC-free trick for Termies? Imagine if Wraithblades could do it too.

And seeing as noone plays either, why not?

"And seeing as noone plays either, why not?"
I think you're misunderstanding me.

Lets take W3 Termies. If you can show that W4 Wraithblades aren't a problem, then you've highly suggested W3 Termies aren't a problem. *And* you've dispelled a great deal of "My Army" bias that plagues these discussions.

On the other hand, if someone shows that W4 Wraithblades would break the game (I doubt it), then they've strongly suggested W3 Termies would also be a problem.

It's not an argument to keep Termies from getting a buff; it's a process to help ensure any buff is appropriate.

Thinking over W4 Wraithblades makes me much more receptive to W3 Termies (even though all my Wraiths are Wraithcannons, and I play my Termies as is (casually)).

I'm actually starting to like W3 Termies as a for-now solution, even more than WS/BS2+ (which I dislike for fluff reasons, not mechanics reasons, but would accept as reasonable).

Also: compare/contrast Termies to Grots. What makes Grots good and Termies bad? I seriously mean, if you want to make Termies better, lets see what makes Grots better than Termies.

 Blackie wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Broken record time. A third wound fixes the majority of their issues. Not ws/bs 2.

And then Meganobz should be 4W, grotesques should get +1W as well, all the bikes, etc....

Termies are fine with 2W considering other units' profiles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
The dissy cannon is still my bar for everything.

Lol, diss cannons are an option that only a single army has. Plasma, missiles or lascannons should be the bar of everything since they're way more common and have some sort of equivalents among different armies. With orks and SW I don't have anything similar to a diss cannon.

No grotesques would go down to 3 as well. Meganobz at 4 would be fine. Custodes should be 5 or 6.
, not 3. 2 wounds is NOT fine given the weaponry.

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
In that sense, most armies have reasonable(or better)-volume D2 weapons.

If I had my way, many of those D2 weapons would be D1, to help fix much more than just Termies (although that alone wouldn't make Termies good). But that kind of change is out of scope of what people want here.

I return to "What role should Termies play?" mixed with "WHat units do that well?"

The roles I see for Termies aren't done well by any units right now.

I'm down for a complete rewrite. Which is basically what you propose.

I've got a pack of notes for one, but the problem I keep running into is that there are too many different profiles/different weapons for them to be usefully distinct from each other so I'm going to need to pass judgement on which profiles/weapons are relevant and which could be deleted.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
In that sense, most armies have reasonable(or better)-volume D2 weapons.

If I had my way, many of those D2 weapons would be D1, to help fix much more than just Termies (although that alone wouldn't make Termies good). But that kind of change is out of scope of what people want here.

I return to "What role should Termies play?" mixed with "WHat units do that well?"

The roles I see for Termies aren't done well by any units right now.

I'm down for a complete rewrite. Which is basically what you propose.

I've got a pack of notes for one, but the problem I keep running into is that there are too many different profiles/different weapons for them to be usefully distinct from each other so I'm going to need to pass judgement on which profiles/weapons are relevant and which could be deleted.

Use a d10 or d12. Problem fixed.

Bharring wrote:
"And seeing as noone plays either, why not?"
I think you're misunderstanding me.

Lets take W3 Termies. If you can show that W4 Wraithblades aren't a problem, then you've highly suggested W3 Termies aren't a problem. *And* you've dispelled a great deal of "My Army" bias that plagues these discussions.

On the other hand, if someone shows that W4 Wraithblades would break the game (I doubt it), then they've strongly suggested W3 Termies would also be a problem.

It's not an argument to keep Termies from getting a buff; it's a process to help ensure any buff is appropriate.

Thinking over W4 Wraithblades makes me much more receptive to W3 Termies (even though all my Wraiths are Wraithcannons, and I play my Termies as is (casually)).

I'm actually starting to like W3 Termies as a for-now solution, even more than WS/BS2+ (which I dislike for fluff reasons, not mechanics reasons, but would accept as reasonable).

Also: compare/contrast Termies to Grots. What makes Grots good and Termies bad? I seriously mean, if you want to make Termies better, lets see what makes Grots better than Termies.

the move from 2 to 3 wounds is a bigger step than the move from 3 to 4 wounds. There are not a lot of D3 weapons out there. And I don't get your grotz vs termies reference. They have completely different combat role, slot , points cost, armament, armor etc. Why do you even bring this up?

Grotesques, and because I've seen them used in a similar manner, at times, to what Termies do. A beefy unit you don't want to meet in CC.

They aren't a great analogue. And really only fit at all under the right circumstances.

Perhaps they shouldn't be part of this conversation.

As for D3 weapons - while there aren't many, the few that come up off the top of my head are the sorts that *should* oneshot a Termie.

Martel732 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
In that sense, most armies have reasonable(or better)-volume D2 weapons.

If I had my way, many of those D2 weapons would be D1, to help fix much more than just Termies (although that alone wouldn't make Termies good). But that kind of change is out of scope of what people want here.

I return to "What role should Termies play?" mixed with "WHat units do that well?"

The roles I see for Termies aren't done well by any units right now.

I'm down for a complete rewrite. Which is basically what you propose.

I've got a pack of notes for one, but the problem I keep running into is that there are too many different profiles/different weapons for them to be usefully distinct from each other so I'm going to need to pass judgement on which profiles/weapons are relevant and which could be deleted.

Use a d10 or d12. Problem fixed.

The problem is less with the dice and more with things that don't have a sensible, functional role in the game. Veteran statlines (Guardsmen/Conscripts/Veterans as separate units, Marines/Veterans as separate units) had a function back when Leadership meant something and 2A made you a better melee unit than 1A instead of marginally less of a joke, but right now they're an artifact of earlier rules that don't appear to have a purpose.

Bharring wrote:
Grotesques, and because I've seen them used in a similar manner, at times, to what Termies do. A beefy unit you don't want to meet in CC.

They aren't a great analogue. And really only fit at all under the right circumstances.

Perhaps they shouldn't be part of this conversation.

As for D3 weapons - while there aren't many, the few that come up off the top of my head are the sorts that *should* oneshot a Termie.

Oh. I thought you meant grotz. As in the Orkz' toilet paper substitute.

D3 weapons that cost 25+ pts and sit on top of 150+ pt tanks should have all the right in the world to kill terminators. I don't want unkillable terminators, I want useful ones.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
In that sense, most armies have reasonable(or better)-volume D2 weapons.

If I had my way, many of those D2 weapons would be D1, to help fix much more than just Termies (although that alone wouldn't make Termies good). But that kind of change is out of scope of what people want here.

I return to "What role should Termies play?" mixed with "WHat units do that well?"

The roles I see for Termies aren't done well by any units right now.

I'm down for a complete rewrite. Which is basically what you propose.

I've got a pack of notes for one, but the problem I keep running into is that there are too many different profiles/different weapons for them to be usefully distinct from each other so I'm going to need to pass judgement on which profiles/weapons are relevant and which could be deleted.

Use a d10 or d12. Problem fixed.

The problem is less with the dice and more with things that don't have a sensible, functional role in the game. Veteran statlines (Guardsmen/Conscripts/Veterans as separate units, Marines/Veterans as separate units) had a function back when Leadership meant something and 2A made you a better melee unit than 1A instead of marginally less of a joke, but right now they're an artifact of earlier rules that don't appear to have a purpose.

I can come up with systems to differentiate that in a D6. It all depends on how deep I am allowed to go with the system.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also remember terminators aren't removing valuable models at range easily. So them being very, very durable is not meta-breaking.

Grotesques should ABSOLUTELY be in the conversation. Everything costs points, regardless of role. I pay points for my units, not "role points".

Martel732 wrote:
...I can come up with systems to differentiate that in a D6. It all depends on how deep I am allowed to go with the system.

Exactly. It made a difference in 4e when units could get wiped by morale and when units were either 1A or 2A, but 2A doesn't make a difference when a good melee unit has 4A or 5A and morale in 8e is a joke or an afterthought, but I don't think trying to sell people on "let's roll the game back three or four editions" is going to fly.

My current thinking is to take a leaf out of the 9th Age people's book, walk back one edition, and try and fork something off of 7e without stripping off as much function as 8e did.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:
Third wound makes them 100% more survivable against overcharging plasma. Let's start with that and see how it goes from there.

I would argue that terminators should have a third wound, 4++ base and an extra attack on top of it to justify their points costs.

Except Plasma has always been the tool meant to kill them, and it's only overcharged Imperial Plasma (which isn't even an issue). Tau Plasma is significantly less powerful killing them, as are Starcannons due to the new wounding chart and DD3 profile.

Now if only half the factions in the game weren't imperial... And it's one thing "a tool meant to kill them" and quite another to casually kill 2 terminators with a single plasma gun and have it available to everyone. "a tool meant to kill everything in this edition, and here's reroll 1's for everyone just for the heck of it" seems more accurate description of plasma atm.

And the Tau plasma that says "Plasma" on the title is not real plasma. If you want the Tau equivalent to the plasma gun, look at the CIB.

Now only if there were that much spammed Plasma in the first place...oh wait there isn't.

Also that's the fault of Melta, Grav, and Flamers being overcosted, not that Plasma was broken. If you made a Plasma Gun 20 points, Grav Guns still wouldn't see the light of day.

Also I do consider Tau Plasma Guns to be the overall equivalent, because that's what they were used for. The new wounding chart and D1 made them significantly less powerful to a Terminator. The Ion Blaster is also not much more effective than it used to be either due to the DD3 profile. You overstate how much more powerful it is like the whiners about Autocannons vs Terminators. If you did the math, it is literally a difference of .07 Terminators dead when firing two shots at BS4+.

I would do something VERY different.

Conscripts: if morale failed, they fall back, and continue on their next turn automatically. The turn after that turn, they may roll to rally.

Regulars: if morale failed, they fall back, but may roll on their next turn to rally.

Vets: if morale failed, they fall back or go to ground, players choice. They may rally at the end of the turn in which they were broken. They get a +2 bonus to rally if they fell back, and a +1 to rally if they instead went to ground.

Martel732 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Broken record time. A third wound fixes the majority of their issues. Not ws/bs 2.

And then Meganobz should be 4W, grotesques should get +1W as well, all the bikes, etc....

Termies are fine with 2W considering other units' profiles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
The dissy cannon is still my bar for everything.

Lol, diss cannons are an option that only a single army has. Plasma, missiles or lascannons should be the bar of everything since they're way more common and have some sort of equivalents among different armies. With orks and SW I don't have anything similar to a diss cannon.

No grotesques would go down to 3 as well. Meganobz at 4 would be fine. Custodes should be 5 or 6.
, not 3. 2 wounds is NOT fine given the weaponry.

...And seeing you're SERIOUSLY suggesting 5 wound Custodes, you should just leave the thread because you haven't a clue what you're talking about. At all. Just stop.

I think I have a much better clue than you. Since you brought up clues. And yes, Custodes should have more wounds than grotesques. Full stop. If grotesques go down to 3, custodes can be 4.

Martel732 wrote:
The dissy cannon is still my bar for everything.

There are three kinds of units to me:

1) units erased by dissy that I don't care about, ie guardsmen
2) units erased that I do care about, ie all non storm shield marines
3) units that are not erased that I care about, like iks and rhinos.

3 wounds is a massive advantage over 2 wounds in 8th. The dissy cannon is a proxy for all kinds of other obnoxious stuff, too. 2 damage weapons are super good in 8th, and they ruin terminators, not the bs/ws.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:
Third wound makes them 100% more survivable against overcharging plasma. Let's start with that and see how it goes from there.

I would argue that terminators should have a third wound, 4++ base and an extra attack on top of it to justify their points costs.

Except Plasma has always been the tool meant to kill them, and it's only overcharged Imperial Plasma (which isn't even an issue). Tau Plasma is significantly less powerful killing them, as are Starcannons due to the new wounding chart and DD3 profile.

It wasnt in 2nd.

And i dont care to compare to previous editions. Their delta durability is not intersting in the current situation.

You need to compare previous editions whether you like it or not, because the durability for the points HAS significantly increased. Get. Over. It.

Also just because ONE weapon wasn't fixed with Chapter Approved doesn't mean we need to bump all Terminators like that. You're supposed to hit the broken weapon. Duh.

No, you don't. Not at all. Yeah, it's better. So what? Is it good enough yet? No. Because these weapons exist in the current edition. I wouldn't use your WS2/BS2 terminators because a huge collection of weapons still evaporate them. WS 2 means nothing if I don't get to CC, and BS 2 doesn't mean much on stormbolters. And I don't see why terminators would have the same fighting profile as captains.

OMG 3 wound terminators! Such a bump! All the Hawkshroud castellans are quaking in their boots. Get real.

Martel732 wrote:
I think I have a much better clue than you. Since you brought up clues. And yes, Custodes should have more wounds than grotesques. Full stop. If grotesques go down to 3, custodes can be 4.

Grotesques also have little killing power compared to Custodes.

In fact, I'm like almost certain you didn't actually compare them and just started to whine for the sake of whining. In fact, if you did an actual side by side comparison, you'd see the Custodes still has a lot of advantages even for being 52 points.

They should still have more wounds given their descriptions in the fluff. And thematically. And for balance.

Of course I've compared them. I've fought against both.

Martel732 wrote:
No, you don't. Not at all. Yeah, it's better. So what? Is it good enough yet? No. Because these weapons exist in the current edition. I wouldn't use your WS2/BS2 terminators because a huge collection of weapons still evaporate them.

OMG 3 wound terminators! Such a bump! All the Hawkshroud castellans are quaking in their boots. Get real.

And then you wouldn't use them with W3 because they aren't killing anything and tarpits don't exist anymore.

Also you're once again using a CLEARLY broken model as your base. Your base should be the units that are sorta near the top, not the ones that are stupid.

It's almost like complaining about Marine durability when it was really the basic offense that went down with 8th. Funny how that works.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
They should still have more wounds given their descriptions in the fluff. And thematically. And for balance.

Of course I've compared them. I've fought against both.

You didn't compare them because you didn't do the math behind it, and now you whine Grotesques are too durable when they already have no killing power overall. That's the tradeoff.

I'm allowed to draw different conclusions from math and value different properties differently. You don't have to agree, but your condescending attitude does NOT enhance your position.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Don't forget in all this that broadsides have SIX wounds. I can justify a lot of wound values with those in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There are other posters who see where I'm coming from with 3W as well. Do they also not have a clue? Just curious.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm allowed to draw different conclusions from math and value different properties differently. You don't have to agree, but your condescending attitude does NOT enhance your position.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Don't forget in all this that broadsides have SIX wounds. I can justify a lot of wound values with those in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
There are other posters who see where I'm coming from with 3W as well. Do they also not have a clue? Just curious.

Yes, the other people suggesting three wounds don't know what they're talking about either. I've already said that.

Also Broadsides are significantly larger and more heavily armored. It isn't unreasonable for them to have 6 wounds especially at their large cost.

So you know better than all of us? Got it.

Martel732 wrote:
So you know better than all of us? Got it.

I will say with confidence my ideas are a lot better than almost all the suggested Marine fixes overall because other people don't look at the underlying problems and what to fix that doesn't scale horribly. W3 Terminators scales horribly once you think about it for more than 2 seconds. That's W3 Blightlords, W4 Paladins, W3 Scarabs, and so on.

Then you look at other faction equivalents. W4 Meganobz, W3 Lychguard, and we would need to look at Tyranid multiwound critters as a whole.