Terminators in 7th edition - How can we help!

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.

**Frozen Ocean**

+1T is fine because they exist in the game. Deathwing Knights (and that Space Wolf formation version of DW Knights that is just better for no cost) and Nurgle Terminators haven't broken the game. A Space Marine on a bike should not be tougher than a Terminator. I'd like to see it on Obliterators and other "Not-Terminators", though. +2T is probably too much. A Toughness increase also means that there's an actual reason to take Terminator armour over artificer armour.

One suggestion for preventing character abuse - what if characters in Terminator armour receive the Toughness increase, but only if they are already below T5? I'm not sure if Abaddon or Typhus should be allowed to bypass this due to their Mark of Nurgle, mostly because they don't really need it.

If you do want to go with +2T, perhaps changing the MoN on Terminators from +1T to Feel No Pain (+?) would be better. This might be worth considering for the aforementioned Deathwing Knights and Space Wolf Shieldbrothers formation, as well as Grey Knights, who really don't need the buff.

I'd like to see storm bolters go to Salvo 2/4 with an appropriate buff to combi-bolters so the Chaos Terminators don't lose out. Perhaps Terminators could fire Assault/Rapid Fire weapons twice, instead? An increase in BS would increase their firepower too, though, so that might be enough.

**Filch**

good luck with that.

**vipoid**

Frozen Ocean wrote:
+1T is fine because they exist in the game. Deathwing Knights (and that Space Wolf formation version of DW Knights that is just better for no cost) and Nurgle Terminators haven't broken the game.

In the case of the former, the +1T isn't permanent. They only get it when they're in base contact with 2 or more other deathwing knights. So, they have to bunch together, and can easily lose the bonus if they lose some members or enter combat. Also, they are much more limited in terms of weapons - carrying only power mauls, rather than fists or thunder hammers.

Using this as an excuse to give all terminators +1T seems dubious at best.

Frozen Ocean wrote:
A Space Marine on a bike should not be tougher than a Terminator

Agreed. So, let's just end the stupidity of bikes giving marines T5. They already confer plenty of bonuses in Relentless, Jink, HoW, speed etc., and the extra toughness is neither necessary nor fluffy.

**AnomanderRake**

The biggest problem with Terminators is the all-or-nothing save system makes it difficult to accurately price things with 2+ saves and AP2 guns. Terminators were pretty good at their present price back in 4e when AP2 guns either had to eat Gets Hot! rolls that didn't allow armour saves on the firer or forced the user to get uncomfortably close to a Terminator unit; nowadays with Suncannons and Ion Accelerators and Exocrines and Psychic Shriek consequence-free ways to kill Terminators from half the table away are fairly common.

That said I'm not here to propose giving Terminators two Wounds, T5, and 4++ saves, that would be silly. All I want is a standard ordinary powerfist/storm bolter Terminator to cost 35pts, with a 5pt upgrade to hammer/shield, and the option to take two upgrade guns at current prices regardless of squad size.

**pelicaniforce**

Frozen Ocean wrote:An increase in BS would increase their firepower too, though, so that might be enough.

When you are talking about bolt guns in a squad, specifically twin-linked bolt guns in a squad, bs5 had might as well not have happened.

Frozen Ocean wrote:Perhaps Terminators could fire Assault/Rapid Fire weapons twice, instead?

only for bolt guns (and las guns?) one hopes, or combi plasma is really silly. Combi-gravs firing twice per turn would, I guess, be the most logical thing to use against... riptides.

vipoid wrote:
Frozen Ocean wrote:
+1T is fine because they exist in the game. Deathwing Knights (and that Space Wolf formation version of DW Knights that is just better for no cost) and Nurgle Terminators haven't broken the game.

In the case of the former, the +1T isn't permanent. They only get it when they're in base contact with 2 or more other deathwing knights. So, they have to bunch together, and can easily lose the bonus if they lose some members or enter combat. Also, they are much more limited in terms of weapons - carrying only power mauls, rather than fists or thunder hammers.

Using this as an excuse to give all terminators +1T seems dubious at best.

I think the excuse is that most armor (carapace?) doesn't do anything to prevent your bones and spine from being snapped if you are flattened by an s7 ap6 hit that doesn't ever touch your skin. TDA seems to provide some rigidity to the limbs and the spine that other things don't.

vipoid wrote:
Frozen Ocean wrote:
A Space Marine on a bike should not be tougher than a Terminator

Agreed. So, let's just end the stupidity of bikes giving marines T5. They already confer plenty of bonuses in Relentless, Jink, HoW, speed etc., and the extra toughness is neither necessary nor fluffy.

**casvalremdeikun**

I think increasing their Ballistic Skill and Toughness by one is probably the way to go. These guys are the most elite troops in the army. They should not have the same basic stat line as a veteran sergeant. Otherwise a five point reduction per marine. If not both of these things.

**pelicaniforce**

Veteran sergeants are almost always former Terminators.

?

**Jambles**

Make storm bolters rapid fire! I guess that would change a lot more than just terminators, but it makes deep-striking in your unit to chew up an infantry squad or a light vehicle more reliable. As for defensive upgrades, I see Grey Knight terminators as a good example - an extra wound makes a big difference without being totally borked.

**Frozen Ocean**

vipoid wrote:
Frozen Ocean wrote:
+1T is fine because they exist in the game. Deathwing Knights (and that Space Wolf formation version of DW Knights that is just better for no cost) and Nurgle Terminators haven't broken the game.

In the case of the former, the +1T isn't permanent. They only get it when they're in base contact with 2 or more other deathwing knights. So, they have to bunch together, and can easily lose the bonus if they lose some members or enter combat. Also, they are much more limited in terms of weapons - carrying only power mauls, rather than fists or thunder hammers.

Using this as an excuse to give all terminators +1T seems dubious at best.

Nurgle Terminators and Arjac's Shield Brothers (while admittedly stupid) still haven't broken the game. And judging by the playtest results in this thread, it being a common Terminator trait doesn't either.

vipoid wrote:
Frozen Ocean wrote:
A Space Marine on a bike should not be tougher than a Terminator

Agreed. So, let's just end the stupidity of bikes giving marines T5. They already confer plenty of bonuses in Relentless, Jink, HoW, speed etc., and the extra toughness is neither necessary nor fluffy.

They've been this way for a long time and, while good, they really don't need a nerf, especially not just so they can make Terminators look better.

**vipoid**

Frozen Ocean wrote:

Nurgle Terminators and Arjac's Shield Brothers (while admittedly stupid) still haven't broken the game. And judging by the playtest results in this thread, it being a common Terminator trait doesn't either.

Is 'haven't broken the game' really the best measure of whether a particular trait is a good idea?

I mean, MoN may not have broken the game, but it certainly broke the CSM book by being miles ahead of the other marks in terms of power level.

Frozen Ocean wrote:

They've been this way for a long time and, while good, they really don't need a nerf, especially not just so they can make Terminators look better.

That it's not new doesn't make it in any way necessary either. Especially since the recent editions have added yet more buffs to bikes.

Sorry, but bikes have received far too many buffs, alongside significant point drops, that make them too good for their cost.

**murphs**

Maths was never my strong point but I tried to do numbers to see how Terminators actually hold up against small arms fire which is the exact type of fire you would expect them to hold up against.

formula = (shots * hit chance * wound chance * failed save)

10 Marines Rapid Firing Bolters

VS Terminators @ 40 points each:
20 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 1/6 = 1.11111 Dead Terminators
40 * 1.111111 = 44.444 points damage done

VS Marines @ 14 points each
20 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 1/3 = 2.22222 Dead Marines
14 * 2.22222 = 31.111 points damage done

VS Ork Boyz @ 6 points each
20 * 2/3 * 1/2 = 6.666666667 Dead Orks
6 * 6.666666667 = 40 points damage done

10 Guardsmen Rapid Firing Lasguns

VS Terminators @ 40 points each:
20 * 1/2 * 1/3 * 1/6 =0.555555556 Dead Terminators
40 * 0.555555556= 22.22222222 points damage done

VS Marines@ 14 points each:
20 * 1/2 * 1/3 * 1/3 =1.111111111 Dead Marines
14 * 0.555555556= 15.55555556 points damage done

VS Orks Boyz @ 6 points each:
20 * 1/2 * 1/3 * 5/6 =2.777777778 Dead Boyz
6 * 2.777777778= 16.66666667points damage done

For cost Terminators are more fragile against small arms fire than both Marines and Ork Boyz. (I don't trust my maths but I think it's all right)

**AnomanderRake**

Math checking out here. So Terminators are more fragile than regular Space Marines, and if a Storm Bolter is worth about a bolter and a half Terminators are putting out half the firepower per point as Tactical Marines before upgrade guns are factored in, then the reason must lie in the power fists (which make Terminators do around three times as much damage per point as Tactical Marines before the Initiative problem is factored in).

The problem is that 40k today is won on the strength of your guns, not on the strength of your power fists.

**endlesswaltz123**

Any weapon attacking them with an AP of 4 or higher (5 or 6) they can re-roll their armour save.

0.185185185 would die from a full squad of bolters rapid firing though there would be special/heavy weapons in the squad presumably as well so I think it would go a long way towards not having them ruined by mass of fire, they could be a pain in combat granted if the opponent is only rocking CCW's, but to be honest for the damage output termies actually put out for their points, having the enemy have to actually bring there big guns out to counter them is exactly what they should be doing fluff wise and on the table top.

And of course against weapons like power weapons, they would still only get the 1 2+ save, so it would sort of make power swords worth it against them in a strange way, especially of the termies are rocking powerfists or thunder hammers and their enemy can still bring weight of attacks with those power swords.

**vipoid**

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Any weapon attacking them with an AP of 4 or higher (5 or 6) they can re-roll their armour save.

0.185185185 would die from a full squad of bolters rapid firing though there would be special/heavy weapons in the squad presumably as well so I think it would go a long way towards not having them ruined by mass of fire, they could be a pain in combat granted if the opponent is only rocking CCW's, but to be honest for the damage output termies actually put out for their points, having the enemy have to actually bring there big guns out to counter them is exactly what they should be doing fluff wise and on the table top.

And of course against weapons like power weapons, they would still only get the 1 2+ save, so it would sort of make power swords worth it against them in a strange way, especially of the termies are rocking powerfists or thunder hammers and their enemy can still bring weight of attacks with those power swords.

Because Lasguns and Bolters aren't quite useless enough at the moment.

**endlesswaltz123**

Bolters and lasguns aren't meant to be taking out terminators, or riptides or whatever else for that matter. That's one of the reasons the game can actually be such a joke at times weapons can be too diverse and thus capable. Cheap weapons like lasguns and bolters can be more powerful in a lot of ways than the one guy with the plasma gun in the squad, as it's so easy and cheap to bring so many of them.

Bolters should be amazing at taking out GEQ, lasguns should be average at killing GEQ's, and should give MEQ's trouble with weight of fire, but like I said, TEQ's require your big guns or your specialised weaponry, and well, if you are crying that your 30 bog standard marines can't take out a termie squad in 1 round of shooting, maybe you should bring a plasma gun or grav gun or two.

**vipoid**

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Bolters and lasguns aren't meant to be taking out terminators, or riptides or whatever else for that matter. That's one of the reasons the game can actually be such a joke at times weapons can be too diverse and thus capable. Cheap weapons like lasguns and bolters can be more powerful in a lot of ways than the one guy with the plasma gun in the squad, as there are just so many of them.

They're not meant to take out riptides, but they should be able to take out terminators with sufficient numbers.

Currently, it takes 36 lasgun shots to take out a terminator. That is not unreasonable.

What you're asking is for it to take 216 shots to take out a single terminator. Even in rapid fire range and with FRFSRF, that's 360pts of guardsmen to take out a single 40pt infantry model. And that's optimal conditions. If you're not in rapid fire and don't have FRFSRF, then you'll need over 1000pts of guardsmen.

1080pts of guardsmen. To kill 1 40pt infantry model. Can you really not see how utterly ridiculous that would be?

Are you planning to increase the cost of terminators to 120+ points?

If not, then this is an awful idea.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

Bolters should be amazing at taking out GEQ, lasguns should be average at killing GEQ's, and have should give MEQ's trouble with weight of fire, but like I said, TEQ's require your big guns or your specialised weaponry, and well, if you are crying that your 30 bog standard marines can't take out a termie squad in 1 round of shooting, maybe you should bring a plasma gun or grav gun or two.

Sorry, no. I'm sure it's nice to imagine terminators as these invincible monoliths, but that doesn't work in a game. Especially for a model that costs a measly 40pts, and sometimes even less.

If you want that kind if survivability, you'd better be prepared to pay heavily for it.

**endlesswaltz123**

With a guard army, even with these rules, are your A) seriously scared of the damage output of that one terminator squad to throw everything at it in 1 turn? and B) do you not think you couldn't still take out said terminator squad in one turn?

It's only lasguns and heavy bolters that will be nerved by the rule, everything else kills them exactly the same as they do now.

**vipoid**

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
With a guard army, even with these rules, are your A) seriously scared of the damage output of that one terminator squad to throw everything at it in 1 turn?

Well, with the rule you're suggesting, I'd have to throw every lasgun at it just to kill a single one.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
and B) do you not think you couldn't still take out said terminator squad in one turn?

The rule you're suggesting is basically invalidating all of the following:
- Lasguns
- Laspistols
- Bolters
- Bolt Pistol
- Emperor's Benediction
- Heavy Bolters
- Autocannons
- Exterminator Autocannons
- Hydra Autocannons
- Taurox Battle Cannon
- Flamers
- Heavy Flamers
- Multilasers
- Eradicator Nova Cannon
- Grenadier Gauntlets
- Heavy Stubber
- Inferno Cannon
- Multiple Rocket Pod
- Taurox Gatling Cannon
- Punisher Gatling Cannon
- Ripper Gun
- Shotgun
- Storm Bolter
- Mortars
- Stormshard Mortars

Amazingly, when you strip all those out, many of my armies wouldn't have a huge amount of firepower left over to kill terminators. Let alone in one turn. Especially if I wanted to take out vehicles - since you're basically creating infantry that are virtually immune to any weapons that aren't anti-tank rounds.

I've no idea how a Necron player would deal with them, since they have very little AP2 at the best of times.

**endlesswaltz123**

Actually, yeah I admit my mistake there. For some reason I was thinking Autocannons and the like would be fine as they are ST7, when obviously my rule states it's AP4 and above so they would be nerfed... Had a long day. My bad.

**AnomanderRake**

Honestly the combination of broadly-available AP2 Large Blasts are a bigger problem for Terminator durability than not being able to hold up to lasgun/bolter-fire. If I were to suggest a minor rules change that didn't require rebalancing everything else pumping the base Inv to 4+ and leaving them at the current cost wouldn't be a bad suggestion.

**koooaei**

As if all that small arms fire is coming from a couple of models. Simple positioning will save your termies from half of the opponent's fire unless you're deepstriking somewhere in the open 1' away from the bunched up blob without support on your part.

**vipoid**

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Actually, yeah I admit my mistake there. For some reason I was thinking Autocannons and the like would be fine as they are ST7, when obviously my rule states it's AP4 and above so they would be nerfed... Had a long day. My bad.

No worries.

AnomanderRake wrote:
Honestly the combination of broadly-available AP2 Large Blasts are a bigger problem for Terminator durability than not being able to hold up to lasgun/bolter-fire. If I were to suggest a minor rules change that didn't require rebalancing everything else pumping the base Inv to 4+ and leaving them at the current cost wouldn't be a bad suggestion.

That could work.

Though, I wonder if our attention should actually be focussed elsewhere - like on rebalancing the units that actually produce these AP2 large blasts.

**AlmightyWalrus**

vipoid wrote:
endlesswaltz123 wrote:
With a guard army, even with these rules, are your A) seriously scared of the damage output of that one terminator squad to throw everything at it in 1 turn?

Well, with the rule you're suggesting, I'd have to throw every lasgun at it just to kill a single one.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
and B) do you not think you couldn't still take out said terminator squad in one turn?

The rule you're suggesting is basically invalidating all of the following:
- Lasguns
- Laspistols
- Bolters
- Bolt Pistol
- Emperor's Benediction
- Heavy Bolters
- Autocannons
- Exterminator Autocannons
- Hydra Autocannons
- Taurox Battle Cannon
- Flamers
- Heavy Flamers
- Multilasers
- Eradicator Nova Cannon
- Grenadier Gauntlets
- Heavy Stubber
- Inferno Cannon
- Multiple Rocket Pod
- Taurox Gatling Cannon
- Punisher Gatling Cannon
- Ripper Gun
- Shotgun
- Storm Bolter
- Mortars
- Stormshard Mortars

Amazingly, when you strip all those out, many of my armies wouldn't have a huge amount of firepower left over to kill terminators. Let alone in one turn. Especially if I wanted to take out vehicles - since you're basically creating infantry that are virtually immune to any weapons that aren't anti-tank rounds.

I've no idea how a Necron player would deal with them, since they have very little AP2 at the best of times.

Couldn't one simply add modify the rule to "rerolls vs. AP4 or worse and S6 or worse"? It gets a bit clunky, but it gets the point across: you want anti-tank weapons because they're essentially walking tanks. There'd still be atuocannons and other anti-tank weapons like that (Necrons could still use their heavy stuff to take them out) while still increasing survivability against standard anti-horde weapons.

Plus, there's still the ever-ubiquitous plasma gun, which would still murder Terminators as usual.

**vipoid**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Couldn't one simply add modify the rule to "rerolls vs. AP4 or worse and S6 or worse"?

What you've written isn't fixing the problem - you're just giving them rerolls against any AP3 weapons that aren't S7 or higher.

You could perhaps write it better so that they only get rerolls if the weapon is <S7 and >AP3 but, as you say, it's getting really clunky and unintuitive.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
It gets a bit clunky, but it gets the point across: you want anti-tank weapons because they're essentially walking tanks.

But that's the problem - terminators *aren't* walking tanks. You have Dreadnaughts and Dreadknights for that.

If you want to make terminators walking tanks, you can't keep them as 40pt infantry models. You'd have to change their concept entirely and make them more like monstrous creatures or walkers (i.e. single, expensive models - not units of infantry). Otherwise, you're just adding far too much resilience and further devaluing infantry units that are already suffering.

The other aspect is that lasguns, bolters and similar weapons are not good at the moment. They're basically irrelevant against MCs, and can't even touch most vehicles (and this, I'll remind you, in an edition when armies can be comprised of nothing but vehicles and MCs). They've also remained unchanged whilst other weapons/units escalate around them - making them even more superfluous and frequently of little use other than ablative wounds for special weapons. Infantry, when people bother including it at all, are one of the few units that bolters and lasguns can actually do something against. So, please understand why I'm not eager to see terminators basically get free immunity to those and other weapons.

Put simply, 40k does not need more escalation. It does not need to make basic weapons even more worthless - 6th and 7th edition has already done an excellent job on both counts. What we need is more stability and fewer units with stupidly powerful weapons.

**Frankenberry**

I'm certainly not able to support this with any of the in-depth maths that have been showing up in the thread, but the idea of a 2+/4++ seems like an OK compromise yeah? I mean T5 is nice, but that seems like a pretty impressive stat boost (then again a +1 invulnerable save may be too). The chances of saving out of the Ap2/1 nastiness increased to a 50/50, opposed to the 1/3. Then again, like I said, I don't have the maths to really support this outside from my experience with the game.

I think the weapon options should vary dependent on chapter tactics/codexes...but that's just my desire for a more in-depth fluffy reason.

**vipoid**

Well, one possible problem with the 2+/4+ is that not all terminators are struggling at the moment - if you see what I mean.

e.g. GK terminators are currently very good, and buffing their save to 4++ (which they can then increase to 3++ via a psychic power) could easily make them too good.

Perhaps a simple price drop on some of the other terminators would be better? That would then put them more in line with both the aforementioned GK terminators, and also marine infantry units in general (most of which went down in price in 6th, whilst terminators did not).

**StarHunter25**

So I tested my idea from a while back. Didn't realize that when put into practice a 6 strong unit of khorne
terminators could potentially weather that much fire. Four dakka banner'd DA tac squads managed to kill
one before I assaulted turn three.
I can only imagine how, say, a unit of deathknights in b2b with a DW command squad with an apothecary.
And on my 'invulnerable save issue, I just figure giving models in terminator armor a rule like the following;

Tactical Dreadnought Armour: Models in Terminator Armour do not take invulnerable saves. Instead if they failed an armour
They may take an additional save that succeeds on a 5+ . If a weapon's AP value would bypass their save, they do not take the additional save.
Note; if the model/unit receives an invulnerable save from an outside source,use its value as the re-roll, and it may always be t
used.

**pelicaniforce**

vipoid wrote:
making them even more superfluous and frequently of little use other than ablative wounds for special weapons. Infantry, when people bother including it at all, are one of the few units that bolters and lasguns can actually do something against. So, please understand why I'm not eager to see terminators basically get free immunity to those and other weapons.

Put simply, 40k does not need more escalation. It does not need to make basic weapons even more worthless - 6th and 7th edition has already done an excellent job on both counts. What we need is more stability and fewer units with stupidly powerful weapons.

Small arms have always been pretty much ablative wounds, to imperial armies. That's sort of a problem with the rules, not the army lists.

One of the uses of Terminators is as platforms for powerful small arms and as being helpful in small-arms firefights. Such things don't exist. but that isn't TDA's fault.

**vipoid**

pelicaniforce wrote:
Small arms have always been pretty much ablative wounds, to imperial armies. That's sort of a problem with the rules, not the army lists.

And you don't extinguish a fire by pouring petrol on it.

**Ond Angel**

vipoid wrote:
pelicaniforce wrote:
Small arms have always been pretty much ablative wounds, to imperial armies. That's sort of a problem with the rules, not the army lists.

And you don't extinguish a fire by pouring petrol on it.

Actually some people would.
I just wish I meant figuratively and/or metaphorically.