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.

That's not a tuned price man.

The point is that by lowering the points, rather than adding wounds, it puts flexibility in your list by letting you build smaller squads. A 10-man Termie squad is LoW level in points. Put it in a LR and it just gets silly.

Cheaper, MSU-style Termie squads would give you more flexibility in your list, on the battlefield, and would start overstretching the enemy's special weapons. Do you want to DS 3x 5-man squads against 3x Iontides (which can double them out with ID), or 6 combat squads? Now all of a sudden, DS is viable and you get to assault. Plus it's easier to box the enemy in with Terminators all over the opponent's backfield.

Incidentally, 200pts of 2-wound LC performs more or less the same against elite CC infantry, but performs poorer against GEQ where due to less models you have less damage output. We've noted that's an issue with Boyz (probably worse with with Genestealers). Also, 225pts of 2-wound TH/SS nearly one-shots a 200pt Lictor Brood, killing 3 out of 4 models while losing only a single Terminator. Not balanced IMO (but very fluffy!)

A points value change is not glamourous -- no special rules, no special weapons, no rerolls, no complex BS. But the implications are huge. It increases damage, it increses survivability, it increases tactical flexibility, and it lets you choose your list with more finesse. It's also simple for your opponents -- a Terminator is still a Terminator. And for this reason it's probably the best solution.

Whiskey144 wrote:

kveldulf wrote:
The whole purpose for terminators

Is this background wise (which IMO should inform some of the TT game design), or is this the "they do this thing better than most of that armies options so this thing should be their role" purpose?

Because if it's the former then the primary purpose of Terminator-equipped Marines was to be an incredibly durable infantry unit when fighting in extreme close quarters and boarding actions. There's a reason why the titular Space Hulk game has only Terminator models, after all- and it's primarily due to the better resilience of a TDA-equipped Marine in the extremely close confines of a Space Hulk than a dude in PA.

Exactly, their role is to be in close quarters and punching things. The storm bolters are a way to soften up the target a little. They worked better when assault made a bigger difference versus rapidfire weapons.

How about we make them a little easier to assault with?

Allow assaults from Deepstrike, but the assault counts as through difficult terrain and disordered. Representing the awkward nature of such an assault.

This means that many other troops become much more useful as well, andyou'd be willing to risk it and deep strike much closer to the enemy. The terminators powerfists mean the difficult terrain is negated in a sense. 2+ is much more survivable in combat, especially if you're picking the target more freely.

Yoyoyo wrote:
That's not a tuned price man.

The point is that by lowering the points, rather than adding wounds, it puts flexibility in your list by letting you build smaller squads. A 10-man Termie squad is LoW level in points. Put it in a LR and it just gets silly.

Cheaper, MSU-style Termie squads would give you more flexibility in your list, on the battlefield, and would start overstretching the enemy's special weapons. Do you want to DS 3x 5-man squads against 3x Iontides (which can double them out with ID), or 6 combat squads? Now all of a sudden, DS is viable and you get to assault. Plus it's easier to box the enemy in with Terminators all over the opponent's backfield.

Incidentally, 200pts of 2-wound LC performs more or less the same against elite CC infantry, but performs poorer against GEQ where due to less models you have less damage output. We've noted that's an issue (probably worse with with Genestealers). Also, 225pts of 2-wound TH/SS nearly one-shots a 200pt Lictor Brood, killing 3 out of 4 models while losing only a single Terminator. Not balanced IMO (but very fluffy!)

A points value change is not glamourous -- no special rules, no special weapons, no rerolls, no complex BS. But the implications are huge. It increases damage, it increses survivability, it increases tactical flexibility, and it lets you choose your list with more finesse. It's also simple for your opponents -- a Terminator is still a Terminator. And for this reason it's probably the best solution.

I've concluded after some points made in this thread, that the most viable options to fix terminators either revolve around reducing point cost or giving them a defensive upgrade (FNP, armour save or AP reduction). However, reducing them to the right amount, which I would argue needs to be 25-28 ppm would unfortunately tip the scales around too much in the SM list - So, making them cheaper would require more point cost retooling in other entries in the SM list - in order for them to be balanced.

Adding a buff might actually be the simpler solution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:

Whiskey144 wrote:

kveldulf wrote:
The whole purpose for terminators

Is this background wise (which IMO should inform some of the TT game design), or is this the "they do this thing better than most of that armies options so this thing should be their role" purpose?

Because if it's the former then the primary purpose of Terminator-equipped Marines was to be an incredibly durable infantry unit when fighting in extreme close quarters and boarding actions. There's a reason why the titular Space Hulk game has only Terminator models, after all- and it's primarily due to the better resilience of a TDA-equipped Marine in the extremely close confines of a Space Hulk than a dude in PA.

Exactly, their role is to be in close quarters and punching things. The storm bolters are a way to soften up the target a little. They worked better when assault made a bigger difference versus rapidfire weapons.

How about we make them a little easier to assault with?

Allow assaults from Deepstrike, but the assault counts as through difficult terrain and disordered. Representing the awkward nature of such an assault.

This means that many other troops become much more useful as well, andyou'd be willing to risk it and deep strike much closer to the enemy. The terminators powerfists mean the difficult terrain is negated in a sense. 2+ is much more survivable in combat, especially if you're picking the target more freely.

Though getting them in close combat would help somewhat with their usefulness, I think there are a number of issues with your proposal still:

Why would terminators gain this and not other deep striking units? If anything, I would see terminators having more of an issue getting into close combat because of their lumbering nature.
The only viable way to use them would be DS?
What if they are not in charge range when they DS?
What if they are not deep striking?
How does this fix their more universal problem regarding point cost efficiency - compared to other units?
....

The main issues at hand is survivability and role: they die essentially 17% slower than tactical marines and have less tactical flexibility than any other SM unit in game. They either need to be much cheaper or get a static buff to be useful.

I think a secondary problem is how cheap tactical marines are. When I play space marine players its a rare game where they bring anything more then the bare minimum of troops. Space Marines are possibly the best standard infantry unit in the game. Bring a 3-5 Tactical Squads and you have 6-10 Combat squaded units with 5 heavy weapon teams and 5 assault teams with a sergeant and a flamer....

140pts basic with 40pts extra for missile launcher with flak, flamer and a veteran sergeant. so 180pts for a rather badass unit. 5 of them and you basically have a 1k list with room for a good commander. THIS is where terminators fail. Why bother with the price for a terminator squad that does the same thing as a tactical squad but better and for 3x the cost per model? Throw in some Rhino's and call it a day.

Tactical marines are not cheap compared to their actual efficacy.

 kveldulf wrote:

Though getting them in close combat would help somewhat with their usefulness, I think there are a number of issues with your proposal still:

Why would terminators gain this and not other deep striking units? If anything, I would see terminators having more of an issue getting into close combat because of their lumbering nature.
The only viable way to use them would be DS?
What if they are not in charge range when they DS?
What if they are not deep striking?
How does this fix their more universal problem regarding point cost efficiency - compared to other units?
....

The main issues at hand is survivability and role: they die essentially 17% slower than tactical marines and have less tactical flexibility than any other SM unit in game. They either need to be much cheaper or get a static buff to be useful.

I would give this to all units that Deepstrike actually... I'm all for assaults from non-assault transports being either Disordered or Difficult Terrain also.

And basically, yes, the only viable way to use them would be Deepstrike. Because that's what they are meant to be used for, deepstriking into a narrow confined area and punching things up close. People trying to walk them around in anything approaching the open, or spending time shooting with them, are upset that die; but that is a situation where someone in this suit of armour would get shot and die!

Martel732 wrote:
Tactical marines are not cheap compared to their actual efficacy.

According to you martel that means that landraiders are broken, terminators are broken, and now Tactical marines are broken....>WTF IS NOT BROKEN IN YOUR F*CKING CODEX! seriously you don't have many units left to use in your lists if you don't use these.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Tactical marines are not cheap compared to their actual efficacy.

According to you martel that means that landraiders are broken, terminators are broken, and now Tactical marines are broken....>WTF IS NOT BROKEN IN YOUR F*CKING CODEX! seriously you don't have many units left to use in your lists if you don't use these.

Not true at all. I just consider those some of the worst units in the codex. There's not much to say about the better units like Sternguard, drop pod ASM, bikers, attack bikers, preds, etc.

Don't take the bait Ghaz. Anyway...

The assault from DS idea is not a great one. It's not because of balance, but because it reduces player agency. Player A can assault, but Player B can do very little but deploy defensively and watch. Not necessarily fun for a lot of people. That's why it's not a rule, along with why FMCs cannot assault from flight.

Buffs and new rules are simpler to houserule, yes. It's more difficult to apply to a wide audience because all of them will argue about the "proper solution", question your judgement, and fight with each other. Sound familiar?

Changing points shakes up the meta, that's the idea. It will most definitely affect the SM codex, and that's alright. It's an ongoing process for the entire game -- adjusting LC Terminators to 25ppm is basically part of a bracketing process that allows us to arrive at the final proper value. It may sound complicated, but it's not. We basically did the theory part in the last page. Now we apply it to the game, watch carefully, see if it works, and make necessary changes with the feedback we get. It's a lot of work though, yes.

Assault Terminators are less complicated than Tacs, but I think 25ppm is fine for LCs. TH/SS are somewhere around 40-45ppm, which is about equivalent to MegaNobz. The deployment system is the next real issue, being the Land Raider/DS. TH/SS will never make good DS without setting them up first, there are simply too few models. Their combat power is already very much in line with what it should be. 6x 5-man squads of LC Termies might be able to pull DS off, though they can't kill any target in the game. Sounds about right.

I think that's maybe acceptable? The Land Raider is the next problem to address regarding TH/SS Termies. Tacs are way, way more complicated with all their options, I think you want to take that on last.

Meganobz have 2 less BS 1 Less init, 2 less leadership and zero access to heavy weapons beyond Kombi Rokkitz. And most importantly, 0 access to invul saves.

Terminators have 1 Less attack and 1 less wound then Meganobz. and zero access to a CHEAP (read that paper thin) transport.

both cost EXACTLY the same. So if were reducing Terminators to 28pts a model then I want my Meganobz to be the same price as well. Make my man missile even cheaper.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Meganobz have 2 less BS 1 Less init, 2 less leadership and zero access to heavy weapons beyond Kombi Rokkitz. And most importantly, 0 access to invul saves.

Terminators have 1 Less attack and 1 less wound then Meganobz. and zero access to a CHEAP (read that paper thin) transport.

both cost EXACTLY the same. So if were reducing Terminators to 28pts a model then I want my Meganobz to be the same price as well. Make my man missile even cheaper.

I'd rather make terminators worth 40 or more than reduce them to 28. However, as it stands now, 28 is the most I'd pay for one because that's double the cost of a tac marine and die at half the rate to non AP 2 weaponry.

Thats absolutely fine, just so long as my Meganobz which are basically carbon copies of Terminators, the same price.

MegaNobz actually make short work of LC Assault Terminators, even at 25ppm. The AP3 can't get through the 2+ Ork armor.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Thats absolutely fine, just so long as my Meganobz which are basically carbon copies of Terminators, the same price.

I'd argue the extra wound makes them slightly better in the current meta; ie they can suck down twice as many grav shots, for example. But I get your point. Neither unit are something I'd ever consider using as they currently are written. I'm picky like that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yoyoyo wrote:
MegaNobz actually make short work of LC Assault Terminators, even at 25ppm. The AP3 can't get through the 2+ Ork armor.

I think LC terminators are pretty much garbage, though. AP 3 is actually pretty poor the way things are now.

Yoyoyo, the basic terminator with fist and storm bolter has the same price as a meganob. Martel who is a self hating space marine thinks that his termies should be reduced by 12pts a model. and im fine with that so long as my meganobz are reduced as well. And when that happens that means my regular nobs will need to drop in price to make them viable as elite choices since Meganobz just became so cheap. So in the end what you lot of successfully done is broke the game :-)

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Yoyoyo, the basic terminator with fist and storm bolter has the same price as a meganob. Martel who is a self hating space marine thinks that his termies should be reduced by 12pts a model. and im fine with that so long as my meganobz are reduced as well. And when that happens that means my regular nobs will need to drop in price to make them viable as elite choices since Meganobz just became so cheap. So in the end what you lot of successfully done is broke the game :-)

I didn't say that. I said I'd prefer they be made worth 40 pts and the most I'd pay for the current incarnation is 28 pts because of the way the shooting phase of this game works. Making terminators not garbage isn't breaking the game. The game's already broken. Eldar are legal to play.

You would argue that having 1 extra wound is worth having a ranged attack that does something, leadership so you dont run away when you lose one model? ohh sorry i forgot to mention....The 5+ invul save that Nobz don't have access to.

Keep in mind most of the time Meganobz aren't shot with grav gunz its lascannons that double them and take away the armor so insta death for them. 40pt model dies to a lascannon dev marine...garbage.

"worth having a ranged attack that does something"

That's one of my primary complaints. Terminators' ranged attacks don't do anything in practice.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
You would argue that having 1 extra wound is worth having a ranged attack that does something, leadership so you dont run away when you lose one model? ohh sorry i forgot to mention....The 5+ invul save that Nobz don't have access to.

Keep in mind most of the time Meganobz aren't shot with grav gunz its lascannons that double them and take away the armor so insta death for them. 40pt model dies to a lascannon dev marine...garbage.

Since the AP 2 vehicle nerf, lascannons have gotten a lot more scarce where I play.

2 shots at 24 inches S4AP5 meaning you kill 8/6th regular orks per gun per turn. Not wound mind you...KILL. 5 Termies shooting = 8ish dead orks for a shooting phase that you think is garbage. In return the nobz have a twin linked shoota which is S4 Ap6 ranged 18 assault 2. Same principle as the Storm Bolter except shorter range and less chance of hitting.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
2 shots at 24 inches S4AP5 meaning you kill 8/6th regular orks per gun per turn. Not wound mind you...KILL. 5 Termies shooting = 8ish dead orks for a shooting phase that you think is garbage. In return the nobz have a twin linked shoota which is S4 Ap6 ranged 18 assault 2. Same principle as the Storm Bolter except shorter range and less chance of hitting.

8 dead Orks is how much compared to the terminator unit's cost? Yeah, try again if you think that is meaningful shooting from such an expensive unit. They might as well not have those guns, they are so weak in the current meta. Xeno players with cheap models always focus on how many models they are picking up and don't think about how expensive the marine unit is that is required to put out those shots. Marine shooting is horribly inefficient except for a select few units.

Bringing more wounds to the table is so valuable now in the era of Riptide pie plates and other such tomfoolery.

Martel you are looking at their guns and thinking "40pts for a storm bolter..garbage" What you need to think is 2+ save 5++ invul, high leadership, Power fist standard, 2 attacks base. That is why the terminator is 40pts a model.

You cherry pick stats out of your unit and compare it to other units. You compared terminators shooting to warp spiders but you don't compare survivability, just shooting. You compare CC oriented units and their ability to kill 2+ units. And then you fail to factor in their shooting of which they usually don't have any.

"Martel you are looking at their guns and thinking "40pts for a storm bolter..garbage" What you need to think is 2+ save 5++ invul, high leadership, Power fist standard, 2 attacks base. That is why the terminator is 40pts a model. "

But it's hard to get all those factors into play. It also doesn't change the math that they are less durable to nearly every weapon than a tac marine. Pathetic. They will almost always get shot to death before they can use most of the stats you listed off. They are perhaps the worst unit in the marine codex. And they have some stiff competition, let me tell you.

And again "They will almost always get shot to death before they can use most of the stats"

Yes and while im focus firing your scary terminators the other 5-10 units in your army are unhindered by the firepower im directing at your terminators, they do their job absolutely fine. they draw fire away from the rest of your army.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
And again "They will almost always get shot to death before they can use most of the stats"

Yes and while im focus firing your scary terminators the other 5-10 units in your army are unhindered by the firepower im directing at your terminators, they do their job absolutely fine. they draw fire away from the rest of your army.

Sadly, it doesn't take that many hits to cripple terminators. If they actually functioned as a true firepower sink, maybe. But they don't. They have crap durability/pt. I've seen a Tau list dust 15 Deathwing terminators in a single turn. You run out of terminators really fast at that rate.

Like I said, switch armies dude, clearly your getting destroyed in your area by other armies and you can't figure out how to win without buffing every model in your army.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Like I said, switch armies dude, clearly your getting destroyed in your area by other armies and you can't figure out how to win without buffing every model in your army.

No, I beat other marines just fine. Except Tiggy stars. Not much I can do there with BA. And many of them are taking units that I wouldn't touch, and I am capitalizing on this. It doesn't sound like you are horribly choosy with your Ork lists, so I'd probably do fine against you as well.

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:


I would give this to all units that Deepstrike actually... I'm all for assaults from non-assault transports being either Disordered or Difficult Terrain also.

And basically, yes, the only viable way to use them would be Deepstrike. Because that's what they are meant to be used for, deepstriking into a narrow confined area and punching things up close. People trying to walk them around in anything approaching the open, or spending time shooting with them, are upset that die; but that is a situation where someone in this suit of armour would get shot and die!

I agree, I advocate the use of SM as a rapid insertion force - like all SM's should really (lore wise). As to how much grace we should give them though (getting there and surviving) is the better, and related question in this thread.

If they are meant to get in and accomplish one thing, that's fine to a degree... but tactically that narrows them down so much that it sacrifices a lot of flexibility in an army - for how expensive they are right now. You better hope they take care of whatever you sent them after (which is a rough selection for them alone) and that they pay for themselves in points or somehow justify whatever tactical options you gave up to field them. There really isn't much room for forgiveness with using them.

In general, it's a tall order for them to fill already, and one that isn't going to change significantly enough by giving them disordered assault.

Ghaz, I agree with you, but overpriced isn't actually the real issue with Tacs. The issue is that Tac Terminators are saddled with that PF by default, it jacks up their default price and completely ruins their flexibility and purpose. MegaNobz are assault units, they're not trying to double-hat. The good news is the solution is actually pretty simple.

If we let Tac Terminators take a cheaper Power Weapon, they come out to about 30pts with a Storm Bolter. This seems about ballpark. You can now roll those points savings into your special weapons and get your MSU on with a 150pt DS squad. Let them take another special weapon per 5-man det, and you have a punchy unit that doesn't require a drop pod but still isn't too expensive to risk sacrificing. They certainly won't be taking on MegaNobz easily with S6 Power Axes, or AP3 anything, but they get a lot more flexible (and hence tactical).

Makes sense right? It doesn't break the game, and it gets Termies back on the table. I think that's about the best that you can do.

In conclusion :

- 25ppm, Assault Terminator w/ 2x LC
- 45ppm, Assault Terminator w/ TH, SS
- 30ppm, Tac Terminator w/ Storm Bolter and Power Weapon
- 40ppm, Tac Terminator w/ Storm Bolter and Power Fist
- Special weapons can be costed subsequently.

Giving Tac Terminators Split Fire would help a lot too, they can pop their special weapons at the relevant target and use their SB/Power Weapons against whatever else makes sense relevant to their assault capability.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Martel you are looking at their guns and thinking "40pts for a storm bolter..garbage" What you need to think is 2+ save 5++ invul, high leadership, Power fist standard, 2 attacks base. That is why the terminator is 40pts a model.

You cherry pick stats out of your unit and compare it to other units. You compared terminators shooting to warp spiders but you don't compare survivability, just shooting. You compare CC oriented units and their ability to kill 2+ units. And then you fail to factor in their shooting of which they usually don't have any.

If you really think that is why they are 40ish pts a model, you should remember that the 5+ invuln was a tac-on 'chapter approved' to terminator survivability issues.... back in 3rd. I don't remember them changing the point value by giving them that. So, as to the metrics of their point values, GW handles it pretty subjectively.

I get a kick out of your posts man.... just really disagree with your point about this.

Edit: FYI, I'm trying not to make this a cherry picking issue myself - by comparing other army lists and what not. I find that pointless as I see the problem with terminators is more of an internally consistent problem that's been magnified with the introduction of centurions and flyers.

 NorseSig wrote:
Yeah it isn't really salvo, but that was the best term I could come up with without a huge wall of text. Which the explaination would take anyway so fail there. I over reacted myself. Maybe make them assault 3 with a full bs during overwatch? I am worried that it has potential for being too powerful there for the 5 points it costs. Maybe the full BS overwatch ability fires at salvo 2/3.

Then I definitely apologize for my excessive aggression over that. I'm not sure though, how Salvo 2/3 would interact with a full-BS overwatch trait... then again, I don't actually know off-hand how Salvo and Overwatch interact anyways, and whether or not there are some odd exceptions regarding the two.

In any case, I think my current preferred option, in the interest of simplifying the mechanics, would be to make Stormbolters as follows:

24" Assault 3 S4 AP5 Shred

This is a substantial mathematical loss in firepower compared to my proposed additional traits, but it's also mechanically simpler on account of reusing existing traits. Arguably it makes it better at fighting T5+, though with only S4 it's still not going to be helpful against anything particularly big and nasty. For the bonused Overwatch profile, then it could fire as follows:

24" Salvo 2/3 S4 AP5 (Overwatch bonus; "Wall of Fire" might be a good name and syncs well with the Template weapon=Wall of Death shtick)

I'd also say that if Shred is incorporated, you should have to pick between using Shred and "holding shots in reserve", so to speak, in order to get the Overwatch bonus.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Something to note y'all. Putting more wounds in the squad by adding wounds, FNP, or other saves won't increase damage output. Putting more wounds in the squad by adding more characters, will. Less models means you'll spend more time stuck in Tarpits, since you can't cut them away as quickly. You get less shooting. And you'll also be more vulnerable to getting doubled out to ID.

Doubling wounds is a solution but it's necessarily as strong as a pure points reduction. This way, you're also increasing effective damage. You also get the chance to run smaller squads and economize points, which can help list building.

For example, would you rather have:

10x Terminators for 200pts;
5x 2-wound Termies for 200pts; or
5x Terminators for 100?

It's definitely something to consider. Please not points values are not to scale

My preference is to make Stormbolters worthwhile, expand the heavy weapon options, and allow 2 heavies per 5 dudes. Probably also need to make some heavies cheaper, as HBs and ACs both are overcosted. Making them 2 Wounds would be kind of... odd. Would it be a trait of TDA? In which case characters could start taking TDA for a bonus wound, which seems like it could be... inconvenient.

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:
Exactly, their role is to be in close quarters and punching things. The storm bolters are a way to soften up the target a little. They worked better when assault made a bigger difference versus rapidfire weapons.

I'd merely like to point out that the kind of things powerfists are good at punching to death are on the opposite end of the target spectrum that Stormbolters are good at killing. As in, powerfists want to be punching T6+, while Stormbolters want to be shooting T3 or at most T4 things. Very different target types.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
I think a secondary problem is how cheap tactical marines are. When I play space marine players its a rare game where they bring anything more then the bare minimum of troops. Space Marines are possibly the best standard infantry unit in the game. Bring a 3-5 Tactical Squads and you have 6-10 Combat squaded units with 5 heavy weapon teams and 5 assault teams with a sergeant and a flamer....

140pts basic with 40pts extra for missile launcher with flak, flamer and a veteran sergeant. so 180pts for a rather badass unit. 5 of them and you basically have a 1k list with room for a good commander. THIS is where terminators fail. Why bother with the price for a terminator squad that does the same thing as a tactical squad but better and for 3x the cost per model? Throw in some Rhino's and call it a day.

Aside from the part where you claim Tac Marines are actually capable, you are somewhat correct. It's not that Tacs are too cheap (much cheaper units that are far more effective exist all over the place... not really in the SM book, unfortunately), it's that Termies are too expensive. The Tac Marine is the baseline from which performance can be measured.

The fact that I could fill the mandatory troops requirement with two Tac squads, with Rhinos and special/heavy options, for the same cost as a single ten-strong Termi squad with 2 ACs, and get both more shots, deadlier shots (plasma/melta), and more versatile weapons (plasma/ML), means that Tac Termies are underperforming and need improvements.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Ghaz, I agree with you, but overpriced isn't actually the real issue with Tacs. The issue is that Tac Terminators are saddled with that PF by default, it jacks up their default price and completely ruins their flexibility and purpose. MegaNobz are assault units, they're not trying to double-hat.

(emphasis mine)

Oh God, this this this this this. If Tac Termies were a melee unit, then most of their upgrades would be melee-related. It may come as a surprise Ghaz, but Tac Terminator upgrades are almost all guns. Oh sure, you can give every dude a chainfist if you want, but the "real" upgrades are either the AC, CML, or HF. IE, guns.

You want to compare MANz and Terminators? Try looking at Assault Termies instead, as both Assault Termies and MANz are meant to be punching things to death. Tac Termies are supposed to be shooty, and for whatever reason GW decreed that (almost) all Tac Termies must also carry power fists.

Yoyoyo wrote:
The good news is the solution is actually pretty simple.

If we let Tac Terminators take a cheaper Power Weapon, they come out to about 30pts with a Storm Bolter. This seems about ballpark. You can now roll those points savings into your special weapons and get your MSU on with a 150pt DS squad. Let them take another special weapon per 5-man det, and you have a punchy unit that doesn't require a drop pod but still isn't too expensive to risk sacrificing. They certainly won't be taking on MegaNobz easily with S6 Power Axes, or AP3 anything, but they get a lot more flexible (and hence tactical).

Makes sense right? It doesn't break the game, and it gets Termies back on the table. I think that's about the best that you can do.

In conclusion :

- 25ppm, Assault Terminator w/ 2x LC
- 45ppm, Assault Terminator w/ TH, SS
- 30ppm, Tac Terminator w/ Storm Bolter and Power Weapon
- 40ppm, Tac Terminator w/ Storm Bolter and Power Fist
- Special weapons can be costed subsequently.

Giving Tac Terminators Split Fire would help a lot too, they can pop their special weapons at the relevant target and use their SB/Power Weapons against whatever else makes sense relevant to their assault capability.

I generally like this idea, minus the part where it somewhat ignores fixing Stormbolters (there's quite a few places that you can get SBs that the only reason to take it is to soak Weapon Destroyed results. Seriously, that should not be a thing).