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.

10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

@Crash Gordon
Xenomancers wrote:
The EASIEST thing to do....is BUFF the STORM BOLTER.

Yes...I realize you can mount SB on rhinos and stuff but people don't do that...know why? Cause they are bad. SB in genreal needs a reason to be taken!

What does a SB do for ANY unit that takes it. It allows you to take 1 more shot into an enemy before you assault it! At the cost of a bonus attack in CC! It's hardly a buff! The only thing SB are good at is 24 inch mobile shooting and I'm sorry - str4 mobile shooting doesn't mean a dang thing in this game.

BUFF ALL SB.
A serious buff. Make them 2/4 salvo str 4 ap5 rending 24". THATS RIGHT. That would make them an excellent weapon. Increase vehical upgrade cost to 10 points to compensate.

I wouldn't be opposed to that, also helps the one on my Vindicator! But are you sure 10 points is enough? Kinda sounds like a massive bargain for Salvo 2/4 Rending, maybe 15 or 20 would be better.

5 points isn't worth it for a current SB so doubling it's firepower and adding rending and doubling it's price seems about right. Only issue I see is strike squads having access to them - maybe all GK PA units would need 2 point price increase to compensate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

HB is still techincally better because it comes with AP4 and str 5 and 36" range. It should probably go to salvo 3/5 but thats another debate.

DoomShakaLaka wrote:10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

I liked another topic's suggestion to make the HB Salvo. If the Storm Bolter becomes Salvo 2/4, then how about making the Heavy Bolter Salvo 3/5, Salvo 3/6 or Salvo 4/6? I'd say the first, don't wanna go too crazy.
Also might be handy if Devastators got Heavy Bolters as standard, gives a reason to pick HBs for them and to have more than the minimum squad of Devs (that is, if they additional guys don't get to pick other weapons too).

Xenomancers wrote:5 points isn't worth it for a current SB so doubling it's firepower and adding rending and doubling it's price seems about right. Only issue I see is strike squads having access to them - maybe all GK PA units would need 2 point price increase to compensate.

Okay, I suppose that sounds fair enough.
Maybe more of a raise for the GK units, but that's another discussion I think (or maybe it's this discussion too, I dunno).

" your point is only comparing them to a known game-breaker... "

What else should I compare them to? Bad units? Scatbikes are the new standard by which everything is judged. Or should be judged.

"It's also more potent than what I actually meant."

I literally meant 5 X assault cannons at 45 ppm. Still inferior to scatbikes, and an elite to boot. Completely fair.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CrashGordon94 wrote:

DoomShakaLaka wrote:10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

I liked another topic's suggestion to make the HB Salvo. If the Storm Bolter becomes Salvo 2/4, then how about making the Heavy Bolter Salvo 3/5, Salvo 3/6 or Salvo 4/6? I'd say the first, don't wanna go too crazy.
Also might be handy if Devastators got Heavy Bolters as standard, gives a reason to pick HBs for them and to have more than the minimum squad of Devs (that is, if they additional guys don't get to pick other weapons too).

Xenomancers wrote:5 points isn't worth it for a current SB so doubling it's firepower and adding rending and doubling it's price seems about right. Only issue I see is strike squads having access to them - maybe all GK PA units would need 2 point price increase to compensate.

Okay, I suppose that sounds fair enough.
Maybe more of a raise for the GK units, but that's another discussion I think (or maybe it's this discussion too, I dunno).

There is no good mathematical niche for the stormbolter. It's a weapon with no purpose. That's why I'm ditching them off terminators.

"A serious buff. Make them 2/4 salvo str 4 ap5 rending 24". THATS RIGHT"

Still too weak for the cost of a terminator. S4 is a deal breaker. Rending is cute, but the real gold is S6. S6 is a panacea in this game. Without a ST buff, the stormbolter will remain garbage.

" I'd say the first, don't wanna go too crazy. "

Why not? It's 7th ed 40K. CRAAAAAAAAAZY TIMES!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
10pts sounds good for that weapon. Now to buff the Heavy Bolter!...

Nope. Too weak. Eldar get a scatterlaser for 10 pts.

Martel732 wrote:
What else should I compare them to? Bad units? Scatbikes are the new standard by which everything is judged. Or should be judged.

Compare them to REASONABLE units, ones neither overpowered NOR underpowered. Bad units should be brought UP to that level and game-breakers (like scatterbikes) should be brought DOWN to that level.
Game-breakers are not and should never be the standard that everything is judged to. They are an anomaly that's bad for the game and should be toned down to make it fair. That's just simple game design logic.

Martel732 wrote:
I literally meant 5 X assault cannons at 45 ppm.

I know you meant that, I don't see how you could think I didn't. I was clarifying what I meant when I said it because I'm just trying to give a weak units a buff, not make more game-breakers.

Martel732 wrote:
Still inferior to scatbikes, and an elite to boot. Completely fair.

Something isn't fair just because it's weaker than a game-breaker, no sensible person could possibly come to such a butter-nuts insane conclusion.

I'll stop here because it seems like you're hung up on scatterbikes. GAME-BREAKERS ARE NOT SOMETHING TO AIM FOR, THEY'RE SOMETHING TO AVOID!
That's even assuming you're serious because I legitimately hate to say this but it really sounds like you could be trolling. Either that or you're what they call "butthurt" about the current Eldar units and are just taking it out here. If that's the case, a better idea would be an Eldar nerf thread.

"GAME-BREAKERS ARE NOT SOMETHING TO AIM FOR, THEY'RE SOMETHING TO AVOID!"

Assault cannon armed terminators at 45 ppm are still substantially inferior to scat bikes, and therefore not a game-breaking unit.

"I'll stop here because it seems like you're hung up on scatterbikes"

I think that ignoring them in a balance discussion is a mistake.

"They are an anomaly that's bad for the game and should be toned down to make it fair"

But they're not going to be toned down until the next codex. A codex, I assume, that will make things even worse. It's psychologically easier to get buffs for bad units than get nerfs on scatterbikes.

"Something isn't fair just because it's weaker than a game-breaker, no sensible person could possibly come to such a butter-nuts insane conclusion. "

Lots of people still claim scatterbikes are fine as well.

My thinking is leaning towards T5, 4++ invul, give SB access to special ammunition, which makes them more versatile at shooting.

Rikerwota wrote:
My thinking is leaning towards T5, 4++ invul, give SB access to special ammunition, which makes them more versatile at shooting.

This isn't terrible, but they don't have quite enough shots/pt to make it worthwhile. Their damage output/pt is incredibly low, and while the versatility would be welcome, there's just not enough dice rolling for 35 ppm.

Martel732 wrote:
Assault cannon armed terminators at 45 ppm are still substantially inferior to scat bikes, and therefore not a game-breaking unit.

Maybe they're not game-breakers, but that's not clear when the only metric you're using is saying they're worse than a known game-breaker. That proves nothing.

Martel732 wrote:
I think that ignoring them in a balance discussion is a mistake.

Ignoring a known game-breaker in general is.
Not bringing up a known game-breaker as the gold standard to be compared to when everyone already knows it needs nerfing and it's NOT SOMETHING TO BE ASPIRED TO is just bloody common sense.
Stop using a broken unit as an excuse to break everything else too.

Martel732 wrote:
But they're not going to be toned down until the next codex. A codex, I assume, that will make things even worse. It's psychologically easier to get buffs for bad units than get nerfs on scatterbikes.

You can say that about everything in this subforum. Games Workshop probably aren't prowling here for ideas to implement. And yet, this forum still exists.
So please, put that argument in the toilet where it belongs and FLUSH!

Martel732 wrote:
Lots of people still claim scatterbikes are fine as well.

Fine, how about we discuss that IN ANOTHER BLOODY TOPIC WHERE THE BLOODY THINGS ARE BLOODY RELEVANT?

If you're not going to stop bringing up this one random game-breaker, then please leave. The rest of us are trying to discuss REASONABLE solutions to make an under-powered unit REASONABLE. We don't need to hear about the flying elf-eared alien bug up your ass.

"The rest of us are trying to discuss REASONABLE solutions to make an under-powered unit REASONABLE. We don't need to hear about the flying elf-eared alien bug up your ass"

So am I. GW has redefined "reasonable" for 7th ed. The game is mostly about firepower now. Unless your "reasonable" fix makes their firepower not awful, it's a non-fix. The suggestion above wasn't terrible, but the terminators still don't get enough shots. So rather than mucking around with the stormbolter (an awful weapon), just give them an existing Imperial weapon with no effective platforms: assault cannon.

"You can say that about everything in this subforum."

Except I might get Eldar players to let me use beefed up terminators, but I'm not going to get them to agree to use nerfed scatbikes after they built/painted them.

"Stop using a broken unit as an excuse to break everything else too. "

If everything is "broken" then nothing is.

"If you're not going to stop bringing up this one random game-breaker, then please leave"

I bring it up partially because it's a directly comparable unit to an assault cannon terminator. I could use D-scythe wraithguard, but it's much harder to compare. We could use grav cents, but that's harder too.

Martel732 wrote:
So am I. GW has redefined "reasonable" for 7th ed. The game is mostly about firepower now. Unless your "reasonable" fix makes their firepower not awful, it's a non-fix. The suggestion above wasn't terrible, but the terminators still don't get enough shots. So rather than mucking around with the stormbolter (an awful weapon), just give them an existing Imperial weapon with no effective platforms: assault cannon.

No, they haven't "redefined" anything, they made a badly-balanced unit. That's all. They are not the gold standard. They are not something to be aspired to. They're another problem, one this thread ISN'T about.
SO fething DROP IT!

Martel732 wrote:
Except I might get Eldar players to let me use beefed up terminators, but I'm not going to get them to agree to use nerfed scatbikes after they built/painted them.

Several problems:
1) If they refuse reasonable action against a problem unit, they're just being tools.
1a) Whether TFG types accept it or not isn't the goal we're aiming for.
2) If they have objections to making their stuff weaker, they'd likely object to you making their stuff stronger because the end result is the same: removing or reducing their advantage.
3) You could turn the tables and refuse to play them unless they DO agree to nerfed scatterbikes.
3a) Maybe you just shouldn't play these people altogether if they're causing you such grief.
4) People are wary about house rules over official stuff anyway. These hypothetical people would probably hypothetically suck it up if these hypothetical nerfs made it into the hypothetical next Eldar Codex. Hypoethically.
4a) What hypothetical douchebags do and don't accept isn't the judge of we we should and shouldn't do.
4b) It's also not an excuse to jump on the game-breaker train with no brakes.

Martel732 wrote:
If everything is "broken" then nothing is.

No. If everything is broken then everything is broken and you have an awful game with no balance. Stop trying to sound clever and drop this line of reasoning.

Martel732 wrote:
I bring it up partially because it's a directly comparable unit to an assault cannon terminator. I could use D-scythe wraithguard, but it's much harder to compare. We could use grav cents, but that's harder too.

No, one's a fast-moving basic unit meant for long-range combat and the other is a slow-moving mid-to-high-end unit for both close combat and short-range shooting. The only reason you compare the two is becaue you have a bug up your ass and are using it to screw up an unrelated discussion.
And if those other units are game-breakers too then they're just as invalid because they're in need of a good nerfing too.
If they're not then it still doesn't matter, you didn't use a variety of things to form a groundwork of what would be reasonable for a unit type, you latched onto an over-powered problem unit and used it as an excuse to dismiss anything that doesn't make these guys just as broken and awful because of your stupid agenda.

Now please, shall we drop unrelated crap and get back to reasonably balancing Terminators?

Make storm bolters assault 3 DONE.
Give them back "follow on fire" DONE.
STOP CREATING THESE THEADS

"Now please, shall we drop unrelated crap and get back to reasonably balancing Terminators?"

I never stopped trying to do that. You have the problem. Assault cannons are the fix to fit 7th ed. Everything else I've seen on there is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Terminators are ridiculously costed for T4 W1 models with popguns. It's much easier to get rid of the popguns than try to make them actually live. Which nothing does in this game except for the special snowflake units of certain books.


"Stop trying to sound clever and drop this line of reasoning. "

No? Because I think I'm right. If all units were great and had their niche, then it would be balanced. That's the definition of balance. Like in Starcraft.

"The only reason you compare the two is becaue you have a bug up your ass and are using it to screw up an unrelated discussion. "

No... because the assault cannon and scatterlaser are very similar.

"2) If they have objections to making their stuff weaker, they'd likely object to you making their stuff stronger because the end result is the same: removing or reducing their advantage. "

I have always found people more open to making their opponent a fair match than having their own stuff nerfed down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ConanMan wrote:
Make storm bolters assault 3 DONE.
Give them back "follow on fire" DONE.
STOP CREATING THESE THEADS

Nope. Still far too weak for the points. More useless S4 shots is just that. Useless.

Martel732 wrote:
I never stopped trying to do that. You have the problem. Assault cannons are the fix to fit 7th ed. Everything else I've seen on there is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Terminators are ridiculously costed for T4 W1 models with popguns.

No, all you ever did was get pissy about the Eldar having a broken unit and insisting on one random solution (They aren't "T4 W1 models with popguns" if they have T5 and W2) and dismissing everything else, bringing the discussion to a dead halt every bloody time. Just because better Storm Bolters don't fit you Eldar butthurt agenda or your gatling gun fetish doesn't make them invalid.

Martel732 wrote:
It's much easier to get rid of the popguns than try to make them actually live. Which nothing does in this game except for the special snowflake units of certain books.

If the so-called "popguns" are made solid, then they aren't "popguns" anymore.
But yes, I'll admit it's easier to dump iffy weapons in favor of better ones but that doesn't automatically make it the BETTER choice. Buffing Storm Bolters is better as it gives another weapon that needs a buff a buff (p.s. Termies aren't the only models with them) which gives another viable option rather than just killing some little bit of variety and interest, it allows better fine-tuning of the weapon so that the units with it are better but not by TOO much (like all Assault Cannons would most likely be. I know GW is FAR from perfect but I figure there's a reason that you can only have that particular weapon on 1/5 of your Termies tops...) and as a bonus it's not a completely middle finger to those who already have a bunch of Storm Bolter-equipped Terminators (Hi, I have 8 and I'm only just starting! I wouldn't be happy if I had to chop up all those guys! Imagine how someone with 50 would feel!).

Martel732 wrote:
No? Because I think I'm right. If all units were great and had their niche, then it would be balanced. That's the definition of balance. Like in Starcraft.

And you're thinking wrong. No surprise when you're zeroed in one a random problem unit and are dismissing anything that doesn't fit that unrelated unit's OTT power level.
You are factually wrong. If you have nothing but broken gak, then you have broken gak everywhere and no balance anywhere. Even the most basic logic tells you that!

Martel732 wrote:
No... because the assault cannon and scatterlaser are very similar.

And the Heavy Flamer is very similar to the Burna, clearly we must compare them to Burna Boyz!
And Terminator Armor is very similar to Artificer Armor, we must also compare them to Inquisitor Coteaz!
If you picked this out because the AC has a similar purpose to the Storm Bolter but happens to be better at it, so is a buffed Storm Bolter!
Also, similarity to a random problem unit is irrelevant.

Martel732 wrote:
I have always found people more open to making their opponent a fair match than having their own stuff nerfed down.

1) Random worthless anecdotal evidence.
2) So what? If they have something that needs to be nerfed then them being a crybaby about taking their OP toy away for the Greater Good doesn't change that.
3) That doesn't work! If you balance one thing against that then it's still broken and nothing else is balanced against it.
4) Nerfing something overpowered is better than bringing everything else up to its level. That way you end up with something stuff fixed instead of everything broken.

Martel732 wrote:
Nope. Still far too weak for the points. More useless S4 shots is just that. Useless.

Funny, you're the only one claiming that. Many people sound like they'd be happy with it. Many find use for good S4 and lower stuff.
It's almost as if the only reason you're dismissing it is because it's not on the random problem unit you picked.

Now please, STOP! You keep bringing this topic to a halt. I can make a "Let's nerf Eldar!" thread and take those unrelated issues there. But if you're not going to stop this, please leave us alone to discuss this in peace. I'd rather not have to report anything.

ConanMan wrote:
Make storm bolters assault 3 DONE.
Give them back "follow on fire" DONE.
STOP CREATING THESE THEADS

whats follow on fire?

"It's almost as if the only reason you're dismissing it is because it's not on the random problem unit you picked. "

No. I've played since 2nd and I've watched S4 become more and more worthless in the game.

"Now please, STOP! You keep bringing this topic to a halt. I can make a "Let's nerf Eldar!" thread and take those unrelated issues there. But if you're not going to stop this, please leave us alone to discuss this in peace. I'd rather not have to report anything."

Please report me then. Because I'm justifying my rules suggestions and you're ranting about a "nerf Eldar thread" that has been done more than this one. Other people seem to be posting comments just fine. You're the one that can't let it go. I'm just shooting down other ideas that I don't think addresses the core failing of terminators in 7th.

"Buffing Storm Bolters is better as it gives another weapon that needs a buff a buff "

More S4 shots are useless, as mentioned above. Special ammo is okay, but still not cost effective without a RoF increase. I haven't seen any buffs that are acceptably good. I'm thinking a buff to S6 ROF 4 24" rending. Oh wait, that's an assault cannon.

" Many find use for good S4 and lower stuff. "

Against bad lists, sure.

"anything that doesn't fit that unrelated unit's OTT power level. "

My proposed terminators are still substantially inferior because of reduced dakka/pt and greatly reduced movement. So this is demonstrably untrue. The issue of dakka/pt is one you stubbornly keep ignoring in your terminator proposals.

Martel732 wrote:
No. I've played since 2nd and I've watched S4 become more and more worthless in the game.

And yet people who have played as long, longer or have more specific experience with newer versions of the game are just fine with it and find use for S4 and lower weapons all the time. It's just you who has an issue with this.

Martel732 wrote:
Please report me then. Because I'm justifying my rules suggestions and you're ranting about a "nerf Eldar thread" that has been done more than this one. Other people seem to be posting comments just fine. You're the one that can't let it go. I'm just shooting down other ideas that I don't think addresses the core failing of terminators in 7th.

I will if you don't stop. I'll give you one more chance before I do.
If by "justifying my rules suggestions" you mean "focusing in on an utterly random and unrelated game problem and dismissing anything that doesn't satisfy the drudge caused by it", then absolutely!
I speak about a "nerf Eldar" thread because that's where discussion of stuff like scatterbikes, what to do about them and what it does to the game if they're not dealt with belong. If it's happened before then it should be no problem to take it over there and leave this thread alone!
Because people are NOT commenting just fine, they were before you started killing this discussion with your dismissal of anything that isn't like scatterbikes. And when people quite rightly say that an unrelated problem unit should be nerfed you immediately fob that off by saying that hypothetical TFGs wouldn't like it so the only choice is to make everything else into a stupid game-breaker too. Quite understandably that stops most people commenting because YOU'RE KILLING THE DISCUSSION! They'd be commenting just fine if you left the topic, as long as you're here they can't.

Martel732 wrote:
I haven't seen any buffs that are acceptably good.

And yet many others have found other things suggested here "acceptably good", this shows that the problem isn't that what they're saying isn't good enough, it's just that you in specific have a stupidly high expectation of what a unit's power level should be, not to mentioned a ridiculously specific idea of where that worth should come from. That's YOUR problem and not theirs.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm thinking a buff to S6 ROF 4 24" rending. Oh wait, that's an assault cannon.

Of course are you, because you have a ridiculous tunnel-vision that blocks out anything else, even though many had workable suggestions which AREN'T that.

Martel732 wrote:
Against bad lists, sure.

No, in general. Nobody else adds that caveat but you. People find uses for S4 weapons in general all the time! Even against highly effective lists!
But that's not what scatterbikes do so you and only you don't care.
P.S. If S4 and lower is absolutely 100% useless then many, MANY units and weapons are useless to you with the only way to buff them in your eyes being to give them S6+, and if Grots, Guardsmen, Tactical Marines and various others all had S6+ then that would be utterly insane and ridiculous, plus the sort of crap we're all trying to avoid. So your thought on S4 and less being useless is FACTUALLY incorrect.

Martel732 wrote:
My proposed terminators are still substantially inferior because of reduced dakka/pt and greatly reduced movement.

How many times do I have to tell you that being weaker than a game-breaker doesn't automatically make something balanced before you get it?
Because it doesn't. Game-breakers are known as such because they are overpowered to such an extent that it significantly disrupts game balance. You can be "substantially inferior" to one and still be broken beyond belief.
Saying that something is balanced because it's weaker than a game-breaker is like saying that something must be on the ground if it's below a high-flying airplane when in reality something can be really high up in the air and still be below that airplane.

Martel732 wrote:
The issue of dakka/pt is one you stubbornly keep ignoring in your terminator proposals.

No I haven't. I've mentioned some stuff that would improve their shooting capabilities (which you ignored because I'm not saying to give everyone an Assault Cannon... Also buffing the Storm Bolter ALSO improves "dakka/pt"!), it's just that I've ALSO suggested OTHER things that would make them better, because that's not the only way to make them better.
Let me just give a hypothetical, I'm not seriously suggesting this because it would be OP, I'd just like to prove a point:
Cost remains the same
They now have WS5/BS5/S5/T5/W2
Terminator Armor now gives a 4++ invulnerable and Storm Shields let you re-roll Armor Saves and Invulnerable Saves.
Terminators get a special rule that lets them Deep Strike into base contact with an enemy unit if they land within maximum charge distance. This counts as charging except that it doesn't allow Overwatch.
Terminators get ANOTHER special rule that lets them ignore Unwieldy.
Sergeants may replace their Power Sword with another Power Weapon of their choice.
All Terminators get another attack base, plus Sergeants get ANOTHER on top of that.

There, I just made them legitimate game-breakers without so much as touching their shooting capabilities! Now maybe you can shut up about how everyone needs an Assault Cannon to be worthwhile.

"It's just you who has an issue with this. "

There are other people on these forums who have noticed the same thing.

"I will if you don't stop. I'll give you one more chance before I do. "

How generous of you. Being an internet bully doesn't make your arguments better.

"I speak about a "nerf Eldar" thread because that's where discussion of stuff like scatterbikes, "

It's not just scatter bikes. Why would anyone use terminators with a Skyhammer annihilation force available to them?

"YOU'RE KILLING THE DISCUSSION! They'd be commenting just fine if you left the topic, as long as you're here they can't. "

Now who is factually incorrect? Everyone else is free to comment and talk about my idea or not talk about my idea. Just as I'm free to express my opinion about their proposed buffs. You are the only one throwing a fit here. You yourself had little trouble responding to Doom and Xenomancer's posts on this very page.

"P.S. If S4 and lower is absolutely 100% useless then many, MANY units and weapons are useless to you "

Marines already have all the S4 shooting they could wish for. That's why elites with even MORE S4 shooting are useless. And, yes, S4 shooting itself has steadily grown less and less useful as lists like all IK have become legal and stronger and stronger weapons have become the new standards.

"You can be "substantially inferior" to one and still be broken beyond belief. "

So a slow unit with mediocre defenses with some S6 guns for 45 ppm is broken beyond belief? Really? You are still paying 225 pts for a unit with 5 wounds. If that's your idea of broken beyond belief, I don't think you're paying attention to the game anymore.

"Cost remains the same
They now have WS5/BS5/S5/T5/W2
Terminator Armor now gives a 4++ invulnerable and Storm Shields let you re-roll Armor Saves and Invulnerable Saves.
Terminators get a special rule that lets them Deep Strike into base contact with an enemy unit if they land within maximum charge distance. This counts as charging except that it doesn't allow Overwatch.
Terminators get ANOTHER special rule that lets them ignore Unwieldy.
Sergeants may replace their Power Sword with another Power Weapon of their choice.
All Terminators get another attack base, plus Sergeants get ANOTHER on top of that. "

So it takes you six rule changes to "break" them. Pretty sure I could break any unit with six wishlist rule changes. Since you are intent on being snarky, let me rephrase: upgunning terminators is the SINGLE most effective thing that could be done. I'm going with the assumption that single changes are more desirable than six-pack changes.

Fun fact - on a typical board (6x4), 45ppm AC-toting Termies destroy 27ppm Scatter Bikes. Yes, even considering range.

Bikes can move a lot faster, especially if they opt not to shoot, but are limited in where to go. ACs on Termies have a 30" threat range in all directions. Doesn't take much to threaten everywhere the bikes can go if they want to shoot.

As for dakka, we're talking S6AP6 vs S6AP4 Rending. Outside 6+ saves, or other saves being better than Armor, the AC is substantially better. The 3+ on the bikes is its most inefficient target, but it still kills much more than double the number of Scatter Bikers than Scatter Bikers kill Termies.

As for mobility, Jetbikes win on movement.
But each Termie is a 30" shooting threat range (a little more, counting the base). On a 6'x4' board, a diameter of over 5' on each model is not small.
Furthermore, each Termie has a potential charge range of 18". This bubble - 36" plus base - is over 3' of pure killzone. In CC, Jetbikes are even more boned than shooting. To a rediculous degree. Jetbikes might strike first in CC, but a charging Termie is *nine times* as deadly to a Jetbike as a Jetbike is to a Termie.

As for objectives, Scatter Bikes can flat out to take an objective last turn. In Eternal War, they might have enough left, if they played defensively, and the Termies decided to ignore objectives, to win. But even then, all the Termie player needs to do is clog the objective with Termies you're not trying to kill (a unit of 3+ Termies would be plenty). Real easy when the Eldar player is just running away. So Termies should win 90% of Eternal War missions, even if somehow the Eldar player prevents engagement.

In Maelstrom, Termies win. Scatterbikes would have to sacrifice a unit to take an objective. And then, only if Termies didn't have it guarded (again, with 3+ Termies, Scatter Bikes can't claim the objective).

Scatter Bikes will be shot off the table much faster than Termies. So Termies win there.

Kill points? Termies win by *points*, meaning lower unit count. Once again, advantage Termies.

So head to head, 45ppm AC Termies destroy Jetbikes.

Please don't try to argue Jetbikrs are more versatile. ACs might do less per poiny to 6+ hordes. But much more to almost anything else. Land Raider? An AC is better than a Lascannon. SL does nothing. Guardsmen, Fire Warriors, or Dire Avengers? AC is 50%-100% better than Scatter Lasers. Wraithknight? AC wins. IK? AC. Dreadknight? AC. Taking small arms fire? Termie armor. Get caught in CC? Termies win vs all but the most elite CC units, Jetbikes lose to Tactical Marines of equal number.

So, point of order. 45ppm AC Termies outperform even the obviously-broken Windriders.

(Although I agree that we should be balancing against the center of the pack, not the top. But that's an argument that always goes on for days.)

"So, point of order. 45ppm AC Termies outperform even the obviously-broken Windriders. "

I disagree, but that's cool. The 12" range is incredibly potent. The scat bikes have far more dakka/pt which is what counts in 7th.

"(Although I agree that we should be balancing against the center of the pack, not the top"

This allows the top to remain the top, with no real competition.

Out of curiosity, what's your fix for tactical terminators? And remember that most Eldar players aren't using footdar, so the stormbolters are indeed mostly useless.

Some specific targets the AC Termies have more dakka/pt against
-IKs
-WKs
-Riptides
-DKs
-Necron Warriors
-Terminators
-Land Raiders
-Necron barges
-Necron CCB
-Fire Warriors
-Dire Avengers

Specific targets where Scatter Bikes are less than 15% better dakka per point:
-Windriders
-Skyhammer Marines

Targets where Scatter Bikes are substantially better dakka/pt:
-Kroot hordes
-Grots

Honestly, which list is scarrier?

Oh, and before you complain about ATSKNF and fearless being bad things because you'd rather break, these are Termies. You should be winning combat. I think the numbers say that 10 Wind riders vs 1 Termie in combat still means the Windriders are more likely to lose combat that turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Potential fixes? The first three fixes for Termies:
-Windrider heavy weapon nerf
-Skyhammer nerf
-WK nerf

That said, there are potential ways to bring Termies up to a "reasonable" level. Heck, Vanilla just got a 5ppm drop.

How would this work out:
-Terminator armor - reroll failed *armor saves*.

What do y'all think of that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Don't field Tac Termies for their Storm Bolters. They are incidental, like the SB on Rhinos and Pods. Field them for their 2+/5++, and their CC threat.

@Bharring: Thank you for pointing all this out.
I think we can ignore Martel now.

@Rerolling Armor Saves: That would be solid. Very solid actually, might need a points increase for that, but maybe I'm overstating things. Either way it's a big patch for their weakness against massed weak firepower.
It was suggested earlier that Terminator Armor get 4++ (with Storm Shields rerolling that instead of giving 3++), combining the two would make Deathwing Knights and TH/SS guys real tough nuts to crack!

I still do think the SB should get a bit of a boost since if it sucks you might as well stick to LC, TH/SS or Deathwing Knights (in the case of Dark Angels) and even if it's just a bonus on vehicles most say it's not much of one. Salvo 2/4 and MAYBE Rending would probably be good enough, really.

" Field them for their 2+/5++, and their CC threat."

That makes them terrible for their price. 2+/5++ has very limited utility on the modern 7th battlefield. They are slow, and have terrible delivery systems. It's too hard to get those powerfists where they are going.

If this is your philosophy, why wouldn't you always use assault terminators? That's what I'm trying to address here.

"-Windrider heavy weapon nerf
-Skyhammer nerf
-WK nerf "

Those don't actually make terminators good. Just less bad against those units. They still have less durability against most weapons than a vanilla marine.

"Heck, Vanilla just got a 5ppm drop. "

"Oh, and before you complain about ATSKNF and fearless being bad things because you'd rather break, these are Termies. You should be winning combat. I think the numbers say that 10 Wind riders vs 1 Termie in combat still means the Windriders are more likely to lose combat that turn."

It's basically impossible to get into combat with Windriders. So I think we can drop that comparison. CC is never happening between these two units.

They are still unfieldable, imo.

"-Terminator armor - reroll failed *armor saves*. "

This would make them much better against their main foil (Wound spam) in terms of defense, but they are still miserable on the offense end of things.

"I think we can ignore Martel now. "

You could have done that a long time ago instead of throwing a hissy fit.

" Very solid actually, might need a points increase for that, but maybe I'm overstating things. "

No, because AP 2 is still very common. AP 2 weapons will be used on the terminators and the massed fire will be turned on units that can jink, like bikers.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I agree terminator are fine as is nothing really needs to be "added" to them just be cautious when deep striking!

 zombiekila707 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I agree terminator are fine as is nothing really needs to be "added" to them just be cautious when deep striking!

But deep striking is a terrible delivery system. If you shoot, you are stuck in "rape me" formation.

Martel732 wrote:

 zombiekila707 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I agree terminator are fine as is nothing really needs to be "added" to them just be cautious when deep striking!

But deep striking is a terrible delivery system. If you shoot, you are stuck in "rape me" formation.

Assuming the enemy has templates ready to go.

Bharring wrote:
Some specific targets the AC Termies have more dakka/pt against
-IKs
-WKs
-Riptides
-DKs
-Necron Warriors
-Terminators
-Land Raiders
-Necron barges
-Necron CCB
-Fire Warriors
-Dire Avengers

Specific targets where Scatter Bikes are less than 15% better dakka per point:
-Windriders
-Skyhammer Marines

Targets where Scatter Bikes are substantially better dakka/pt:
-Kroot hordes
-Grots

Honestly, which list is scarrier?

Oh, and before you complain about ATSKNF and fearless being bad things because you'd rather break, these are Termies. You should be winning combat. I think the numbers say that 10 Wind riders vs 1 Termie in combat still means the Windriders are more likely to lose combat that turn.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Potential fixes? The first three fixes for Termies:
-Windrider heavy weapon nerf
-Skyhammer nerf
-WK nerf

That said, there are potential ways to bring Termies up to a "reasonable" level. Heck, Vanilla just got a 5ppm drop.

How would this work out:
-Terminator armor - reroll failed *armor saves*.

What do y'all think of that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Don't field Tac Termies for their Storm Bolters. They are incidental, like the SB on Rhinos and Pods. Field them for their 2+/5++, and their CC threat.

How do you figure that? on the IK? Not only do the scat bikes have 12" + range - they also do exactly the same amount of dmg vs the side profile of an IK. and they are Still almost 20 points cheaper. I think its fair to say that these weapons have different optimizations but to claim one is better than the other is just nutts. When you are paying almost 20 points less for a scat bike over an AC term - and the option thats 20 points less has greater mobility - the ability to jink for 4+ save compared to a 5++ save and longer range. I think it's pretty clear what option is "better." My suggestion for 2/4 salvo rending storm bolters for 35 point terms I think is a little more realistic and you wouldn't need to change the fluff of terms. They'd still put out decent firepower and have great CC ability. I know I would use them and it would be fun.

Know why CC will never happen with Termies and Wind riders? Because Wind riders would be destroyed. They have the mobility to stay away, sure. But that incredible difference in CC gives Termies great board control.

If you buff Termies up to glass cannon firepower, and retain their durability, how would that be fair?

"But that incredible difference in CC gives Termies great board control. "

Not really, because they die like slime to shooting like most units in this game. They just don't live to get in CC. That's why the power fist is so incredibly overcosted. I'm more of the line of thought of Xenomancers on this topic.

", and retain their durability, how would that be fair"

They are not that durable, especially since getting within 24" puts you within range of all kinds of unpleasantness.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Desubot wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 zombiekila707 wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
They already went down 5 points. If you want them to be gods, just say so.

I agree terminator are fine as is nothing really needs to be "added" to them just be cautious when deep striking!

But deep striking is a terrible delivery system. If you shoot, you are stuck in "rape me" formation.

Assuming the enemy has templates ready to go.

You really think that's a wise risk in 7th "dakka everywhere" ed? I have taken advantage of opponents using the deep strike mechanic so many times that I'm very wary of it.

Xenomancers wrote:My suggestion for 2/4 salvo rending storm bolters for 35 point terms I think is a little more realistic and you wouldn't need to change the fluff of terms. They'd still put out decent firepower and have great CC ability. I know I would use them and it would be fun.

I would certainly support it and appreciate it too!

Bharring wrote:If you buff Termies up to glass cannon firepower, and retain their durability, how would that be fair?

I think that's the point he seems to be missing, no surprise for someone who looks up to game-breakers as an example of what to do.