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.

Have you run the numbers for Heavy Bolter sternguard ammo terminators? I'm liking that better than ACs anyway.

Not that AC terminators would be close to autowin. They shoot, once, and then die like everything else in this game that's not a special snowflake unit.

"Only Termies win by a much, much wider margin. And against many more foes. "

Except they wouldn't in practice.

"Imagine this scenario: Two Termies per 5 get the 'Super Martel Special' AC. 36" range, heavy 10. The others are stuck with Storm Bolters. Whole 5man unit clocks in at 200 points. Would you still say they'd suck? "

That changes the situation. A situation that I'm looking at on a case by case basis. I'm not trying to use generalities like you are. I really don't care how terminators get more firepower. But they need more firepower or people will just use assault terminators with a 3++ invuln. If shooting terminators are just going to be there for power fist duty, then you should just be using assault terminators all the time.

" and a quarter or less the CC capability"

You make the mistake of thinking this matters in most games. It doesn't. They get shot long before CC matters.

What else wouldn't shoot once, then die to an equal amount of firepower?

It might not take as much firepower as youd like to remove Termies, but it still takes much more firepower/point than killing Windriders.

Why don't Windriders fire once then die? Because their firepower kills too much.

So why wouldnt the Termies that have more firepower/pt kill more? And then be even harder to remove?

How, precicesly, would 45ppm Termies all with ACs not win more frequently and against a wider variety of enemies than Scatter Bikers?
Better firepower/pt.
Better survivability/pt.
Better CC.
Better Morale.

Sure, Scatter Bikes can Flat Out onto objectives if there aren't 3 Termies sitting on them. But you're sacrificing up to a 270pt unit without even shooting that round to hold one objective that the opponent hasn't covered. So ObSec does little.

ScatterBikes have 36" range, and more maneuverability. But the table is 4x6. Two units of Termies cover the bulk of the table easily. Even if they start on foot.

Most other armies will die faster, and kill fewer, when faced with these Termies.

In practice, they'd go well beyond what Scatter Bikes do today. Pure broken cheese.

CC may not mean much to you, but it certainly means something. And durability. And ATSHKNF. And CT. And deep strike. If you don't want CC, have you considered taking units that aren't CC beasts?

I can tell you that if I go up against a unit that can beat me in CC even when greatly outnumbered, *and* shoot me off the table while most of my shots bounce off them, I'm not going to enjoy that much.

"Why don't Windriders fire once then die? Because their firepower kills too much. "

And many units can't reach them. That's actually more important than their firepower often, because it stops units from shooting them that the Windriders didn't get to shoot at. 24" -> 36" is the best range bump in the game.

"Better firepower/pt."

Not even close. Windriders have way more shots/pt. I'm not sure how you are valuing rending, but it's not THAT valuable.

Your whole post is kind of moot, since I've moved on from the AC thing. I like the heavy bolter w/special ammo better.

You also have ignored the point of firepower being necessary as to not make the assault terminators an auto-take over the tactical terminators.

", but it certainly means something"

Keep telling me that as I take my CC units off the table with a croupier stick.

" have you considered taking units that aren't CC beasts? "

I'm beginning to think you are trolling here. This thread is to address the issue that tactical terminators are unplayable. So, yes, almost every marine player I know has considered this. And decided to NEVER use this unit.

"If you don't want CC, have you considered taking units that aren't CC beasts? "

I just wanted to comment on this again. I play BA and I'm down to one true CC unit per list due to how incredibly crappy CC is now. It really pisses me off that armies like your Eldar have turned the game into a game of "how many dice can I throw in the shooting phase". Codices like Eldar have drive this change, so that's why I think the terminators solution MUST be a firepower one. That and to differentiate from assault terminators MEANINGFULLY.

When have I said Tac Termies should have no shooting?

They certainly have better shooting stock than Wraithblades. Or Necron Wraiths. Or Incubi.

Storm Bolters may just be incidental fire, but throw in a pair of heavy weapons, and the squad's firepower is a bit better.

2xCML? Under the proposed, that'd be 220ish I think? Plus 6 Bolter shots?

Devs can do the same at 200 (10man + 4 heavies), but lack Relentless, Power Fists, Deep Strikes, and fearless. Halfish the saves, twice the wounds.

Seems like its in the ballpark? Doesn't change roles or models?

How about double Heavy Flamers? More expensive than a Dreadnaught with the same, but a lot more adaptable and survivable.

Double ACs in a 5man? 8 S6 AP4 rending shots? On a 2+/5++ T4 platform? That beats all but TEQ-hunters in CC?

At the right price point, don't any of those sound good?

"and the squad's firepower is a bit better. "

A bit better doesn't cut it in 7th ed.

" 8 S6 AP4 rending shots? On a 2+/5++ T4 platform?"

8 shots is a joke in 7th. Scatbikes are throwing FORTY. FORTY.

CMLs are a joke as well because frag missiles are awful and krak missiles are primarily good against MCs without 2+ armor. Krak missiles are ironically pretty crappy against most vehicles. They are not worth a heavy weapon slot for sure.

"Devs can do the same at 200 "

I don't use devs, either, because they suck. The only devs that are good are Skyhammer devs with grav cannons.

"How about double Heavy Flamers?"

Marines need more heavy flamers like a hole in the head.

Look. Most terminator heavy weapons suck. Taking more of them doesn't make them any better. Except the assault cannon, because 20 S6 shots is getting into the realm of Eldardom, which by definition makes them viable. Scatbikes still have double the shots, but I guess being half as efficacious as Eldar is a sin.

Most Termie heavy weapons suck the way that most other race's heavy weapons suck. Namely, they aren't Scatter Bikes, so you don't care.

Bharring wrote:
Most Termie heavy weapons suck the way that most other race's heavy weapons suck. Namely, they aren't Scatter Bikes, so you don't care.

Indeed.
If you use that as your baseline then nothing's gonna work. BECAUSE NOBODY WANTS MORE GAME-BREAKERS!
Scatterbikes are BROKEN, that means that THEY need to change too. But we shouldn't talk about that here. As this isn't their topic.



Now, onto something relevant: Why Heavy Bolters instead of a buffed Storm Bolter? You can give it more shots, more range and the stronger profile if needed and it doesn't screw over existing models. Never got an answer.

the fact that bharring thinks that 8 S6 AP4 shots at 24' is better then a unit of scatter bikes and would beat the scatter bikes every game makes me think he is trolling.

As a heads up im a neutral party in this completely, I don't play Space Marines and I am not Eldar/Necron.

Tac termies need some kind of advanced fire power in this edition. SO far Martel has made a lot of good suggestions and Crash and Bharring have shot them down because nobody wants anymore units on par with Eldar units.

And if you really think that Scat bikes aren't MORE durable then Tac terminators then your smoking something. 3+ armor and a 4+ jink beats a 2+ armor and 5++ invul any day of the week.

Gas,
The references were to 5 Termies each with an AC stock.

That's 20 shots.

While its fewer shots than the same points of Wind riders, each AC shot is more than twice as likely to kill a Windrider as a Scatter Laser shot is to kill a Termie.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
3+/4+ jink beats 2+/5++? On what day?

AP4+ kills Wind riders twice as fast.
AP3 kills Windriders 3x if they jink, 6x if they don't.
AP2 kills Windriders 0.75x faster if they jink (cutting their firepower by 75%), 1.5x faster if they don't.

Ignores Cover AP3 kill Windriders 6x faster
Ignores Cover AP2 kill Windriders 1.5x faster

CC AP3 kill Windriders 6x faster
CC AP2 kill Windriders 1.5x faster.

The *only* situation where 3+/4+ jink beats 2+/5++ is vs AP2 ranged shots where the defending unit is willing to sacrifice 75% of its shooting.

In all other situations, 2+/5++ ranges from 1.5 to 6 times better.

And "All other situations" are much, much more common.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You are right that I don't want more units at Scatterbike levels. I want fewer. None preferably. I want the Scstterbikes themselves changed, too. But you'd have to read my posts beyond Martel's characterizations to know that.

The stats are fine as they are I say;

Give the sergeants a selection of short skill list of 3-5 skills he can purchase and 1-2 special weapons, perhaps even one that gives him +1 I and you will see that the termies can flourish in the current meta and 7th. It works for the aspect eldar and their exarchs... why should terminator sergeants be any less trained?

SM Sarges are officers/higher rank soldiers.

Exarchs are fully consumed with the path. Not even leaders in the traditional sense, more paragons/obsessives.

They aren't really the same thing. Not that Exarchs shouldn't pay more for what they get, but an SM sarge is the same flesh and blood, the same equipment, and the same training as the other Marines. Just higher rank and often more skilled. Exarchs aren't Aspect Warriors anymore.

Bharring wrote:
Gas,
The references were to 5 Termies each with an AC stock.

That's 20 shots.

While its fewer shots than the same points of Wind riders, each AC shot is more than twice as likely to kill a Windrider as a Scatter Laser shot is to kill a Termie.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
3+/4+ jink beats 2+/5++? On what day?

AP4+ kills Wind riders twice as fast.
AP3 kills Windriders 3x if they jink, 6x if they don't.
AP2 kills Windriders 0.75x faster if they jink (cutting their firepower by 75%), 1.5x faster if they don't.

Ignores Cover AP3 kill Windriders 6x faster
Ignores Cover AP2 kill Windriders 1.5x faster

CC AP3 kill Windriders 6x faster
CC AP2 kill Windriders 1.5x faster.

The *only* situation where 3+/4+ jink beats 2+/5++ is vs AP2 ranged shots where the defending unit is willing to sacrifice 75% of its shooting.

In all other situations, 2+/5++ ranges from 1.5 to 6 times better.

And "All other situations" are much, much more common.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You are right that I don't want more units at Scatterbike levels. I want fewer. None preferably. I want the Scstterbikes themselves changed, too. But you'd have to read my posts beyond Martel's characterizations to know that.

Scatterbikes have the ability to shoot and scoot. They are basically impossible to catch. "Ohh but 2 units of terminators can easily catch them" So just double the amount of units which just about triples the points cost compared to the scat bikes and boom we can catch scat bikes......kinda inefficient wouldn't you agree? Terminators vs scat bikes in a vacuum scat bikes win every time. In a real game Scat bikes win every time because the termies will never be able to catch the bikes and shoot them let alone get in Close combat. In a real game the second those terminators disembark or deep strike they are SHOT OFF THE TABLE.

Yeah 3+ 4+ is tougher to kill then 2+ 5++. Because realistically how many AP4 ignores cover weapons are in the game compared to weapons that are AP1-2 or have rending? the answer is that their are WAY more AP1-2 weapons in the game then AP1-4 ignores cover weapons. Furthermore your scat bikes can quickly hide behind cover AFTER shooting where as the terminators are stuck out in the open and easily killed.

As an Ork player when I see terminators all I see are 200+ points of easy kills. When I see Scat bikes I see the death of my Ork Boyz and a lot of turns wasted trying to kill them. The most successful tactic I have had in kill terminators is either shooting them to death with Deff Gunz/Shoota Boyz or just assaulting them with boyz who either kill them outright or wound them so badly that I either win or win by turn 2. Best tactic in killing scat bikes is ....hope? I fire massive volleys and they get their 4+ cover save if not their 3+ armor save and thats only if I can actually see them which most of the time I cant.

Ohh and 5 terminators with a AC each still lose to scat bikes. 24' range means that unless the eldar player is stupid the marine player will never be able to catch the Scat bikes while in return the Eldar player can pick off terminators every turn and on the last turn can shoot forward and take whatever objective needs to be held.

I'm not arguing that Termies aren't competitive, even at the current 175pts for 5.

I'm arguing that coming with ACs stock would be broken.

A couple of concerns with your assessment:
- How are Termies being shot off the table upon deep striking before they get to shoot? By a unit without Intercepted? If they Deep strike in, they are shooting first.

- How do Scatter Bikes stay away from Termies while shooting?
On an infinite sized board, its possible. But standing on the center line, Termies threaten two board edges simultaneously. Their threat range is 24"+6", which is a circle of over 50" in diameter. Its not exactly small. And if the scatter bikes end movement anywhere in there, they lose heavily. And as Termies can push their way anywhere in this matchup, if Scatter Bikes don't shoot to avoid getting shot, winding down the clock actually helps Termies more.

As for being shot off the table, Scatter Bikes kill 4x(2/3)(5/6)(1/6) Termies. Each bike can kill, on average (20/54) Termies. That is scary. But any round Termies are in range, they kill 4x(2/3)(2/3)(1/3)+4x(2/3)(1/6)(1) Windriders, or 4x(4/27) + 4x(3/27), or (56/54) Wind riders.

So let's try that out. 5 Termies vs 9 Windriders. Large points advantage Windriders.

Termies drop in and kill over 5 Windriders.
Assuming they hold, 4 wind riders kill 80/54 Termies.
Remaining Termies likely finish off the Windriders if they're in range. If not, they'll get them the following round.

Anything can be shot off the table. Termies take more than most. Giving them glass cannon firepower would make them OP.

As for likelyhood of weapons, I think there is some confusion. Its not just AP4 ignores cover where Termies do better. Its anything AP3+, *or* anything AP1/2 with Ignores Cover. Or Scatter Bikes don't want to jink (fun fact - a jinking Scatter Bike is less deadly to a Termie, than a Storm Bolter termie is to a Scatter Biker). Or CC.

The majority of the firepower isn't AP1/2. It might feel like that at times, but AP3+ vastly outnumbers AP1/2.

Even if somehow AP1/2 were as prevelant as AP3+, Scatter Bikes are only marginally more survivable vs AP1/2 while jinking (0.25), whereas Termies are much more survivable (1.5x - 6x!) vs everything else. It's not even close.

Cover doesn't flip much. It means, with intervening ruins, Scatter Bikes can use the Jink numbers without jinking. So only vs AP1/2. still only 25% better best case, but 3x worse worst case.

As for rocketing forward last turn, you must be within 3" to claim an objective. Even with ObSec. 3 Termies you've been trying to run from instead of fighting all game can hold an objective, and prevent you from getting close enough. And that assumes both Eternal War and Eldar player taking second turn. Otherwise, rocketing onto an objective will show you what powerfists do to jetbikss when they come forward.

Current Scat Bikers are OP, and Termies arent competitive, but these AC Termies just destroy.

Bharring wrote:
I'm not arguing that Termies aren't competitive, even at the current 175pts for 5.

I'm arguing that coming with ACs stock would be broken.

A couple of concerns with your assessment:
- How are Termies being shot off the table upon deep striking before they get to shoot? By a unit without Intercepted? If they Deep strike in, they are shooting first.

- How do Scatter Bikes stay away from Termies while shooting?
On an infinite sized board, its possible. But standing on the center line, Termies threaten two board edges simultaneously. Their threat range is 24"+6", which is a circle of over 50" in diameter. Its not exactly small. And if the scatter bikes end movement anywhere in there, they lose heavily. And as Termies can push their way anywhere in this matchup, if Scatter Bikes don't shoot to avoid getting shot, winding down the clock actually helps Termies more.

As for being shot off the table, Scatter Bikes kill 4x(2/3)(5/6)(1/6) Termies. Each bike can kill, on average (20/54) Termies. That is scary. But any round Termies are in range, they kill 4x(2/3)(2/3)(1/3)+4x(2/3)(1/6)(1) Windriders, or 4x(4/27) + 4x(3/27), or (56/54) Wind riders.

So let's try that out. 5 Termies vs 9 Windriders. Large points advantage Windriders.

Termies drop in and kill over 5 Windriders.
Assuming they hold, 4 wind riders kill 80/54 Termies.
Remaining Termies likely finish off the Windriders if they're in range. If not, they'll get them the following round.

Anything can be shot off the table. Termies take more than most. Giving them glass cannon firepower would make them OP.

As for likelyhood of weapons, I think there is some confusion. Its not just AP4 ignores cover where Termies do better. Its anything AP3+, *or* anything AP1/2 with Ignores Cover. Or Scatter Bikes don't want to jink (fun fact - a jinking Scatter Bike is less deadly to a Termie, than a Storm Bolter termie is to a Scatter Biker). Or CC.

The majority of the firepower isn't AP1/2. It might feel like that at times, but AP3+ vastly outnumbers AP1/2.

Even if somehow AP1/2 were as prevelant as AP3+, Scatter Bikes are only marginally more survivable vs AP1/2 while jinking (0.25), whereas Termies are much more survivable (1.5x - 6x!) vs everything else. It's not even close.

Cover doesn't flip much. It means, with intervening ruins, Scatter Bikes can use the Jink numbers without jinking. So only vs AP1/2. still only 25% better best case, but 3x worse worst case.

As for rocketing forward last turn, you must be within 3" to claim an objective. Even with ObSec. 3 Termies you've been trying to run from instead of fighting all game can hold an objective, and prevent you from getting close enough. And that assumes both Eternal War and Eldar player taking second turn. Otherwise, rocketing onto an objective will show you what powerfists do to jetbikss when they come forward.

Current Scat Bikers are OP, and Termies arent competitive, but these AC Termies just destroy.

Your math is so broken it is ridiculous. 5 termies fire 10 Bolt gun shots, hitting 6-7 times and wounding 3-4 times. the bikers should fail roughly 1 or at the most 2 of their armor saves. If you gave them all AC's (which I said they would have to pay for btw) thats 20 shots about 12-14 hits and about 10 wounds and thats still only 2-3 dead riders, and if the rend hits thats a jink save so a 50/50 chance so lets go on the side of 3 dead riders. thats in a deep strike where the bikers don't get to shoot and then hide before termies can return fire.

Also in the current rules a 5 man termy squad can deep strike and can fire but since they have Storm Bolters the most they can do is kill a handful of infantry or maybe put a glance on some rear armor. On the other persons turn they will wipe out the terminators because they don't want them getting into CC. This is simple why do you not grasp this? have you ever played with/against terminators?

I've said like three times now I've moved on to the heavy bolter w/special ammo thing. I keep getting ignored. It's all good though.

"This is simple why do you not grasp this?"

Because it doesn't fit the narrative.

Gaz,
As I said, the numbers and situation where they wipe the floor with Windriders is where they're 45ppm with ACs.

In that situation, clearly our math disagrees. Let's try to find out where that is.

Here's how I calculate them shooting Windriders:
4 shots each.
2/3 to hit.
2/3 to wound without rending, 1/6 to rend
1/3 to kill without rending, 1 with rending, but we'll jink this time for 1/2

The formula, per Termie, is thus:
4x(2/3)(2/3)(1/3) = 4x(4/27) nonrending kills +
4x(2/3)(1/6)(1/2) = 4x(1/18) rending kills

4x(8/56) + 4x(3/56) = 4x(11/56), or 44/54, or roughly 80% chance per Termie to kill a Windrider, while they jink. (Earlier number was without jinking).

Slightly over .8 x 5 is slightly over 4, not 3.

Furthermore, 5 Termies at 45ppm is 225 points. 9 Windriders at 27ppm is 243 pts.

I'm not disagreeing with the point that tac Termies are bad. I field mine from time to time, and have played against them too. They can can anchor a line, or give a threat that must be handled, or slowly push, but don't make their points back usually.

I don't know how many times I can say that I agree they aren't currently effective, and still have people tell me I'm arguing otherwise.

Last time I fielded Termies was Assault Termies. Lost 4 SS/TH to a single Psychic Screech.

A memorable time i fielded my Tac Termies, they got shot off the table in one round of shooting plus overwatch by 5 Bolt Pistol chosen.

Now neither of those are the result of their stats (seriously, run those odds!), but I'm just trying to show that I do run Termies.

Martel,
You have moved on, but the logic against the AC Termies is still being debated. Leaving factually inaccurate statements to stand is really hard for me.

(Side note - Ghaz, as an Ork player, what do you think of 200pts for 5 Termies with 2x Heavy Flamers?)

" Leaving factually inaccurate statements to stand is really hard for me. "

Sorry? I sometimes prefer that people believe factually inaccurate things because it makes them easier to beat.

"but don't make their points back usually. "

I don't like this metric in general.

"but the logic against the AC Termies is still being debated"

That's your mistake. There is very little logic to this game to begin with. I personally still think AC terminators would fine for 7th ed, but heavy bolters with special ammo gives them more range and takes away their efficacy vs vehicles, because so many freaked out over a couple rends. But as for AC, I really think its as simple as if Eldar can get 40 S6 shots for 270 pts, then marines should be able to have 20 S6 shots for 225 pts. Everything else is handwaving, word salad, and overreaction to me. I've decided to go down to 15 shots that reach as far as the Eldar 40 shots and have some extra ammo options. But I'm not sure that 15 shots would be worth 175 pts, though. (These terminators would be 35 ppm, not 45 ppm)

In other words, ScatterBike clones or bust, any debate is beneath you?

Again.
1) Why Heavy Bolters and not buffed Storm Bolters? You can give them more shots. You can give them the stronger profile.
2) Scatterbikes are NOT the standard, they are a mistake. Don't measure based on them, anything you find from doing that is absolutely useless.

Bharring wrote:
In other words, ScatterBike clones or bust, any debate is beneath you?

Yep, he seems to have made it pretty clear.

Bharring wrote:
In other words, ScatterBike clones or bust, any debate is beneath you?

No. I just said for like the 5th time I'm more in favor of the heavy bolter version. I just find your objections laughable. Especially from an Eldar player.

In fact, I want to drop the AC thing altogether.

"Everything else is handwaving, word salad..."

You removed your more crazy verbage about how logic doesn't matter, that all that matters is Termies should have amazing shooting, and any logic - even if it did show they would be OP - is both unwelcome and irrelevant. The whole no-reasoning-matters argument of an earlier version of that post is what I was replying to.

You had flatly dismissed all arguments that didn't push the "they have less daka than WindRiders" point, quite abrasively.

It was really quite shocking. I hope it was just a mistype.

Bharring wrote:
"Everything else is handwaving, word salad..."

You removed your more crazy verbage about how logic doesn't matter, that all that matters is Termies should have amazing shooting, and any logic - even if it did show they would be OP - is both unwelcome and irrelevant. The whole no-reasoning-matters argument of an earlier version of that post is what I was replying to.

You had flatly dismissed all arguments that didn't push the "they have less daka than WindRiders" point, quite abrasively.

It was really quite shocking. I hope it was just a mistype.

Shocking? Really? Okay. You're acting like I killed your cat. I just disagree with you about only letting Eldar have the cool toys.

" quite abrasively. "

A lot less abrasive than it is trying to take on Eldar with BA, I assure you.

" even if it did show they would be OP"

But it's okay for Eldar to trot out an ENTIRE LIST of "OP". Okay.

No, you called any argument I might ever make 'word salad', irrelevant, and stupid, regardless of content. I'll chalk that up to a mistype that you corrected, and hopefully we can move on.

For probably the twentieth time in 11 pages, I'm not saying only Eldar should have stupidly OP gak. I'm saying noone should. How many times do I need to say that?

That brings us to what to do in the face of Eldar having that gak.

Making Termies even more gakkily OP shouldn't be an option.

Making Termies just as OP is an option some embrace. I certainly disagree. Currently, Scatter Lasers only matter directly when Eldar is on the board. Making Termies just as OP as Eldar gakkiness ruins games with Marines and Eldar, even if it *might* balance Marines vs Eldar.

Externally speaking, as the share of armies that are OP approach 50%, the frequency with which games are ruined increases.

I'd suggested the approach of Eldar being fixed, but that's not what this thread is about. Its about what to change for Termies. In that regard, what level are we trying to tune them to? Beyond ScatterBike level? Equal to Scatter Bikes? Equal to the middle? Equal to the bottom 33%? I'd suggest aiming for the middle.

This is where our argument breaks down. You see scatterbikes as The New Middle. That's our first problem. Then, looking at the same change, you see subpar, I see outrageously beyond ScatterBikes. If we're that far out of agreement, I don't think well ever come to terms.

And so, that is where we're at, when someone else engaged about if the same change set we disagree on is actually OP. Some basic math changed hands, and didn't match. You'd think we could finish that discussion without you screaming "But you're wrong! And you can't keep discussing because I've retracted that theory!".

Furthermore, I had hoped to hear from other people, too, about what they think of other options. For instance, what do other people think of 200-ish points for a 5man with two heavies? I know you don't care about it, but I'm hoping to hear more from people who don't just dismiss me as a dirty Eldar player. Especially when discussing my Termies, which I seem to field more than you in the first place.

Well, we know what Ghazkuul thinks. And Crash.

Bharring, Should terminators all have Heavy Bolters or AC's? No they shouldn't because it will make them OP. HOWEVER! your argument is that they shouldn't because then they are just as OP as Eldar and you don't want Eldar to be OP to begin with either. The problem with that is that we know for a fact GW doesn't give a Feth what we think or for game balance and we furthermore know its going to be a long time if EVER before GW gets rid of Scatter bikes or ridiculously OP undercosted Wraith Knights. So should every army from now on take nerfs to bring them back to the power level they should be at? or should every army continue to get buffed to try and contend with Eldar/Necron OP?

Eldar and Necrons Broke the game horribly, I doubt GW is going to admit a mistake and go back and fix it so realistically the only solution is to buff everyone else to match Eldar/necron power levels.

Or we ourselves could nerf Eldar/Necrons to everyone else's level.

I don't get why people always pull the "GW would never nerf OP thing X so soon" in a proposed rule thread where people are actively making rules to ignore GW's current rules.

I could turn around and say "GW would never buff Terminators so soon after releasing C:SM, so we should nerf Eldar/Necrons and other OP things down to their level"

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Or we ourselves could nerf Eldar/Necrons to everyone else's level.

I don't get why people always pull the "GW would never nerf OP thing X so soon" in a proposed rule thread where people are actively making rules to ignore GW's current rules.

I could turn around and say "GW would never buff Terminators so soon after releasing C:SM, so we should nerf Eldar/Necrons and other OP things down to their level"

So in a "Buff Terminators" thread you think the answer to how weak and pathetic terminators are is to nerf Eldar and Necrons? completely ignoring the fact that my horrendously underpowered Ork Codex eats terminators for breakfast? or that Tau destroy Terminator before they can even get off an assault? or that even IG can shoot Terminators off the table before the Terminators can kill more hten a handful of guardsmen?

How about making a useful contribution to the thread as opposed to complaining that we think Terminators need to be on the same power level as Scat bikes

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Or we ourselves could nerf Eldar/Necrons to everyone else's level.

I don't get why people always pull the "GW would never nerf OP thing X so soon" in a proposed rule thread where people are actively making rules to ignore GW's current rules.

I could turn around and say "GW would never buff Terminators so soon after releasing C:SM, so we should nerf Eldar/Necrons and other OP things down to their level"

Practically impossible. Players flock to the original material, even if it's bad. Many of them dare not to venture out into the mysterious world of house-ruling. It's kind of a crowd mentality thing where because some of them are too scared to make the jump, the rest of us can't jump because we'd divide the game even more, and players don't grow on trees. Secondly, getting players in general to agree that, for example, X is worth 43 points and NOT 44 per model would be another impossible task. Finally, getting past players that have more ego than playskill is also an issue. (I've personally found that our worst local players are also the ones that have the most ridiculous ideas about what armies and units are good etc.)

Bharring wrote:

Thoughts?

No, I don't think they are. I think scattering around some +1 to values like storm bolter shots and upgrades per squad aren't thoughts, I think they are random. Technically these are things that they do not currently have, and are therefore "more things," but this is basically irrelevant, like giving daemonettes bs9. Yeah, ok, your rangers have Hatred: gargoyles. +3 points. Bizzarely, your rangers don't really have trouble fighting gargoyles in cc, are not things you would use to fight gargoyles in cc, will very rarely be in combat with gargoyles, and very rarely be on the table with gargoyles.

It's really frustrating because I think Martel has useful things to say (I'm not remotely interested in using the ideas, but it's useful to read) and I would really rather he were just posting mostly by himself, because this interference has meant it took like four weeks to transition away from liking a 24" gun on an infantry platform.


I think the most important thing is that even though they can get bs5 and tons of special rules, Dire Avengers, Banshees, etc are not worth taking, and neither are most marines units, and indeed most types of infantry. If an infantry unit are used it is mostly to take up board space, which TDA don't do because losing one base is a big drop in footprint. So you gotta make infantry better in some way than bikes and gargantuan creatures.

Martel732 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Can we just Remove bladestorm. and make scatterbikes 1 scatter per unit of 3.. please..

Find an Eldar player to agree to that and sure.

"Personal experience of 20+ years of gaming. It's a psychology thing. People seem to HATE taking nerfs on their stuff, but don't mind their opponents being brought up to "their level". They get to keep their sense of superiority, which is important to many gamers. The idea that they can't be beat with the 'real rules'. "

I think this is really important. I'm not going to invite an eldar player to play with my new houserules that are just a bright idea like scatterlaser nerfs. I'm going to make him feel generous by asking him to allow me some OP units of my own that he can still pretty much destroy because he's got really good units.

I'm not saying to not buff them, I'm saying to to buff them to the standard of an OP unit because "GW won't change Scatbikes anytime soon".

Do you not see the absurdity of justifying buffing Termis to OP levels because GW won't nerf Scatbikes?

I agree, Termis need a buff, but if the logic your going to use is "make them OP because GW won't make non-OP units not OP anytime soon" then why bother trying to write proposed rules for anything since GW won't do what we're writing anytime soon.

And why wouldn't I complain about you wanting to buff Termis through the roof to the levels of a unit you know is OP? Look if you want an echochamer of "Lol let's make this OP because GW" be my guest, but that isn't good game design.

Plus how many people do you think would be willing to play with proposed rules that make a unit OP? Would you be willing to face a unit that deletes 1/2 a mob of boyz every turn?

Terminators undoubtbly need a boost, but this isn't the way to do it. Buffing Storm Bolters? All good and fine (as long as my Chaos Terminators get a boost to their combi-bolters to compensate). Giving them a 4++ by default and/or allowing them to re-roll saves? By all means.

We seem to get a thread like this every month where people suggest sane and non-gamebreaking suggestions only for it to reach "give them all ACs".

And Martel before you go "I've moved on from that", I know you have. That said I feel it's better to minorly buff their storm bolters (a weapon that is by all standards universally terrible), boost their defense and maybe (if needed) a points decrease on top of that rather than give them all heavy bolters with special ammo.

How would that work, anyway? 30" Str 5 AP 3 Heavy 3 Gets Hot! for Vengeance? But then what would Kraken do, since currently they boost the AP by 1, and therefore would be infinitely better. Would vengeance by AP2, then? Because that's better than the "All ACs" suggestion and even more broken, even with Get's Hot.

EDIT: If buffing Termis to OP levels instead of nerfing Eldar/Necrons is solely so Eldar/Necrons players are more willing to face you, how willing do you think everyone else will be to play with you OP Termis? You can't say buffing them to OP levels so the players of 2 armies in the game are more accepting is so you can have more opponents with your houserules when simultaneously everyone else will decline to play against you with your houserules for the exact same reason.