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.

"Seriously though using eldar and especially scatbikes as a metric for anything is gonna lead to badly skewed results. "

Why? It's good enough for Eldar.

In a nutshell because it was a glaring mistake. An eff-u to someone being forced to tone down wave serpents. If your familiar with MTG for example scatbikes are the 'mental misstep' of 40k.

We've been working on a massive FUQ (unanswered) slash Errata here locally so I am interested in what you guys are brewing here for termies because they do need a little help.

However its too difficult even unrealistic to use eldar as a metric because they force the vast majority of units to be reworked to compensate. Its the arms race.

Much easier [and better IMO] to just nerf windriders bring back the former distort and tone down infinite warp jumps.

I do like the idea of terminator rounds and even of multiple heavy weapons, maaybe even better saves. Its the combo of all the above thats looking ridiculous. Once per game terminator rounds even sounds aight. Or 1 heavy weapon per model with current weapon stats. But even here we need to consider scatbikes have a lot going for them but combat ability is null and saves are much worse than on TDA. They trade firepower to obtain jink saves. Terminators don't trade anything.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
At the same time, 4++ to 3++ is kinda weak, even if it gives Hammer of Wrath or whatever. That would be a weak tradeoff for losing the new and improved Storm Bolter.

It's certainly less lucrative than it was before. 3 options as I see it:
1) Slight modification to one of your suggestions: SS provides 3++. If a model already has an invulnerable save, instead of using the ss's 3++, the player may instead elect to reroll the model's existing invulnerable save. (my feeling is this should only be applicable to a models invulnerable save, i.e. not applicable to cover saves as it might be a bit too good otherwise. Thoughts?
2) SS 3++ & confers counterattack (considerable better than hammer)
3) SS 3++ & confers HOW. Points reduced appropriately form teminators to keep it competive vs sb.

dominuschao wrote:
In a nutshell because it was a glaring mistake. An eff-u to someone being forced to tone down wave serpents. If your familiar with MTG for example scatbikes are the 'mental misstep' of 40k.

We've been working on a massive FUQ (unanswered) slash Errata here locally so I am interested in what you guys are brewing here for termies because they do need a little help.

However its too difficult even unrealistic to use eldar as a metric because they force the vast majority of units to be reworked to compensate. Its the arms race.

Much easier [and better IMO] to just nerf windriders bring back the former distort and tone down infinite warp jumps.

I do like the idea of terminator rounds and even of multiple heavy weapons, maaybe even better saves. Its the combo of all the above thats looking ridiculous. Once per game terminator rounds even sounds aight. Or 1 heavy weapon per model with current weapon stats. But even here we need to consider scatbikes have a lot going for them but combat ability is null and saves are much worse than on TDA. They trade firepower to obtain jink saves. Terminators don't trade anything.

My counter to this is that if you don't make serious changes to what tactical terminators can do at range, you will only ever see the assault version of terminators. The salvo 2/4 special ammo stormbolters sound pretty decent, as does heavy bolters w/special ammo. Sadly, CC ability is practically a non-factor in so many 7th ed games.

Also, don't forget that the windrider's movement and range mean that they will frequently be taking zero return fire, making them immortal. Stormbolters but terminators within all kinds of nasty return fire like grav cannons. This is the same reasoning as to why the Riptde is at least twice as durable as the Dreadknight, despite similar stats; far less effective incoming shots.

And the unfortunate problem is that the nerfs wouldn't stop with windriders. There are many calls for nerfs on many things in the game such as grav. If you nerf grav, then Riptides and WK need nerfed at minimum. One nerf leads to another nerf, etc. It's not really any different than bringing everything up.

Some good points Martel and your right, terminators fall short in straight fire fights. The game is hostile to elite units vs elite models embedded inside fodder units.

Honestly I think grav on terminators might be a better avenue to explore than new weapon profiles (barring better stormbolters which should be a thing). Maybe reduced scatter DS or similar 'strategic' type abilities.

Grav would be more balanced then some of the other weaponry simply decause it doesn't have a strength value, forces jink, and most importantly its directly proportionate to armour saves in terms of effectiveness. Or in short it hurts meq, eldar, crons, tau while not crushing some of the weaker armies out there, like massed high RoF long ranged heavy weapons (and scats) do. Downside is they would actually be a better version of cents at that point, which is saying something.

Windriders I know quite well. I actually just recently quit using them as written for friendlies and went back to their former profile because they are disgusting and unfun if maxed as written. They basically invalidate a large portion of most books options. They were even borderline too good in the last dex IMO. Taking them back to 1/3 heavies is necessary.

The nerfs in general I disagree on simply because the number of OP'd units is far less than that of the underpowered units in the game. Shortest route and all that.

Anyway I digress a little. So heres some questions:
What is the purpose of terminators? i.e. what would these rules accomplish?

Should terminators be spammable, dedicated to taking out primarily infantry or uber elite 1-of units that can tackle anything? Whats the goal here?

In a perfect world, I would get rid of the useless powerfists that turn tactical terminators into CC units. Footslogging CC units with T4 W1 are a dumpster fire in 7th ed.

I don't think we all agree on a goal here, because my plan would be to turn them into the marine version of broadsides because they are utter failures as CC units.

I have even seen people stop using assault terminators for the exact same reason. Foot slogging CC units. In fact, there's never a reason to use ANY terminator unit over a grav cent or a grav biker. Not having to catch your opponent and being able to just go "LOL GRAV!" is too good to pass up. Why use powerfists when I can just grav?

Powerfists, by the way, that will NEVER catch windriders, so a CC comparison is meaningless. Being an "objective bully" is also meaningless when the Eldar are aiming to table you.

Eliminating or at least trimming back on PFs to say sergs or whatever would open up better ranged ability in return. Assault does happen and its effective. Or in this case counter assault. Cents with no support are a perfect example. SnP = no overwatch and in combat they fold. But ya I agree the dual purpose termie is outdated. PFs are mostly worthless now in this context.

Anway I do get the impression this is aimed primarily at dealing with eldar. Or in other words basically an anti meta unit. So lets run with that for a sec..

Just spit balling here but maybe terminator armour really just needs to shrug grav, like grav immunity of some sort, and include tracking systems that ignore jink. Ya it moves away from their traditional role in the fluff (although stormbolters could still accomplish that). In return the unit is focused on dealing with two of the most problematic elements in today's environment (jinking bikes and grav spam) without splash damaging every other unit that already struggles, which is really what makes windriders too good.. they are anti infantry in spades, double as anti light-med armour, out maneuver everyone AND they're obsec.

dominuschao wrote:
Eliminating or at least trimming back on PFs to say sergs or whatever would open up better ranged ability in return. Assault does happen and its effective. Or in this case counter assault. Cents with no support are a perfect example. SnP = no overwatch and in combat they fold. But ya I agree the dual purpose termie is outdated. PFs are mostly worthless now in this context.

Anway I do get the impression this is aimed primarily at dealing with eldar. Or in other words basically an anti meta unit. So lets run with that for a sec..

Just spit balling here but maybe terminator armour really just needs to shrug grav, like grav immunity of some sort, and include tracking systems that ignore jink. Ya it moves away from their traditional role in the fluff (although stormbolters could still accomplish that). In return the unit is focused on dealing with two of the most problematic elements in today's environment (jinking bikes and grav spam) without splash damaging every other unit that already struggles, which is really what makes windriders too good.. they are anti infantry in spades, double as anti light-med armour, out maneuver everyone AND they're obsec.

Terminators fail against more than just Eldar. They just fail the hardest there. Really, any marine list can pack enough AP 2 to melt them down.Tau have the pie plate of doom, and lists with lots of MCs really don't give a feth at all about your armor.

Adding SM heavy weapons to the list would be an interesting option.

Perhaps a Grav Cannon as a Heavy option?

How would 5 Termies toting two Grav Cannons (with Amps, probably) for 200-ish points feel?

Bharring wrote:
Adding SM heavy weapons to the list would be an interesting option.

Perhaps a Grav Cannon as a Heavy option?

How would 5 Termies toting two Grav Cannons (with Amps, probably) for 200-ish points feel?

More expensive then 3 grav cannons and 3 missile launchers with the added benifit of deep striking? (edit: oh wait nevermind cents are more)
IF renta pods wasn't a thing then i would say yeah sounds cool

not any more though.

Storm bolters are supposed to be comparable to heavy stubbers, which is the option they replace on Guard vehicles. If you move them too far out heavy stubber territory, you're going to screw with Guard balance.

The heavy stubber is what, 36" S4 AP6 Heavy 3? (or is it AP -? I know it used to be one and was changed to the other... but that's it) In which case the the stubber trades one/two points of AP for an additional 12" of range. Do the SB/HS options cost the same in the IG codex?

Martel732 wrote:

dominuschao wrote:
Eliminating or at least trimming back on PFs to say sergs or whatever would open up better ranged ability in return. Assault does happen and its effective. Or in this case counter assault. Cents with no support are a perfect example. SnP = no overwatch and in combat they fold. But ya I agree the dual purpose termie is outdated. PFs are mostly worthless now in this context.

Anway I do get the impression this is aimed primarily at dealing with eldar. Or in other words basically an anti meta unit. So lets run with that for a sec..

Just spit balling here but maybe terminator armour really just needs to shrug grav, like grav immunity of some sort, and include tracking systems that ignore jink. Ya it moves away from their traditional role in the fluff (although stormbolters could still accomplish that). In return the unit is focused on dealing with two of the most problematic elements in today's environment (jinking bikes and grav spam) without splash damaging every other unit that already struggles, which is really what makes windriders too good.. they are anti infantry in spades, double as anti light-med armour, out maneuver everyone AND they're obsec.

Terminators fail against more than just Eldar. They just fail the hardest there. Really, any marine list can pack enough AP 2 to melt them down.Tau have the pie plate of doom, and lists with lots of MCs really don't give a feth at all about your armor.

Has anyone suggested TDA granting an additional wound to any model that takes it, grey knights already have it I think though not worded that way. As far as a better SB goes just consult the fluff. Should be twice a bolter and more rapid which relentless would mitigate. So Salvo 2/4 and either twinlinked or shred sounds fair and fits the direction of weight of fire.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
The heavy stubber is what, 36" S4 AP6 Heavy 3? (or is it AP -? I know it used to be one and was changed to the other... but that's it) In which case the the stubber trades one/two points of AP for an additional 12" of range. Do the SB/HS options cost the same in the IG codex?

They're the same cost.

Actually I think the stubber is all-around better mathematically... It has 1 more shot.

Higher range and a single extra shot, makes it a no brainer, especially when it comes to choosing your co-ax

Anyway the point is that the storm bolter should be on the approximate power level of a heavy stubber.

Alcibiades wrote:
Anyway the point is that the storm bolter should be on the approximate power level of a heavy stubber.

Only the same for 5+ armor I think. Otherwise the Stubber outperforms the Storm Bolter.

Around the same level.

It shouldn't outdamage the HS by a big margin.

Let terminator relentless carry over to PF, so that they strike at initative. That should certainly make them pretty competative again with a single stroke.

Models in Terminator Armor should ignore the Unwieldy rule. They should also have the Hammer of Wrath rule. And make their Storm Bolters rending or Master-crafted.

Making the fist lose unwieldy on termies is undesirable -it would completely imbalance the viability of other close combat weapons. Lightning claws would go relegated to use against T3 enemies. Don't forget us wolves players deliberately fit out some of our termies with mauls, swords and wolf claws so that we CAN strike at initiative

The preferable solution is to make fists optional imo.

Wonder how a second storm bolter, or combi-weapon on a termie, in place of the fist, would work. Give one of the weapons a suitable bayonet attachment for aesthetics of course.

 thegreatchimp wrote:
Making the fist lose unwieldy on termies is undesirable -it would completely imbalance the viability of other close combat weapons. Lightning claws would go relegated to use against T3 enemies. Don't forget us wolves players deliberately fit out some of our termies with mauls, swords and wolf claws so that we CAN strike at initiative

The preferable solution is to make fists optional imo.

Wonder how a second storm bolter, or combi-weapon on a termie, in place of the fist, would work. Give one of the weapons a suitable bayonet attachment for aesthetics of course.

Lightning Claws give additional attacks too, don't forget about that. It wouldn't be totally imbalanced.

While LCs would have the potential to do more damage, on average the single PF would do more damage more often whilst ignoring all armour saves.

Tactical Termis and TH/SS Termis would have to skyrocket in price for that to even be a thing (at least 45pts/55pts, most likely higher).

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
While LCs would have the potential to do more damage, on average the single PF would do more damage more often whilst ignoring all armour saves.

Tactical Termis and TH/SS Termis would have to skyrocket in price for that to even be a thing (at least 45pts/55pts, most likely higher).

Thereby making them totally useless.

Which is why it shouldn't be done.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Which is why it shouldn't be done.

You really think that ability would be so valuable? It think its value would be minimal, because they would not be able to win that many more CCs. CC ability is not even the issue anyway.

People still bitch about a S6 Powerfist on initiative on a t3 3+ infantry for 57pts.

How is 5 S8 Powerfists on initiative at 35ppm going to be reasonable?

And for what targets to Tac Termies need them? They already win CC against most targets. Why do they need to win more?

It really is.
LC termis can't go down enough to make it balanced while also not being absurdly cheap.

AP2 weapons at initiative are a big deal, and most of those are only S:U or S:+1, not S:x2.

You're now ID-ing MEQ and less at I4 (or I5 on Slaanesh Termis) and only allow invul saves.


If a xenos army got that ability on a model for less than 50pts along with a 2+ and a 3++ the cries of cheese would be deafening.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
It really is.
LC termis can't go down enough to make it balanced while also not being absurdly cheap.

AP2 weapons at initiative are a big deal, and most of those are only S:U or S:+1, not S:x2.

You're now ID-ing MEQ and less at I4 (or I5 on Slaanesh Termis) and only allow invul saves.


If a xenos army got that ability on a model for less than 50pts along with a 2+ and a 3++ the cries of cheese would be deafening.

"AP2 weapons at initiative are a big deal"

I don't think so. Most units die before they can reach CC. A durable unit with AP 2 on init, maybe, but terminators pale in comparsion to TWC or Wraiths. And they are slow. At any rate, it's a pointless upgrade at best, as dying before CC is a trademark problem for terminators.

Bharring wrote:
People still bitch about a S6 Powerfist on initiative on a t3 3+ infantry for 57pts.

NOBODY does that. Quit exaggerating.