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.

 GoonBandito wrote:
Buffing Terminator/Storm Bolters stats is not the way to - nerfing everything is imo. There's too much low AP weapons in the game, which affect not just Terminators but a whole heap of other things. Maybe the following ideas?

* Bladestorm on Shuriken Weapons becomes AP3
* All multishot AP2 weapons in general see a 5-10pt increase across the board, regardless of codex
* Grav gets nerfed to AP-, but gets AP2 on a To Wound of 6.

You people continuously miss the point.
Even if you did all that, why would I take Terminators? They still wouldn't be good...

Well if you nerf everything, then they might actually be useful as they wouldn't be playing in a game of "who can bring the biggest gun."

When has GW ever pushed nerfs like are being proposed? Only once: 2nd ed to 3rd ed.

Martel732 wrote:
When has GW ever pushed nerfs like are being proposed? Only once: 2nd ed to 3rd ed.

All power weapons not being ap 2 in 6th edition.

They already made the change for melee, now ranged needs the same thing.

If you changed all of those ap 2 situations, terminators still die to small arms fire.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
If you changed all of those ap 2 situations, terminators still die to small arms fire.

One of the problems with terminators is that they die to both big guns (AP2) and small arms (roll those ones) If they were a little more resistant to one/both, they might be a little more viable. As it is now, pretty much everything is good against them. I guess they are good vs. Small volumes of high S, non-AP2 fire. Not a lot of that out there.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Well if you nerf everything, then they might actually be useful as they wouldn't be playing in a game of "who can bring the biggest gun."

Incorrect. They still don't carry firepower themselves, and won't earn their points back.

The cut from 40 to 35 was a step in the right direction, but it leads the question to what they're doing I cannot get elsewhere. It naturally leads to why Storm Bolters are terrible weapons and need a minor buff. Seeing as we can get more Bolter shots elsewhere for less points, why not just bump the weapon to S5? It still wouldn't make people want to take them as an upgrade, but at least you end up hating Tactical Terminators less.

 Vaktathi wrote:

More and more I think that infantry squads in general just need to be abstracted essentially as a single entity if the game's scale is going to stay the way it is or continue to escalate. Micromanaging each individual infantryman's save or their handheld weapons when there's stuff like I previously mentioned floating about the board is simply far too granular for what is necessary.

So you mean just bite the bullet and use the Epic rules with 28mm models?

I would personally rather see a buff to terminator armour and not to storm bolters.

Heavy bolter should be salvo so someone might actually take it occasionally.

Without more firepower, there is no change to terminator armor that would make me use them.

Martel732 wrote:
Without more firepower, there is no change to terminator armor that would make me use them.

If you gave them better firepower they would just be centurion lite.

Give them 2+ rerolling failed armour saves built in and I bet they would be a lot more viable as a back field deep strike unit that would cause lots of problems for heavy weapons teams and objective campers.

Meh. I'd pass still. Stormbolters suck that hard.

If the game had better assault rules. You're looking at thirty S8 AP2 attacks. Nothing to be sniffed at.

 Konrax wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Without more firepower, there is no change to terminator armor that would make me use them.

If you gave them better firepower they would just be centurion lite.

Give them 2+ rerolling failed armour saves built in and I bet they would be a lot more viable as a back field deep strike unit that would cause lots of problems for heavy weapons teams and objective campers.

Except it wouldn't cause problems because we're ignoring that Terminators aren't dangerous. All that does is makes me ignore 10 S4 shots on my backfield. Big deal.

I have a friend whom uses Terminators very well with a Librarian Conclave buffing them with Invisibility.

Still, thats about the only thing which works though.

 master of ordinance wrote:
I have a friend whom uses Terminators very well with a Librarian Conclave buffing them with Invisibility.

Still, thats about the only thing which works though.

I have Tzeentch terminators I play and I try to buff them with invis and endurance and they can be very meaty with that. Of course their range is a joke but they plow forward and melee crush quite well.

 master of ordinance wrote:
I have a friend whom uses Terminators very well with a Librarian Conclave buffing them with Invisibility.

Still, thats about the only thing which works though.

EVERYTHING is good with Invisibility because Invisibility is stupidly written.

You can't say a unit is useful based off that. It's pretty lazy.

 master of ordinance wrote:
I have a friend whom uses Terminators very well with a Librarian Conclave buffing them with Invisibility.

Still, thats about the only thing which works though.

He'd be much better off making grav cents invisible.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The biggest problem methinks is simply that the scale of the game has runaway on itself. Terminators are fearsome heavy assault infantry, but are ultimately infantry nonetheless. When the game is now factoring in strategic bombers, Godzilla sized creatures, single units that put out more mid-strength firepower than entire 5E IG gunlines would, and units that are basically composed entirely of "ultra-HQ" equivalent units (e.g. TWC deathstars), it becomes difficult to reasonably differentiate units without turning them into something they're not.

More and more I think that infantry squads in general just need to be abstracted essentially as a single entity if the game's scale is going to stay the way it is or continue to escalate. Micromanaging each individual infantryman's save or their handheld weapons when there's stuff like I previously mentioned floating about the board is simply far too granular for what is necessary.

The game used to be about infantry fighting infantry with a very few tanks with no need to worry about gargantuan creatures, and I think there is no reason with the addition of GCs that the rules shouldn't give infantry the ability to stay useful as separate models. The shooting rules themselves should just allow them to cause multiple wounds with one shot or do extra damage to tanks, native to the unit without any special rules. If hypothetically you were playing this as a cooperative or single player game, it would be more fun to be infantry trying to survive or kill a pack of riptides, Knights and wraith knights than to be the monster that has to trample a bunch of puny infantry.

Of course terminators are terrible. It's not even important anymore to kill the infantry that they fail to be good at killing. So you have to buff infantry so that terminators have something to kill again and so that terminators will also get this buffs. Yes, you do have to continue the cycle of buffs until it is complete, no, you cannot nerf things into being balanced, because the large models make this a different game than it was. And the rules then also need to be different.

Sheesh, sorry guys, I was just making an observation!

Its the rage coming from the diconnect between terminator fluff and terminator tt reality.

Eh, I can understand that. I feel the same way about the LRBT and variants.

There's different storm bolters too. The Marine-portable ones are more like pistols, especially the Terminator ones in a Terminator fist, whereas the vehicle mounted ones are significantly bigger and we all know bigger is better in 40k.

Maybe the Terminator ones should have a higher rate of fire? I now its not much but it is better than nothing.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Maybe the Terminator ones should have a higher rate of fire? I now its not much but it is better than nothing.

Make them 2/4 Salvo
All bolters have Shred.
H. Bolters become 3/5 Salvo

I think that'd fix bolters.


Then again, I think IG should have a rule that if another squad has already fired at a target using lasguns, all other squads get to re-roll 1's to hit since they benefit from the laser pointers

I dunno about Bolters having Shred, but it would at least give them character.

In the RPG they do have a rule similar to shred.

My main issue is that, fluff wise, they should be better at hitting vehicles, but Rending on everyone is kinda ridiculous.

At the D6 level it IS pretty hard to represent the Bolter as a fearsome weapon.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
My main issue is that, fluff wise, they should be better at hitting vehicles, but Rending on everyone is kinda ridiculous.

At the D6 level it IS pretty hard to represent the Bolter as a fearsome weapon.

As someone who plays the TT-RPG, I don't get the idea that bolters are effective against tanks (though tanks in the fluff seem crazy durable compared to the table top). I always get the impression that bolters are decimating all but the most heavily armored infantry, decimating orks, cultists, and demons with horrific wounds.
Hence shred.
Usually it seems that marines are scrambling to attach a melta bomb or use a heavy weapon when a tank rolls into town.

Rending I think is fine for eldar weapons. They are described as a storm of sharp metal being fired at rapid velocities. I can imagine them hitting perfectly and just shredding through armor, but normally not being very effective against heavy armor.

I'll readily agree that the D6 system is rough to work with. I prefer the 2d6 system used in WMH, and really wish 40k would move to it.

I think d20 would be awesome myself.