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.

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

Nerfing Eldar and Tau will not fix the terminator at all. They're not viable against things like TACTICAL squads.

4th edition was filled to the brim with Tank Hunting twin-asscan Termies.
5th edition was choke full of 3++ Hammernators.

Terminators desperately need help, but they've also had a couple of favourable editions they've exploited as well.

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

Nerfing Eldar and Tau will not fix the terminator at all. They're not viable against things like TACTICAL squads.

Didn't Space Wolves have that silly "Imma fire all my Vortex Missiles in one turn!" thing back in 2nd?

EDIT: I'm not sure that 250 points would be fair for a Terminator Squad with 2 Assault Cannons, even with an extra wound. 8 S6 shots at 215 points, which it'd be if we just let the current ones take an extra Assault Cannon, does not seem over the top to me. A squad of Havocs with Reaper Autocannons have similar damage output (longer range and higher strength vs. rending) while being cheaper, but lose out in durability, but it's not like autocannon Havocs are dominating the field.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

Nerfing Eldar and Tau will not fix the terminator at all. They're not viable against things like TACTICAL squads.

Didn't Space Wolves have that silly "Imma fire all my Vortex Missiles in one turn!" thing back in 2nd?

Krak missiles? Yes. But it still sucked compared to what CSM had. And Eldar. And Tyranids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Experiment 626 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

Nerfing Eldar and Tau will not fix the terminator at all. They're not viable against things like TACTICAL squads.

4th edition was filled to the brim with Tank Hunting twin-asscan Termies.
5th edition was choke full of 3++ Hammernators.

Terminators desperately need help, but they've also had a couple of favourable editions they've exploited as well.

5th 3++ terminators were not an issue in my experience. Too slow to be a threat.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

Nerfing Eldar and Tau will not fix the terminator at all. They're not viable against things like TACTICAL squads.

Didn't Space Wolves have that silly "Imma fire all my Vortex Missiles in one turn!" thing back in 2nd?

EDIT: I'm not sure that 250 points would be fair for a Terminator Squad with 2 Assault Cannons, even with an extra wound. 8 S6 shots at 215 points, which it'd be if we just let the current ones take an extra Assault Cannon, does not seem over the top to me. A squad of Havocs with Reaper Autocannons have similar damage output (longer range and higher strength vs. rending) while being cheaper, but lose out in durability, but it's not like autocannon Havocs are dominating the field.

Havocs only get regular Autocannons - not the twin-linked kind that Termies get.

Also, while the autocannon gains +1S + double the range, and a unit of Havocs puts out the same amount of shooting as two assault cannons, they're also forced to stay entirely static in order to be even remotely effective.
Meanwhile, Termies get an effective 30" range, are more mobile without sacrificing all accuracy, and have Rending which easily beats out the +1S of the autocannon.

Not saying that Autocannon Havocs are trash, (they not, just plainly average), but the Termies functionally have a lot more going for them, assuming a proposed price drop & lack or idiotic tax on their second gun.

Best armor in the imperium? Lets make the unit T4 with one wound!

Make them two wound. Make them T5. And do not ffs up the.point value.

Anyone who uses nurgle termies knows they work, but cost an ergegious amount of points.

Look at oblits, two wounds. Work freaking great. Nurgle oblits? Giant pain in the ass for everyone. Centurians do not even have an invuln.....t5 with two wounds.

Make them an anti infantry cheaper option to the shooty big boys and voila, fixed um for yah.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

Nerfing Eldar and Tau will not fix the terminator at all. They're not viable against things like TACTICAL squads.

Didn't Space Wolves have that silly "Imma fire all my Vortex Missiles in one turn!" thing back in 2nd?

EDIT: I'm not sure that 250 points would be fair for a Terminator Squad with 2 Assault Cannons, even with an extra wound. 8 S6 shots at 215 points, which it'd be if we just let the current ones take an extra Assault Cannon, does not seem over the top to me. A squad of Havocs with Reaper Autocannons have similar damage output (longer range and higher strength vs. rending) while being cheaper, but lose out in durability, but it's not like autocannon Havocs are dominating the field.

Havocs only get regular Autocannons - not the twin-linked kind that Termies get.

Also, while the autocannon gains +1S + double the range, and a unit of Havocs puts out the same amount of shooting as two assault cannons, they're also forced to stay entirely static in order to be even remotely effective.
Meanwhile, Termies get an effective 30" range, are more mobile without sacrificing all accuracy, and have Rending which easily beats out the +1S of the autocannon.

Not saying that Autocannon Havocs are trash, (they not, just plainly average), but the Termies functionally have a lot more going for them, assuming a proposed price drop & lack or idiotic tax on their second gun.

Not really. For a little over the price of a Terminator squad carrying a single Assault Cannon, you get two Havoc squads with Autocannons.

Two Assault Cannons in the same unit is NOT going to break anything, not even close.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:

Look at it like this:
Loyalist Assault Terminators at base are 175. With the same loadout and with MoS your Chaos ones are nearing 40 a pop. The only thing you're doing better is charging T4 3+ outside of cover for the points. THEN you look at the benefits Loyalists get, and then you realize how silly your statement sounds.

C'mon dude, can't you see what he is saying? Internal balance=/=external balance, Chaos don't have the same options as Loyalists hence units are priced differently based on the role they play within an army. You shouldn't compare unit to unit between codexes without looking extensively at the rest of the list. Chaos have little access to 2+ Sv's, making the 2+ svs they DO get a little more expensive, probably not what they deserve but you can understand the logic behind the decision. Chaos Terminators also start off cheaper than Loyalists therefore pay more to be upgraded to a similar level. It's the same concept behind Fantasy's Tomb Guard vs Grave Guard, very similar units but Tomb Guard are more expensive because the TK army syngerised better with them.

Also MoS terminators are better then loyalist terminators if both have Lightning Claws against I4 opponents, which is statistically a large category. So there is that.

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment, there's no point trying to convince people who have already dug their own holes for their own graves so to say.

Whilst I agree that the CSM has a hand now and needs a drastic overhaul (would love some NL legion tactics and plastic Dreadclaws ), it still does not dictate that we still have a hand until then.

Ultimately people can be blue in the face about math to me and I could not give a care less. They have a role, I made that role and I made that role good in my area and that is all I care about.

In short the internet does not know your area and therefore can only grasp at math as their straws because that's all they have.

People can spite, bubble and toil all they like, meanwhile I will be breaking Decurions as I have done with that unit because I understand that CSM does not play survivability but plays the quantity is its own quality/ overwhelm target priority faction very well (just like Orks as I have found out ) and not the untouchable units that will wreck face as the internet so desperately craves for every unit in their book alone .

Terminators suffer the same problems as Meganobz, They are USELESS in about 90% of scenarios and only fit a single role inside an army. They are designed to go kill really expensive things that are vulnerable to there S8 Power Fists/Power Klaws. The problem with them is that other units inside both armies are just as capable of doing that job but for cheaper or with more flexibility.

I have a single unit of Meganobz because for significantly less points I can use a boyz squad with a Nob PK and get the job done, while at the same time being more durable and having a bigger threat/impact on the game.

The reason why is because in previous editions AP2 and mass firepower was RARE, but 4th edition and onward it became more and more common, at this point its easy for an army to grab a bunch of AP1-2 weapons that make having Terminators useless, or if they can't bring AP 1-2 weapons they can bring a bunch of weapons that put out a terribfic amount of shots and drown the terminators/Mega Nobz in weight of fire.

 happygolucky wrote:

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:

Look at it like this:
Loyalist Assault Terminators at base are 175. With the same loadout and with MoS your Chaos ones are nearing 40 a pop. The only thing you're doing better is charging T4 3+ outside of cover for the points. THEN you look at the benefits Loyalists get, and then you realize how silly your statement sounds.

C'mon dude, can't you see what he is saying? Internal balance=/=external balance, Chaos don't have the same options as Loyalists hence units are priced differently based on the role they play within an army. You shouldn't compare unit to unit between codexes without looking extensively at the rest of the list. Chaos have little access to 2+ Sv's, making the 2+ svs they DO get a little more expensive, probably not what they deserve but you can understand the logic behind the decision. Chaos Terminators also start off cheaper than Loyalists therefore pay more to be upgraded to a similar level. It's the same concept behind Fantasy's Tomb Guard vs Grave Guard, very similar units but Tomb Guard are more expensive because the TK army syngerised better with them.

Also MoS terminators are better then loyalist terminators if both have Lightning Claws against I4 opponents, which is statistically a large category. So there is that.

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment, there's no point trying to convince people who have already dug their own holes for their own graves so to say.

Whilst I agree that the CSM has a hand now and needs a drastic overhaul (would love some NL legion tactics and plastic Dreadclaws ), it still does not dictate that we still have a hand until then.

Ultimately people can be blue in the face about math to me and I could not give a care less. They have a role, I made that role and I made that role good in my area and that is all I care about.

In short the internet does not know your area and therefore can only grasp at math as their straws because that's all they have.

People can spite, bubble and toil all they like, meanwhile I will be breaking Decurions as I have done with that unit because I understand that CSM does not play survivability but plays the quantity is its own quality/ overwhelm target priority faction very well (just like Orks as I have found out ) and not the untouchable units that will wreck face as the internet so desperately craves for every unit in their book alone .

Ah. Yes. You're clearly the chosen one and the only person on the Internet to claim such a discovery, and it is why CSM's and Terminators in general are simply wrecking face at tournaments all over the globe!

For the record, MoS LC Terminators only perform better in that situation when the target isn't in cover, in which case, the unit costing more is performing exactly the same as the Loyalist counterpart.

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

I agree, except regarding 2nd edition. 3+ save on 2D6 made them very hard to being down even with modifiers, unless you were pumping lascannon shots into them. It's curious you should say that -they proved very resiliant in any game I played them in in 2nd ed. I particularly recall an incident where a single hammernator went on a a 20 killing spree against orks and gretchin.

If you run deep strike shooty nators, then there isnt much you cant kill in one turn. Sure, they might die the next turn, but hey, if you can kill a stormsurge in the process its worth it.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

I agree, except regarding 2nd edition. 3+ save on 2D6 made them very hard to being down even with modifiers, unless you were pumping lascannon shots into them. It's curious you should say that -they proved very resiliant in any game I played them in in 2nd ed. I particularly recall an incident where a single hammernator went on a a 20 killing spree against orks and gretchin.

Anything with a -3 save modifier or greater was very lethal to them. Shuriken cannons being one of the main culprits. They died quickly every game I saw them in.

IIRC 2nd ed had some funky target priority rules where you could stick cheap, fast units in the open close to enemy units and they would be forced to shoot at that?

 Sgt. Vanden wrote:
If you run deep strike shooty nators, then there isnt much you cant kill in one turn. Sure, they might die the next turn, but hey, if you can kill a stormsurge in the process its worth it.

This confuses me, because you're paying Terminator tax on a suicide unit whose role is better filled by Sternguard in pretty much every aspect, including points.

Both can take Heavy flamers, terminators don't have access to Combi-weapons, melta-weapons, plasmaguns, grav-guns, meltabombs, grenades, droppod deepstrike security (i've seen more terminators killed by razorwire then should be possible), or special ammo.

Yeah they get assault cannons and cyclone missile launchers, which means, at max, only 2 of the models are doing anything of value while the other 8 are plinking away with stormbolters. And to even get a second special weapon, you are mandated to pay out ANOTHER 175 points for 5 more useless gits! A cheaper maxed unit of sternguard are infinitely better, and all 10 members are useful.

That Terminators suicide squad just cost you 400 points (10 guys, 2 upgrades).
That Sternguard squad cost you 320 points (355 with DP), with 10 guys, all armed with combi weapons.

Hell, a bare-bones Sternguard unit comes in at 220pts and will kill everything -expect- AV11 or higher. Stick in two meltaguns for 20 pts and you can deal with anything.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No, loyalist terminators have never been viable. Armor save modifiers killed them in 2nd, and plasma being AP 2 killed them in 3rd ed on.

I agree, except regarding 2nd edition. 3+ save on 2D6 made them very hard to being down even with modifiers, unless you were pumping lascannon shots into them. It's curious you should say that -they proved very resiliant in any game I played them in in 2nd ed. I particularly recall an incident where a single hammernator went on a a 20 killing spree against orks and gretchin.

What they did have in 2nd was a method for getting into the enemies face reliably which was both valuable and rare.

nareik wrote:
IIRC 2nd ed had some funky target priority rules where you could stick cheap, fast units in the open close to enemy units and they would be forced to shoot at that?

Yes, you had to shoot the closest thing.

Martel732 wrote:

nareik wrote:
IIRC 2nd ed had some funky target priority rules where you could stick cheap, fast units in the open close to enemy units and they would be forced to shoot at that?

Yes, you had to shoot the closest thing.

Trying to recall...did you have the choice between targeting the closest squad OR the closest vehicle?

I don't think so. But vehicles were god awful in 2nd. I can remember it still... "I rip your track off with my power fist"

 thepowerfulwill wrote:
So maybe it's because I've been out of the game for a while and the metas changed, but no one seems to bring termies to the table anymore and people rip them open online, wondering what's with the changes adittude towards the bulky marines?

It's a matter of point cost.

GW seems to think that something with a 2+/5++ save, a storm bolter, 2 attacks, and a power fist is still an amazing unit worth 35 points.
The problem is they don't have the damage output to justify those points. Lets look at a sample terminator army.
The entire army has 41 terminators on the table. I would either take Imperial Fists or Iron Hands to increase their damage output. White scars librarians would give you some hit and run options as well.
With the Task Force benefits, you could get a lot of leverage with 'psychic scream' form your librarians. The Extremis Level Threat would also help your units punch down a wraithknight that got to close.
The army throws out 81 bolter dice a turn, and has 14 MLs a turn to shoot as well. It's MSU to it can hit multiple targets.

But there are some big flaws with this. Firstly, 41 terminators is just not that durable. In a game filled with scat bikes, warp spiders, wraithknights, stormsurges, and riptide spam -- killing 41 2+ models is not that hard. It won't happen in one turn, but it will happen over the course of a game. It's the reason you don't see armies of 80 marines anymore.

Secondly, the range is low. Sure, 24" seems great at first, but the reality is that you won't be able to focus your firepower where you need it to be to score kills without seriously bunching up your units. You might be able to deep strike 1-2 squads to help with this issue.

Finally, there are threats that will just wipe the army off the board. Wraithknights will give endless problems. Dual Stormsurges will just rush in and stomp the army to death. "But I have 10 STR 8, AP2 attacks per squad". The 2 stormsurges don't care. Hitting in 3's and wounding on 2's is a lot less effective when there is a 4++ and 5+ FNP added.
(2/3 to hit) * (5/6 to wound) * (1/2 failed save) * (2/3 failed FNP) = 5/27 chance to wound per attack. (~18%)
That means all 10 attacks will do ~2 wounds before the stormsurges start stomping the terminators to death. That is assuming the stormsurges don't just sit stationary and use their superior firepower to wipe the terminators.

How could GW fix this? Giving terminators a 5+ FNP would help greatly.
Making stomp not 'remove model from play' on the roll of a 6 would help greatly. Then the terminators could whittle down the stormsurge.
Letting all terminators start arriving from deep strike on turn 1 would help greatly.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

nareik wrote:
IIRC 2nd ed had some funky target priority rules where you could stick cheap, fast units in the open close to enemy units and they would be forced to shoot at that?

Yes, you had to shoot the closest thing.

Trying to recall...did you have the choice between targeting the closest squad OR the closest vehicle?

Models were grouped into several sizes, regular infantry, bigger stuff like dreads/tyranid warriors, and then vehicles. Had to shoot the closest or pick from another category. Vehicles were insanely durable compared with today.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 happygolucky wrote:

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:

Look at it like this:
Loyalist Assault Terminators at base are 175. With the same loadout and with MoS your Chaos ones are nearing 40 a pop. The only thing you're doing better is charging T4 3+ outside of cover for the points. THEN you look at the benefits Loyalists get, and then you realize how silly your statement sounds.

C'mon dude, can't you see what he is saying? Internal balance=/=external balance, Chaos don't have the same options as Loyalists hence units are priced differently based on the role they play within an army. You shouldn't compare unit to unit between codexes without looking extensively at the rest of the list. Chaos have little access to 2+ Sv's, making the 2+ svs they DO get a little more expensive, probably not what they deserve but you can understand the logic behind the decision. Chaos Terminators also start off cheaper than Loyalists therefore pay more to be upgraded to a similar level. It's the same concept behind Fantasy's Tomb Guard vs Grave Guard, very similar units but Tomb Guard are more expensive because the TK army syngerised better with them.

Also MoS terminators are better then loyalist terminators if both have Lightning Claws against I4 opponents, which is statistically a large category. So there is that.

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment, there's no point trying to convince people who have already dug their own holes for their own graves so to say.

Whilst I agree that the CSM has a hand now and needs a drastic overhaul (would love some NL legion tactics and plastic Dreadclaws ), it still does not dictate that we still have a hand until then.

Ultimately people can be blue in the face about math to me and I could not give a care less. They have a role, I made that role and I made that role good in my area and that is all I care about.

In short the internet does not know your area and therefore can only grasp at math as their straws because that's all they have.

People can spite, bubble and toil all they like, meanwhile I will be breaking Decurions as I have done with that unit because I understand that CSM does not play survivability but plays the quantity is its own quality/ overwhelm target priority faction very well (just like Orks as I have found out ) and not the untouchable units that will wreck face as the internet so desperately craves for every unit in their book alone .

Ah. Yes. You're clearly the chosen one and the only person on the Internet to claim such a discovery, and it is why CSM's and Terminators in general are simply wrecking face at tournaments all over the globe!

For the record, MoS LC Terminators only perform better in that situation when the target isn't in cover, in which case, the unit costing more is performing exactly the same as the Loyalist counterpart.

Yes. Because everything must be compared to far distant tournaments which is most likely not your area, and sure as hell ain't mine.

For the record, if your talking about tourneys then just play Eldar because that's clearly all the internet knows and craves tourney standard-wise

I'm not Sun Su, but I know by well what the CSM book has to offer and what it can pull off. If your just going to say why no one should be playing terminators because X tourneys says so then don't bother playing any form of marines at all and just play Eldar netlists X, Y and Z. But thanks for twisting my words to extreme lengths for pulling straws with passive aggressive attacks

Part of the problem seems to be that the scale of the game is out of whack and part seems to be that terminators are sold as generalist elite infantry instead of very specialised units. They seem customised for clearing out tunnels and punching their way through walls in places with extremely limited space rather than wide open battlefields.

 Sgt. Vanden wrote:
If you run deep strike shooty nators, then there isnt much you cant kill in one turn. Sure, they might die the next turn, but hey, if you can kill a stormsurge in the process its worth it.

How are tactical terminators killing a stormsurge in one turn, even with a heavy weapon (or two for that matter)???

 MarsNZ wrote:
Models were grouped into several sizes, regular infantry, bigger stuff like dreads/tyranid warriors, and then vehicles. Had to shoot the closest or pick from another category.

Aye, that rings a bell.

For my money, the big problem with Terminators (and indeed all expensive elite infantry) is that the type of firepower you'd take to clear out hordes is also effective against them precisely because of how expensive they are. If the same firepower you'd apply to killing 8 Guardsmen will also kill 1 Terminator with statistical reliability, then there's no reason not to take that type of firepower over firepower that will, say, kill 1 Terminator with statistical reliability but only kill 1-2 Guardsmen.

The easiest fix without fundamental rules changes would be to simply make Terminators 2-wound models. They are in general supposed to be the most elite units in their respective factions, and that's a fairly common mechanic for elite units in other factions. I don't mind the fact they'd be insta-killed by lascannons and the like because in general such weapons are not really the bane of Terminators. What is the bane is high-volume shooting that inflicts so many wounds that you're bound to fail some of those armor saves.

The problem with making Terminators 2-wound models, however, is that GW would have to change unit entries in a hojillion different codexes. Releasing an errata would be sufficient until dexes get updated, but we all know how recalcitrant GW is to errata things. Another idea would be to alter armor saves so they get to be rerolled against any wounds whose AP is, say, at least +2 what the target's save value is. So, 2+ save figures would get to reroll vs AP4 or higher, 3+ save figures would get to reroll vs AP5 or higher, and so on. It would make high-volume fire less effective against elite units, and require players to make some tactical choices rather than just being able to rely on high-volume fire for all occasions. I think this would work because I have a unit that has Terminator cost but gives the appropriate value for the points I pay - Ravenwing Knights, who can reroll their 3+ Jink save (they have Skilled Riders), and can get up to a 2+ with proximity to a Dark Shroud. I have to worry about Ignores Cover weapons, but short of that they give me an appropriate amount of bang for their buck.

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:

The problem with making Terminators 2-wound models, however, is that GW would have to change unit entries in a hojillion different codexes. Releasing an errata would be sufficient until dexes get updated, but we all know how recalcitrant GW is to errata things. Another idea would be to alter armor saves so they get to be rerolled against any wounds whose AP is, say, at least +2 what the target's save value is. So, 2+ save figures would get to reroll vs AP4 or higher, 3+ save figures would get to reroll vs AP5 or higher, and so on. It would make high-volume fire less effective against elite units, and require players to make some tactical choices rather than just being able to rely on high-volume fire for all occasions. I think this would work because I have a unit that has Terminator cost but gives the appropriate value for the points I pay - Ravenwing Knights, who can reroll their 3+ Jink save (they have Skilled Riders), and can get up to a 2+ with proximity to a Dark Shroud. I have to worry about Ignores Cover weapons, but short of that they give me an appropriate amount of bang for their buck.

A good FNP roll would accomplish the same effect as rerolling based on AP. FNP is essentially a reroll on the save that is negated by high strength (aka, AT) attacks. Thing is, how good should that FNP roll be? 3+ FNP is too good without a points increase, but 4+ FNP would fit with their current points cost, and it keeps them different enough from Centurions. It would also help against rending and lower strength AP2.

Its also an easy fix to implement. A single errata or even WD article stating that ALL models wearing terminator armour now have FNP 4+. No points changes, no lengthy rules, no stat changes, just a simple blanket statement using an existing USR. It serves the purpose of making them largely immune to most forms of small arms fire, enhances durability against small arms specialized weaponry (plasma and grav for example), while true anti-tank weaponry negates much of their durability (leaving only the invulnerable save).

 ClassicCarraway wrote:


A good FNP roll would accomplish the same effect as rerolling based on AP. FNP is essentially a reroll on the save that is negated by high strength (aka, AT) attacks. Thing is, how good should that FNP roll be? 3+ FNP is too good without a points increase, but 4+ FNP would fit with their current points cost, and it keeps them different enough from Centurions. It would also help against rending and lower strength AP2.

Its also an easy fix to implement. A single errata or even WD article stating that ALL models wearing terminator armour now have FNP 4+. No points changes, no lengthy rules, no stat changes, just a simple blanket statement using an existing USR. It serves the purpose of making them largely immune to most forms of small arms fire, enhances durability against small arms specialized weaponry (plasma and grav for example), while true anti-tank weaponry negates much of their durability (leaving only the invulnerable save).

Excellent idea. In fact, probably the best suggestion I've seen on the many threads that have discussed this.

One problem with FNP over armour reroll is that the terminators won't benefit from being joined by apothecaries... but I guess that can be fluff handwaved away as the life support/medical systems in TDA being just that darn good?

The problem with terminators is no sweeping advance and gakky weapons. I can buy one special weapon per 5 if they were better choices. The storm bolter needs a serious buff. Comparing to the Skitarii vanguards radium carbine (only other codex I have on hand) your trading 6" of range for -1s same ap, super rending (to wound roll of 6 causes 2 wounds regardless of toughness) and one extra shot.

That's a basic weapon for a basic and very cheap troop choice. Storm bolter, the basic weapon for an elite troop choice should be better. Imo make the storm bolter assault 4. It doesn't need some stupid special rule but termmies suffer from being low model counts so having more shots would significantly even the balance.

Terminators who are relentless not being able to sweeping advance makes no sense. In fluff these guys plow through enemies non stop, and charge through walls like they're paper. But in game these relentless cc specialists win combat and go "okay guys time to...relent on our enemies"

Assault 4 storm bolter, sweeping assault, let termmies take better weapons like lascanons, grav weapons, plasma rifles/cannons and they'll make a comeback

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Its also an easy fix to implement. A single errata or even WD article stating that ALL models wearing terminator armour now have FNP 4+. No points changes, no lengthy rules, no stat changes, just a simple blanket statement using an existing USR. It serves the purpose of making them largely immune to most forms of small arms fire, enhances durability against small arms specialized weaponry (plasma and grav for example), while true anti-tank weaponry negates much of their durability (leaving only the invulnerable save).

So Iron Hands get 3+ FNP on their terminators, and all their characters can essentially count on 2+ with a warlord trait? Sure, this would work in the sense of making them ridiculous like everything else. 40K is broken as far as I'm concerned, it's only route now is to go into a AoS style system where everything is crazy.

If you want to use terminators, I would suggest playing 30K. With the increased cost of basic troops, they aren't as obnoxiously overpriced, and the overall power level of the game is lower, so there are no crazy Xenos hijinks. You also get two different varieties with better rules (Cataphracts get 4++ but can't overwatch or run; Tartaros can sweep after close combats, which is major in 30K as well).