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.

They have twin-linked useless guns.

Martel732 wrote:
They have twin-linked useless guns.

Which comes back to why in the world are we still using these wildly outdated rules for Rapid Fire, why have Boltguns not been given Rending or a Strength boost, etc etc.

There's so many things that could be done to improve the damage output of Boltguns/Combi-Boltguns, Storm Bolters and Lasguns...it's silly that we just keep getting their stats copy/pasted every new book.

In a D6-based system, there aren't a lot of options when the heavy bolter is only one better in each category.

Martel732 wrote:
In a D6-based system, there aren't a lot of options when the heavy bolter is only one better in each category.

There's plenty of options. Rules like "Bladestorm" exist, don't they?

 Kanluwen wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Holy crap, why are you guys trying to make them as durable as Centurions? They will lack the offense of Centurions so all you did is make them useless still. You're not giving them a niche.

Because Terminators' durability is supposed to what the Centurions emulate?

Centurions are durable walking gun platforms, Terminators are durable close ranged shock troops.

So you make them as durable as Centurions for no cost increase, which means Centurions still do better offensively and therefore I still have no reason to take Terminators. You guys still miss the mark by hundreds of feet.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
In a D6-based system, there aren't a lot of options when the heavy bolter is only one better in each category.

There's plenty of options. Rules like "Bladestorm" exist, don't they?

None that really fit.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Holy crap, why are you guys trying to make them as durable as Centurions? They will lack the offense of Centurions so all you did is make them useless still. You're not giving them a niche.

Because Terminators' durability is supposed to what the Centurions emulate?

Centurions are durable walking gun platforms, Terminators are durable close ranged shock troops.

So you make them as durable as Centurions for no cost increase, which means Centurions still do better offensively and therefore I still have no reason to take Terminators.

How many people think that Terminators are worth their points, even now with the reduced points costs they've had?

And there's plenty of reasons to take Terminators if they get turned into a durable close range shock unit. It's not like they and Centurions are competing for slots, seeing as how Centurions are HS and Terminators are Elites.

You guys still miss the mark by hundreds of feet.

And all you've done is sling mud on ideas. Why not contribute instead of just throw shade out there?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
In a D6-based system, there aren't a lot of options when the heavy bolter is only one better in each category.

There's plenty of options. Rules like "Bladestorm" exist, don't they?

None that really fit.

So?

Mass Reactive Bolts:
When a weapon with this special rule rolls To Wound, any To Wound roll of a 6 can only be mitigated by an Invulnerable Save.

It's not beyond belief that they could have come up with something like this ages ago.

I'd much rather have assault cannons. S4 shooting is not valuable for a marine list.

Martel732 wrote:
I'd much rather have assault cannons. S4 shooting is not valuable for a marine list.

S4 shooting that can, on 6's, wound targets that are not otherwise able to be harmed by S4 and also ignore armor saves is valuable for a Marine list.

It's just like the Rad Poisoning rule for Skitarii; even if the gun normally would do nothing those To Wound rolls of 6s cause Wounds.

Something like that for Boltguns would be a game changer, just as much as Special Issue Ammunition has been.

You can't roll enough sixes per point spent on the models to make them worth it. If we are talking terminators. If you make it a general rule, terminators are still useless because marines get way more bolter shots per point.

Martel732 wrote:
You can't roll enough sixes per point spent on the models to make them worth it. If we are talking terminators. If you make it a general rule, terminators are still useless because marines get way more bolter shots per point.

They do now, yes.

There's a lot of things that can be done to change that though.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'd much rather have assault cannons. S4 shooting is not valuable for a marine list.

S4 shooting that can, on 6's, wound targets that are not otherwise able to be harmed by S4 and also ignore armor saves is valuable for a Marine list.

It's just like the Rad Poisoning rule for Skitarii; even if the gun normally would do nothing those To Wound rolls of 6s cause Wounds.

Something like that for Boltguns would be a game changer, just as much as Special Issue Ammunition has been.

And then you're taking rules from other armies, like many unoriginals have done. I've once seen someone suggest Bolt weapons gain a rule like Gauss! Bolts don't need a special rule; certain weapons and units need fixing.

Terminators were meant to be shock troopers that teleport on the field (because Land Raiders are garbage, lets be honest. Those things are worth 200 at most), but they don't have the offensive capabilities to reflect that at all. If you make them as durable as Centurions, we are at, using Assault Centurions as the baseline with no upgrades outside of the Centurion Veteren Sergeant:
1. 10 Bolter shots vs 9-18 Bolter shots, always TL with Flamers always TL
2. 8 S8 AP2 I1 melee attacks + 2 S4 AP3 I4 attacks vs 7 S10 AP2 I4 melee attacks
Once we get to upgrades, you see that Centurions can take Split Fire (which means you pepper a squad with one set of Hurricanes and shoot another up real bad, and charge the less shot one), or Melta Guns that are TL, which makes their MC hunting status much better.

So when we do that, outside the Deep Strike, Centurions are a better value because you can give them a pod to do almost the same thing. So we need to make Terminators themselves more offensively appealing. So I literally ALWAYS propose:
1. S5 Storm Bolters, two Heavy Weapons per 5 Terminators (so we can get a total of 4 in a 10 man squad)
2. Lightning Claw Terminators start at 30 base, and TH/SS is a 5 point upgrade, as I think 2+/3++ is roughly worth as much as 2+/5++ with the better flexibility

I fixed them without having to drastically alter their profile, made them offensively better without too much effort, and most of all they have a different feel when used compared to Centurions.

Martel732 wrote:
So MANZ get what? 3 wounds? 4 wounds?

I'd be fine with that, actually. I'm not a fan of boosting units in every other book just because an underpowered unit like terminators get boosted, but MANZ could probably stand a bit of a boost themselves. You'd still take them out the same way you do now. They'd just be less vulnerable to small arms fire. Seems reasonable to me. I'm also a fan of increasing the wounds of pretty much every non-HQ character (and maybe them as well) across the board.

Regarding improving storm bolters and bolters in general... Personally, I'd like to rework marines entirely to make them a half-step closer to being movie marines. They just don't reflect their own fluff very well as they are now. So while this change wouldn't necessarily exist in a vacuum, I'd be completely fine with strength 5 bolt weapons. It's simpler and cleaner than giving them a special rule, you'd have a similar damage output to tau fire warriors while having less range (thus avoiding stealing their thunder), and you'd be reasonably more threatening to a wide range of targets. Including light transports which you could now glance to death with basic bolt weapons. It helps terminators. It helps tac marines. i like the idea.

That's a lot of rebalancing in giving out more wounds.

Terminators are a big loser in the D6-based system. Moving to D10 would make a lot of these problems go away.

There's no way a bolter should be as strong as a heavy bolter.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Holy crap, why are you guys trying to make them as durable as Centurions? They will lack the offense of Centurions so all you did is make them useless still. You're not giving them a niche.

We could delete Centurions...

We aren't deleting unit entries because you're butthurt about how you feel about the models. How about you actually attempt on fixing Terminators by making them more dangerous instead whilst Centurions be less scary but more durable?

You all have yet to address Martel'so point about MANz too.

You can't have your cake (model size/power creep) and eat it (models falling off the bottom because the game's gotten too big).

This isn't a problem with a d6-based system, it's a problem with continually stacking new bigger things on top of the scale. Back in 4th a Terminator was about as big and scary as a single infantryman got. He took work to get rid of, got into combat frequently, did lots of killing, and could stand toe-to-toe with much bigger foes. 5th decided big fast MCs and AP2 blasts were a cool thing to do, 6th brought in aircraft, superheavies, and more AP2 shooting, et cetera.

The Terminator has been crowded out of the bottom of the heavy infantry niche by Centurions, who are tougher and killer in every way. If I try to make Terminators better without tearing down Centurions I'm going to continue escalating the power creep, someone else is going to fall off the bottom, and we're going to be having this discussion about how to make Space Marine infantry less terrible a few months down the line.

The problem is EXACTLY a d6-based system with so many different models. Models that crowd out the terminator. Terminators may have been functional in 4th, but were not in 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, or 7th.

@Anomander kinda hit the nail on the head, we have already reached the point where troop choices are laughable to take, unless you are using them to abuse a formation, IE Lions blade strike force letting you take 350+ points of transports for free. They keep stacking more and more units atop the piller and things are getting pushed out.

Each Force org choice needs to be relative in power to point cost, and thats where most of the problem are at here, terminators are no where near their point cost. If they only ran 150 or 160 like cents did, we would not be having this conversation. But the fact that their are a very expensive elite choice for SM, compaired to the cent who cost 40 points less for more damage. Thats where the imbalance comes in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
The problem is EXACTLY a d6-based system with so many different models. Models that crowd out the terminator. Terminators may have been functional in 4th, but were not in 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, or 7th.

Which is why, imo, they need to be brought up to centurions power level, or have their points dropped to that of centurions. you are paying more for models and getting less outta them.


Note im basing this off of DW terminators so appologies if that gets lost in translation or effects the view im coming from.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Holy crap, why are you guys trying to make them as durable as Centurions? They will lack the offense of Centurions so all you did is make them useless still. You're not giving them a niche.

We could delete Centurions...

We aren't deleting unit entries because you're butthurt about how you feel about the models. How about you actually attempt on fixing Terminators by making them more dangerous instead whilst Centurions be less scary but more durable?

You all have yet to address Martel'so point about MANz too.

You can't have your cake (model size/power creep) and eat it (models falling off the bottom because the game's gotten too big).

This isn't a problem with a d6-based system, it's a problem with continually stacking new bigger things on top of the scale. Back in 4th a Terminator was about as big and scary as a single infantryman got. He took work to get rid of, got into combat frequently, did lots of killing, and could stand toe-to-toe with much bigger foes. 5th decided big fast MCs and AP2 blasts were a cool thing to do, 6th brought in aircraft, superheavies, and more AP2 shooting, et cetera.

The Terminator has been crowded out of the bottom of the heavy infantry niche by Centurions, who are tougher and killer in every way. If I try to make Terminators better without tearing down Centurions I'm going to continue escalating the power creep, someone else is going to fall off the bottom, and we're going to be having this discussion about how to make Space Marine infantry less terrible a few months down the line.

I started in 4th edition and I can tell you that Terminators were absolutely NOT scary back then, even with better Assault Cannons, and I say that as someone that had a small Daemonhunters army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wyldhunt wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
So MANZ get what? 3 wounds? 4 wounds?

I'd be fine with that, actually. I'm not a fan of boosting units in every other book just because an underpowered unit like terminators get boosted, but MANZ could probably stand a bit of a boost themselves. You'd still take them out the same way you do now. They'd just be less vulnerable to small arms fire. Seems reasonable to me. I'm also a fan of increasing the wounds of pretty much every non-HQ character (and maybe them as well) across the board.

Regarding improving storm bolters and bolters in general... Personally, I'd like to rework marines entirely to make them a half-step closer to being movie marines. They just don't reflect their own fluff very well as they are now. So while this change wouldn't necessarily exist in a vacuum, I'd be completely fine with strength 5 bolt weapons. It's simpler and cleaner than giving them a special rule, you'd have a similar damage output to tau fire warriors while having less range (thus avoiding stealing their thunder), and you'd be reasonably more threatening to a wide range of targets. Including light transports which you could now glance to death with basic bolt weapons. It helps terminators. It helps tac marines. i like the idea.

Bolt Weapons don't need to be S5. What we need is Tactical Marines that can double up on Special or Heavy weapons rather than 1 of each and then S5 for Storm Bolters.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Holy crap, why are you guys trying to make them as durable as Centurions? They will lack the offense of Centurions so all you did is make them useless still. You're not giving them a niche.

We could delete Centurions...

We aren't deleting unit entries because you're butthurt about how you feel about the models. How about you actually attempt on fixing Terminators by making them more dangerous instead whilst Centurions be less scary but more durable?

You all have yet to address Martel'so point about MANz too.

You can't have your cake (model size/power creep) and eat it (models falling off the bottom because the game's gotten too big).

This isn't a problem with a d6-based system, it's a problem with continually stacking new bigger things on top of the scale. Back in 4th a Terminator was about as big and scary as a single infantryman got. He took work to get rid of, got into combat frequently, did lots of killing, and could stand toe-to-toe with much bigger foes. 5th decided big fast MCs and AP2 blasts were a cool thing to do, 6th brought in aircraft, superheavies, and more AP2 shooting, et cetera.

The Terminator has been crowded out of the bottom of the heavy infantry niche by Centurions, who are tougher and killer in every way. If I try to make Terminators better without tearing down Centurions I'm going to continue escalating the power creep, someone else is going to fall off the bottom, and we're going to be having this discussion about how to make Space Marine infantry less terrible a few months down the line.

I started in 4th edition and I can tell you that Terminators were absolutely NOT scary back then, even with better Assault Cannons, and I say that as someone that had a small Daemonhunters army.

Might not be relatable, but i know in 5th, TH/SS termies in a LR was a solid deathstar combo. Sounds to me like its boiling down to bolters need to be better.

TH/SS in LR was not good in 5th.

Martel732 wrote:
TH/SS in LR was not good in 5th.

Thank you. Certainly MUCH better than they were, but not good.

Once per game moving as jump infantry would work combined with s8 ap2 hammer of wrath, representing the recharge delay on a personal teleporter and the ability to literally punch through the warp.

As for storm bolters, easy fix would be to-hit rolls of a 4+ cause 2 hits, 6+ 3 hits. This would make them worth 5 points in the army I think.

They'd be like Grey Knight Interceptors then.

AP3 on a a 5+ to wound rending on a 6 up?

 Backspacehacker wrote:
AP3 on a a 5+ to wound rending on a 6 up?

AP is not fixing this. Lack of shots and lack of shot strength is the problem. Even with this change, a unit of 5 terminators gets eight such shots, plus their crappy heavy weapon. *YAWN* If your target has cover, there goes this scheme almost entirely.

Termis need more attacks, a better weapon (a special stormbolter or something) and a secondary save (kinda like feel no pain) on a 4+ or something. They cost way to many points have way to few shots and attacks to be of real impact on the game.

 Capamaru wrote:
Termis need more attacks, a better weapon (a special stormbolter or something) and a secondary save (kinda like feel no pain) on a 4+ or something. They cost way to many points have way to few shots and attacks to be of real impact on the game.

So coming from a DW terminator perspective what about this.

give SB rapid fire rending. so a standard terminator load out, on a deep strike will be able to unload 16 bolter shots, that are twin linked, and rending on 6s on the turn they drop in assuming they are within 12 inches which is pretty likely if you are using teleport homers.

But the shots that don't rend don't accomplish much. Still not a big threat.

Martel732 wrote:
But the shots that don't rend don't accomplish much. Still not a big threat.

Then what do you suggest?

All assault cannons. Leave nothing to chance. If it's good enough for Eldar troops, then space elite super elites would be similarly equipped. This is the reality of 7th ed. What they're armed with in fluff no longer has any bearing. They deep strike in, and get 20 S6 AP4 rending shots. Still not enough to threaten the best units in the game, but it's not trivial.