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.

 Battlegrinder wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I simply LOVE that someone just suggested out of the blue that Bikers gain a wound rather than toughness and totally didn't think of any consequences that could possibly happen.

This thread really brought out the stupid in some people.

Stupidity like insulting other users because you don't like their ideas?

That's because it is a stupid idea. It makes Bikers more immune to small arms and still more durable compared to Terminators because jink > 5++ when you get more for cheaper.

Like, that shouldn't have been up for debate at all. Anything on a bike gaining a wound means 2 wound Scatterbikes and Tomb Blades AND Ork Bikers. Then I'm sure someone might suggest just Marines getting it and I have to ask why they're the only exception to the rule just so you can try and justify T5 Terminators.

It is a bad idea and you should feel bad for defending them.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:That's because it is a stupid idea. It makes Bikers more immune to small arms and still more durable compared to Terminators because jink > 5++ when you get more for cheaper.

Like, that shouldn't have been up for debate at all. Anything on a bike gaining a wound means 2 wound Scatterbikes and Tomb Blades AND Ork Bikers. Then I'm sure someone might suggest just Marines getting it and I have to ask why they're the only exception to the rule just so you can try and justify T5 Terminators.

It is a bad idea and you should feel bad for defending them.

And yet in previous editions didn't we have 2 wound bikers, that somehow didn't destroy all balance? Or factions where one unit had a rule that similar units in others didn't? You could totally give marine bikers 2 wounds and not everyone else, with the rational of "because I wrote the rulebook and I say so". That is not to say it's a good idea, but it doesn't justify your attitude either.

Make Terminators T5, give them a 4+ invuln and buff Terminator Stormbolters to Salvo 2/3 36" shred. That way they are actually worth 50 points a model.

 Battlegrinder wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:That's because it is a stupid idea. It makes Bikers more immune to small arms and still more durable compared to Terminators because jink > 5++ when you get more for cheaper.

Like, that shouldn't have been up for debate at all. Anything on a bike gaining a wound means 2 wound Scatterbikes and Tomb Blades AND Ork Bikers. Then I'm sure someone might suggest just Marines getting it and I have to ask why they're the only exception to the rule just so you can try and justify T5 Terminators.

It is a bad idea and you should feel bad for defending them.

And yet in previous editions didn't we have 2 wound bikers, that somehow didn't destroy all balance? Or factions where one unit had a rule that similar units in others didn't? You could totally give marine bikers 2 wounds and not everyone else, with the rational of "because I wrote the rulebook and I say so". That is not to say it's a good idea, but it doesn't justify your attitude either.

We're not in previous editions. We are in 7th edition and going into 8th soon. That's not a good argument. Also ask people how much fun they thought Nob Bikers were. They needed the nerf bat (though not as hard as the one they got).

And no you can't, because you're not being consistent. Bikes have always been consistently an additional Toughness point, only now conflicting with Instant Death. And you'd still have not fixed the core issue with Terminators, because why take Terminators at that price point when I can still get more Bikers and special weapons instead?

Because apparently I wasn't clear enough, RULE #1 is MANDATORY.

As are RULE #2 and RULE #3, of course.

A link to the rules so that everyone can refresh themselves:

https://www.dakkadakka.com/core/forum_rules.jsp

I'll be good.

Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.

Bikes adding a wound would not break anything, the ar.or savs remains the same along with the toughness which means you're effectively adding one additional marine. The math hammer for the statistical probabilities to kill a marine chasing butterflies in an open field with every weapon in the game have been done. It's not difficult to kill a T4 3+ model, much less effectively 2. The end result is that's it's not very difficult at all.

Jink, while I am not a fan of it, is simply a cover save, one which terminators as well as regular power armored marines can also get through terrain/effects.

Orks are a completely different codex. Personally, I don't play as or against Orks, so I would not rule out their ability to gain a wound from a bike as well, but if it ends up being too beneficial through playtesting, then simply say that their bikes, like their vehicles, are too ramshackle to be able to take a hit for the team and not grant Nobs on bikes the additional wound.

Arguing that GW can't bring back an older rule, model or profile just doesn't hold any water, as they have made what was once old new again before and with an edition change comes change in general as always.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I'll be good.

Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.

Tau Broadsides are basically 2-wound Terminators (with no invuln save unless you purchase one for significant points), and are fairly squishy for their points (roughly twice the cost of a Terminator) as a result... while Wraithguard do have T6 but only a 3+ save (and no invulnerable save), and are thus relying entirely on the T6 for protection.

Making Terminators as tough as Wraithguard (T6) but with their significantly better level of protection (2+/5++) would be going too far. IMO.



Bikes getting +1 W instead of +1 T would be a mixed bag for most bikes, I'd imagine - for the rank and file, it would increase durability slightly (moreso against small-arms fire than high S (6+ for Eldar, 8+ for most Marines/Orks), but for Characters, the extra W would not be nearly as beneficial as the extra resistance to being ID'd.

I still feel that what you do to one, you need to do to the other and while a T6 loyalist Terminator is one thing, a T7 Nurgle one is insane.

I still think the best option is just a general points decrease along with an additional wound and/or FNP for the base stat line.

Further improvement can be made with their weapon options and transport rules.

Keep their price the same.

Up their toughness to 5.
Up their wounds to 2.
Give them rending on their profile, not to the storm bolter itself.
Reduce their armor save to 3+.

This massively increases their longevity, with minor adjustments that are fluff appropriate. It keeps their use cases the same, and just makes them better overall at those things.

Why would you reduce their armour save? To balance things out?

This subject seems like it belongs in proposed rules with all of the content..

That said while point for point tactical terminators are not the most efficient unit I would argue that they are points efficient for the model itself, especially as you can swap for catchatari terminator armor for free and get the 2+ 4++. My proposed fix is they just suffer from being in the wrong slot , require to many in a unit mandatory and limited weapons. move them to troops, min model count 3, 1 heavy weapon per 3. Now for 105 points you get 3 models, 2+ armor, objective secured and they get a nice long range weapon of choice that presents a reasonable threat in cc (ps @ i4 2 power fists i1)

Terminators should not be troops, honestly they are the definition of 'the elite' section in the fluff sense.

If they make a change to stormbolters imo they should work like two boltguns fired as a single weapon.
Even Tactical Terminators are primarily melee units, that's why they're packing powerfists.

I'd like +1T for Termies, they certainly deserve it more than bikers do.

I always associate Terminators with Space Hulk, high close range damage output and input.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Terminators should not be troops, honestly they are the definition of 'the elite' section in the fluff sense.

If they make a change to stormbolters imo they should work like two boltguns fired as a single weapon.
Even Tactical Terminators are primarily melee units, that's why they're packing powerfists.

I'd like +1T for Termies, they certainly deserve it more than bikers do.

I always associate Terminators with Space Hulk, high close range damage output and input.

I know the fluff, but on the table tactical terminators compared to assault terminators are just lacking. how would adding one toughness still make the competing assault terminators look less appealing? also lighting claws and TH/SS beat the heck out of power fists. and a power sword... though I suppose the ability to mix and match might not be bad just combine them all into one entry "terminator. may exchange storm bolter and power fist for lightning claws, 10 points for TH/SS" but I still doubt anybody would take the normal terminator unless that was the only one able to take a heavy weapon.

The argument for troops is they now compete with tac marines and scouts and comparatively if the squad size were reduced they would fit there and be competitive. heck even in the fluff terminators fight along side their brothers and usually not more than a few mentioned at a time when they are directly referred to so at least the squad size seems appropriate.

Off topic slightly, but I love the tactical terminator models, and have more than 50 of them myself. I have and do field them though usually in apocalypse style games. They are still better than a lot of things non Imperium armies get for the points.

Another thought is that most everybody already has Tactical terminators and that most boxed sets include them, so GW may have less incentive to make them great as they want you to get more models on top of that starter set.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I'll be good.

Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.

Tau Broadsides are basically 2-wound Terminators (with no invuln save unless you purchase one for significant points), and are fairly squishy for their points (roughly twice the cost of a Terminator) as a result... while Wraithguard do have T6 but only a 3+ save (and no invulnerable save), and are thus relying entirely on the T6 for protection.

Making Terminators as tough as Wraithguard (T6) but with their significantly better level of protection (2+/5++) would be going too far. IMO.



Bikes getting +1 W instead of +1 T would be a mixed bag for most bikes, I'd imagine - for the rank and file, it would increase durability slightly (moreso against small-arms fire than high S (6+ for Eldar, 8+ for most Marines/Orks), but for Characters, the extra W would not be nearly as beneficial as the extra resistance to being ID'd.

Broadside Suits also have actual damage output, which is the thing Terminators lack. If you want durable, the Centurion now exists to get your fix.

Also by making Bikers 2 wounds instead of T5 you actually made them more durable to everything, as anything IDing them will be inflicting the wound on the same roll it would a T5 model. You can look at the math if you want.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I'll be good.

Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.

Tau Broadsides are basically 2-wound Terminators (with no invuln save unless you purchase one for significant points), and are fairly squishy for their points (roughly twice the cost of a Terminator) as a result... while Wraithguard do have T6 but only a 3+ save (and no invulnerable save), and are thus relying entirely on the T6 for protection.

Making Terminators as tough as Wraithguard (T6) but with their significantly better level of protection (2+/5++) would be going too far. IMO.



Bikes getting +1 W instead of +1 T would be a mixed bag for most bikes, I'd imagine - for the rank and file, it would increase durability slightly (moreso against small-arms fire than high S (6+ for Eldar, 8+ for most Marines/Orks), but for Characters, the extra W would not be nearly as beneficial as the extra resistance to being ID'd.

Broadside Suits also have actual damage output, which is the thing Terminators lack. If you want durable, the Centurion now exists to get your fix.

This is why I and others have suggested either increasing their damage output via buffing (theirs at least if not all) Storm Bolters, replacing Storm Bolters altogether and/or allowing them to take more than one alternate weapon (as I had suggested, at a small points cost no less so it's not horribly imbalanced).

Also by making Bikers 2 wounds instead of T5 you actually made them more durable to everything, as anything IDing them will be inflicting the wound on the same roll it would a T5 model. You can look at the math if you want.

Bolters, Lasguns and other small arms have a better chance of actually wounding a T4 3+ model than a T5 3+ model. That's simply undeniable. However, as I suggested, as the bike is another component to be able to hit, aside from the marine atop it alone, that is the reasoning in granting them an additional wound rather than better toughness.

Also, as mentioned, Multi-Wound characters gain less of a benefit than the average marine, as they can now be ID'd by STR 8 weapons. This is offset by their fantastic movement ability and Jink (if they're being attacked by something that allows a cover save).

Oppressor wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I'll be good.

Let's back to talking terminators. How tough and what sort of save do Tau Broadsides and Eldar Wraithguard have? Wraithguard are toughness 6 aren't they? I definitely think terminators could be boosted to match that level. They should be tougher and more durable than Centurions. I mean, there should be a reason why the armour is only issued to the first company whilst the others only get the cent suits.

Tau Broadsides are basically 2-wound Terminators (with no invuln save unless you purchase one for significant points), and are fairly squishy for their points (roughly twice the cost of a Terminator) as a result... while Wraithguard do have T6 but only a 3+ save (and no invulnerable save), and are thus relying entirely on the T6 for protection.

Making Terminators as tough as Wraithguard (T6) but with their significantly better level of protection (2+/5++) would be going too far. IMO.



Bikes getting +1 W instead of +1 T would be a mixed bag for most bikes, I'd imagine - for the rank and file, it would increase durability slightly (moreso against small-arms fire than high S (6+ for Eldar, 8+ for most Marines/Orks), but for Characters, the extra W would not be nearly as beneficial as the extra resistance to being ID'd.

Broadside Suits also have actual damage output, which is the thing Terminators lack. If you want durable, the Centurion now exists to get your fix.

This is why I and others have suggested either increasing their damage output via buffing (theirs at least if not all) Storm Bolters, replacing Storm Bolters altogether and/or allowing them to take more than one alternate weapon (as I had suggested, at a small points cost no less so it's not horribly imbalanced).

Also by making Bikers 2 wounds instead of T5 you actually made them more durable to everything, as anything IDing them will be inflicting the wound on the same roll it would a T5 model. You can look at the math if you want.

Bolters, Lasguns and other small arms have a better chance of actually wounding a T4 3+ model than a T5 3+ model. That's simply undeniable. However, as I suggested, as the bike is another component to be able to hit, aside from the marine atop it alone, that is the reasoning in granting them an additional wound rather than better toughness.

Also, as mentioned, Multi-Wound characters gain less of a benefit than the average marine, as they can now be ID'd by double STR wounds taken. This is offset by their fantastic movement ability and Jink (if they're being attacked by something that allows a cover save).

Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.

*Quote Tree sniped*

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.

Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.

As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?

Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?

Oppressor wrote:
*Quote Tree sniped*

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.

Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.

As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?

Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?

Bikes are cheaper for IC's because they're not coming with weapons and theoretically the Terminator Armor has a Invul assuming the character doesn't have one to begin with, making it a no brainer for foot Librarians.

Also you got the issue of Terminators having to be the elite of the elite, yet they don't have the offensive capability to do that. We got Centurions that are already durable, and maybe in a universe where they don't exist I might understand the arguments for making Terminators more of a wall.
However, Centurions DO exist, and they're doing the job you were originally wanting Terminators to do, even though they never did it well to begin with.

The problem with terminators 2+ saves is it only benefits you vs AP3 weapons. Against AP4 and worse you are paying 2.5 times a tactical marine for only double the protection. Against AP2 you only get a 50% more protection and having 150% more bodies is clearly better (and some cover is as good as a 5+ invul).

Against AP3 a Terminator is suddenly as resilient as 6 tactical marines (4 if they have a cover save). The thing is though your opponent knows this and will therefore aim their AP3 weaponry elsewhere.

In terms of shooting again the storm bolter is not as good as 2.5 bolters. It becomes dramatically worse if you get into 12 inches.

The powerfist is okay but it is on a unit which will struggle to get into assaults and isn't that much of a blender unless they get there without taking casualties (which you can't expect to happen).

You can give them a higher toughness, wounds and different guns but at what point do you accept you are just making them into centurions?

Here's another idea -- Terminators are immune to effects like Rending and Bladestorm.

It doesn't change their statline, but their armor will be more effective and actually outperform Centurions.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
also lighting claws and TH/SS beat the heck out of power fists. and a power sword...

The tradeoff here should be firepower. If Tac Terminators can fire 20x SB shots within 12", let's say they kill six Daemonettes who would otherwise strike first at Initiative 5. I do think they take less casualties this way.

There needs to be a rate of fire fix like psuedo-rapidfire, but that's a change which I think would be welcomed.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Oppressor wrote:
*Quote Tree sniped*

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.

Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.

As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?

Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?

Bikes are cheaper for IC's because they're not coming with weapons and theoretically the Terminator Armor has a Invul assuming the character doesn't have one to begin with, making it a no brainer for foot Librarians.

Also you got the issue of Terminators having to be the elite of the elite, yet they don't have the offensive capability to do that. We got Centurions that are already durable, and maybe in a universe where they don't exist I might understand the arguments for making Terminators more of a wall.
However, Centurions DO exist, and they're doing the job you were originally wanting Terminators to do, even though they never did it well to begin with.

Assault Squads were not 'Squated' with the advent of Vanguard Vets. Tac Squads were not 'Squated with the advent of Sternguard. Etc... Also, with my proposed changes, they still fit their role perfectly, without stepping on anyone else's toes. Dev Cents have longer range as their advantage as well as more firepower at that range. Terminators are closer ranged (36" max if using my suggestions) but better at 24" and under.

Bikes are 7ppm for anyone other than an IC. TDA is 19ppm for anyone other than an IC.

Bikes are 20ppm for ICs. TDA is 30ppm for ICs.

Bikes granting +1W (instead of +1T) will therefore be changed to 15ppm for NON ICs, and remain the same for ICs as they do not benefit as much.

This is in keeping with effectively doubling the model count for NON ICs as well as paying a little extra for the movement bonus and Jink.

Does that seem better?

Oppressor wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Oppressor wrote:
*Quote Tree sniped*

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.

Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.

As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?

Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?

Bikes are cheaper for IC's because they're not coming with weapons and theoretically the Terminator Armor has a Invul assuming the character doesn't have one to begin with, making it a no brainer for foot Librarians.

Also you got the issue of Terminators having to be the elite of the elite, yet they don't have the offensive capability to do that. We got Centurions that are already durable, and maybe in a universe where they don't exist I might understand the arguments for making Terminators more of a wall.
However, Centurions DO exist, and they're doing the job you were originally wanting Terminators to do, even though they never did it well to begin with.

Assault Squads were not 'Squated' with the advent of Vanguard Vets. Tac Squads were not 'Squated with the advent of Sternguard. Etc... Also, with my proposed changes, they still fit their role perfectly, without stepping on anyone else's toes. Dev Cents have longer range as their advantage as well as more firepower at that range. Terminators are closer ranged (36" max if using my suggestions) but better at 24" and under.

Bikes are 7ppm for anyone other than an IC. TDA is 19ppm for anyone other than an IC.

Bikes are 20ppm for ICs. TDA is 30ppm for ICs.

Bikes granting +1W (instead of +1T) will therefore be changed to 15ppm for NON ICs, and remain the same for ICs as they do not benefit as much.

This is in keeping with effectively doubling the model count for NON ICs as well as paying a little extra for the movement bonus and Jink.

Does that seem better?

The difference being that those are completely different roles and you're trying to hamfistedly make Terminators into Centurions. That isn't a matter of units being squatted and that was a bad claim on your end.

All I'm saying is that you should read the post that is two above you. How far are you going just to make them Centurions? They're the wall you want. Terminators needed a more defined role, and I explained it/gave rules how to make them fit that role.

What is it we are trying to accomplish here anyway? I've already got my vanguard vets and honor guard for assaults, and centurions and bikes for shooting. I have drop pods for deep striking... well pretty much anything. Dreads are actually pretty decent now at running up and power fisting things to death, and at full initiative.

Terminators pay a bunch of points for stuff that just isn't that good anymore, particularly since their preferred transport is in the same boat, and buffing them up just makes them or other units redundant.

They need to more specialized so they fill a niche in the army. Trying to make them great at everything just means they will always be overcosted or underperforming, or stupidly OP.

So.... what is it terminators should be doing that other units don't already have on lockdown?

If you give them all assault cannons, they are imperial s6 spam.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Oppressor wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Oppressor wrote:
*Quote Tree sniped*

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Of course a model will be wounded less by those weapons with t4 vs T5. The earlier post doesn't take into account how math works, though.
Let us just talk bolter shots for a moment. At BS4 it takes 14 shots to kill T5 3+ and 9 to kill T4 3+. However, there's still another wound in the equation not being taken into account. So in reality, it takes 18 shots to kill a T4 W2 Biker. This is going to happen for every weapon until S7 where the T4 Biker will double in toughness, and both die at the same rate at S8+ weapons.

Yes, I do understand that you double the effective models you must wound, I posted such earlier, I still have no issue with it as it is addressed by the rational of being atop another model.

As much as I loathe to suggest it, perhaps a return of the old T4(5) (or however the heck it was done, T5 for wounds but T4 for ID, it's been awhile and the memory is foggy) would be in order?

Or a points increase for bikes, why should they be cheaper than TDA to begin with?

Bikes are cheaper for IC's because they're not coming with weapons and theoretically the Terminator Armor has a Invul assuming the character doesn't have one to begin with, making it a no brainer for foot Librarians.

Also you got the issue of Terminators having to be the elite of the elite, yet they don't have the offensive capability to do that. We got Centurions that are already durable, and maybe in a universe where they don't exist I might understand the arguments for making Terminators more of a wall.
However, Centurions DO exist, and they're doing the job you were originally wanting Terminators to do, even though they never did it well to begin with.

Assault Squads were not 'Squated' with the advent of Vanguard Vets. Tac Squads were not 'Squated with the advent of Sternguard. Etc... Also, with my proposed changes, they still fit their role perfectly, without stepping on anyone else's toes. Dev Cents have longer range as their advantage as well as more firepower at that range. Terminators are closer ranged (36" max if using my suggestions) but better at 24" and under.

Bikes are 7ppm for anyone other than an IC. TDA is 19ppm for anyone other than an IC.

Bikes are 20ppm for ICs. TDA is 30ppm for ICs.

Bikes granting +1W (instead of +1T) will therefore be changed to 15ppm for NON ICs, and remain the same for ICs as they do not benefit as much.

This is in keeping with effectively doubling the model count for NON ICs as well as paying a little extra for the movement bonus and Jink.

Does that seem better?

The difference being that those are completely different roles and you're trying to hamfistedly make Terminators into Centurions.

No idea what you're on about as I have made it perfectly clear that that was neither my intent nor my result.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:That isn't a matter of units being squatted and that was a bad claim on your end.

I let the Doom and Gloom I had from page one get the better of me again, the point remains the same though, those units are not superflouos.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:All I'm saying is that you should read the post that is two above you.
How far are you going just to make them Centurions? They're the wall you want. Terminators needed a more defined role, and I explained it/gave rules how to make them fit that role.

All I have been saying is that there is now a niche, their original niche, for them to fill again, with my changes, while not stepping on anyone else's toes. If you are going to reply to me, then do it based on what I have posted, not others.


Let the rage go.


Dev Cents want nothing to do with combat and are horrid at it. Tactical Terminators have no issue with running into melee.
Dev cents are better at longer range than Terninators, as they should be.
Dev Cents are the guys you want to stand basically out in the open shooting every/anything as that's what they're made for.
Just pray they don't get into melee.

I am sick and tired of the 'If it's not specialized it sucks' mentality and crowd. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a 'Jack of all Trades'. You don't like that, fantastic, good for you, stop assuming that no one else should either and therefore it should not exist.

Inb4wittyifyouwantousesuckyunitslol reply.

You're still only looking at Devastator Centurions. You keep forgetting how inferior both versions of Terminators are to Assault Centurions.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You're still only looking at Devastator Centurions. You keep forgetting how inferior both versions of Terminators are to Assault Centurions.

I have not forgotten about Ass Cents.

Ass Cents have at best 24" range with Hurricane Bolters. Otherwise it's 12" with a TL Melta. They are melee specialists first and foremost with the ability to deal with something directly in front them at best. They want to charge. They have to charge. They do NOT have impressive firepower.

AssCents want to be in melee.
AssCents do NOT want to be standing around between targets.
AssCents swing two STR10 AP2 unwieldly power weapons at initiative each.
They are for wrecking face, face to face, with some possible shooting at best.
They are Slow and Purposeful, so you better have a garaunteed way to get them to where they need to be for the rest of the game, because they are not going to be able to redeploy and/or offer any help anywhere else on the board anytime soon.

My proposed change allows Tactical Terminators to be able to stand and shoot, with impressive if not effective firepower, should that be all they can do.
Terminators are not Slow and Purposeful, so even if you teleported them in, they could at least Run somewhere to get in better range.

So I have been looking into 1) doubling firepower within 12" as if SB were Rapidfire, and 2) TDA giving immunity to Rending/Bladestorm.

Let's match up 5x Tac Terminators (175pts) versus 4x Necron Wraiths (172pts).

Shooting

Assault

Total wounds at this point : Wraiths have inflicted ~2.8 wounds, Tac Terminators stand at ~6.5. If the Terminators get the charge, or remove a Wraith with ranged fire, they're almost certain to win decisively. Without Rending immunity and the firepower buff, Wraiths have the advantage and are almost certain to wipe the Terminators in 6x rounds of CC, losing around 2x models.

Facing the new changes, Necrons can try to use other units, or lean on Harvest bonuses to get an advantage. But you can no longer simply push a Rending CC unit into combat with Terminators and expect the win. Likewise, TH/SS aren't automatically superior in this situation since Tacs are less likely to lose their armor save.

Everyone likes their own ideas, but I would argue two things. 1st, I think the increased ROF reflects how Tac Terminators are supposed to concentrate a lot of firepower among a few models. 2nd, while they rely on a marine statline, TDA is now far superior to the average 2+ save and it shows.

Centurions might still be better at shaking off Lasguns, but that's ok. Terminators are already better versus AP1/AP2.

Immune to S5 weapons and under weapons. Maybe even S6
+4 or 5 Invul to every thing else.
Assault 3, maybe 4. Small blast.