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.

 Nevelon wrote:

NivlacSupreme wrote:

Wait... The "one save" rule applies to invulns?

Yup, and has since 2nd ed.

You can take your armor -or- your invuln -or- your cover save
Then any wound negate stuff, like Feel No Pain
And then any other shenanigans the work outside the normal system.

It’s one reason I like the idea of changing the TDA invuln to a FNP save. Or just give them FNP straight up on top of their invuln. Layered saves is pretty much the only way to stay alive out there.

Oh. I watched a few battle reports before I started playing where they took armor saves and then invulns. I play that way. Makes them far better.

That's highly illegal, and it's not going to fly with other groups.

Sounds like a mix up with some older whfb stuff.

Martel732 wrote:
"All Land Raider variants are 190 points base. "

It's still sketchy at that price, but I'll take it.

190 points base and come stock with the Land raider spearhead rules.

"ignore all damage results but explodes and weapon destroyed"
+
Have the move through cover rule and on a 4+ count a penetrating hit as a glancing hit.

Now you have a tank that can at least deal with a few melta guns - if you have 5 meltas it's still toast. Ignores the grav cannon immobilized results and can drive right through cover not giving a gak about hurting it's massive treds with a pebble.

Okay, that's fine. The amount of patching that took was frickin ridiculous, though.

 Future War Cultist wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I don't know. I think terminators are more elite than sternguard.

And it is this type of thinking that has people in here suggesting to fix Terminators by upping their defense a ridiculous amount because they "think" that's how it should be.

Leave things to the roles they were meant to have. Special Ammo is a Sternguard thing; if you give Special Ammo to Terminators you'd need to figure out a way to differentiate Sternguard even more.

Not really. Sternguard will still have much more firepower than Terminators thanks to their combi bolters and heavy weapons. And they'll be cheaper, won't be able to teleport and won't be as hard in close combat. There's enough differences there. Tactical Marines and Scout Marines both have bolt guns, but they're very different from each other in their tactical applications.

And I still think that Terminators should have their Toughness and Wounds increased. I'm just not so sure to what level.

Not by a lot if we are keeping everything at the same price. 8 Sternguard is 176 and 5 Terminators is 175. At 18-24", Terminators have 2 more shots and at 12 and below they only have 6 more shots on top of Terminators being more durable than Sternguard for the price. And even though Sternguard aren't durable, they always made up for it with firepower and customization. Special Ammo is THEIR thing and Deathwatch's thing. Let them have it.

Another pendulum push back to "no, they will never be viable". At least, on a D6 system. They only soak 83% of incoming fire while being T4 1W and can't affect anything at range. It's the killer combo that no one seems to be able to overcome.

Martel732 wrote:
That's highly illegal, and it's not going to fly with other groups.

There's one person I play with.

NivlacSupreme wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
That's highly illegal, and it's not going to fly with other groups.

There's one person I play with.

I'm talking in a general sense.

Martel732 wrote:
Another pendulum push back to "no, they will never be viable". At least, on a D6 system. They only soak 83% of incoming fire while being T4 1W and can't affect anything at range. It's the killer combo that no one seems to be able to overcome.

Layered saves and increased toughness.

Terminators are meant to be tough, but so are marines in general. Marines are already meant to be hard as nails on the tabletop, and terminators are just another step up from that. Its just unfortunate that the game has had a run-away on offense and increases in gamesize.

Changing their stats or giving them goodies just continues that run-away and it shafts other players in the process (if termies get two wounds, what do meganobs get?)

The reasonable solution is to have points cost for things not be fixed in stone once a codex is released. If gw put up a page where they could reduce or increase a units points cost when it gets unreasonable, just about everything would see play.

Marines might as well be grots vs Tau and Eldar.

Martel732 wrote:
Marines might as well be grots vs Tau and Eldar.

Grots might as well be paladins against a space marine vindicator.

so what? there's nothing wrong with a game having units that obliterate anything they touch. The solution is to adjust the points until the opportunity cost of taking that unit outweighs the benefit of being able to delete whatever you want. Not to further skew the game by bulking up one thing at the expense of everything else.

The vindicator isn't seen very often because for its points, what it does isn't super fantastic. If they were 27 points I promise you'd see them in every space marine list ever.

Terminator rules are fine; just like most other rules. Their points cost is out of whack.

The rules should be adjusted when they no longer work; not when things are no longer balanced well. That's why points and costs exist.

Theoretically, you should be using things like Teleport and Land Raiders to help Terminators survive.

Meganobz get a lot of traction out of Trukks, it's not like having 2W means they get to footslog without any issue.

Land raider. Lol.

What?! You can only have one save?

Thats explay why my Terminators were so tought and in general my shooting was never so powerfull as this forums seem it to bee.

Most of the time I was rolling 2 saves (Cover and then armour) or 3 (Cover, then armour, then invul)

As a Tau player this will bring tears to my regular opponents (Basically my 4 friends)!

It's in the rule book.

You take an armor/cover/invuln save.

The only layered save in general is FNP.

I think we made this mistake from the Regeneration and Ward saves in WHFB.

Actually I prefer them layered... but well, maybe is just because is how I always do it!

sorry for the offtopic!

Martel732 wrote:
Land raider. Lol.

It's clearly in need of an update!

Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"All Land Raider variants are 190 points base. "

It's still sketchy at that price, but I'll take it.

190 points base and come stock with the Land raider spearhead rules.

"ignore all damage results but explodes and weapon destroyed"
+
Have the move through cover rule and on a 4+ count a penetrating hit as a glancing hit.

Now you have a tank that can at least deal with a few melta guns - if you have 5 meltas it's still toast. Ignores the grav cannon immobilized results and can drive right through cover not giving a gak about hurting it's massive treds with a pebble.

Martel732 wrote:Okay, that's fine. The amount of patching that took was frickin ridiculous, though.

The quick and dirty fix to the LR is just to make it a super heavy. Don’t need to change anything but it’s type. Still not perfect, but solves a bunch of it’s problems. It does cause a few new issues, but frankly when has GW fixed something without breaking a few other things in the process?

You can make it immune to terrain for starters. Otherwise, the single assault you are trying to squeeze out of the thing just isn't worth it. TWC do it 5X better than terminators in LRs.

The problem here is that people can't agree on how they should be used.

It has *nothing* to do with the dice system involved.

If we cannot agree on what their purpose should be, we can't effectively balance them. I've already stated my opinion on the matter but I feel that terminators make sense as tanky units.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
You can make it immune to terrain for starters. Otherwise, the single assault you are trying to squeeze out of the thing just isn't worth it. TWC do it 5X better than terminators in LRs.

Aside from movement what is the primary difference between TWC and Terminators in melee combat? Why are TWC good?

S5, T5 2W, can take stormshields and powerfists as options. They become true S10 with a powerfist which lets them double out OTHER T5 units. Huge. Absolutely huge. The power fists on terminators are toys in comparison.

"It has *nothing* to do with the dice system involved. "

I disagree. There is mathematical niche to put them in even if we agree on a role. Those niches are taken by TWC and grav centurions.

It can't be durable enough on a 2+ save vs weapons that are high ROF wounding on 2's. The only layered save available can also be negated by S8.

They can't be shooty enough because their canonical weapon is a dumpster fire.

They can't punch enough because the game has moved past S8 AP2 at init 1.

People usually give me the "But Centurions..." argument when I say "give them an additional wound" so I guess that goes out the window. (Centurions were a bad idea for this very reason but that's another thread)

So beyond that? I'd say make Storm Bolters Assault 4 and or AP 4. Upgrading the assault cannon is kind of hard considering it would apply to far more models. Deathwing getting TL on the turn they deepstrike makes them much better but even then...

Honestly, I think it's best to just wait and see what they do with 8th. Maybe they'll bring back the old 2nd edition Terminator armor. 3+ on 2d6. (not really)

They do need to be more survivable though. That's really just the long and the short of it.

 Lusall wrote:
People usually give me the "But Centurions..." argument when I say "give them an additional wound" so I guess that goes out the window. (Centurions were a bad idea for this very reason but that's another thread)

So beyond that? I'd say make Storm Bolters Assault 4 and or AP 4. Upgrading the assault cannon is kind of hard considering it would apply to far more models. Deathwing getting TL on the turn they deepstrike makes them much better but even then...

Honestly, I think it's best to just wait and see what they do with 8th. Maybe they'll bring back the old 2nd edition Terminator armor. 3+ on 2d6. (not really)

They do need to be more survivable though. That's really just the long and the short of it.

You give them more defense without more offense, I'l just ignore them more.

Martel732 wrote:

 Lusall wrote:
People usually give me the "But Centurions..." argument when I say "give them an additional wound" so I guess that goes out the window. (Centurions were a bad idea for this very reason but that's another thread)

So beyond that? I'd say make Storm Bolters Assault 4 and or AP 4. Upgrading the assault cannon is kind of hard considering it would apply to far more models. Deathwing getting TL on the turn they deepstrike makes them much better but even then...

Honestly, I think it's best to just wait and see what they do with 8th. Maybe they'll bring back the old 2nd edition Terminator armor. 3+ on 2d6. (not really)

They do need to be more survivable though. That's really just the long and the short of it.

You give them more defense without more offense, I'l just ignore them more.

Hence the idea I threw out about buffing storm bolters. Just to start. I've honestly never understood why terminators couldn't take Las Canons myself. Of course now the answer is "But centurions..."

Martel732 wrote:
"It has *nothing* to do with the dice system involved. "

I disagree. There is mathematical niche to put them in even if we agree on a role. Those niches are taken by TWC and grav centurions.

Not really, TWC can be faster, punchier and more expensive while Terminators can be cheaper and on a per-point basis harder to kill. Grav Cents can be shootier, less mobile and harder to transport (though honestly I think Cents can just feth off completely, Terminators should fill the role that Cents fill.... but if you want to make a distinction between them you can).

Terminators don't really suffer from the D6 system, they suffer from poor rules design and offensive power creep. You could just as easily make them suck in a D10 system.

After reading all the debate, my vote would be +1w, fnp, special issue ammo and 2 heavies per 5 whilst reducing the cost of The heavy weapons.
The special issue ammo and 2 heavies fixes the damage output issue.
1 extra wound is in the vast majority of circumstances more durable than +1T, yet the termies can still be ID'd by anti-tank weapons. The fnp and extra wound will help tremendously against small arms too and gives a layered save without giving precedent to an invuln being a layered save.
Against plasma for instance a termi will have a 5++ followed by a 5+++ on 2 wounds making them more durable but not immune, against most small arms they will get 2+ followed by a 5+++ on 2 wounds making them around 3 times more durable. Whilst against say a lascannon they still only get that 5++ and will be ID'd so that the anti-tank weapons will still do a job against them.
Also keeping the toughness at 4 prevents any Nurgle silliness taking them to T6.
Of course Deathguard termis will need a 4+++ to compensate since they get 5+++ anyway.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In fact doing the maths, fnp and +1w makes them exactly 3 times more durable against anything less than st8. Even against plasma. So anything not anti-tank will require 3 times more shots/hits. Whilst they remain as (un)durable against anything above st8.

I also like the idea mentioned about the 190pt Land Raiders.

I like all of this.

They'll still get two 5+ saves against gav right?

 Nevelon wrote:

Xenomancers wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"All Land Raider variants are 190 points base. "

It's still sketchy at that price, but I'll take it.

190 points base and come stock with the Land raider spearhead rules.

"ignore all damage results but explodes and weapon destroyed"
+
Have the move through cover rule and on a 4+ count a penetrating hit as a glancing hit.

Now you have a tank that can at least deal with a few melta guns - if you have 5 meltas it's still toast. Ignores the grav cannon immobilized results and can drive right through cover not giving a gak about hurting it's massive treds with a pebble.

Martel732 wrote:Okay, that's fine. The amount of patching that took was frickin ridiculous, though.

The quick and dirty fix to the LR is just to make it a super heavy. Don’t need to change anything but it’s type. Still not perfect, but solves a bunch of it’s problems. It does cause a few new issues, but frankly when has GW fixed something without breaking a few other things in the process?

I've suggested a superheavy rule for a LR - it seems to create more problems than it solves. Mainly super-heavies kill everything inside when they die basically.