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.

on Land Raiders

this is a systemic problem with vehicle sin general needing fixing and is not limited to Landraiders

for cheap transports vehicle rules make sense carry 10 models av11 3 hp and 35 points for a single storm bolter ... great. add a few AV and weapons suddenly that vehicle spikes in points costs.

but if you wanted to just bandage the land raider reinforced treads and reinforced hull special rules. reinforced tread ignore dangerous terrain tests, reinforced hull ignore explode and immobilize results instead lose an extra hull point

Poly Ranger wrote:
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.

We really need to theorycraft these changes to see if they work.

Poly Ranger Termies (5x, 175pts) vs. Whip Coil Wraiths (4x, 173pts)

Terminators shoot with 2+ poison : 10(2/3)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.85W, removes 1st Wraith
Terminators overwatch : 10(1/6)(5/6)(1/3) = 0.46W (2.31W total)
Wraiths charge, 1st phase : 12(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 12(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.88W
Terminators in CC, 2nd phase : 2(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) + 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.22W, removes 2nd Wraith (3.53W total)
Wraiths in CC, second phase : 6(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 6(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.44W (1.33W total)
Terminators in CC, second phase : 2(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) + 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.22W (4.75W total)
Wraiths in CC, third phase : 6(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 6(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.44W, removes 1st Terminator (1.77W total)
Terminators in CC, third phase : 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.11W, removes 3rd Wraith (5.86W total)
Wraiths in CC, fourth phase : 3(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 3(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.22W (1.99W total)
Terminators in CC, fourth phase : 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.11W (6.97W total)
Wraiths in CC, fifth phase : 3(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 3(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.22W (2.21W total)
Terminators in CC, fifth phase : 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.11W, removes 4th Wraith (8.08W total). Consolidate.

TLDR : Terminators lose 1x Power Sword Sgt, Wraiths wiped out in 3 turns despite getting the charge.

Meanwhile, how are Terminators going to perform against CC units that don't define the meta, like Incubi or Bullgryns? Or hey, even Eldar... why would you ever take a CC unit other than a Wraithknight, who cancels out the Terminator 2W/FNP and isn't vulnerable to Poison? Doesn't 2W/FNP encourage an even greater reliance on D-Weapons and "remove from play" effecfs like Stomp?

Hence why I say people don't think before giving them the durability of or greater than Centurions for the points.

Martel732 wrote:
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.

Well we're moving in the right direction. You and I agree that 5T, 2W is a good addition. I do like the 5STR as well. To me they should also get something in terms of ranged. Either (a) remove their relentless platform so they can sweep or (b) give them enhanced firepower - my personal preference would be rending on their storm bolter profile (terminator storm bolter).

In regards to the mathematical point - illustrate to me what you'd like, from a probability standpoint, and we can make it happen, or something close to it, with 6 sided dice.

The reason I proposed lowering their save to 3+, is that it would change their role considerably. Immediately they become way more survivable against grav, but at the same time, they have *no reduction in survivability against AP2*. There's not a whole lot of long-ranged, mass-firing AP3.

Lastly, I would also suggest that terminators strike at initiative 2 with unwieldy weapons. As it stands right now, terminators with thunder hammers and storm shields versus veterans with power fists and storm shields is a total wash, yet the cost for the terminators is considerably higher. And both have a 3++, except the vets can also take jump packs for a more reliable charge. Yeah you lose the ability to ride in a land raider but does anyone realistically care.

So, like foot TWC? That's a lot of changes, but that might be necessary. It's very messy.

Martel732 wrote:
So, like foot TWC? That's a lot of changes, but that might be necessary. It's very messy.

My personal preference is:

1. Deep strike should be preserved. It's iconic and a very useful ability, very unique to terminator armour. That means we can't sweep - fine - but we need something to make up for that.

2. Enhanced survivability. I think we're on the same page here, mostly. If I had total control their stat line would be: WS5 BS4 S5 T5 I4 W2 3+/4++

3. Better melee. Up their initiative to 2 with unwieldy weapons. This (i think) would be totally unique to units in terminator armour. They'd be the kings of high str weaponry.

4. Slightly better ranged. Storm bolters wielded by terminators get the rending special rule.

My idea of terminators is deep strike in, tank some shots, and do damage in melee before they die. They still fall quickly to high initiative swarms of attacks, they're vulnerable to the instant death special rule. but they don't get blasted off the board before they do anything.


Important note: you should never see turn 1 charges with terminators via formation with my proposed changes. So for instance, that BA drop pod terminator assault should not happen. They're way too strong with these changes for a guaranteed charge coming from deep strike.

Yoyoyo wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
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.

We really need to theorycraft these changes to see if they work.

Poly Ranger Termies (5x, 175pts) vs. Whip Coil Wraiths (4x, 173pts)

Terminators shoot with 2+ poison : 10(2/3)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.85W, removes 1st Wraith
Terminators overwatch : 10(1/6)(5/6)(1/3) = 0.46W (2.31W total)
Wraiths charge, 1st phase : 12(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 12(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.88W
Terminators in CC, 2nd phase : 2(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) + 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.22W, removes 2nd Wraith (3.53W total)
Wraiths in CC, second phase : 6(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 6(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.44W (1.33W total)
Terminators in CC, second phase : 2(1/2)(1/3)(1/3) + 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.22W (4.75W total)
Wraiths in CC, third phase : 6(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 6(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.44W, removes 1st Terminator (1.77W total)
Terminators in CC, third phase : 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.11W, removes 3rd Wraith (5.86W total)
Wraiths in CC, fourth phase : 3(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 3(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.22W (1.99W total)
Terminators in CC, fourth phase : 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.11W (6.97W total)
Wraiths in CC, fifth phase : 3(1/2)(2/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 3(1/2)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.22W (2.21W total)
Terminators in CC, fifth phase : 8(1/2)(5/6)(1/3) = 1.11W, removes 4th Wraith (8.08W total). Consolidate.

TLDR : Terminators lose 1x Power Sword Sgt, Wraiths wiped out in 3 turns despite getting the charge.

Meanwhile, how are Terminators going to perform against CC units that don't define the meta, like Incubi or Bullgryns? Or hey, even Eldar... why would you ever take a CC unit other than a Wraithknight, who cancels out the Terminator 2W/FNP and isn't vulnerable to Poison? Doesn't 2W/FNP encourage an even greater reliance on D-Weapons and "remove from play" effecfs like Stomp?

But you are entirely looking at this in a vacume of two units, no offence. Wraiths still get a 3++ against anything ap2 or better that termis don't (even ignoring potential RP), they also can't be ID'd by st8 or 9. So in the wider picture that is a major weakness that terims will still suffer with this buff that Wraiths won't suffer from.
Then take into account the speed of each unit. In most circumstances, the Necron player will just deny the unfavourable combat. With the speed of Wraiths and the lack of speed of termis, why would it be any other way the majority of the time? If a player who has termis can catch Wraiths in combat then fair play - they should be able to give a fair show against them!
Wraiths aren't a unit with ap2 anyway, they rely on their rending, so why should they decimate termis like they currently do? Especially since they get so much more for their points in comparison.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:

Spoiler:

Poly Ranger wrote:
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?

Thanks. Yeh that would be a 5++ then a 5+++ against grav

The entire above argument does nothing to fix terminators, it just adds them to the list of gak thats broken.

Leave them as is, drop their points, and give some love to special rules that allow you to change the way the behave (tyberos, first company etc) similar to what DA got.

Their rules are fine, their cost isnt. When I mishap with assault termies its devasting, not because if hav eto footslog, but rather such a huge chunk of points is not out of the game. Make it so that loosing them to a stomp isnt as painful to your army, and they work as intended.

Poly Ranger wrote:
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.

Rarely do I think proposed rules are any good, but your +1 W and FnP breakdown is well thought out. Nicely done.

I don't agree on the special ammunition, I like that Sternguard have their special something. I think going for Rending or an extra shot/s would be better for Terminators. Aesthetically I feel that MOAR BULLETS is more appropriate for them than doing anything fancy. Sternguard the scalpel, Terminators the hammer, in my opinion.

Poly Ranger wrote:
But you are entirely looking at this in a vacume of two units, no offence.

Err, what about Incubi, Bullgryns, Wraithblades? Meanwhile, what about anti-TEQ weapons?

2x Plasmaguns (current) : 4(2/3)(5/6)(2/3) = 1.48W (1-2 models removed)
2x Plasmaguns (amended) : 4(2/3)(5/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.98W (no models removed)
2x Meltaguns (amended) : 2(2/3)(5/6)(2/3) = 0.74W (likely 1 model removed)

Interesting -- Melta now becomes a better anti-Terminator weapon. Meanwhile the rest of a 10-man Tac Squad can currently bolter down a Terminator, amended defense might take one down over 3 turns. They certainly won't be firing that long! Can we no longer tone down Grav Cannons because it's the only weapon that Tac Squads stand a chance with?

So, you will have a ton of cascading effects if Teminators become one of the strongest units, in the most popular faction in the game. I'm not looking at this in a vacuum. You need to address every. single. faction. to ask how each will counter Terminators, that are suddenly 3x tougher against everything except S8+.

Wraiths are only one example. But good question -- what should and should not counter Terminators? That's thinking from a design perspective, instead of just throwing out ideas and seeing what sticks.

This is perhaps the most fascinating problem in the whole game. Terminators are iconic, but the loyalist versions have never had sufficient crunch to back up their fluff. The CSM versions haven't in a long time, although they find life as suicide troops. Also not very fluffy.

The range of opinions about what they should be able to do and what needs to be done to get them there is incredibly diverse.

Martel732 wrote:
This is perhaps the most fascinating problem in the whole game. Terminators are iconic, but the loyalist versions have never had sufficient crunch to back up their fluff. The CSM versions haven't in a long time, although they find life as suicide troops. Also not very fluffy.

The range of opinions about what they should be able to do and what needs to be done to get them there is incredibly diverse.

That's usually why you write a design document whenever you have a collaborative project. Otherwise people tend to go in their own directions!

My greyknight terms do quite well when I take them. Why? Because they get to fill the troop function in the army - yeah - they are expensive but they are also the lowest unit on the totem-poll of threats. Dreadknights/imperialknights are what has my opponents attention. On top of all this - mobility is not a concern because each term unit will have a libby which can give them mobility if needed. PE Daemons is just icing.

With loyalist terms - you still have a troop tax - which means you still need to fill your troops and pay for terms and less scary things because you don't have any points left.

Let people take terms as troops and they will be fielded over tacticals (outside of a gladius). Even for it's points I would much prefer 5 terms to 10 tactical marines. I make this decision without even thinking about it in the greykngiht codex. In comparison strike squad marines are better point per point than a tactical marine as well.

Even when you consider this - all it does is highlight the fact that tactical marines are in even worse shape than terminators. Both units need buffs for them to be viable. Then we can talk about removing formations that give marines free points just so they can hang with actually good units. I just laugh inside when I hear people complaining about marines being super OP - they need a points handicap just to compete and still lose half the time.

Imagine if eldar had a formation that gave them 55 point discounts on their wave serpents/Falcons for taking min dire avenger squads. How do you think gladius would stack up against that?

Back to terminators - you want to fix them - you need to fix the tactical marine first. Making them fill the troop function is not the right idea.

Tac marine
Relentless (base)
Bolter (shred standard*heavy bolter too*)
power armor 6++ save and 5+ FNP
Vet Sargents get +1 WS and BS and +1 attack and an additional +1 attack in a challange (this should be a standard rule for all spacemarine characters) in a challange
+chapter tactics
16 points. (same stats for chaos marines too)

terminators
vet sargent line
Terminator armor +1S+1T 2+ 5++/4+FNP
Storm bolters 2/3 salvo + shred (can trade for thunder hammer)
Standard power weapon of your choice - can upgrade to a powerfist or a storm sheild for +5 points
2 heavies per 5

38 points

Points I could be wrong on - both options might need to cost more but I believe this is the power level they should have in order to be considered good units. (This is actually pretty light IMO when you have 81 point scatter bike units running around).

Yoyoyo wrote:

Wraiths are only one example. But good question -- what should and should not counter Terminators?

So, as a guy who got into this thing in 2nd Ed, I always look at three "core" factions for balance against Space Marines: Eldar, Guard and Tyranids. Each of them is sufficiently different than SM, and most other races fall somewhere between them in terms of capability and "strategic poise".

Eldar don't seem to have any problem with the +1W and FnP Terminators. Fire Dragons bring the Melta, Wraithguard bring the D, and Shuriken weapons are (imo) a little too lethal against Terminators right now. Not surprisingly, I think Eldar can handle them fine.

Guard: Besides waves of guys, Guard are the army of Ordinance. Most Ordinance is S 8 and up, so the FnP and extra wound will be ignored by their cannons. Terminators getting caught in in the sights of a Demolisher cannon will still get blasted to pieces. If the 2+ isn't made vs. a Battlecannon (ie. the Terminator catches the shell in the chest), the marine is still turned to paste inside his armor. Seems appropriate to me.

Tyranids: Making Terminators more protected against the Swarms of little guys is great, but imo Genestealers ought to be a real threat to them. Admittedly I think that's a little more of Genestealer problem these days. Terminatos Vs. Tyranid MCs should strike a nuanced balance IMO. Both sides should be very lethal to each other. What's sad is that I don't know a Carnifex's Strength these days. Is it 8 or better? Or is it a sad 6? Poor Tyranids. Honestly I'd push through the change to Terminators and then work the Tyranids to balance correctly with some high S MCs, and the option for the old Toxin Sacs (is that right?) rules where they did two wounds to the victim instead of one.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:

Wraiths are only one example. But good question -- what should and should not counter Terminators?

So, as a guy who got into this thing in 2nd Ed, I always look at three "core" factions for balance against Space Marines: Eldar, Guard and Tyranids. Each of them is sufficiently different than SM, and most other races fall somewhere between them in terms of capability and "strategic poise".

Eldar don't seem to have any problem with the +1W and FnP Terminators. Fire Dragons bring the Melta, Wraithguard bring the D, and Shuriken weapons are (imo) a little too lethal against Terminators right now. Not surprisingly, I think Eldar can handle them fine.

Guard: Besides waves of guys, Guard are the army of Ordinance. Most Ordinance is S 8 and up, so the FnP and extra wound will be ignored by their cannons. Terminators getting caught in in the sights of a Demolisher cannon will still get blasted to pieces. If the 2+ isn't made vs. a Battlecannon (ie. the Terminator catches the shell in the chest), the marine is still turned to paste inside his armor. Seems appropriate to me.

Tyranids: Making Terminators more protected against the Swarms of little guys is great, but imo Genestealers ought to be a real threat to them. Admittedly I think that's a little more of Genestealer problem these days. Terminatos Vs. Tyranid MCs should strike a nuanced balance IMO. Both sides should be very lethal to each other. What's sad is that I don't know a Carnifex's Strength these days. Is it 8 or better? Or is it a sad 6? Poor Tyranids. Honestly I'd push through the change to Terminators and then work the Tyranids to balance correctly with some high S MCs, and the option for the old Toxin Sacs (is that right?) rules where they did two wounds to the victim instead of one.

Genstealers blow massively these days - they have to make rules to have them setup right next to you and be able to assault turn 1 to give them any play. Steelers used to wreck terms - like obliterate them.

" Steelers used to wreck terms - like obliterate them"

Which isn't fluffy either. I hated tyranids in 2nd. They still might be the most obnoxious thing GW has never made. The Hive Tyrant was always 1" behind the carnifex, they had strategy cards that would wipe half a list before the game, etc.

Martel732 wrote:
" Steelers used to wreck terms - like obliterate them"

Which isn't fluffy either. I hated tyranids in 2nd. They still might be the most obnoxious thing GW has never made. The Hive Tyrant was always 1" behind the carnifex, they had strategy cards that would wipe half a list before the game, etc.

that was then... now the tyranids are in a bad place wishing they had something as good as tactical terminators in the elites slot

fluff just does not work on a table though. Eldar and space marines would have no more than 10 models on a table in large games while some armies like orks would nnot be abel to fit on the table as it would be full of models.

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" Steelers used to wreck terms - like obliterate them"

Which isn't fluffy either. I hated tyranids in 2nd. They still might be the most obnoxious thing GW has never made. The Hive Tyrant was always 1" behind the carnifex, they had strategy cards that would wipe half a list before the game, etc.

that was then... now the tyranids are in a bad place wishing they had something as good as tactical terminators in the elites slot

fluff just does not work on a table though. Eldar and space marines would have no more than 10 models on a table in large games while some armies like orks would nnot be abel to fit on the table as it would be full of models.

I don't think the fluff is that extreme. I just don't think it's appropriate for a genestealer to be able to do what they could in 2nd.

Out of curiosity :

5x Poly Ranger Terminators (175pts) versus 13x GSC Purestrains (182pts, native 5++)

Terminators shoot : 10(2/3)(5/6)(2/3) = 3.70W
Terminators overwatch : 10(1/6)(5/6)(2/3) = 0.92W (4.63W total)
8x Purestrains attack, 1st phase : 32(2/3)(1/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 32(2/3)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 2.37W
4x Terminators counterattack = 8(1/2)(5/6)(2/3) = 2.22W (6.85W total)
6x Purestrains attack, 2nd phase : 18(2/3)(1/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 18(2/3)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 1.33W (3.7W total)
3x Terminators counterattack = 6(1/2)(5/6)(2/3) = 1.67W (8.51W total)
4x Purestrains attack, 3rd phase : 12(2/3)(1/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 12(2/3)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.88W (4.59W total)
3x Terminators counterattack = 6(1/2)(5/6)(2/3) = 1.67W (10.19W total)
3x Purestrains attack, 4th phase : 9(2/3)(1/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 9(2/3)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.67W (5.25W total)
3x Terminators counterattack = 6(1/2)(5/6)(2/3) = 1.67W (11.85W total)
1x Purestrains attack, 5th phase : 3(2/3)(1/3)(1/6)(2/3) + 3(2/3)(1/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.22W (5.47W total)
3x Terminators counterattack = 6(1/2)(5/6)(2/3) = 1.67W (13.52W total)

TLDR: Terminators win with approx 50-60% casualties. To actually win at points, the only option is successfully charging out of DS.

Carnifex would get removed by 2+ poison in 2 rounds of shooting. Special Issue Ammo is probably a little too much, especially given how Storm Bolters reach out to 24" better.

Martel732 wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
" Steelers used to wreck terms - like obliterate them"

Which isn't fluffy either. I hated tyranids in 2nd. They still might be the most obnoxious thing GW has never made. The Hive Tyrant was always 1" behind the carnifex, they had strategy cards that would wipe half a list before the game, etc.

that was then... now the tyranids are in a bad place wishing they had something as good as tactical terminators in the elites slot

fluff just does not work on a table though. Eldar and space marines would have no more than 10 models on a table in large games while some armies like orks would nnot be abel to fit on the table as it would be full of models.

I don't think the fluff is that extreme. I just don't think it's appropriate for a genestealer to be able to do what they could in 2nd.

aye, it was meant as a bit of hyperbole but the point would stand that a base marine would cost much more than 14 points and a ork boy just a few. I usually choose fluffwise to think of it as a model representing so many of a squad. perhaps a ork boy is 4 orks working together, or a gaunt being 3-4 gaunts and a space marine squad might not be 5 men, but 2 and the heavy weapon guy means the weapon itself was damaged... why else would nobody else know how to pick it up and fire it.

I still think of all this CSM and SM of the imperioum need squads to be min 3 not 5, 1 heavy weapon per 3, and troops then be done with it

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

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.

My slightly less quick and dirty suggestion is to make LRs superheavies, but without the giant boom at the end, just wrecked/blow up like a normal tank. That way you get to shoot your guns at whoever you want, ignore terrain, and fight at full until the last HP is gone. Which is the bulk of the LR’s problems, and might actually make them worth the points.

 Insectum7 wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
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.

Rarely do I think proposed rules are any good, but your +1 W and FnP breakdown is well thought out. Nicely done.

I don't agree on the special ammunition, I like that Sternguard have their special something. I think going for Rending or an extra shot/s would be better for Terminators. Aesthetically I feel that MOAR BULLETS is more appropriate for them than doing anything fancy. Sternguard the scalpel, Terminators the hammer, in my opinion.

Thank you. Yeh considering Yoyoyo's breakdowns I agree that special issue ammunition would be a step too far maybe. Do you agree with the 2 heavies per 5 though?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Yoyoyo wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
But you are entirely looking at this in a vacume of two units, no offence.

Err, what about Incubi, Bullgryns, Wraithblades? Meanwhile, what about anti-TEQ weapons?

2x Plasmaguns (current) : 4(2/3)(5/6)(2/3) = 1.48W (1-2 models removed)
2x Plasmaguns (amended) : 4(2/3)(5/6)(2/3)(2/3) = 0.98W (no models removed)
2x Meltaguns (amended) : 2(2/3)(5/6)(2/3) = 0.74W (likely 1 model removed)

Interesting -- Melta now becomes a better anti-Terminator weapon. Meanwhile the rest of a 10-man Tac Squad can currently bolter down a Terminator, amended defense might take one down over 3 turns. They certainly won't be firing that long! Can we no longer tone down Grav Cannons because it's the only weapon that Tac Squads stand a chance with?

So, you will have a ton of cascading effects if Teminators become one of the strongest units, in the most popular faction in the game. I'm not looking at this in a vacuum. You need to address every. single. faction. to ask how each will counter Terminators, that are suddenly 3x tougher against everything except S8+.

Wraiths are only one example. But good question -- what should and should not counter Terminators? That's thinking from a design perspective, instead of just throwing out ideas and seeing what sticks.

I like the fact that melta would be an anti-termi weapon, as it literally burns a hole through tanks so should do the same through term is. As mentioned above, all factions have access to st8+ and that will be what deals with termis. They also become 3x more resistant to grav, so it won't encourage more grav against them over other weapons.
Being able to weather shots below st8 will be their shtick. They will have a role whilst still having obvious counters. Plasma and grav will still be an effective weapon against them as well, just not an auto delete. 4.5 plasma/grav wounds will kill 1 termi compared to 3. So 8.1 shots from a bs4 model will wipe one rather than 2.7 shots (which you've got to agree 2.7 shots from cheap rapid fire weapons or moderately priced HRoF weapons taking down a termi for it's points is insane). Plus terminator suits are designed to handle things like radiation and plasma leaks encountered on space hulks.
As mentioned above, they will still melt to things like demolisher cannons and are still as vulnerable to st8+ that doesn't ignore their armour too so will still get outright killed on that roll of 1.
They still suffer from another major weakness too and that is their mobility, which sucks still, this can't be taken into account with straight out mathammer fights. So I reckon with +1w and FnP, they will be pretty balanced.

Another idea. In addition to T5 2W and FNP (with a pretty substantial price increase for MoN terminators ) allow them to mix and match weapons the same way wolfstar do. Assault cannon and SS? If you want an 80+ point model sure. Missile launcher and lightening claws? Be my guest. I'm not suggesting termies get ALL these buffs, but 2 or 3 would make them what they are supposed to be. I mean never again do I want to see S5 storm bolters. That's more or less bringing back psy bolt for GK.

Genestealers still wreck terminators. when you're throwing 40+ dice at a squad of 5 terms the expected casualties is easily 5... Not sure where this Genestealers suck stuff is coming from.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dantes_Baals wrote:
Another idea. In addition to T5 2W and FNP (with a pretty substantial price increase for MoN terminators ) allow them to mix and match weapons the same way wolfstar do. Assault cannon and SS? If you want an 80+ point model sure. Missile launcher and lightening claws? Be my guest. I'm not suggesting termies get ALL these buffs, but 2 or 3 would make them what they are supposed to be. I mean never again do I want to see S5 storm bolters. That's more or less bringing back psy bolt for GK.

S5 storm bolters on GK wouldn't help them be more viable.

Dantes_Baals wrote:
Another idea. In addition to T5 2W and FNP (with a pretty substantial price increase for MoN terminators ) allow them to mix and match weapons the same way wolfstar do. Assault cannon and SS? If you want an 80+ point model sure. Missile launcher and lightening claws? Be my guest. I'm not suggesting termies get ALL these buffs, but 2 or 3 would make them what they are supposed to be. I mean never again do I want to see S5 storm bolters. That's more or less bringing back psy bolt for GK.

So you want them to be Centurions.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Dantes_Baals wrote:
Another idea. In addition to T5 2W and FNP (with a pretty substantial price increase for MoN terminators ) allow them to mix and match weapons the same way wolfstar do. Assault cannon and SS? If you want an 80+ point model sure. Missile launcher and lightening claws? Be my guest. I'm not suggesting termies get ALL these buffs, but 2 or 3 would make them what they are supposed to be. I mean never again do I want to see S5 storm bolters. That's more or less bringing back psy bolt for GK.

So you want them to be Centurions.

I don't see why terminators need heavy firepower.

For those who feel terminators should be ranged damage per turn - why? Why pay the overhead for terminator armor on a ranged platform?

I agree with the above - they should be distinct from Centurions.

 Nevelon wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

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.

My slightly less quick and dirty suggestion is to make LRs superheavies, but without the giant boom at the end, just wrecked/blow up like a normal tank. That way you get to shoot your guns at whoever you want, ignore terrain, and fight at full until the last HP is gone. Which is the bulk of the LR’s problems, and might actually make them worth the points.

I know for a fact that AV14 is tough to kill as a superheavy as I face Typhons on a regular basis. If they went to super heavies that didn't kill the dude's inside - they would be worth their points at 240 points.

Poly Ranger wrote:
I like the fact that melta would be an anti-termi weapon, as it literally burns a hole through tanks so should do the same through term is. As mentioned above, all factions have access to st8+ and that will be what deals with termis.

It works well enough for Meganobz, the only problem is the variety of support that Imperium and Chaos have available. Aside from ICs and psychic powers, even just Mark of Nurgle will remove anything below S10 as an effective option.

Instant Death is just not a very good mechanic by itself, adding a wounding value might be an alternative.

Lasgun = 0.5
Bolter = 1
Plasmagun = 1
Meltagun = 2

So to kill a 2+ 5++ Terminator with 2W:

--> 24 Lasgun Wounds (4 unsaved = 2)
--> 12 Bolter Wounds (2 unsaved = 2)
--> 3 Plasma Wounds (2 unsaved = 2)
--> 1.5 Melta Wounds (1 unsaved = 2)

Lack of granularity has been mentioned, a Bolter and Lasgun wound really shouldn't be equal. Plus maybe we could eliminate the saving throw in some circumstances, and just work off modifiers and effects. Layered saves do work but they've also created some unfortunate mechanics.

Anyway, just food for thought. 40k is held together with spit and duct tape at this point. A comprehensive fix will need to address some of the core mechanics.

Poly Ranger wrote:

Thank you. Yeh considering Yoyoyo's breakdowns I agree that special issue ammunition would be a step too far maybe. Do you agree with the 2 heavies per 5 though?

If Terminator heavy weapons (Mostly the Assault Cannon) weren't shared by other units then I would say no. I'd prefer the traditional 1 per 5 but with better stats on the weapons. However, since Land Speeders and Razorbacks can have Assault Cannons, it's less appropriate to buff them, and more appropriate to add more to the Terminator Squad.

That said, if Storm Bolters got buffed, then it's less of an issue since what we're really looking for is the squad to have better ranged damage output. Or you could give Terminators BS 5 and they'd be more effective with it/them too, without changing weapon stats that affect other units.

Yoyoyo wrote:
a Bolter and Lasgun wound really shouldn't be equal.

They already aren't. There's no need to nerf Lasguns, they're really not overpowered as they are right now.