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.

Pretty sure Meganobz have 3 wounds already, no?

Also, how is it unfair? Terminators, with the exception of TH/SS Assault Terminators, have been trash for those same 20 years. They still are. You really shouldn't let historical stats in other editions influence balance in the current one. That way lies madness.

 Blackie wrote:

 kadeton wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
It was already done. 2W termies are fine now.

The suggestion currently floating around is to give Terminators 3 Wds. That way they're no longer killed by a single overcharged plasma hit, which makes them dramatically more efficient and might shift the current plasma-heavy meta.

And then you have to give +1W to a lot of things actually. Nobz, meganobz, bikes, TWC, wulfen, centurions etc.... Terminators already had their +1W, units like nobz or wulfen, which had 2W in previous edition stayed with their 2W. Now if termies get three wounds when they had 1 for 20+ years and other units that already had 2 still remain with 2 it would be very silly and unfair IMHO.

When I made a similar suggestion way back I mentioned that all 2 wound units that were supposed to be elite somehow(terminators, bikers, etc) should be getting a +1 wound. It would mitigate plasma spam and make it worthwhile to use weapons that can do more wounds on those models.

 Blackie wrote:

 kadeton wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
It was already done. 2W termies are fine now.

The suggestion currently floating around is to give Terminators 3 Wds. That way they're no longer killed by a single overcharged plasma hit, which makes them dramatically more efficient and might shift the current plasma-heavy meta.

And then you have to give +1W to a lot of things actually. Nobz, meganobz, bikes, TWC, wulfen, centurions etc.... Terminators already had their +1W, units like nobz or wulfen, which had 2W in previous edition stayed with their 2W. Now if termies get three wounds when they had 1 for 20+ years and other units that already had 2 still remain with 2 it would be very silly and unfair IMHO.

You are thinking small. Terminators with 3 wounds are your friends, not your enemies. If terminators get 3 wounds (and meganobz as well), then the meta will shift away from plasma spam. This will in turn make the environment more friendly for your meganobz so you can play them more often and be happier about it.

Also, seconding not considering fair or unfair treatment of previous editions when deciding the current balance.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Pretty sure Meganobz have 3 wounds already, no?

Also, how is it unfair? Terminators, with the exception of TH/SS Assault Terminators, have been trash for those same 20 years. They still are. You really shouldn't let historical stats in other editions influence balance in the current one. That way lies madness.

Meganobz used tin have 2 wounds. So when everyone got a bump, so did they.

I think Deathshrouds (that have 2 wounds in HH already) should have gotten a bump.

tneva82 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

Ferrus126 wrote:
All Terminators get +1 wounds. To be honest I'm not even sure that would make them playable. But +2 wounds would probably be OP.

It was already done. 2W termies are fine now.

They just need more melee damage output or some good synergies to make close combat oriented termies shine in a SM army. Orks elites have a similar problem since power klaws (like power fists) are not even remotely as deadly as they used to be with 8+W vehicles/monsters and the D3 damage.

With all the D2 weapons out there W2 on terminator priced models is pretty much irrelevant.

So I did intend for the majority of terminators to have 3 wounds when I posted this, sorry if it was not clear. Terminators and like units need the extra durability in the current play environment, they are currently a joke and have been ever since I started playing 40k (at the beginning of 7th). The awesome Terminator model is what got me into 40k to begin with but it mostly collects dust.

I am pretty sure we can all agree that Terminators need a buff (if they are ever going to be seen on the board again). Reducing there points is not really an option right? And they already have fantastic weapon selections. There mobility and other stats don't really matter if they get shot of the board immediately after they arrive. Everyone and there grandmother has deep strike these days so its not really worth mentioning. So I think the only and most sensible option is to increase there wound count so they can stay on the board to at least attempt to make up there point cost.

I can dream until the FAQ drops at least =)

Problem with +1 wound on Terminators is you're essentially making them four wound models anyways.

Two overcharged plasma gun shots (or autocannon shots, or Battlecannon shots, or any other D2/Dd3 weapon) would be required to kill a single Terminator, if it hit, wounded, and got past the saves. You might as well make them 4 wounds and be done with it.

The only difference between 3 and 4 wounds is with the random damage weapons (a 16.7% durability increase against d6 weapons and 33% against d3 weapons), and any Damage 3 weapons (Baneblade Cannons, Predator Autocannons).

I think the whole point of Plasma is it's supposed to be one shot, one Terminator, provided saves go badly. If you give Terminators 3 wounds, then as far as plasma is concerned they might as well have four.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think the whole point of Plasma is it's supposed to be one shot, one Terminator, provided saves go badly. If you give Terminators 3 wounds, then as far as plasma is concerned they might as well have four.

As far as overcharged plasma is concerned, sure. It makes a huge difference for D1 weapons, though.

The funniest thing about Terminators (IMO and also IIRC) is that in the fluff, Terminator armour was adapted from protective gear designed specifically to allow people to work on plasma reactors from the inside. Plasma is the thing they should absolutely protect against.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


I think the whole point of Plasma is it's supposed to be one shot, one Terminator, provided saves go badly. If you give Terminators 3 wounds, then as far as plasma is concerned they might as well have four.

Yeah that is a very good point. But currently plasma is very available and pretty cheap (in comparison to other weapon profiles) so it could stand to take a nerf IMO. But one thing I don't understand is some of the underlying fluff/intent, Is plasma supposed to one shot terminators?

Yes, I don't really see how "it would make them very good against plasma" a valid argument given how plasma is basically the go-to gun for any IoM unit that can take it because of how its simply good against everything at the moment...

And as people stated-1 wound guns are a thing yaknow.

kadeton wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think the whole point of Plasma is it's supposed to be one shot, one Terminator, provided saves go badly. If you give Terminators 3 wounds, then as far as plasma is concerned they might as well have four.

As far as overcharged plasma is concerned, sure. It makes a huge difference for D1 weapons, though.

The funniest thing about Terminators (IMO and also IIRC) is that in the fluff, Terminator armour was adapted from protective gear designed specifically to allow people to work on plasma reactors from the inside. Plasma is the thing they should absolutely protect against.

Just like how radiation suits (designed to work on the inside of nuclear reactors) make you 100% safe at ground zero of a nuclear explosion!

I've always hated this rationalization, because reactors and weapons are totally different even if they operate on the same underlying principle. Weapons typically seek to deliver their entire output in a single short burst, while reactors deliver the same amount of energy over a much longer, more spread out period of time. In the case of nuclear weapons, it's the difference between nanoseconds and decades; plasma may very well be the same. A material able to endure/absorb/reflect a tiny bit of radiation/heat for a few moments of those decades will not necessarily be able to endure the huge and abrupt thermal and radioactive input from a single pulse of a weapon.

Ferrus126 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


I think the whole point of Plasma is it's supposed to be one shot, one Terminator, provided saves go badly. If you give Terminators 3 wounds, then as far as plasma is concerned they might as well have four.

Yeah that is a very good point. But currently plasma is very available and pretty cheap (in comparison to other weapon profiles) so it could stand to take a nerf IMO. But one thing I don't understand is some of the underlying fluff/intent, Is plasma supposed to one shot terminators?

Plasma has, since its inception, been the "anti-heavy-infantry" gun, and I'd hardly say it's cheap. Just as an example, Renegade Marauders double the cost of the entire squad from just buying two plasma guns. Same thing with Imperial Guard Command Squads. Hell, if you give them all plasma guns, the command squad is three times the price of the models by themselves.

EDIT:
I don't think one-wound guns are the problem for terminators currently, so buffing their durability against one-wound weapons seems silly. The cited problem is Plasma, which, to be honest, is supposed to be good against terminators. The reason it is so prolific is that it is also good against light infantry, medium infantry, and damn near every vehicle in the game.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Yes, I don't really see how "it would make them very good against plasma" a valid argument given how plasma is basically the go-to gun for any IoM unit that can take it because of how its simply good against everything at the moment...

And as people stated-1 wound guns are a thing yaknow.

Yea I think too many people have the complex where they want to boost everything up to meet the extreme ends of things. Just nerf plasma costs or make it S6 and S7 OC.

Heres to hoping this thing finally drops... been waiting! COMMON GW!

That said, I agree Terminators should get +1 Wound. I get that the main issue is "plasma spam" for them, but seriously, they are mean't to take on things like Lascannons (in the fluff). They're small, portable dreadnaughts... They should be able to take a plasma hit. You also need to realize that a majority of Terminators die to a lot of stuff; mortars, small arms fire in bulk, etc. Hell, even my Blightlords, which (arguably) are the most durable Terminators feel flimsy in many games.

Make Terminators great again!

The problem lies in the idea that Warhammer 40k really lacks a wound spectrum.

3 Wound terminators(or elites) would mean that you have to commit with plasma which nerfs plasma a bit without buffing them too much against everything that is non-plasma. They would only be effectively "4 wounds" against plasma, but everything else they'd just be 3 wound models. This would be important for units that do damage based on sheer volume of 1 damage attacks.

Regarding 1 wound plasma, sure, it would solve some issues, but again it makes the game a bit too "all or nothing" affair. I would rather see variance in hit points and wound generation that allows for a better representation of survivability and deadliness rather than having everyhing revolve around such binary numbers as 1 or 2.

 Eldarsif wrote:
The problem lies in the idea that Warhammer 40k really lacks a wound spectrum.

3 Wound terminators(or elites) would mean that you have to commit with plasma which nerfs plasma a bit without buffing them too much against everything that is non-plasma. They would only be effectively "4 wounds" against plasma, but everything else they'd just be 3 wound models. This would be important for units that do damage based on sheer volume of 1 damage attacks.

Regarding 1 wound plasma, sure, it would solve some issues, but again it makes the game a bit too "all or nothing" affair. I would rather see variance in hit points and wound generation that allows for a better representation of survivability and deadliness rather than having everyhing revolve around such binary numbers as 1 or 2.

I can see this argument.

I really think it boils down to the way the new damage/wounds system operates, as opposed to the old way where everything did 1 wound regardless. They should have laid out a map as to what weapons should do how many wounds a weapon does (for example, lascannons do d6 because they're anti-tank weapons) then base it around that. As it is now, some models die far too quickly because things do SO MUCH damage.

Guys guys... maybe instead of buffing all 2W models with +1 Wound... making 2D damage weapons irrelevant (Because autocannons are surely destroying armies left and right)... we don't... rebalance plasma?

Hm? Plasma is the one 2D weapon that is easely spammed and its actually good agaisnt nearly everything.

With Custodes you feel how much resilient you are agaisnt plasma, being wounded by it on 3+ instead of 2+, with two shots needed to kill one custodes and 4++ instead of 5++. But you are still vulnerable to other 2 damage weapons like Autocannons compared with Terminators, Bikes, etc...

 Galas wrote:
Guys guys... maybe instead of buffing all 2W models with +1 Wound... making 2D damage weapons irrelevant (Because autocannons are surely destroying armies left and right)... we don't... rebalance plasma?

Hm? Plasma is the one 2D weapon that is easely spammed and its actually good agaisnt nearly everything.

With Custodes you feel how much resilient you are agaisnt plasma, being wounded by it on 3+ instead of 2+, with two shots needed to kill one custodes and 4++ instead of 5++. But you are still vulnerable to other 2 damage weapons like Autocannons compared with Terminators, Bikes, etc...

I think a part of the problem is that GW intended for plasma to be balanced with the "You kill yourself by accident" overcharge thing. Then they started adding rerolls to everything and their parents which meant that people were far more likely to take a chance on a plasma misfire than before.

Would be interesting if they'd just FAQ it so that when you overcharge and roll a natural 1 you are not allowed to reroll it.

Ferrus126 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

Ferrus126 wrote:
All Terminators get +1 wounds. To be honest I'm not even sure that would make them playable. But +2 wounds would probably be OP.

It was already done. 2W termies are fine now.

They just need more melee damage output or some good synergies to make close combat oriented termies shine in a SM army. Orks elites have a similar problem since power klaws (like power fists) are not even remotely as deadly as they used to be with 8+W vehicles/monsters and the D3 damage.

With all the D2 weapons out there W2 on terminator priced models is pretty much irrelevant.

So I did intend for the majority of terminators to have 3 wounds when I posted this, sorry if it was not clear. Terminators and like units need the extra durability in the current play environment, they are currently a joke and have been ever since I started playing 40k (at the beginning of 7th). The awesome Terminator model is what got me into 40k to begin with but it mostly collects dust.

I am pretty sure we can all agree that Terminators need a buff (if they are ever going to be seen on the board again). Reducing there points is not really an option right? And they already have fantastic weapon selections. There mobility and other stats don't really matter if they get shot of the board immediately after they arrive. Everyone and there grandmother has deep strike these days so its not really worth mentioning. So I think the only and most sensible option is to increase there wound count so they can stay on the board to at least attempt to make up there point cost.

I can dream until the FAQ drops at least =)

Exalted.

For their price, Terminator squads absolutely need to be tougher. I get the point that the two wounds is supposed to make them resistant to small arms fire and that plasma kills heavy infantry.

It's just that... you pay so much to have Terminators there in the first place. It's a big chunk or anyone's army for a small squad. Make them more durable or make them cheaper.

I really think it boils down to the way the new damage/wounds system operates, as opposed to the old way where everything did 1 wound regardless. They should have laid out a map as to what weapons should do how many wounds a weapon does (for example, lascannons do d6 because they're anti-tank weapons) then base it around that. As it is now, some models die far too quickly because things do SO MUCH damage.

I believe the issue is that they just used a simple conversion charts(HP x 2) to calculate the new values instead of taking a proper look and balancing things by hand.

I do agree that making plasma overcharge actually dangerous would be a good start to making plasma an actual choice.

Currently, you overcharge against terminators because "WHY NOT!?" but if a roll of a natural 1 always overheated and could never be re-rolled, that's probably take a big chunk out of plasma's effectiveness.

 Eldarsif wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Guys guys... maybe instead of buffing all 2W models with +1 Wound... making 2D damage weapons irrelevant (Because autocannons are surely destroying armies left and right)... we don't... rebalance plasma?

Hm? Plasma is the one 2D weapon that is easely spammed and its actually good agaisnt nearly everything.

With Custodes you feel how much resilient you are agaisnt plasma, being wounded by it on 3+ instead of 2+, with two shots needed to kill one custodes and 4++ instead of 5++. But you are still vulnerable to other 2 damage weapons like Autocannons compared with Terminators, Bikes, etc...

I think a part of the problem is that GW intended for plasma to be balanced with the "You kill yourself by accident" overcharge thing. Then they started adding rerolls to everything and their parents which meant that people were far more likely to take a chance on a plasma misfire than before.

Would be interesting if they'd just FAQ it so that when you overcharge and roll a natural 1 you are not allowed to reroll it.

I think the problem with that is that you punish expensive plasma like combi-plasma Chaos Terminators or Space Marines with plasma, but you left things like imperial guard or Tempestus Scions plasma in a, comparatively, much better position.
I think making plasma S6/S7 would be the best nerf one could do to it. If then, its still so good, they could make it a bit more expensive.

No to the natural 1 because that just means matines lose plasma and scions keep on trucking.

 Galas wrote:
I think the problem with that is that you punish expensive plasma like combi-plasma Chaos Terminators or Space Marines with plasma, but you left things like imperial guard or Tempestus Scions plasma in a, comparatively, much better position.

This is easily fixed : Plasma overheats on a natural 1. The bearer takes 1 Mortal Wound (instead of being killed outright). This way, Hellblasters or Terminators wouldn't die on their first roll of 1, but Scions would.

Many plasma weapons in the game already work like that (deal MW to the bearer instead of killing him), I don't think it would be much of a change. It would, however, make the decision of overheating a real one, instead of the "overheat all the time" we have now.

So... Where is this post Adeptacon FAQ then?

Why not go the other way and give TDA and equivalents a special rule that says that they take -1 wound per shot (minimum 1)? The necrons, I believe, have that same rule against everything so it's not a new concept.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
So... Where is this post Adeptacon FAQ then?

Patience is a virtue.

Plasam is an across the board problem not just terminators. Plasma should never have been s7 s8 it should have stayed at s6 is safe s7 is gets hot like always has outside of the heavy variants. Powercreeping plasma was a huge mistake but unfortunately GW have stuck too it so the only option left is to price it at the appropriate cost which is about twice its current price.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
So... Where is this post Adeptacon FAQ then?

Patience is a virtue.

We've been patient for 25 days.
6 more an it'll be an April FAQ.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
So... Where is this post Adeptacon FAQ then?

Patience is a virtue.

We've been patient for 25 days.
6 more an it'll be an April FAQ.

And there you go, you answered your own question. Somewhere between 'this second' and 6 days from now.

Learn to wait.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
So... Where is this post Adeptacon FAQ then?

Patience is a virtue.

We've been patient for 25 days.
6 more an it'll be an April FAQ.

Are you that eager to start bitching about how it changed nothing and is a waste of time?

I'm also looking forward to people adding it to their list of things that they have to bring along to a game with the BRB, multiple codexes, Indexes, Chapter Approved, faction FAQ, Oxford English Dictionanary, army insurance papers, permission slip from wife etc

I think GW needs to replace their Squat clock and their Adepta Sororitas clock with a March FAQ clock...