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.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Djangomatic82 wrote:
It wouldn't be as good as giving them a reroll failed saves. if you look at the pic above, bumping them to T5 would be the same against S4 weapons as the opponent getting a -1 to their wound rolls,

Do they need reroll failed saves though?

I thought the intention of this topic was to make Terminators strong against small arms fire (as they should be). Lowering the damage of weapons by 1 makes them stronger against multi-damage weapons (that are designed to be strong against them) and reroll failed saves makes them stronger against all weaponry.

Another thing to consider is the cost of those shots to findout where terminators give away a lot of points for minimal cost to the opposition.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

Djangomatic82 wrote:
It wouldn't be as good as giving them a reroll failed saves. if you look at the pic above, bumping them to T5 would be the same against S4 weapons as the opponent getting a -1 to their wound rolls,

Do they need reroll failed saves though?

I thought the intention of this topic was to make Terminators strong against small arms fire (as they should be). Lowering the damage of weapons by 1 makes them stronger against multi-damage weapons (that are designed to be strong against them) and reroll failed saves makes them stronger against all weaponry.

Terminators are already durable against small arms fire. What are you going on about?

Due to the AP system and prevalence of D2 weapons, Termies are not as durable to ANY class of weapons as they should be. If Plasmas were as rare on the TT as they are supposed to be in the fluff, Termies might be fine.
They might do fine against regular bolters as-is, but there are factions that can throw buckets of dice at them.

Termies need at least 2 of the following to be viable again, preferable all 3:
1) 1+ armour. Doesn't do much against AP-0 as 1s would still fail, but it really helps against AP-1 or AP-2
2) Crux Terminatus should reduce damage by 1 instead of give 5++. If you have a 1+ armour, a 5++ probably won't come into play at all, so trading it to reduce damage actually makes it do what it's supposed to: Keep the Termies alive longer
3) WS/BS 2+. This could be made to only apply WS 2+ to Assualt Termies and BS2+s to regulars. It would mean regular Termies with fists would still be BS3+ (hitting on 4s because fists) but if you want Termies that assault well, get Assault Termies

-

ooooooor....... you can just cost them for what they're actually worth and not prixed because [reasons].

 skchsan wrote:
ooooooor....... you can just cost them for what they're actually worth and not prixed because [reasons].

Ultimately this is our best hope with CA. It just feels weird that a single Plasma gun can outright kill 2 Termies, even if they were cheaper.
A plasma gun taking out 1 Termies makes sense, but with reroll 1s everywhere, it's too easy for a plasma gun to get into RF range and blast away 2 Termies

-

 Galef wrote:
Due to the AP system and prevalence of D2 weapons, Termies are not as durable to ANY class of weapons as they should be. If Plasmas were as rare on the TT as they are supposed to be in the fluff, Termies might be fine.
They might do fine against regular bolters as-is, but there are factions that can throw buckets of dice at them.

Termies need at least 2 of the following to be viable again, preferable all 3:
1) 1+ armour. Doesn't do much against AP-0 as 1s would still fail, but it really helps against AP-1 or AP-2
2) Crux Terminatus should reduce damage by 1 instead of give 5++. If you have a 1+ armour, a 5++ probably won't come into play at all, so trading it to reduce damage actually makes it do what it's supposed to: Keep the Termies alive longer
3) WS/BS 2+. This could be made to only apply WS 2+ to Assualt Termies and BS2+s to regulars. It would mean regular Termies with fists would still be BS3+ (hitting on 4s because fists) but if you want Termies that assault well, get Assault Termies

-

Once again, I have to point out that durability isn't the issue here. They're more durable to more weapons than ever before compared to the weapons they're less durable against.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Once again, I have to point out that durability isn't the issue here. They're more durable to more weapons than ever before compared to the weapons they're less durable against.

Durability absolutely is part of the issue. Even if you bump them to WS/BS2+ and knock a few points off of them, you still have the issue that they will die prior to getting to used that improved WS/BS more than once.
I wholeheartedly agree that their damage output is abysmal, but the longer they live, the more damage they do.
There is no way CA would make them so cheap that you could get twice as many. More likely, you'll be able to add a whopping 1 more Termie per unit (so 6 would cost what 5 do now) but no one would add that 6th Termie, so their damage output didn't change at all (aside for the proposed WS/BS bump)

So you'll have 5 Termies that do the same damage and the points you saved would go somewhere else in your list. Meanwhile, those 5 termies still die. So how was their damage output increased?
Living an extra turn (or diverting more enemy firepower) guarantees that your army gets to lay down more damage next turn (unless your already tabled)

-

The proposed rules being thrown around suggest that people want them to survive AT weapons, which is completely silly in terms of scaling and/or fluff

For example, we have the proposed fix of taking of a damage to a minimum of 1. In theory it sounds nice. However, Terminators would now:
1. Have a 1/3 chance to survive a Lascannon or Melta or Lance shot compared to the previous 1/6
2. Force Weapons and Custodes Weapons only kill them 1/3 of the time
3. Power Fists only kill them 1/3 of the time

That's just a few off the top of my head where it doesn't match fluff for weapons that were supposed to not have that many issues. Strictly D2 Weapons are the issue here, plain and simple, as they can come super cheap (the Disintegrator is easily one of the biggest point mistakes GW has done in a long time) and Plasma comes so cheap on Guard units you don't care about losing some to get the better profile.

Sure, they're less durable to certain weapons this edition. However, for the most part they either stayed the same or became MUCH more durable. That's why when I tell people to create a list of weapons they're less durable to compared to a list of weapons they're more durable to...people don't do it.

That's also why I am suggesting removing the 5++ entirely for the reduce damage by 1 rule. It ends up averaging out against D6 weapons, but has a significant affect on D2 only

Alternatively having 1+ armour works too. It makes the 5++ almost never relevant, but it really crippled AP-1/-2 weapons (which is where the armour should really work). AP-3 and beyond still gets through the armour 50% of the time, which is where most D2+ weapons are already.

Either charge works really well. Then add WS/BS2+ and your done. Points reduction is optional at this point, but probably not needed

-

Personally, I'd be happy if GW just did something like the following to them, even keeping everything costed as they are now, at parity with aggressors, just the terminator heavy weapon options accounting for the rather large point difference. The option to take a squad of 3 models instead of 5, with a heavy weapon option for every 2 instead of 5 terminators would make the normal squad a compelling anti tank unit with a cyclone missile launcher, though admittedly expensive.

 Galef wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
ooooooor....... you can just cost them for what they're actually worth and not prixed because [reasons].

Ultimately this is our best hope with CA. It just feels weird that a single Plasma gun can outright kill 2 Termies, even if they were cheaper.
A plasma gun taking out 1 Termies makes sense, but with reroll 1s everywhere, it's too easy for a plasma gun to get into RF range and blast away 2 Termies

-

Termies need to be reduced by 8ppm for them to start looking like they're worth taking. 26 pts for T4 W2 2+/5++ Sv is far too expensive.

Matter of fact, moat 2W models need points revision as it follows the model of "double the cost of W1 equivalent", which clearly isn't working.

 Galef wrote:
That's also why I am suggesting removing the 5++ entirely for the reduce damage by 1 rule. It ends up averaging out against D6 weapons, but has a significant affect on D2 only

Alternatively having 1+ armour works too. It makes the 5++ almost never relevant, but it really crippled AP-1/-2 weapons (which is where the armour should really work). AP-3 and beyond still gets through the armour 50% of the time, which is where most D2+ weapons are already.

Either charge works really well. Then add WS/BS2+ and your done. Points reduction is optional at this point, but probably not needed

-

While I get what your saying Deathguard Terminators would be an unkillable mess it also has some problematic interactions with catafract armour who's defining feature is a 4++, to be clear it still sucks but deathguard T5 2W and 5+++ rocking T5 1+ armour -1D damn they are going to be a PITA as a D3 weapons wound stop avaraging a dead termi, lascannons will only kill them 1/6 of the time they hit ouch.

Ice_can wrote:

 Galef wrote:
That's also why I am suggesting removing the 5++ entirely for the reduce damage by 1 rule. It ends up averaging out against D6 weapons, but has a significant affect on D2 only

Alternatively having 1+ armour works too. It makes the 5++ almost never relevant, but it really crippled AP-1/-2 weapons (which is where the armour should really work). AP-3 and beyond still gets through the armour 50% of the time, which is where most D2+ weapons are already.

Either charge works really well. Then add WS/BS2+ and your done. Points reduction is optional at this point, but probably not needed

-

While I get what your saying Deathguard Terminators would be an unkillable mess it also has some problematic interactions with catafract armour who's defining feature is a 4++, to be clear it still sucks but deathguard T5 2W and 5+++ rocking T5 1+ armour -1D damn they are going to be a PITA as a D3 weapons wound stop avaraging a dead termi, lascannons will only kill them 1/6 of the time they hit ouch.

Important to note that I am specifically suggesting the Crux Terminus ability go from 5++ to -1D.
DG Termies do not have a Crux Terminus ability, so maybe they stay as-is.
I now feel like 1+ Armour and -1D should be separate "fixes" that probably don't need to happen at the same time. (even though 1+ armour basically makes a 5++ irrelevant 99% of the time)
"Special" Termies will always need special attention when discussing sweeping changes. I take that as a given and propose rules from that standpoint.

But as much as I would like rules and abilities to be changed to better represent Termies, at this point, it's more likely to just be points changes, which is better than nothing
I'd say at least a 30% decrease for all TEQs would feel about right

-

 Galef wrote:
But as much as I would like rules and abilities to be changed to better represent Termies, at this point, it's more likely to just be points changes, which is better than nothing
I'd say at least a 30% decrease for all TEQs would feel about right

Right, which is about 8 pts less.

Also to tack on, I feel like along with the changes with twin-linked [weapon] becoming twin-[weapon], there needs to be more distinction in terms of points and functionality between storm bolter and twin-boltgun. Twin-boltgun should be 24" RP 2 @ 2 pts and make stormbolters into 18" Assault 3 @ 1 pt.

 skchsan wrote:
Also to tack on, I feel like along with the changes with twin-linked [weapon] becoming twin-[weapon], there needs to be more distinction in terms of points and functionality between storm bolter and twin-boltgun. Twin-boltgun should be 24" RP 2 @ 2 pts and make stormbolters into 18" Assault 3 @ 1 pt.

Yeah, I thought if funny that in 8E, Stormbolters, Twin-bolters and Combi-bolters are all exactly the same.
Twin- & Combi- bolters are fine as the same thing, especially since the majority of either exist in different factions (Imperial and Chaos respectively)
But Stormbolters should be different somehow and I like your suggestion. Gives them an extra shot outside 12", but unfortunately it's 1 less shot within 12' and no shots outside 18"
I'd amend it to either 24" Assault 3, or 18" Assault 4

I also really want Heavy Bolters to be RP2 @ 36", but that's for a different thread.

-

 Galef wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Galef wrote:
That's also why I am suggesting removing the 5++ entirely for the reduce damage by 1 rule. It ends up averaging out against D6 weapons, but has a significant affect on D2 only

Alternatively having 1+ armour works too. It makes the 5++ almost never relevant, but it really crippled AP-1/-2 weapons (which is where the armour should really work). AP-3 and beyond still gets through the armour 50% of the time, which is where most D2+ weapons are already.

Either charge works really well. Then add WS/BS2+ and your done. Points reduction is optional at this point, but probably not needed

-

While I get what your saying Deathguard Terminators would be an unkillable mess it also has some problematic interactions with catafract armour who's defining feature is a 4++, to be clear it still sucks but deathguard T5 2W and 5+++ rocking T5 1+ armour -1D damn they are going to be a PITA as a D3 weapons wound stop avaraging a dead termi, lascannons will only kill them 1/6 of the time they hit ouch.

Important to note that I am specifically suggesting the Crux Terminus ability go from 5++ to -1D.
DG Termies do not have a Crux Terminus ability, so maybe they stay as-is.
I now feel like 1+ Armour and -1D should be separate "fixes" that probably don't need to happen at the same time. (even though 1+ armour basically makes a 5++ irrelevant 99% of the time)
"Special" Termies will always need special attention when discussing sweeping changes. I take that as a given and propose rules from that standpoint.

But as much as I would like rules and abilities to be changed to better represent Termies, at this point, it's more likely to just be points changes, which is better than nothing
I'd say at least a 30% decrease for all TEQs would feel about right

-

That's the thing with the "special" Terminators. When these fixes are proposed, how universal can they be and do they scale well? That's why when fixing certain Power Armor Marines, you gotta keep in mind how to interact with Rubric and Plague Marines if you're looking at durability (which they're actually both fine at, but they most definitely lack on offense).

This again? I'd suggest the same thing to improve them as all the other "classic" marines.

1. +1 Attack all round (including on the Sarge)
2. Space Marines get to fire Bolt weapons double the number of times indicated on the profile

Additionally, for Terminators, I'd let them ignore movement when firing heavy weapons.

Separate, but related to the topic at hand: points increase for plasma guns. They're too cheap, and they're bloody everywhere, despite supposedly being rare.

One solution would be to make a separation between those units and their gear. Not all bolters/storm bolters, power armor, or terminator armor need to have the same in-game effect. For example, new armor marks and new ammo types for weapons that only adeptus astartes utilize. That could create variations between units without making blight or rubric terminators too powerful.

In order to accomplish some of that, the designers need to be able to change the background to incorporate the rules occasionally without creating the 'Cawl' effect. The reality of the current state of the game means that what was written for 40k back in the late 80's and throughout 90's isn't going to cover all the variations of units within each space marine or chaos space marine faction available now. It needs to be more mutable to the point of being able to introduce new units or gear and claim they've been in the story line for several millennia.


In regards to the plasma statement. Plasma is so ubiquitous because flame (and to a lesser extent, melta) weapons are so poor this edition. Those weapons need to be revised first. It's also pointless to attempt to use a 'fluff' excuse for limiting plasma in game. Very little of the background pertains to in-game value, space marines are a prime example.

Plas is just too good this edition. The IOM version of the 'perfect' termie killer got a safe profile, then got new, stronger overheating profile. Which got D2 the same time Termies went to W2. Even the Xeno Plas weapons got multidamage.

Bringing all Plas to D1 would do a lot to help termies. Dissies and Star Cannons might not be S8, but they're still too good at killing Termies while doing too well vs Vehicles and MCs too.

While it changes a lot more, Termies could help with a redo of killiness across the board. I know it's not going to happen, but I can dream, can't I?

Ice_can wrote:

 Galef wrote:
That's also why I am suggesting removing the 5++ entirely for the reduce damage by 1 rule. It ends up averaging out against D6 weapons, but has a significant affect on D2 only

Alternatively having 1+ armour works too. It makes the 5++ almost never relevant, but it really crippled AP-1/-2 weapons (which is where the armour should really work). AP-3 and beyond still gets through the armour 50% of the time, which is where most D2+ weapons are already.

Either charge works really well. Then add WS/BS2+ and your done. Points reduction is optional at this point, but probably not needed

-

While I get what your saying Deathguard Terminators would be an unkillable mess it also has some problematic interactions with catafract armour who's defining feature is a 4++, to be clear it still sucks but deathguard T5 2W and 5+++ rocking T5 1+ armour -1D damn they are going to be a PITA as a D3 weapons wound stop avaraging a dead termi, lascannons will only kill them 1/6 of the time they hit ouch.

But Death Guard terminators should be more resilient than normal terminators like they are now. So if normal termis get some buff so should DG termis get the same buff or some different buff that keeps them as mech beter compared to normal termis as they are now.

Bharring wrote:
Plas is just too good this edition. The IOM version of the 'perfect' termie killer got a safe profile, then got new, stronger overheating profile. Which got D2 the same time Termies went to W2. Even the Xeno Plas weapons got multidamage.

Bringing all Plas to D1 would do a lot to help termies. Dissies and Star Cannons might not be S8, but they're still too good at killing Termies while doing too well vs Vehicles and MCs too.

While it changes a lot more, Termies could help with a redo of killiness across the board. I know it's not going to happen, but I can dream, can't I?

*Looks at Tau plasma*

Not ALL Xenos.

If we made overcharging Plasma only D1, would we do anything else for it to compensate (like AP-3 going to -4?) or is the jump to S8 enough to merit the risk of rolling 1s?
I'd argue that D2 is the whole reason for overcharging, so I'd prefer we just swap the points values for Plasma guns and Melta guns so that Meltas are cheaper then Plasma.
Maybe even make Plasmas and even 20ppm since they really are so versatile.

-

 Galef wrote:
If we made overcharging Plasma only D1, would we do anything else for it to compensate (like AP-3 going to -4?) or is the jump to S8 enough to merit the risk of rolling 1s?
I'd argue that D2 is the whole reason for overcharging, so I'd prefer we just swap the points values for Plasma guns and Melta guns so that Meltas are cheaper then Plasma.
Maybe even make Plasmas and even 20ppm since they really are so versatile.

-

Plasma Overcharge profile should be something like "the bearer suffers a mortal wound if it fails its hit roll" instead of having a 1 in 6 (or 1 in 36) chance of blowing up.
This way, it will compensate for lower BS models getting cheaper plasmas (as there are more inherent risk involved).

Bharring wrote:
Plas is just too good this edition. The IOM version of the 'perfect' termie killer got a safe profile, then got new, stronger overheating profile. Which got D2 the same time Termies went to W2. Even the Xeno Plas weapons got multidamage.

Bringing all Plas to D1 would do a lot to help termies. Dissies and Star Cannons might not be S8, but they're still too good at killing Termies while doing too well vs Vehicles and MCs too.

While it changes a lot more, Termies could help with a redo of killiness across the board. I know it's not going to happen, but I can dream, can't I?

Except it isn't the perfect Terminator killer if you don't Overcharge. Why would you even try and say that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:
If we made overcharging Plasma only D1, would we do anything else for it to compensate (like AP-3 going to -4?) or is the jump to S8 enough to merit the risk of rolling 1s?
I'd argue that D2 is the whole reason for overcharging, so I'd prefer we just swap the points values for Plasma guns and Melta guns so that Meltas are cheaper then Plasma.
Maybe even make Plasmas and even 20ppm since they really are so versatile.

-

20 points is stupid.

A basic Tactical Marine squad becomes 85 points for ONE Plasma Gun. Plasma can at max go to 15 points, but other weapons are the real issue here. You could make the Plasma Gun 40 points, but nobody is gonna take the Melta Gun at 17 points still.

Any failed hit makes negs to hit too powerful.

What if we divorced it from the hit roll to the wound roll. "On a natural roll of 1 to wound the bearer suffers 1 mortal wound."?

No re-roll or bonus to wound shenanigans, gets rid of negative to hit modifiers basically removing OC.

Would probably still need to swap prices of plasma and melta though.

bananathug wrote:
Any failed hit makes negs to hit too powerful.

What if we divorced it from the hit roll to the wound roll. "On a natural roll of 1 to wound the bearer suffers 1 mortal wound."?

No re-roll or bonus to wound shenanigans, gets rid of negative to hit modifiers basically removing OC.

Would probably still need to swap prices of plasma and melta though.

That's actually not bad, but it does lower the chance to overheat.
You inherently have more dice to roll to-hit then to-wound (as some to-hits do fail)

I'd like Plasma to "overheat" on natural rolls of 1 to-hit and cause a single MW.
After that, you make them 17ppm and Meltas 13ppm (swap the points) and you are far closer to balanced.
Give TEQs (even the DG ones) a 1+ armour and call it a day.

-

Bharring wrote:
Plas is just too good this edition. The IOM version of the 'perfect' termie killer got a safe profile, then got new, stronger overheating profile. Which got D2 the same time Termies went to W2. Even the Xeno Plas weapons got multidamage.

Bringing all Plas to D1 would do a lot to help termies. Dissies and Star Cannons might not be S8, but they're still too good at killing Termies while doing too well vs Vehicles and MCs too.

While it changes a lot more, Termies could help with a redo of killiness across the board. I know it's not going to happen, but I can dream, can't I?

Plasma is a kiddie toy next to Xeno weapons at this point. Especially when doom enters the picture. At least plasma has to get within 12" to really give me the business.

To illustrate the futility of focusing on plas, I've been laying waste to terminators with a deredeo and two stalkers. There are multiple points of failure, and plasma is not even the most aggregious imo.

The easiest fix would be to give all terminators SIA ammo like DW, but charge vanilla prices for them. That's pretty reasonable.

Why should Terminators get something that's a gimmick for another army?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Why should Terminators get something that's a gimmick for another army?

Because its a good gimmick whose access should be increased, imo. SIA basically solves the bolter problem without introducing more wacky new crap. It also provides way more utility than merely BS 2+. Give Deathwatch some extra gimmicks beyond SIA to compensate. Perhaps a defensive gimmick?

Martel732 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Why should Terminators get something that's a gimmick for another army?

Because its a good gimmick whose access should be increased, imo. SIA basically solves the bolter problem without introducing more wacky new crap. It also provides way more utility than merely BS 2+. Give Deathwatch some extra gimmicks beyond SIA to compensate. Perhaps a defensive gimmick?

Or just cost them appropriately and not just slap on "double the price of 1W model because it has 2W" mentality.