Terminator Armour / Terminators

File: 1207141051922 - Terminator.jpg (202KB, 576x660px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 576x660px

>>43591490
Fuck yeah Terminators!

>>43591490
Terminators used to have a 2+ save on 2d6, meaning they needed to roll 2 1s to fail a save. Combine that with the fact AP on weapons just modified that number rather than ignoring it, and terminators used to be very hard to crack.

Once you also consider that shooting has also gotten more powerful and assault units need to be very fast, Terminators just sort of got left behind.

I think the solution is to make them harder to kill first though. Its what they're known for

>>43591490
idk OP, the terminators with special stuff like dark angels or grey knight paladins seem to also get a bad rep

File: tyberos the red wake terminator vs mantis warriors.jpg (2MB, 1598x1000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1598x1000px

>>43591490
I'll admit, I've always had a hard on for Tactical Dreadnought armour despite me not playing an imperial army. I don't think T5 cuts if for them though. As you've mentioned, they're just more problematic than simple surviving.

>>43591490
>This thing is shit
>Let's give it some buff!
>But now it's good, so let's increase its cost in order to make it shit again!

This is how retarded you sound. You want to make them better? You have to buff them without increasing their cost. Something like this:

Crux Terminatus:
Roll a D6 each time an unsaved Wound is suffered by a model wearing Terminator armour. If the result is equal or lower than the AP value at which the Wound was resolved, it is discounted - treat it as having been saved. With a roll of 6 the wound is never discarded, even if the weapons had AP 6 or Ap -

>>43592776
Da heck does this mean? If you you take an AP 2 shot you ignore it on a 2+?

>>43593318
> If the result is equal or lower than the AP value it is discounted

If you take an AP 2 shot you ignore it on a 1 or a 2. If you take an Ap 1 you ignore it on a 1 and an Ap5 is ignored on a 5-.

It makes Terminator thougher against Plasma (against which is basically fnp) and much less vulnerable to saturation. Which is the main way to kill them and the one that make less sense in the fluff.

>>43591748
I believe it was a 3+ on 2d6, anon, with Abaddon having a 1+ and forgot who having a 2+.
Everything else you said is spot on. Termies aren't tough enough to be worth their points, or come with killy enough options. I remember back when a squad of terminators in center field with a assault cannon or heavy flamer meant the other guy had no choice but to lock them down with their best assault units or put ALL the firepower on them or suffer a high price.

>>43591490
Even in Deathwatch, they aren't all that useful in broad situations because you lose the ability to dodge, which is almost a death sentence against high power foes which usually have some very powerful shooty options.

>>43594219
The 2nd ed terminator were special for sure. They did actually feel set apart from normal marines because of the 2D6 save.

>>43591490

I like Terminators too. But changing stats is probably not going to happen and you can go about it in almost limitless ways.

Easiest one is to just lower their points. Something like 25 points each, to be on par with Honor Guard or veterans. But that lowers their elite feel and generates more army size creeping.

I think GW is moving in the right direction with terminators, the most recent space marine codex dropped the price of terminators by 5 points and gave them 2 formations that make them fairly powerful. I run a formation of 4 squads of deep striking tactical terminators with my scout army and they have yet to underperform.

Do I think that they could be better for their points? Certainly! But they're better than they were in the previous codex.

>>43595541
>the most recent space marine codex dropped the price of terminators by 5 points

Then increased the price of shields by another 5 points, after already increasing it by 5 points in the previous codex. 45 points per model lol.

Sternguard should be BS5, Vanguard should be WS5,

Terminators are WS, BS5, Stormbolters get buffed to assault 3 shred. Terminators get +1 toughness, and can take a heavy flamer for free, assault cannon at 5 points, cyclone at 10. 2 Heavy Weapons/5 models. Free upgrade to Lightning Claws/3 Points for Storm Shields. Terminator Sargeant gets 2 wounds and access to wargear.

I would cost them at 39 points per model, so you are looking at 210 points for 5 with thunderhammer and storm shield, or 200 even for a pair of assault cannons in a "tactical terminator" section. That's actually a decent output of firepower.

I would love to see Dark Angels get "Deathwing Devastators" that could take 4 heavy weapons.

The problem is still mobility. After your initial deep strike, you are stuck somewhere and pretty much useless for the rest of the game. Land raiders don't really fix that problem.

>>43594219
Anything with Blessing of Khorn got +1 to its save. So regular Khorn marines had a 2+ save on 1D6 and their Terms had a 2+ on 2D6. I'm pretty sure this included Abaddon.

Op here. I really like some of the responses here. I love the idea of >>43597894 . I would say this is more along the idea of what I would like to see as a universal buff to the unit. I think that Ws5 Bs5 S5 T5 is not to much. I think that +1 W on the sgt is a stroke of the smarts. I was talking to some friends about this same problem, one said "why not give them each +1W". And it never seemed like a good responce.
Another friend also talked about how guns are getting better / more options. So I was going to propose that the Storm bolter be Rapid fire 2, 2shot at max range, 4 at short. But again I like the Ass 3 shred.

At the end of the day, Termins need to be able to soak damage on par with a predator's AV13 and put out damage, be it at range or in close, and they just are not at the min.

(I too long for dev DW Termins with plasma cannons. I look to FW to lead the way in this, and the 1st legion. Ex: Tyrant or Fulmentarus)

I live in hope

>>43598916
Terminators really suffered as Plasma equivalents became cheaper and more common. Making them require dedicated anti-tank weapons feels like a good change, but is tricky to put into rules.

TDA is supposed to be nearly a vehicle, right? Make them a walker with 10/10/10, but let them keep their 2+ armor on top. Dedicated AV will tear them down, but no amount of lasgun is cracking that shit.

>>43599197
There actually used to be infantry models that had an AV value in place of an armor save. I actually wouldn't mind seeing them bring that back.

>>43598916

It's funny, because back when I started playing, the scariest thing that hit the tabletop was my friend's black Templar Terminator Swordbrothers coming out of a Crusader. That's nothing these days.

S5 might be a bit much as you put them p to S10 with their melee options.

Giving all of them 2 wounds would probably warrant a price increase, but a "mini-character" with a relic blade as the default would give him a chance against a lot of things. Shit, a relic blade with an assault 3 shred stormbolter isn't bad period.

Or give them the option to take a storm shield with a relic blade for i4 hits.

As a DA player I've thought about this a lot.

Nurgle Terminators and Deathwing knights end up being T6, which is crazy, you'd need 6's to wound on lasguns and then a 2+ save. You would need 4 full infantry sections firing their lasguns to drop 1 terminator. That's pretty sweet.

Then with my changes, return fire will completely wipe 10 GEQ...or larger hordes with the assault cannons as well.

They should be scary.

T5 doesn't help against plasma though.

>>43599197
I wouldn't go that far. Perhaps reduce the AP of weapons by 1? This would only allow melta to crack them open but you can't just remove them with plasma fire. This would definitely merit a point increase though.

>>43599230
Attack bikes used to do this too. Pretty sweet, actually.

>>43591490
The problem is that Space Marines need a serious stat buff coupled with a points increase to be fluffy. Something like Power Armor giving a 2+ armor save (that re-rolls) save while Terminator armor supplies a 2++ re rollable save.

In turn, a Space Marine army would be comprised of a handful of units, as it should be.

>>43599252
Another thing that should be done is make all Space Marines mini-monstrous creatures.

>>43599421

Movie marines are your answer.

>>43599480

The problem is that 40k rewards specialists who reduce randomness and provide consistency. Space Marines are generalists with few models.

They pretty much have; look at the winning Nova lists. ThunderwolfCav+Black Knights are sick.

I love Tg some times, brings up things I would not thing off.
>>43599197
This is interesting. Melta's kill you on 2+ still, LasCannons on 1+ and Plasma on 3+? As an Idea it solves small arms fire as a problem. This could be workable.
>>43598970 is right. Plasma spam is a real thorn.
>>43599252
Relic Blade are so cool, but make Lc's Pointless. Maybe on a honour guard unit?
S10 is good, too good. maybe change power fists to +4S ap2 unwieldy?
Also, the problem with going -1ap to all in comming damage, is Power Fist / Axe / TH are ap 2, mean CC is a slogg.
Maybe fk'ing with the roll to wound is the way to go? keep S4 T4 BUT... now hear me out... Half the strength on all on coming damage? melta's wound on a 4+, plasma on 5+, bolters on 6+. that dose not seem to bad. Poison and flesh bane get around it, and it works out sorta like >>43599197

>>43599545
Movie Marines were only slightly close to the fluff on release, but with the proliferation of high AP weapons on cheap troops and Eldar stronk it definitely no longer holds up.

File: Pauldrons.jpg (29KB, 216x338px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 216x338px

Early Termes were hilarious. The true Pauldron Kings

>>43599689

Relic Blade was for the Sargeant only.

Messing with power fists or damage is just unnecessary rules bloat IMHO, convoluted. Keep it simple. Reduce return damage by forcing rerolls on to-wound.

>Models equipped with Terminator Armor add 1 to both their Wounds and Toughness characteristics. In addition, they may re-roll failed Armor or Invulnerable saves.
Change Veterans/Terminators/Honor Guard/all equivalents (Deathwing, Sanguinary Guard, etc.) to WS5/BS5.
Terminator and Assault Terminator squads may fire ranged weapons twice, or gain one of Furious Charge, Rage or Hatred.

File: blogger-image--1090197420.jpg (117KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 480x640px

>>43599739

>>43600676
>>43599739
Awesome

Giving terminator armor +1 W would be an easy option but it doesn't make terminators any more exciting.

a 1+ armor save (Need AP1 or double toughness weapons to penetrate) would make things really interesting but balancing would be tricky and would probably lead to increased amounts of S8 and AP1.

Points costs reduction could likely not ever be enough. Chaos terminators have been 31 points for a long time now and are still not so great. Someone said loyalist terminators are 30 points each now? And yet they just aren't good enough. Expensive single wound models are too easily overwhelmed in the current state of the game.

If the game is played at more reasonable point levels (750-1250 instead of 2000-2500) terminators magically become a lot better.

FNP would be another easy way to add durability, but maybe not as good as extra wounds.