News:

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: The Problem with terminators  (Read 4381 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gal'rgae Neverborne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 358
  • Country: gb
  • Armies: Eldar, Deathwing, Daemons
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #20 on: September 30, 2019, 06:12:42 PM »
T5 Terminators as mentioned by GML brings them too close too to custodes.

A squad of terminators should feel like a squad of terminators, the subtle difference between Space Marnie terminators work in groups whereas Custodes work as a group of individuals.

The problems terminators have are (assuming the points were accurate)

Too Slow
Too Fragile
Not Enough damage output.
Don't Create Command points
Few Uses for them

Could we fix these, better deep strike options, more durability (without copy-pasting other "terminators" better damage output)

Being able to fire a storm bolter within 1"
Ability to gain a +1 to armour..... somehow... maybe based on them being "in the thick of it"?
Closer deep-strike
Turn 1 Deepstike
Re-Deepstrike
More Attacks
Ignoring -1 with Heavy Weapons
Ignoring -1 with Powerfist
Ignoring -1 with Thunder hammer


Not obviously all of the above... maybe some? Others?

« Last Edit: September 30, 2019, 06:13:48 PM by Gal'rgae Neverborne »

Offline Killersquid

  • The Cause of Diabetes -Captain- Necrontyr Immortal - KoN Veteran - Master of All Diplomacy | Wi-Fi Nomad |
  • Staff
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8684
  • Country: ca
  • Armies: Harlequins, Spiderfang, Skaven, Space Wolves
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #21 on: October 9, 2019, 12:00:44 PM »
I think they should just ignore rend -1. I think that'd make a huge difference.

I use them in my space wolves sometimes,  and they do work. I've come to really appreciate chainfists, especially when fighting marines. The +1 attack in the first round of combat helps a lot.
Harlequin Army Blog

That's not blatant, this is blatant: I'm super happy that I'm playing Austria, the greatest nation in all of Diplomacy!

Azore of Austria

Offline Grand Master Lomandalis

  • Grand Master of the Deathwing | Oh the lolmanity! | 40kOnline's Care Bear of LOL!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11244
  • Country: ca
  • We were murderers first, last, and always!
  • Armies: Dark Angels, Custodes, Harlequins, Night Lords
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #22 on: January 18, 2020, 08:53:14 AM »
I think the question needs to be raised now that we've seen the previews for Ritual of the Damned as to whether it does enough to make Terminators (specifically Deathwing) viable?

It's an expensive combination, but if you're willing to spend 5 command points in one shot you can have a squad of 10 Terminators shooting twice (4cp if it is a 5 man unit), and deep striking close enough to the enemy to also pull off a reliable charge.  The Warlord trait also does help to make them a threat against vehicles.
If there is anything that recent politics has taught us, it is that quotes taken out of context can mean what ever you want them to.
Well I always liked the globals...
I knew I had fans!!!

Quote
"Dark Angels are Traitors" is the 40k equivalent of Flat Earthers.  You can provide all of the proof you want that says otherwise, but people just can't let it go...

Offline Gal'rgae Neverborne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 358
  • Country: gb
  • Armies: Eldar, Deathwing, Daemons
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #23 on: January 26, 2020, 03:43:51 PM »
Just reading what you've written, there are three answers.

Does it make a (pure) Deathwing army for viable - Absolutely not.

Deathwing models just don't have the firepower to make shooting twice viable. To put this in context of how wrong GW has got Terminators in general, they've gone from 2 shots at 24" to, 4 Shots at 24" if stationary & 8 With command points to now 4" all the time and still shots with command points and they are still bunk. - Grade (E-)

Does it make a Death Raven army viable - No.

There's just no way a Death/Raven army is going to generate the command points (and use them pragmatically)  to pull this off, and the instances where you could do it, deep strike is too easy to screen off with cannon fodder, and the few instances you could do it with no obvious counter you're putting to many command points into this.. (F)

Does it help a Greenwing army? Well yeah, I've got to give you that as it's an option. But ultimately this is actually probably the worse use.

However, you'd need to take terminators, and enough to make it viable, and Ravenwing bikes, and fill out the FoC. And the points you're committing is now to great not to use this. And there will always be a better strategery for your army build - In the context to what you could have in a "greenwing army" (F-)
« Last Edit: January 26, 2020, 03:47:17 PM by Gal'rgae Neverborne »

Offline Grand Master Lomandalis

  • Grand Master of the Deathwing | Oh the lolmanity! | 40kOnline's Care Bear of LOL!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11244
  • Country: ca
  • We were murderers first, last, and always!
  • Armies: Dark Angels, Custodes, Harlequins, Night Lords
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #24 on: January 26, 2020, 04:05:29 PM »
There is no way that a pure Deathwing list will ever be viable with Terminators in the state that they are.  I built a list that focuses around a shooty Deathwing-bomb, and it requires double Battalions to pull off.  Basically, it is a fun list to say "Look what I can do."  The only biker in the list is a Ravenwing Apothecary whose only job is to survive until turn 2.

2nd turn looks something like this:
  • Switch to Tactical Doctrine
  • -2 Command Points:  Combined Assault to bring in 10 Terminators w/ 2 Cyclone Missile Launchers with Belial right behind them
  • -3 CP:  Deathwing Assault
  • -1 CP:  Fury of the First in Movment Phase
  • -1 CP:  Fury of the First in Shooting Phase
  • -1 CP:  Adaptive Strategy in 3rd turn.

Cute, but definitely not worth the commitment.  Sadly, Ritual of the Damned continues the trend that the most efficient Dark Angel army is still one that is centred around the 2nd Company.  Thanks to Impeccable Mobility, I'm looking at a list that has 8 Land Speeders, including the Dark Shroud (Sammy, 2 Talonmasters, 2 Tornadoes, 2 Typhoons, Darkshroud).
If there is anything that recent politics has taught us, it is that quotes taken out of context can mean what ever you want them to.
Well I always liked the globals...
I knew I had fans!!!

Quote
"Dark Angels are Traitors" is the 40k equivalent of Flat Earthers.  You can provide all of the proof you want that says otherwise, but people just can't let it go...

Offline Gal'rgae Neverborne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 358
  • Country: gb
  • Armies: Eldar, Deathwing, Daemons
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #25 on: May 4, 2020, 01:53:08 PM »
Not sure on if i should start a new topic for this, but I've decided not too. Essentially because there's only been a handful of topics in the last 12 months.

I've had an idea.

*Ahem*

Models in terminator armour have a 2+ save, in addition, they reduce all save modifiers by 1. (5++ removed )

eg. a -1 becomes 0

Storm shields grant a 3+ Save, in addition, they reduce all save modifiers by 1, if a model in terminator amour also has a storm shield all save modifiers are reduced by 2. (3++ removed)


Good bad OP?
 

Offline Blazinghand

  • Warlock | Master of the Ravenwing
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1218
  • Country: us
  • Die for the Emperor or die trying!
  • Armies: Eldar, Orks
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #26 on: May 4, 2020, 04:34:14 PM »
If GW were going to completely rework terminators, you could just give then a Sv value of 1+. This would still fail on a roll of a 1, but would require that foes have more AP to penetrate it.
Quote from: Howard Zinn
There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.

Offline Killersquid

  • The Cause of Diabetes -Captain- Necrontyr Immortal - KoN Veteran - Master of All Diplomacy | Wi-Fi Nomad |
  • Staff
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8684
  • Country: ca
  • Armies: Harlequins, Spiderfang, Skaven, Space Wolves
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #27 on: May 4, 2020, 07:05:14 PM »
If GW were going to completely rework terminators, you could just give then a Sv value of 1+. This would still fail on a roll of a 1, but would require that foes have more AP to penetrate it.


Not quite. A save of 1+ means the model is immune to ap.

An unmodified save roll of a 1 always fails. When a save roll is modified by the Ap characteristic of an attack, it can never be modified to less than 1. When a model has a Save characteristic of 1+, modified save rolls of 1 are successfully saved.

This means, while the Terminators have a save roll of 1+, only unmodified save rolls of 1 will inflict damage regardless of the AP characteristic of the weapon used for the attack.
Harlequin Army Blog

That's not blatant, this is blatant: I'm super happy that I'm playing Austria, the greatest nation in all of Diplomacy!

Azore of Austria

Offline Grand Master Lomandalis

  • Grand Master of the Deathwing | Oh the lolmanity! | 40kOnline's Care Bear of LOL!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11244
  • Country: ca
  • We were murderers first, last, and always!
  • Armies: Dark Angels, Custodes, Harlequins, Night Lords
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #28 on: May 4, 2020, 07:43:25 PM »
I think it could be kept within the realms of mechanics that are already in the game.

  • Terminator Armour grants a 2+ save
  • Immune to AP-1 and AP-2
  • Suffers no penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons
  • Storm Shield gives +2 to a Terminator's save (can be combined with Cover), with an unmodified roll of 1 always failing.
  • Terminators are increased to 3 wounds

Following this, you get rid of the invulnerable save so there is the rare chance to actually bypass their armour.  The way I look at it is that if you want to get through Tactical Dreadnought Armour, you should be firing the heaviest weapons you have at them.  If you use it to crack a battle tank, you should use it to crack open the marine.
If there is anything that recent politics has taught us, it is that quotes taken out of context can mean what ever you want them to.
Well I always liked the globals...
I knew I had fans!!!

Quote
"Dark Angels are Traitors" is the 40k equivalent of Flat Earthers.  You can provide all of the proof you want that says otherwise, but people just can't let it go...

Offline CharlesM

  • Newest
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • I *LOVE* 40k Online!
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #29 on: May 22, 2020, 11:10:02 PM »
I've been using my Deathwing force to play on and off again since 5th edition and while they are down at the moment for play-ability.  Hopefully they will bounce back and become relevant in the near future.  My Deathwing group still makes up the most points in my Dark Angels army.  Just wish I could use it or other parts of my Dark Angels to play sometime this year instead of just painting and displaying it.  Of course an active venue would help since mine dried up almost 2 years ago.       

Offline Calamity

  • Concussor Concussed Dice | Captain
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Senior Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2994
  • Country: gb
  • Cocking up miniatures since 1998
  • Armies: Kharadron Overlords, Bloodbound, Celestial Lions
Re: The Problem with terminators
« Reply #30 on: May 23, 2020, 06:04:47 AM »
I want to throw my hat into the ring and also back giving Terminators +1 wound.

Actually, come to think of it, how many extra wounds could you happily give them before it comes silly?  Because I think extra wounds is definitely the way to go.

 


Powered by EzPortal