How to Improve Terminators! Suggestion and Ideas welcome!

[Orange Knight]

The humble Terminator squad.

 

One of the best looking infantry kits in the Astartes range. Chunky, classic, refined, simple... disappointing rules, underwhelming wargear.

 

It wouldn't take a lot to fix them as some perfectly viable versions exist with minor rules adjustments or additions, but are limited to the specific Chapters or Chaos Factions.

 

Starting with the Tactical variant:

 

-Allow squads of 5 to take both the Cyclone Missile Launcher AND the Assault Cannon

-Change the Stormbolter profile to 24" 4 shots, rapid fire 2.

-Change the Assault Cannon profile to 8 shots.

-Upgrade the power sword to be Master Crafted.

 

Change their special rule to:

"Fury of the 1st:" This unit may re-roll the wound roll against units that have been selected as the target for Oath of Moment.

 

 

The Assault Variant is, in my opinion, slightly better. That's not to say they can't be improved further, and I believe that their Special rules and profiles should be updated:

 

-The Thunder Hammer should hit on 3+. Give it a unique name such as "Indomitus Thunder Hammer" so that they don't impact other units.

-Models armed with Lightning Claws should improve the AP by 1 in the turn they charged.

-Models armed with Thunder Hammers and Stormshields should gain a defensive bonus; "If the strength characteristic of an attack that targets them is higher than their toughness, subtract 1 from the wound roll"

 

 

What do you guys think of these suggestions, and in turn what would you change about them?

Edited October 15 by Orange Knight

[Karhedron]

The Power Fist is a decent weapon and I am actually fairly happy with their melee output. The Chain Fist should also gain Anti-Monster 3+ but otherwise I am happy with it being a side-grade to the regular power fist. Making the Sword Master Crafted would be nice but since the Seargent can take a Power Fist anyway, I am not too bothered by this.

 

The shooting output of the Tactical variant though is abysmal. A 5-man Intercessor squad can put out 20 S4 AP-1 shots to 24". Terminators should be at the very least able to match that. The Assault Cannon needs AP-1 as well, I would argue the Onslaught Gatling Cannons need this too as at the moment, both weapons really rely on fishing for 6s.

 

I like your proposed changes to FOTF. This would help their middling weapons actually push some damage through (with the caveat that they need some improved AP to actually make it stick). That would make Lightning Claws even more redundant though so maybe +1 to Wound or something?

 

TH/SS Termies are OK and see some play at the moment. The Lightning Claw variety are very weak though and lack a reason to exist. Maybe giving them Sustained Hits 1 to represent the slashing follow up attacks would be helpful (although it overlaps with Terminator Libby).

[HeadlessCross]

4 hours ago, Karhedron said:

The Power Fist is a decent weapon and I am actually fairly happy with their melee output. The Chain Fist should also gain Anti-Monster 3+ but otherwise I am happy with it being a side-grade to the regular power fist. Making the Sword Master Crafted would be nice but since the Seargent can take a Power Fist anyway, I am not too bothered by this.

 

The shooting output of the Tactical variant though is abysmal. A 5-man Intercessor squad can put out 20 S4 AP-1 shots to 24". Terminators should be at the very least able to match that. The Assault Cannon needs AP-1 as well, I would argue the Onslaught Gatling Cannons need this too as at the moment, both weapons really rely on fishing for 6s.

 

I like your proposed changes to FOTF. This would help their middling weapons actually push some damage through (with the caveat that they need some improved AP to actually make it stick). That would make Lightning Claws even more redundant though so maybe +1 to Wound or something?

 

TH/SS Termies are OK and see some play at the moment. The Lightning Claw variety are very weak though and lack a reason to exist. Maybe giving them Sustained Hits 1 to represent the slashing follow up attacks would be helpful (although it overlaps with Terminator Libby).

In many cases the Lightning Claw variant is actually better, but the W4 outweighs those benefits. 

 

I proposed this in another thread, but they need entirely different Bespoke rules and need a better hit rate on all their weapons. 

[Galron]

I would simply put a -1 ap on terminator storm bolters and leave the rest alone and give them a minor ability of Suppressing Fusillade. If a squad of 5+ models fires all of its storm bolters at an enemy squad within 12" it must make a battle shock check.

 

As for assault terminators I still think their thunder hammers should be -3ap and maybe damage 3. They are kind of anemic now even with the dev wounds.

[Karhedron]

32 minutes ago, Galron said:

As for assault terminators I still think their thunder hammers should be -3ap and maybe damage 3. They are kind of anemic now even with the dev wounds.

 

3D melee seems to be the preserve of really big weapons now like Dreadnought fists or a few relics carried by named Characters. 

[SvenIronhand]

Basic Terminators should have BS 2+ on their Storm Bolters with AP -1. All they really need. 

[HeadlessCross]

4 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

3D melee seems to be the preserve of really big weapons now like Dreadnought fists or a few relics carried by named Characters. 

An argument can be made that Dread equivalents might need to do more damage in melee already, but often course that's not the topic. 

[Orange Knight]

21 hours ago, SvenIronhand said:

Basic Terminators should have BS 2+ on their Storm Bolters with AP -1. All they really need. 

 

Not enough. 5 Intercessors would still be far better at shooting. It's why I suggest overhauls to the numbers of attacks and allowing all the weapin upgrades in a unit of 5.

[Jolemai]

Intercessors being boosted too much is the problem there though.

[Karhedron]

29 minutes ago, Jolemai said:

Intercessors being boosted too much is the problem there though.

 

If everyone was spamming Intercessors, I would agree with you but they are still rarely taken in competitive lists. I normally run a squad or two in friendly games as I like the mobility and ability sticky Objectives but even with their buffs, they are not setting the competitive meta on fire. Terminators need to be buffed to the level they can at least compete with basic Battleline infantry for firepower.

[ChapterMasterGodfrey]

On 10/15/2025 at 12:34 AM, Orange Knight said:

-Change the Stormbolter profile to 24" 4 shots, rapid fire 2

AP -1 for me as well. 

[Galron]

2 hours ago, Karhedron said:

If everyone was spamming Intercessors

Hmmm Now you have given me some ideas after I finish my Emp Shield project as I do love the look :P

[Karhedron]

2 minutes ago, Galron said:

Hmmm Now you have given me some ideas after I finish my Emp Shield project as I do love the look :P

 

I find that they work well in my BA and SW melee-centric lists. While people focus on the hammer units hurtling towards their lines, these boys quietly get on with scoring and putting out a surprisingly respectable level of anti-infantry firepower. 

[Rhavien]

5 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

If everyone was spamming Intercessors, I would agree with you but they are still rarely taken in competitive lists. I normally run a squad or two in friendly games as I like the mobility and ability sticky Objectives but even with their buffs, they are not setting the competitive meta on fire. Terminators need to be buffed to the level they can at least compete with basic Battleline infantry for firepower.

If they would set the meta on fire you'd know that they are far too good. I would say Intercessors have found their niche. Termis need theirs and I don't think it's to compete with intercessors about how many S4 shots they can dish out. They need a better bespoke rule in my opinion. I don't like the connection to OoM at all for example. 

I would also like to split up TH and LC terminators in terms of rules. LCs should get mortals on the charge or D2 on 6s to wound or something. TH should be more defensive focused. -1 to wound them for example (if S is greater than T).

[HeadlessCross]

1 hour ago, Rhavien said:

If they would set the meta on fire you'd know that they are far too good. I would say Intercessors have found their niche. Termis need theirs and I don't think it's to compete with intercessors about how many S4 shots they can dish out. They need a better bespoke rule in my opinion. I don't like the connection to OoM at all for example. 

I would also like to split up TH and LC terminators in terms of rules. LCs should get mortals on the charge or D2 on 6s to wound or something. TH should be more defensive focused. -1 to wound them for example (if S is greater than T).

PLEASE no separate datasheets for everything. Terminators need to be on just one sheet. That's it. It can be done. 

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, Rhavien said:

I don't like the connection to OoM at all for example. 

 

I agree with you here. I feel like being 100+ year old veterans means they are experienced enough to pick their own priority targets and the officers trust and respect them enough to get on with it.

[jaxom]

Current Shooting Performance

Outside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Guardsman/Guardian - 3 casualties
• Ork Boy - 1.5 casualties
• Fire Warriors - 2.2 casualties

Inside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Guardsman/Guardian - 6 casualties
• Ork Boy - 3 casualties
• Fire Warriors - 4.5 casualties

I feel safe writing that Tactical Terminators are not meeting expectations. Mine is they should at least average wiping 10 Guardsman. 

 

Improvement Options

 

Available dashboards: Unit Profile, Weapon Profile, and Special Rules. Weapon Profile and Special Rules are options. Stat consistency and role are two ways to approach it. For example, Intercessors got extra attacks because of a role-based rule. Bolt Rifle stats thus stayed consistent. Storm Bolters could be due for a consistency update with Grey Hunter Bolt Carbines (2A Rapid Fire 1).

 

Tweaking Storm Bolters based on Grey Hunter Bolt Carbines

 

Option 1: 4A Rapid Fire 2

Option 2: 2A Rapid Fire 1 Twin-Linked

 

Starting by looking at Option 2 because that has a lesser value for the casualty upper limit.

 

Outside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Guardsman/Guardian - 4 casualties
• Ork Boy - 2.5 casualties
• Fire Warriors - 3 casualties

Inside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Guardsman/Guardian - 6 casualties
• Ork Boy - 3.7 casualties
• Fire Warriors - 4.4 casualties

TL isn't doing much relative to losing one attack in RF range; not really surprised. Results: does not meet expectations.

 

Let's take a look at Option 1, with its upper casualty limit of 30.

Outside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Guardsman/Guardian - 6 casualties
• Ork Boy - 3 casualties
• Fire Warriors - 4.5 casualties

Inside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Guardsman/Guardian - 9 casualties
• Ork Boy - 4.4 casualties
• Fire Warriors - 6.7 casualties

Not bad. At this point, I think we're seeing the current systemic issue from GW's benchmarks. Overhauling the benchmarks would take care of this, but that's a much bigger ask than this topic entails. For now, assume a few extra casualties from special weapons. I'll go into Special Rule options in my next post. It could probably be combined with update Storm Bolter stats without a problem.

[jaxom]

Special Rule Improvement

I very much agree with @Karhedron, both on schema reasoning, and the Terminators shouldn't be tied to Oath because it effectively leaves them with no special rule if the battle goes in a different direction. I got the impression that Caanok Var was a test-bed for improving Terminators. So I'm assuming a special rule like his, giving Sustained Hits 1 or Lethal Hits depending on target. I'm also assuming it would function like a mini-Oath. So only against one unit at a time, but that doesn't change the calculations here.

 

Continuing on with 4 Attacks, RF 2, Sustained Hits 1

 

Outside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Guardsman/Guardian - 8 casualties
• Ork Boy - 4 casualties
• Fire Warriors - 6 casualties

Inside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Guardsman/Guardian - 12 casualties
• Ork Boy - 6 casualties
• Fire Warriors - 9 casualties

And now we're seeing a reliable wipe-out of the T3 targets (assuming a few extra casualties from special weapons) within RF range.

 

I'll add in power fist stuff here next, but am submitting so I don't lose this while I work on it.

 

Current Power Fist Performance

 

• Marines - 5.5 casualties
• Plague Marines - 4.4 casualties
• Custodes - 2.2 casualties
• Nobz (w/Warboss) - 4 casualties
• Terminators - 2.2 casualties
• Eightbound/Gravis - 3 casualties
• Blightlords - 2.2 casualties
• Deathshroud - 1.6 casualties
• Rhino - 4.4 damage, or 3 turns to kill
• Armiger - 4.4 damage, or 3.2 turns to kill
• Questoris Knight - 4.4 damage, or 6 turns to kill

 

And this is without any Faction effects (looking at you, Deathguard units). Power Fists (as are) have some weird break points relative to common defensive stats; and that does weird things to how the results play with my expectations. For example, Blightlords require all the same rolling as Plague Marines, but the 2D into 3W provides the difference. So the casualties look good, but the rolling process to get there feels bad.

 

More to come later

 

 

 

Edited October 19 by jaxom
Power Fist stuff

[CastellanDeMolay]

I've always thought tactical Terminators were back-to-front weapons-wise. The kind of things they usually need to kill in Assault are more often standard or heavy infantry, and sending them into a large target often makes their Storm Bolters ineffective. I would have thought short range anti-tank weapons with melee weapons targeted at monsters and bullying heavy infantry would make more sense in terms of loadout, but the concept was developed during Rogue Trader when it was an almost entirely infantry-centric game with a handful of mostly light-armoured vehicles, and the units were still designed around real-world logistical sensibilities, like having a uniform ammunition supply for standard weapons with exceptions made only for specialised equipment like Flamers and missile launchers. I think a large part of the problem with Terminators is that the design paradigm has changed so much since their inception, but the fixed nature of a model's weapons necessitates that they are not updated to match that new paradigm, filled with more niche specialists who are largely free of realistic practical concerns about supply lines and resource allocation. 

 

With that in mind, I think tactical Terminators can have a defined role, even in a world filled with Assault Centurions and Aggressors. I'm unsure that clearing-out chaff is the best way to do it, but having a Deep-Striking unit that can effectively strip away a Character's Bodyguard to isolate a high value target could be something worth designing towards. 

 

I don't think Storm-Bolters need to be limited to being a higher RoF version of the Bolter. Historically some units have had special types of ammunition that don't need to be modelled on the unit, avoiding the need for an updated shooting profile to invalidate older models or require bad-feeling "proxying" with a redundant kit. The new Sternguard are a good example of this with their specialised Bolt Rifles granting them an unusually effective shooting profile for what are otherwise fairly standard Astartes infantry. 

 

It probably sounds unimaginative, but I think something like gaining a second shooting profile that allows them to trade Rapid Fire for Devastating Wounds works well for this. They can still flex into blasting away a bunch of infantry, but would also be able to threaten higher Toughness targets and those with good armour saves, or who may have gained some other defensive buff from an attached Character. 

[jaxom]

6 hours ago, CastellanDeMolay said:

I've always thought tactical Terminators were back-to-front weapons-wise. The kind of things they usually need to kill in Assault are more often standard or heavy infantry, and sending them into a large target often makes their Storm Bolters ineffective. I would have thought short range anti-tank weapons with melee weapons targeted at monsters and bullying heavy infantry would make more sense in terms of loadout, but the concept was developed during Rogue Trader when it was an almost entirely infantry-centric game with a handful of mostly light-armoured vehicles, and the units were still designed around real-world logistical sensibilities, like having a uniform ammunition supply for standard weapons with exceptions made only for specialised equipment like Flamers and missile launchers. I think a large part of the problem with Terminators is that the design paradigm has changed so much since their inception, but the fixed nature of a model's weapons necessitates that they are not updated to match that new paradigm, filled with more niche specialists who are largely free of realistic practical concerns about supply lines and resource allocation. 

100% agree and a large part of why I think Assault Terminators have generally been more favored.

 

6 hours ago, CastellanDeMolay said:

It probably sounds unimaginative, but I think something like gaining a second shooting profile that allows them to trade Rapid Fire for Devastating Wounds works well for this. They can still flex into blasting away a bunch of infantry, but would also be able to threaten higher Toughness targets and those with good armour saves, or who may have gained some other defensive buff from an attached Character. 

 

I wasn't going to do this originally, but your idea got me curious. How would the assumed Sustained/Lethal impact shooting at heavy infantry and vehicle targets?

 

Outside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Marines - 1.5 casualties
• Plague Marines - 1 casualties
• Custodes - 0.33 casualties
• Nobz (w/Warboss) - 1.5 casualties
• Terminators - 0.33 casualties
• Eightbound/Gravis - 0.66 casualties
• Blightlords - 0.33 casualties
• Deathshroud - 0.25 casualties
• Rhino - 3.3 damage, or 3 turns to kill
• Armiger - 3.3 damage, or 4.2 turns to kill
• Questoris Knight - 3.3 damage, or 8 turns to kill

Inside of Rapid Fire Range, Add-Ons Incidental

• Marines - 2.2 casualties
• Plague Marines - 1.5 casualties
• Custodes - 0.5 casualties
• Nobz (w/Warboss) - 2.2 casualties
• Terminators - 0.5 casualties
• Eightbound/Gravis - 1 casualties
• Blightlords - 0.5 casualties
• Deathshroud - 0.33 casualties
• Rhino - 3.3 damage, or 3 turns to kill
• Armiger - 3.3 damage, or 4.2 turns to kill
• Questoris Knight - 3.3 damage, or 8 turns to kill

The double Bolt Carbine Sustained/Lethal used for the calculations would let them "still flex into blasting away a bunch of infantry, but would also be able to threaten higher Toughness targets and those with good armour saves," if it's a vehicle or monster with a 3+ or worse save. Heavy and Ultraheavy Infantry are weird. It takes 6A SH1 from 5 Terminators to feel like they're meeting expectations for killing basic Marines and Nobz. Again, an issue with GW benchmarks. I'm curious what they would look like with AP1.

 

Power Fists with the Sustained/Critical special rule next. 

Power Fist Performance with Sustained/Lethal Special Rule

 

• Marines - 7.4 casualties
• Plague Marines - 6 casualties
• Custodes - 3 casualties
• Nobz (w/Warboss) - 5.5 casualties
• Terminators - 3 casualties
• Eightbound/Gravis - 4 casualties
• Blightlords - 3 casualties
• Deathshroud - 2.22 casualties
• Rhino - 6.7 damage, or 2 turns to kill
• Armiger - 6.7 damage, or 2.1 turns to kill
• Questoris Knight - 6.7 damage, or 4 turns to kill

 

This looks pretty good to me. Enough extra damage to tip attacks against "Basic" Heavy Infantry into 5-man squad wipes. The only thing I don't like is taking 2 turns to kill an Rhino or Armiger, but hey, vehicles are tougher nowadays and it's probably my own bias.

 

In conclusion, for Tactical Terminators, I'd be okay with Storm Bolters becoming two Grey Hunter Bolt Carbines strapped together, Power Fists staying as is, and a Special Rule giving the unit giving Sustained Hits 1 or Lethal Hits depending on target (infantry or vehicle/monster).

 

Next up, Assault Terminators

 

Edited October 19 by jaxom
added Power Fist stuff

[Orange Knight]

The conversation has been great.

 

It's very important to recognise just how underwhelming the Tactical Terminator unit is currently. Remember that for 10 points more you can take a Repulsor Tank - that has a significant volume of impressive firepower, toughness and utility.

 

I know I sound like a broken record but we have to remember that the rules are generally built around the models and not the other way around. Terminator wargear is just very anemic when compared to Aggressors, Centurions or other units in the point range across different factions. But it should be noted that good Terminators do exist, and that they have achieved that status with a few extra layers of abilities and some wargear tweaks.

[jaxom]

I've done the initial calculation for Lightning Claw armed Assault Terminators.

• Guardsmen/Guardians - 15 casualties
• Aspect/Fire Warriors - 12 casualties
• Marines - 5 casualties
• Plague Marines - 3 casualties
• Custodes - 1.5 casualties
• Nobz (w/Warboss) - 5 casualties
• Terminators - 2 casualties
• Eightbound/Gravis - 2 casualties
• Blightlords - 1.5 casualties
• Deathshroud/Allarus - 1 casualty
• Dreadnought - 2.5 damage, or 4.8 turns to kill
• Armiger - 6.2 damage, or 2.2 turns to kill
• Questoris Knight - 3.4 damage, or 7.6 turns to kill

The results are not meeting my expectations when attacking Heavy Infantry and Ultraheavy Infantry; while simultaneously being better than Power Fists against Armigers.

 

I've spent the past few days thinking about ways to address the issues I have with the results. I am concerned that it's my expectations which are off. At the moment, Lightning Claws are upjumped power swords and I don't think that's okay. I think they should be amazing anti-infantry weapons, capable of slicing a Marine in half with no problem while being complete 'naff against anything else.

 

Other's opinions?

[CastellanDeMolay]

Agreed, even in editions past they were usually underwhelming unless you could stack a re-roll Hits on top of their re-roll Wounds. The extra Wound from the Storm Shield is not a small thing to sacrifice for what are actually kind-of sub-par melee weapons. I think, with their current profile, 5 Attacks is really underwhelming, but could be reasonable If they had better AP and Damage. 

D1 is Astartes Chainsword/Power Sword territory, which feels wrong for what are basically four Power Swords on each hand. The AP-2 is no better than the Thunder Hammer, which makes it feel like the trade-off isn't worthwhile, even with the extra couple of Attacks they currently have. Without running the numbers, I'd say something like S5, AP-3, D: D3 compares more favourably when reading it. Otherwise I'd want to see at least another couple of attacks. 

[jaxom]

7 hours ago, CastellanDeMolay said:

D1 is Astartes Chainsword/Power Sword territory, which feels wrong for what are basically four Power Swords on each hand. The AP-2 is no better than the Thunder Hammer, which makes it feel like the trade-off isn't worthwhile, even with the extra couple of Attacks they currently have. Without running the numbers, I'd say something like S5, AP-3, D: D3 compares more favourably when reading it. Otherwise I'd want to see at least another couple of attacks. 

Yeah that sounds about right. I was thinking Anti-Infantry 3+, and D3+1 damage to guarantee kills on 2W creatures and still have 3W/4W ultraheavy infantry be more resilient.

[Tacitus]

I actually like them at D1.  But they should have so many D1 attacks they have similar output to a D2 or D3+1 statline.  They should be overkill but still absolutely wreck 20 grots/guards/swarms/etc  This also helps against the -1 Damage abilities.