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.

Jaon wrote:10 sniper wounds = INSTANT PIN (coz it would)

Not quite. IIRC, snake eyes automatically passes leadership regardless of modifiers.

nostromo wrote:My conclusion, pinning has never been able to consistently influence the outcome of a battle and it still can't despite the rule change of 5th.

ChrisCP wrote:Dark Eldar might want to disagree with you there.

^ What he said.

nostromo wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:It would also make a kind of sense that a bunch of sniper rifles have a greater chance of pinning a unit than a single rifle would.

Aside from that fluff perspective, the rules are not, in any way, shape or form, clear.
People can say it all they want. it doesn't make it any more true.

It Can Be Read Either Way.

Do you really think they'll come out with a faq that says 'yeah look we changed this rule but really meant it to be the exact same thing as in 4th despite the obvious change in wording'.

I'll tell you why pinning was (marginally) boosted in this edition.
- It was crappy in 4th to begin with
- 5th ed codex throw fearless around like it's candy, further reducing it's impact on the game

I say marginally because it's nowhere near broken if you play it by weapon, i'd even say there's still some weaksauce sticking on it.
10 shots, 6 hits, 3 wounds, 1 unsaved wound -> 1 pinning test
hmmm, on second thought it's exactly as crappy as before and might aswell keep playing 4th rule and avoid this inane argument.

My conclusion, pinning has never been able to consistently influence the outcome of a battle and it still can't despite the rule change of 5th.

The funny thing is that I agree with you.

I am firmly in the "weapons causes pinning tests, not units" camp.
But that doesn´t prevent me from acknowledging the fact that the text is unclear and can be read either way.

The problem arises when hordes of pinning weapons are fired at guard. lets say some ratlings...friendly fire at some guardsmen.

10 shots, 6 hit, 3 wound, 2 unsaved. 2 pinning tests, if their not vets or dont have an attached commander, their probably pinned, but the simple fact is its still only 2 dead guardsmen and a commander about to yell GET BACK IN THE FIGHT!

Pinning is quite crap. But when (I think nids have a type of unit that fits this) you get 7 unsaved pinning wounds, bad things happen. I accidentally played it by wound, not weapon, last game, but somehow my guard passed the 5 or so pinning wounds from a hive tyranids large blast pinning something or other.

I have always read it as per weapon, but we play it per unit.

Jaon wrote:The problem arises when hordes of pinning weapons are fired at guard. lets say some ratlings...friendly fire at some guardsmen.

10 shots, 6 hit, 3 wound, 2 unsaved. 2 pinning tests, if their not vets or dont have an attached commander, their probably pinned, but the simple fact is its still only 2 dead guardsmen and a commander about to yell GET BACK IN THE FIGHT!

Pinning is quite crap. But when (I think nids have a type of unit that fits this) you get 7 unsaved pinning wounds, bad things happen. I accidentally played it by wound, not weapon, last game, but somehow my guard passed the 5 or so pinning wounds from a hive tyranids large blast pinning something or other.

You present this like it is a bad thing.

I am not worried that the meta-game suddenly changes (as if changes in the meta-game could be considered a bad thing in and of itself) to armies spamming pinning weapons.

After all in order for that scenario to play out, one has to have a unit armed with a lot of pinning weapons (as opposed to one/a few which causes a lot of casualties), loaded dice and an army to back that up.
Currently I don't know of any such units.
On top of that, the frequency with which GW hands out Fearless these days lessens the effect of Pinning on the game.

I believe that a unit that is supposed to be good at pinning (mortars, snipers and such) should actually be.....you know, good at pinning. And I don't consider the increased chance of forcing the target unit to take a single test, to make such "Pin-specialists" really worthwhile.