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.

 Storm Shadow wrote:


Saito Togan is easily one of my favorites. guess i'll just have to wait to play Ariadna. i see that a lot of YuJing units are CC oriented, does this leave them at a disadvantage since Infinity is predominately a shooty game? otherwise, YuJing will most likely be my first army choice. now the real question is...vanilla, imperial service, or japanese sectorial?

i know for a fact that i'd like to run with a high number of sniper rifles.

The biggest limit on Sniper rifle quantity will be your 'SWC' (Special Weapon Cost). If you're not familiar with this, it's the way Infinity limits use of extremely powerful weapons, and it varies for weapons depending on who is using it. Depending on what point limit you're playing at, you could probably realistically put in 2 or 3.

Yu Jing can be more CC orientated (especially if you go with the Japanese Sectorial - lots of cyber samurai!), although that's not necessarily a bad thing considering that the melee rules are apparently going to be made a bit more effective with 3rd edition. As it stands, one crap dice roll can get your melee specialist killed (as happened to a friend of mine, when his Aleph Myrmidon ran into combat and took a rifle butt to the face from a standard Haqqislam line trooper in a game we played recently )

As it stands there is nothing really wrong with melee, but a lot of the time it makes sense to use a shooting weapon than to try and engage someone in close combat*. Even something like a Yu Jing Onobiwan (who is a kind of super-ninja, with an awesome TAG killing mono-filament sword) is probably going to end up using his boarding shotgun or nanopulsar template weapon more often than not. You're paying the points for the thermoptic camo and infiltration skills, not the power CC weapon.

* I say 'makes more sense', but there will be situations when you want to go for that 'movie style ending' and have your guy run through the gunfire to plant their CC weapon in someone's head, especially at the end of a game which is already decided.

MarcoSkoll wrote:Well, if that's what you've decided the answer is, why did you even need to ask?

to vent frustration, duh.

Pacific wrote:

 Storm Shadow wrote:


Saito Togan is easily one of my favorites. guess i'll just have to wait to play Ariadna. i see that a lot of YuJing units are CC oriented, does this leave them at a disadvantage since Infinity is predominately a shooty game? otherwise, YuJing will most likely be my first army choice. now the real question is...vanilla, imperial service, or japanese sectorial?

i know for a fact that i'd like to run with a high number of sniper rifles.

The biggest limit on Sniper rifle quantity will be your 'SWC' (Special Weapon Cost). If you're not familiar with this, it's the way Infinity limits use of extremely powerful weapons, and it varies for weapons depending on who is using it. Depending on what point limit you're playing at, you could probably realistically put in 2 or 3.

Yu Jing can be more CC orientated (especially if you go with the Japanese Sectorial - lots of cyber samurai!), although that's not necessarily a bad thing considering that the melee rules are apparently going to be made a bit more effective with 3rd edition. As it stands, one crap dice roll can get your melee specialist killed (as happened to a friend of mine, when his Aleph Myrmidon ran into combat and took a rifle butt to the face from a standard Haqqislam line trooper in a game we played recently )

As it stands there is nothing really wrong with melee, but a lot of the time it makes sense to use a shooting weapon than to try and engage someone in close combat*. Even something like a Yu Jing Onobiwan (who is a kind of super-ninja, with an awesome TAG killing mono-filament sword) is probably going to end up using his boarding shotgun or nanopulsar template weapon more often than not. You're paying the points for the thermoptic camo and infiltration skills, not the power CC weapon.

* I say 'makes more sense', but there will be situations when you want to go for that 'movie style ending' and have your guy run through the gunfire to plant their CC weapon in someone's head, especially at the end of a game which is already decided.

i've been messing around with different lists on aleph toolbox, so yes i have an understanding of the SWC. a friend and i are just starting out in infinity, but eventually we'd like to work our way up to 300 point games. i'd very easily be happy with 3 snipers in a 10 man force.

with that being said, would any army benefit the most from the use of sniper rifles? possible PanO since they have the highest BS?

Multi sniper rifles aren't something I take frequently. Higher burst on weapon means you have higher chance to beat the opponent in face to face roll. The more often you beat his result, the more you'll likely to remove the model.

Multi sniper rifles are designed to abuse the range modifiers and you'll need to be sure you're always in the optimal range as you don't have the burst advantage.

Don't hung too much on BS attribute, with proper flanking and stacking negative modifiers for the opponent to overcome, it'll be far worse for him than straight on engagement and relaying on your higher BS to carry you over.

 Knight wrote:
Multi sniper rifles aren't something I take frequently. Higher burst on weapon means you have higher chance to beat the opponent in face to face roll. The more often you beat his result, the more you'll likely to remove the model.

Multi sniper rifles are designed to abuse the range modifiers and you'll need to be sure you're always in the optimal range as you don't have the burst advantage.

Don't hung too much on BS attribute, with proper flanking and stacking negative modifiers for the opponent to overcome, it'll be far worse for him than straight on engagement and relaying on your higher BS to carry you over.

is it true that a pair of snipers can effectively pin down most of the board?

 Storm Shadow wrote:
is it true that a pair of snipers can effectively pin down most of the board?

Yes - and the same also applies to other weapons with a long enough range - things like Autocannons, HMGs and Missile launchers.

However, it's hugely dependent on table layout. With lots of tall terrain in the deployment zones and nothing to block lines of fire, then you end up with something of a "bowl", where models on the rim have really large fields of fire. In such a circumstance, two snipers could pin down much of the board, particularly if the opponent doesn't have equally long ranged weapons to take them out.
But put two snipers on a table with loads and loads of single level buildings/walls/etc and no elevated positions to exploit though... and they'll be practically useless.

It's something of an art learning to set up good Infinity tables. The short version of my opinion is you want plenty of fire lanes (a couple of these should even be right across a typical table, there's no point in HMGs and sniper rifles having long range if they never get to use it), but you don't want to be able to see too much of the table from any one position (particularly if that position is in a player's deployment zone).
This does, however, mean LOADS more terrain than you find on a typical 40K table. As an example, here are some photos (not mine, credit goes to IJW) of some tables I played on a few tournaments back:

 MarcoSkoll wrote:

 Storm Shadow wrote:
is it true that a pair of snipers can effectively pin down most of the board?

Yes - and the same also applies to other weapons with a long enough range - things like Autocannons, HMGs and Missile launchers.

However, it's hugely dependent on table layout. With lots of tall terrain in the deployment zones and nothing to block lines of fire, then you end up with something of a "bowl", where models on the rim have really large fields of fire. In such a circumstance, two snipers could pin down much of the board, particularly if the opponent doesn't have equally long ranged weapons to take them out.
But put two snipers on a table with loads and loads of single level buildings/walls/etc and no elevated positions to exploit though... and they'll be practically useless.

It's something of an art learning to set up good Infinity tables. The short version of my opinion is you want plenty of fire lanes (a couple of these should even be right across a typical table, there's no point in HMGs and sniper rifles having long range if they never get to use it), but you don't want to be able to see too much of the table from any one position (particularly if that position is in a player's deployment zone).
This does, however, mean LOADS more terrain than you find on a typical 40K table. As an example, here are some photos (not mine, credit goes to IJW) of some tables I played on a few tournaments back:

Spoiler:

i love the one with the purple crates. i shall aspire to create a table layout similar.