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.

Sniper Rifles (+15 points per model)

S * AP 6 48" Range Heavy 1

Special:

-Sniper rifles always wound on a 4+ against any model with a toughness value.

- Any unit suffering one or more unsaved wounds from a sniper rifle must immediately take a Leadership test with -1 penalty for every shot that hit, whether it wounds or not, and if they fail they automatically go to ground per the rule in the BRB p. 24 under "Going to Ground". No leadership modifications may be used for this leadership test, e.g. Mob Rule, Fearless, and Stubborn. This does not include rules that allow for rerolling of failed morale/leadership tests, so in that case a failed Leadership test may be rerolled as normal. Wargear (such as the Bosspole) and unit upgrade options (such as the Commissar "Summary Execution" ability) may be used to negate a failed Leadership test when a unit comes under sniper rifle fire.

- Against a vehicle, the sniper rifle counts as a S6 rending weapon (rends on a 5+), but the ballistic skill of the shooter is reduced by 1 to account for the increased difficulty in hitting vulnerable targets on armored vehicles.

Stubborn should still apply. Vehicle rule is meh.

Let's look at this on ratlings.

Ratlings - 20ppm.
200 for 10

10 shots, 6.6r hits, 3.3r wounds, .5r rends. Pins almost automatically against anything.


Although personally, I'd prefer 60" range, snipers hit and wound on the same value (3+ to hit, 3+ to wound).

I don't agree with it going through Fearless. Most units that are Fearless, are that way because they are utterly insane/not afraid of death/pumped up on combat stims etc. that some snipers shooting at them doesn't affect their morale at all and doesn't appeal to their sense of self preservation.

Although 48' range would be nice. Its not very pratical, most of the fight, in my experience takes place within 36' anyway.

The revised snipers wouldn't be free though - they'd cost an additional 15 points per model. So that squad of 10 ratlings would be 250 points, not 200.

I could change it to 20 points per model and add an additional possibility:

Spotters: A unit of snipers may take 1 spotter per 5 models for an additional 50 points. The Spotter is equipped with a combat scope, and can give one model in its unit +1 Ballistic Skill for that shooting phase. However, Spotters may only take a pistol and close combat weapon as weaponry.

So the squad would then look like this:

8x Ratling Snipers (Sniper Rifle)
- Spotter (combat scope, laspistol, combat knife)
- Spotter (combat scope, laspistol, combat knife)
Total cost: 340 points

Think that cost would justify the -1 modifier to the leadership test to avoid being forced to go to ground?

And fearless/stubborn etc isn't the same as stupid. If you're taking sniper fire, no matter how unafraid you are, you'd have at least enough sense of self-preservation to try and stay in cover until you can identify where the sniper shots are coming from so you can kill the snipers.

I was also thinking that on any roll to hit of 6, the sniper would be able to choose the target model in the unit that they're wounding, but give up the rending (against troops) and the negative leadership penalty for the sniper shots, but that seemed a bit too complicated; unnecessarily so IMO.

Chesh wrote:Sniper Rifles (+15 points per model)

S * AP 6 48" Range Heavy 1

Special:

-Sniper rifles always wound on a 4+ against any model with a toughness value.

- Any unit suffering one or more unsaved wounds from a sniper rifle must immediately take a Leadership test with -1 penalty for every shot that hit, whether it wounds or not, and if they fail they automatically go to ground per the rule in the BRB p. 24 under "Going to Ground". No leadership modifications may be used for this leadership test, e.g. Mob Rule, Fearless, and Stubborn. This does not include rules that allow for rerolling of failed morale/leadership tests, so in that case a failed Leadership test may be rerolled as normal. Wargear (such as the Bosspole) and unit upgrade options (such as the Commissar "Summary Execution" ability) may be used to negate a failed Leadership test when a unit comes under sniper rifle fire.

- Against a vehicle, the sniper rifle counts as a S6 rending weapon (rends on a 5+), but the ballistic skill of the shooter is reduced by 1 to account for the increased difficulty in hitting vulnerable targets on armored vehicles.

Are... are you serious?

He's serious, isn't he? :/

Sniper rifles... that ignore fearless?

Why have you referenced going to ground rather than a pinning test? It is, after all the same thing. (You shouldn't be making rules if you don't understand the rules of the game, not that that has ever stopped me.)

Okay, they wound on 4+ that's normal.

First off, your rule could be simplified to this:

Take a pinning test at -1 to Leadership. This test is always taken at the highest unmodified leadership, with no special rules applying.

Wait, why? make it -2 and remove this crap about ignoring fearless and the mob rule. That just isn't realistic. If a bloke is willing to pit himself against a daemon fifteen times his height, I don't think he's going to care about a little sniper rifle (okay, the dead guy might, but this guy has no regard for self or comrade.) A stubborn bloke is still gonna be Stubborn in the face of a sniper. Darnath's pretty stubborn. He should've died a few hundred years ago, but he's got balls. I don't think he's afraid of a little sniper.

I think it is far less reasonable to allow a commissar to shoot someone (risking the chance to be shot in the face, mind you.) to make them get back up than to have a unit be unhindered by the rule. A man who fires a sniper at a fearless unit, is after all, stupid.

No. A sniper is S3 against vehicles for a reason. It is ridiculous to assume that a Sniper can explode a land raider on first turn or even when he starts taking damage. This rule is absurd and would send the price of snipers through the roof. (though, it'd fit in with all the games abstractia.)

TheCrazyCryptek wrote:I don't agree with it going through Fearless. Most units that are Fearless, are that way because they are utterly insane/not afraid of death/pumped up on combat stims etc. that some snipers shooting at them doesn't affect their morale at all and doesn't appeal to their sense of self preservation.

^ this.

Chesh wrote:The revised snipers wouldn't be free though - they'd cost an additional 15 points per model. So that squad of 10 ratlings would be 250 points, not 200.

Why would ratlings be 250 points rather than 200 if you're saying they're 15 points more at this system? the number should be 350.

Maybe it's just a typo~

Ratling 5p model 5p weapon. Up to 15, is +10ppm

I personally loved the old fixed 2+ to-hit rule. This, and a 72"/120" range and problem solved.

Scipio Africanus wrote:Are... are you serious?

He's serious, isn't he? :/

Yeah, I'm kicking around ideas trying to make sniper rifles better. I used to love using them, but now they're just this side of useless against damn near everything.

Scipio Africanus wrote:Sniper rifles... that ignore fearless?

It goes through fearless etc to represent models dragging wounded comrades out of the line of fire (which would take some time, naturally, as they're trying to keep from getting sniped as well), and because sniper rifles are currently WOEFULLY underpowered. It's not that they're afraid of the rifle, it's that they're trying to dodge fire from it while helping out their comrades. Just figured it would be easier to note it like that than try to pull every possible modifier and special rule, THEN explain them each individually.

Scipio Africanus wrote:Why have you referenced going to ground rather than a pinning test? It is, after all the same thing. (You shouldn't be making rules if you don't understand the rules of the game, not that that has ever stopped me.)

I don't have the BRB handy at work. I remember the page for going to ground because I've been playing around with that + scouts + camo cloaks as objectivesitters in games, so it gets referenced a lot during games. I could be mistaken, but don't pinning tests require another Ld check to get unpinned, and I'm also pretty sure there's no +1 bonus to cover saves for being pinned as opposed to going to ground?

Scipio Africanus wrote:First off, your rule could be simplified to this:

Take a pinning test at -1 to Leadership. This test is always taken at the highest unmodified leadership, with no special rules applying.

I wanted the -1 per hit, because rather than a flat modifier doesn't it make more sense that the more shots you take, the higher (or lower, rather) the modifier should be? I know that if I'm getting shot at by a machine gun firing 550 rounds per minute is going to make me far more likely to duck than a single muzzle-loading musket (just to compare rates of fire). Basically, the greater the volume of fire the more likely I am to duck, and I think a stacking negative modifier best represents that.

Scipio Africanus wrote:Wait, why? make it -2 and remove this crap about ignoring fearless and the mob rule. That just isn't realistic. If a bloke is willing to pit himself against a daemon fifteen times his height, I don't think he's going to care about a little sniper rifle (okay, the dead guy might, but this guy has no regard for self or comrade.) A stubborn bloke is still gonna be Stubborn in the face of a sniper. Darnath's pretty stubborn. He should've died a few hundred years ago, but he's got balls. I don't think he's afraid of a little sniper.

I think it is far less reasonable to allow a commissar to shoot someone (risking the chance to be shot in the face, mind you.) to make them get back up than to have a unit be unhindered by the rule. A man who fires a sniper at a fearless unit, is after all, stupid.

Again, "being afraid of" isn't the reason it bypasses special rules regarding morale/leadership tests. It's the reaction the unit has to getting shot by sniper fire; stop, take cover, gather wounded and find the sniper

Scipio Africanus wrote:I think it is far less reasonable to allow a commissar to shoot someone (risking the chance to be shot in the face, mind you.) to make them get back up than to have a unit be unhindered by the rule. A man who fires a sniper at a fearless unit, is after all, stupid.

If anything, I'd want to direct all of my sniper rifle fire at the fearless units, simply because they're more likely to cause damage than a unit that can be turned aside. Fearless units won't be stopped - only slightly delayed.

Scipio Africanus wrote:No. A sniper is S3 against vehicles for a reason. It is ridiculous to assume that a Sniper can explode a land raider on first turn or even when he starts taking damage. This rule is absurd and would send the price of snipers through the roof. (though, it'd fit in with all the games abstractia.)

That's why I gave it -1 BS when shooting against vehicles, to represent the difficulty of hitting the small chinks in a vehicle's armor, but perhaps you're right - lemme mathhammer it out right quick, using SM Scouts
5+ to hit (BS3 -1 for the vehicle) = 1/3
6 to rend and penetrate AV14 = 1/6
5+ on rending roll to penetrate AV14 = 1/3
6 to explode = 1/6

.17*.33*.17*.33 = .31% chance to blow up a LR. In other words, not likely to happen at all, ever, in the course of normal play - although simulators and mathhammering will always show it as a possibility, I consider a third of one percent a decent enough chance to pull off a "miracle shot".

Scipio Africanus wrote:

TheCrazyCryptek wrote:I don't agree with it going through Fearless. Most units that are Fearless, are that way because they are utterly insane/not afraid of death/pumped up on combat stims etc. that some snipers shooting at them doesn't affect their morale at all and doesn't appeal to their sense of self preservation.

^ this.

Chesh wrote:The revised snipers wouldn't be free though - they'd cost an additional 15 points per model. So that squad of 10 ratlings would be 250 points, not 200.

Why would ratlings be 250 points rather than 200 if you're saying they're 15 points more at this system? the number should be 350.

Maybe it's just a typo~

I'm going off point values in Army Builder. I don't have a copy of the IG Codex either here at work or at home, but I do have copies of AB. AB gave me 100 points for a squad of 10 Ratlings with sniper rifles already equipped. Adding the +15 points per model gave me 250 points. Again, I don't have any of my codices or the BRB at work, so if I make a rules mistake, bitte entschuldigen Sie. (please forgive me). Marines would be 290 points for 10 sniper models (140 + 150 for the sniper rifles).

Sniper Rifles that ignore fearless. Seriously.

Ever heard of a unit called Death Company?

"We are to die for the honour of the chapter, to redeem our souls! For Sanguinius!"
"Arghhh! Someone's shooting at us with a sniper rifle! I don't care that I'm overcome with bloodlust, and that I'm supposed to be a fearless murderer! I'm scared I want my mummy!"

Honestly, that would be idiotic on many levels. Gaunts in synapse have no thoughts of their own. Suddenly they get shot at and they're cowering behind rocks.

Okay, so it doesn't ignore Fearless then. Count that as the same thing as abilities that let them auto-pass morale checks. How else could we go about making this rule workable? I'd like to start taking snipers again.

Chesh wrote:Yeah, I'm kicking around ideas trying to make sniper rifles better. I used to love using them, but now they're just this side of useless against damn near everything.

It goes through fearless etc to represent models dragging wounded comrades out of the line of fire (which would take some time, naturally, as they're trying to keep from getting sniped as well), and because sniper rifles are currently WOEFULLY underpowered. It's not that they're afraid of the rifle, it's that they're trying to dodge fire from it while helping out their comrades. Just figured it would be easier to note it like that than try to pull every possible modifier and special rule, THEN explain them each individually.

I don't have the BRB handy at work. I remember the page for going to ground because I've been playing around with that + scouts + camo cloaks as objectivesitters in games, so it gets referenced a lot during games. I could be mistaken, but don't pinning tests require another Ld check to get unpinned, and I'm also pretty sure there's no +1 bonus to cover saves for being pinned as opposed to going to ground?
Take a pinning test at -1 to Leadership. This test is always taken at the highest unmodified leadership, with no special rules applying.

I wanted the -1 per hit, because rather than a flat modifier doesn't it make more sense that the more shots you take, the higher (or lower, rather) the modifier should be? I know that if I'm getting shot at by a machine gun firing 550 rounds per minute is going to make me far more likely to duck than a single muzzle-loading musket (just to compare rates of fire). Basically, the greater the volume of fire the more likely I am to duck, and I think a stacking negative modifier best represents that.

Again, "being afraid of" isn't the reason it bypasses special rules regarding morale/leadership tests. It's the reaction the unit has to getting shot by sniper fire; stop, take cover, gather wounded and find the sniper

If anything, I'd want to direct all of my sniper rifle fire at the fearless units, simply because they're more likely to cause damage than a unit that can be turned aside. Fearless units won't be stopped - only slightly delayed.

Scipio Africanus wrote:

Chesh wrote:Yeah, I'm kicking around ideas trying to make sniper rifles better. I used to love using them, but now they're just this side of useless against damn near everything.

It goes through fearless etc to represent models dragging wounded comrades out of the line of fire (which would take some time, naturally, as they're trying to keep from getting sniped as well), and because sniper rifles are currently WOEFULLY underpowered. It's not that they're afraid of the rifle, it's that they're trying to dodge fire from it while helping out their comrades. Just figured it would be easier to note it like that than try to pull every possible modifier and special rule, THEN explain them each individually.

I don't have the BRB handy at work. I remember the page for going to ground because I've been playing around with that + scouts + camo cloaks as objectivesitters in games, so it gets referenced a lot during games. I could be mistaken, but don't pinning tests require another Ld check to get unpinned, and I'm also pretty sure there's no +1 bonus to cover saves for being pinned as opposed to going to ground?
Take a pinning test at -1 to Leadership. This test is always taken at the highest unmodified leadership, with no special rules applying.

I wanted the -1 per hit, because rather than a flat modifier doesn't it make more sense that the more shots you take, the higher (or lower, rather) the modifier should be? I know that if I'm getting shot at by a machine gun firing 550 rounds per minute is going to make me far more likely to duck than a single muzzle-loading musket (just to compare rates of fire). Basically, the greater the volume of fire the more likely I am to duck, and I think a stacking negative modifier best represents that.

Again, "being afraid of" isn't the reason it bypasses special rules regarding morale/leadership tests. It's the reaction the unit has to getting shot by sniper fire; stop, take cover, gather wounded and find the sniper

If anything, I'd want to direct all of my sniper rifle fire at the fearless units, simply because they're more likely to cause damage than a unit that can be turned aside. Fearless units won't be stopped - only slightly delayed.

There are a few flaws in your thinking here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chesh wrote:Yeah, I'm kicking around ideas trying to make sniper rifles better. I used to love using them, but now they're just this side of useless against damn near everything.

I can respect that. I understand why you feel butthurt about them, they have been made fairly weak (not that I played anything other than 5e)

Chesh wrote:It goes through fearless etc to represent models dragging wounded comrades out of the line of fire (which would take some time, naturally, as they're trying to keep from getting sniped as well), and because sniper rifles are currently WOEFULLY underpowered. It's not that they're afraid of the rifle, it's that they're trying to dodge fire from it while helping out their comrades. Just figured it would be easier to note it like that than try to pull every possible modifier and special rule, THEN explain them each individually.

No. Fearless models will not give two flying feths about their comrades. That’s my point. they are like your average rapper: They say I don’t give a feth too often. They will fight on, will move forward and will not get scared off like some gretchin because of a sniper. Under no circumstances whatsoever. They will not fend for their fallen and they will not stop their onslaught.

Chesh wrote:I don't have the BRB handy at work. I remember the page for going to ground because I've been playing around with that + scouts + camo cloaks as objectivesitters in games, so it gets referenced a lot during games. I could be mistaken, but don't pinning tests require another Ld check to get unpinned, and I'm also pretty sure there's no +1 bonus to cover saves for being pinned as opposed to going to ground?
Take a pinning test at -1 to Leadership. This test is always taken at the highest unmodified leadership, with no special rules applying.

There is a cover save bonus attached to being pinned. They are exactly the same, only pinning is a test whereas going to ground is voluntary. You may go to ground and therefore not need to take a pinning test, because you already technically are pinned.

Chesh wrote:I wanted the -1 per hit, because rather than a flat modifier doesn't it make more sense that the more shots you take, the higher (or lower, rather) the modifier should be? I know that if I'm getting shot at by a machine gun firing 550 rounds per minute is going to make me far more likely to duck than a single muzzle-loading musket (just to compare rates of fire). Basically, the greater the volume of fire the more likely I am to duck, and I think a stacking negative modifier best represents that.

Okay, I misread that as a single -1 to Ld. My mistake. I can agree with this, I support it.

It is never justified to remove a fearless models’ fearlessness. Under no circumstances (not even Mat ward has the balls to do that.)

Ratlings are 10 ppm with sniper rifles. Sniper rifles armywide in IG are 5 ppm. 10 - 5 = 5. 5 point ratling + 15 point new sniper rifle = 20 points per model. It's new math, I know. Crazy how you might have to think laterally to come up with these things.

Anyways, it's still much easier to go back to a hits on 2+ and 60-120" range, rather than introducing more and more rules.

chrisrawr wrote:Ratlings are 10 ppm with sniper rifles. Sniper rifles armywide in IG are 5 ppm. 10 - 5 = 5. 5 point ratling + 15 point new sniper rifle = 20 points per model. It's new math, I know. Crazy how you might have to think laterally to come up with these things.

Anyways, it's still much easier to go back to a hits on 2+ and 60-120" range, rather than introducing more and more rules.

I don't have the IG Codex, as I stated before. Someone used Ratlings as an example in another discussion about this and I just went with that example. Try reading the thread before calling me out on my "lateral thinking failure" and it might actually apply some day.

Also, hitting on 2+ and wounding on 4+ would still suck in 5th edition. If you have nothing to add to the discussion other than insults, then please just read other threads. Nobody's forcing you to respond to this one.

Scipio Africanus wrote:No. Fearless models will not give two flying feths about their comrades. That’s my point. they are like your average rapper: They say I don’t give a feth too often. They will fight on, will move forward and will not get scared off like some gretchin because of a sniper. Under no circumstances whatsoever. They will not fend for their fallen and they will not stop their onslaught.

In some cases though, that doesn't apply. Take Orks for example - they're only fearless when they have strength in numbers - that doesn't mean they actually ARE fearless, just means the mob is big enough that they feel invincible. If orks around them start dropping due to an "invisible" sniper, then that fearlessness doesn't make sense. But in most cases, I agree - so should it just be "the LD test is always taken on the model's leadership value with no modifiers allowed"? That would stop the Orks, which would make sense, but it wouldn't stop units that are inherently fearless for whatever reason.

Scipio Africanus wrote:There is a cover save bonus attached to being pinned. They are exactly the same, only pinning is a test whereas going to ground is voluntary. You may go to ground and therefore not need to take a pinning test, because you already technically are pinned.

Yeah, I checked the rulebook when I went home for lunch. My bad on that one - so it would just be a pinning test then (I thought pinning was worse than going to ground, which sort of made sense considering it's something you're forced to do rather than something optional)

Scipio Africanus wrote:It is never justified to remove a fearless models’ fearlessness. Under no circumstances

Even in my above example with Orks and Mob Rule?

TheCrazyCryptek wrote:Although 48' range would be nice. Its not very pratical, most of the fight, in my experience takes place within 36' anyway.

Yeah, it'd still be nice to have some extra range on it. You'd think that a sniper rifle would be accurate at farther distances than a heavy bolter (machine gun), at the very least.

So here's what we have so far:

Sniper Rifle (+15 points each)

S * AP 6 Range 48" Heavy 1 Rending (5+)

Special:
- Sniper rifles wound on a 4+ (3+ would be a bit over the top, I'd think? Unless the additional points cost would justify that) against any model with a toughness value.

- Any unit suffering one or more unsaved wounds from a sniper rifle must take a pinning test with a -1 penalty for every model hit, whether it wounded or not. This pinning test must be taken on the unit's listed leadership value, no modifiers apply e.g. Mob Rule.

- Snipers firing at a vehicle do so at -1 Ballistic Skill to represent the added difficulty of hitting vulnerable areas on armored vehicles.

- For every 5 models in a sniper unit, one of them may be upgraded to a spotter with a combat scope (counts as auspex), pistol and close combat weapon for an additional +50 points.

If you don't want to see sniper rifles blowing up Land Raiders (and why not? It's a small enough chance at 0.31%, but I can see your point), then I'd move it back to AP - and give it 3+ to wound models with a toughness value. That way the highest result on the vehicle damage table for non open-topped vehicles would just be a wreck instead of an explosion.

Chesh wrote:
Sniper Rifle (+15 points each)

S * AP 6 Range 48" Heavy 1 Rending (5+)

Special:
- Sniper rifles wound on a 4+ (3+ would be a bit over the top, I'd think? Unless the additional points cost would justify that) against any model with a toughness value.

- Any unit suffering one or more unsaved wounds from a sniper rifle must take a pinning test with a -1 penalty for every model hit, whether it wounded or not. This pinning test must be taken on the unit's listed leadership value, no modifiers apply e.g. Mob Rule.

- Snipers firing at a vehicle do so at -1 Ballistic Skill to represent the added difficulty of hitting vulnerable areas on armored vehicles.

- For every 5 models in a sniper unit, one of them may be upgraded to a spotter with a combat scope (counts as auspex), pistol and close combat weapon for an additional +50 points.

For 15 points this is dead expensive. Especially for the models you will buy it (Guardsmen/Scouts). I would say their current cost is nice for even this "stronger" version. And WTF is this spotter thing? For 50 points it is better to be a game winning trick!

It counteracts the -1 penalty to BS for shooting at vehicles for 1-2 models in the unit, or gives +1 for shooting at infantry. Should it be +30 points instead? Or keep the +50 points and count as an auspex (+1 BS to one designated model in the squad) AND allow that model to "call its shot" - that is, allocate the wound to a specific model in the target unit.

5+ rending is kind of nice against toughness models, since it'll force invulnerable saves 1/3rd of the time

The 15 points pays for AP 6 instead of AP - (so it doesn't get the -1 to rolls on the vehicle damage table) and 5+ rending, plus the negative modifiers to leadership for pinning tests. I can adjust that some, some suggestions have been hitting/wounding on 3+, lowering it to AP 5, and increasing the range to 60"

+1 BS seemed nice enough, especially if you use it on a scout sergeant, which would give them a BS5 for that shot.

I was the one who brought up ratlings. Both times I brought ratlings up, I explained my math behind them. If you are going to imply I insulted you while slighting me both times, you need to stop seeing sarcasm and cynicism on the internet and start taking literal word at face value.

Yes, at which point I loaded up a squad of ratlings in Army Builder and looked at the point cost, then added 15 points per model for the new sniper rifles. I believe I explained this already.

How about, instead of trying to increase the chances of a one-shot weapon pinning a squad when even heavy machine guns can't, we focus on the "sniper" aspect of things and make it possible for even a regular sniper rifle to choose which model is wounded in an enemy unit?

Say, sniper rifles always hit on a 2+, and on a roll to hit of 5 or better, the firing player gets to allocate any resulting wound on the enemy unit? That would make sniper rifles worth taking in my opinion, and would make a lot more sense in terms of a sniper's real role on a crowded battlefield. With all the crazy gak going on in your average 40k game that doesn't cause pinning, one casualty from a needle rifle is NOT going to get anyone's heads down.

The reason sniper rifles have been pinning in-game is because they're supposed to be "hidden", so it looks like your battle brother Joe standing next to you just all of a sudden grew another hole where there wasn't one before. That doesn't work in a game with no fog of war and no possibility for it, so they slapped on the pinning rule and called it good.

I like it as a means of maybe slowing down the units that would otherwise be barreling down on the fragile back-line units, like devastators or whirlwinds etc, or breaking up a devastating multiple charge setup by pinning one of the units for a turn. But I also agree they should be able to "call their shots" as it were - but making it random doesn't sit right for some reason.

How about a special ability for the spotter units called "Shoot that one over there!" or something, that allows the spotter to call targets for the sniper to hit. Then it would be the best of both worlds - 2 "called shots" per volley plus it'll still pin (for whatever that's worth, since most of the crap I'd want pinned are already fearless, or might as well be).

@Chesh if you're going to sit under the point and refuse to look up, don't blame others when it passes overhead.

Chesh wrote:Sniper Rifles (+15 points per model)

S * AP 6 48" Range Heavy 1

Special:

-Sniper rifles always wound on a 4+ against any model with a toughness value.

- Any unit suffering one or more unsaved wounds from a sniper rifle must immediately take a Leadership test with -1 penalty for every shot that hit, whether it wounds or not, and if they fail they automatically go to ground per the rule in the BRB p. 24 under "Going to Ground". No leadership modifications may be used for this leadership test, e.g. Mob Rule, Fearless, and Stubborn. This does not include rules that allow for rerolling of failed morale/leadership tests, so in that case a failed Leadership test may be rerolled as normal. Wargear (such as the Bosspole) and unit upgrade options (such as the Commissar "Summary Execution" ability) may be used to negate a failed Leadership test when a unit comes under sniper rifle fire.

- Against a vehicle, the sniper rifle counts as a S6 rending weapon (rends on a 5+), but the ballistic skill of the shooter is reduced by 1 to account for the increased difficulty in hitting vulnerable targets on armored vehicles.

Where are you getting this crazy range and vehicle strength?
Range:
Can a sniper rifle outrange a 30mm chain gun(assault cannon) no Can it outrange a 5" auto loader(autocannon) no. At some point the projectile is too light and to susceptible to the wind.

Vehicle stopping power:
Sniper rifles are used against light vehicles, material, and electronics but they have no use against armored targets. You just cant get such a small projectile to do any damage against heavy armor plate.


Pinning:
this is even sillier. In an open field away from battle sure perhaps a sniper rifle could pin a squad, but in the heat of battle what is a squad going to fear more. A machine gun blading away 10 rounds a second at them or a sniper rifles shooing 10 times a MINUTE. In the chaos of a fire fight it is unlikely a squad would even notice a sniper rifle firing at it.

I say leave sniper rifles as is and improve the Pinning mechanic so that it actually means something (cumulative -1 to Ld per additional wound would be about right).

Then add an Anti-Materiel Rifle, which is a lot like a standard sniper rifle except 48 inches range, AP 4 and counts as St 6 against vehicles. Make it a limited selection upgrade for for units that can already take sniper rifles.

Exergy wrote:

Chesh wrote:Sniper Rifles (+15 points per model)

S * AP 6 48" Range Heavy 1

Special:

-Sniper rifles always wound on a 4+ against any model with a toughness value.

- Any unit suffering one or more unsaved wounds from a sniper rifle must immediately take a Leadership test with -1 penalty for every shot that hit, whether it wounds or not, and if they fail they automatically go to ground per the rule in the BRB p. 24 under "Going to Ground". No leadership modifications may be used for this leadership test, e.g. Mob Rule, Fearless, and Stubborn. This does not include rules that allow for rerolling of failed morale/leadership tests, so in that case a failed Leadership test may be rerolled as normal. Wargear (such as the Bosspole) and unit upgrade options (such as the Commissar "Summary Execution" ability) may be used to negate a failed Leadership test when a unit comes under sniper rifle fire.

- Against a vehicle, the sniper rifle counts as a S6 rending weapon (rends on a 5+), but the ballistic skill of the shooter is reduced by 1 to account for the increased difficulty in hitting vulnerable targets on armored vehicles.

Where are you getting this crazy range and vehicle strength?
Range:
Can a sniper rifle outrange a 30mm chain gun(assault cannon) no Can it outrange a 5" auto loader(autocannon) no. At some point the projectile is too light and to susceptible to the wind.

Vehicle stopping power:
Sniper rifles are used against light vehicles, material, and electronics but they have no use against armored targets. You just cant get such a small projectile to do any damage against heavy armor plate.


Pinning:
this is even sillier. In an open field away from battle sure perhaps a sniper rifle could pin a squad, but in the heat of battle what is a squad going to fear more. A machine gun blading away 10 rounds a second at them or a sniper rifles shooing 10 times a MINUTE. In the chaos of a fire fight it is unlikely a squad would even notice a sniper rifle firing at it.

YES, THANK YOU. Someone else gets it. If you want to make sniper rifles better, quit trying to make them good at something they shouldn't be able to do in the first place - pinning.

Eh, snipers do fine at bthe 1200m range for the most part, and we have reports of ap rounds slapping down modern tanks (which are many times more durable than canon landraiders). Replace pinning with allocation, increase overall dmg output against inf and mcs, and as was mentioned introduce AT snipers.

Exergy wrote:Range:
Can a sniper rifle outrange a 30mm chain gun(assault cannon) no Can it outrange a 5" auto loader(autocannon) no. At some point the projectile is too light and to susceptible to the wind.

Does a sniper rifle have the same max range as a 30mm chain gun or 5" autoloader (I'd say an autocannon would be closer to the 40mm Bofors machine gun, at about 250ish rounds per minute)? No. But how accurate are those weapons at or approaching their max range? The point isn't the weapon's max range, the point is how accurate the shooter is at putting a bullet on target at or approaching the horizon (which is naturally going to be the limit of any man-portable firing system).

Longest sniper rifle shot that resulted in a confirmed kill is 2470 meters, by the way. It was also repeated by the same shooter, so we're fairly sure it wasn't just a fluke:

using an Accuracy International L115A3, British Corporal Craig Harrison killed two Taliban with consecutive shots at a distance of 2.47 kilometres (8120 ft) in Helmand Province, Afghanistan last November (2009)

Exergy wrote:Vehicle stopping power:
Sniper rifles are used against light vehicles, material, and electronics but they have no use against armored targets. You just cant get such a small projectile to do any damage against heavy armor plate.

That's the point against vehicles. You don't aim for the armor plates, you aim for the vulnerable points. Tanks, even modern tanks in the US Army, are vulnerable to sniper fire, and our worst enemy is infantry. To use a modern tank as an example - let's say the same tank I drove in the Army, the M1 Abrams - you could hit a HEAT round while it was loaded in the main gun and kill the crew. You could take out the center periscope for the driver and the driver can't see where the tank is going (the commander could stick his head out of the hatch and give the driver directions, but who's going to do that under fire?)

That would count as vehicle wrecked and immobilized, respectively. And that's from sniper fire using 7.42mm ammunition, or possibly .308 (depending on the rifle). So yes, snipers can and have wrecked tanks and stopped them.

So then get rid of pinning and trade it for allocation? Sounds good, but how would that play out? 5+ roll to hit, as suggested, seems a little bit random, but then allowing all wounds from sniper rifles to be allocated by the shooting player seems a little over the top.

I think the vehicle rules as proposed are pretty decent. It should keep them fairly decent against light armor (transports and the like) and add a small chance against heavier armor. There's always a chance you may explode a round that's chambered in one of the vehicles guns, or break a link in the track, or even hit fuel storage, or kill the driver, etc... Snipers today are trained to aim for vulnerable points on current heavy armored targets, and common sense should tell you not to aim for the armor plating.

Chesh wrote:

Longest sniper rifle shot that resulted in a confirmed kill is 2470 meters, by the way. It was also repeated by the same shooter, so we're fairly sure it wasn't just a fluke:

using an Accuracy International L115A3, British Corporal Craig Harrison killed two Taliban with consecutive shots at a distance of 2.47 kilometres (8120 ft) in Helmand Province, Afghanistan last November (2009)

That's the point against vehicles. You don't aim for the armor plates, you aim for the vulnerable points. Tanks, even modern tanks in the US Army, are vulnerable to sniper fire, and our worst enemy is infantry. To use a modern tank as an example - let's say the same tank I drove in the Army, the M1 Abrams - you could hit a HEAT round while it was loaded in the main gun and kill the crew. You could take out the center periscope for the driver and the driver can't see where the tank is going (the commander could stick his head out of the hatch and give the driver directions, but who's going to do that under fire?)

That would count as vehicle wrecked and immobilized, respectively. And that's from sniper fire using 7.42mm ammunition, or possibly .308 (depending on the rifle). So yes, snipers can and have wrecked tanks and stopped them.

So then get rid of pinning and trade it for allocation? Sounds good, but how would that play out? 5+ roll to hit, as suggested, seems a little bit random, but then allowing all wounds from sniper rifles to be allocated by the shooting player seems a little over the top.

I think the vehicle rules as proposed are pretty decent. It should keep them fairly decent against light armor (transports and the like) and add a small chance against heavier armor. There's always a chance you may explode a round that's chambered in one of the vehicles guns, or break a link in the track, or even hit fuel storage, or kill the driver, etc... Snipers today are trained to aim for vulnerable points on current heavy armored targets, and common sense should tell you not to aim for the armor plating.

killing men is much easier than rendering a scope useless. For one thing men are much larger than a scope.

It is certainly possible to destroy a tank with a sniper rifle but it isnt very likely. It is entirely possible to down a fighter jet with a pistol shot, again not very likely.

Case in point, when armies of the current world want to take down tanks they use large caliber guns, rockets, or missiles when they want to down aircraft they dont use pistols, they use flak guns or SAMs. Tanks main vunerability is to infantry, but not because of their guns, sniper or otherwise but because of their grenades, democharges, and the like.

I find it very unlikely that an average or moderately above average soldier could hit the right part of the track, scope, radio, or other very vunerable spot on a tank in real battlefield conditions while the tank is moving. Given 15min to set up, without any distractions or visual obscurity, I bet a sniper could hit something squishy on a tank that isnt moving, but those are very differetn conditions.

Ld Modifiers should.apply. That's the benefit of.being Fearless. And the few guys who are stubborn would be buggered.

How about S = BS

My gaming group has already changed the rules for snipers.
Now they wound on a 3+ instead of a 4+, and if a 6 is rolled to wound the sniper may allocate which model in the target is hit.