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.

So with the BA leak telling us all about basically every marine weapon, I think it's fair to assume all snipers are going to be similar (on a wound roll of 6 they inflict a mortal wound) and can target characters.

Is there any reason not to take them ever?

Is there some armies that don't get them?

Are tac marines outshined by scouts?
Both are troops
scouts are 11pts marines are 13pts
Negliagble difference in save (likely).

Is there any reason to ever take tacticals in 8th?

Well, I wouldn't count on all snipers getting the 6-is-mortal thing: Tau sniper drones don't, for example. I would expect Rangers and Ratlings to get it though.

That aside: Tacticals are a lot more mobile, they can get heavy weapons that are actually useful now. Also, 3+ vs 4+ save isn't quite negligible - it's actually fairly major, unless camo cloaks still do exactly what they do now.

Tactical marines are cheaper (13 per model, 15 for a scout with sniper, 18 with a camo cloak) and can grab heavy/special weapons, with splitfire on everything. You'll also need 9 sniper shots to reliably put a mortal wound on anything.

To put it simply, with the high number of wounds most characters have, you likely just won't be shooting them period. The number of snipers needed to take these 5-6 w people down (much less the behemoths like RG) doesn't make it particularly efficient. They may even have bodyguards to soak damage as well. It'd probably be easier to either try deepstriking, melee, or ignore them until you've thinned out the troops near them.

On the other hand, a free mortal wound for every 9 shots on top of your normal damage is nice. But it'll be close to what a single special or heavy weapon contribute to a tactical squad.

The place they will shine most is against demons, as ignoring invulnerable saves (plus the lack of high saves in general) plays to their strengths.

I don't think sniper scouts will be able to displace tacs for reasons mentioned above. As a Guard player, I still won't even be putting them in SWTs simply because three of them at 4+ to hit is not that impressive.

Ratlings on the other hand... a squad of 10 Ratlings could get a lot of mileage out of those mortal wounds. I'm going to have to see if there's a way to buff them with re-rolls to wound, like the current Bring It Down order.

People is gonna be dissapointed if they think that in 8th a single squad of snipers will kill the enemy warlords in 1-2 turns. Those big HQ are gonna have many wounds, saves, bodyguards, etc...

Snipers in 8th are gonna be the best way to kill those independent characters that offers those sweet sinergyes and buffs. Aphotecarys, Mekboyz, Commisars, Librarians, Taus Fireblade/Ethereals, etc...
Sargeants, Standad bearers, etc... are all IC now in 8th, so the number of targets that a Sniper will have is gonna be huge. And in a game dominated by buffs and sinergies, killing the core pieces of those combos is crucial.

jade_angel wrote:
Well, I wouldn't count on all snipers getting the 6-is-mortal thing: Tau sniper drones don't, for example. I would expect Rangers and Ratlings to get it though.

That aside: Tacticals are a lot more mobile, they can get heavy weapons that are actually useful now. Also, 3+ vs 4+ save isn't quite negligible - it's actually fairly major, unless camo cloaks still do exactly what they do now.

I assumed the camo cloak buff if it works that way.

Do we know Tau drones don't get 6 = mortal? I felt it was more like the old rending thing than a specific model thing.

On the issue of tacticals vs scouts I would've thought the other options in an SM army would have shored up the other parts tacticals do thereby making them less needed.

 Boniface wrote:

jade_angel wrote:
Well, I wouldn't count on all snipers getting the 6-is-mortal thing: Tau sniper drones don't, for example. I would expect Rangers and Ratlings to get it though.

That aside: Tacticals are a lot more mobile, they can get heavy weapons that are actually useful now. Also, 3+ vs 4+ save isn't quite negligible - it's actually fairly major, unless camo cloaks still do exactly what they do now.

I assumed the camo cloak buff if it works that way.

Do we know Tau drones don't get 6 = mortal? I felt it was more like the old rending thing than a specific model thing.

On the issue of tacticals vs scouts I would've thought the other options in an SM army would have shored up the other parts tacticals do thereby making them less needed.

We know the sniper drones don't because of the datasheet in the Faction Focus article, which see: .
Nothing about that on there, and there's no "Sniper" USR to roll it into. In fact, other than having "sniper" in the name, and the fact that their Longshot Pulse Rifles can ignore the targeting restriction, they're just Pulse Rifles with 48" range.

I suppose other parts of the SM army do cover the things Tacticals can do, but then, that's never been their schtick. They're not specialists that can do something nobody else can; they're generalists that are halfway competent at everything. One can quibble about whether or not that works - in 7e it mostly doesn't, in 8e, we'll see - but they are interesting to get more of whatever you need. Unlike Eldar, say, SM can't easily afford to fill every possible niche with specialists, they have to play to their jack-of-all-trades nature. I think Tacticals will still have a role.

That said, I will mostly agree that it seems sniper scouts are no longer garbage, and are pretty useful now.

I feel that T3 characters could be in a world of hurt from snipers (thinking Eldar Farseers, warlocks, etc). Wounding on 3's, probably poor save for the character, means it won't take a sniper unit long to take out low T, low save leaders. Will be interesting to see.

I have something like 20 Alaitoc Pathfinders that have languished in limbo for a year now.

They will be happy to bring swift vengeance to the other craftworlders that took their place. Ehehehee.

Note from the leaks that, so far, "fragile" independent characters aren't much of a thing. The tau's drone spotter has 3 wounds, with a 2+ save in cover. The default ethereal is 4 wounds with a 5+, but can take a drone escort as well, while the named ethereals are 5/6, with invulnerable saves and bodyguards. The weakest blood angel IC was 4 wounds and a 3+.

In short, I don't think most sniper units will have the power to kill even weak ICs with any reliability. It'll take either a ton of guns or quite a few turns.

I think it depends on your faction. Not doing a ton of damage is still a lot more than not being able to fire at them at all and shutting down your opponents buff is probably going to have a huge effect. The snipers can also be buffed by other characters and such. Telion comes to mind, or IC snipers like the vindicare.
CSm might be able to target ICs with mortal wounds via psychic powers. Things like that could be fairly potent IC killers, but ideally they would be supported by conventional sipers. At that point you might have a viable firebase to take out ICs

Tacticals are going to be better at pretty much everything else so should still have a spot as far as troops are concerned.

TAC marines will be even worse in 8th edition than they are in 7th edition.

They were marginally useful in that boltguns would kill other troops, and their 3+ save made them fairly sticky. But now, with save mods, and no AP on their weapon...

Their primary use I see will be as shock troops to absorb casualties for ICs and body-block first turn charges. They're better at this than scouts, so i'll probably use some TAC marines. I might take some scout snipers, too.

I could easily see:

1 squad Guillimarines. 10 models, combat squadded
1 squad scout snipers, 5 models
1 squad TAC marines. 10 models, combat squadded

As my base to get some command points. I'll have some flexibility. I can deter first turn charges to some degree. The cost would be relatively low here, and i could have some serious artillery backing up these guys.

 Boniface wrote:
Is there some armies that don't get them?

Ork snipers?

 Marmatag wrote:
TAC marines will be even worse in 8th edition than they are in 7th edition.

They were marginally useful in that boltguns would kill other troops, and their 3+ save made them fairly sticky. But now, with save mods, and no AP on their weapon...

Their primary use I see will be as shock troops to absorb casualties for ICs and body-block first turn charges. They're better at this than scouts, so i'll probably use some TAC marines. I might take some scout snipers, too.

I could easily see:

1 squad Guillimarines. 10 models, combat squadded
1 squad scout snipers, 5 models
1 squad TAC marines. 10 models, combat squadded

As my base to get some command points. I'll have some flexibility. I can deter first turn charges to some degree. The cost would be relatively low here, and i could have some serious artillery backing up these guys.

I see a lot of folks lamenting the loss of AP5 on bolters - do you really see a lot of 5+/6+ guys out of cover? I seldom see that, with the possible exception of Kabalite Warriors falling out of dead Raiders. I'm a lot more likely to see 3+ or 4+ saves.

Being able to fire my special and heavy weapons at targets that they actually work on will be an upgrade. Up to now, most of the heavy weapons were useless (fixed by core rules), and it was rare to fire at a target where I wasn't wasting either my bolters or special weapons.

Is combat squading still a thing? I have not seen any datasheet that showed any rule that allows a unit to split up into different units so far. None of the BA datasheets have it.

 Boniface wrote:

Is there any reason to ever take tacticals in 8th?

Yeah, they can take better Specials and Heavy Weapons, and have a better save.

Sniper Rifle has only S4, no AP and does only one Damage. It's not very good at killing things like. . . a squad of Tactical Marines.

Also, given that the Grav Cannon still has 4 shots, a -3 mod, and does D3 Damage per hit against 3+ or better models, it remains a great counter to Primaris Marines, Terminators, Characters etc.

If you're scared of Snipers, put your Character in or behind a Tank or wall. Crisis averted.

jade_angel wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
TAC marines will be even worse in 8th edition than they are in 7th edition.

They were marginally useful in that boltguns would kill other troops, and their 3+ save made them fairly sticky. But now, with save mods, and no AP on their weapon...

Their primary use I see will be as shock troops to absorb casualties for ICs and body-block first turn charges. They're better at this than scouts, so i'll probably use some TAC marines. I might take some scout snipers, too.

I could easily see:

1 squad Guillimarines. 10 models, combat squadded
1 squad scout snipers, 5 models
1 squad TAC marines. 10 models, combat squadded

As my base to get some command points. I'll have some flexibility. I can deter first turn charges to some degree. The cost would be relatively low here, and i could have some serious artillery backing up these guys.

I see a lot of folks lamenting the loss of AP5 on bolters - do you really see a lot of 5+/6+ guys out of cover? I seldom see that, with the possible exception of Kabalite Warriors falling out of dead Raiders. I'm a lot more likely to see 3+ or 4+ saves.

Being able to fire my special and heavy weapons at targets that they actually work on will be an upgrade. Up to now, most of the heavy weapons were useless (fixed by core rules), and it was rare to fire at a target where I wasn't wasting either my bolters or special weapons.

I mean I do, personally.

I guess the argument is... Boltguns sucked in 7th, and were made worse. Was this really called for?

Boltguns sucked in 7th, and were made worse. Was this really called for?

They are worse vs. Gaunts and Guardsmen, but boltguns are much better at killing bigger models now.

Want to kill gaunts and guardsmen? Frag Grenades/missiles will help you if youre really having trouble with it. Or punch them.

jade_angel wrote:I see a lot of folks lamenting the loss of AP5 on bolters - do you really see a lot of 5+/6+ guys out of cover? I seldom see that, with the possible exception of Kabalite Warriors falling out of dead Raiders. I'm a lot more likely to see 3+ or 4+ saves.

Marmatag wrote:I mean I do, personally.

I guess the argument is... Boltguns sucked in 7th, and were made worse. Was this really called for?

You basically didn't see 5+/6+ armour save units at all because EVERYONE had ap5 guns as standard. Yes, some armies used them, but that was either because they had no choice (DE) or the other options were overpriced (Orks, Chaos). IG were about the only ones who dipped their toe into the water and even then many people just took vets with carapace instead. Even then, we're looking trash tier armies who have troops choices that evaporate if you look at them sideways. Is that why they were trash tier? Possibly, though with the proper points, almost anything can be balanced.

Yes, bolters were pretty trash before, but really, it's not like bolters have been singled out, every ap5/6 weapon recieved a "nerf" (though since you never saw anything worse than a 4+, is it really a nerf?) and you can still bring things down through volume of fire the same way you made termies go away while also taking the occasional wound of something you couldn't even hurt before. Overall, the bolter is still in roughly the same place as before, maybe a bit better since wounding T6/7 on 5's is a decent enough trade-off for losing the ability to ignore 5+ armour while units that were traditionally useless against small arms fire still get a save (even if a poor one), meaning they're not quite as useless as they were previously. I think it's a good change, though we'll have to wait and see after a few games have been played before we make final judgement.

My italian is google translate levels of bad, and the pages we have are awful, but unless I really misunderstood something deathmarks also have mortal wounds on 6's, and they are rapid fire 1 instead of having a 48" range. It makes them attractive, but they are only strength 4 and have no AP, so outside of character assassinations (which they excel at because of deep strike), they are not as good as other similarly priced necron units like immortals, or warriors blobs.

As for the scouts vs tacticals conversation, it hasn't really changed since 7th, when you took tacticals in 7th because it gave you free stuff, except now you don't get free stuff. I suppose you could argue tac squads get better wargear options with things like grav cannons and lascannons and that's matters now as opposed to before because you can split fire.

I wonder if Wolf Scouts will get something that actually makes them Elite. Honestly I'd be satisfied with a name change - Fenrisian Scouts, Winter Scouts, just slowly cut the word wolf out of the codex.

Mandatory? probably not.

probably not a bad idea to diversify though.

as others said it will probably be useful at best for lower T characters like Tau and guard (hope they dont take out that commissar)

asides from that it may be better to blow away the chaff with superior fire power so list building will be interesting.

6 Scout Snipers will do a mortal wound to a Character every other turn. Um, yay? And the way cover works now those Tacs are pretty much just as tough to dig out of cover.

Given the points spread of 8th, with all the HW and Vehicles going up in price, we should see more normal infantry. Tac Marines with Bolters are fine at killing enemy infantry on the advance. Plus they can occasionally chip in a wound against bigger targets. Also, most models takes the objective is a thing, so warm bodies can win games.

In general, I think Tac Marines are significantly more useful in 8th. It's not all about the bolter vs Sniper rifle.

 Fenris-77 wrote:
6 Scout Snipers will do a mortal wound to a Character every other turn. Um, yay? And the way cover works now those Tacs are pretty much just as tough to dig out of cover.

Given the points spread of 8th, with all the HW and Vehicles going up in price, we should see more normal infantry. Tac Marines with Bolters are fine at killing enemy infantry on the advance. Plus they can occasionally chip in a wound against bigger targets. Also, most models takes the objective is a thing, so warm bodies can win games.

In general, I think Tac Marines are significantly more useful in 8th. It's not all about the bolter vs Sniper rifle.

agreed, the problem with tac marines was the pre-ponderance of hard targets, and insufficant soft targets. looking at the point costing, 8th edition is going to be "age of infantry" so you might see demi-companies with 1 or 2 predators backing them up (which I think is how GW has always WANTED the force mix to be)

Yup, I agree., both about previous editions and what GW has always 'wanted'.
I think we'll see a lot of infantry and a lot of guys opting for elite infantry (16-20pt range like Berserkers and Death Company) over midrange armour, at least in some cases.There seems to be a lot of stuff like Dreads and Preds that's now something like 200pts a pop, which is about the same as reasonably equipped elite infantry squad.

Anyway, most of the leaks seem to index more infantry taking the table, which I think is good for the game, and good for the basic Tac squad.

 Fenris-77 wrote:
Yup, I agree., both about previous editions and what GW has always 'wanted'.
I think we'll see a lot of infantry and a lot of guys opting for elite infantry (16-20pt range like Berserkers and Death Company) over midrange armour, at least in some cases.There seems to be a lot of stuff like Dreads and Preds that's now something like 200pts a pop, which is about the same as reasonably equipped elite infantry squad.

Anyway, most of the leaks seem to index more infantry taking the table, which I think is good for the game, and good for the basic Tac squad.

yeah, I was finishing building some mk IV armor last night and actually found myself bothering to give the squads a heavy bolter. something 6th and 7th I would have seen as an OBVIOUS waste. in 8th edition though from everything we've seen, I think it might not be a bad choice.

It's possible Camo cloaks now shorten the range of any weapon shooting at them SW:A style.

In response to the OP...yes snipers are mandatory in all SM lists against all opponents! And no; there is literally no possible situation that can ever occur in New hammer where in a Tac Marine squad could ever out-perform a Scout squad! Period. No more discussion needed.

Now on to my question...hyperbole - mandatory for all? Death to evidence-based argument?

 Marmatag wrote:
TAC marines will be even worse in 8th edition than they are in 7th edition.

They were marginally useful in that boltguns would kill other troops, and their 3+ save made them fairly sticky. But now, with save mods, and no AP on their weapon...

Their primary use I see will be as shock troops to absorb casualties for ICs and body-block first turn charges. They're better at this than scouts, so i'll probably use some TAC marines. I might take some scout snipers, too.

I could easily see:

1 squad Guillimarines. 10 models, combat squadded
1 squad scout snipers, 5 models
1 squad TAC marines. 10 models, combat squadded

As my base to get some command points. I'll have some flexibility. I can deter first turn charges to some degree. The cost would be relatively low here, and i could have some serious artillery backing up these guys.

Agreed. This is even compounded by the leaks indicate that Rhino and Razorbacks are at 70pts mark before taking any weapons while Droppod are100pts mark. Foot Power Armor Marines desperately need transports to be playable. Now GW increased the points of their transport at least by a double, that means TAC Marines will be even more severely outnumbered by other Factions.

Neophyte2012 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
TAC marines will be even worse in 8th edition than they are in 7th edition.

They were marginally useful in that boltguns would kill other troops, and their 3+ save made them fairly sticky. But now, with save mods, and no AP on their weapon...

Their primary use I see will be as shock troops to absorb casualties for ICs and body-block first turn charges. They're better at this than scouts, so i'll probably use some TAC marines. I might take some scout snipers, too.

I could easily see:

1 squad Guillimarines. 10 models, combat squadded
1 squad scout snipers, 5 models
1 squad TAC marines. 10 models, combat squadded

As my base to get some command points. I'll have some flexibility. I can deter first turn charges to some degree. The cost would be relatively low here, and i could have some serious artillery backing up these guys.

Agreed. This is even compounded by the leaks indicate that Rhino and Razorbacks are at 70pts mark before taking any weapons while Droppod are100pts mark. Foot Power Armor Marines desperately need transports to be playable. Now GW increased the points of their transport at least by a double, that means TAC Marines will be even more severely outnumbered by other Factions.

I imagine we'll see people being creative with transports. one thing occured to me today about drop pods, they're most commonly used to deliver "stern guard sucide melta" before you needed 1 pod per squad of 5. now you'll be able to double up. so depending on how you deploy you MAY be able to get drop pods for that at a discount, by needing less of them.