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.

I mean, I guess if you're going to get sniper rifles, maybe, but then you're dropping 18pts on a kinda flimsy unit with very situational and unpredictable effectiveness. I don't see why the cloaks aren't 1pt at most or better yet free, for 2pts you can make those scouts into Tac Marines that also have a 2+ cover save, 3+ everywhere else which is usually the case, and better weapon options. Am I missing something?

Well, it's either that or your snipers aren't getting a 2+ save in cover. Since no one else has access to Sniper Rifles, you gotta make that choice as to whether or not the cloaks are worth it. That will depend on your play style and the types of armies you play against and those players' playstyles. In this way, Snipers with Cloaks could range from super useful, to super useless.

Camo Cloaks should be -1 to hit. Then they would be worth it at their current price.

Gwarok:

It's a way overpriced item. A scout with a camo cloak is more expensive than a Tac with the same armor save (in cover) and worse armor save (out of cover).

Sniper rifles are overpriced too. My advice is to avoid the 2 items entirely.

Scouts really aren't much less durable for the price, so I wouldn't bother even if they were just one point a piece.

I always give my sniper scouts the cloak. drop them in cover and they're pretty durable. had a heldrake come after a squad and it couldn't do anything to them. They're totally worth the points.

Rocmistro wrote:
Gwarok:

It's a way overpriced item. A scout with a camo cloak is more expensive than a Tac with the same armor save (in cover) and worse armor save (out of cover).

Sniper rifles are overpriced too. My advice is to avoid the 2 items entirely.

The scout though is better IMO.

One of the main reasons to take scouts, bubble wrapping your forces, often requires you to be out of cover. It’s not worth investing the points in chaff.

That said, one of the other reasons, backfield campers, sniper/cloaks can still work. But I agree with others that cloaks are overpriced. It’s like the points never got the memo that cover saves were no longer unmodified.

For the points I’m leaning more towards intercessors. Same save in cover, better in the open. While not quite the range, the bolt rifles are close. Fishing for mortal wounds and character targeting in nice, but so is a blanket -1 AP. Twice the wounds is also hard to turn down.

The general consensus would be that if you're using scouts for anything but area denial and board control then you're using them wrong.

If you have the points free and can't use them anywhere else then you may as well give it to the scouts. I've had a few characters plinked off by some lucky sniper shots previously (mortal wounds on 6's in addition to normal damage is quite annoying)

GW probably just made a mistake. Cover went from awesome in the last edition to one step away from useless now. GW has placed a high premium on cover this edition, making it harder to claim, cost more points to improve, and just about impossible to ignore when shooting at someone in cover.

Cloaks are too expensive, and it would be nice to see them get cheaper in Chapter Approved.

 Primark G wrote:

Rocmistro wrote:
Gwarok:

It's a way overpriced item. A scout with a camo cloak is more expensive than a Tac with the same armor save (in cover) and worse armor save (out of cover).

Sniper rifles are overpriced too. My advice is to avoid the 2 items entirely.

The scout though is better IMO.

Yes I agree. The "2 items" I said to avoid are Sniper Rifles and Camo Cloaks, not Scouts.

Sniper Rifles themselves aren't too bad if you do camping with a Heavy Bolter or ML. Usually you're deploying in the front though so most of the time only one squad would really get much use.

 Tamwulf wrote:
GW probably just made a mistake. Cover went from awesome in the last edition to one step away from useless now.

cover was useless to space marines generally speaking, now it's pretty good. I'd not say cover has gotten worse

BrianDavion wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:
GW probably just made a mistake. Cover went from awesome in the last edition to one step away from useless now.

cover was useless to space marines generally speaking, now it's pretty good. I'd not say cover has gotten worse

I’d not say it was useless to marines. There was a lot of AP1-2 and rending stuff out there. And in the context of scouts, a heavy dollop of AP4 on top of that. A 2+ cover save in previous editions was massive. Now it’s just pretty nice. But cloaks are priced like they still give you a 2++, which just isn’t the case anymore.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:
GW probably just made a mistake. Cover went from awesome in the last edition to one step away from useless now.

cover was useless to space marines generally speaking, now it's pretty good. I'd not say cover has gotten worse

Indeed. The usefulness of cover in 8th greatly benefits those with a 3+ save as opposed to an Ork with a 6+

Although I hated the blanket 4+ or better for everything in previous editions as it made AP essentially redundant.

I'd like to see a shift of as a BS modifier for cover as opposed to flat out stopping the damage. -1 to hit for being in cover would help a terminator just as equally as a guardsmen - once the shot hits, the rest is as per normal.

Congrats you just built -3 or worse untargetable eldar bye bye anything BS4+ without a way of ignoring cover or adding to their to hit. I get the idea but given stuff already has -2 to hit and people think thats busted as all hell a -3 is crazy unless your going to give out ignores cover like candy, heck even BS3+ would need sixes. In addition it also makes reapers fixed 3+ even more OP.

Ice_can wrote:
Congrats you just built -3 or worse untargetable eldar bye bye anything BS4+ without a way of ignoring cover or adding to their to hit. I get the idea but given stuff already has -2 to hit and people think thats busted as all hell a -3 is crazy unless your going to give out ignores cover like candy, heck even BS3+ would need sixes. In addition it also makes reapers fixed 3+ even more OP.

Nobody said that it would be easy.
One step would be per model terrain and cover rules, rather than per unit.
Another would be BS mods for some terrain, some with both.
So, hardened bunker, both.
Ruined stone wall, both.
Most everything else, BS.
Forest, BS.
Crater, BS.

To be fair the deployment options from scouts would make them generally better than taC marines even at the same cost. So the points on cloaks are fair. That said I generally don’t take them because the extra durability isn’t worth it.

Space marines pay too much for durability they can’t use. Why compound this problem?

1) Never get camo-cloaks or sniper rifles for your scouts. Scouts should be kept as cheap as possible and used for board control, objective camping and deep strike denial. Give the sergeant a power sword and that's it.

2) Cover simply ought to give a bonus to Toughness. +1 T for light cover and +2 T for heavy cover. Something like that.

pismakron wrote:
1) Never get camo-cloaks or sniper rifles for your scouts. Scouts should be kept as cheap as possible and used for board control, objective camping and deep strike denial. Give the sergeant a power sword and that's it.

2) Cover simply ought to give a bonus to Toughness. +1 T for light cover and +2 T for heavy cover. Something like that.

1, I disagree. they've been working out for me .

2, I totally agree. maybe have 2 types: cover & concealment. concealment -1 to hit, actual cover -1 to wound.