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'm thinking ratlings may be viable in a tournament that allows forge world.

There's going to be a lot of allied IG sabres. Sniper rifles do well against t7.

Against MEQ the top targets would be TFC, TWC, and hyperoius missile systems.

If your own IG already has a lord commissar for sabres the ld6 of ratlings won't matter much.

< Taken by the void dragon >

 Hedkrakka wrote:
I haven't been able to find any post by the OP where he says he's only got 15 points left.

Anyway, IMO the problem with snipers is that their role is too narrow. Meltas and Plasmas are popular for a reason-they complement the rest of the army by helping our big guns RELIABLY (that's the magic word) deal with high armor values and good armor saves.

I agree, but there's rarely a time you can't shuffle things around to regenerate an extra 5 points for an autocannon or heavy bolter. Reliability is key.

People seem to say that wounding on 4+ is a positive. Then listing examples where the thing wounded on a 4+ will still get its armor save. Plasma (or melta) generally wound MCs on a 3+ or 4+ (or 2+ with melta) and strip the armor save. Saying 4+ is good is like saying regular guardsmen aim better than Imperial Stormtroopers.
They also seem to be enthralled by the idea of rolling 6s for bonuses. My vet sergeant with 2 plasma pistols can also allocate shots on a 6. They wound better than 4+ on anything worth allocating shots to and ignore armor.
Yeah the range is different, but that's not much of an issue in my book.

Sniper models look cool, pretty much the only reason I bothered to make any. They sit in my case but only get action once in a blue moon.

 Che-Vito wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Che-Vito wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

HawaiiMatt wrote:
Plasma can't hit a unit 24-36" away.

Yes it can. A plasma gun has a 30" range since you can move 6" and still fire at full BS, while the sniper rifles have to be stationary.

Of course the real answer is to take three plasma guns and stop talking about unrealistic units that are created for the sole purpose of "proving" that snipers don't suck.

A Plasma Gun is a Rapid Fire weapon...it Snap Shots if you move 6" and fire.

Err, no. Read the rules again.

Instead of making a pointless bump to your post count, why not provide a quote to back up what you're saying?

...you have the rules wrong. Wouldn't it have been easier to just concede that?

As for sniper rifles having the same point-for-point damage output as a Plasma Gun... why take 3 sniper rifles over 3 plasma guns? No one takes a single plasma gun on their squads.

< Taken by the void dragon >

As an Ork player who builds every list around cover, I always give the opponent the benefit of Cover as well.

Essentially when I Mathhammer I try to figure how survivable my unit is as opposed to solely how much damage it does. This discussion is similiar to Lootas behind an ADL 40" away vs. Shootas 6" away with at best a 5+ cover.

Thusly, when calculating Snipers vs. Plamsa vets, it's pretty gosh darn obvious that the Snipers have a much longer life expectancy. Therefore, the amount of damage, over the course of a game assuming the opponet is competent/awake, done by Snipers in cover, with or without cloaks, may easily surpass the one shot Plasma Vets.

Tiarna Fuilteach wrote:
Has anyone any experience using them in this edition...I'm talking on guardsmen not ratlings by the way

CCS- x2 sniper and autocannon

is what i usually use, gives orders and good for MC

 Che-Vito wrote:

Griddlelol wrote:
They also seem to be enthralled by the idea of rolling 6s for bonuses. My vet sergeant with 2 plasma pistols can also allocate shots on a 6. They wound better than 4+ on anything worth allocating shots to and ignore armor.

Why in the world would you put 30 points worth of wargear on a model with 1 wound, that will have the Fun* of Gets Hot 1/3rd of the time?

Firstly it's 20pts. Secondly, why would I not want to have 2 extra PG shots at 12" range? If I have 20pts to spare, 2 more plasma shots are a god sent. It's only 5pts more than having what equates to 4 PGs in a vet squad.

That single model makes my PG squad have the potential for 8 plasma shots when in rapid fire range. If they don't kill their target, they're probably dead anyway, so I might as well try to squeeze every bit of damage out of them as possible. That 27pt sergeant only needs 2 kill 2 marines to be more than worth his points, and if it's terminators, then we're laughing.

I guess you're the kind of person who puts 1 PG in a vet squad because they don't want the vets to die from rolling 1s.

< Taken by the void dragon >

 Che-Vito wrote:

Playing Footguard for me, meant MOAR BODIES. Beefing up a Sergeant like that seems silly for most playstyles. It might fit in well with a Mech list, or even a mechanized squad, where the Sergeant won't be pointlessly gunned down from a distance.

I assumed you knew I was talking about mech vets. There's no other way to run vets effectively anyway.

< Taken by the void dragon >

 Che-Vito wrote:

Griddlelol wrote:
They also seem to be enthralled by the idea of rolling 6s for bonuses. My vet sergeant with 2 plasma pistols can also allocate shots on a 6. They wound better than 4+ on anything worth allocating shots to and ignore armor.

Why in the world would you put 30 points worth of wargear on a model with 1 wound, that will have the Fun* of Gets Hot 1/3rd of the time?

Because plasma pistols are only 10 points each for Imperial Guard Veteran Sergeants. He's essentially paying 20 points for a 4th plasma gun when the unit is in Rapid Fire range. The "Gets Hot" is the least of his worries since anything that lives through the fusillade of fire is going to tackle the Guardsmen and vigorously hump their mouths anyway. It's not like you can give a Vet Squad sergeant anything that will make him worth paying attention to in close combat so you might as well use him to give you a little bit more firepower.

 Hedkrakka wrote:
I haven't been able to find any post by the OP where he says he's only got 15 points left.

Anyway, IMO the problem with snipers is that their role is too narrow. Meltas and Plasmas are popular for a reason-they complement the rest of the army by helping our big guns RELIABLY (that's the magic word) deal with high armor values and good armor saves.

As the correct math has shown, sniper rifles in numbers do as good at range as plasma against targets in the open. The longer range can pay off.
Against Marines in cover:
115 vet squad: 3 shots, 3+ to hit, 2+ to wound, 5+ cover = 1.11 kills plas
100 points of ratlings: 10 shots, 3+ hit, 4-5 wound with 3+ armor, 6 wounds with 5+ cover = 1.48 sniper kills vs a unit in cover.
You should avoid taking snipers on other platforms, as the cost is too high for what you get.

Plasma guns are a pretty poor choice for dealing with vehicles. Especially in an army that has so many better options.
Snipers don't have that narrow of a role. The 200 points of snipers I run drop ~3 marines a turn, usually one with precision. Alternatively, they down an AV11 vehicle a turn.
I'd only fire plasma at tanks as a last resort. I don't want to over-heat using plasma on a rhino, I know I'm going to need it eventually at point blank vs the marines.
Another good use for snipers is breaking coherency. If an opponent deploys in a maximum spread (to limit hits from pie plates), you can use a precision snipe round to kill a guy in the middle of the squad, forcing it to move to regain coherency. It's pretty effective against infantry based heavy weapons.


Saying that snipers rely on luck isn't true, they rely on volume of fire. Just like bolters, pulse rifles and massed lasguns do.
Have you ever rapid fired a blob into Thunderhammer terminators? The lasguns kill about as many as the plasmaguns do. It's not luck getting those kills, it's rolling enough dice.

And as for using 3 sniper rifles...

in my guard army i run three sniper rifles in one of the vet squads, I find its good for what its supposed to be used for, namely causing wounds to high T models, and causing pinning checks at range 36"
the occasional precision strike on a special weapon, or a rend on something is just gravy, and completely unpredictable of course.
5 pts isnt supposed to be game changing, but given the choice between 3 snipers and one plasma, I take the snipers and it usually pays off ( and no gets hot is nice)

To which I stated, use flamers.

-Matt

 Che-Vito wrote:

It'd do you well to learn both forum rules as well as general courtesy.
"Something that I effectively made up in my head" was how Rapid Fire weapons were in the last edition of the game.

No it wasn't. Last edition of the game, Rapid Fire weapons could double tap at half range after moving.

You said "Rapid fire weapons can snap fire after moving" then claim that's how they were last ed. Wrong twice.

Posting consistently unhelpful and snarky comments instead of my example above, are what makes it hard to take yourself or Peregrine seriously....despite your recent join-date and high post count.
Go figure.

We've corrected your misunderstanding of several rules and pointed out the innefectiveness of an upgrade. You're welcome.

If you choose not to take us seriously, that is to your misfortune.

But it's not likely, so we're not arguing that. The strengths of Plasma also rely on chance.

Again, all of the strengths I listed were 100% guaranteed. No chance,

I'll repeat, two of yours were 50% chances, one of them was 16% chance, and one was 50% chance or worse.

40k is a game of chance, yes. But Guard are strong when they perform reliably, within the boundaries of chance. Sniper rifles are not reliable. They are taken for that one "Oh my god, I precision shot and rended your captain's last wound! Amazing" low-chance, friendly exciting moment.

They are not reliable. They are a fun choice, for friendly games. However, this is 40k Tactics, and they are the bad tactical choice.

I remind you; I'm not being rude, though you seem to perceive it as such. I'm merely attempting to clarify a stance to someone who seems adamant against it. Such requires a more assertive approach, than broaching said stance to someone on the fence.

Cheers.

-TheCaptain

< Taken by the void dragon >

I find sniper rifles work well, when the unit is sat at the back of a board with a specific role, if your playing heavy weapon guard units, so several heavy weapon teams a Platoon command squad with a pair of snipers and a heavy weapon (usually a heavy bolter), can be quite affective along with the fact that they are a scoring unit, I commonly use them against either light armoured vehicles such as rhino's or monstrous creatures, because more often then not their is always a vehicle with a single hull point remaining, and a heavy bolter +2 sniper rifles can occasionaly bring you that relief you need, and because it is an other wise in my books an innafective squad its a nice little purchase.

I refrain from taking plasma guns on platoon command because they die to easy and giving them plasma makes them a massive target, so a pair of snipers and a heavy bolter means that the enemy regardes them as nothing more then a paper weight and they can do the job they love without usually being harased, and the odd order a turn is a bonus,

 Che-Vito wrote:

Snap Fire didn't exist in 5e, didn't you know?
I was referring to the obvious part: in 5e, moving at all with a model made them fire Rapid Fire weapons within 12".

 Che-Vito wrote:

A Plasma Gun is a Rapid Fire weapon...it Snap Shots if you move 6" and fire.

Huh...well...huh.

Those two comments seem to be referring to different things.

I'm not going to grace the rest of your post with a response; you're simply stating your opinions on tactics as fact

No, no. They're facts. I promise.

Again, all of the strengths I listed were 100% guaranteed. No chance,

Fact.

I'll repeat, two of yours were 50% chances, one of them was 16% chance, and one was 50% chance or worse.

Fact.

40k is a game of chance, yes. But Guard are strong when they perform reliably, within the boundaries of chance. Sniper rifles are not reliable.

Fact. They precision shot and wound 1/12 times, then have to force a failed armor save. They rend 1/12 times.

They are taken for that one "Oh my god, I precision shot and rended your captain's last wound! Amazing" low-chance, friendly exciting moment.

Fact.

Please don't dismiss my factual statements as opinions. It is bad for legitimate viewers of this thread hoping to glean tactical knowledge.

I understand you don't agree with what I say, and that is fine, but dismissing it is counterproductive for the tactical community of Dakkadakka.

-TheCaptain

< Taken by the void dragon >

With how many damn people Get Fearless now days i would only consider Sniper rifles for Capping HQ units of Non MEQ units - Such as Infiltrating with the following

Harker -

Vets - x3 Sniper rifles

- Heavy Bolter

Expensive , but it works fairly well for assasinating certain enemy commanders for an easy killpoint

 Che-Vito wrote:
A sniper and a plasma gun will wound T7 50% of the time.

And the sniper rifle won't get through the armor save that T7 tends to have, while a plasma gun will. Conclusion: the plasma gun is far more reliable at anti-MC, especially since most non-Apocalypse MCs are T6 at best and the plasma gun wounds them on a 3+ or even a 2+.

A sniper will reliably wound T3 on a 4+, as Plasma Gun will reliably wound it on a 2+

Wounding T3 on a 4+ isn't reliable, it's a joke.

Because they're different weapons with different strengths.

The point is that the plasma gun's strengths are all consistent and reliable, while the sniper rifle's "strengths" are based on hoping to get lucky against bad odds.

 Peregrine wrote:

The point is that the plasma gun's strengths are all consistent and reliable, while the sniper rifle's "strengths" are based on hoping to get lucky against bad odds.

Literally the whole 100% of this.

 Kasrkin229 wrote:
Expensive , but it works fairly well for assasinating certain enemy commanders for an easy killpoint

Except it doesn't. First of all you aren't getting anywhere with infiltrate that you can't hit on turn 1 with a Griffon and barrage snipe the target far more effectively. Second, your chances of sniping anything are a joke, you need 6s to get a precise shot, and you only have six shots to get one, with only three of them potentially wounding on better than a 4+, and a very low chance of getting better than AP 4 with any of them. So unless you have a one-wound no-save HQ unit sitting in a vulnerable spot your chances of getting that killpoint are effectively nonexistent.

Quite honestly I'd bring A squad of Ratlings shoved into ruins to a tourney in my local meta.

Not saying they're gamebreaking, just that there is a ton of Nid players runnin around.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
Quite honestly I'd bring A squad of Ratlings shoved into ruins to a tourney in my local meta.

Not saying they're gamebreaking, just that there is a ton of Nid players runnin around.

And that's fine. Ratlings, compared to Guardsman snipers; aren't god awful. One squad has enough snipers to average 1 precision shot and 1 rending shot per turn. They can infiltrate, and have stealth.

Poor ld, price, and toughness aside, Ratlings have their uses (as niche as they may be).

But a guardsman should never be given a sniper rifle, unless you literally have no choice.

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Che-Vito wrote:


Termies drop in near a tower filled with a IG SWS with plasma? Snipers can fix that.

No. No they can't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

easysauce wrote:

5 pts isnt supposed to be game changing, but given the choice between 3 snipers and one plasma, I take the snipers and it usually pays off ( and no gets hot is nice)

This is literally an awful decision.

Plasma can be fired at full BS on the move. Sniper can't. ( why would I want to move a unit equipped with weapons meant to out range 24" weapons while it holds onto an objective?)

Plasma gets two shots in rapidfire range. Sniper doesn't. (plasma gets 0 shots past 30", and has to move to get that 30, IG dont usually want to get closer to many armies sniper gets one, well three since one plasma cost 3x one sniper)

Plasma wounds T5 and lower on a 2+, and can instant death T3. Sniper can't. (yup, and pasmas cannot ID t4, meltas can, but sacrifice range, again trade offs)

Plasma is guaranteed to be AP2. Sniper isn't. (yup very true, but against units with armour 5, or 6, its not that big a deal, against termies its a huge deal)

Plasma can penetrate AV12. Sniper can't. (also true, but plasma wont take out special weapons sometimes)

Again. Snipers in guard are awful. You definitely can take them, and it seems like plenty of you do, but just know it's not smart.

3 snipers can kill 3 enemies, one plasma can not, 2 max if at rapid fire range, but doubling the chance of Over heat,

3 snipers will never kill themselves, plasma sure can

again... snipers to hold the objective and out range 24" guns, and plasmas to move up... its not an either or choice with guard, different weapons for different situations... pinning a unit is awesome

everything is a trade off

both plasma and sniper are awesome at the roles they were designed for,

with that in mind, I do take several units of plasma/melta, but only ONE unit with 3 snipers to sit back and out range while holding objectives

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

The point is that the plasma gun's strengths are all consistent and reliable, while the sniper rifle's "strengths" are based on hoping to get lucky against bad odds.

Literally the whole 100% of this.

While a few of us don't agree with TheCaptain or Peregrine due to their tone, this is exactly why Sniper Rifles aren't preferable to Plasma.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

While a few of us don't agree with TheCaptain or Peregrine due to their tone

Sound tactical advice is sound tactical advice. What language, tone, height relative to sea-level, color of skin, age, gender, etc, are all irrelevant.

I don't understand why this has devolved into an "either/or" argument. Why not use both? Plasma is great at killing MEQ/TEQ. Great! Snipers can precision kill leaders/special weapons and cause pinning tests. Great! TAKE BOTH.

If you want plasma, take Vets with 3x plasma for 115 pts
If you want Snipers, take Ratlings with 10x Snipers for 100 pts.

They each have DIFFERENT strengths which play to their completely different job descriptions. I would much take two of each than four of the same. That said, taking snipers on vets is usually silly (as they are usually moving), and taking them on BS3 models is certainly silly (if you are relying on those rending shots, you need more hits!).

Cheesedoodler wrote:
I don't understand why this has devolved into an "either/or" argument. Why not use both? Plasma is great at killing MEQ/TEQ. Great! Snipers can precision kill leaders/special weapons and cause pinning tests. Great! TAKE BOTH.

If you want plasma, take Vets with 3x plasma for 115 pts
If you want Snipers, take Ratlings with 10x Snipers for 100 pts.

They each have DIFFERENT strengths which play to their completely different job descriptions. I would much take two of each than four of the same.

Obviously the vets are going to move forward (probably mounted) to get into solid plasma range. Obviously the snipers are going to sit back (r infiltrate) and hang out with their 3++ save and plink away.

Mostly because on Dakka, if you disagree, you have to fight to the death.

Jokind aside; you're right about where to put snipers. If you absolutely have to have snipers, take Ratlings. If you absolutely have to use Guardsman snipers, proxy them as Ratlings.

 TheCaptain wrote:


Jokind aside; you're right about where to put snipers. If you absolutely have to have snipers, take Ratlings. If you absolutely have to use Guardsman snipers, proxy them as Ratlings.

This I think the models are horribly silly, so I converted up some normal damn humans carrying rifles and let my opponent know they count as rats. No one ever has a problem with this.

Something else that almost no one is talking about -- and something that I think NEEDS to be considered in this "argument" -- is survivability. The plasma/demolition vets are likely going to seem much scarier than my ratlings, and will probably take more fire to which they have only their 5+ armour. If the vets are mounted and their chimera explodes, thats free STR4 hits on everybody. If the ratlings DO ever got shot at (in my experience, almost never) they'll have a 3+ cover save because they infiltrated into ruins and have stealth. I can tell you for damn sure that 10 living ratlings are going to cause more wounds then 10 dead veterans.