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, to pass on the vitriol and look at the math, there is one thing that people do tend to slightly overlook too much is rending.

I've had good enough success against terminators with just lascannons and meltaguns, for example. Against that target type, compare two PCSs with lascannons against two PCSs with sniper rifles for the same cost.

Here, the lascannons put down .56 terminators a turn, while the snipers do .66, largely thanks to that chance of getting in a rending shot. The same comparison against a TMC sees .84 against 1.1. And that's not counting things like the snipers making better use of BiD (more likely to hit with 2 lascannons on the first roll than hitting with all 8 sniper rifles), and the occasional failed pinning check and precise shot.

They're not the best weapon in the codex for these heavier targets, but they're still in the top tier along with meltaguns and lascannons and the like. And that's just at BS3, with ratlings, those numbers get even better, and 8 sniper rifles aren't exactly going to be bad against hordes either.

The reason why I scarcely take them isn't because they are objectively bad, as some think. The reason I don't take them is because whatever I could be doing with sniper rifles, I could be doing with lascannons instead, and lascannons, unlike sniper rifles, are good against vehicles.

My gaming store was pretty quick to figure out that the loss of stun-locking made vehicles better than hull points made them worse, and that mech as a whole is stronger than foot over the transition into 6th. I basically can't afford to spend points on weapon upgrades that can't handle AV13+.

Put another way, the sniper rifle isn't versatile enough to warrant spending mass points on them.

easysauce wrote:


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

I believe there are some problems with your math. First, reliability isn't about "can" kill, it's about "will" kill.

Example: with BS4, vs. MEQ in the open:
3 Sniper rifles (up to 36") 2 hits, 1 wound, 0.17 rending wounds, 0.28 non-rending unsaved wounds, 0.45 total unsaved wounds
Plasma gun (less than 12") 1.33 hits, 1.11 wounds, 1.11 unsaved wounds;
Plasma gun (12-24") 1 hit, 0.83 wounds, 0.83 unsaved wounds.
Plasma gun (24-36") nothing. (movement helps shift this to 30-36" if it's favorable to leave current position, but I don't include it in my comparison)

The standard deviations being the same, the Plasma gun kills more as long as it's in range. Except that the standard deviation for the unsaved wounds caused by the sniper rifle is higher due wounds coming from 6's which don't allow saves. More standard deviation=less reliability, as you're more likely to stray farther from the average value. And that's without considering that special weapons are usually taken either singly on a PIS or in groups of 3-4 on Vets, SWS or Command Squads of either Variety, so three Snipers aren't even a real alternative to a single Plasma.

About plasma gunners killing themselves... The IG couldn't care less about losing a few guys if they have the ability to take enemies down with them. Keeping Vets alive is only important when holding an objective with no backup available.

Anyway, I hate the Ratlings' T2. Maybe I've just been unlucky, but no cover save seems to be able to cope with the sheer amount of wounds they suffer, after which they just run out of cover to get shot to pieces even if they regroup. They do have good sniper firepower, sure, but they just don't seem to like to stick around, especially since they like to Infiltrate or Outflank far away from Ld boosts.

wow.. how it is suddenly either or ...

mathhammer is all well and good, but utility has its place as well,

the .34 chance of wounding the rapid firing shooter who will fail a save 2/3 times when rapid firing evens things out and Denys future shots
or that the meq wont be able to shoot back at the snipers till its in range
or that pinning a unit is quite useful,
or that precision shooting a special is quite useful,
or that most of the armies guard face can pwn them in CC so you usually want to stay back
or that not all armies are marines, on lightly armored targets the sniper rifle will do much better
or that you may want to hold an objective in your zone that never comes withing 24" of the enemy, rendering the plasma useless,



but hey, dont like em, dont take em,

they work well when used well,
i field several units of plasmas, and several with meltas, and a lone sniper unit holding back out of 24" range, works well for me, my sniper models have been put to good use for 14 years of 40k now

easysauce wrote:
wow.. how it is suddenly either or ...

mathhammer is all well and good, but utility has its place as well,

the .34 chance of wounding the rapid firing shooter who will fail a save 2/3 times when rapid firing evens things out and Denys future shots 1/18 chance to wound yourself? Not exactly something to fear.
or that the meq wont be able to shoot back at the snipers till its in range Difference being Snipers are useless on the move. You get 1, maybe 2 turns of free shooting, but if you ever have to relocate; those turns are all but useless shooting.
or that pinning a unit is quite useful, and remarkably unreliable
or that precision shooting a special is quite useful, "quite useful" seems like a stretch, given the tabletop capability of the sniper.
or that most of the armies guard face can pwn them in CC so you usually want to stay back One extra turn of sniper shooting isn't going to save you from a dedicated foot-unit. Especially considering, if your opponent knows how to use them, they won't be simply letting you pelt them with longlas. They'll either close that gap too fast for the snipers to do anything, or use LOS to prevent themself from taking shots. Against CC units used well, you're lucky to get two shooting phases. I'd rather have plasma, ensuring that something actually happens in those 2 shooting phases.
or that not all armies are marines, on lightly armored targets the sniper rifle will do much better No. No it won't.
or that you may want to hold an objective in your zone that never comes withing 24" of the enemy, rendering the plasma useless If your opponent never comes within 24" of your home objective, they are either terrible, or you have the fastest troops on the tabletop. No one gets so tied up in their own tablehalf that they can't take a run at your home objective. Then there's deepstrikers, outflankers, bikes. More reason I'd rather have plasma on my home objective.

 TheCaptain wrote:

 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.

Some people are more likely to take sound tactical advice when it is coming from a more level-headed source.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

Some people are more likely to take sound tactical advice when it is coming from a more level-headed source.

Choosing to ignore good advice for the sake of niceness is remarkably silly. I pity said hypothetical person.

despite you not worrying about it, guards men do die to plasma over heats, sometimes while using their shots on 8 pt orks, or 5 pt guard, or whatever else isnt a space marine.

the probability of rolling a 1 is the same as rolling a 6, if dice always followed statistics, it wouldnt be random now would it?

a six to hit = bonus, a 6 to wound = bonus for snipers, and you get 3 of those chances for 15pts, and yes, against models that are not 3+ saves, the ap of plasma becomes less useful, and the lack of ap on non rending snipers becomes less hindering. if a unit gets pinned, you also get an extra turn, to shoot at it, in addition to the extra turn from the range.

jebus, dont act like I am saying "dont take plenty of plasma guns" I am saying when you already have a bunch there is utility from taking some snipers, not better or worse, just better in some ways, and worse in others.

besides, for MEQ battle cannons/basilisks are the ubersauce anyway, I save the plasma for termie's /2+ models, and use the snipes on targets they are more suited for.

You know what snipes better than a sniper rifle? A Griffon. Wounds on a 2+, precise shot on a 4+ (and often on a 3+ or even a 2+), usually inflicts enough wounds to get one through the key model's save.

I don't see why people are comparing sniper rifles against plasma guns vs. MEq. You might as well be comparing the autocannon vs. the lascannon against AV13.

Just because a weapon isn't as good as another weapon in the one role that the second weapon is designed to be good at doesn't make the first weapon bad, it just means that it's designed to fill a different role.

And the same confusion here applies to the griffon. Griffons are never going to be good against terminators or monstrous creatures, which is precisely what sniper rifles are designed to be good at. Furthermore, I even question if the griffon is the best anti-light infantry. For roughly the same price as a griffon, you get 8 ratlings, and I'd think that 8 BS4 shots are going to land a hell of a lot more hits per turn against properly displaced infantry than a single large blast.

 Ailaros wrote:
Griffons are never going to be good against terminators or monstrous creatures

Sniper rifles might be "better" against MCs (though still bad), but not against terminators. Wounding on a 4+ instead of a 2+ offsets the occasional rending shot, and the snipers probably aren't getting as many hits as a Griffon.

For roughly the same price as a griffon, you get 8 ratlings, and I'd think that 8 BS4 shots are going to land a hell of a lot more hits per turn against properly displaced infantry than a single large blast.

Hardly. Wounding on a 4+ kills snipers as general wound producers, 8 BS 4 shots gives you 2.666 wounds, 0.86 of that AP 1. Because the Griffon wounds on a 2+ it only has to get about 3.2 models under the blast to match the snipers, and has a much better chance of getting a precise shot.

IG noob weighing in here on the original topic. (The plasma/sniper debate I will leave to those more qualified than I!)

I'm wondering if a group of ratlings with an attached allied IC may synergise well & make a more valid choice, say an attached rune priest casting prescience and equipped with jaws? It would make a mean anti MC unit with decent leadership and ATSKNF. Would the majority toughness thing cock that up and make the RP far too squishy, even in cover?
A 10 man ratling squad rerolling hits with 4+ to wound & rend/precision shenanigans sounds pretty good in theory.
(I can't even remember if ICs can join ratling squads, I'm at work & codex is at home.)

A big thing people seem to be harping about is how the sniper rifle can outrange the plasma gun (and other weapons) with its 36" range. That's true, but I've found that it really isn't that great. I use Eldar Pathfinders in all my Eldar lists, so I have a decent bit of experience at using snipers, and one of the things I dislike the most about them is their range. (And yes I know we're talking about guard, but deploying and using snipers is deploying and using snipers)

I say this, because Pretty much ALL vehicle and heavy weapons will outrange sniper rifles, and anyone with a weapon with less range will be doing their absolute best to close that gap as quickly as possible. Snipers are in an odd limbo between truly long ranged weapons (Lascannons, etc) and short ranged weapons (lasguns, meltas, plasma, etc) They will either be taken out by something with superior range, or something that closes the gap and brings superior firepower up close. In reality, their effective kill zone is 24-36" because once bad guys get closer its time to think about moving or making a last stand.

Also, the 36" range is usually not enough to take shots from turn one on most things (this is not an absolute, but in my experience after deployment my snipers are only within 36" of a select few units) so you have maybe from turn 2 to turn 4 to actually get effective shots with snipers.

Last nail in the coffin, is that if your opponent has anyone in transports, snipers are useless until the transports are popped, and (depending on dice roles etc) you can expect transports to get their payload at least somewhat closer to your snipers (hence doing their job of transporting), thus bringing back the recurring issue of snipers being pushed out of their hiding spots.

TL;DR - 36" range really isn't that great... (unfortunately )

Just my two cents, but I'm not expert.

 Daedricbob wrote:
IG noob weighing in here on the original topic. (The plasma/sniper debate I will leave to those more qualified than I!)

I'm wondering if a group of ratlings with an attached allied IC may synergise well & make a more valid choice, say an attached rune priest casting prescience and equipped with jaws? It would make a mean anti MC unit with decent leadership and ATSKNF. Would the majority toughness thing cock that up and make the RP far too squishy, even in cover?
A 10 man ratling squad rerolling hits with 4+ to wound & rend/precision shenanigans sounds pretty good in theory.
(I can't even remember if ICs can join ratling squads, I'm at work & codex is at home.)

The good thing about ratlings is they have useful output, and are cheap, making them not really worth dealing with. Put them out on a flank, with decent fire lines to 1 or 2 objectives. Don't put anything else near them. Your opponent can ignore them and you get some decent firepower most/all game long, or he can go out of his way to deal with them. Either way, it is good for you. If you opponent has to send more than 100 points out of the way to deal with the ratlings, you come out ahead. If they ratlings are ignored and does some useful damage, you come out ahead.
The problem with adding an IC to them is they become worth killing. Suddenly you've doubled, or more than doubled their cost, while not doubling their firepower. You've also lost the ability to infiltrate out on a flank when you want to attach an IC (unless the IC also has infiltrate).
Stick the IC in the blob with the plasma guns. You will get a lot better mileage out of that.

-Matt


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
You know what snipes better than a sniper rifle? A Griffon. Wounds on a 2+, precise shot on a 4+ (and often on a 3+ or even a 2+), usually inflicts enough wounds to get one through the key model's save.

Yeah, it's a good thing that snipers are a heavy support choice... It's like comparing apples to dragons.
And besides me, who runs griffons?
Griffon doesn't precise shot at all. It just forces wound allocation from the center of the template, which lands on target 5/9ths of the time (1/3rd with re-roll). The problem being is that the guy that the griffon might want to snipe isn't in the biggest cluster.

-Matt

My personal opinion is that sniper rifles are far too unpredictable and usually underwhelming. Ratlings sound good until something farts in their direction and they run screaming! I would rather take a weapon with a wider range of use like a plasma gun, heck I'd rather have grenade launchers over sniper rifles. I think the only way I would ever take ratlings again is to take a squad of three to hide behind a quad gun as a dedicated team to man it. Even then that would be only if I had nowhere else to spend 30 points.

 TheLionOfTheForest wrote:
My personal opinion is that sniper rifles are far too unpredictable and usually underwhelming. Ratlings sound good until something farts in their direction and they run screaming! I would rather take a weapon with a wider range of use like a plasma gun, heck I'd rather have grenade launchers over sniper rifles. I think the only way I would ever take ratlings again is to take a squad of three to hide behind a quad gun as a dedicated team to man it. Even then that would be only if I had nowhere else to spend 30 points.

T2 and stealth is as survivable as T3 vs S3 shoot, and against any other strength, the T2 with stealth is more survivable. If you have 4+ cover, instead of 5+ cover, the ratlings are more survivable against all weapon strengths.
If you run a unit of 10, it isn't easy getting the 3 kills you need to force the break test on a unit of 10 ratlings, especially if you deploy out on a flank away from objectives.
On average, it takes 10 tactical marines, with a heavy bolter to kill 3 ratlings at range. I'm all for my opponent sending a whole tactical squad to deal with a cheap elite unit.

The key to ratlings is placement.
You want to be in cover.
You cannot be on the way to something else worth killing/taking.

If you can place (Infiltrate) ratlings where you are 24-36" from objectives, but not on the way to the objective, they will be worth it. You have to make your opponent choose between moving toward an objective, or going after the ratlings.
Yes, a flamer will make short work of them. But 24-36" away from the rest of my infantry is exactly where I want my opponent to be putting his templates.

If you're placing your ratlings near your other infantry, you're opponent can kill them on the way in, meaning you aren't making use of the infiltrate properly.

-Matt

 TheCaptain wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

Some people are more likely to take sound tactical advice when it is coming from a more level-headed source.

Choosing to ignore good advice for the sake of niceness is remarkably silly. I pity said hypothetical person.

Perhaps, but they'll learn in the end I'm sure. Then you can say you told them so.

I've been running three snipers a regimental standard and a Master of ordnance to some success with camo cloaks

Tiarna Fuilteach wrote:
I've been running three snipers a regimental standard and a Master of ordnance to some success with camo cloaks

Why? Snipers can't do much (if anything at all) against the kinds of units you want to use the MoO on, so you're just wasting 15 points. Buy a LC instead.

It always scatters anyway so I just plop it on something akin to a monstrous creature or character as the snipers are built for them

Tiarna Fuilteach wrote:
It always scatters anyway so I just plop it on something akin to a monstrous creature or character as the snipers are built for them

What scatters?

Also, Snipers are awfully ineffective at killing characters and MC's. A single lascannon would be better. More consistent wounds, no armor save, and can hurt tanks.