kyussinchains wrote:
to clarify I think sniper should be a ranged attack ability only it should not apply in engagements either to firefight OR close combat rolls
Agreed.
kyussinchains wrote:
it may be viable in engagements, but just adds fiddliness, plus it opens the door for further fiddliness in the form of infantry CC snipers, it also doesn't abstract well IMO
Very much agreed. It's just getting more and more complex and fiddly the deeper we go and frankly while the RAW are not the best, they're going to be better left alone in the long run. In this case we're actually better adding a new rule/ability from scratch I think instead of tinkering with an established, albeit imperfect, existing rule. List designers and ACs can then choose to adopt as they wish (read: SG "fixing" Banshees).
kyussinchains wrote:
snipers are not best employed against armoured vehicles and their ilk.
Here's where we disagree. Sniper has nothing to do with AT vs AP vs MV. It should be applied on the unit as a whole, indicating that any shooting the unit has can use sniper
OR on an individual weapon (which while not in the original rules is defacto how it gets applied) which then states that shooting with that weapon can chose to use the sniper ability. While AFAIK, there's no AT snipers in EA lists at this time, there's nothing preventing it in the future. In fact the EUK tank destroyers have AT sniper I believe so that's a case where it logically makes sense. In a nutshell, sniper is how your weapon can be used, not what it can effect.
kyussinchains wrote:
If you want to represent a sniper in engagements, first strike represents the sniper scoring a surprise headshot, if you want some kind of melee attack boost, infiltrate is great at representing someone sneaking up and assassinating a target
YES
_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!
-
I HAVE NO POINT-
Penal Legion-Fan list-
Help me make Whitescars not suck!