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.

This is Pure Gold Mellon! It's really very useful. It's great to see exactly what each weapon brings to the table!

I've also realized I've never bothered much with model placement in squads in my other armies, and I only now recognize what it can do and how important it's going to be for a mid-size foot army like I'm building. I'm very impressed, this will change the way I play.

If It's okay with you, I'll quote your posts in the other nid thread. Thanks for taking the time to work this all out!

Wow, that's awesome! Thank you for the praise, you really made my day. And feel free to quote me as much as you like.

I am planning to make a dakka article of the stuff that is generally about placing blasts and unit coherency. I put a beta version of it on the tactics forum for feedback. Maybe reference people to that thread to read it in a slightly more structured way?

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/277369.page

Cheers!

They were good with the 4th ed codex, but now that without number is gone, they are crap unless you just want themto be a wall for your tyrant or lictor or whatever.

Yeah seeing as the math for spinefists versus fleshborers is so painfully obvious, it puts into question how GW decides on their point costs. Especially because spinefist models come with fleshborers on the sprue, meaning that GW will sell no more models with the pricing change, only annoy players.

As for the weapon maths, bravo! I love maths too, though I did skip to your conclusions. As an aside, beyond the advantages/disadvantages of a VC/DS/Prime in shooting, there is the wound allocation advantages. Thus, even if you dont care for the shooting bonus, the weapon still has use as a different model.

I always thought the fleshborer vs. spinefists in the 4th edition codex was a perfect example of a well thought-out codex; while the fists where cheaper, meaning you could pack more bodies in, the fleshborers had STR 4 with rerolling wounds. Both options where valid.

Personally, since I face orks mostly, I modelled all my gaunts with fleshborers, making them an actual threat. And now, let's just say I'm glad I did. Even without mathhammer, it's painfully obvious at first glance that you pay for a downgrade when you take spinefists. The whole codex screams "rushed" to me, and that's just one of the more obvious examples. This is an issue that should have been noticed and fixed within 2-3 test games, and it's truly shameful that it made its way all the way to the printed codex.