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 already know most people view the fleshborer as the best buy but I was doing some math between the fleshborer and the spine fists and t his is what i found.

Fleshborer
against marines/equivalents
on average will hit 15 out of 30 shots due to bs3
on average 8 wounds rounded up
after saves will be 3 wounds rounded up

against less than marines
average 15 out of 30 hits again
average 10 wounds rounded up
5 wounds after saves

spine fists
against marines
average of 22 hits after twin linked
average of 11 wounds
average of 4 wounded up after saves

against less than marines
average of 22 hits after twin link
average 15 wounds after saves
8 wounds after saves rounded up

statistically speaking spine fists are better according to math? anyone have a rebuttal?

Your math is wrong. Spine fists are S 3. They only wound marines 1/3 of the time, so 22.5 hits would translate to 7.5 wounds before saves against T 4, which is exactly the same as Fleshborers.

Spinefists are better against guardsmen, eldar and tau, which is pretty good. But fleshborers are better against ork and marine bikers, plague marines and anything with T 5-7 which is also a fair range of targets.

It's generally a bit irrelevant though, because the 'gants with fleshborers and spinefists mostly serve as ablative wounds to the ones with devourers.

but against t5+ you are taking 3 wounds roughly and turning it into 1 most likely with both weapons, you are geting a very small ammount of wounds on marines or above with these buys no mater what weapon you take so i personaly think the fists for t3 is a beter investment because both are going to do piss poor vs t5

I believe the actual math-hammer in the big Tyranid tactic thread worked out that Fleshborers are about par with Spinefists against T4, slightly worse at T3 or below, better at T5 and T7 but worse against T6.

So, in perspective...

T3 and below - IG, Eldar, Tau, Sisters
T4 - Marines, CSM, Orks, Necrons, Jetbikes, Tau Suits
T5 - Plague Marines, Bikes
T6 - Most MCs
T7 - I believe this is Riptide and Wraithlord territory?

 DarkStarSabre wrote:
I believe the actual math-hammer in the big Tyranid tactic thread worked out that Fleshborers are about par with Spinefists against T4, slightly worse at T3 or below, better at T5 and T7 but worse against T6.

Correct, they are also able to glance AV 10 which Spinefists cannot.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:
I believe the actual math-hammer in the big Tyranid tactic thread worked out that Fleshborers are about par with Spinefists against T4, slightly worse at T3 or below, better at T5 and T7 but worse against T6.

Correct, they are also able to glance AV 10 which Spinefists cannot.

True, but situations in which I have run gaunts behind vehicles to get their rear arc with nothing else nearby capable of doing the job better (Warriors with S5 deathspitters, Carnifexes, Zoanthropes, Hive Guard, Trygons) can be counted on one hand. Generally if you're that close to the rear armour of a vehicle with your expendable cannon fodder then there's probably something else that can do the job better nearby.