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.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
What do you cost the spears weapon at? It's basically a plasma pistol that cant kill the user combined with a master crafted power sword that has +2 str and an additional -1 AP - those 2 peices of gear are 17 points and the spear is better and worse in some regards. They also get a 3+ save +1 attack and 4++ to shooting compared to a windrider that costs 23 points. 23+17 is 40 - and thats not even calculating their increased durability. They would still be great and effective at 40 points. At 31 it's criminal to play them - downright criminal.

Let's break down the hyperbole here a bit. It's a Plasma Pistol with a 6" Range and 1 to 2 less strength so giving it strictly the same cost as a plasma pistol is disingenuous. Additionally it is only a +2 S Power Sword on a round on combat the spears charged, otherwise it its a S3 weapon with a still reputable AP and damage profile. Trying to draw cost parallels between two similar pieces of equipment doesn't work because it ignores the context of the unit. I think the spear does deserve a discounted price from the Plasma Pistol/Power Weapon Setup because it is more situational in its application. If Spears were costed at 33-34 ppm I'd be OK (bumping the cost of the lance from 8 to 10 or 11 ppm would be fair). At 40 they're too fragile and too limited in their scope to be worth taking.

Nothing about what I said qualifies as hyperbole. I picked the 2 closest weapons to the starlances abilities I could think of and combined their cost and admitted that they werent a perfect example - the starlance actually has better close combat stats than a MCpower sword and a little bit worse shooting stats...BUT it can't kill the user and can advance and shoot. Using their points as a proxy puts the unit at 40 points without even accounting for the +1 save +1 attack and 4++ save to shooting (which you claim makes them too fragile) FYI 4++ saves on models with 2 wounds aren't fragile -esp when they have a 3+ save to protect from small arms. They are an exceptionally tough unit even at 40 points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:
That's the crux of the argument really...the lances are very strong in exceptionally limited situations. 6" shooting range and powered up on the turn of the charge?

As far as durability - if you can't kill 7 wounds of Space Marine toughness, there's a whole other issue. Now, someone spamming them with large squads all over the board? Perhaps a bigger issue.

I've play against them 5 times now. What do you mean by situational? Do you mean that they will always be in range to shoot turn 1 even without psychic support and with psychic support can probably engage any unit in your army? That's not situational. Here's an example of something that is situational - aggressors getting to shoot twice if they didn't move with 18 inch range weapons - that is situational.

If you hyperbole your hyperbole, is that hyperbole^2?

If you can point out what lines I posted were exaggerated or not to be taken seriously - I will gladly clarify.

btw 0^2 is still 0.

 Xenomancers wrote:



Nothing about what I said qualifies as hyperbole. I picked the 2 closest weapons to the starlances abilities I could think of and combined their cost and admitted that they werent a perfect example - the starlance actually has better close combat stats than a MCpower sword and a little bit worse shooting stats...BUT it can't kill the user and can advance and shoot. Using their points as a proxy puts the unit at 40 points without even accounting for the +1 save +1 attack and 4++ save to shooting (which you claim makes them too fragile) FYI 4++ saves on models with 2 wounds aren't fragile -esp when they have a 3+ save to protect from small arms. They are an exceptionally tough unit even at 40 points.

First if we're pointing out hyperbole - the phrase 'downright criminal to play them' is clearly hyperbole. Also as you state you chose the closest weapons - not the weapons - so you cannot use those valuations without editing for variance. A plasma pistol with 1 or 2 less strength and 6" less range is clearly not worth the same as a plasma pistol. Nor would a master crafted power sword be worth the same if it only functioned in the turn you charge. The weapon gets a discount as a result of those 2 factors. Until you acknowledge that you're working from a flawed basis (applying a strict point conversion method to an inexact match) no further conversation can be had. You've established a set PPM you'd like to see Spears at and you won't step back to understand you're using an incorrect method to account for the cost of the unit. The unit is if not appropriately costed very close based on the fact that it is a high impact unit that has to be used well to excel. It functions like most other Eldar units in that it occupies a niche and is good there and is pointed to account for the lack of other options that accomplish the same goal in the book.

Way to miss the point...

ITT: Shining Spears are finally worth taking. An update for anyone just joining the conversation.

 Xenomancers wrote:
What do you cost the spears weapon at? It's basically a plasma pistol that cant kill the user combined with a master crafted power sword that has +2 str and an additional -1 AP - those 2 peices of gear are 17 points and the spear is better and worse in some regards. They also get a 3+ save +1 attack and 4++ to shooting compared to a windrider that costs 23 points. 23+17 is 40 - and thats not even calculating their increased durability. They would still be great and effective at 40 points. At 31 it's criminal to play them - downright criminal.[/size]

But it's not exactly a plasma pistol is it? So it's cheaper, S7 is an arguably more important breakpoint since it is more effective against vehicles and monstrous creatures than S6, it's also half the range, which probably factors in slightly. The not-quite master-crafted power sword, that only get's +2 S when it charges, so again, not quite as good, so it's not an apples to apples comparison. I mean it really starts to get into some nebulous territory, they clearly don't have all the same advantages, so they should be priced differently, the price of the bike itself is priced differently because it assumes the presence of a T3 rider, but it has the fly keyword, so how much does that cost, but it's T4 vs T5 which means that it's in a sweet spot to be wounded on a 3+ by a large percentage of the anti-horde weaponry out there, we could spend all kinds of time going down this pretty subjective rabbit hole. I think I fall in the category of it being a bit too close to call conclusively.

I think the point has already been hit upon in that SM/CSM bikers getting a point reduction would probably bring them more closely in line with Shining Spears. The point being that the solution isn't always to up the price on something, if the comparable unit is not being fielded (as in the case of SM/CSM bikers), then increasing the cost of Shining Spears isn't going to get more bikers on the table, but decreasing the cost might.

 Xenomancers wrote:
There is no sense to their point increases and decreases. They seem almost completely random.

Seem being the operative word here. Our insight into the design and balancing process is obviously limited, but we can assume that some combination of internal testing, sales, event play, and community feedback comprise the metrics used to make such decisions. Saying definitively how those factors are weighted in such an assessment is masturbatory conjecture at best.

Hoodwink wrote:
ITT: Shining Spears are finally worth taking. An update for anyone just joining the conversation.

Just to add to this:

"Shining Spears are finally worth taking....so they must need a points increase!"

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:



Nothing about what I said qualifies as hyperbole. I picked the 2 closest weapons to the starlances abilities I could think of and combined their cost and admitted that they werent a perfect example - the starlance actually has better close combat stats than a MCpower sword and a little bit worse shooting stats...BUT it can't kill the user and can advance and shoot. Using their points as a proxy puts the unit at 40 points without even accounting for the +1 save +1 attack and 4++ save to shooting (which you claim makes them too fragile) FYI 4++ saves on models with 2 wounds aren't fragile -esp when they have a 3+ save to protect from small arms. They are an exceptionally tough unit even at 40 points.

First if we're pointing out hyperbole - the phrase 'downright criminal to play them' is clearly hyperbole. Also as you state you chose the closest weapons - not the weapons - so you cannot use those valuations without editing for variance. A plasma pistol with 1 or 2 less strength and 6" less range is clearly not worth the same as a plasma pistol. Nor would a master crafted power sword be worth the same if it only functioned in the turn you charge. The weapon gets a discount as a result of those 2 factors. Until you acknowledge that you're working from a flawed basis (applying a strict point conversion method to an inexact match) no further conversation can be had. You've established a set PPM you'd like to see Spears at and you won't step back to understand you're using an incorrect method to account for the cost of the unit. The unit is if not appropriately costed very close based on the fact that it is a high impact unit that has to be used well to excel. It functions like most other Eldar units in that it occupies a niche and is good there and is pointed to account for the lack of other options that accomplish the same goal in the book.

The niche they fill right now is - killing too much for too little and being to hard to kill in return. My assessment of weapon costing is correct. You are taking away too much value from the lance weapon. It's still ap -4 d2 in proceding rounds of close/combat (it just loses the str bonus) which is already an insanely powerful profile for a melle weapon (not that it matters - they kill whatever unit they charge anyways). Plus it's shooting profile is equal to a plasma pistol in value. You can advance and shoot it with no pentalty so it's range is effectively the same (they auto advance 6 inches). It has better ap AND it does 2 flat damage without risking killing it's self. Competitively it's better than a plasma pistol - because killing yourself is basically always bad. So unless your argument is that you should get free stats on units - you have basically lost this argument.

Cool - so per usual you aren't interested in discourse or anything remotely similar. Lesson learned, this is the 2nd or 3rd thread where I've seen that you're effectively interested in stating your opinion and then that being the end of the conversation. Thank goodness you have no influence on the actual state of the game.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
Cool - so per usual you aren't interested in discourse or anything remotely similar. Lesson learned, this is the 2nd or 3rd thread where I've seen that you're effectively interested in stating your opinion and then that being the end of the conversation. Thank goodness you have no influence on the actual state of the game.

I'm really not stating opinions. I'm posting actual facts about what similar weapons costs and demonstrated if you add those cost together you are already over 40 points for a spear - without even accounting for the other stats it has over a wind rider (which includes a 4++ save to shooting as well...LOL). You could counter my statements if you had some facts you could post about similar weapons for less points - but you wont find any because they don't exist. AKA Shining spears are OP.

 Xenomancers wrote:
The niche they fill right now is - killing too much for too little and being to hard to kill in return.

Hasty generalization - which to be fair is a result of your constant desire to retreat into hyperbole and emotional appeal.

 Xenomancers wrote:
My assessment of weapon costing is correct.

Argument from authority - you being the authority. Put your math and points breakdown in place and you can at least have the foundation by which to make an absolutist statement like this. You haven't despite your loose claims that it's better than a Plasma Pistol.

 Xenomancers wrote:
You are taking away too much value from the lance weapon. It's still ap -4 d2 in proceding rounds of close/combat (it just loses the str bonus) which is already an insanely powerful profile for a melle weapon (not that it matters - they kill whatever unit they charge anyways). Plus it's shooting profile is equal to a plasma pistol in value.

Just losing the strength bonus is kind of a big deal, as much as you'd like to dismiss it, since all the rest of those stats are pretty meaningless unless you have the strength to bring them to bear. Going from S5 to S4 means T8+ is wounded on a 6, going from S4 to S3 means that T6+ is wounded on a 6, but more importantly, you go from 2 or 3+ wounding against base troops to 4 or 5+ wounding, dropping 33% effectiveness for the rest of those "wildly overpowered blarghflaffinblagh!" stats. Also, for 279 point, you can get 9 of them, making 18 attacks on the charge, that's not an insignificant investment, and here's the thing, they will not kill whatever they charge, on average, they will probably kill 10 (9.33 with a standard deviation of 2.12 against MEQ), against T7 (standard vehicle/monstrous creature toughness) it drops to less than 5 wounds, not even killing a dreadnought that costs half the points.

 Xenomancers wrote:
You can advance and shoot it with no pentalty so it's range is effectively the same (they auto advance 6 inches). It has better ap AND it does 2 flat damage without risking killing it's self. Competitively it's better than a plasma pistol - because killing yourself is basically always bad. So unless your argument is that you should get free stats on units - you have basically lost this argument.

False equivalency - So because of the context in which it exists (on a fast moving bike) the range cannot be used in the comparison? Am I allowed to say that because SM always surround their plasma with the ability to re-roll 1s that the fact that they could kill the user cannot be used in the comparison? The fact that S6 is significantly less useful against most transports and monstrous creatures than S7 is completely irrelevant as well?

I mean I'm not stating one way or another, but you're not even interested in having a discussion or hearing other opinions, you've disingenuously engaged in a debate wherein you have a predetermined outcome in mind and have no interest in actually getting into specifics. Why should anyone waste time discussing this stuff with you?

Put Spears and Reapers up by 5ppm, bring Spectres down by 5ppm, Dragons and Spiders down by 2ppm,, give Scorpions -1AP and a rule giving +1A for every group of 10 models (so 1-10 models, +1A, 11-20 models, +2A, etc) they're in combat with.

Banshees still need something, but otherwise, that would put the aspects all on pretty solid, reasonable footing.

do you have an argument? or are you just going to poke at mine...do you think the range portion should cost slightly less than a plasma gun? 6 points? Maybe 5? Even though it's superior vs everything that isn't a tank? Is an assault weapon...and has better AP? And does 2 damage without risk of overheat kill?

Is that your argument? You have to actually have an argument to make an argument. Just assigning random fallacies to someone elses points isn't an argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think my favorite thing I've heard about spears in this thread is that they are a "niche unit". LOL.

Snipers are a niche unit - they are only good against certain kinds of characters - rarely will they make their points back unless the feild is flodded with 1 wound heros.

Spears are not a niche unit. Spears are a bulldozer unit that destroy everything in their path and then are hard to kill in return. Their niche is underpriced destruction LOL.

 Xenomancers wrote:
do you have an argument? or are you just going to poke at mine...do you think the range portion should cost slightly less than a plasma gun? 6 points? Maybe 5? Even though it's superior vs everything that isn't a tank? Is an assault weapon...and has better AP? And does 2 damage without risk of overheat kill?

Is that your argument? You have to actually have an argument to make an argument. Just assigning random fallacies to someone elses points isn't an argument.

No one has to counter your argument when it is a flawed and fallacious argument. There is no compelling reason to offer any evidence to counter yours because your argument is founded on inconsistencies.

 Xenomancers wrote:
do you have an argument? or are you just going to poke at mine...do you think the range portion should cost slightly less than a plasma gun? 6 points? Maybe 5? Even though it's superior vs everything that isn't a tank? Is an assault weapon...and has better AP? And does 2 damage without risk of overheat kill?

Is that your argument? You have to actually have an argument to make an argument. Just assigning random fallacies to someone elses points isn't an argument.

They aren't random fallacies, they're rather specific actually.

No I don't have an argument other than your methodology of debate is woefully lacking and simply retreats into hyperbole and emotional appeal. I at least took a look at the math, which clearly shows that they don't "destroy anything they attack". Against the right target, absolutely, they will be devastating (as long as the death of ~10 guys is devastating to the unit), if your opponent manages to feed them something less appetizing, not so much. In the right circumstances a Plasma Pistol will actually be far superior to the Lance, specifically against any high toughness targets. But the way you're pitching it, they're the second coming of Girlyman.

I mean if that's your point great, we can wrap up your contribution to this debate with "Xeno thinks this, but can't be bothered to show his work.", thanks for your participation.

 Xenomancers wrote:
If you can point out what lines I posted were exaggerated or not to be taken seriously - I will gladly clarify.

btw 0^2 is still 0.

Nah, you've clearly crossed over into irrational numbers. I eagerly anticipate the next step in your "I'm rubber and your glue" argument.

Please call the police to arrest me, because I'm fielding Spears this weekend. Hopefully the incredibly overcosted Leman Russes they'll be facing won't be too butthurt.

 Xenomancers wrote:
do you have an argument? or are you just going to poke at mine...do you think the range portion should cost slightly less than a plasma gun? 6 points? Maybe 5? Even though it's superior vs everything that isn't a tank? Is an assault weapon...and has better AP? And does 2 damage without risk of overheat kill?

Is that your argument? You have to actually have an argument to make an argument. Just assigning random fallacies to someone elses points isn't an argument.

What's the point of refuting your argument (which has been done now - repeatedly and roundly), if you won't even consider the simple fact that it's been refuted? You know, there's that old saying about playing chess with pigeons.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
do you have an argument? or are you just going to poke at mine...do you think the range portion should cost slightly less than a plasma gun? 6 points? Maybe 5? Even though it's superior vs everything that isn't a tank? Is an assault weapon...and has better AP? And does 2 damage without risk of overheat kill?

Is that your argument? You have to actually have an argument to make an argument. Just assigning random fallacies to someone elses points isn't an argument.

Snip
I at least took a look at the math, which clearly shows that they don't "destroy anything they attack". Against the right target, absolutely, they will be devastating (as long as the death of ~10 guys is devastating to the unit), if your opponent manages to feed them something less appetizing, not so much. In the right circumstances a Plasma Pistol will actually be far superior to the Lance, specifically against any high toughness targets. But the way you're pitching it, they're the second coming of Girlyman.

I mean if that's your point great, we can wrap up your contribution to this debate with "Xeno thinks this, but can't be bothered to show his work.", thanks for your participation.

Spears are great against infantry, even better against elite infantry, even better against multi-wound infantry and better than one of the best units against tanks:

My math could be way off and I hope it is but, I don't have my book infront of me but spears are 31 and exarchs with the star lance are 33 right?

t4 3+ 1 wound
.66 x .66 per lance x3 + .66 x .5 x .33 per shrunken x4 = 1.4 wounds per spear or ppw of 22.1 (better if I start counting rending on 6s)
.66 x .66 x4 + .66 x .5 x .33 = 1.74 or 18.9 ppw
11 ppw against multi-wound t4 3+ (bye bye primaris)

one turn return of 58.9% on naked marines, 100% on 2 las-cannon dev squads, 81% v. primaris 150% v. hellblasters

t7-11 3+ monster/vehicle
.66 x .33 x 3 x 2 = 1.3 + .66 x .16 x .33 x 4 = .13 for 1.43 wounds per spear or 21.6 ppw
.66 x .54 x 4 x 2 = 2.85 + .66 x .29 x .33 x 4 = .25 for 3.1 wounds per exarch or 10 ppw

So a squad of 3 + an exarch has a ppw of 18.7

For comparison the best SM tank hunter (quad las pred) with killshot only clocks in at a 18.96 under ideal conditions, 24.92 if it has to move and 36.38 without killshot. Those preds have a ppw against t4 3+ of 95.38

Maneuverable enough to pick proper targets
One of the best PPW I've seen
4++ v. shooting
ability to have cw traits/ynarri shenanigans
Oh, and they went down in costs

The razorback that everyone is afraid of and just got nerfed:
t4 3+
.66 x .66 x .5 x 12 = 2.61 wounds 38 ppw (pre nerf cost)
t7+ 3+
.66 x .33 x .5 x 12 = 1.3 wounds = 76 ppw (pre nerf cost)
w/ guilliman
.878 x .878 x .5 x12 = 4.6 or 21.7 ppw (pre nerf with no included cost for guilliman)
.878 x .54 x .5 x 12 = 2.84 or 35 ppw (pre nerf with no included cost for guilliman)

Yep, guilliman + assbacks needed to go up in points while shining spears are exactly where they need to be

 Saber wrote:
Those are from Ghost Miniatures, in Russia.

Found them, thanks! Shame they are currently out of stock though :(

Hrm, though not 100% sure i want to pay 150% of the cost of GW spears for them, plus shipping and then likely a customs charge on top. Shame really!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
OK, so lets try to do some points comparisons. /commence rambling.

Inferno Pistol – 9 points, Plasma Pistol – 7 points, Laser Lance 8 points.

So, currently the Lance is pointed between the 2 pistols, even though it has the lowest str shooting, joint lowest range and mid/joint mid damage output, whilst also having the joint best AP.

Sounds pretty reasonable overall – It gains the AP benefit of the highest priced weapon, along with its range weakness, whilst also gaining the best damage from the plasma profile, but then suffers a significant str reduction.

As for melee. MC power sword – 10 points, Power lance – 4 points. (note- power maul can be used instead of the lance)

Ok, so, the Lance is pointed between these two weapons again. So, the lance has the best ap out of the 3. The lance always strikes at str 6 regardless of who charged, or whether it’s the 2nd round of combat. Sword is always str 4. Lance and Sword have the same damage.

So, based on “averages”, the Laser lance does twice as much damage in the turn it charges as the Power lance, for double the cost, and the sword does 38% less damage than the Laser lance in the first charge. This yells to me that the Sword is overpriced, not the lance being overpriced in this instance. HOWEVER, if the Spears are charged or make it to a 2nd round of combat, they damage output is exactly the same as the power lance, but for double the power lances cost! So, does that mean the Laser lance is now overpriced to?

So, over the course of 1 battle-round, (2 assault phases), the laser lance works out at being 33% better than the Power lance, but for double the cost.

So, as we are talking about killing MEQs here, lets take the plasma pistol and the power lance for a total of 11 points, 3 more than the cost of the laser lance.
For those 3 points, you get, +6” range, -1ap, -1 damage (but this is irrelevant vs MEQs), +1 str (again, irrelevant), 33% less damage in combat over 2 rounds, in the turn that the unit charged (the gap gets smaller each turn locked in combat but…), 19% more damage in over 2 rounds of combat, in the turn the unit GOT charged (due to the pistol being able to fire into combat).

So, not exactly stunning differences, but we then have to take into account platforms.
Spears cost 93 points for a unit of 3 (not inc. star lance). For that you get T4, 7 wounds, 16” move, 3+ and a 4++ vs shooting.
In comparison, Company Vets on bikes with Plasma pistols and Power mauls clock in at 141 for 3. For this you get T5, 6 wounds, 14” move, 3+.

Both units have the same number of attacks in CC. So, looking at platforms, Vets seem to be massively overpriced in comparison, but, it also has to be noted that the Vets are an index costed unit at base. A different comparison is that a standard 3 man bike squad with the weapons on the sergeant comes in at 92 points – but they have also have 3 less attacks when compared to the spears, and less “top end” weaponry. If the full bike squad could take the weapons, they’d come to a total of 114 points, 23 points more than the spears.

The question here though, is, are the basic Spears under-costed, or are the basic bikers over-costed? One thing to note in addition though, is a twin boltgun costs 2 points on a bike, whereas a twin catapult costs 5 on a jetbike. (for the purposes of comparison the debate of assault vs rapid fire is being ignored, due to the us needing to also ignore the saim-hann advance and charge stratagem, as we’d need to agree a “cost” for 1 cp).

The biggest indicator, in my mind will be the DA codex this weekend and the cost of Black Knights. Once we have the updated points cost for that unit, we can then revisit these costs in another attempt to determine issues. Currently BKs are 150 points for 3 – if this is reduced then it’ll make things vest interesting!

Kdash wrote:
The question here though, is, are the basic Spears under-costed, or are the basic bikers over-costed?

Given how infrequently we actually see them in any kind of competitive lists (honestly, I don't think we've seen much in the way of competitive CWE lists at a tournament level yet either), I am leaning towards the latter.

A 9 man squad of SS costs 279 points without any upgrades. For that cost I feel like they're doing a pretty good job, solid, not crazy.

For example, I can get a 10 man squad of Berzerkers in a Rhino for around the same price, without the Rhino, those Berzerkers are more than likely dead or heavily damaged (without the Rhino, it becomes ~15 man squad):

Versus the Rhino:
Shuriken Catapults ~3 wounds (2.67 w/ 1.57 deviation)
Laser Lance ~4 wounds (4.00 w/ 2.49 deviation)
Charging Laser Lance vs Rhino ~8 wounds (8.00 w/ 3.53 deviation)

Versus Berzerkers:
Charging Laser Lance vs Berzerkers ~8 wounds (8.00 w/ 2.11 deviation) - I didn't count the multiple wounds from the Laser Lance on this, since it makes no difference against single wound models.

So on average, between shooting and charging the Spears will destroy the Rhino. If they get lucky, they will destroy the Rhino in the shooting phase and get to charge the Berzerkers, possibly wiping them out if they get lucky.

The operative word here being lucky, if they don't destroy the Rhino with shooting and have to charge it to destroy it, they leave the Berzerkers more or less intact, who will in all likelihood (without much luck at all) completely destroy the Shining Spears. Yes, Berzerkers are a premier hand to hand unit, but not an example of premier durability, I put them down as an example primarily due to the fact that they were the first unit I thought of that was roughly the same point total. At the same time I could pull up several examples at a similar point cost that would be destroyed easily by spears or vice versa.

However, in many ways, such a comparison is a false equivalency, Berzerkers are a hyper specialized unit, they should destroy Shining Spears in close combat. Spears are a hybrid unit designed to do a few different things pretty well, as usual it's about applying the right tool to the right situation, you know, Warhammer.

Your forgetting the exarch with a star lance (which is probably one of the most OP units in the game and probably what pushes the SS from good to OP for only 2 additional points)

Or you run them as ynarri, pop the rhino with shooting and charging and then pop the berzerkers with charging, or pop the rhino and surround it with your 9 SS (because fly) so all the berzerkers inside die and then go charge something else...

bananathug wrote:
Your forgetting the exarch with a star lance (which is probably one of the most OP units in the game and probably what pushes the SS from good to OP for only 2 additional points)

I was going with a base unit, but sure, 281 points, you get one of your ranged attacks bumped to S8 and 3 of your close combat attacks bumped to S8. That doesn't radically change the calculus. Without going into the math for it, you're probably adding another wound in shooting and hand to hand, maybe 2. Again, it will require a bit of luck to actually kill the Rhino with shooting, the unit is still in all likelihood relegated to charging the Rhino.

bananathug wrote:
Or you run them as ynarri, pop the rhino with shooting and charging and then pop the berzerkers with charging, or pop the rhino and surround it with your 9 SS (because fly) so all the berzerkers inside die and then go charge something else...

Yes, but that's not really a function of being Shining Spears as much as it's simply good positioning, I've had opponents do that to me with Genestealers. It also assumes you can surround the Rhino, which, again, given good positioning, may not be possible.

 Galas wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:
Nothing. They're just the only bikes in the game that aren't absolute trash, so they look better relatively.

Oh internet hyperbole, you never disappoint. "Shining Spears are the most OP units in the game" vs "All bikes in the game are absolute trash". Beautifull.

Spoiler:

I stopped reading at this point. Hilarious, and true, well played sir!

bananathug wrote:
surround it with your 9 SS (because fly) so all the berzerkers inside die and then go charge something else...

9 Shining Spears don't have enough coverage to trap anything a Rhino. Maybe you're thinking that things move from their vehicle when it dies, but they do not. They teleport to wherever they want to deploy.

I haven't done all the maths against every opponent but I know that a standard unit of 6 Spears can completely wipe out over 10 marines a turn on average... or nearly 20 guardsmen... ouch. That's before throwing in Raging Wind, Feigned Retreat and psychic powers.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

bananathug wrote:
surround it with your 9 SS (because fly) so all the berzerkers inside die and then go charge something else...

9 Shining Spears don't have enough coverage to trap anything a Rhino. Maybe you're thinking that things move from their vehicle when it dies, but they do not. They teleport to wherever they want to deploy.

pg 183 of the rule book:
If a transport is destroyed any units embarked within it immediately disembark before the transport model is removed...When a unit disembarks, set iu up on the battlefield so that all of its models are within 3" of the transport and not within 1" of any enemy models.

I don't have any spear models in front of me but based on the size of a rhino I don't think it would be difficult for a unit that can fly to completely surround one such that the units inside cannot be placed w/in 3" but outside of 1" from all enemy models. If base size is approx 1" across and 2" long and you only need to be @ 1" of a model w/in 1" to be engaged with the model in hand to hand a ring of models 1" from the rhino with bases >1" width will preclude at least some of the transported models from being set-up w/in 1" of the model being destroyed (1 front + back, 2 on one side and 2 rows of 2 on the other and your 9th model somewhere else)

Versus the Rhino:
Shuriken Catapults ~3 wounds (2.67 w/ 1.57 deviation)
Laser Lance ~4 wounds (4.00 w/ 2.49 deviation)
Charging Laser Lance vs Rhino ~8 wounds (8.00 w/ 3.53 deviation)

so 15 wounds v. a rhino chasis for that squad of 9 @ 281 points, adding 2 points for the exarch gives you 1.7 EXTRA wounds (1.4 v. 3.1) seems like a good use of 2 points...

Also that 280 points of spears doing 15 damage to that rhino is 50% more powerful than 2 quad las predators (dedicated space marine anti-vehicle) which do 10 damage to the same rhino but cost 380 points.
Quad las preds: .66 x .66 x .84 = .365 x 4 = 1.45 x 3.5 = 5.12 per 190 point tank

I would argue that right there makes spears OP as they fill several roles(anti-infantry and anti-armor) better and cheaper than specialists fill one role.
Or 280 points to deal 15 wounds >>>>> 380 points to deal 10 or you can just look at the PPW post I posted earlier in the thread...

So either spears are under costed by about 50% (should cost closer to 40-45 points) or the SM codex needs a major buff. I'm down for either but it doesn't seem like the math supports the opinion that they are just "good" unless we are willing to concede that SM just "suck"

I'd concede all day long that SM just suck. It isn't a good book, especially in its post 7th, post battle company, hang over days.

Kdash wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Those are from Ghost Miniatures, in Russia.

Found them, thanks! Shame they are currently out of stock though :(

As far as I know, they're all made to order. Just email him. I've ordered roughly $1200 of miniatures from him in two shipments. The bigger one cost about $25 in shipping, and the smaller one about $15. Both arrived within 3 weeks to Canada, and there were no customs charges. Also, he gave me an extra Farseer Skyrunner and a bunch of shuriken cannons and scatterlasers he made for his jetbike miniatures, all free of charge. YMMV though.

The Mattler wrote:

Kdash wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Those are from Ghost Miniatures, in Russia.

Found them, thanks! Shame they are currently out of stock though :(

As far as I know, they're all made to order. Just email him. I've ordered roughly $1200 of miniatures from him in two shipments. The bigger one cost about $25 in shipping, and the smaller one about $15. Both arrived within 3 weeks to Canada, and there were no customs charges. Also, he gave me an extra Farseer Skyrunner and a bunch of shuriken cannons and scatterlasers he made for his jetbike miniatures, all free of charge. YMMV though.

The biggest complaint I have with Ghost Minis is not with their product. I compared them to what I get from FW and wonder why I paid so much for an inferior product from FW. Ghost Minis quality was top notch and really put FW to shame. I definitely felt the price was justified and will definitely order again.

As far as the OP, now that a person understands the Spears are decent (they have been sub par since their first release), gotta learn to deal with them. I have played them a few times and found they can hit hard for one turn. After that, they get crippled. My way to mitigate that is to take MSU Spears and let my opponents figure it out. In the days of turn 1 Magnus charges, double shooting Slaanesh Obliterators, 4 point demon chaff with inv saves, and other craziness, this is just another unit people need to learn how to deal with.