Classichammer

NOTABLE EXCEPTIONS FROM THIS QUESTION: High Elves may fight in 3 ranks with spears and their stock warrior comes equipped with hand weapon & shield AND spears so they should not be included in the following question. Spears also come gratis on the Dark Elf Warriors, so they are exempt as well.

THE QUESTION: What are you guys' opinions on ever purchasing/equipping spears in 6th Edition? While I once assumed they would have their role as the go-to equipment if you are expecting to face cavalry or charges, a few years of actually playing the game with a solid grasp on the rules has led me to observe that in most cases, spears are surprisingly not the optimal choice.

If you are an Empire player, the swordsmen are WS4 and benefit from an extra point of Armour Save in CC, so they actually counter intuitively play the role of the unit that expects to get charged better than the spearmen do unless they are facing a WS5 or more AND S6 or more adversary.

If you are an Orcs and Goblins player, equipping your goblins with spears for +1 pt/model inflates their price to 150%, while only offering more WS2 attacks that are unlikely to wound any armoured cavalry anyways. Similarly, equipping them on your boyz for +2 pts/model drives their price point to 140% of stock price. When cheap static CC is your goal, simply bringing another half of a unit adding to your Ranks and Outnumber seems more cost effective than buying spears, right? Especially in a world where ending a CC outnumbered by a Fear Causing enemy is a death sentence.

This is all anecdotal and I haven't gamed it out specifically for every single race but are there ANY cases where purchasing spears as additional equipment for a unit is the right call?

Are Skaven Clanrats good candidates as units to purchase them for? They start at a stock price of 5 pts/model, and have WS3, just like Orc Boyz. However, equipping them with spears only costs +1pts/model, so we are only looking at a unit inflating to 120% of its original price to open up that second rank of attacks back.

Skeleton Warriors start at 8 pts a pop and adding the spears only costs +1 pt/model, so this is only 112% of original price. Not a bad inflation number, but is the extra rank of WS2 attacks really more effective than just adding bodies to help ensure outnumbering the enemy?

Taking a look at Saurus Warriors, they start at a whopping 12 pts/model. Their spears would still just be a +2pts/model investment. Now, their second rank of attacks back would not get that extra Predatory Fighter attack, but you could still be looking at an extra 4-6 S4 attacks back, depending on how wide your formation is. Would it be worth it to invest into spears for this unit if the chances of taking a charge look high?

The Bretonnian Man-At-Arms are allowed to choose which extra equipment they have to supplement their hand weapon and shield- they can pick either spears or halberds for free. Would a Bretonnian player expecting to take charges think the spears are a good option? Or would we mostly err on the side of the pole-arms (halberds) so we have the option to make our attacks S4?

Interested to hear others' thoughts. Do you have experience using or facing many spearmen units? Have they ever outperformed their not-equipped-with-spears counterparts?

I honestly don't see where 1 extra point of armor outshines a full rank of attacks. Spears are an automatic choice for me.

If you are talking about the choice between Swordsmen and Spearmen for Empire, the Swordsmen also enjoy a WS boost relative to Spearmen and so suffer less hits in addition to saving more wounds with the 4+ armour save. I believe the math works out to favour bringing Swordsmen as your unit expecting to take a charge rather than Spearmen, doesn’t it? Unless you are facing WS 5 or more AND S6 or more enemies?

EDIT: I am seeing that Swordsmen actually cost 7 pts to the Spearmen only being 6, so that could be an argument for taking Spears as Empire, where their cost to equip is thought of as -1? Maybe?

Generally I don't rate spears at all, and will usually only use them if they're freebies. If given the choice between spears or halberds, I will choose the halberds every time.

You do however seem to be overthinking the numbers far too much though. The points values aren't the problem with spears (indeed, points values are never the problem. They're just pie in the sky. Life is far too short to let a silly thing like points values stop you from using the models you love).

No, the real problem with spears is that their combat bonus is reactive, where I invariably want to be proactive, not least because 6th edition Warhammer is generally a game that rewards being proactive over being reactive.

Put another way, the problem with spears is that little phrase:

expecting to take charges

And that's just it. I don't expect to take charges. I expect to be the one making charges, not taking them, and I invariably opt for an aggressive, high-tempo doctrine to ensure that because I want to be dictating the battle on my terms, not the other side's; making decisive attacks, seizing the initiative and getting inside the opponent's decision cycle. Even with Dwarfs I will usually load up on mobility enhancements like Strollaz' Rune or an Anvil of Doom for Oath And Honour to get the other side off-balance. As far as I'm concerned, if I'm regularly anticipating getting charged, then I have already lost.

In this context, spears are largely pointless except as a very niche contingency, because they only ever do anything in situations I plan to actively avoid. This is also why I always have and always will rate halberds much more, because those are equally useful on the attack as well as the defence, and I plan to be doing much more attacking than defending.

The main exception is defending a castle, but then you're only fighting in one rank most of the time anyway.

But that's not the real answer to your question. The real answer to the question 'are spears effective' is yes, they are. This is because spears are a serviceable weapon for infantry and cavalry that is both cheap and quick to build and simple and quick to train in the use of, letting you quickly assemble a large effective fighting force.

They are also effective because Warhammer is a fantasy game, and it's just not a fantasy battle without a good forest of steel-tipped spears marching forward inexorably. This then, is why you should take spears - they are a means to the end of putting down a mighty imposing forest of spears carried by massed ranks of spearmen, and that end is the ultimate goal of Warhammer (unless you have access to pikes or halberds instead of course).

It's always worth it for chariots and cavalry when they don't already have it (cheap strength bonus for expensive models!), but that doesn't seem to be the focus of your question.

I have a slightly different view than Kakapo. It's not about expecting to take charges but more if you expect to break the opponent on the charge. Let's start by assuming the unit has spears already and has just charged an enemy unit. At this point, you have a choice: use spears or use hand weapons and shields (almost all units that have spears have this option). The spears won't provide their bonus, so the question is if the extra point of armour save is likely to change the result significantly.
There are a few possibilities in order of consideration/increasing complexity:

1. The opponent is high enough strength you get no armour save either way. Spears.
2. You're going to win or lose regardless of weapon by enough that the losing unit will probably flee. Hand weapons and shields, it might save a model and you'll never see the spear bonus anyway. Fear causing units often trigger this state.
3. You're fighting low leadership enemies who will probably run if you can win, and the result is close. Hand weapons and shields might give you the push you need to get that one extra point.
4. The combat will almost certainly continue. Probably spears. It's trading taking more casualties now for inflicting more later. It's only probably because of the effect of rank bonuses. If the extra casualties might reasonably cause you to lose a point of rank bonus that you wouldn't have otherwise lost, and you're not about to lose the bonus from a counter charge to the flank anyway, it might be worth using hand weapons to make sure you don't end up in a losing situation next turn. This is based around the assumption that less than one in four attacks will wound (i.e. equal or worse weapon skill, S not greater than T, and there is an armour save) and the unit is 4 models wide. If the unit is wider or doesn't have a full second rank, adjust appropriately.

Thus, when fighting against high strength or high leadership armies, you'll often use the spears if you have them. This is pretty much everything other than Orcs and Goblins, Skaven, Bretonnia, and Empire and even they encourage it near a battle standard. Conversely, if your army consistently breaks units when you charge (reliable flank charges, shear combat power), then the spear is a waste on infantry.

This suggests a principle: if taking spears costs you a flanking unit that can negate rank bonuses, you should prefer the extra unit, otherwise it's reasonable to pay extra for spears.

Part 2: spears or halberds
If you're not playing Bretonnia or Empire, that's pretty much the end. These two armies have the choice of bringing a halberd instead. Against toughness 6, spears are better; against 7, halberds are better. A toughness this high is rare enough that this doesn't really matter. I'm out of time for now, so I'll leave any further commenting on this for later.

I will only take halberds on a unit with heavy armor as you can't use the shield and halberd together in combat.

That's the thing, by default Empire doesn't give shields to spearmen or halberdiers. It's a point extra.

The thing I find most amusing is if you're going to win and the enemy will almost certainly flee and you have a shield, you should use hand weapon and shield over both halberds and spears since the goal changes from maximizing enemy casualties to minimizing yours and thus the hand weapon and shield wins.

So, to be mathematical about it, assuming you only have one attack, spears are better than halberds long term in terms of wounds in some cases and worse in others.
Assuming a unit champion and 4 models wide, the results are as follows. It's slightly more in favour of spears without the champion or if the unit is wider. If you have a shield, then you also take fewer casualties.

Thanks to the Empire detachment rule and the ability to eliminate enemy rank bonuses with combined charges/counter charges, it seems likely that Empire would prefer halberds if a detachment is present and spears if it's not since that would directly affect the likelihood of combat lasting more than one round.

Bretonnian peasants probably want the spear and shield. They can always use a hand weapon if the knights are helping.

Both these statements assume you don't know what army you're facing. If you know it's dwarfs, saurus, ogres, mortal chaos or 2+ save knights, then bring out the halberds. Everyone else, including beastmen, get spears.

Have you read any of our battle reports? Have you SEEN how my dice roll?!?!?!?!?!? I NEVER go into any combat expressly expecting to win it. My dice will punish my overconfidence at a second's notice without batting an eye.

Weirdly combat seems to be where my dice reward my confidence and aggression the most in Warhammer. I think I can count on one hand with fingers left over the number of models my Glade Guard have actually managed to knock out with bow shooting, but once they're in combat they'll see off whole regiments of geared up combat troops. To say nothing of how terrifying my Eternal Guard have been.

Which just goes to show how little mean averages matter to Warhammer. Amateurs study math, experts study dice psychology.

Spears are a "do as I say, not as I do" option for my beloved undead. Skeleton Warriors aren't there to kill things by attacking them - they win by attrition, squeaking out by one point and forcing the auto-break through fear. A 5+ save isn't great, but it's better than nowt - keeps their numbers up and the enemy's dynamic combat resolution down.

However! I started out playing the Army of Sylvania, and there's no "just a hand weapon" option there. Your Sylvanian Militia are full kit Skeletons with light armour and either crossbows, spear and shield, or halberd and shield. As such, my original and longest serving regiment pulls double duty - it had to work in a Von Carstein or Sylvanian context - and that means spears-a-go-go. I've since built a more "optimised" block with sword and board, but Kakapo's right, there's something about the look of massed spears that's just right. Especially if you've painstakingly modelled them at an appropriate angle for the first, second, third and subsequent ranks. I had a lot of time on my hands when I was eighteen.

Just Tony wrote: ↑Fri Nov 24, 2023 1:33 am Have you read any of our battle reports? Have you SEEN how my dice roll?!?!?!?!?!? I NEVER go into any combat expressly expecting to win it. My dice will punish my overconfidence at a second's notice without batting an eye.

If you charge a war machine or the flank of a missile unit with a full strength infantry unit, you have more static combat resolution than the target has attacks. It doesn't matter what you roll, you're going to win that combat. And yes, they might not run and your unit could get destroyed by a countering flank charge shortly after, but I think it's reasonable to expect to win there.

But that's not the reason I wrote expect there. It's because people have different expectations, because the surrounding context matters and when you charge you already have a preconceived notion of what will happen. If you expect to win in the first turn, regardless of how right or wrong that might be, your approach should be different than if you don't. If you never expect to win in the first turn, then spears are for you. If you always expect to win, then they're not. Of course, this then leads to reinforcement of those expectations because choosing the better option for your expectation leads to your expectation being met more often, and there might be a more optimal play available by changing your expectations, but that's the fun part.

Jonathan E wrote: ↑Fri Nov 24, 2023 6:54 am I've since built a more "optimised" block with sword and board

Fun fact. If your skeletons can strike first, spears are often better. For example, if you're casting Hellish Vigor on the unit or fighting Empire greatswords, you want to use the spears if you have them.

Initiative matters and spears + striking first can and does beat out hand weapon and shield for net wounds, at least after the first round of combat.

I think I'm having too much fun with the math here.

Sadly, the margins are small and might not justify an increased points cost for spears (it's about 1 extra point of combat resolution every three rounds of fighting against T3 opponents), but the unit really is better with them. It also doesn't work as well against higher toughness enemies—it's a net negative against saurus warriors unless you widen the spear unit to 5-6 models to get even more attacks.

Generally speaking the only infantry units which I will pay to equip with spears are Saurus Warriors, Savage Orcs, and Clanrats (and the clanrats only get them because I have points to spare).

To get the most out of spears you need either high Strength (Saurus, Savage Orc Big'uns), high Attacks (Savage Orcs) or high Initiative (skaven/elves), though having a decent Weapon Skill is a nice secondary consideration.

High strength and attacks means that those extra attacks have a better chance of actually dealing damage, while high initiative enables you to strike first in subsequent rounds of combat, hopefully overwhelming through quantity rather than quality and counting on decreased attacks back to mitigate the reduced armour save.

Gobbos, with their low WS, I, and pretty much everything else are wasting points on spears, especially considering that Hardgrots (gobbos with LA, HW + Shield) are amongst the best value static infantry in the game.

Human spearmen are also kind bad, in that I never bother taking them. I'd frankly invest in Free Company (which are cheaper) if I want a lot of attacks from my unit (and I can apply those on a charge!). For imperial infantry I prefer Swordsmen, Halberdiers(great counter-attacking detachments), the afore mentioned Free Company and Greatswords.

A Special mention should probably be made for Beastherd Ungors. These often overlooked beastmen come with spears and are cheap at 4pts per model. They are great for adding numbers to your herd as well as proving some support attacks with their spears to help out their bigger gors brothers. Far too often I see herds made up of 15+ gors and only the minimum 5 ungors. My herds generally contain about 6-8 gors (depending on if they are a main battle herd of a support ambushing herd) and 7-15 ungors. They generally perform as well or better than gor dominated herds, but at much less costing, enabling me to add more support unit to help them out (such as a chariot).

*Edit: Of course, if you want a truely effective "spearman" unit and can afford the rare slot, get some Dogs of War Pikemen!*

I am incredibly thankful for and impressed by all the extremely thoughtful and insightful points made in response to my original question. It is wicked cool to hear perspectives and opinions from players with much more experience and with a different history of opponents.