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.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I look forward to some Smurf player coming here on Dakka and whining about how Gulliman got annihilated by an Avatar.

Space Marines have a tons of choices to take down Avater of Khaine. Any Ultramarine let the Avater charged into Guilliman is not a good player.

On the other hand, Eldar player should have thousands of method to fight against Guilliman. They should be the faction that can just laugh at a T6 walking melee MC.

gungo wrote:

You don't need the battlewagon ghaz and his star can move run and charge the same turn even in mega armour with reroll on run/charge die due to ere we go.
However my typical star yes is ghaz, Maddoc, dls megaboss, warboss in mega armour, big mek in mega armour w KFF, 3 nobs (1 w bosspole) and battlewagon w killkannon for 914pts. A battlewagon w 4++ can shooting is annoying and hard to kill and once ghaz star debarks and charges the wagon is still annoying running around shooting str7ap3 large blasts plus any rokkits. Girly man than has to deal w ~20x str 10/9 ap2 mostly rerollable ws7-9 atks on the charge w a couple of 2+los bodies all with 5+ fnp. It's annoying hard to kill without lucky stomp. I don't think guilliman will last to the end of turn 2. You are right it's overkill point wise however it's really the only ork way to take him down.

Ok without the BW the council is 700-750 points, which twice guilliman's cost anyway. And the council may take all the SM firepower in the world before reaching guilliman if they go on foot. Orks don't need to take him down, just play objecitves and kill the rest of the SM army, force guilliman to assault expendable units that block his way.

The Avatar won't annihilate Guilliman as the Avatar will struggle massively to land a wound on him, but as Guilliman can't hurt the Avatar the Avatar is guaranteed to win without injury after a very, very long battle.

Unless Rowboat wants to use Our Weapons are Useless and risk being swept... There are few other times where such a rule is so apt!

(And I had thought that OWAU forced units to flee if they actually could not harm the enemy in CC, but maybe that's an older edition. Still, forcing Gulliman to flee would be hilarious)

Easy with my Speed Freeks. Don't go near him. 6" move is nowt, my bikes and Trukks will outrun you all day.

I will also elect to run the feth away.

I actually faced Guilliman in my first game yesterday and he sure knows how to make a mighty entrance.

My list was khorne daemonkin with 2x D-Thirster + Belakor

Guilliman was supporting an Imperial Guard army.

I cast invisibility on one of my D-Thirster and send him tank hunting a foot away from Guilliman. The entire army shoots at him and does 1 wound.

Guilliman charges at the invisible thrister, rolls his attacks, misses but gets some re-rolls of 1s and hits with the only thing he can hit with...a 6.

Then rolls to wound and lands another 6.

Invisible D-Thirster OWNED!

My jaw dropped...

a turn later I assault Guilliman with the second D-Thirster and a maulerfiend (lasher tendrils)

Guilliman rolls his attacks normally minus 2 attacks of course. And hits with most but gets no 1s, deals 2 wounds ot the D-Thirster.

D-Thirster swings with 9 attacks on the charge (warlord trait) smashes the primarch to hell and back with 2 6s to wound.

Guilliman fails his 4+ WELL BE BACK roll and I'm just glad I don't have to fight that guy again.

 KommissarKiln wrote:
Unless Rowboat wants to use Our Weapons are Useless and risk being swept... There are few other times where such a rule is so apt!

(And I had thought that OWAU forced units to flee if they actually could not harm the enemy in CC, but maybe that's an older edition. Still, forcing Gulliman to flee would be hilarious)

Just one problem with that

Gulliman is fearless

Ah, so the two of them do have to duke it out for a couple years till Gulliman's finally whittled down?

 Akaiyou wrote:

Guilliman charges at the invisible thrister, rolls his attacks, misses but gets some re-rolls of 1s and hits with the only thing he can hit with...a 6.

Then rolls to wound and lands another 6.

Invisible D-Thirster OWNED!

He than has to roll another d6 on the d-table. So, unless he rolls another 6, d-thirster is fine.

 KommissarKiln wrote:
Ah, so the two of them do have to duke it out for a couple years till Gulliman's finally whittled down?

Or until Guillimann stomps his way out. Either way going to be a long fight.

 koooaei wrote:

 Akaiyou wrote:

Guilliman charges at the invisible thrister, rolls his attacks, misses but gets some re-rolls of 1s and hits with the only thing he can hit with...a 6.

Then rolls to wound and lands another 6.

Invisible D-Thirster OWNED!

He than has to roll another d6 on the d-table. So, unless he rolls another 6, d-thirster is fine.

Read again bro he rolled a 6 to hit and a 6 to wound. No further 6s needed.

2 exalted seeker chariots


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KommissarKiln wrote:
Unless Rowboat wants to use Our Weapons are Useless and risk being swept... There are few other times where such a rule is so apt!

(And I had thought that OWAU forced units to flee if they actually could not harm the enemy in CC, but maybe that's an older edition. Still, forcing Gulliman to flee would be hilarious)

Guilliman can´t get swept as he has TSKNF. But needs to lose combat first.

 Akaiyou wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 Akaiyou wrote:

Guilliman charges at the invisible thrister, rolls his attacks, misses but gets some re-rolls of 1s and hits with the only thing he can hit with...a 6.

Then rolls to wound and lands another 6.

Invisible D-Thirster OWNED!

He than has to roll another d6 on the d-table. So, unless he rolls another 6, d-thirster is fine.

Read again bro he rolled a 6 to hit and a 6 to wound. No further 6s needed.

I believe the assumption was the D-thirster is T6 and has more than 3 wounds. I don't know of any place that uses the natural D-str table of 6+D6 wounds. If that is the case, no more sixes are necessary, but most places two 6s on the D table would be the optimal number.

A lot of players, in ITC, NOVA, locals, or otherwise, simply don't use the full D-str table as it is absurd. It's almost as crazy as a 6 on the stomp table, but it removes almost every Super Heavies as well. Haha.

Not many tournaments that I go to in the UK use a reduced table.

Saythings wrote:

 Akaiyou wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 Akaiyou wrote:

Guilliman charges at the invisible thrister, rolls his attacks, misses but gets some re-rolls of 1s and hits with the only thing he can hit with...a 6.

Then rolls to wound and lands another 6.

Invisible D-Thirster OWNED!

He than has to roll another d6 on the d-table. So, unless he rolls another 6, d-thirster is fine.

Read again bro he rolled a 6 to hit and a 6 to wound. No further 6s needed.

I believe the assumption was the D-thirster is T6 and has more than 3 wounds. I don't know of any place that uses the natural D-str table of 6+D6 wounds. If that is the case, no more sixes are necessary, but most places two 6s on the D table would be the optimal number.

A lot of players, in ITC, NOVA, locals, or otherwise, simply don't use the full D-str table as it is absurd. It's almost as crazy as a 6 on the stomp table, but it removes almost every Super Heavies as well. Haha.

Our FLGS usings the table in the book for both friendly games and league games. What else would we use?

ITC/NOVA versions is the only thing I see. Haha. I have yet to use full StrD - Silly meta shifts.

Saythings wrote:
A lot of players, in ITC, NOVA, locals, or otherwise, simply don't use the full D-str table as it is absurd. It's almost as crazy as a 6 on the stomp table, but it removes almost every Super Heavies as well. Haha.

The ITC only nerfs ranged StrD, NOVA nerfs it all. Quick search of Adepticon's FAQ and it looks like they have no nerf at all.

Saythings wrote:

 Akaiyou wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 Akaiyou wrote:

Guilliman charges at the invisible thrister, rolls his attacks, misses but gets some re-rolls of 1s and hits with the only thing he can hit with...a 6.

Then rolls to wound and lands another 6.

Invisible D-Thirster OWNED!

He than has to roll another d6 on the d-table. So, unless he rolls another 6, d-thirster is fine.

Read again bro he rolled a 6 to hit and a 6 to wound. No further 6s needed.

I believe the assumption was the D-thirster is T6 and has more than 3 wounds. I don't know of any place that uses the natural D-str table of 6+D6 wounds. If that is the case, no more sixes are necessary, but most places two 6s on the D table would be the optimal number.

A lot of players, in ITC, NOVA, locals, or otherwise, simply don't use the full D-str table as it is absurd. It's almost as crazy as a 6 on the stomp table, but it removes almost every Super Heavies as well. Haha.

Doesn't a 6 to-wound counts as a d-hit? In this case he also has to resolve the actual result on the d-table. And i believe it doesn't state that a 6 to-wound counts as a 6 on the d-table. It's just a d-hit.
As i see it.
To-hit -> To-wound -> If 6 than a roll on d-table.

If you hit with a Destroyer weapon then you immediately roll on the Destroyer Table there is no 'to wound' roll. That's the whole point of Destroyer weapons.

I didn't know some tournaments nerfed D strength weapons that's a bit lame. The game won't break by allowing full str D it infact keeps deathstars in check.

I had no idea so many places used the full StrD. That's pretty crazy - from my perspective at least.

Also the difference between D6+6 wounds and 3 wounds (nerfed 6 result) against a deathstar is minimum. Most HQs in a deathstar have 2-3 wounds. Short of Celestine, Azrael and a Chapter Master, I can't think of too many Imperial Deathstars that care about the D chat. It's the stomps that really mess with a deathstar, and even on that note, it's only the 6 result on a stomp that does damage. Stomps still remove all the above HQs.

 koooaei wrote:

Saythings wrote:

 Akaiyou wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 Akaiyou wrote:

Guilliman charges at the invisible thrister, rolls his attacks, misses but gets some re-rolls of 1s and hits with the only thing he can hit with...a 6.

Then rolls to wound and lands another 6.

Invisible D-Thirster OWNED!

He than has to roll another d6 on the d-table. So, unless he rolls another 6, d-thirster is fine.

Read again bro he rolled a 6 to hit and a 6 to wound. No further 6s needed.

I believe the assumption was the D-thirster is T6 and has more than 3 wounds. I don't know of any place that uses the natural D-str table of 6+D6 wounds. If that is the case, no more sixes are necessary, but most places two 6s on the D table would be the optimal number.

A lot of players, in ITC, NOVA, locals, or otherwise, simply don't use the full D-str table as it is absurd. It's almost as crazy as a 6 on the stomp table, but it removes almost every Super Heavies as well. Haha.

Doesn't a 6 to-wound counts as a d-hit? In this case he also has to resolve the actual result on the d-table. And i believe it doesn't state that a 6 to-wound counts as a 6 on the d-table. It's just a d-hit.
As i see it.
To-hit -> To-wound -> If 6 than a roll on d-table.

Guilliman makes a To Hit roll. If you roll a 6 on that, then you roll on the D-table rather than rolling To Wound. So he skips a step. Just to add clarity.