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.

You're missing the point. I'm saying price should include accessibility. I didn't say his current price does or does not do so, that's a whole different issue. I will say his price should account for his accessibility though.

Audustum wrote:
You're missing the point. I'm saying price should include accessibility. I didn't say his current price does or does not do so, that's a whole different issue. I will say his price should account for his accessibility though.

Sorry, in the context of your first post on this topic I thought you were saying he shouldn't be more expensive, which I think was part of Xenomancer's argument.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Audustum wrote:
You're missing the point. I'm saying price should include accessibility. I didn't say his current price does or does not do so, that's a whole different issue. I will say his price should account for his accessibility though.

Sorry, in the context of your first post on this topic I thought you were saying he shouldn't be more expensive, which I think was part of Xenomancer's argument.

It's O.K. I think he's about right, maybe a small increase to 400 or 450 or a change to make his To Wound aura only effect melee. So there's my two-cents there.

The math on the Guilliman buff is overwhelming. The average use case of a 3+ followed by a 4+ has the output of that shot double. The 3+ 3+ use case is an 80% increase and the 4+ 4+ is a 125% increase.

If Guilliman were 1000 points, you would still have the same gun output on the top of 1 as a 2000 point force without Guilliman if you completely discount his personal output. You would lack the durability of the 2000 point force, though.

At 600 points, Guilliman would still be competitive if you built around him.

Reroll all hit rolls probably shouldn't exist as a buff on any character. Reroll both hit and wound definitely shouldn't exist. If they do have to exist, then they should be costed appropriately.

LiMunPai wrote:
The math on the Guilliman buff is overwhelming. The average use case of a 3+ followed by a 4+ has the output of that shot double. The 3+ 3+ use case is an 80% increase and the 4+ 4+ is a 125% increase.

If Guilliman were 1000 points, you would still have the same gun output on the top of 1 as a 2000 point force without Guilliman if you completely discount his personal output. You would lack the durability of the 2000 point force, though.

At 600 points, Guilliman would still be competitive if you built around him.

Reroll all hit rolls probably shouldn't exist as a buff on any character. Reroll both hit and wound definitely shouldn't exist. If they do have to exist, then they should be costed appropriately.

That's at full strength. As units die around him his buff becomes less and less useful.

Maybe it should be "pick a unit within 6" or "pick two units within 6"".

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Seriously though, he's over 350 points. He's almost 20% of a 2000 Point list. What don't you want him to do? If you spent that much on a character they better have some good stuff going on.

Well, how about we compare him to a Bloodthirster (which is 340pts). We'll use the Unfettered Fury one, as I think it's the most comparable.

Mobility:
The Bloodthirster moves 12"
Girlyman moves 8" (though he does get +1 to Advance and Charge moves)
Bloodthirster wins (but see below).

Durability:
The Bloodthirster is T7, has 16 wounds with a 3+/5+ save.
Girlyman is T6, has 9 wounds with a 2+/3+ save and the first time he's killed, he gets back up with d6 wounds on a 4+.
Probably about even here (the bloodthirster has more wounds but its saves are significantly worse and Girlyman can get back up with ~3.5 extra wounds).

Shooting:
The Bloodthirster's ranged attack is 8" Assault d3 S7 AP-3 Dd3
Girlyman's ranged attack is 24" Rapid Fire 3 S6 AP-1 D2 (rerolling failed to-hit and to-wound rolls)
Given his rerolls, his extra shots and better range, I think Girlyman wins this one.

Melee:
The Bloodthirster has 7 attacks and one melee weapon: S11 AP-4 Dd6 (I'm assuming that he charged, otherwise he's S10 with 6 attacks.)
Girlyman has 6 attacks and 2 melee weapons: 1) S8 AP-4 D3, inflicts d3 Mortal Wounds for each 6+ rolled to wound.
2) S12 AP-3 D3
(both of Girlyman's weapons reroll failed to-hit and to-wound rolls.)
They're pretty close in terms of stats, but I think Girlyman's rerolls wins it for him here.

Buffs:
The Bloodthirster hands out his Ld10 to nearby Khorne daemons. They also get +1S and +1A if they charge or are charged.
Girlyman gives all Ultramarine units within 6" rerolls to-hit and to-wound. He also gives you 3 CPs.
No contest. Girlyman blows the Bloodthirster out of the water. Even without the command points, his buff applies to far more units, is useful for both shooting and melee.

So, the Bloodthirster has better mobility, whist Girlyman has better shooting, melee and buffs. However, my results might be a bit controversial, so lets pretend that they're at least equal in melee and shooting.

Here's the thing: Girlyman is completely immune to enemy shooting if he isn't the closest target. Not only that but the bloodthirster's movement, WS and attacks degrade substantially as he gets wounded.

Does this really seem balanced to you?

Honestly I would strongly prefer it if most of these re-roll auras were board-wide rather than within 6", compared to what we have now. Obviously that makes them better and things with auras would need to be more expensive, but it gives you more reason to bring same-faction units (since you have a reason to care about units that aren't in your big clump) and also means that you have no reason to clump in the first place, which is just really dumb and boring.

Other kinds of auras like KFF probably still need to be based on proximity, but they should generally be using this "entirely within" wording to limit what they can apply to.

Dionysodorus wrote:
Honestly I would strongly prefer it if all auras were board-wide rather than within 6", compared to what we have now. Obviously that makes them better and things with auras would need to be more expensive, but it gives you more reason to bring same-faction units (since you have a reason to care about units that aren't in your big clump) and also means that you have no reason to clump in the first place, which is just really dumb and boring.

This is nuts. The thing keeping Rowboat in check is that to take objectives, they have to leave his aura in the first place.

Martel732 wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Honestly I would strongly prefer it if all auras were board-wide rather than within 6", compared to what we have now. Obviously that makes them better and things with auras would need to be more expensive, but it gives you more reason to bring same-faction units (since you have a reason to care about units that aren't in your big clump) and also means that you have no reason to clump in the first place, which is just really dumb and boring.

This is nuts. The thing keeping Rowboat in check is that to take objectives, they have to leave his aura in the first place.

I mean, I specifically said it makes things with auras stronger and they should cost more. It just wouldn't be fun playing against these one-big-clump lists even if they were balanced.

Dionysodorus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
Honestly I would strongly prefer it if all auras were board-wide rather than within 6", compared to what we have now. Obviously that makes them better and things with auras would need to be more expensive, but it gives you more reason to bring same-faction units (since you have a reason to care about units that aren't in your big clump) and also means that you have no reason to clump in the first place, which is just really dumb and boring.

This is nuts. The thing keeping Rowboat in check is that to take objectives, they have to leave his aura in the first place.

I mean, I specifically said it makes things with auras stronger and they should cost more. It just wouldn't be fun playing against these one-big-clump lists even if they were balanced.

Make the "aura" hit a set number of units max. That fixes both issues.

Martel732 wrote:

Make the "aura" hit a set number of units max. That fixes both issues.

Yes, this was the first suggestion I made in the thread.

 vipoid wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Seriously though, he's over 350 points. He's almost 20% of a 2000 Point list. What don't you want him to do? If you spent that much on a character they better have some good stuff going on.

Well, how about we compare him to a Bloodthirster (which is 340pts). We'll use the Unfettered Fury one, as I think it's the most comparable.

Mobility:
The Bloodthirster moves 12"
Girlyman moves 8" (though he does get +1 to Advance and Charge moves)
Bloodthirster wins (but see below).

Durability:
The Bloodthirster is T7, has 16 wounds with a 3+/5+ save.
Girlyman is T6, has 9 wounds with a 2+/3+ save and the first time he's killed, he gets back up with d6 wounds on a 4+.
Probably about even here (the bloodthirster has more wounds but its saves are significantly worse and Girlyman can get back up with ~3.5 extra wounds).

Shooting:
The Bloodthirster's ranged attack is 8" Assault d3 S7 AP-3 Dd3
Girlyman's ranged attack is 24" Rapid Fire 3 S6 AP-1 D2 (rerolling failed to-hit and to-wound rolls)
Given his rerolls, his extra shots and better range, I think Girlyman wins this one.

Melee:
The Bloodthirster has 7 attacks and one melee weapon: S11 AP-4 Dd6 (I'm assuming that he charged, otherwise he's S10 with 6 attacks.)
Girlyman has 6 attacks and 2 melee weapons: 1) S8 AP-4 D3, inflicts d3 Mortal Wounds for each 6+ rolled to wound.
2) S12 AP-3 D3
(both of Girlyman's weapons reroll failed to-hit and to-wound rolls.)
They're pretty close in terms of stats, but I think Girlyman's rerolls wins it for him here.

Buffs:
The Bloodthirster hands out his Ld10 to nearby Khorne daemons. They also get +1S and +1A if they charge or are charged.
Girlyman gives all Ultramarine units within 6" rerolls to-hit and to-wound. He also gives you 3 CPs.
No contest. Girlyman blows the Bloodthirster out of the water. Even without the command points, his buff applies to far more units, is useful for both shooting and melee.

So, the Bloodthirster has better mobility, whist Girlyman has better shooting, melee and buffs. However, my results might be a bit controversial, so lets pretend that they're at least equal in melee and shooting.

Here's the thing: Girlyman is completely immune to enemy shooting if he isn't the closest target. Not only that but the bloodthirster's movement, WS and attacks degrade substantially as he gets wounded.

Does this really seem balanced to you?

Actually yes. You can obviously say the Bloodthirster is worse at range combat, but rerolls are super insignificant because both units are hitting on 2+ (so the first round of combat they land the same number of attacks at 5.8, and then the Bloodthirster is landing 5). Plus the D6 damage is much better than a chance for mortal wounds on a 6, all while wounding everything below T6 on 2+.

Plus with higher mobility + Fly, you can really choose your targets. Plus with higher mobility, it's a lot easier to get your wanted aura bonuses where you want them.

Dionysodorus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Make the "aura" hit a set number of units max. That fixes both issues.

Yes, this was the first suggestion I made in the thread.

I come up with that independently, but if I can think of it, so can many others.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Actually yes. You can obviously say the Bloodthirster is worse at range combat, but rerolls are super insignificant because both units are hitting on 2+ (so the first round of combat they land the same number of attacks at 5.8, and then the Bloodthirster is landing 5). Plus the D6 damage is much better than a chance for mortal wounds on a 6, all while wounding everything below T6 on 2+.

3 damage is more reliable and the extra mortal wounds and rerolls easily push it over the top.

What's more, once the Bloodthirster is down to half wounds it's melee becomes far worse than Girlyman's.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Plus with higher mobility + Fly, you can really choose your targets.

And with no protection from shooting, any unit can target you.

What's more, once he's down to half wounds, his mobility is no better than Girlyman's, whilst none of Girlyman's stats ever deteriorate.

You're also completely ignoring Girlyman's vastly superior buffs.

Martel732 wrote:

I come up with that independently, but if I can think of it, so can many others.

Congratulations? Like, I have no idea what you're trying to do in this conversation. I said something. You made an embarrassing reply that revealed that you hadn't actually read the thing you were replying to. I pointed this out. You brought up an alternative "fix" to the aura problem that several people see as if you were disagreeing with me. I pointed out that actually, no, I already made clear that I thought that was a fine solution. And now you're wanting credit or something for coming up with it first.

 Galas wrote:
I think he is actually overcosted. Wheres the point of having Guilliman when you can take more Stormravens?

He and Magnus should be made minimun 50-150 points cheaper.

Bwahahaha, undercosted? Guilliman is the singel best model in the entire game and you want him to cost the same as Marneus Calgar?
Also: Stormravens caught the nerfblade

Dionysodorus wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

I come up with that independently, but if I can think of it, so can many others.

Congratulations? Like, I have no idea what you're trying to do in this conversation. I said something. You made an embarrassing reply that revealed that you hadn't actually read the thing you were replying to. I pointed this out. You brought up an alternative "fix" to the aura problem that several people see as if you were disagreeing with me. I pointed out that actually, no, I already made clear that I thought that was a fine solution. And now you're wanting credit or something for coming up with it first.

Not at all. No credit. I just thought it was interesting that we both came up with the same thing independently.

And no, I didn't read the whole thing.

Stop complaining it's getting old....

 vipoid wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Actually yes. You can obviously say the Bloodthirster is worse at range combat, but rerolls are super insignificant because both units are hitting on 2+ (so the first round of combat they land the same number of attacks at 5.8, and then the Bloodthirster is landing 5). Plus the D6 damage is much better than a chance for mortal wounds on a 6, all while wounding everything below T6 on 2+.

3 damage is more reliable and the extra mortal wounds and rerolls easily push it over the top.

What's more, once the Bloodthirster is down to half wounds it's melee becomes far worse than Girlyman's.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Plus with higher mobility + Fly, you can really choose your targets.

And with no protection from shooting, any unit can target you.

What's more, once he's down to half wounds, his mobility is no better than Girlyman's, whilst none of Girlyman's stats ever deteriorate.

You're also completely ignoring Girlyman's vastly superior buffs.

You can tout "reliability" but the fact is that the average roll on a D6 is 3.5. You can proclaim it might be worse than that during the whole game, and I can proclaim the opposite. Mortal wounds are unreliable in this instance due to the randomness you proclaim to be the issue for the D6 damage on the Bloodthirster. Difference here is you need the 6 to wound, whereas the Bloodthirster doesn't need such a gimmick.

Also being able to be targeted doesn't matter if something can't shoot at it. A Bloodthirster is going to be in melee, which means unless the target has Fly itself needs to disengage and lose a turn. Not everything is going to be able to shoot at it and take down 14 wounds. You're overreacting to potential protection for Roboute, who will be a 360 Point rock of rerolls and won't do any melee.

JNAProductions wrote:Also, is he an infantry model? Because if so, it takes...

Only around 19 Vindicare turns to kill him (maybe less, if you roll a lot of 6s to wound). But if he's not, then with T6, it takes around 35 Vindicare Turns, I think.

He is not~
Appropriately he is a Monster.
The Truth is Girlyman isn't a revived Primarch
He is Cegorach in disguise

vipoid wrote:

 Talamare wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Could someone do the math on how hard Girlyman is to kill vs a Greater Daemon? (Noting that the latter don't bring an incredible buff, can't hide behind units and can't revive from the dead.)

CSM Daemon Prince (Not Khorne +1 Attack)
Sword
((9 + (1/2 * 3.5)) / (5/6)) / (4 * 35/36 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 3) = 4.97 Daemon Princes / Turns

+3 Claws
((9 + (1/2 * 3.5)) / (5/6)) / (7 * 35/36 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 2) = 4.26 Daemon Princes / Turns

Axe
((9 + (1/2 * 3.5)) / (5/6)) / (4 * 28/36 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 3) = 6.21 Daemon Princes / Turns

Let me know what else

Sorry, I meant in terms of how hard it is to kill Girlyman, compared to how hard it is to kill a Greater Daemon with the same weapon(s).

Let's keep using Claw Daemon Princes as a Measure

vs Bloodthrister
(16 / (5/6)) / (7 * 35/36 * 1/2 * 2/3 * 2) = 4.23 Daemon Princes

vs Lord of Change
(16 / (5/6)) / (7 * 35/36 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 2) = 5.64 Daemon Princes

vs Unclean One
((12 / (5/6)) / (2/3)) / (7 * 35/36 * 1/2 * 2/3 * 2) = 4.76 Daemon Princes

vs Keeper of Secrets
(12 / (5/6)) / (7 * 35/36 * 1/2 * 2/3 * 2) = 3.17 Daemon Princes


Using Lascannons [Girlyman - ((9 + (1/2 * 3.5)) / (5/6)) / (1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 3.5) = 24.87 Lascannon Shots ]
vs Bloodthrister
(16 / (5/6)) / (1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5) = 18.51 Lascannons

vs Lord of Change
(16 / (5/6)) / (1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 1/2 * 3.5) = 24.68 Lascannons

vs Unclean One
((12 / (5/6)) / (2/3)) / (1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5) = 20.82 Lascannons

vs Keeper of Secrets
(12 / (5/6)) / (1 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 2/3 * 3.5) = 13.88 Lascannons

One more for the Audience at Home! Girly Man Killing Greater Daemons! ((6 * 35/36 * 3/4 * 3) + (6 * 35/36 * 9/36 * 2))
vs Bloodthrister
(16 / (5/6)) / ((6 * 35/36 * 3/4 * 3 * 2/3) + (6 * 35/36 * 9/36 * 2)) = 1.64 Turns

vs Lord of Change
(16 / (5/6)) / ((6 * 35/36 * 3/4 * 3 * 1/2) + (6 * 35/36 * 9/36 * 2)) = 2.02 Turns

vs Unclean One
((12 / (5/6)) / (2/3)) / ((6 * 35/36 * 3/4 * 3 * 2/3) + (6 * 35/36 * 9/36 * 2)) = 1.85 Turns

vs Keeper of Secrets
(12 / (5/6)) / ((6 * 35/36 * 3/4 * 3 * 2/3) + (6 * 35/36 * 9/36 * 2)) = 1.23 Turns

andysonic1 wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
((9 + (1/2 * 3.5)) / (5/6)) / (4 * 28/36 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 3) = 6.21 Daemon Princes / Turns

I feel like something went a little wrong here. Did you change the AP on the Axe to -3 and include the -1WS when using the weapon? Using a calculator says it'll take 5 turns not 7.

I did factor in the reduced weapon skill
I ignored the +1 AP, 2+/3++. You only need AP-1

EDIT I forgot to include Daemon Prince own reroll aura, I'm going to add it to this post, but I'm not going to bother going back to edit the previous post.

I Think that we would se a change in how people view him in 6 months when we have the first 10 codexes with new rules, army specific relics warlord traits, psyhic powers and strats..

There are some beastly relics and strats in the SM codex.. just look at the BT relic that negates Magnus smite on a 4+

With All the new options the armies are getting there is sure to be some nasty things there AS Well.

And again 360 points for 1 character is a fair Price comparede to the Price you end up paying Per SM unit.. i Think that his Price fits Well inside the dex.. and for people who want to play a pure SM army with no baneblades. Knights, 180 points ig bettalion for 3 CP. I Think it is fair to keep him as he is. Remember not everyone is a turnament player who cheeses, the dex has to accomodate both sides..

And you Will only see him in smurf armies

And my guess is that Magnus Will end up being much tougher when the CSM dex lands

I just wonder how you can't pick out Rowboat on the battlefield when something like a Hive Tyrant can be picked out in an army full of similarly sized and shaped monsters.......

 Battlesong wrote:
I just wonder how you can't pick out Rowboat on the battlefield when something like a Hive Tyrant can be picked out in an army full of similarly sized and shaped monsters.......

A - SHOOT THEIR LEADER?!
B - Who is their Leader?
A - HOW ABOUT THAT GUY WHO IS 3 FEET TALLER THAN EVERYONE...
B - I don't know... He kinda of blends in with everyone else...
A - HE'S WEARING PURE GOLD TRIMMED ARMOR!
B - I mean... I guess... but like...
A - HE HAS A GIANT F'ING FLAMING SWORD!!!
B - Listen Captain, I'm starting to sense a bit of hostility...

 vipoid wrote:


So, the Bloodthirster has better mobility, whist Girlyman has better shooting, melee and buffs. However, my results might be a bit controversial, so lets pretend that they're at least equal in melee and shooting.

Here's the thing: Girlyman is completely immune to enemy shooting if he isn't the closest target. Not only that but the bloodthirster's movement, WS and attacks degrade substantially as he gets wounded.

Does this really seem balanced to you?

One other minor point. RG is a LoW - BT is not.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Yes, the only factions are Chaos and Ultramarines.

I look forward to seeing the 360 point 2+/3++ Imperial Guard commander with 9 wounds.

Give us Solar Macharius back, have "fix it all Cawl" bring him back as a clone. Give him a 30" bubble he can issue orders in, have him issue 10 orders a turn and give us +8 Command Points. I will even settle for a 2+/2++ with 7 wounds haha... I am being completely facetious.

In regards to the overall topic "GW does not know balance" - I will respectfully disagree. Power fists are going down to 12 points and thunder hammers to 16. If they can pinpoint little things like that, which would have been noticed well before the community made a stink about it to get the book to print, then clearly they do see the problems.

RG will get his point bump or rule change in due time.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 3orangewhips wrote:
I feel you Xeno--I think Draigo porting around under 2 ravens is better, but that's because those guns are pointed at me.

Driago can work with any strategy because he can be placed anywhere. Any strat involving Gurlyman has to be focused around walking up the board with him - to say this isn't ideal is an understatement. I will say - if Guilliman could deep strike - he'd be worth 500 points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also - this is relevent. Calgar has been reduced to 190 points per a french codex release pdf that can be found in the Codex rumors thread.

Calgar gives +2 command points. Has reroll all hits and can deep strike with his terminator armor. I'm pretty sure I'm taking him every game now. I might even sit Guilliman down with calgar at this price.

I have been using Calgar almost every game already since 8th dropped with his armour halving all damage, and Guilliman has only seen the table twice but if this is true Cagar will be an auto-take for any Ultramarines army. Being that cheap he's very viable as the main HQ in the detachment to which Guilliman is allied.

Daedalus81 wrote:
In regards to the overall topic "GW does not know balance" - I will respectfully disagree. Power fists are going down to 12 points and thunder hammers to 16. If they can pinpoint little things like that, which would have been noticed well before the community made a stink about it to get the book to print, then clearly they do see the problems.

RG will get his point bump or rule change in due time.

Yep, this is certainly encouraging.

Has anyone faced this list yet?


Roboute Guilliman
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
Devastator w/Missile Launcher
... etc