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.

As we've been through before:
If "one statline" is a problem, why do people complain so much about Reapers and Spears, who share the Dire Avenger statline?

 Eonfuzz wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

No I was around. Seem to remember IG winning everything and they got buffed in their codex. LOL. Index marines is basically the same thing as codex marines minus razors are like 15 points more expensive and Gman went up 40 points. In other words - space marines were weak AF in the index they are just a little weaker now. Also storm ravens were a lot cheaper in index. 5 Storm raven armies...yeah...space marines let me tell yeah.

Looks like someone's forgotten about the advantage of being one of the only armies with Stratagems, Relics, Faction Traits and sane point costs.

Have you seen space marine stratagems?
How about Ultra marine trait that lets me fall back and shoot with infantry or dreads only at -1 to hit? When anything with the fly keyword does this at full ballistic?

In any case yeah - they did get some toys for like a month that no one else had. All their toys are crap by comparison / all their units are overcosted / they even have the worst psychic powers to boot.

Bharring wrote:
As we've been through before:
If "one statline" is a problem, why do people complain so much about Reapers and Spears, who share the Dire Avenger statline?

I don't know much about spears, but for reapers, its special equipment that is way undercosted. If marine devs got similar special equipment, they would be equivalent. But they don't.

Assault marines need to have more perks over a tac marine than a jump pack and chainsword, or tacs need to be a lot nastier.

Bharring wrote:
But the belief that where they were at 6-12 months ago was "trash" is a problem. If we can't see when and how they *weren't* trash, it's nearly impossible to figure out if they're trash, by how much, and what needs to change to make them non-trash.

Besides, this line of discussion came from "even if Gman wins tournies, SM is trash", which was contrasted with CWE Index being considered OP because of one model *in another book* that was OP at the time. Once again, it speaks to what it means to be "trash".

I'd argue that Gman isn't quite good enough to make SM top tier now. But if "trash" means anything but undisputed #1, it's a very different discussion than "trash" meaning can't hold its own against more than a couple other books.

how many tournaments are there a year? It seems Gman wins a tourney every couple of months. It is meaningless. All you need to do to win a tournament is win 5 games in a row. Almost any army can do that every once and a while - even if it is not very strong.

For example - I have gone second in my last 13 games. The odds of that are really low - but it does happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
As we've been through before:
If "one statline" is a problem, why do people complain so much about Reapers and Spears, who share the Dire Avenger statline?

I don't know much about spears, but for reapers, its special equipment that is way undercosted. If marine devs got similar special equipment, they would be equivalent. But they don't.

Assault marines need to have more perks over a tac marine than a jump pack and chainsword, or tacs need to be a lot nastier.

31 points - T4 2W A216" move 3+/4++ to shooting attacks. Auto advance 6"

4 Shuriken Shots and a laser lance shot. Assault 1 Str 6 ap-4 flat2 damage 6" range. This weapon can also be used in CC. Attacks resolve at str 6 ap-4 flat 2.
The exarch also has +1 W and +1 attack and rerolls wounds vs vehical vs Except he has 3 attacks and str 8 instead of 6.

Compare that to a vangaurd vet and laugh your butt off.

-1 To Hit traits are fine when you aren't getting more than 2 stacks. Raven Guard certainly aren't doing that...

So spears don't have dire avenger stats at all.

"Have you seen space marine stratagems?"
They were certainly better than the CWE strats at the time.

"How about Ultra marine trait that lets me fall back and shoot with infantry or dreads only at -1 to hit? When anything with the fly keyword does this at full ballistic?"
Better than most faction's trait at the time which was:

I mean, that's situational and not great, but every other faction's non-fly units that fell back couldn't shoot at all. Compared to no trait, the UM trait is better. Again, better than the CWE/Tau/Nid/DE/etc traits at the time.

"they did get some toys for like a month that no one else had."
July 2017 until November 2017 isn't "like a month". There was only "like a month" until they were 1 of 2 with books. Still very exclusive at that point. Many, many more months before the "average" army had their toys.

"how many tournaments are there a year? It seems Gman wins a tourney every couple of months. It is meaningless. All you need to do to win a tournament is win 5 games in a row. Almost any army can do that every once and a while - even if it is not very strong. "
From the section you quoted from me: "I'd argue that Gman isn't quite good enough to make SM top tier now."
How can you read that and conclude that I'm arguing Gman is so good that he makes SM top tier now? Seriously?

"For example - I have gone second in my second 13 games. The odds of that are really low - but it does happen."
That's why, when discussing which lists were good when, I don't look for an example or two of an army winning in that era. I pull up a list of winning lists of that era then look at them. Hypothesis, then data collection, instead of seeking the data to fit the hypothesis.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"So spears don't have dire avenger stats at all."
"Compare that to a vangaurd vet and laugh your butt off."
Seriously? Vanguard Vet is the SM equivelent of an elite on a bike? And not something like Company Vet On Bike? VV would be more Banshee or Scorpion.

DA -> Shining Spear
-2 basic weapons instead of 1
-Massive movement buff
-Must take CC/special weapon (Lance)
-2W
-Bike armor
-4++ vs shooting replaces DA special rule

Tac -> Company Vet
-2 basic weapons instead of 1
-Massive movement buff
-May take CC weapon (long list) and/or Special weapon (incl. PG)
-2W
-Bike armor (same as Tac, though)

Shining Spears are better pointed, use an Eldar bike (so can move more), and has an awesome special rule. But they are "just an upgrade of a DA" in the same way that a Company Vet Bike is an upgrade of a Tac.

In either case, yes, Shining Spears share their statline with DAs much the same way that SM bikes share their statlines with Tacs.

WTF would you consider the analoge of an elite Biker unit to be that of a jumppacker?

 Crimson wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


So, lets see how those non-alaitoc eldar lists are doing at tournaments.

Though there the choice at least is between 'pretty damn good' and 'brokenly OP'. But yeah, it is still a problem. I knew this would happen when they announced the subfaction rules. GW can't make them balanced, and as there is no associated point cost, the balance cannot be achieved that way either. But as I just said in another thread, armywide -1 to hit was a terrible idea, and if they would just get rid of those it would fix a lot of balance issue.

For marines they need to fix both RGs, Guilliman and Raven Guard, and then adjust the point costs so that marines can be competitive without these crutches.

Can you point out to me the other eldar subfaction tactic that's "pretty damn good" compared to, say, non-UM space marine chapters?

You've got:

-Iron Hands (we all know how enthusiastic marine players are about this one!)
-max casualty of 1 for morale, vehicles degrade less (This one I'll definitely say is pretty solid in a vehicle-focused list, but eldar are highly MSU focused and have good LD anyway so the first part rarely helps much)
-reroll hits of one with shuriken weapons (if only we had a 60pt character who did this for everything...)
-reroll charges, and two bad units get to move and fire their scatter lasers and dark lances (how are those competitive Black Templars lists working?)

Compare to off-meta tactics for marines, particularly Salamanders and Raven Guard.

Eldar has a lot of the same traits as space marines do - they just dominate with them because they have better costed units...good stratagems...2 good lists of psychic powers. Plus their traits apply to all their stuff.

Imagine is CWE had power from pain and flayed skull...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
"Have you seen space marine stratagems?"
They were certainly better than the CWE strats at the time.

"How about Ultra marine trait that lets me fall back and shoot with infantry or dreads only at -1 to hit? When anything with the fly keyword does this at full ballistic?"
Better than most faction's trait at the time which was:

I mean, that's situational and not great, but every other faction's non-fly units that fell back couldn't shoot at all. Compared to no trait, the UM trait is better. Again, better than the CWE/Tau/Nid/DE/etc traits at the time.

"they did get some toys for like a month that no one else had."
July 2017 until November 2017 isn't "like a month". There was only "like a month" until they were 1 of 2 with books. Still very exclusive at that point. Many, many more months before the "average" army had their toys.

"how many tournaments are there a year? It seems Gman wins a tourney every couple of months. It is meaningless. All you need to do to win a tournament is win 5 games in a row. Almost any army can do that every once and a while - even if it is not very strong. "
From the section you quoted from me: "I'd argue that Gman isn't quite good enough to make SM top tier now."
How can you read that and conclude that I'm arguing Gman is so good that he makes SM top tier now? Seriously?

"For example - I have gone second in my second 13 games. The odds of that are really low - but it does happen."
That's why, when discussing which lists were good when, I don't look for an example or two of an army winning in that era. I pull up a list of winning lists of that era then look at them. Hypothesis, then data collection, instead of seeking the data to fit the hypothesis.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"So spears don't have dire avenger stats at all."
"Compare that to a vangaurd vet and laugh your butt off."
Seriously? Vanguard Vet is the SM equivelent of an elite on a bike? And not something like Company Vet On Bike? VV would be more Banshee or Scorpion.

DA -> Shining Spear
-2 basic weapons instead of 1
-Massive movement buff
-Must take CC/special weapon (Lance)
-2W
-Bike armor
-4++ vs shooting replaces DA special rule

Tac -> Company Vet
-2 basic weapons instead of 1
-Massive movement buff
-May take CC weapon (long list) and/or Special weapon (incl. PG)
-2W
-Bike armor (same as Tac, though)

Shining Spears are better pointed, use an Eldar bike (so can move more), and has an awesome special rule. But they are "just an upgrade of a DA" in the same way that a Company Vet Bike is an upgrade of a Tac.

In either case, yes, Shining Spears share their statline with DAs much the same way that SM bikes share their statlines with Tacs.

WTF would you consider the analoge of an elite Biker unit to be that of a jumppacker?

I'll save you the time for the annylisis.

It's kind of like poker.

DE are like pocket kings

Space marines are pocket 2's

First, what, exactly, is that supposed to imply beyond "DE > SM"? I could see "DE and SM both have in-book synergy, but SM is still bad" may somewhat be what you mean? I'm at a loss.

Second,
How does SM vs DE relate to whether any non-bad army has non-troops that share Troop statlines?

 Xenomancers wrote:
Eldar has a lot of the same traits as space marines do - they just dominate with them because they have better costed units...good stratagems...2 good lists of psychic powers. Plus their traits apply to all their stuff.

Imagine is CWE had power from pain and flayed skull...

Again, I'm gonna have to ask, what is this "them"? It amazes me that you can have a stance towards Space Marines where "Oh, so [Ultramarines, Raven Guard, Guilliman Armies, Stormraven Spam] is decent, but SPACE MARINES are bad!" nearly every time anyone posts a marine list that does well at any event, among the responses from you and other members of your church is "wheres muh iron hands tournament list?"

Where are the tournament winning Biel-tan lists? Tournament winning Ulthwe lists? Who is dominating with non-Alaitoc eldar? All we've ever seen is single units in Ynnari detachments taking the White Scars - sorry, I mean Saim-Hann - stratagem.

You just seem to blindly attack any non-marine faction as OP and needs nurfs regardless of where they actually fall in current tournament tier lists. Where did CWE fall in that ATC result lineup? Were they right at the top? Oh, tenth? seventh in terms of faction popularity?

You don't apply any of the same standards you apply to marines to any other faction, and will decry nearly everything as OP if you can use it to cast marines as bad, and I just do not get it. They're pretty universally poor and need buffs, but what's with the crusade to get everything nerfed down to the effectively index level that marines are at?

Bharring wrote:
First, what, exactly, is that supposed to imply beyond "DE > SM"? I could see "DE and SM both have in-book synergy, but SM is still bad" may somewhat be what you mean? I'm at a loss.

Second,
How does SM vs DE relate to whether any non-bad army has non-troops that share Troop statlines?

Basically I was just trying to tell you the analysis of tournament data is a waste of time when the answer is so simple. You can make a space marine army that can win a game.
Pocket 2's technically has a 50% chance to beat a randomly drawn hand heads up. Where as pocket aces have an 80% chance to beat any randomly drawn hand. You can still lose with it though.

Really - every army should be winning tournaments every once and a while. The fact that they don't is just because not enough people play them. Space marines are a highly played army - you can expect to see them win some events. It's a long shot every-time they do though. This game is probability - with some skill mixed in.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Eldar has a lot of the same traits as space marines do - they just dominate with them because they have better costed units...good stratagems...2 good lists of psychic powers. Plus their traits apply to all their stuff.

Imagine is CWE had power from pain and flayed skull...

Again, I'm gonna have to ask, what is this "them"? It amazes me that you can have a stance towards Space Marines where "Oh, so [Ultramarines, Raven Guard, Guilliman Armies, Stormraven Spam] is decent, but SPACE MARINES are bad!" nearly every time anyone posts a marine list that does well at any event, among the responses from you and other members of your church is "wheres muh iron hands tournament list?"

Where are the tournament winning Biel-tan lists? Tournament winning Ulthwe lists? Who is dominating with non-Alaitoc eldar? All we've ever seen is single units in Ynnari detachments taking the White Scars - sorry, I mean Saim-Hann - stratagem.

You just seem to blindly attack any non-marine faction as OP and needs nurfs regardless of where they actually fall in current tournament tier lists. Where did CWE fall in that ATC result lineup? Were they right at the top? Oh, tenth? seventh in terms of faction popularity?

You don't apply any of the same standards you apply to marines to any other faction, and will decry nearly everything as OP if you can use it to cast marines as bad, and I just do not get it. They're pretty universally poor and need buffs, but what's with the crusade to get everything nerfed down to the effectively index level that marines are at?

Why would you take anything but the best army trait to a tournament? Unless you are space marines or Ad mech. Who have their best build tied to weak army traits from a special character.
Raven gaurd is the best space marine trait - Guilliman is the best build. This is another factor that hurts space marines.
Ad mech have the same trait with the same OP stratagem - but give up Cawl to use it.

If only beiltan had access to shinning spears - that is what people would play I am sure. Limitations are a huge factor - eldar have unlimited access to their best characters/stratagems/units with whatever trait they want.

Also - I don't want nerfs. I want marine buffs because they are a clear outlier in power compared to the rest of the game. (some things need nerfs thought - like spears...and castellan knights)

"Basically I was just trying to tell you the analysis of tournament data is a waste of time when the answer is so simple. You can make a space marine army that can win a game.
Pocket 2's technically has a 50% chance to beat a randomly drawn hand heads up. Where as pocket aces have an 80% chance to beat any randomly drawn hand. You can still lose with it though. "
You can, sure. Odds of a player, assuming they get pocket 2s every hand, of winning 5 hands straight? 0.032%. No, I don't mean 3%. So, for every *3125* 5-hand tournaments, you'd expect that to happen... once on average. At ~15 big tournies a month, you should see it... once every 208 months?

Math is useful. When used *correctly*. Analogies can be powerful, but only when they bring something to the table.

"If only beiltan had access to shinning spears"
In what codex did they not? In no rules or fluff that i can think of would Alaitoc have more ready access to Spears than BielTan. Whether BielTan or Samm-Hain has more is debateable, but that's. Where did you come up with that?

" eldar have unlimited access to their best characters/stratagems/units with whatever trait they want."
Most of CWE Characters don't get *any* traits. Two meh characters get Alaitoc, but the best character that gets a trait is Uthwe. Where did you pull that from?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry, I got turned around.
You're saying Bobby G is not like Ms Ynnari because UM can't take Bobby G and get the Raven Guard trait on his guys, but CWE can take Ms Ynnari (who isn't CWE) and still get the Alaitoc trait on her guys (she can't)?

If that were true, you might have a point.

Bharring wrote:
What about IG that don't like Guardsmen? Wait, no, sorry. Bad example.

Whew, glad you acknowledged this as a bad example. I can't imagine getting into a faction with the idea that I would hate their troops, especially if i had been gifted point-for-point the best troops in the entire game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

Sorry, I got turned around.
You're saying Bobby G is not like Ms Ynnari because UM can't take Bobby G and get the Raven Guard trait on his guys, but CWE can take Ms Ynnari (who isn't CWE) and still get the Alaitoc trait on her guys (she can't)?

If that were true, you might have a point.

Eldar retain their craftworld keyword when they become Ynnari. So they can still receive <craftworld> buffs based on radius and you can still use <craftworld> stratagems on them.

But not their *traits*. So you can't use Raven Guards "-1 to hit" or Iron Hands "6+ FNP" on units that take SfD. In other words, they can't get Alaitoc's *trait*.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(You can still use <Adeptus Astartes> on Raven Guard units in lists that take Bobby G.)

Yes but, there is no overlapping <GUILLIMAN> keyword. Making him entirely worthless for Raven Guard.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Bharring wrote:
So when Ynnari were the broken hotness (Index), CWE was OP because they could field Whats-Her-Face. But when Bobby G was/is good, Marines are poop because it's just Bobby G?

(Since the codex, CWE are unquestionably good now.)

Viable builds being locked to one subfaction or even worse, to one specific special character, is a failure in codex design. You're supposed to be able play various chapters with this book.

So, lets see how those non-alaitoc eldar lists are doing at tournaments.

*crickets*

Actually Ultwhe Guardian-Spam and SainHaim+Ynnary are used too. But to be honest when a sub-faction has no associated special character does it even matters that is the only viable one in the codex? Of course it lacks more options, but it isn't that big of a deal.
What I lose if I use my Iron Warriors as Alpha Legion? Nothing.

So you can't take Bobby G in a detatchment with units using the Raven Guard trait? Isn't that at least similar to not being able to take Ms Ynnari in a detatchment using the Alaitoc trait?

Is not like Ynnari are any better designed than Gorillaman.

I would say it's not very reasonable to dismiss one but not the other.

They are both a failure, shown by how GW can't make Ynnari work properly without being OP in all of their incarnations, and Roboto G is just competitive enough because his army sucks. You put him in any other Codex and it would become the most OP thing ever made.

Ynnari need to be their own codex for proper balance. The way it's done now is ridiculous.

If Ynnari need their own Codex, why doesn't Gman?

Isn't it the same basic problem for both? So much of a force multiplier other subfactions don't get?

Bharring wrote:
If Ynnari need their own Codex, why doesn't Gman?

Isn't it the same basic problem for both? So much of a force multiplier other subfactions don't get?

Roboute's issue is his aura needs to be nerfed, then the mariine issues need to be fixed for all marines.

Ynnari need their own rules, or no rules, not other people's rules plus.

Bharring wrote:
If Ynnari need their own Codex, why doesn't Gman?

Isn't it the same basic problem for both? So much of a force multiplier other subfactions don't get?

Except you could use Ynnari with Sam Hain, Alaitoc, etc, and they retain their much of their identity. They can use stratagems, buffs, special units, etc. The chapter tactics themselves are a complete joke anyway, as they don't impact much of the marine line. Even if you lost chapter tactics, there are better ways to use Guilliman than Ultramarines if he made those buffs available to all Astartes keyword units. For instance, Grey Knights would happily give up the entirety of their tactics to be used with Guilliman. Imperial Fists, White Scars, could make interesting pairings too, with Guilliman being fast enough to keep up with White Scars and Bolter Drill inspired Sternguards with full rerolls.

Guilliman is far more restricted, you have to see this.

And in general I agree that both units are poorly balanced. I further agree that if you dropped Guilliman into literally ANY other army non-marines in the game, he would instantly become the most broken thing in 40k history. It's the fact that the marine range is so bad in general that makes him not insane broken.

What are we still arguing about here?

Gulliman makes marines less terrible but still not as good as the good codexes, right?

Marines really aren't good at anything (shooting, CQC, infantry, vehicles, defense, psychic, mobility, strategems, tactics). At best they are mid-tier (raven guard aggressors, guilliman backed dev squads) but lack the tools to leverage those areas where they are not terrible into a cohesive army with an identity that can win games.

Their inability to field a true TAC list is probably what holds them back the most (can't fight hordes and knights because they are over-costed/under-powered). But even then they can't do any one thing better than other armies can do that one thing (ATC results).

I feel like most posters agree with all of these and the battle is about what "trash tier" means. If you play in a casual meta there is no such thing. Most armies can compete with most other armies because you are not facing DE backed up by CWE or knights or guards+custodes every game.

For those of us in net-list, current meta hotness trash tier is a real thing. There are matchups that I'm not going to be able to win (at least with some reasonable chance of success) due to the imbalance between a good, good codex list and a good, bad codex list.

As far as cat-lady vs guilliman. CWE still have to tools to field highly competitive lists without her. They work really well in soup lists and the hotness is CWE + DE. You really don't see marines at top tables with or without guilliman. Maybe scouts when we needed to screen from first turn charges but now that has been removed there's really no reason to take them.

You guys have figured it out. Tuning the marine codex to work with guilliman ruined it. There are rumors of all the primarchs coming out and if that is the plan then maybe marines can be saved by The Lion or Dorn or whatever other cash grab mini-dex GW is going to put out that desperate marine players will gobble up.

ITC missions really punish G-man lists because board control is so vital to scoring points.

I took G-man to ATC and did very well against a variety of opponents. I scored 28 points against Guard, BA, Shield Captain list. I killed 50 Guard, 12 mortars, two shield captains and 2 BA captains, 15 Scouts - basically a horde list with character backup. I faced 6 Knights from two lists and left 5 of them dead. I tabled a Tau list with 3 Riptides and 3 Ghostkeels and a ton of drones.

G-man
2 Repulsers, all dakka
3 Predators, Heavy bolters, auto cannon
Thunderfire cannon
3 Scouts (2- snipers)
Smash Captain
Techmarine

Killshot is something else on turn 1, but that never killed a Knight on its own. Repulsors are crazy with rerolls. They fly, they reduce charges by 2, they overwatch like mad with G-Man nearby. They are workhorses. I went second against a list with 3 Knights and 3 Shield captains. Lost a predator turn 1 and tabled him except for a single 5-man squad hiding in the back corner.

In 3 practice games it tabled Dark Eldar every time. My lowest scoring game was against Eldar/DE. I lost 2 predators, repulsor, 2 Scouts and the Techmarine. I killed everything except 2 ranger squads, a warlock and a ravager with 5 warriors.

This is a potent list.

A version of it won the Buckeye Battles GT recently.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/07/23/pure-space-marines-win-the-buckeye-battles-gt/

DarthDiggler wrote:
ITC missions really punish G-man lists because board control is so vital to scoring points.

I took G-man to ATC and did very well against a variety of opponents. I scored 28 points against Guard, BA, Shield Captain list. I killed 50 Guard, 12 mortars, two shield captains and 2 BA captains, 15 Scouts - basically a horde list with character backup. I faced 6 Knights from two lists and left 5 of them dead. I tabled a Tau list with 3 Riptides and 3 Ghostkeels and a ton of drones.

G-man
2 Repulsers, all dakka
3 Predators, Heavy bolters, auto cannon
Thunderfire cannon
3 Scouts (2- snipers)
Smash Captain
Techmarine

Killshot is something else on turn 1, but that never killed a Knight on its own. Repulsors are crazy with rerolls. They fly, they reduce charges by 2, they overwatch like mad with G-Man nearby. They are workhorses. I went second against a list with 3 Knights and 3 Shield captains. Lost a predator turn 1 and tabled him except for a single 5-man squad hiding in the back corner.

In 3 practice games it tabled Dark Eldar every time. My lowest scoring game was against Eldar/DE. I lost 2 predators, repulsor, 2 Scouts and the Techmarine. I killed everything except 2 ranger squads, a warlock and a ravager with 5 warriors.

This is a potent list.

A version of it won the Buckeye Battles GT recently.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/07/23/pure-space-marines-win-the-buckeye-battles-gt/

What detachments did you take for that list?
Also people were only killing 1 predator per turn that is some bad rolling or something odd because no way does a predator last 1 turn in the open.

Battalion - Superheavy auxillery - heavy auxiliary (-1 cp)

I outranged most everything and would deploy the predators, in some cases, 57-60” away from antitank guns. I could move up 12” and fire with rerolls. My Scouts would create a buffer so BA smashcaptains couldn’t ‘wings of fire’ into a tank turn 1. Sometimes I would continue the screen with characters.

After turn 1 most opponents would forget about the predators and try to stop the repulsor who were doing a ton of damage. In most of my games I would end up using predators to screen for the repulsors.

Yes it is widely known that G-man getting turn 1 is straight up fabulous. No one is disputing that he's powerful. For a while I ran a list that featured Guilliman, Tigurius, Smashcaptain, scouts, single-heavy squads for the double hellfire / krakk, stormraven, and miscellaneous stuff. It worked very well when it went first. But there are quite a few things that would feth your couch.

And, in a meta that definitely favors gunlines, building a G-man gunline isn't the worst decision in the world.

ITC doesn't punish Guilliman. It punishes lists that ignore the movement phase for as much dakka as humanly possible.