I just can't believe all this talk about allies. I just can't understand how GW did lots of work to get rid of them and for 6 months, we finally had no allies in 5th edition, but to bring it back in 6th edition makes no sense to me. Before it was like taboo to use them, but now it seems alot, and I mean alot of people are excited about using it and having another codex in their army. Since it was considered cheesy to do so before, and seeing now how say GK and SW can ally with each other, would you be TFG now?

Would you even play agaisnt people like that? I think if I see a person who does exactly this and only cherry picks the best of both codicies, I don't think I will play that person. Why, I don't think I would have a fun game. If a person can't use his codex but has to use allies and cherry picks the best units to me you are TFG. Now if you use it for fluff reasons and they are not the best units and not cherry picking, then I would play because that would be a fun game then.

So what do the members of Dakka Dakka think? Are you TFG if you cherry pick the best units of 2 codicies?

in short no

I will be useing allies to do this

Stormraven
2 stormtalons (cant do it i know, so will hav to ask permision)
stormeagle
6 landspeeders (ravenwing)
2 ravenwing attack sqauds with attack bikes
Liby on bike (to test new powers)
Sammael

I look foward to useing an incredibly fast force to outmanuever my oponents and i it will look cool as hell

I personally don't think I'd do it, but I don't think I have a specific issue with the bare concept of it. Naturally, we'll need to see how it works in game, but my tolerance for cheese is pretty high, so I'm still hopeful.

TFG is TFG, you know who they are whether they use allies or not.

Using allies for fun and/or fluffy games will not make you TFG. If you are doing it to be a bit more competitive in a competitive setting, not really. If you go out of your way to use/abuse it to WAAC, then you are "probably" TFG. Not necessarily, but "probably".

Its going to be killer. Of course there will be copious amounts of abusive douchebaggery like GK SW but i plan to inject my templars with my guardsmen and i've got a whole back story for it. Plus, i wouldn't mind having a stormraven, just wondering whether or not my templars can hop in for a ride.

Allies rules were included for one reason only by GW: To sell more kits to more players who didn't buy them before.

Case in point, my blood angels will probably be fielding a storm talon alongside a Codex: Space Marines librarian and scout squad at some point in the future.

The required HQ + Troop to unlock 1 choice from other slots is a tax, and granted Grey Hunters/Rune Priests are hardly considered bad units but a player can't just cherry pick the hot sauce from their ally book.

In the long run players will use allies to shore up weaknesses in their army lists, thus making just about every list an all-rounder at tournaments. Unless some broken combo interacts with the entire new ruleset (which we haven't seen and digested yet), i don't think using Allies will make you TFG. Mostly because now everyone has some sort of access to it (except tyranids but from what i've seen Monstrous Creatures are getting a huge buff).

My thoughts, anyway.

We don't even know any of the specifics of how allies work. We can't say anything about how it might effect the meta or how competitive games will line up.

tetrisphreak wrote:Allies rules were included for one reason only by GW: To sell more kits to more players who didn't buy them before.
.

Except it'd mean purchasing less kits of your own army, so that's bs.
OP - doubtful. There's not many combinations that are "overpowered" really, but there's some that are interesting.

I wonder if there are any extra restrictions on the Allied choices you can take. Like if you take an Ork Warboss on a bike, can you also take a biker nobs mob as a Troops choice? That should be a pretty potent allied unit.

I will be wanting to put my White Scar Bikers and either Stormtalon or Scouts and Speeder Storm in with GK or BA. Cheese much?

Testify wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:Allies rules were included for one reason only by GW: To sell more kits to more players who didn't buy them before.
.

Except it'd mean purchasing less kits of your own army, so that's bs.
OP - doubtful. There's not many combinations that are "overpowered" really, but there's some that are interesting.

Really? BS? I am constantly buying models - who do you know that buys only EXACTLY the models needed for 1500 point list and never buys anything else? That's the BS. Most people I know buy lots of different kits so they can CHANGE their lists between games and tournaments. Allies are opening up model kits to players who previously didn't even think of buying them - they couldn't use them ever. Having the option to ally gives people a substantial reason to go ahead and splurge on the Grey Knight terminator box, or a strike squad box, when all they played before was Imperial Guard or Space Wolves (as an example).

Anybody who doesn't think GW is in this for the money above all else is deluding themselves. Personally I just hope the game is still fun to play allies or not.

I wouldn't say so, I reckon it'll actually encourage fluffy lists.

For example, I'm making Death Guard with nurgle daemon allies and Epidemius.

Formosa wrote:in short no

I will be useing allies to do this

Stormraven
2 stormtalons (cant do it i know, so will hav to ask permision)
stormeagle
6 landspeeders (ravenwing)
2 ravenwing attack sqauds with attack bikes
Liby on bike (to test new powers)
Sammael

I look foward to useing an incredibly fast force to outmanuever my oponents and i it will look cool as hell

Now the quesiton is, who is going to be your HQ and Troop choice in order to get the Stormraven? Can't remember what a Stormtalon is, but would let you use it since it's for fun.

It will entirely depend on how the rule works.

Especially who can ally with whom and then how much, restriction etc.

But on reading it, my first thought was 'good grief, GK/IG blended bs'.

The libby on a bike could be his HQ from blood angels, and a fast razorback could keep up with the rest of the list and count as his troop unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Davor wrote:

Formosa wrote:in short no

I will be useing allies to do this

Stormraven
2 stormtalons (cant do it i know, so will hav to ask permision)
stormeagle
6 landspeeders (ravenwing)
2 ravenwing attack sqauds with attack bikes
Liby on bike (to test new powers)
Sammael

I look foward to useing an incredibly fast force to outmanuever my oponents and i it will look cool as hell

Now the quesiton is, who is going to be your HQ and Troop choice in order to get the Stormraven? Can't remember what a Stormtalon is, but would let you use it since it's for fun.

What? No! That's a stupid question. If you exploit any given rule you're in TFG territory, but if I take a tactical squad in my IG army I'm hardly breaking the game.

If this rumour just so happens to be true when it drops, I might just sit out a lot of 6th ed. I'm personally not a fan of allies, not even in the slightest, regardless of whether or not my opponent is TFG, I just don't like it.

But no, you're not automatically TFG for using a rule in an edition, that's just stupid.

Blacksails wrote:If this rumour just so happens to be true when it drops, I might just sit out a lot of 6th ed. I'm personally not a fan of allies, not even in the slightest, regardless of whether or not my opponent is TFG, I just don't like it.

But no, you're not automatically TFG for using a rule in an edition, that's just stupid.

Sitting out of an edition based on one rule seems a little knee-jerky. But hey, if you don't enjoy the game i understand not playing. I'd suggest at least a couple games first before bowing out. God knows we don't need a mass exodus of players like when WFB 8th came out.... :-/

Testify wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:Allies rules were included for one reason only by GW: To sell more kits to more players who didn't buy them before.
.

Except it'd mean purchasing less kits of your own army, so that's bs.

Heh, of course it isn't, if you'd actually think about it for a bit. Which is the more likely scenario? That someone is going to add some IG allies to their space marines, and stop buying right there, or at some point decide that since they've got a start to an IG army, and some of those other kits looks good, why not flesh it out some more?

Blacksails wrote:If this rumour just so happens to be true when it drops, I might just sit out a lot of 6th ed. I'm personally not a fan of allies, not even in the slightest, regardless of whether or not my opponent is TFG, I just don't like it.

But no, you're not automatically TFG for using a rule in an edition, that's just stupid.

It's not a rumor, it's in the rulebook. It's been confirmed in White Dwarf and in shots of the rulebook itself. Some armies can and can't ally, and there are degrees of alliance. For instance, Chaos Marines and Chaos Daemons are easy allies, while an alliance between Chaos Marines and Orks may be a bit more strained. How exactly this is played out in-game is still a mystery, whether it's through points allowance or what, but it's still in there. Besides, nobody says you have to take allies! You can take the same army as ever and just have a little more variety in what's at the other end of your barrel.

It's really no surprise or big issue that GW are going to do things to try and sell more models. I don't see how you can complain about that when you understand they are a business.

I personally think it's a great thing and I look forward to seeing all the creativity people make of the possibility within their painting and modelling. People who create WAAC armies will do it in any set up, who cares. People who create silly armies, Tau with waagh banners etc. already existed. If pink necrons or angry marines never bothered you why would this?

tetrisphreak wrote:

Blacksails wrote:If this rumour just so happens to be true when it drops, I might just sit out a lot of 6th ed. I'm personally not a fan of allies, not even in the slightest, regardless of whether or not my opponent is TFG, I just don't like it.

But no, you're not automatically TFG for using a rule in an edition, that's just stupid.

Sitting out of an edition based on one rule seems a little knee-jerky. But hey, if you don't enjoy the game i understand not playing. I'd suggest at least a couple games first before bowing out. God knows we don't need a mass exodus of players like when WFB 8th came out.... :-/

I should have clarified; the allies rule will be the piece of straw that broke the camel's back for me, if most of the rumours are true. I'll obviously pick up the rules, read em through, try and get a few games in before judging, but it certainly doesn't bode well for me, particularly if the fluff goes the route the rumours are saying it will.

yeah the liby on a bike will be my HQ, dont know how BA work but does a captain on a bike also unlock bikes as troops?

Brother SRM wrote:
It's not a rumor, it's in the rulebook. It's been confirmed in White Dwarf and in shots of the rulebook itself. Some armies can and can't ally, and there are degrees of alliance. For instance, Chaos Marines and Chaos Daemons are easy allies, while an alliance between Chaos Marines and Orks may be a bit more strained. How exactly this is played out in-game is still a mystery, whether it's through points allowance or what, but it's still in there. Besides, nobody says you have to take allies! You can take the same army as ever and just have a little more variety in what's at the other end of your barrel.

Good to know. I've been gone for two weeks on survival training so I missed the last batch of news regarding 6th. I'm not concerned about what it will do to my army, but what it will do to all my opponent's armies. In the waning days of the Inquisition codex, I played a number of games against armies using the allies rule, and every combination, regardless of whether or not it was powerful or weak, just bothered me. I can't explain why, just one of those rules that rubs me the wrong way for no real reason. Maybe I have a problem, but it is what it is for me.

That being said, I would never judge my opponent based solely on whether or not he/she brings allies to a game.

Glorioski wrote:
I personally think it's a great thing and I look forward to seeing all the creativity people make of the possibility within their painting and modelling. People who create WAAC armies will do it in any set up, who cares. People who create silly armies, Tau with waagh banners etc. already existed. If pink necrons or angry marines never bothered you why would this?

This is basically my reasoning. The competitive players can get more competitive, the wackier players can get more wacky, and the fluffy players can get more fluffy. It evens the playing field a little bit (while adding some combinations I don't like) but Chaos Marines getting their daemons back is just so great. Allying IG or Marines with Inquisition forces is doable again, and now I've even got some incentive to start a small Eldar army to accompany my Marines in a battle. It's smart on GW's part, since while someone like me may only initially get a few units to make an allied force, I could potentially end up starting a whole new army based on that. It's one of GW's smartest maneuvers in the past few years, and one that could have a very good effect on gameplay.

Formosa wrote:yeah the liby on a bike will be my HQ, dont know how BA work but does a captain on a bike also unlock bikes as troops?

Sadly no. BA librarians can take bikes though, and since you only get 1 ally HQ slot he'd fit there best.

A squad of assault marines with a melta gun in a Las/Plas (fast) razorback is 165 points. The libby on the bike is like 130 or so. Then your storm raven is 200+ points. So to do your list you need to make sure you've got about 500 points to dump into the boys in red.

Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

We don't know yet. There was a chart from a few months ago that keeps getting posted, but it's from a random tournament somewhere and not the actual rulebook. We'll know in a week with the new rulebook, as the only information in the WD for alliances is some Chaos/Chaos and Imperial/Imperial allied armies.

My guess would be most codexs, maybe not Orks, Eldar, or Nids, but all the others would be plausable.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=22400024a&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Astronomican+%28Astronomican%29

Prettymuch everyone in some regard - no clue as to the 'levels' of alliance they have with each army though. That'll be confirmed when rulebooks start getting into the general population next week.

Brother SRM wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

We don't know yet. There was a chart from a few months ago that keeps getting posted, but it's from a random tournament somewhere and not the actual rulebook. We'll know in a week with the new rulebook, as the only information in the WD for alliances is some Chaos/Chaos and Imperial/Imperial allied armies.

We do now, check it out...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=22400024a&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Astronomican+%28Astronomican%29

Glorioski wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

We don't know yet. There was a chart from a few months ago that keeps getting posted, but it's from a random tournament somewhere and not the actual rulebook. We'll know in a week with the new rulebook, as the only information in the WD for alliances is some Chaos/Chaos and Imperial/Imperial allied armies.

We do now, check it out...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=22400024a&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Astronomican+%28Astronomican%29

Pretty pictures and catalogue but it doesn't seem to have any actual links to info...

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Glorioski wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

We don't know yet. There was a chart from a few months ago that keeps getting posted, but it's from a random tournament somewhere and not the actual rulebook. We'll know in a week with the new rulebook, as the only information in the WD for alliances is some Chaos/Chaos and Imperial/Imperial allied armies.

We do now, check it out...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=22400024a&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Astronomican+%28Astronomican%29

Pretty pictures and catalogue but it doesn't seem to have any actual links to info...

Yeh for some reasons the pics don't link to the pages. use the menu on the left hand side.

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Glorioski wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

We don't know yet. There was a chart from a few months ago that keeps getting posted, but it's from a random tournament somewhere and not the actual rulebook. We'll know in a week with the new rulebook, as the only information in the WD for alliances is some Chaos/Chaos and Imperial/Imperial allied armies.

We do now, check it out...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=22400024a&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Astronomican+%28Astronomican%29

Pretty pictures and catalogue but it doesn't seem to have any actual links to info...

Click the links to the left, not the ones beneath the images that indeed lead to nowhere.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

BA...

but anyway my opinion in this is like a coin... on one side I can see what the OP is saying and TBH SW and GK in one game seems a bit... of a horror story and I can see this happen plenty in tournaments...

On the other side I can see this can be great, on my part as I always wanted to filed a few Juggernoughts of khorne along side my CSM...

I love it. According to that link, Tau can ally with damn near everyone.


We did the Kroot Bubble Wrap. Now let's try some Gue'Vesa bubble Wrap.


Gonna buy some IG vets because I hate painting faces something fierce.

Taking Allies won't always make you TFG but TFG will always take Allies.

tetrisphreak wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Who can crons ally with?
I didn't pick up the WD.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=22400024a&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Astronomican+%28Astronomican%29

Prettymuch everyone in some regard - no clue as to the 'levels' of alliance they have with each army though. That'll be confirmed when rulebooks start getting into the general population next week.

Well, my Eldar can ally with GK and SW, but I'll pride myself in the fact that I won't abuse this rule. It'd be cool to ally with DE, I've always kinda wanted a DE army so this is a good substitute. That said, I'm doing fine with Eldar on their own, I don't think I need any help

Orks. Orks can ally with Marines. WHAT

Tyranids naturally can ally with no-one. NOM.

One thing that I think will be nice for allies is probably a good chunk of the old Lost and the Damned lovers might be satisfied now (me being one of them). I think just a blanket stamp of "Allies = TFG" is a little short-sighted and will have to wait to see how GW implements wholly.

Wow, yeah. Black Templars and Grey Knights can ally with 'Crons and Dark Eldar? That's not TFG, that's just lame.

Allies is a dumb rule. Write good dexes rather than trying to make up for it this way. Lets sell more kits and dexes also lets make our terrain kits part of the foc. Gk + sw. Hilarious. And makes no sense fluffwise.

I'm sick of people insisting GW is being an evil corporate behemouth by introducing allies/terrain. If you think that a larger selection of goods leads to greater sales, you have no business acumen. People spend whatever money they want to spend, they aren't going to go mental and take out a second mortgage because they can use allies all of a sudden.

Taking Allies won't always make you TFG but TFG will always take Allies.

I agree. I refuse to think I am even close to being TFG when I play my Ultramarines paired with my Sisters of Battle, or alongside my Imperial Guard. That's called "fluffy", not powergaming.

Also, if I was to ever play more than for fun games with my friends, I can still use the Kroot Carnivores that I am fielding alongside my Eldar "pirates". While right now I don't care, as we still allow the full Kroot Merc rules, if I'm ever playing with people that use "6th only" rules, I can still take them.

Unfortunately, because we go by fluff, my Oldcrons will remain friendless.

Personally, I think the allies thing is a brilliant idea. Not only can you create more fluffy armies but it means I can use actual bloodletters with my World Eaters again instead of the rubbish "summoned lesser daemons"

Of course, it is a blatant move by GW to make more money by selling kits from different armies to players who will decide to eventually make an independent army from their allied models but who cares? GW is a business and as such has to make money in order to keep going. Do you really think they remake the rules and codexes every few years just to keep the game fresh? By rewriting the rules every 4-5 years they force the players to spend more money so they can keep playing the game.
Of course, non of this is going to stop me playing, I love this game

I don't get why a radical inquisitor can't ally with Demons. That's pretty much their whole thing...

I just hope you can't take more than 1 allied faction (I guess points are a limiting factor at some point).

I do think BT need a smaller pool, as do the SoB and GK, their fluff alone kinda limits them more than others.

That being said, I guess I'll be the poster boy of poster boys when I pull out my Tanith IG (been converting them slowly for almost a year) and my 2nd company ultras. If anyone calls me out for running Tactical Marines along side foot slogging IG vets, well screw them.

Testify wrote:I'm sick of people insisting GW is being an evil corporate behemouth by introducing allies/terrain. If you think that a larger selection of goods leads to greater sales, you have no business acumen. People spend whatever money they want to spend, they aren't going to go mental and take out a second mortgage because they can use allies all of a sudden.

Yes, but it does lead to people buyng "just a little" of a particular army they've been just thinking about collecting. Then before they know it they play that army as well. It is much easier to justify playing an army after you've bought some of the models, this gets them to buy those models. A gateway buy if you will. It worked by splitting CSM and CD.

michaelcycle wrote:Allies is a dumb rule. Write good dexes rather than trying to make up for it this way. Lets sell more kits and dexes also lets make our terrain kits part of the foc. Gk + sw. Hilarious. And makes no sense fluffwise.

"My SW/GK list is meant to represent the two fighting together at Armageddon I".

Oh look, it made sense, no way!

Testify wrote:I don't get why a radical inquisitor can't ally with Demons. That's pretty much their whole thing...

Yeh, plus renegade marines who still remain close to codex astartes in structure should be able to ally with Demons and CSM.

I've seen a lot of talk about Allies - HOW DO THEY WORK?

There's all talk and not a lot of how.

Somebody please help me here.

I will totally use allies. I will combine my Tau with IG and totally BOMBARD the EVERLOVING CRAP out of people. I will convert everything into neat looking Gue'Vesa forces and rain death and destruction upon those who oppose The Greater effing Good. HUZZAH!

Some of those ally choices... just confuse me.

SilverMK2 wrote:Some of those ally choices... just confuse me.

There's a good reason for that.

I'm kind of disappointed that Tryanids cant ally with IG. It would be great to be able to run a Genestealer Cult with actual Genestealers.

Thatguyoverthere wrote:I'm kind of disappointed that Tryanids cant ally with IG. It would be great to be able to run a Genestealer Cult with actual Genestealers.

Indeed, this is one of the more confusing choices GW have made with this.

Thatguyoverthere wrote:I'm kind of disappointed that Tryanids cant ally with IG. It would be great to be able to run a Genestealer Cult with actual Genestealers.

It might well be a special rule in the new 'nid codex. Letting them ally with Guard as standard would just be weird.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Testify wrote:I'm sick of people insisting GW is being an evil corporate behemouth by introducing allies/terrain. If you think that a larger selection of goods leads to greater sales, you have no business acumen. People spend whatever money they want to spend, they aren't going to go mental and take out a second mortgage because they can use allies all of a sudden.

Yes, but it does lead to people buyng "just a little" of a particular army they've been just thinking about collecting. Then before they know it they play that army as well. It is much easier to justify playing an army after you've bought some of the models, this gets them to buy those models. A gateway buy if you will. It worked by splitting CSM and CD.

Why does GW care whether I spend £20 on one army or another?

I'm looking forward to it, personally. I think the potential variations of allegiances will bring a greater balance to the game than a single over powered codex brings unbalance currently. Also you can't be sure what new codices will bring to the table.

Peace Out!
Jonny!

I don't mind if people want to use them, but won't be taking allies myself.

However, I've already started piling up plasticard and bits to make my own version of a bastion. My Waaagh! could certainly benefit from some static defences...

Maybe allies is an optional rule like 'with opponents consent' of 'for story driven games' etc?

There are actually different types of ally, as a leaked picture of the rulebook says. "Begrudging allies" or whatever they're called, have different rules. I'm pretty sure area of affect things don't cross-over unless you're "brothers in arms", i.e. fellow imperials.
So say hello to FNP and FC blob guard

I don't believe so. It seems to be a part of the main rules.

I think this may bring some balance into the game. Tau could take some BA assault marines as allies to offset their vulnerability to CC. Maybe with a Librarian to give them a Psychic Hood.



Edit: hehe, Dark Eldar can ally with Tau

Allies CAN make for some fluffy, justifiable, and entertaining alliances and combos on the table top.

Allies WILL make broken combos and pretty much make a lot of armies unfun to play against.

When you could ally, all anyone saw was the most powerful choices and broken combos. No one every took penitant engines as allies, but those damn Inquistors with full table pyschic hoods and deep strike interupting shooting guys (brainfart I can't remember their names) who hung out around devi squads and russes were everywhere.

Yeah, my EC like the idea that I can actually take a Keeper of Secrets and real Damonettes again. But I'll give it all up if I never have to see Paladins hanging around Sanguinary Priests.

Edit: hehe, Dark Eldar can ally with Tau

There was indeed an alliance done in the DE book about Tau and DE where the tau called upon the mercenary services of one of the Covens...

They did their job well, fought back tyranids, and a whole bunch of other stuff that was helpful to the tau...Till they realized what they wanted in cost (people) and what they were doing to said people (It's a coven, figure it out), and when the tau decided to stop their services they turned on them and began capturing more.

Allies WILL make broken combos and pretty much make a lot of armies unfun to play against.

You mean like several now?

Yeah, my EC like the idea that I can actually take a Keeper of Secrets and real Damonettes again. But I'll give it all up if I never have to see Paladins hanging around Sanguinary Priests.

Bit scary yeah, but since they can no longer wound allocate at will they'll begin to lose a bit of their power.

Jayden63 wrote:
Yeah, my EC like the idea that I can actually take a Keeper of Secrets and real Damonettes again. But I'll give it all up if I never have to see Paladins hanging around Sanguinary Priests.

Paladins can get FNP anyway, and for cheaper than a kitted up priest, plus they'd have to take a much weaker BA HQ and troop choice.
Another "overpowered combo" that's actually pretty rubbish. If a GK player would rather have a Sanguinary Priest and a BA HQ/Troop, that's grand with me.

The only reason a Sang priest would be good is with say Terminators or Purifiers.

I still think the deadweight of the additional HQ and troop would be such a drag that it wasn't worth it, especially for a 1 wound power armour model that can be easily smashed in assault.

In answer to the title? Hell yes, in my opinion and this allies gak is just money grabbing. Before it was a case of "This is your stuff. Take what you want from here."
"But I want a Bloodthirster!"
"Then you need this instead *hands CD codex*"
"But I want Abbaddon too!"

You couldn't have both ways. Now however, GW aee actually encouraging.you to buy more books and models for your armies. If that is what they are going.to do they may as well make the main book a lot more expensive, and put every unit into the main book. Would save a lot on production costs.for them I think.

The reason I don't like it is because it allows for some cheesy gak, and to avoid an army's downfall. Daemons can be a really.good dex, just that they need to Deep Strike. If it were an objectives game they'd have.problems..But.now the solution is simply take Plague Marines and a Bastion. Dump 'em down and let your Bloodcrushers murder.

Or Dark Eldar, who are notoriously fragile, taking some nice, tough, bulky Immortals and pop a Monolith down.

Obviously I don't know how the.allies work, but there is potential for some.seriously cheesy stuff there.

Depends on the point level.

A Librarian and a couple of assault marine squads could be a decent support for any army, especially if buffed by FnP.



This does open up some nice "Count's As" options for some armies.

Gue'vesa Auxiliaries for Tau(Counts As IG)

Real looted vehicles for Orks(IG counts as Grots wearing stolen IG equipment/looted vehicles)

Phototoxin wrote:Maybe allies is an optional rule like 'with opponents consent' of 'for story driven games' etc?

They're in the rulebook, they're not house rules or whatever.

It just depends on how G.W handles allies. Because I do not want to see a unit of Terminators with the Eldar power Fortune upon them.

People thought that the 3.5 dex was good for Chaos...you guys haven't seen anything yet. Just imagine what its going to be like to fight the new Chaos dex in a few months with Daemons as allies. You gotta rememeber when they broke them off into their own dex they fixed a bunch of stuff for Daemons where they would be a stand alone army. Now you are giving them back in their better form to an army that is only going to get better.

Fateweaver standing behind Abaddon and a squad of Cult Terminators. Sounds like a lot of fun to me.

Obliterators for ranged and Crushers of Khorne for close combat...yeah thats going to be funny.

Also the Chaos Sorcerer sitting back making people Hallucinate and attack each other or just stand their while the Crushers charge them and get raped.

No this isn't going to overpowered at all....LOL

On another note I actually agree with Space Wolves and Grey Knights getting to ally because of the first battle for Armageddon. However I believe that if you choose to do this combo then the Grey Knights should not be allowed to take an Inquisitor of any kind because of Grimnars deep hatred for them.

If it were an objectives game they'd have.problems..But.now the solution is simply take Plague Marines and a Bastion

I'm sorry, but how are The Plaguebearers worse than the plague marines? They are one of the best objective holders in the entire game, plague marines are also far more expensive, and have a faux T5, rather than the true T5 plaguebearers have, along with a good inv save and FNP, and going to ground making them even harder to even remove.

The main issue daemons have is coming entirely piecemeal, with deepstriking an entire army not being so hot at all.

Of course we don't know how combat is going to work now.

That could totally change the dynamics. If everything is OP, nothing is.

For me it entirely depends upon how it is handled. Everyone knows that cherry-picking units from various codices will make your army harder so that kind of ally system will just play into the hands of the waac types who already run Crowe/Purifier/Razorback/Rifleman Dreads and similar spam lists. They will look for weaknesses within their codex and fill it with spammed allies.

In terms of fluff or even common sense allies make perfect sense. Imperial forces all fight alongside each other. Marine commanders don't say stuff like "I'm not fighting in the same force as Imperial Guard, they are not part of my codex". It is entirely logical. If it is done with care it will enhance the game and allow more options for customising units and forces to allow more fun and character.

Needless to say it will have to be done carefully. Nids for example could not reasonably ally with anyone at all, ever. Eldar would never side with Dark Eldar, Imperials with Chaos, Necrons with anyone else, etc. It is going to have to be strictly limited and carefully done.

I see Storm of Magic as a likely model, even though this allows all sorts of odd combinations.

It will be interesting for sure and it is not long now!

Doesnt that make GW the TFG? they made allies rule, they would know the consequences ( if any )

You'll be fine using allies.

Testify wrote:

Jayden63 wrote:
Yeah, my EC like the idea that I can actually take a Keeper of Secrets and real Damonettes again. But I'll give it all up if I never have to see Paladins hanging around Sanguinary Priests.

Paladins can get FNP anyway, and for cheaper than a kitted up priest, plus they'd have to take a much weaker BA HQ and troop choice.
Another "overpowered combo" that's actually pretty rubbish. If a GK player would rather have a Sanguinary Priest and a BA HQ/Troop, that's grand with me.

You do realize that a BA Librarian with Terminator armor, Stormshield and Unleashed rage compliments paladins perfectly right?

Giving the unit the ability to reroll misses with a Psychic power is awesome.

tetrisphreak wrote:

Blacksails wrote:If this rumour just so happens to be true when it drops, I might just sit out a lot of 6th ed. I'm personally not a fan of allies, not even in the slightest, regardless of whether or not my opponent is TFG, I just don't like it.

But no, you're not automatically TFG for using a rule in an edition, that's just stupid.

Sitting out of an edition based on one rule seems a little knee-jerky. But hey, if you don't enjoy the game i understand not playing. I'd suggest at least a couple games first before bowing out. God knows we don't need a mass exodus of players like when WFB 8th came out.... :-/

It might be just one rule, but it's one which affects (indeed radically changes) the rules of composition for every army, and one which seems to have been imposed without the slightest thought for its negative impact upon game balance. I'm coming to the conclusion that this edition deserves to provoke an exodus of players.

English Assassin wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:

Blacksails wrote:If this rumour just so happens to be true when it drops, I might just sit out a lot of 6th ed. I'm personally not a fan of allies, not even in the slightest, regardless of whether or not my opponent is TFG, I just don't like it.

But no, you're not automatically TFG for using a rule in an edition, that's just stupid.

Sitting out of an edition based on one rule seems a little knee-jerky. But hey, if you don't enjoy the game i understand not playing. I'd suggest at least a couple games first before bowing out. God knows we don't need a mass exodus of players like when WFB 8th came out.... :-/

It might be just one rule, but it's one which affects (indeed radically changes) the rules of composition for every army, and one which seems to have been imposed without the slightest thought for its negative impact upon game balance. I'm coming to the conclusion that this edition deserves to provoke an exodus of players.

I actually just pre-ordered 6th ed at my nearest GW, so I'll at least have the rules to peruse and maybe, just maybe, get in a game or two. Chances are won't be playing much anyways I'll be in the middle of nowhere Saskatchewan for the next forseeable future. I'll reserve my full judgement for the edition after I have the rules in hand, but so far all the rumours aren't exactly leaving a good taste in my mouth.

I didn't like allies before, and I likely won't now. We'll see what happens, but I wouldn't be surprised if I start spending more money on other game systems I've neglected.

English Assassin wrote:

tetrisphreak wrote:

Blacksails wrote:If this rumour just so happens to be true when it drops, I might just sit out a lot of 6th ed. I'm personally not a fan of allies, not even in the slightest, regardless of whether or not my opponent is TFG, I just don't like it.

But no, you're not automatically TFG for using a rule in an edition, that's just stupid.

Sitting out of an edition based on one rule seems a little knee-jerky. But hey, if you don't enjoy the game i understand not playing. I'd suggest at least a couple games first before bowing out. God knows we don't need a mass exodus of players like when WFB 8th came out.... :-/

It might be just one rule, but it's one which affects (indeed radically changes) the rules of composition for every army, and one which seems to have been imposed without the slightest thought for its negative impact upon game balance. I'm coming to the conclusion that this edition deserves to provoke an exodus of players.

How many tabletop games have you been involved in the development of? Just out of curiosity.

I'm excited to be able to run a true daemonbomb list now with CSM. One squad of chaos marines with a chaos icon and a sorcerer in a rhino, drive up to midfield and wait.

Imperials - "What, they plan on taking us on with just that? How laughab- Oh dear Emperor."

Hey, Daemons might just be doable now

Grey Templar wrote:Hey, Daemons might just be doable now

The problem with allying CSM and Deamons is who's summoning rules do you use? Am I going to have to split my Keeper and three units of damonettes into two groups (first wave/second wave) and hope some drop when they are supposed to. Or can they use the summoning icons that I would have bought for generic deamons in the CSM?

One way would be really cool. The other makes it almost not worth it.

I'll be using Allies if possible.

Mainly because I've been torn between my vanilla Marines and using my Sisters of Battle, now that my opponent is using Orks - she uses my models, so I couldn't very well use my Marines while she was using them.

The idea of playing Marines and Sisters allied together is very appealing to me, if only for custom fluff reasons. It will make me very happy if it's possible in the new edition. ^_^

Edit: Somehow I confused the premise of this thread with the premise of the previous thread I posted in.

No, I don't think it makes you TFG for just using the allies rules. Why would it? It provides for some nice fluff opportunities to be played out in-game. Some combinations might be worthy of it, but that's typical of a lot of rules. They can get abused if used in the right way.

I didn't think that TFG was based on what your army composition was, though. I thought it had more to do with attitude.

Game abuse is what makes you "TFG".

Space Marines/Necrons.

Proceeding to headdesk as hard as I possibly can.

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of Allies. Being able to mix IG and SM makes it feel a lot like the fluff says; an IG regiment backed up by a squad of, say, Assault Marines wouldn't be broken or OP at all, and would fill a nice gap in an IG dex; that of a fast-moving countercharge unit. IG/CSM can represent LatD again (hear that, 2nd/3rd ed veterans?).

But some combinations are just plain silly, like Marines/Dark Eldar, or Dark Angels/Necrons.

Honestly, let's face it; TFG's gonna TFG, no matter what. It was inevitable; 5th mandated MSU spam for TFG's, and now it'll probably be power combos among other things. I'm not quite sure I'd say an opponent is a TFG for just using Ally rules, but it's how he applies it, as you all have said.

+1 to application leading to TFG or not to TFG. Allied SM units is fluffy-Armageddon comes to mind with BT, Sallies and I forget the third, if there was one. Tycho and Cortez working together to snuff an Ork army. A GK libby and termie squad assisting BT to purge some witches. An IG army getting a tactical squad and captain to assist. Daemons, traitor guard and CSM in any combination. These all work. Even Eldar/DEldar if Harlies are involved (eh...). Others...Running Draigo and Paladins to help out a Cron army....Go away. Your kind doesn't belong.

Yeah it's not just as simple as "combine this army with that army". There will be rules to limit the interactions, pretty sure the things outside of troops and HQ will be pretty damn hard to field in masse.....

I would go with the theory that the allies rule is just a ploy to sell people a second army(or more) not deliberately a plan to bring balance to the game.

timetowaste85 wrote:+1 to application leading to TFG or not to TFG. Allied SM units is fluffy-Armageddon comes to mind with BT, Sallies and I forget the third, if there was one. Tycho and Cortez working together to snuff an Ork army. A GK libby and termie squad assisting BT to purge some witches. An IG army getting a tactical squad and captain to assist. Daemons, traitor guard and CSM in any combination. These all work. Even Eldar/DEldar if Harlies are involved (eh...). Others...Running Draigo and Paladins to help out a Cron army....Go away. Your kind doesn't belong.

The problem with justifying taking some of these combo for "fluff" reasons is that there are two sides to a story. The good guys and the bad guys. Sure on Armegeddon three SM factions showed up to fight orks. But If someone is across the table with Tau, where were they during Armegeddon? Suddenly, your fluffy army loose all fluff because the battle is no longer fluffy and the whole thing just becomes picking and choosing the strongest aspects of both SM armies.

For a planned out battle, yeah, go for it. But just because your bringing an ally list that is fluffy in your mind, the whole thing may no longer appear that way depending on what is on the other side. Team battles have had this issue for years. But most often you just have to play with the figures you have so that a real game can actually happen. Its just the way it is.

My biggest worry is that for every good "fluffy" allied forces there are going to be 10 of them that are just pulling power. I don't want to see Thunderwolves with furious charge. I don't want to see plasma/melta vets in a Cron army. But that is what is going to happen.

TheAvengingKnee wrote:I would go with the theory that the allies rule is just a ploy to sell people a second army(or more) not deliberately a plan to bring balance to the game.

GW has a plan to sell more models? Say it ain't so!

It's pretty obvious that it is, and I'm okay with that. If I want some Eldar to run as allies with my IG and later on decide to expand them into a full army, then GW gets more sales and I get to play games with models before I have enough to field a proper army.

Whether people think of me as a TFG or not...I still am laughing over the Deathwing with my IG combo

AegisGrimm wrote:Game abuse is what makes you "TFG".

It is not cheating if the rules let you do it...

You can still be a TFG within the rules, just not a cheat

I guess I am not understanding of what he means by

AegisGrimm wrote:Game abuse.

If he was referencing cheating then sure TFG.

If he was referencing using the army list you think has a good shot at winning the most games, then I do not see how that is abuse, since the system lets you do it, it can not be abuse. (Abuse is basically improper usage to unfairly gain benefit).

Oh its very possible to be TFG and be within the rules. If you ever want to know who the most hated guy in a gaming club is...its usually the "Rules Lawyer" and all of you just now blinked and knew exactly who I was referring to in your own group.

At 2k there are going to be some sickening combos with the Allies chart. If allies can ride in vehicles from the other group maybe old Bjorn the Fell Handed could finally get a ride in a Stormraven instead of having to walk everywhere lol

We do not have a rules lawyer in my gaming group.

Although if thoroughly knowing the rules is being a "rules lawyer" then my group has 5 people out of 7 that thoroughly know the rules.

im just looking forward to adding stormtalons to my DE army, along with a few GK libbys and maybe a swarmlord for kicks.

yay allies!

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Deadshot wrote:If it were an objectives game they'd have.problems..But.now the solution is simply take Plague Marines and a Bastion

I'm sorry, but how are The Plaguebearers worse than the plague marines? They are one of the best objective holders in the entire game, plague marines are also far more expensive, and have a faux T5, rather than the true T5 plaguebearers have, along with a good inv save and FNP, and going to ground making them even harder to even remove.

The main issue daemons have is coming entirely piecemeal, with deepstriking an entire army not being so hot at all.

The difference being the Plaguebearers still need to Deep Strike whereas the Plaguemarines can just deploy on the objective, and in the bastion for good measure.

No there is a big difference between knowing the rules and being a "Rules Lawyer" lol. A person who knows the rules can generally settle any dispute that might come up during a game and once it has been settled they will let it go after it happens. The rules lawyer is incapable of this and will find something in the rulebook somewhere or in an errata somewhere later on to prove to whomever he was playing that he was in fact right and they played it wrong during the game.

Reivax26 wrote:The rules lawyer is incapable of this and will find something in the rulebook somewhere or in an errata somewhere later on to prove to whomever he was playing that he was in fact right and they played it wrong during the game.

So playing by the actual rules is bad?

I do not understand your point.

6th ed more than any previous edition is shaping up to be a "narrative wargame". If you want to be TFG, go play Warmahordes (a great competitive system) until youi realise winning isn't everything and telling a story in a fictional universe is just what 40K is now.

I personally love it. Back in 2nd edition, when Dark Millennium dropped, I was overjoyed to use a squad of Grey Knights along my IG. Getting back the Inquisitors that were nullified by the GK codex and the new and improved assassins will also be a boon.

Chaos also wins in a big fluffy way, since now they can take traitor guard and proper daemons.

This is a brilliant move on their part, both from a business and fun perspective. There's also the point to consider that if people want to mix and match chapters in one list, they better have them painted in a way to differentiate them. I can't be bothered to remember which grey plastic space marines are space wolves, and which ones are blood angels.

I for one cant wait to have a reason to use my inquisitor coteaz from since the daemonHunters days, add him and some dca and crusaders, and maybe a strike squad to my elysians ig army

DeathReaper wrote:

Reivax26 wrote:The rules lawyer is incapable of this and will find something in the rulebook somewhere or in an errata somewhere later on to prove to whomever he was playing that he was in fact right and they played it wrong during the game.

So playing by the actual rules is bad?

I do not understand your point.

Sounds to me that you may well be TFG

TFG is an attitude, not an army list.

For some of the more wtf team ups, [Tau and Daemons ] the restriction should be that you should have to provide detailed background on why they would ally together, and model/convert your army appropriately. E.g. if it's Orks and CSM and they are 'Chaos Orks' then you should add tentacles and spikes. If I see that I would be happy to play an allied army. If not I won't.

Brother SRM wrote:

TheAvengingKnee wrote:I would go with the theory that the allies rule is just a ploy to sell people a second army(or more) not deliberately a plan to bring balance to the game.

GW has a plan to sell more models? Say it ain't so!

It's pretty obvious that it is, and I'm okay with that. If I want some Eldar to run as allies with my IG and later on decide to expand them into a full army, then GW gets more sales and I get to play games with models before I have enough to field a proper army.

QFT. There is a pretty high barrier to starting a new army in 40k. You need to get something in the order of 1000pts worth of stuff before you can use any of them. The allies rules allows people to slowly work their way in. As a new player, I wasn't really considering getting anything other than Necrons for ages. Now I can choose from a broader selection. Will it increase my purchases overall? No. Will it for some? Probably. But it does let me use cool things that I otherwise wouldn't have even considered. And I think in the long run it keeps me in the hobby for longer, because I'm less likely to get bored.

And it creates lots of great modelling opportunities for people. Chaos Orks. Ork mercs with marines. Tau controlled Guard worlds. Some of it will be an absolute fluff nightmare. Some of it won't. Some of it will be TFG. Some of it will be great, well-intentioned (I'm thinking Word Bearers with daemons, and maybe some guard).

GW want to make money. And the best way for them to do that is by pleasing as many people as possible. They don't want to create too many TFGs, because TFG's are the minority.

Lobukia wrote:TFG is an attitude, not an army list.

TFG all depends on the situation

sometimes it will be both... sometimes it will be one or the other...

Like it has been said, TFG is an attitude. If you're min-maxing to create the fluff-nightmare uber list to smash all foes, then you're probably TFG. If you're just using allies for fun, or because you don't have a full army yet, then no harm, no foul.


GW is pretty smart in bringing it back, marketing wise. It's like a drug dealer offering the first hit at a reduced rate and getting you hooked, lol. If you have one army, with models that only work for that one army, you have less incentive to buy a second army. If you suddenly have units that you can use for more than one, maybe next time you're at the store you think "Hey, what if I got one of these too..." Eventually, you have two armies instead of one. If GW converts even 10% of its player base to a second army, that's a boatload of money.

Gateway drugs, lol. Plus, allowing allies might move more product in lines that don't always sell as well. Or sell more Finecrap figs.

I just hope that they wrote the rules with the lowest common denominator in mind.

TFg is 100% attitude, and nothing else. its the guy who wants to win, brags and cheers when he does, and whines and cries when he dosent. he will "forget" his own rules or fudge them, take offense when asked to clarify, but demand to see every little thing in the other guys codex if it looks like it might hurt his odds, or is something he was not expecting.

its pure attitude. nothing more. if someone creates a poweerful list and it just happens to be the holy grail of all army lists and is the one to rule them all, well great. a TFG will use that power for evil and parade it around and shove it in your face any chance he gets. a normal person...not so much, and after discovery of its "power" will probally reserve it for tournament play.

TFG's generally dont play the game for fun... they play to win. the WAAC attitude prevails, but i would hazard that majority of other people are not. and just want to have fun. the allies system will allow that. people to have fun with new army combos, and bring some new flavor and spice to the mix. it will also make "netlists" a little less prevelant since the number of combos goes up a ton. granted there will be some "broken" list combos arising, but there will also be a hard counter for it quickly. and taking or discovering it, does not make you TFG... just one who has vision, foresight and brains. using it to pound your gamiung group and friends over and over, bragging about how its unstoppable, refusing to change it when asked, and throwing the b***h fit when you loose.... THATS what makes you T...F...in....G!

All I want is a LRBT for my orks. A propah wagon!

However I see alot of Grey Hunters and Longfangs on the horizon.

Why whould anyone take devistators over longfangs?

"But Deffdred, You have to take an HQ and a troop before you get those longfangs!"

"Yeah, a JotWW cannon and some Grey Hunters."

I hope unique characters aren't allowed to ally. But my friend brought up a good point, "Dude, GW wants to sell finecast. They WILL let you take characters!"

Great... Commisar Yarrick alongside Gazzy.

Lysander, Kantor AND Vulkan?!

9 dreadnoughts in an Ultramarine army?!

Is it possible the allies will be part of the FOC? So you could have 6 Tac Squads but if you wanted some Grey Hunters you would need to drop some Tacs as there is no slot left?

I think part of the problem is going to be that some really fluffy allies might also be over powered.

Allot of combinations with IG for example would seem to be overpowered. Given the ubiquity of IG in the setting, Loyalist Guard, Traitor Guard, and Tau's Goey 'v's would mean that just about anyone could ally with Guard and have it make sense in the fluff.

The problems come from armies being good at one specific thing. Guard and Tau for example are the premiere shooty armies, but , with some exceptions, crumble like wet newspaper in close combat. If they suddenly have access to some of the toughest melee units in the game, even if it makes sense from a fluff stand point, they are going to get a huge boost.

Thatguyoverthere wrote:I think part of the problem is going to be that some really fluffy allies might also be over powered.

Allot of combinations with IG for example would seem to be overpowered. Given the ubiquity of IG in the setting, Loyalist Guard, Traitor Guard, and Tau's Goey 'v's would mean that just about anyone could ally with Guard and have it make sense in the fluff.

The problems come from armies being good at one specific thing. Guard and Tau for example are the premiere shooty armies, but , with some exceptions, crumble like wet newspaper in close combat. If they suddenly have access to some of the toughest melee units in the game, even if it makes sense from a fluff stand point, they are going to get a huge boost.

Good. Let everyone get boosts. It's the easiest way to a level playing field for everyone, where players can have a fair game based on who is the better general. Not like now where whoever packs the most vendettas in a guard army get's a durr-hurr win every time.

The thing is, the toughest CC units in the game are generally part of armies that are already good (as in "doesn't instantly fold unless it's a power-blob"). They're not going to stop Tau or IG units from folding instantly in CC, and any points spent on CC prowess would be points that aren't going into Broadsides, Crisis Suits, Hydras, Vendettas or similar units.

We'll in that case I won't feel bad for throwing Henchmen into my Mech/Vet list.

Just wanna throw my two cents in about allies seeing as how threads are popping up everywhere about them. Going off of GWs website it looks as though the ally combinations are pretty hokey, Dark Eldar shouldn't be able to team with Space Marines but whatever. As to the TFG concept, I think if you run a Mech BA or IG list for every game or a Purifier spam list, or a Long Fang Razorback list you are TFG. I am so sick of seeing those armies all over the place. I run Grey Knights an have never ran Purifier spam, I also run Space Wolves and just recently put together a Tau army. Now you better believe I am going to have Long Fangs or a Broadside unit in my backfield as my GK Terminators or Strike Squads advance. If it eliminates the "I win" net lists I will be happy. I think with the availability of allies you are going to see so many different combinations of very competitive lists it will eliminate the 4 or 5 uber lists we have now. An to think I would contemplating ebaying my Space Wolves, the only thing that kept me from doing so was my Thunderhawk and Achilles Land Raider decked out with Space wolf iconography and colors. Bring on the allies I am stoked.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Deadshot wrote:Is it possible the allies will be part of the FOC? So you could have 6 Tac Squads but if you wanted some Grey Hunters you would need to drop some Tacs as there is no slot left?

Well if ya take a look at the recent WD they have 3 heavies plus a heavy in their ally detachment. So I believe now you would be able to take up to 7 tac squads. Nids supposedly are not getting allies so I would expect to see each slot in its FOC get bumped up allowing them to take 4 of each extra slot and up to 7 troops.

Testify wrote:

Thatguyoverthere wrote:I'm kind of disappointed that Tryanids cant ally with IG. It would be great to be able to run a Genestealer Cult with actual Genestealers.

It might well be a special rule in the new 'nid codex. Letting them ally with Guard as standard would just be weird.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Testify wrote:I'm sick of people insisting GW is being an evil corporate behemouth by introducing allies/terrain. If you think that a larger selection of goods leads to greater sales, you have no business acumen. People spend whatever money they want to spend, they aren't going to go mental and take out a second mortgage because they can use allies all of a sudden.

Yes, but it does lead to people buyng "just a little" of a particular army they've been just thinking about collecting. Then before they know it they play that army as well. It is much easier to justify playing an army after you've bought some of the models, this gets them to buy those models. A gateway buy if you will. It worked by splitting CSM and CD.

Why does GW care whether I spend £20 on one army or another?

If you cannot understand the advantage of people owning multiple armies then it is beyond my ability to explain it to you.

Only time will tell, I guess.

Only read page 2. So alot of people are trying to justify this by using FLUFF.

So as someone said, if SW and GK are fighting at Armagedon, and say fight my Nids, and I say I am not at Armagedon, does that make us both TFG? I mean I am saying we are not at Armagedon when fighting so I am TFG, and you are still TFG since you are still using SW and GK in a non fluffy section.

Also if we go by Fluff, after the battle will you destroy your SW army? This would be like either the GK/Inqusition kills/and or mind wipes them. THIS WOULD BE FLUFFY THEN.

Another example I read was like Tau allying up with BT or another army agaisnt Tyranids. They ally up to destroy the Nid invation. Ok what if you are not playing agaisnt Nids then? ARE you TFG because now you are playing in a non fluffy way?

You know I find it kind of funny, almost all the justification is because it's "Fluffy". Why doens't anyone have the balls to say, this is what they enjoy and it will give them fun instead of hiding behind justification and say it's fluffy.

Thatguyoverthere wrote:I think part of the problem is going to be that some really fluffy allies might also be over powered.

Allot of combinations with IG for example would seem to be overpowered. Given the ubiquity of IG in the setting, Loyalist Guard, Traitor Guard, and Tau's Goey 'v's would mean that just about anyone could ally with Guard and have it make sense in the fluff.

The problems come from armies being good at one specific thing. Guard and Tau for example are the premiere shooty armies, but , with some exceptions, crumble like wet newspaper in close combat. If they suddenly have access to some of the toughest melee units in the game, even if it makes sense from a fluff stand point, they are going to get a huge boost.

I do think some armies will LOOOVE the pain that IG can add to their list. The requirements are real easy to meet, too. 320 points nets you a Primaris Psyker who gets to roll for up to 2 powers, a squad of veterans with three meltaguns, and a pair of Hydras to deal with fliers.

so why is taking units that work in your codex automatically make you TFG? aparently longfangs, venoms, etc all make you TFG as soon as they touch your army list.


so to avoid being TFG's everyone should just take 1 of everything, no duplicates allowed. because god forbid youactually take units in your army that are actually decent usable...

but hey if it means not being TFg ill gladley trade my warriors in for a unit of wracks, a unit of wyches, some foot wyches, some foot warriors and a single warrior squad on raider. then ill take a talos, a jet fighter, and a bomber for heavies, a single incubi squad, maybe some mandrakes and bloodbrides, cause trueborn, venoms and ravagers are effective so i cant have them.

to those who cry "X list is OP, taking it = TFG" go learn to play your army and stop whining. taking a list that works is NOT being TFG, the attitude used when using it is.

Davor wrote:Only read page 2. So alot of people are trying to justify this by using FLUFF.

So as someone said, if SW and GK are fighting at Armagedon, and say fight my Nids, and I say I am not at Armagedon, does that make us both TFG? I mean I am saying we are not at Armagedon when fighting so I am TFG, and you are still TFG since you are still using SW and GK in a non fluffy section.

Also if we go by Fluff, after the battle will you destroy your SW army? This would be like either the GK/Inqusition kills/and or mind wipes them. THIS WOULD BE FLUFFY THEN.

Another example I read was like Tau allying up with BT or another army agaisnt Tyranids. They ally up to destroy the Nid invation. Ok what if you are not playing agaisnt Nids then? ARE you TFG because now you are playing in a non fluffy way?

You know I find it kind of funny, almost all the justification is because it's "Fluffy". Why doens't anyone have the balls to say, this is what they enjoy and it will give them fun instead of hiding behind justification and say it's fluffy.

Your post made me LOL, just because I am sure that there are people cooking up ways to add uber stuff to their current Purifier/SW Razorspam/BA Mech list right now, who feel the need to justify why they are adding a squadron of Leman Russ tanks to their BA Mech list or Long Fangs to their Purifier spam lists.

The addition of allies does allow for more enjoyment of the game fluffwise, but I will cringe the first time I see Dark Eldar teaming with Grey Knights or Blood Angels. I know it will happen eventually.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DarthSpader wrote:so why is taking units that work in your codex automatically make you TFG? aparently longfangs, venoms, etc all make you TFG as soon as they touch your army list.


so to avoid being TFG's everyone should just take 1 of everything, no duplicates allowed. because god forbid youactually take units in your army that are actually decent usable...

but hey if it means not being TFg ill gladley trade my warriors in for a unit of wracks, a unit of wyches, some foot wyches, some foot warriors and a single warrior squad on raider. then ill take a talos, a jet fighter, and a bomber for heavies, a single incubi squad, maybe some mandrakes and bloodbrides, cause trueborn, venoms and ravagers are effective so i cant have them.

to those who cry "X list is OP, taking it = TFG" go learn to play your army and stop whining. taking a list that works is NOT being TFG, the attitude used when using it is.

IMO you are not TFG for running a list that takes full advantage of your codex, what makes you (not you personally) TFG is that you run that same old tired list game after game, and you have to win everytime. Maybe now we will see more than a couple select units from each codex on the table. I know from a Grey Knight standpoint the Dreadknights stock rose quite a bit thanks to the ability to select other pyschic powers and maybe to even use that silly flying death from above attack.

exactly. thats ATTITUDE, and has nothing to do with army list composistion. if i made an army with 1 of everything and completly ROFLPWNED everyone, and then bragged and rubbed it in, and was basically a bunghole about it then im fully qualified for the title. there are plenty of people in my local area who play "netlists" and are very nice people, fun to play against, and generally have 2 lists. the super optimized one, and a more "toned down" version. personally i have venomspam, but i also have a lighter version of it, namley with fewer warrior venoms, some wyches, and a fighter replacing a ravager. i wont break out the tournament grade list unless its a tourney, or im requested.

but ... again TFG is an attitude 100%, nothing else. although i suppose you could argue for a TFL (that f***ing list) situation...

DarthSpader wrote:exactly. thats ATTITUDE, and has nothing to do with army list composistion. if i made an army with 1 of everything and completly ROFLPWNED everyone, and then bragged and rubbed it in, and was basically a bunghole about it then im fully qualified for the title. there are plenty of people in my local area who play "netlists" and are very nice people, fun to play against, and generally have 2 lists. the super optimized one, and a more "toned down" version. personally i have venomspam, but i also have a lighter version of it, namley with fewer warrior venoms, some wyches, and a fighter replacing a ravager. i wont break out the tournament grade list unless its a tourney, or im requested.

but ... again TFG is an attitude 100%, nothing else. although i suppose you could argue for a TFL (that f***ing list) situation...

Well the days of Netlists are over I believe, the options are limitless now as to what you can put together. Runepriests and Broadsides FTW!

valace2 wrote:The addition of allies does allow for more enjoyment of the game fluffwise, but I will cringe the first time I see Dark Eldar teaming with Grey Knights or Blood Angels. I know it will happen eventually.

I seriously doubt it. If the rules are similar to those in fantasy the disadvantages in playing the army will outweigh any advantages.

I'm going to be blunt.

It's a game. If I want to put some Tau in my IG, then I will, because I think it'll be fun. It's not being TFG, it's me getting the most out of a game I enjoy. Hardcore fluff be damned, I'll think of some justification

Agree that attitude makes you TFG. We had a guy at a recent tournament who was basically wearing a sign that said it.

When you go around before a tournament starts making comments about other peoples armies like "Oh look a Netlist", or "Have you ever seen so much cheese in one place?" and he was the guy playing 3 Rune Priests with Jaws and maxed out Long Fangs.

Now that I think of it, I might get him a big shirt with just those 3 letters really big across the front so people will know not to even talk to him.

right.

and if that same player had instead, used the same list but been friendly, respectable and otherwise a good sport, he would NOT be TFG.

personally i play my venomspam lists at tourneys. simply because i go expecting to see the same caliber. when i dont or when i clean up in a match, i make darn sure to shake hands after along with the "good game thanks for playing" and so on. i also do my best to be as polite and respectful as possible, if i dont know a rule and question it, i make sure to point out im just ignorant and want clarification. there are also numerous other players in the local area who play "netlists" and are also very good sports, and great opponents.

some people arent like that, but again...it boils down to attitude for sure... and really it is only a game. if you cant have a good time with it, why spend thousands of dollars on it? not like you can make a career out of playing and winning 40k....

DarthSpader wrote:so why is taking units that work in your codex automatically make you TFG? aparently longfangs, venoms, etc all make you TFG as soon as they touch your army list.


so to avoid being TFG's everyone should just take 1 of everything, no duplicates allowed. because god forbid youactually take units in your army that are actually decent usable...

but hey if it means not being TFg ill gladley trade my warriors in for a unit of wracks, a unit of wyches, some foot wyches, some foot warriors and a single warrior squad on raider. then ill take a talos, a jet fighter, and a bomber for heavies, a single incubi squad, maybe some mandrakes and bloodbrides, cause trueborn, venoms and ravagers are effective so i cant have them.

to those who cry "X list is OP, taking it = TFG" go learn to play your army and stop whining. taking a list that works is NOT being TFG, the attitude used when using it is.

Since I mentioned Longfangs in like 4 posts lately I'll assume you are kinda refering to me.

My problem isn't people using models that they think are cool or would add some kick to their armies. My problem is that some people will exploit this new rule to an extreme.

My fear is that most WAAC players will crunch points and immediatly see that their He'Stan/Lysander can now include Grey Hunters (superiour troop choice) and Longfangs (superiour heavy choice) without changing anything. They certainly won't waste time and money converting anything. They can just say that they "have veteran skills".

Also I don't see what point you're trying to make by listing DE units.

Taking "units in your army that are actually decent usable" is fine. Having a squad of Grey Hunters bro-fisting Duke Sliscuss while riding in a Raider seems a little TFG.

But then again my defenition for TFG might be different than yours. Sure it's an attitude thing. "I'm going to make a GK/BA list so stupid... the guys at the FLGS are gonna love this!"

So then TFG walks in with his specifically broken list and we all "roll our eyes" knowing TFG just got his copy of the rulebook.

I agree Darth. If I play against someone with a "netlist" who is a casual good natured person who is respectful of people and we have a smooth flowing game and I lose I really don't care. It happened in the last tournament. I went up against a guy running the Scarab Farm list for Crons and had a perfectly enjoyable game. I've known him for years now and we were both laughing even though I was getting ripped apart.

Losing to someone who is playing the "netlist" and they are TFG is like nails on a chalkboard though.

tetrisphreak wrote:

Thatguyoverthere wrote:I think part of the problem is going to be that some really fluffy allies might also be over powered.

The problems come from armies being good at one specific thing. Guard and Tau for example are the premiere shooty armies, but , with some exceptions, crumble like wet newspaper in close combat. If they suddenly have access to some of the toughest melee units in the game, even if it makes sense from a fluff stand point, they are going to get a huge boost.

Good. Let everyone get boosts. It's the easiest way to a level playing field for everyone...

No, the easiest route to a level playing field would be to employ writers capable of designing balanced army lists, not to allow wild disparities in effectiveness to emerge, and then to try to fix them with the sticking-plaster of alliances.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Glorioski wrote:We do now, check it out...

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=22400024a&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Astronomican+%28Astronomican%29

Pretty pictures and catalogue but it doesn't seem to have any actual links to info...

Click the links to the left, not the ones beneath the images that indeed lead to nowhere.

Have you noticed that the lists are in alphabetical order, in 2 or 3 sections. The most likely candidates are on top, followed by increasingly unlikely candidates (sisters of battle are listed under S).

I never played anything but 5th edition so don't know how Allies will impact the meta... but as a hobbyist who enjoys the P&M side as much as the gaming I'm looking at it as a huge opportunity for conversions and incorporating small side forces into armies. I hope for that reason alone people wouldn't look at me as TFG for it.

E.g. My Orks looted Space Marines contingent or their enslaved Tau, or finally having a good excuse to add some Flesh Tearers to the BA army without having to start from scratch.

This is the problem all gaming communities have - all of them have TFG or a bunch of WAAC players and sometimes the two go hand in hand.

Will I use allies? Yes.

Will I abuse the rules? No.

I want to make an army fluffy, like the Tau with GueVesa or CSM with Daemons or Traitor Guard.

Hell, I even want a Harlequin army, which is now totally allowed under the new ally rules.

My fear is that most WAAC players will crunch points and immediatly see that their He'Stan/Lysander can now include Grey Hunters (superiour troop choice) and Longfangs (superiour heavy choice) without changing anything. They certainly won't waste time and money converting anything. They can just say that they "have veteran skills".

I'm not sure why they would take them as allies, they would probably prefer to take them as a main army if they really gave a damn about it.

Now that tacs can move with heavy weapons and still fire them, and lascannons are now able to do damage rolling. I feel I would prefer them to GH a bit.

In broad terms, the Imperium makes very little distinction between Craftworld Eldar and the denizens of Commoragh. To them, the two races are simply Eldar. Therefore, if they will ally with one, they will ally with the other.

EDIT - And I'm not a fan of these ally rules either, but in fluff terms, most of the match ups make sense. The good guys joining forces with the bad guys to defeat a more evil bad guy is a classic story device.

My short answer is no but I think to some degree you have to look at this from the personal standpoint of the person taking the allies. If it is just to get some rarely used models he owns on the table then I am probably fine with that.

At the same time I tend to like to play in games that are "historical" or "fluffy" so I would prefer that the pairings of allies make some sort of sense from a storytelling standpoint.

In my case I own a small IG force, maybe 2000 points; about 5000 points of Black Templars, about 8000 points of Vanilla Marines of my own chapter, 2000 points of Minotaurs, about 2000 points of Crimson Fists and around 11000 points of Orks.

I will probably at some point ally in my IG with one of the marine flavors. I cannot ever imagine allying in Orks with any of the Imperials and just would not do it.

I think all I would ask of my opponent in regards to allies is that they make some kind of sense. So if he shows up with Crimson Fists and wants to ally in Orks I would prefer he not do it. However, I would not refuse to play him if that is what he really wanted to bring.

i agree with this looking forward to csm/daemons.

so not looking forward to IG / GK power combo builds

Both are fluffy

I think these allies are a great way to sell starter sets. I knew I certainly wasn't buying one because I don't play DA or CSM and don't plan to, so I have no reason to buy it. I can just get the big rulebook. Now I have a possible reason to get it. Still won't but in the same way, someone who plays Daemons or IG, they may say "Don't need anything, can't use it, no go."

Now they can say "Oh, maybe some Deathwing to go with my Draigowing, or some Berserkers to suit my Tzeentch Daemons."

Allies in and of themselves does not make one a terrible person or a "TFG"

Using allies in an abusive manner however does.

So, if you want a chaplain and a couple squads of marines with your IG fine. If you want to load up on long fangs, not so fine.

IG/GK (or any army with GK) is only fluffy if you are fighting against Demons.

Fluff is no excuse for poor game balance, especially if it is used to gimp one faction at the expense of others.

Which is not to say that allies makes you TFG. If it's in the rulebook, you can use it.

I see what the OP is trying to say, and I think he has a legitimate point. But look at it this way... For all of those players who hate GK and SW because they are "overpowered" and are tired of losing. Now you can have some OP cheese in your army too.

I play space wolves - have always played space wolves and will always play space wolves and I can tell you they don't need allies. Nor do I want any. But it might be fun to convert up a death watch kill team and a deathwatch captain just to have them in my army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And by the way .... people have been playing 2 on 2 team games for a long time. Those games had no restrictions on who could be allies. They must have had the same issues, but I dont' remember anybody complaining then.

Yes. And thus, IMO, 6th Edition makes being TFG, if not mandatory, at least overwhelmingly likely if you want to be "competitive." OP, unmotivated, unfluffy "allies" will be added just to over-maximize already "maximized" lists.

So much whining!

Seriously, if you don't want to play against allies, you don't have to. Just tell your opponent you have no interest in playing against it, and either you find a new opponent or they whip up a single army list and fight allies against someone else. No one is going to be forcing you at gunpoint to play against it.

Personally, I look forward to running my Daemons with IG and CSM, and my BT with Steel legion. I may decide that I have no interest in playing against a BA/GK combo, or against a non-fluffy list like Crons/anything. If so, I will just say "thanks but no thanks".

TFG will be TFG no matter what the rules, codexes or whatever. We had TFG when BA came out, when SW, GK and IG came out. There will be TFG when CSM comes out, and when 6th Ed finally arrives. Its really simple, if you want to use the allies rules to be TFG, then no one can stop you except to not play against you. And if you are TFG, there is literally no way to force someone to play against you.


edit: On a side note, I notice that no one is bringing up old complaints about how allies destroyed Apocalypse. Even though you could literally ally anything in that format.

People also need to realize that taking allies isn't going to be a complete separate detachment with its own comprehensive FOC. You can't take 3 psyflemen dreadnoughts in addition to the 3 you already have. Allied armies are mandatory 1HQ and 1 Troop, then 0-1 for a second Troop, Fast Attack, Elites and Heavy Support. It's enough to fill some gaps and add some flavor without overpowering the army you already have.

In other words, I'll be adding an IG platoon and Leman Russ squad to my Crimson Fists some games, not a whole second army of Imperial Guard.

Hmmm. It makes me want to play as GK now. Just so I can have 10 models of GKs as my army, and two platoons of IG totaling over 100 models, as my small detachment of allies.

No, but even stil a possibility of a Guard army with 4 Vendetta Squadrons is insane. And all you need is another CCS, always good and another Meltavet squad to hurl in a vendetta. And if there is points left over you can squeeze in another few Hydras for taking out enemy aircraft.

Are you allowed to ally with yourself?

That seems sort of counter productive, unless they change the FOC so that you only get 2 HQ, and 3 Elites, if you ally with yourself.

It's all about your intention.

If someone wants to include Long Fangs/Venom/IG Stuff/Etc in their army because they genuinely love the models or genuinely love a bit of Fluff they appear in, then they're not TFG. If, however, they're doing it so they have a better chance of winning then yes, they probably are TFG.

Thatguyoverthere wrote:Are you allowed to ally with yourself?

That seems sort of counter productive, unless they change the FOC so that you only get 2 HQ, and 3 Elites, if you ally with yourself.

Well the allies chart says that each army can ally with itself no problems, and rightly so. Many will see it as an excuse to get more for one army. Nids will now be able to run 7 Tervigons and 4 broods of Gaunts (2 in HQ, 3 Troops, 1 Allied HQ and 1 Allied troop with another Termagaunt brood).

How about running 8 Stormravens? Play GK/BA and take the 3 you normally have, plus allied GK one in Allied FA and an Allied BA in Allied HS. Or is it only 1 codex as an ally?

b-man wrote:TFG is TFG, you know who they are whether they use allies or not.

Oh my god, this. TFG has nothing to do with what kind of list you run, how well you paint, whether you play more marines than xenos, or whatever. Its strictly about the player attitude. The TFG at my LGS is a guy who plays space wolves, is severely overweight, loud, bombastic, and generally obnoxious. He is happy to walk over to you, uninvited, while you are playing a game, and tell you about how your army is flavor of the month unfluffy, waac, poorly painted, and whatever else. He also likes to put his army case and foam down on 2-3 tables, and you have to fight him to get him to move it so you can use one for actual playing. At another store about 100 miles away, the tfg is a competitive guy who stays in shape, dressed well, likes to run tough armies, but he constantly tries to cheat and bully people on the rules. One is just an donkey-cave, the other is textbook waac.

I kind of want to play against that list. Just to see if I can put down 14d6 worth of Termagaunts a turn.

12 Basilisks might be able to do it.

Thatguyoverthere wrote:I kind of want to play against that list. Just to see if I can put down 14d6 worth of Termagaunts a turn.

12 Basilisks might be able to do it.

Whats the ignore cover ordnance tank?

Orks can ally with space marines.

Wat.

I won't be using the allies system. My orks run alone.

I'm pumped, I get my Inquisition list back! Imperial Guard base with Valkyries, Veterans, and Stormtroopers, allied GK army with an Inquisitor, an Assassin, and a few PAGKs.

Grugknuckle wrote:I see what the OP is trying to say, and I think he has a legitimate point. But look at it this way... For all of those players who hate GK and SW because they are "overpowered" and are tired of losing. Now you can have some OP cheese in your army too.

I play space wolves - have always played space wolves and will always play space wolves and I can tell you they don't need allies. Nor do I want any. But it might be fun to convert up a death watch kill team and a deathwatch captain just to have them in my army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And by the way .... people have been playing 2 on 2 team games for a long time. Those games had no restrictions on who could be allies. They must have had the same issues, but I dont' remember anybody complaining then.

Nothing wrong with you playing SW and always have and will, and wanting to try something different, I can understand, but someone say trying SW and then GK when no Deamons are present, IS TFG. No fluff reason to play that at all.

<--- my reaction to the people saying you can ally with yourself. Why on earth would GW put that in there? They might as well just change the force org instead.

BA and GK would be a fluffy alliance. Its in the codexes after all

loota boy wrote:Orks can ally with space marines.

Wat.

I won't be using the allies system. My orks run alone.

Well, for orks it's not an ally table, but a loot table. The different levels of lootability only show how well orks understand the looted tech

Deadshot wrote:

Thatguyoverthere wrote:Are you allowed to ally with yourself?

That seems sort of counter productive, unless they change the FOC so that you only get 2 HQ, and 3 Elites, if you ally with yourself.

Well the allies chart says that each army can ally with itself no problems, and rightly so. Many will see it as an excuse to get more for one army. Nids will now be able to run 7 Tervigons and 4 broods of Gaunts (2 in HQ, 3 Troops, 1 Allied HQ and 1 Allied troop with another Termagaunt brood).

How about running 8 Stormravens? Play GK/BA and take the 3 you normally have, plus allied GK one in Allied FA and an Allied BA in Allied HS. Or is it only 1 codex as an ally?

You cannot ally with yourself and are limited to one allied codex.

Why does tge allies chart have a green box for the same armies? Nids it says Nids can ally with themselves.

I'm not sure if its been linked in this thread yet, but THIS is probably as close to an official confirmation of the allies matrix as we will get before the book is released.

Deadshot wrote:Why does tge allies chart have a green box for the same armies? Nids it says Nids can ally with themselves.

Isnt that because that chart that's floating around is just from some doubles tournament a while back? I don't think its the one from the actual rulebook. Allying with yourself would just be wierd.

I would deffinitely like to have it for my IG though, lets me run more tanks and not have to squadron them, or gives me access to up to 8 vet squads and 12 vendettas/valkyries if i ever feel like making an aircav list some day...

txscotch12 wrote:so not looking forward to IG / GK power combo builds

People need to seriously stop this. These will not be power builds. What makes these armies so potent is saturation. Take IG, for example, what makes them lethal is that they have a slew of vehicles and tons of heavy weapons. Now, everyone is crying "Oh no, Grey Knights with Manticores and Hydras". But think about it, now the GK player has to spend points on squishy T3 KPs in order to unlock those heavy support options. And then, without the layer upon layer of Chimeras, those Manticores basically go belly up first turn, especially with the new vehicle rules. Likewise, the IG player who is taking a Grandmaster and some Terminators to "shore up his melee weakness" is spending upward of 500-600 points that could have been spent on more tanks and more heavy weapons. Meanwhile, all of those anti-Marine weapons that were wasted overkill against puny guardsmen or 55-point transports now suddenly have ideal targets. Not only are you diluting the power of the parent list, you're making target priority that much easier for the opponent.

The only real power combos that jump out involve mixing Marine chapters. Any C:SM list could probably be improved with the addition of a Runepriest, a squad of Grey Hunters, and a unit of Longfangs. But honestly, even these don't really bother me. C:SM needs all the help they can get, so they aren't stuck playing Vulkan/Lysander cookie-cutter lists. Another caveat to this is that anyone mixing chapters will have to paint them appropriately, because you can't be expected to remember which grey marines are Blood Angels and which are Space Wolves.

SW TH/SS guys are 66 points a piece. Normal marine termies 40, BA termies 45. I can see a huge appeal to bring in a termi librarian with unleash rage, 8 or so assault termies and 5 assault marines with free razorback into a SW army.

This has no fluff justification for it what so ever, but doesn't hurt the SW players army in the least.

So BAs and SWs could never, under any circumstances, help each other on the battlefield?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Armageddon_Wars

I'm just going to use allies to bring more of my army to the table.

Grey Templar wrote:So BAs and SWs could never, under any circumstances, help each other on the battlefield?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Armageddon_Wars

And exactly where are the Tau/DE/IG/Necrons/etc., pretty much anyone other than Orks, at Armageddon that that teamup had to fight against?

Its only fluffy if everything is within fluff.


Sorry, there are just some combos, that while in one instance might have actually happened, but lets be real. If someone has brought allies where the units it contains could be fielded with the parent codex but at a higher points cost, then while you may still be fluffy in a few eyes, you will be powergaming in most everyone elses.

Both the Space Wolves and the Blood Angels have had a long-standing "friendly rivalry" with each other since the time of the Heresy. They are, however, both noted as setting aside their differences when facing a common enemy. In order for that to be true, then there must be some occasions where they are on the field together, and not just during the Armageddon conflict. After all, Great Hunts come fairly frequently, which sees the Wolves flying hither and yon across the galaxy. It would be ludicrous to think that any major battle they engage in, of the kind it is said Great Hunts involve, would not involve Marine-brothers from other Chapters.

A SW/BA army doesn't HAVE to represent a force from Armageddon.

It could easily represent some BAs and SWs who happened to be operating in the same area, bumped into each other while persuing a common foe and started working together.

Maybe they are part of an Imperial Crusade.


Table top battles don't represent historical battles all the time, they just need to fit whatever narrative the player has to hand.

Still, I think "Brothers in Arms" is given out to freely to many marines. I remember more than one occasion where two chapters almost went to war with each other over some relicts of a primarch or the danger of chapter secrets being exposed.

I really can't see Black Templars taking direct orders from Belial or Sicarius, or Ultramarines walking side-by-side with Helbrecht, who basically doesn't give a damn about what they, their chapter and their primarch stand for.

Something that just came to my mind - doesn't the Black Templar codex explicitly prohibit you from joining sides with psykers?

I wonder if it's 0-1 allies choice or could you have more than one, grey knights with sniper scouts and an avatar

Tiarna Fuilteach wrote:I wonder if it's 0-1 allies choice or could you have more than one, grey knights with sniper scouts and an avatar

Not sure, but that sounds pretty terrible. Why would you do that?

Jidmah wrote:I really can't see Black Templars taking direct orders from Belial or Sicarius, or Ultramarines walking side-by-side with Helbrecht, who basically doesn't give a damn about what they, their chapter and their primarch stand for.

Something that just came to my mind - doesn't the Black Templar codex explicitly prohibit you from joining sides with psykers?

Yes, their codex specifically says "Black Templars cannot take any models as allies that have psychic powers, and cannot ally with any army that has a model with psychic powers, with the exception of the Grey Knights." (paraphrased)

So you CAN ally with BA or Ultrasmurfs, but not if they take a librarian. Same with IG, its fine unless they take a Primaris Psyker or Sanctioned Psykers.

Still can't see why so many are violently objecting to the allies rules, apart from fluff reasons. Whether you take allies or not, the points for the match remain the same. So that Draigowing you wanted to add to your BA will actually do a pretty good job of messing up your original FOC.

Given how allies don't make WHFB players TFG, I don't think it will in 40k either. The situation will simply have to work itself out over the next several months.

Razgryz wrote:

Jidmah wrote:I really can't see Black Templars taking direct orders from Belial or Sicarius, or Ultramarines walking side-by-side with Helbrecht, who basically doesn't give a damn about what they, their chapter and their primarch stand for.

Something that just came to my mind - doesn't the Black Templar codex explicitly prohibit you from joining sides with psykers?

Yes, their codex specifically says "Black Templars cannot take any models as allies that have psychic powers, and cannot ally with any army that has a model with psychic powers, with the exception of the Grey Knights." (paraphrased)

So you CAN ally with BA or Ultrasmurfs, but not if they take a librarian. Same with IG, its fine unless they take a Primaris Psyker or Sanctioned Psykers.

Still can't see why so many are violently objecting to the allies rules, apart from fluff reasons. Whether you take allies or not, the points for the match remain the same. So that Draigowing you wanted to add to your BA will actually do a pretty good job of messing up your original FOC.

Well that rule for BT will still stand so no fluff is broken. Quite simple actually.

I do agree that for the most part allies will not add much to a particular army competitivly speaking.


The only allies I can see making their way into the competitive scene will be,

Long Fangs, Grey Hunters, and Rune Priest for armies that can take it. To give them a decent melee unit and the psychic powers Rune Priests have.

Lord Commissar and Blob Squad to unlock either/or/both Vendettas, LRBTs, and Basilisks. Alternativly they might got for a heavy weapon focused platoon if they need some more long range fire support(GKs, Orks, Space Marines)

GKs. Could be either Crowe and some Purifiers along with a Rifleman dred, or Grandmaster/Libby along with some Terminators. Basically for armies that want some CC support.

Daemons and Chaos allying. Daemons could take some CSMs so they could have a few units on the field to start with, and some Icons to drop next to. Vice verse for the same reasons.


Everything else seems like it would subtract from the competitive structure of the army to take.

Personally I blame the tournament scene for all of this hype. In both 4th & 5th you could take allies. In both rule books it states that anytime you get above 2500 points you can add another force org chart. So if you really want allies in 5th just play bigger games. What really makes this a big deal is the tournament mindset that will allow you to do this in smaller games.

Can I just get clarification? As far as we.yet know, do allies count towards a normal FOC and not a seperate "Ally FOC?"

By that I mean could I take a 10 man Pally unit and nornal SM scouts andDraigo and it would be legal?

From everything I've seen it's separate, you have to take 1 HQ and 1 Troop of the allied force, which then unlocks 1 more Troop, 1 Elite, 1 Fast Attack, and 1 Heavy Support.

Grey Templar wrote:
Lord Commissar and Blob Squad to unlock either/or/both Vendettas, LRBTs, and Basilisks. Alternativly they might got for a heavy weapon focused platoon if they need some more long range fire support(GKs, Orks, Space Marines)

GKs. Could be either Crowe and some Purifiers along with a Rifleman dred, or Grandmaster/Libby along with some Terminators. Basically for armies that want some CC support.

Lord Commissar is a decent option, but the Primaris Psyker may also be a very good choice depending on which powers he has access to. Something to increase cover saves, or that power that allows Overwatch to be at regular BS could all greatly benefit a home-base blob squad.

As for Crowe, I think it has been stated that no named characters can be taken as allies.

I dont see allies as a bad thing. In sub 2k games it forces many players who would only take the requisite 2 troops to now take 3 if they want to take some allied crap. Which I am fine with.

MandalorynOranj wrote:From everything I've seen it's separate, you have to take 1 HQ and 1 Troop of the allied force, which then unlocks 1 more Troop, 1 Elite, 1 Fast Attack, and 1 Heavy Support.

So I MUST take an HQ and troop and not just either?

yes you are required to take 1 troop and 1 hq then can take 0-1 from other slots, and up to 1 more troop.

Right. Those are mandatory.

A damn. I had a great list in mind where I could actually field 10 Paladins and a Dreadknight. So sick of having 5 man squads.

All these people going on about how it is not fluffy for this army to team up with this one while facing that is getting annoying. You can create your own fluff for each enemy you face. If the GK and SW are in the same area and facing Necrons, they aren't going to go, "Sorry can't help, its not in the main fluff in our universe. Have to go it on your own." They will help out their fellow Marines fighting for the Imperium.

Stop getting your underwear in a twist over such silly things as the same side coming together to fight a common enemy that isn't written down somewhere. We play in a game where there has been 10,000years of warfare to choose from. You really think these battles haven't happened at some point?

Azza007 wrote:All these people going on about how it is not fluffy for this army to team up with this one while facing that is getting annoying. You can create your own fluff for each enemy you face. If the GK and SW are in the same area and facing Necrons, they aren't going to go, "Sorry can't help, its not in the main fluff in our universe. Have to go it on your own." They will help out their fellow Marines fighting for the Imperium.

Stop getting your underwear in a twist over such silly things as the same side coming together to fight a common enemy that isn't written down somewhere. We play in a game where there has been 10,000years of warfare to choose from. You really think these battles haven't happened at some point?

Very true, even GW changes the fluff to go with what ever their current flavor is. Just look at any book by Matt Ward.

I don't think it makes you a TFG, I think it actually helps the game.

I now have a reason to be excited for releases that are not for armies I play, because I will be able to take some of the new things in my army. I don't have to buy whole armies anymore, I can just buy a few units to add to my existing armies. It also means I don't have to buy as much, as I can combine the armies I already have to form larger forces.

Plus, tons of odd-ball armies are now possible. Mercenaries, LoTD, Corsairs and Tau-human alliances are now playable, which gives more variation to the table top.

Honestly, I was just about ready to shelve my stuff and go to Warmahordes, but this allies thing got me.

So GW says "Screw it, we're not supporting GT's anymore", and a few weeks later, allies are reintroduced. They'll sell more models and not have to hear any of the bickering. This was perhaps a clever ruse, methinks!

tgjensen wrote:I wonder if there are any extra restrictions on the Allied choices you can take. Like if you take an Ork Warboss on a bike, can you also take a biker nobs mob as a Troops choice? That should be a pretty potent allied unit.

or, for that matter, can I take an SM captain and take a unit of bikes as thr troop choice (pretty much the same thing)?

I think everything like that will work as normal.

Mr. S Baldrick wrote:

Azza007 wrote:All these people going on about how it is not fluffy for this army to team up with this one while facing that is getting annoying. You can create your own fluff for each enemy you face. If the GK and SW are in the same area and facing Necrons, they aren't going to go, "Sorry can't help, its not in the main fluff in our universe. Have to go it on your own." They will help out their fellow Marines fighting for the Imperium.

Stop getting your underwear in a twist over such silly things as the same side coming together to fight a common enemy that isn't written down somewhere. We play in a game where there has been 10,000years of warfare to choose from. You really think these battles haven't happened at some point?

Very true, even GW changes the fluff to go with what ever their current flavor is. Just look at any book by Matt Ward.

And Phil Kelly, and Cruddnce.

Again, WARD MADE NOTHING UP. everything in his books thats caused massive amounts of rage was in the fluff before. Only the various SCs were new.

And just because a Codex has someone's name on the cover doesn't mean he wrote the whole thing. Codices are collaberative efforts from the entire design team, its just that one person is the main writer(meaning he writes the rules)

is it just me or does it seem like Vostroyan IG and SW are a match made in heaven...

Grey Templar wrote:Again, WARD MADE NOTHING UP. everything in his books thats caused massive amounts of rage was in the fluff before. Only the various SCs were new.

And just because a Codex has someone's name on the cover doesn't mean he wrote the whole thing. Codices are collaberative efforts from the entire design team, its just that one person is the main writer(meaning he writes the rules)

No, I am pretty sure that Ward sits in his office at the gw headquarters, big cigar in his mouth, glass of bourbon in his hand, and he thinks up ways to get more money out of the waac crowd while making us good natured players angry by ruining what was a very serious and well written universe single handedly. I mean seriously, team of writers? Collaborative efforts? Next youre going to tell us the illuminati are behind crop circles. Put your tin foil hat on, and go back to your basement sir, we have no need for your kind on this rational discussion board.

sirlotsofpain wrote:is it just me or does it seem like Vostroyan IG and SW are a match made in heaven...

Or vosotroyans and sanguinary guard....vosotroyans and paladins.....or vosotroyans and deathwing. Now that I think about it, vosotroyans would look pretty sick next to any elite marine army.

Grey Templar wrote:Again, WARD MADE NOTHING UP. everything in his books thats caused massive amounts of rage was in the fluff before. Only the various SCs were new.

And just because a Codex has someone's name on the cover doesn't mean he wrote the whole thing. Codices are collaberative efforts from the entire design team, its just that one person is the main writer(meaning he writes the rules)

Not exactly. He often borrows fluff from older material, but then modifies it slightly to make his protagonists that much more superkewlusa#1. Some of the little blurb stories are also all him. And the SC are his worst offenses.

Omegus wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:Again, WARD MADE NOTHING UP. everything in his books thats caused massive amounts of rage was in the fluff before. Only the various SCs were new.

And just because a Codex has someone's name on the cover doesn't mean he wrote the whole thing. Codices are collaberative efforts from the entire design team, its just that one person is the main writer(meaning he writes the rules)

Not exactly. He often borrows fluff from older material, but then modifies it slightly to make his protagonists that much more superkewlusa#1. Some of the little blurb stories are also all him. And the SC are his worst offenses.

Like Phil Kelly did with Vect? It's not surprisingly uncommon anyways with the three writers, only Robert of the three is more nuanced (or at least, he just re-writes the old fluff and sticks it in)

Draigo-chapter master of the grey knights kills demons

OMG GUIZE WARD RUINED THE FLUFF FOR EVERYTHING BAAWWWWWWWW

Straken-carries a man across a fething continent alone, punches space marines in the face all day because he is half bionic

Sweet, makes sense.

Sanguinor-blood angels demon/psychic manifestation/reincarnated hero that randomly shows up and kills things

HURR SOOOOO STUPID WARD IS DUM

Vect-uber badass dark eldar who rose from the ranks of nothing to being awesome by his wits alone

yeah, no problems here.

IG come out

OMG IG ARE BROKEN

Vanilla marines and blood angels come out

well they are kind of cool I guess

Space wolves come out

OMG NOBODY CAN BEAT THEM JAWS IS IMBA, BAWWWLONG FANGS

Nids come out

BAAAWWW WORST BOOK EVER

Grey knights come out

WARD RUINED THE FLUFF AND THE RULES AND NOBODY CAN BEAT THEM.

I like how when something isnt to somebody's preference in a Ward book, its because of Ward. But when its an issue with a not Ward book, its just a problem with that codex. People moan about purifiers=Ward is incompetent. People moan about long fangs=long fangs are broken, but Kelly is never mentioned.

Omegus wrote:As for Crowe, I think it has been stated that no named characters can be taken as allies.

Incorrect. There is no restriction on named characters, this has been confirmed by multiple people with actual rulebooks, as well as GW suggesting multiple named characters on their allies page.

I feel like if it becomes cheesy, then the community will adapt. Allies are optional, nobody's forcing you to take them, so many would view it as a "non-essential" rule. Some LFGS tourneys may simply post a rule that says no allies used in tournaments, and that would solve the problem of people cheesing it up in tourneys.

As for fun at home, it at least gives backing to those who would want allies for fluff reasons. For example, my regiment of Guard in the fluff that I wrote served as heavy armour support with Raven Guard, not necessarily as a supplement but as an "finger" of the SM.

If I had a scout marine squad and a few veteran Marines to act as commanders fluff-wise, what do I get that I didn't have already? Same weapons as my IG and the scouts are about equal to what I could upgrade my vets to. I just like the look of having some non-bulky SM models and the coolness factor of the Astartes gracing my regiment.

I understand that someone handpicking IG's best artillery and throwing in some GK psykers and a Land Raider or two is something less desirable, but I don't think it'll be common enough to cause a major concern. Plus the communal "good" you get from having people again able to field fluff-based armies such as Inquisition IG or something similar I believe would far outweigh the "bad" you get from people cheesing the game.

But hey, that's just my 3 bits.

If I see fluffly allies, I'll allow it. But if I see GK with SW, your ass isn't getting a game. Bottom line.

I still can't understand why people think allies are mandatory... bookless fools.

juraigamer wrote:If I see fluffly allies, I'll allow it. But if I see GK with SW, your ass isn't getting a game. Bottom line.

I still can't understand why people think allies are mandatory... bookless fools.

SO what About my idea of DA/Tau. I'm just asking for an honest opinion.

juraigamer wrote:If I see fluffly allies, I'll allow it. But if I see GK with SW, your ass isn't getting a game. Bottom line.

I still can't understand why people think allies are mandatory... bookless fools.

And that's understandable because that's something that probably just shouldn't be mixed, like brushing your teeth and drinking orange juice. Super-psyker super-strict super-justicars mixed with mead-swilling, psyker-hating, anarchic, ravenous space vikings? Yeah no. Either one could go alright with vanilla marines as a happy medium, but that's just throwing the opposite spectrums together. Other allies that should probably never happen are Eldar and Dark Eldar, GK and Chaos, 'Nids and anybody... Well if 'Nids can't devour biometal that may open up something with 'Crons but hey, if the 'Crons help the 'nids eat everything then what are they gonna eat? Maybe they go off across space and outside this universe and start eating EVERYTHING together.