Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Watchersinthedark wrote:

 captain collius wrote:
They can be good or bad I just wish GW had made the Allies Chart more realistic. I.E. Dark Angels don't really trust anyone ever they only get along with the Guard because the guard generally doesn't question what the DA tell them. Conversely Most space marines won't do the same. Also Necrons and Blood angels should not be battle brothers.

Yup, that is my one gripe about allies as well

Also space marines should not be battle brothers with tau, but IG should be battle brothers with tau (purge the xenos and gue'vessa auxiliary respectively).

Anyone else remember the days when you could ally in certain armies only if you were fighting certain foes.

So if you fighting Chaos you could ally in Harlequins..........or you could Ally Guard and Marines but not if you used abhumans or Xenos

I'm very fluff orientated in 40k so they work for me whentheymake sense but drive me mad if it is just wrong!

I like the allies. There is nothing more fluffy than a Space Marine army with IG support. Or CSM with deamons.

Another good point.

Your allies should never out point the main force. There should be a cap on the points spent on allies. Like 25%, that way you only see them in bigger games (aka fluff games).

That's how it was in 2nd edition. Certain allies were listed as being available for an army, and you could only have up to 50% of your force be allies.

The allies aren't the problem. The problem is the army books the allies come from. 6th edition is great is you just look at the CRB. As usual, it's the army books that mess everything up.

To go back to Starcraft analogies, if Zerg, Protoss, and Terran are all balanced, then Zerg and Protoss vs Terran and Terran should be a decent match. In 40K, we have Tau and Eldar vs Space Marines and IG and it's just comparable because the lists aren't balanced to being with. This being the case, I don't think we can logically fault the allies rules.

They should keep allies but have more conditions, such as no special characters on both teams as it seems unlikely that asdrubael vect and eldrad would be able to put their differences aside, whereas if either the dark eldar or eldar were without strong leadership they might be more likely to throw in their lot with the others. Similarly nids should get a unit nominated to have mind control or whatever, and can ally if with non special character led armies if they take it. Necrons allying with tau does my head in, theres no explanation, its just so people can build stupid powerlists with no flavour.

Again, if the army books were balanced, mixing two army books wouldn't be any better than mono-Dark Eldar, for example.

Pretty much. Which wont happen because we have to have a reason to go buy every new army.