Necrons and BA friends? Possible justification?

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.

**Deadshot**

So I was reading today's What's new Today, and I found somethign that might help explain why The Sons of Sanguinius and the Metal Zombies are now BFFs.

What's New Today, Monday 31st October 2011 wrote:Aside from the named characters (of which there are seven) in the Codex, you also have the Necron Overlords. Because of their programming, the Necron race must attempt to rebuild the glorious Necron Dynasties and reclaim the galaxy (the galaxy that they once tore apart, but we won't go into that just yet). However, they are also very pragmatic, which means that on occasion, a Necron Overlord will have to agree to an alliance with another race to ensure victory or survival - an utterly abhorrent situation, but one of necessity. Besides, when all things are considered, they can always attack their allies at a later date. Necrons are immortal, their foes (and necessary allies) are not.

**Coolyo294**

Necrons and BA aren't best buddies.

**CthuluIsSpy**

Yep, seems legit.

Seriously, this makes perfect sense.

**purplefood**

We already know this...
It was a matter of ignoring the BA and fighting the Nids in order to survive or carry on fighting the BA and all die. They chose the pragmatic option and the BA likely also chose the pragmatic option.
It wasn't an agreed alliance but a ceasefire, the 2 armies didn't (AFAIK) act in concert unless they took cues from each others troop movements.
Most people's problem comes from the last line...

**Deadshot**

Ignore

**Mr Nobody**

The best way to view it is that they don't make allies with insects, and would usually squash them on the spot. But if you have more pressing matters, you might overlook them to fight the more dangerous enemy. The insects might fight the enemies too, but you really don't care.

**iproxtaco**

For those who didn't buy into the regular internet hyperbole or had the sense to read the passage themselves, none of this justification was needed. At least now however people that require something to be written there in black and white word for word can rest assured there's a fluff explanation.

**Seaward**

iproxtaco wrote:For those who didn't buy into the regular internet hyperbole or had the sense to read the passage themselves, none of this justification was needed. At least now however people that require something to be written there in black and white word for word can rest assured there's a fluff explanation.

There is - and always was - a fluff explanation for why they stopped fighting each other and fought the 'nids.

There isn't - and never will be - a fluff explanation for why they decided to shake hands, exchange addresses for Christmas cards, and go their separate ways after.

**purplefood**

Seaward wrote:
iproxtaco wrote:For those who didn't buy into the regular internet hyperbole or had the sense to read the passage themselves, none of this justification was needed. At least now however people that require something to be written there in black and white word for word can rest assured there's a fluff explanation.

There is - and always was - a fluff explanation for why they stopped fighting each other and fought the 'nids.

There isn't - and never will be - a fluff explanation for why they decided to shake hands, exchange addresses for Christmas cards, and go their separate ways after.

Like i said...
It's the bit at the end that annoyed people...
I don't know the exact wording but it implied the BA thought that attacking the Necrons was 'distastful' after they had so recently defeated the Tyranids together.

**iproxtaco**

Seaward wrote:
iproxtaco wrote:For those who didn't buy into the regular internet hyperbole or had the sense to read the passage themselves, none of this justification was needed. At least now however people that require something to be written there in black and white word for word can rest assured there's a fluff explanation.

There is - and always was - a fluff explanation for why they stopped fighting each other and fought the 'nids.

There isn't - and never will be - a fluff explanation for why they decided to shake hands, exchange addresses for Christmas cards, and go their separate ways after.

Yeah, there is. Dante being the overall commander of the Blood Angels.

**Void__Dragon**

With the recent retcon of the Necrons, a lot of gak that shouldn't of happened before is now possible.

That said, the Necrons ignoring the Blood Angels to destroy the Tyranids is not one of those things.

**Ixion**

I want to know exactly what part of what book the so-called Necron/Blood Angel pillow fight slumber party fluff in question appears in. I am going to have an informed opinion on this, or no opinion at all.

**Coolyo294**

Blood Angels 5ed Codex.

**Ixion**

Coolyo294 wrote:Blood Angels 5ed Codex.

Much thanks; I'll get on that straight away.

**nomotog**

The new fluff dose put it in a new light. It could have been silent king forces. He is trying to unite necrons to stop the nids from eating up all the good hosts. In that case it's not so much alliance, but the necrons preserving the BA for latter use as host bodies. Kind of like how you put animals on the endangered species list, so you don't turn around one day and realize that the humans have all died out.

**bombboy1252**

purplefood wrote:We already know this...
It was a matter of ignoring the BA and fighting the Nids in order to survive or carry on fighting the BA and all die. They chose the pragmatic option and the BA likely also chose the pragmatic option.
It wasn't an agreed alliance but a ceasefire, the 2 armies didn't (AFAIK) act in concert unless they took cues from each others troop movements.
Most people's problem comes from the last line...

Purplefood summed up my thoughts pretty nicely...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

iproxtaco wrote:For those who didn't buy into the regular internet hyperbole or had the sense to read the passage themselves, none of this justification was needed. At least now however people that require something to be written there in black and white word for word can rest assured there's a fluff explanation.

This also sums up my thoughts nicely...