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.

Whats not to like?

Coteaz dual FOC + 2 DET of DE allies. Yummy.

Skriker wrote:
The biggest issue I see though is all of the overhyped different space marine lists being able to be combined however one chooses. The best that comes to mind would be blood angels assault units backed up by space wolves long fangs missile launcher spam and that is just one of the many options out there.

Yes, Blood Angels would be able to take one allied unit of Long Fangs after paying for a Troops Choice and an HQ. How is that "spam" again?

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Skriker wrote:
The biggest issue I see though is all of the overhyped different space marine lists being able to be combined however one chooses. The best that comes to mind would be blood angels assault units backed up by space wolves long fangs missile launcher spam and that is just one of the many options out there.

Yes, Blood Angels would be able to take one allied unit of Long Fangs after paying for a Troops Choice and an HQ. How is that "spam" again?

I don't know if I'd concider that "spam" either.

But those troops would be Grey Hunters... the best Marine troop choice in the game for their points cost.

That HQ would probably be a Runepreist or 2 as space wolves get 2 for 1 HQs.

And then come the long fangs.

I already know a few marine players who are already planning on buy these very models.

Yeah, most supposedly "cheesy" combos really just dilute both forces.

I mean, Grey Hunters and a Rune Priest are good, but they really don't bring much to the BA army. Who already have a Troops choice with 2 base attacks. Its a hefty tax just to get one LF squad.

Grey Templar wrote:Yeah, most supposedly "cheesy" combos really just dilute both forces.

I mean, Grey Hunters and a Rune Priest are good, but they really don't bring much to the BA army. Who already have a Troops choice with 2 base attacks. Its a hefty tax just to get one LF squad.

Especially when Blood Angels Devestators are useful already.

To be honest, I think it is possible to justify just about any ally combination on that chart, by using the sentence, "and then the Tyranids came.. "

I love that you might now see some traitor guard mixed with daemons. Perhaps some Blood Axe orcs with human allies. There are many, many possibilities for use of imagination, and I'm all for the options being opened up to the players.

The only thing I am against is the effect it will have on the aesthetic appeal of the game. BA and SW combinations might sound fine, as might many other of those ally combinations, but I remain to be convinced that someone could make a job of modelling and painting them so they don't look like two mis-matched jigsaw pieces wedged together.

TBH a lot of the 40k players at my club are younger, and not being able to afford an entire army or else getting bored 500pts in to their collection and switching, already played in 5th edition with allies through necessity.

I would predict that most people will carry on in the same way as they did before - people who aren't that bothered about modelling/painting, will just chuck a load of unpainted stuff down on the table, and carry on. Others, who are fastidious and worry a lot about the visual appeal of their army, will probably have to think long and hard about whether they want allies in their force, regardless of the improvements it might bring to their efficacy in game.

DeffDred wrote:

TheLionOfTheForest wrote:Again, Everyone seems to forget that the "allies system" is not about highfives and drinking beer! It's about armies A and B getting ambushed by army C or even C and D.

Why is that so hard for people to wrap their heads around?

Its is the levels that are very annoying - Battle brothers when it should be Allies of Conveience, Allies of Convenience when they should be Desperate Allies and vice versa - simple chart discards so much history and background - :(

I like the allies rule, because I like the whole new realm of army possibilities that it opens up. After all, I don't think that 1,500 points of GKs and 500 points of Space Wolves is going to be that much cheesier than 2,000 points of GKs.

Mr Morden wrote:

DeffDred wrote:

TheLionOfTheForest wrote:Again, Everyone seems to forget that the "allies system" is not about highfives and drinking beer! It's about armies A and B getting ambushed by army C or even C and D.

Why is that so hard for people to wrap their heads around?

Its is the levels that are very annoying - Battle brothers when it should be Allies of Conveience, Allies of Convenience when they should be Desperate Allies and vice versa - simple chart discards so much history and background - :(

TheLionOfTheForest didn't say that... I did.

He made that responce... not me.

Is something wrong with "quotes" right now?

I like my SOB can team up with ym BT. The Witchhunters book had rules for taking (in place of) some units outside the codex. But sometimes the girls need a hand, or the guys need a girl to fix things.
Why I dislike it...well my IG should not be fighting along side anyone but other Imps. After all, all good IG are told Xenos are evil and will steal your soul and kill your kittens and kick your mom in the head. Okay, I can see Tau maybe, but only once in a great moon. Marines should not have to side with anyone at all, Necrons should kill people on their side just because they are there. And Yarrik with an Ork...makes me sick.

Why I dislike it...well my IG should not be fighting along side anyone but other Imps. After all, all good IG are told Xenos are evil and will steal your soul and kill your kittens and kick your mom in the head.

IG with tau = Gue'vasa

IG with chaos = Traitors

Not that hard to understand.

Necrons should kill people on their side just because they are there.

These aren't 3rd edition Necrons anymore, some Overlords will willingly ally at times with the various factions, while some will go after other xenos with passion and even other necrons with full hatred.

RicBlasko wrote:I like my SOB can team up with ym BT. The Witchhunters book had rules for taking (in place of) some units outside the codex. But sometimes the girls need a hand, or the guys need a girl to fix things.
Why I dislike it...well my IG should not be fighting along side anyone but other Imps. After all, all good IG are told Xenos are evil and will steal your soul and kill your kittens and kick your mom in the head. Okay, I can see Tau maybe, but only once in a great moon. Marines should not have to side with anyone at all, Necrons should kill people on their side just because they are there. And Yarrik with an Ork...makes me sick.

I'm confused... You think your IG should be able to to up with imperial armies but not marines?

Necrons aren't mindless kill machines anymore.

Yarrick with orks makes you sick? Wait till you see me army... you'll vomit for weeks.

DeffDred wrote:

RicBlasko wrote:I like my SOB can team up with ym BT. The Witchhunters book had rules for taking (in place of) some units outside the codex. But sometimes the girls need a hand, or the guys need a girl to fix things.
Why I dislike it...well my IG should not be fighting along side anyone but other Imps. After all, all good IG are told Xenos are evil and will steal your soul and kill your kittens and kick your mom in the head. Okay, I can see Tau maybe, but only once in a great moon. Marines should not have to side with anyone at all, Necrons should kill people on their side just because they are there. And Yarrik with an Ork...makes me sick.

I'm confused... You think your IG should be able to to up with imperial armies but not marines?

Necrons aren't mindless kill machines anymore.

Yarrick with orks makes you sick? Wait till you see me army... you'll vomit for weeks.

I can't wait to see a Yarrick/ Ghazgkull army that's built like a buddy cop movie. Would be hilarious and epic. Yarrick and Ghazzy are at the final battle, finally about to end it, when you insert whichever faction the week you want, and they have to team up and beat it so they can finish their fight uninterrupted. Not really that far fetched. Ghazzy see's Yarrick as the ultimate foe, and enjoys fighting him, so fighting alongside him would probably be fun change of pace for the old warboss. Yarrick is obsessed with killing the old warboss, and I can guarantee you that if another force showed up and threatened to kill ghazgkull before Yarrick could, he would stop at nothing to kill the interloper, so he could finish ghazzy himself.

But that's just my point of view. Honestly I'm worried about some people in this thread, if the Ghazzy/ Yarrick thing has got you this freaked out, I don't know how you can read anything about 40k without getting an aneurism. There's so many fluff contradictions already it's a miracle your heads haven't exploded yet Just relax, and if someone brings that "disgusting" Yarrick/ ghazzy allied force, you don't HAVE to play them, but at the same time, you don't need to be a jerk and rag on them nonstop about it...

Shadelkan wrote:So yes, GW knows nothing of balance, but this makes their game system more interesting. If anything, constantly considering balance would limit the abilities of some unit choices, and we'd have plenty of choices with only marginal differences.

I agree and the balance should come from tactical possibilities in rules, not making similar armies with different looks.

Shadelkan wrote:Of course, the main culprit is the folks who still think Warhammer 40k is meant to be a competitive game system. By the fact that 6th ed tries very hard to convince the players to create a narrative and enjoyable game experience for both, where rules bending is acceptable, I think there's the proof.

Yes 40K should be taking a direction of being competetive game system but with emphasis more on tactics than on list building. Competive systems have more depth which translate to more fun even for casual players except those who prefer luck based adventure games for 6+ kids. For narrative games I don't nee FOC, points and loads of models just skirmish system and 20 characters maybe. I prefer to forge narrative and cinematics through tactical events on battlefield than rolls for a dangerous plants in the forest.

The way GW makes 6th edition cinematic is cheap, imo.

I agree and the balance should come from tactical possibilities in rules, not making similar armies with different looks.

Some of the new 6th edition stuff actually does promote tactics, like flanking is now an effective tool to be used in 6th.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Some of the new 6th edition stuff actually does promote tactics, like flanking is now an effective tool to be used in 6th.

Yes and there's more, wound alocation, ability to move only part of the models from unit, fixed number glances to destroy a vehicle - top of my head and all great imo. Makes it even worse to see the right design decision paired with questionable ones.

There's a lot of things I like in 6th edition and need to test it really before making a judgment. Bad sign though (for me at least) if I think about houseruling with the first read.

I love the creative ideas it can cause. It makes an army I've been a little interested in but with little to no ideas for suddenly full of options by spinning them off allies of the existing armies.

I'm going to give my Necrons Tau allies but only the tech (no Kroot allowed). Since my collection includes Trazyn and Szeras collecting Tau technology and using it in battle for research makes perfect sense. Plus Tau XV25 Stealth Team look pretty cool with Immortal heads.

For my Orks Chaos Daemons are the ally of choice despite low compatibility. Why? Chaos Orks. I recently gave a Skulltaker an Ork head and Powerclaw and it looks great and through that I've decided that I want to make a Chaos army using Ork parts.

Back to your original question people like to play allies because they get to use 2 armies!!!