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.

TBD wrote:Yes, you are of course right about Eldar/Necrons.

It will be interesting to see who gets to be buddies with who aside from the obvious.

For example will Black Templars be able to be allies to another Imperium army that includes a psyker? Especially GK

Looks like another forever unallied army to me.

According to the fluff, alliance restrictions should be like this:

*shrug* I dunno, I don't really expect a lot of extra restrictions on allies, to be honest with you. I think it's a nod toward narrative gaming (and model sales) and not balanced gameplay. It'd be somewhat self-defeating if they added too many caveats.

I'm okay with allies rules. They'll provide a structure for using allies in friendly games, and will likely be banned from every major tournament for obvious reasons. IMO, we'll be good either way. It's the movement and missions rules that will make or break the edition, IMO.

Any alliance rules will be inherently unfair if they are based in "fluff" as it will favour imperial and chaos armies and most likely leave Tyranids in the cold. There is no need for these rules to be part of the "standard game" as players could already (and did already) house rule whatever alliances they wanted for their own games.

I really enjoy a good, hard fought, competitive game of 40K. I hate to see one or other player screwed over by book imbalances or for example, crappy reserve rolls. I gain far less enjoyment from a hard fought loss than a win based on poor balance.

For that reason, I'm not seeing much point in the rumoured changes. If I want "fluff" and so on, I can play a roleplaying game with far less expense and set up time, with my roleplaying buddies. Wargaming, for me, is a competition, not a co-operative storytelling exercise, much as story is part of a good game.

rothrich wrote:This wish wont come true as none of the necron fluf says much about allying with orks

The way the Necron background is written in the current codex you can make your Overlord as good or evil as you want, with whatever agenda you come up with, and the rest of the army just follows the leader. There is (almost) no set doctrine. That is what makes this codex/background so great & unique Imo.

With the probable exception of their ancient enemies you can come up with whatever storyline reason you like to have them be allies to most other armies.

It's rather the other way around. With who & why would Orks play nice along with someone else? Mercenaries? Promise of power?

RegulusBlack wrote:Too many people are simply arguing to argue (someone is wrong on the internets...)

here are some options for everyone.

1) continue to play the game and enjoy yourself
2) continue to play the game and be miserable
3) do not continue to play the game.

some of you are overreacting to proposed rumors, there should be a different thread that is titled (HOW NEW 6TH EDITION RULES WILL RUIN 40K) or something, not RISK is RISK and your not a tournament player so you cant play for fun, or im right and you are stupid face.

so either keep playing or not, but cut the woe is me crap and keep the thread back on possible rumors

I've got some characters to model...

some more options:

4) Enjoy theorizing about possible rumours, I'm sorry but I just can't help it.
5) Chill down and let people discuss things that might not even happen have their fun

TBD wrote:

rothrich wrote:This wish wont come true as none of the necron fluf says much about allying with orks

The way the Necron background is written in the current codex you can make your Overlord as good or evil as you want, with whatever agenda you come up with, and the rest of the army just follows the leader. There is (almost) no set doctrine. That is what makes this codex/background so great & unique Imo.

With the probable exception of their ancient enemies you can come up with whatever storyline reason you like to have them be allies to most other armies.

It's rather the other way around. With who & why would Orks play nice along with someone else? Mercenaries? Promise of power?

Orks like to fight, simple was that.

Cyrax wrote:According to the fluff, alliance restrictions should be like this:

Spoiler:

Imperium
1)Black Templars: can ally 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 if they don't include Psykers.
2)Blood Angels: can ally 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (with duel), 8, 11, 13, 15
3)Dark Angels: can ally 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 if they don't include abhumans.
4)Grey Knights: can ally 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 15
5)Imperial Guard: can ally 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, (9, 10 as traitor guard), 11, 14, 15
6)Sisters of Battle: can ally 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
7)Space Marines: can ally 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 15
8)Space Wolves: can ally 1, 2, 3 (with duel), 4, 5, 7, 11, 15

Chaos
9)Chaos Daemons: can ally 5 (as traitor guard), 10
10)Chaos Space Marines: can ally 5 (as traitor guard), 9, 14

Eldar
11)Eldar: can ally 4, 5, 7, 8, 14, 15
12)Dark Eldar: can ally 11(kinship), 14

Others
13)Necrons: can ally 2, 4, 13, 14, 15

14)Orks: can ally 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15 as mercenaries.

15)Tau Empire: can ally 2, 4, 5, 7 (Ultramarines), 8, 13, 14 (not if a Farsight army).

16)Tyranids: forever alone

Chaos and Dark Eldar can have some sort of pact also like they had in (for example) the Salamander novels.

Feel free to modify the list.

elrabin wrote:I do expect some sort of restriction (like max 1 allied unit / FOC), but I would suspect additional constraints along the lines of:
- Models can't embark in an ally's vehicle
- Characters can't join allied units
- Special rules don't get conferred onto allied units

This way it still "feels" like two different armies, rather than one.

I also wouldn't be at all surprised if the rumoured Allies are simply a slight re-working of the current Multiple Detachment rules, to allow you to field armies from different codexes with your opponent's permission.

Or somthing similar to the way the DH/HW did it.

I don't expect Tyranids to be able to ally with anyone, but there could be a fluff case for IG allies (as Genestealer Cult Brood Brothers).

You have the ability to buy different terrain (it even has its own
slot on the new FOC), e.g, you can buy a Bastion with a Quad-Gun
(which has the aforementioned Skyfire USR). There seem to be quite a
few options for what terrain you can buy...

Hmmm...

yeah, my greyhunter squads would all be running around in chimeras with way more fireports.

Makes me chuckle just thinking about the site of spacewolves all hunkered down in an ork truck blasting fools.

gannam wrote:yeah, my greyhunter squads would all be running around in chimeras with way more fireports.

Makes me chuckle just thinking about the site of spacewolves all hunkered down in an ork truck blasting fools.

The 1st one i would call chessey, the the 2nd one just sounds right for some reason, either that or Battle-Wagons.

I don't know if anybody has thought of this idea yet

but...why...not...ban...allies....in...friendly/tournament games...

Hey, I'm probably 10 pages and two days too late...

But to be honest, people seem to be moaning for the sake of it I've lived through every edition of 40k and every time I hear the same old story and every time I write a reply like this
If your not happy with the new 40k then switch to FOW it makes sense.

I really hope this allies rumour is true. The thing I enjoy the most about 40k is customising my army. Now with the concept of allies I can build models that look like they're part of their allied army.

I'm hoping that the rule allows you to create your own reason for an alliance. Chaos infected Tyranids, Necrons wearing Tau armour, Orks forcing survivors of previous battles to fight for them and so many other great ideas that would allow for so much customising fun.

Do_I_Not_Like_That: Your post is totally cool, from your perspective. But look at someone who wants a portable wargame. If you don't have a stable gaming group, you're going to rely on the "core rules." And as soon as those rules allow something, it's going to become a lot more common. So once the core rules allow allies, I'm going to (on average) enjoy 40K a lot less, because there's more chance of me ending up playing with someone who wants to use those rules. Since I don't have a stable group, I'm more likely to have to "put up with" stuff like that. So, I reckon it's reasonable for me to be a bit worried about that development.

That said, I'll probably just ignore it and stop playing 40K, without any real drama, if it ends up being a game I don't enjoy. I've got WM/H, so I'm not too fussed. But talking about it is still fun to me, for some barely understood reason

gannam wrote:yeah, my greyhunter squads would all be running around in chimeras with way more fireports.

Makes me chuckle just thinking about the site of spacewolves all hunkered down in an ork truck blasting fools.

pretty sure that happened in a Bill King novel at one point...

having a good solid non cheesy alliance system is a great way to sale models, and its a great way to really have customized armies. As as a painter and modeler, this is just freaking fantastic to me. I have tons of one off models from different armies that I want to field.

I could see vanilla marines taking 3 squads of long fangs with this too. OUCH

Well I'm looking forward to grots allying with Abaddon and blazing a trail across the galaxy.

I mean, you would for a laugh!!

Not news at this point but here is a facebook update from my flgs
"Alright peeps, you knew it was coming. 40K 6th edition will be available for sale on June 30th. You can reserve your copy starting today at either the Provo or Lehi location."

Nitros14 wrote:

Palindrome wrote:
On the other side of the coin the rumours fro fantasy 8th sounded really good before it was released and look how that turned out.

8th is the best ruleset Fantasy has ever had.

Since 8th Fantasy has become tremendously more popular.

Except among people who want a dice game to be perfectly predictable and non-random I guess.

I virtually stopped playing Fantasy. All the strategy of manovoure, charge and counter charge has been illiminated in favor of Initiative!! When my Bretonnians lances strike last on the charge that did it for me. NOW fantasy is a dice rolling game.

Sandy

I don't mean to get on my soapbox here and sound like an old man, but back in the 1980s we had no internet, no citadel washes, barely any painting guides, or those little nozzles on plastic glue that just make so much sense, no liquid green stuff, no sand in tubs (you had to do it yourself ). I you wanted horse hair paint brushes, you had to buy a horse first, you had to make your own slotta bases, citadel paints were like tar, etc etc etc I could go on all night and day.

I wish back then that worrying about allies was our main problem!!

gannam wrote:yeah, my greyhunter squads would all be running around in chimeras with way more fireports.

Keep in mind they are dedicated transports, meaning you'll need to buy a unit to go with them, and unless they change the dedicated transport rules (which we've heard nothing on as yet) you'll have to start your GH's outside and load them up turn 1.

besides, how many fire points do you need with GH's?

gannam wrote:having a good solid non cheesy alliance system is a great way to sale models, and its a great way to really have customized armies. As as a painter and modeler, this is just freaking fantastic to me. I have tons of one off models from different armies that I want to field.

I could see vanilla marines taking 3 squads of long fangs with this too. OUCH

The problem is however, it is somewhat difficult to see an allies rule being really balanced IMHO, even if the allied force is required to take the mandatory FoC choices, it can still lead to armies plugging gaps in their list with the reeeally powerful units from other Codices (e.g. Long Fangs, Vendetta's, Psyflemen).
The current rumours suggest the allies must provide a (single) HQ and a (single) Troops choice, which means Grey Knights allies for example could simply take an Inquisitor and Henchmen (which could cost as little as 37pts altogether - made even better if KP's are removed and VP's re-introduced - before an army could load up on Psyflemen or Purifiers etc.
Similarly, if an army wanted an ally to provide Vendettas or Long Fangs, then Veterans and Grey Hunters are both very good troop choices, whilst Rune Priests and IG HQ's are good and cheap respectively.

I think with allies, there is a lot of room for abuse, even with restrictions.

@ DO_I_NOT_LIKE_THAT. It's true it is a "golden age of gaming" as we keep hearing. There are better paints, ever improving models,a strong third party presence, even video games devoted to our hobby. So we've got to find something to complain about what will we do>

Yeah, but the fact that things are better than they were does not stop anyone from pointing out when something isn't good or could be better- that's how things improve!

Cyrax wrote:

TBD wrote:Yes, you are of course right about Eldar/Necrons.

It will be interesting to see who gets to be buddies with who aside from the obvious.

For example will Black Templars be able to be allies to another Imperium army that includes a psyker? Especially GK

Looks like another forever unallied army to me.

According to the fluff, alliance restrictions should be like this:

Spoiler:

Imperium
1)Black Templars: can ally 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 if they don't include Psykers.
2)Blood Angels: can ally 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 (with duel), 8, 11, 13, 15
3)Dark Angels: can ally 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 if they don't include abhumans.
4)Grey Knights: can ally 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14, 15
5)Imperial Guard: can ally 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, (9, 10 as traitor guard), 11, 14, 15
6)Sisters of Battle: can ally 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
7)Space Marines: can ally 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 15
8)Space Wolves: can ally 1, 2, 3 (with duel), 4, 5, 7, 11, 15

Chaos
9)Chaos Daemons: can ally 5 (as traitor guard), 10
10)Chaos Space Marines: can ally 5 (as traitor guard), 9, 14

Eldar
11)Eldar: can ally 4, 5, 7, 8, 14, 15
12)Dark Eldar: can ally 11(kinship), 14

Others
13)Necrons: can ally 2, 4, 13, 14, 15

14)Orks: can ally 4, 5, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15 as mercenaries.

15)Tau Empire: can ally 2, 4, 5, 7 (Ultramarines), 8, 13, 14 (not if a Farsight army).

16)Tyranids: forever alone

Except for the fact that Black Templars are expressly stated in their codex as being able to ally with Grey Knights and they are the only psykers they can ally with as well. Just a fact you may not have known, otherwise nice work. Looks almost identical to the allies matrix GW published for the tournament.

Beamo wrote:

gannam wrote:yeah, my greyhunter squads would all be running around in chimeras with way more fireports.

Makes me chuckle just thinking about the site of spacewolves all hunkered down in an ork truck blasting fools.

pretty sure that happened in a Bill King novel at one point...

Ragnar's Claw, the second of the Ragnar books by Bill King has Ragnar and co infiltrate an Ork base and steal an Ork buggy and then proceed to race Orks. Obviously the Space Wolves win because they are Space Wolves. That and the Ork they were racing was too busy wiggling his arse mooning the Space Wolves. pages 401 to 408 of the first Space Wolf Omnibus.

That's a fair point DaBoss you've got to keep an eye on all aspects of a system to make things better.