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.

Looking at the grand alliance could you put together any of those for a army? I play dwarfs and vampire counts. Could I expand with the dwarfs and add in a bunch of empire? They are both part of the "Order alliance so should work together? Or even wood elves?

Apparently so, yes.

You can either field faction-pure army or go for mixed one within the alliance, so the humans + dwarfs example you made is good. Or you can grab orcs and add ogre ironblaster converted to be manned by orcs and goblins. Or you can convert doom diver to be an ogre throwing poor winged goblin as a part of ogre army.

I quite like that - allows for cool, fluffy army designs. You want to make a human + dwarf expedition? Feel free to. A feral warband of beastmen led by a chaos lord who got betrayed and now seeks revenge? Sure!

I have always been mainly a lore gorger when it comes to GW games - I'd rather field a cool army with a soul rather than min-maxed netlist that crushes on tournaments, so whenever I can I preach about the fun of having a characterful army that you get immersed in. Named units, named commanders, background - you really can make it all feel awesome. Especially if you run a themed campaign with ye friends!

Cool! That's good to know. Could make for some interesting games!

 Klerych wrote:
Apparently so, yes.

You can either field faction-pure army or go for mixed one within the alliance, so the humans + dwarfs example you made is good. Or you can grab orcs and add ogre ironblaster converted to be manned by orcs and goblins. Or you can convert doom diver to be an ogre throwing poor winged goblin as a part of ogre army.

I quite like that - allows for cool, fluffy army designs. You want to make a human + dwarf expedition? Feel free to. A feral warband of beastmen led by a chaos lord who got betrayed and now seeks revenge? Sure!

I have always been mainly a lore gorger when it comes to GW games - I'd rather field a cool army with a soul rather than min-maxed netlist that crushes on tournaments, so whenever I can I preach about the fun of having a characterful army that you get immersed in. Named units, named commanders, background - you really can make it all feel awesome. Especially if you run a themed campaign with ye friends!

And you can also use it to cherry pick the biggest baddest models in a min-maxed army. The rules are bad, even if you use them in a good way.

 Purifier wrote:

 Klerych wrote:
Apparently so, yes.

You can either field faction-pure army or go for mixed one within the alliance, so the humans + dwarfs example you made is good. Or you can grab orcs and add ogre ironblaster converted to be manned by orcs and goblins. Or you can convert doom diver to be an ogre throwing poor winged goblin as a part of ogre army.

I quite like that - allows for cool, fluffy army designs. You want to make a human + dwarf expedition? Feel free to. A feral warband of beastmen led by a chaos lord who got betrayed and now seeks revenge? Sure!

I have always been mainly a lore gorger when it comes to GW games - I'd rather field a cool army with a soul rather than min-maxed netlist that crushes on tournaments, so whenever I can I preach about the fun of having a characterful army that you get immersed in. Named units, named commanders, background - you really can make it all feel awesome. Especially if you run a themed campaign with ye friends!

And you can also use it to cherry pick the biggest baddest models in a min-maxed army. The rules are bad, even if you use them in a good way.

Noone denies that. Even in 100 "wound" limit one can just grab 8 steam tanks. Or a couple bloodthirsters. Or... yeah, you get the point. So yeah, no arguing there at all, everyone can see that. I also dislike the lack of balance, but if the game is supposed to be that, then it's either quit or stay for what it is, that's all. We're all grownups, we can decide for ourselves what we want to do with our spare time! If I want a pick up game it's not going to be AoS, it's going to be WarZone Resurrection, X-Wing or WarmaHordes as I play those systems and carrying even full armies for all 3 takes less than one army bag that used to get full when carrying a complete 2400pts ETC army for WFB. Or 2k points 40k army.

Sucks for people who were super serious about WFB (although they can just move over to KoW as it seems to be your go to rank'n'file game now), but I myself am affected more positively by AoS than 8th ed - I really loathed the cumbersome shoebox regimental movement rules and lack of mixed armies, so I do not miss it that much. That game to me was only suitable for ultra-competitive, netlisty, powerbuildy ETC play that tired me more than it entertained me.

AoS seems to be more indiscriminate fun-centered. When we get tournament rules we'll be able to play at least partially fair games, but to me it's all about cool looking, fluffy armies that I am free to tailor to my desire.