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.

Back in 6th edition, Eldar was Allies of Convenient to most of the Imperium, but for some reason, they and the Space Marines were Battle Brothers with Tau.

In 7th edition, the entire Imperium got shoved into one category which made Space Wolves allying with Inquisition, Sister of Battle and Dark Angels fully legit. The Eldar were, once again, Allies of Convenient and the Tau downgraded to Desperate Allies. I stopped playing in 7th edition, but I had a blast running a very assault-focused and in-our-face-in-turn-one Grey Knights and Eldar list.

Now we are in 8th edition and I am not seeing any legitimate way to field Aeldari and Space Marines together without asking the opposite guy, which is obviously not going to be the case in Tournament. This is despite the fact that the Ynnari also took part in the Battle of Ultramar and Yvraine helped resurrected Guilliman. This is like a farcry from 2nd edition where an entire page of the Imperial Army Codex was dedicated to fielding Eldar as allies (all units allowed except the Avatar).

So when is GW going to make it happen? Why can Ynnari ally with Vect who wants them all dead but not with Guilliman who agrees to help them?

They should at the very least, resurrect some of the hints of the craftworlds and the imperium treaty’s and alliances. Purely to show that the imperium is lead by people who are not stupid.
As well as the grim dark reality of the position the two races share.

So much potential for Inquistors and such in the narrative to be explored there.

Eh honestly the 40K alliance system needs an AoS style overhaul. Especially for the Marines who are already somewhat totally broken for the min-max soup lists that are possible.

Maybe ynnari and ultras get a nod just for fluff reasons, plus its be funny to watch the rage ensue when it spawned a better combo than an iron hands list.

Eldar are too arrogant to negotiate with monkeigh.
DE are more interested in imperial slaves.
So no, no alliance at all. Only in times of max. despair.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Eldar are too arrogant to negotiate with monkeigh.
DE are more interested in imperial slaves.
So no, no alliance at all. Only in times of max. despair.

“Know this Mon-Keigh. We do not fight for your Emperor, we fight against Chaos.”

 Overread wrote:
Eh honestly the 40K alliance system needs an AoS style overhaul. Especially for the Marines who are already somewhat totally broken for the min-max soup lists that are possible.

Agree.

just what 40k needs 3 executioners with feros and 6 eldar flyers.

...because such alliances are ultimately better left to narrative games where they actually belong and not opened for cheesy tournament lists, where souping in general is problematic to begin with even inside larger factions themselves?

GW has made it entirely legal, go and try something outside the "matched only, no talking beforehand grr" bubble.

No please no. As above, taking the most broken part of a faction and allowing it to ally with another broken faction reeks of the ultimate tedious arms race (which no other faction will be able to compete with).

 wuestenfux wrote:
Eldar are too arrogant to negotiate with monkeigh.
DE are more interested in imperial slaves.
So no, no alliance at all. Only in times of max. despair.

In their defense, when was the last time you made a formal alliance or pact with the bats who help keep mosquitos at bay? Or the E. Coli in your gut?

You don't barter with such things. You just make sure they're kept in their place and do their jobs.

99% of the time, the Eldar and Imperium are aggressively hostile with each other and both hold the other in extreme disdain and contempt. Yeah, they can work together against a mutual existential threat, but that's about it. Examples of working together are extremely rare exceptions, not casual alliances of convenience. The 6E allies table was...more than a wee bit awkward fluff-wise in a few instances, and the whole 6E/7E allies mechanism was funky.

[Citation Needed]

We are told that the Imperium and the Aeldari are constantly at each other's throats, but the actual lore is replete with instances of them fighting together, sometimes explicitly working together.

Like everything in 40K lore, 'x' exists in exactly the quantity that the author needs it to at that moment.

--------------------------------------------------

I am all for an Imperium/Aeldari alliance in the rules. Course, same already exists, in the mode of play that is specifically designed to better represent the 'fluff'.

I don't play tournaments, but I can also 100% see why an Imperium/Aeldari alliance is not permissible in Matched Play.

The prior allies system was dumb. I personally won (read DOMINATED) 2 local tourneys in 7th with a mix of CWE and Necrons. 2 Factions that should NEVER ally together.

The 8E system is much better, but does have it's flaws. I would not be opposed to a Matched Play amendment that allowed certain factions being taken together, but you lose detachment bonuses for doing so.
CWE + Imperium
Chaos Marines + Necrons or Orks
Aeldari or Imperium + T'au

There is justification for all of those, but the mechanics don't quote work in 8E

-

I've had a lot of fun with games where four players decide to play, then they discuss the fluffiest pairings (If there's a Necron list and a CWE list, even Imperium will split to keep them from buddying up...) and play a 2v2.

It's a lot of fun. And a team of 1 Eldar player and 1 IoM player is a much more fun opponent than a player with Eldar and IoM on the table.

The craftworld eldar and imperium could hold both alliance and treaty’s and still be at odds often, the imperium is a huge place ruled in a way where a lot of the population is only educated for what they will need to know.

And over such distances, misunderstanding can be a huge issue.
With the last chances they even refer to a eldar ambassador grav vehicle.
This sets up a lot for the tone of the narrative, Quite grim and dark for the setting background even if the alliance they put in is vague and the terms mostly for the imperium as a whole rather than even bother to tell entire systems of arrangements.

Best left for narrative rules, but it could be done with good thought and some creative rules for more balanced play as well.
One of the big issues with the narrative setup is how simple and sterile the setting is, kinda a War story for kiddy’s at times. Even when they do get a bit more ambitious, it’s not really getting very far with its politics and it’s political movements.
They have tyranids for the NoNever, and chaos for the something insane.
But with necrons, eldar and tau there should be a bit more.

I want a fluffy reason for a mixed army of custodes, death guard and tyranids!

Spoletta wrote:
I want a fluffy reason for a mixed army of custodes, death guard and tyranids!

A Sorceror Did It.

Theoretically they could just say your army doesn't have to be battleforged in matched play, meaning you can ally whatever you want, but don't get any faction boni or stratagems. It would also mean you don't have to have proper detachments, but oh well. I don't think any single unit is as OP that you'd like to lose stratagems to use it, though.

Bharring wrote:
I've had a lot of fun with games where four players decide to play, then they discuss the fluffiest pairings (If there's a Necron list and a CWE list, even Imperium will split to keep them from buddying up...) and play a 2v2.

It's a lot of fun. And a team of 1 Eldar player and 1 IoM player is a much more fun opponent than a player with Eldar and IoM on the table.

what'd be even more intreasting is to set up a narrative event and have each player write down their "ic objectives" on a seperate card. toss in some mild Roleplaying into the mix

Play Open Play and you can do whatever alliance you like. Use all the Matched Play rules bar the faction ones if you like.

Of course it won’t be accepted in a tournament but it’s just fine between friends. I mean, I say just fine... the time I faced off against a T’au/Craftworlders alliance a little while ago was... well... brief?

BrianDavion wrote:

Bharring wrote:
I've had a lot of fun with games where four players decide to play, then they discuss the fluffiest pairings (If there's a Necron list and a CWE list, even Imperium will split to keep them from buddying up...) and play a 2v2.

It's a lot of fun. And a team of 1 Eldar player and 1 IoM player is a much more fun opponent than a player with Eldar and IoM on the table.

what'd be even more intreasting is to set up a narrative event and have each player write down their "ic objectives" on a seperate card. toss in some mild Roleplaying into the mix

We had a giant Apoc game once where there were two sides (Basically IoM, Eldar, T'au on one, everyone else on the other that time) the organizer gave each faction a "secret" objective, on top of their public objectives.

The Eldar one that day was to control a particular building - even against their allies (meaning non-Eldar models friendly models counted as contesting). It made things really cool.

In less structured games, we've also come up with objectives mid-game just to make more fun.

If you wanted to try this, I'd suggest a neutral 3rd party decide the "secret" objective. Or draw them Maelstrom style secretly.

How is this an issue? If you're doing it for narrative reasons, just use narrative play. If you're looking for a more balanced game, apply some matched play rules to your narrative game.

And if you're looking for matched play, you deal with the limitations that come with that. You don't get to cast the same psi power twice just because both your psyker know it, and you brought two units of bullgryn. That's not what matched play is for,and the same applies to how allies work.

Instead of trying to change Matched Play to fit your narrative, just use Narrative Play. Otherwise all you're doing is breaking matched play even further.

nekooni wrote:
How is this an issue? If you're doing it for narrative reasons, just use narrative play. If you're looking for a more balanced game, apply some matched play rules to your narrative game.

And if you're looking for matched play, you deal with the limitations that come with that. You don't get to cast the same psi power twice just because both your psyker know it, and you brought two units of bullgryn. That's not what matched play is for,and the same applies to how allies work.

Instead of trying to change Matched Play to fit your narrative, just use Narrative Play. Otherwise all you're doing is breaking matched play even further.

Preach. Far better put than I.

Never, eldar are sneaky high falootin alien fiends. They only help when it pleases them and turn on you when it pleases them. The only proper alliance with Eldar is sharing with them your bolt, into their head.

The alliance rules for this game are awful and I wish they'd take them away mostly but maybe have some factions that are more meant as limited allies but can be solo faction. Such as knights, Harlies, Storm troopers, Assassins, Inquisition etc, etc. With limitations to make it not as bad as it currently feels.

bibotot wrote:
Back in 6th edition, Eldar was Allies of Convenient to most of the Imperium, but for some reason, they and the Space Marines were Battle Brothers with Tau.

In 7th edition, the entire Imperium got shoved into one category which made Space Wolves allying with Inquisition, Sister of Battle and Dark Angels fully legit. The Eldar were, once again, Allies of Convenient and the Tau downgraded to Desperate Allies. I stopped playing in 7th edition, but I had a blast running a very assault-focused and in-our-face-in-turn-one Grey Knights and Eldar list.

Now we are in 8th edition and I am not seeing any legitimate way to field Aeldari and Space Marines together without asking the opposite guy, which is obviously not going to be the case in Tournament. This is despite the fact that the Ynnari also took part in the Battle of Ultramar and Yvraine helped resurrected Guilliman. This is like a farcry from 2nd edition where an entire page of the Imperial Army Codex was dedicated to fielding Eldar as allies (all units allowed except the Avatar).

So when is GW going to make it happen? Why can Ynnari ally with Vect who wants them all dead but not with Guilliman who agrees to help them?

There’s nothing stopping you playing an allied force like this right now! Just play narrative or open play.

Why isn’t the ridiculous allies system in matched play? Impossible to balance, I suspect.

Imperium an eldar soups are already the strongest games in game(well except now IH became the new king). This would just make them even more powerful. Would be huge kick in teeth for xenos and chaos.

Thanks, no.

For matched play? Never would probably be preferable. For narrative games, there's nothing really stopping you doing it right now.

Backgroundwise, (CW) Eldar and the Imperium are allies more often than enemies, as stated in the vast majority of core rulebooks for the game.

Balancewise, allies cause a mess so generally should be left out of pick up games and matched play (and this really should extend to Imperial and Eldar soups).

For narrative games or multiplayer with two large opposing sides, there's no reason not to.

tneva82 wrote:
Imperium an eldar soups are already the strongest games in game(well except now IH became the new king). This would just make them even more powerful. Would be huge kick in teeth for xenos and chaos.

Thanks, no.

it would be a... unique way to deal with Xenos by giving Imperoium and some xenos the order keyword and chaos and some xenos the "disorder" keywork... but I think the game'd be lesser for it.