Understanding 6th: Allies; The Troop "tax"

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.

**Kaldor**

valace2 wrote:
I don't care if this makes me TFG

Well, yeah. That's how you get to be that guy.

**Kevlar**

Kaldor wrote:

Well, yeah. That's how you get to be that guy.

Or you could just adopt the cheesiest special character from the cheesiest army list as your online persona. Might as well go get TFG tattoo on your forehead.

**valace2**

Kaldor wrote:
valace2 wrote:
I don't care if this makes me TFG

Well, yeah. That's how you get to be that guy.

oh so I am not that guy yet?

Well geeeee thanks I feel so much better now.

Ya know what the guy I played wouldn't consider me TFG, an we both agreed that Belial and his buddies will prolly become one of the most common allies you see, just because of how much hurt they can put on an opponent.

Why would I take DA allies for bikes or tac marines? The point of taking allies is to improve my army. I am not taking a Tau allied detachment for fire warriors or pathfinders I am taking them to get Str10 AP1 shots into my army.

**Kaldor**

Kevlar wrote:
Kaldor wrote:

Well, yeah. That's how you get to be that guy.

Or you could just adopt the cheesiest special character from the cheesiest army list as your online persona. Might as well go get TFG tattoo on your forehead.

Online persona? How bout you go play in the corner. The adults are talking.

valace2 wrote:
Kaldor wrote:
valace2 wrote:
I don't care if this makes me TFG

Well, yeah. That's how you get to be that guy.

oh so I am not that guy yet?

I dunno, depends how much you take your opponents enjoyment into account when building your list.

We know the game balance isn't perfect. We know some army builds are extremely powerful and difficult to beat. For some groups, this is why they play 40K. I think it's a bit misguided myself, the rules are too poorly written to appropriately support competitive play, but more power to them if that's what they want to do.

But knowingly taking those over-powered builds to 'regular' games nights with no regard for your opponents, and only viewing allies as a way to increase the power of your lists, makes you that guy.

**valace2**

Well then according to you I am TFG, funny how none of the guys I game with would say the same thing.

I had 4 scoring units, 2 small squishy units of Grey Hunters an 2 5 man th/ss squads. I rolled well getting the warlord trait that made my Wolf Lord scoring an being on a thunderwolf mount an going first there was no way I was not getting to the relic. Seems like I made every roll I needed to before the game, if it would have been a multi objective game I prolly would have had a lot harder time winning.

I added some hammer units to my army but in a multi objective game it was an ok list, I wouldn't consider it overpowered an neither would a lot of people. 6th has been out what two an a half months now, so no one really knows what is powerful an what isn't, people say that the Necron airfore is the shiz, but I doubt I will ever play against it, because none of the guys I game with are that douchey.

With your logic though, because I added only 2 units of TH/SS terminators I am TFG. Well so be it.

An the guy I gamed with had a good time, so yea I dunno what that is supposed to mean because I am TFG.

**Mannahnin**

Kaldor wrote:
Kevlar wrote:
Kaldor wrote:

Well, yeah. That's how you get to be that guy.
Or you could just adopt the cheesiest special character from the cheesiest army list as your online persona. Might as well go get TFG tattoo on your forehead.
Online persona? How bout you go play in the corner. The adults are talking.

If you're judging other people as being jerks for playing differently with their toy soldiers, and for using stuff you consider overpowered, while identifying yourself with a character which is widely viewed as overpowered, and was banned from events until a relatively short while ago, that's more that a little ironic.

Also, dismissing other people as children is rude and inappropriate.

**valace2**

Mannahnin wrote:
Kaldor wrote:
Kevlar wrote:
Kaldor wrote:

Well, yeah. That's how you get to be that guy.
Or you could just adopt the cheesiest special character from the cheesiest army list as your online persona. Might as well go get TFG tattoo on your forehead.
Online persona? How bout you go play in the corner. The adults are talking.

If you're judging other people as being jerks for playing differently with their toy soldiers, and for using stuff you consider overpowered, while identifying yourself with a character which is widely viewed as overpowered, and was banned from events until a relatively short while ago, that's more that a little ironic.

Also, dismissing other people as children is rude and inappropriate.

I wasn't going to say that, thanks for doing it for me.

I wouldn't consider Draigo overpowered, I would consider him overrated.

An I am a Grey Knight player.

**Makutsu**

Kaldor wrote:
Makutsu wrote:
So if someone enjoys the fluff and builds a fluff based army that is just strong due to GWs somewhat broken rules then he is TFG? even if he is nice and friendly?

Yes. Because he's deliberately doing things that people don't like. Building an over-powered roflstomping list for use in 'regular' games for example.

That's the definition of TFG.

By your definition if people don't like how you dress does that make you a TFG? since you are deliberately dressing the way that people don't like.

If he's using a over powered list then you use an overpowered list, so simple. It's like playing a sport and the other person has better equipment, and you tell him that he's an a**hole for using better equipment. Doesn't make much sense sorry.

**Mannahnin**

valace2 wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:
If you're judging other people as being jerks for playing differently with their toy soldiers, and for using stuff you consider overpowered, while identifying yourself with a character which is widely viewed as overpowered, and was banned from events until a relatively short while ago, that's more that a little ironic.

Also, dismissing other people as children is rude and inappropriate.

I wasn't going to say that, thanks for doing it for me.

I wouldn't consider Draigo overpowered, I would consider him overrated.

An I am a Grey Knight player.

Sure, but that doesn't affect the point. I don't think I'd consider Draigo overpowered anymore either. But the perception is there, just as Kaldor perceives allies to be overpowered. In either case, people are being silly by condemning others for their choice of which toys to play with, both of which are within the rules of the game. I find his condemnations particularly ironic, because I can remember previous editions of the game when special characters in general were regarded as unbalanced and not playtested like the rest of the codex, and banned from most competitive events. Which is remarkably similar to how some folks are now reacting to Allies.

Honestly I don't disagree with all of Kaldor's opinions. If a player brings something which IS overpowered, or at least overpowered for the context he's playing in, yeah, that can be a jerk move. You should always be willing to communicate with opponents and make sure you're both coming to the game with compatible expectations. To ignore or violate the other person's expectations for the game is being TFG.

**valace2**

Hetelic wrote:
Remembering that I’m still new to 40k, and that some parts of this post may be incorrect, I’ve been thinking a lot about the inclusion of allies in 40k armies.
I’ve listened to a few podcasts and 1 in particular: The 11th Company, have talked at length about including an allied detachment in your primary army. The focus of much of the debate regarding allies lies in –WHAT- allies to take, how many points to spend on allies, and other issues of efficiency and list building.

From what I can understand, the main reasons to include allies in your 40k army is to either safeguard your armies weakness (ie, wolf priests for psychic defence); or to further enhance your armies strength (ie, Deathwing Terminators). When looking at allies in these terms, very few (if any) lists are taking allies for troops. In fact, it appears that the allied troop choice is just a minimum unit that allows you to unlock the more specialised Elite/ Heavy/ Fast options. In this respect, the troop choice you must take could be considered a “tax” for taking other units.
So I then considered how to manipulate this “tax”, going on the principle that a competitive list will maximise the important elements, and minimise the chaff.

So (finally getting to the point), is this the area where “force multiplier” characters really shine? Example, some people suggest that Draigo is very over-costed a 2XX points; however, if you really want to add Paladins to your space marines, does this become the most efficient way to do it? Likewise, if you really want to add SM terminators to your Guard, is Belial more cost effective than a DA captain and a 5man tac squad?
I think this is especially prevalent with non-special characters that allow FoC manipulation, like a Biker-Boss or SM bike Captain. A biker boss allows you to add a Nob biker squad to an allied army, without the “tax2 of paying for additional troops, and the boss adds to the unit to enhance its effectiveness.

Am I barking up the wrong tree?? Is Draigo always overpriced, and nothing can offset that? Or will we begin to see more of these “force multiplier” characters as the Meta-game changes, and more specific unit counters are required?

Many thanks, Hetelic

Back to your original topic, I would say Draigo an Paladins would be a poor ally choice, he costs so much an they don't do enough. You would have to play at least a 2k game to make it work even remotely well. Belial is the best character for this purpose as he adds the ability to take TH/SS terminators with cyclones. At 130pts the guy is amazing, an I would assume when a new DA codex comes out he will cost more, so enjoy him now.

There are a lot of troops out there which are not that bad to take, Grey Hunters being one because of their cheap cost 2 base attacks an ability to take 2 plasma/melta for 5pts. Fire Warriors are the other, sure you want Broadsides if you are taking Tau as allies but the fire warriors got a huge boost with the change to rapid fire.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mannahnin wrote:
valace2 wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:
If you're judging other people as being jerks for playing differently with their toy soldiers, and for using stuff you consider overpowered, while identifying yourself with a character which is widely viewed as overpowered, and was banned from events until a relatively short while ago, that's more that a little ironic.

Also, dismissing other people as children is rude and inappropriate.

I wasn't going to say that, thanks for doing it for me.

I wouldn't consider Draigo overpowered, I would consider him overrated.

An I am a Grey Knight player.

Sure, but that doesn't affect the point. I don't think I'd consider Draigo overpowered anymore either. But the perception is there, just as Kaldor perceives allies to be overpowered. In either case, people are being silly by condemning others for their choice of which toys to play with, both of which are within the rules of the game. I find his condemnations particularly ironic, because I can remember previous editions of the game when special characters in general were regarded as unbalanced and not playtested like the rest of the codex, and banned from most competitive events. Which is remarkably similar to how some folks are now reacting to Allies.

Honestly I don't disagree with all of Kaldor's opinions. If a player brings something which IS overpowered, or at least overpowered for the context he's playing in, yeah, that can be a jerk move. You should always be willing to communicate with opponents and make sure you're both coming to the game with compatible expectations. To ignore or violate the other person's expectations for the game is being TFG.

I completely agree. I am fortunate enough to have a great group of guys to game with, I know usually what they will be bringing, and they have a good idea of what I will be bringing.

**strengthofthedragon2**

A lot of good things said in this thread... I really like the new allies ability... I like to think that GW put some kind of thought into it to keep people from "breaking" it (they also had fluff to follow lol) My first ally army was a CSM/Daemons Epidemius list... and after playing it, I felt like a jerk... I wasn't rude while playing the game (with some buddies at our local gaming spot), but it was like Whoa! this allies thing has to be used carefully. It was in a 4k vs 4k game and sine we are all a little more educated (and considerate) of what lists we bring. Don't get me wrong, now that everyone has had time to get models and build allies, we occasionally bring what we call "A-hole" lists that are played for fun (but usually ending in competitive arguements lol). But I would not walk into a brand new gaming spot and plop down an Epidemius list... I definately agree with some on here that you should let your opponent know what your list has been built for-- fun or competition. I also like the allies because it gives me the opportunity to pick up some of the cooler models that I would otherwise not be able to play!

**Baronyu**

I think the allies addition is a good thing, if you only think about the newest armies, yeah it could be a bit game-breaking, but think about the older codices who probably won't see an updated codex anytime soon, they could somehow patch their army up some, if they choose to, and stay competitive. Also new possibilities to lists.

Personally, I don't intend to take any allies, might be because of the fact that the two armies of my choice haven't got much allies at all (

), or that I really don't want to pay the troop tax, especially if it's not the troop that I want from the allies, or that I'm a purist, I'm being fictionally racist toward the craftworld losers.

Sad to say, Imperium benefits more from the allies matrix being that everyone is BFF with everyone(sans xenos that is not tau..), as mentioned, want terminators/bikes/etc as scoring unit? Well, get an ally to give you that if your army can't do that! If only I could bring Eldar and somehow make my grotesques a scoring unit as well...

**Lansirill**

I tend to feel more like it's an HQ tax. Of course, my SM armies in 5th ed would generally just run a Chaplain with a jump pack as its HQ because it was the cheapest HQ that was good for something. Things seem to have shifted to where a beefy HQ is actually a good idea and I haven't gotten the memo yet, so maybe that's why some people view it as a troop tax. Really though, most codices have a reasonably useful troop choice that you can take. Even if all it does is sit on an objective, it's useful. I honestly can't think of any codex pairings where the troops from one are strictly inferior to the troops from the other.

**lazarian**

From a troop standpoint basic marines are outclassed by either Deathwing, Grey hunters, Blood Angel assault squads, infantry platoons or any of myriad GK incarnations. Literally every imperial army aside from C:SM get 'better' troops. The strength of the vanilla codex are the select few efficiencies that crop up and unique models like thunderfires and stormtalons.

That for many is the definition of tax, if you want the few vanilla goodies you have to tax yourself with a less appealing choice.

**Invisible Jesus**

Kaldor wrote:
Makumba wrote:
dude this means everything you ever take in an army is making you TFG , unless your taking spawn class units . How is it possible to make an army with units that dont make it easier to win , do you load up your GK with psi lancers and stuff ?
ally are in official rules , they are as illega/WAAC/TFG as taking a Lemman Russ in an IG army or terminators in DA/GK.

Any army built purely to win with no thought given to theme or aesthetic fits that category.

There's a difference between building a solid list, and taking a deliberately abusive TFG list, and if your only consideration when including allies is "Will this make it easier for me to win?" then you've crossed that line.

fething eh! That is spot on Kaldor.

If you do this you are an absolute **** and should be hung drawn and quartered. For real bro.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

valace2 wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:
Kaldor wrote:
Kevlar wrote:
Kaldor wrote:

Well, yeah. That's how you get to be that guy.
Or you could just adopt the cheesiest special character from the cheesiest army list as your online persona. Might as well go get TFG tattoo on your forehead.
Online persona? How bout you go play in the corner. The adults are talking.

If you're judging other people as being jerks for playing differently with their toy soldiers, and for using stuff you consider overpowered, while identifying yourself with a character which is widely viewed as overpowered, and was banned from events until a relatively short while ago, that's more that a little ironic.

Also, dismissing other people as children is rude and inappropriate.

I wasn't going to say that, thanks for doing it for me.

I wouldn't consider Draigo overpowered, I would consider him overrated.

An I am a Grey Knight player.

Those who call GK's overpowered are just upset they cannot beat them, so jump on the Matt Ward-hating bandwagon, despite not really knowing why they hate him. They just read 1d4chan and have jumped on the bandwagon to cover up there frustration. True story.

Also, I don't think Kaldor is 'judging people'. This is an internet forum, which makes that quite difficult by it's nature because these are just words and profile pictures. It's not as if he is racially profiling people so get a grip man.
Kaldor is just speaking the truth. And the truth hurts to all the TFG's here who are taking Allies just to win. And WAAC players are invariably unpleasant people to play. If you are putting so much effort into WAAC you need to get a life. Sorry if that is 'rude' or 'inappropriate' to your sensitive feelings.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Playing to win is not the same thing as being TFG. It really isn't. Equating the two is, frankly, insulting. Playing to win and playing to have fun also aren't mutually exclusive; in fact, I'd argue that an opponent that isn't even trying to win is a pretty dull opponent.

**captain collius**

Kaldor wrote:
Makumba wrote:
dude this means everything you ever take in an army is making you TFG , unless your taking spawn class units . How is it possible to make an army with units that dont make it easier to win , do you load up your GK with psi lancers and stuff ?
ally are in official rules , they are as illega/WAAC/TFG as taking a Lemman Russ in an IG army or terminators in DA/GK.

Any army built purely to win with no thought given to theme or aesthetic fits that category.

There's a difference between building a solid list, and taking a deliberately abusive TFG list, and if your only consideration when including allies is "Will this make it easier for me to win?" then you've crossed that line.

Oh boy you must hate tournament players. How DARE we try to actually win a game! You know what the best looking list i saw at nova was Necorns/GK he took Renaissance man because he made them look good together. Allies are not a TFG move they are simply a mechanic inserted by GW top let us play the game and start small armies that eventually turn into full armies. Unless your tyranids in which case buy more gaunts.

Now back to the OP: there is no troops tax and there is no problem with using allies. Generally you should use allies to cover your armies weaknesses or to add punch to your list.

**kronk**

Theme and Aesthetic? Space Marines and Imperial Guard work together all of the time. Different chapters of Space Marines work together all of the time. Necrons and Blood Angels Bro-Fisted that one time.

None of these make anyone TFG. TFG can be TFG playing with Nids or playing with Dark Angels or playing with Tau and Ork allies.

As for the troops being a tax, it all depends on what you're looking for in your allies, doesn't it?

If you are taking something for the troops choice, then no. That isn't a tax, as you're getting exactly what you want.

If you are wanting access to LR Battle Tanks, then a few squads of veterans would be a tax. However, melta-vets and plasma-vets in a chimera are still pretty nice and not over the top expensive, so that aren't too much of a tax.

**GQuail**

I find it quite amusing to see people talk about Allies as overpowered, game-breaking cheese engines. After all, back in earlier editions of the game allies were a core thing - 2nd ed in particular featured rules for allying in the Black Codex and the later full codices - and it's absence from later editions caused problems for some particular forces. (I'm thinking Sisters of Battle who, when their WD 'dex was 5th Ed, lost a whole swathe of options.)

Now I do prefer to play games with people whose armies have fluffy touches rather than being all mechanics - and undeniably reintroducing allies is going to produce some odd situations players haven't been used to for a while. but to be honest I'm more bothered by the normalisation of Special Characters away from the "your opponents permission" status (and the powers of said characters being army-design-changing and thusly not easilly removed from some forces.) than the terrible thought that my Tau opponent might throw some Howling Banshees at me without a fluff reason for it.

I don't care much for tournament play, though, and think some of the codices are already pretty unbalanced. If you turn up to a tournament and get crushed by a strange allied contingent when last year you'd have crushed that army in it's "pure" form then that's perhaps going to make you feel different - but I'm not sure I'd be playing with you anyway. :-)

Re: the OP's point: yes, there is sort of a tax in that you have to take an HQ and Troop rather than the stuff you "really" want. Your allied Land Raider can't just appear out of thin air: you need to back it up with a Space Marine Librarian and Tactical Squad or whatever. Still, as others have said, Troops are always useful for objectives so it's not the end of the world. Yes, in some cases you are forced to get "worse" troops than your standard , but I think in most cases you won't begrudge your one troops choice.

**ZebioLizard2**

Those who call GK's overpowered are just upset they cannot beat them, so jump on the Matt Ward-hating bandwagon, despite not really knowing why they hate him. They just read 1d4chan and have jumped on the bandwagon to cover up there frustration. True story.

I hate GK being one of the Top Tier Cheesy dex's.

I don't hate Matt Ward however, considering the other writer's aren't much better at balance.

Got a better theory?

**Dark**

If I could still import/buy from outside the country, I'd toy around with the idea of havinf Leman Russes with my SWs again just for kicks.

**Brother SRM**

I want to add some Leman Russes to my Space Marines, and with them comes a platoon of IG infantry. These plug the void of long-range firepower in my Marine army and generally make my army better. This apparently makes me TFG for some reason. Taking a Dreadnought with autocannons, or a devastator squad would probably make my army better as well. Does that make me TFG?

(Hint: The answer is no)

**hotsauceman1**

Exactly SRM, Does taking a drop podding melta sternguad make me a TFG for how good it is? No it doesnt. Its not different from taking an over powered unit in your own codex.

**Brother SRM**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Exactly SRM, Does taking a drop podding melta sternguad make me a TFG for how good it is? No it doesnt. Its not different from taking an over powered unit in your own codex.

And even then, these units aren't overpowered, they're just good.

**psychadelicmime**

My tau army has an ally marine contingent that I use as marines who defected to the tau. Sure I may take assault terminators as an elite choice and assault marines as my fast attack to cover my cc weakness, but I don't think that's being tfg.

**Brother SRM**

psychadelicmime wrote:
My tau army has an ally marine contingent that I use as marines who defected to the tau. Sure I may take assault terminators as an elite choice and assault marines as my fast attack to cover my cc weakness, but I don't think that's being tfg.

It isn't, it's using the rules as intended to plug a gap in your codex. Honestly, I don't see the point in Allies whining since everyone but Tyranids can take them.

**BoomWolf**

Allies are totally TFG move!

After all you don't follow the strict tactics that the codex tells you to follow! you DARE attempt a bit of originality and something SLIGHTLY different then the armies we have seen for years.

The NERVE. to DARE do anything new, or even want to WIN the game? heck no! you are supposed to find how to waste as many points as possible in your list, making it as weak as humanly (or xenoly) possible.

And if you ever win a game because your list was better then your opponent's, you shold quit the hobby immediately because you are an a$$h0le.

**Bran Dawri**

Makutsu wrote:
Back on Topic:
For an example taking Guardians or Rangers in a Dark Eldar Army does somewhat bring down the mobility, and they aren't cheap too.
If I could I would just bring a Farseer to the game.

So why don't you take 3 guardian jetbikes with a Shuricannon? Only cost just under 80 points, and they have a +1S Heavy Bolter that can JSJ.

**Makutsu**

Bran Dawri wrote:
Makutsu wrote:
Back on Topic:
For an example taking Guardians or Rangers in a Dark Eldar Army does somewhat bring down the mobility, and they aren't cheap too.
If I could I would just bring a Farseer to the game.

So why don't you take 3 guardian jetbikes with a Shuricannon? Only cost just under 80 points, and they have a +1S Heavy Bolter that can JSJ.

but for about the same cost I could get a venom which is way better than what it does, of course I have to get a squad as well but overall it's not as good IMHO.

Also, 3 bikes is pretty squishy and they don't really help out Dark Eldar's weakness.

Rangers are the only things I find useful since they can help us grab objectives as we can't anymore in vehicles which we are always in... which fixes one major problem.

**Invisible Jesus**

captain collius wrote:
Kaldor wrote:
Makumba wrote:
dude this means everything you ever take in an army is making you TFG , unless your taking spawn class units . How is it possible to make an army with units that dont make it easier to win , do you load up your GK with psi lancers and stuff ?
ally are in official rules , they are as illega/WAAC/TFG as taking a Lemman Russ in an IG army or terminators in DA/GK.

Any army built purely to win with no thought given to theme or aesthetic fits that category.

There's a difference between building a solid list, and taking a deliberately abusive TFG list, and if your only consideration when including allies is "Will this make it easier for me to win?" then you've crossed that line.

Oh boy you must hate tournament players. How DARE we try to actually win a game! .... Allies are not a TFG move they are simply a mechanic inserted by GW top let us play the game and start small armies that eventually turn into full armies. Unless your tyranids in which case buy more gaunts...Generally you should use allies to cover your armies weaknesses or to add punch to your list.

Oh dear God...You really need to take a reality check, because if you really believe that Allies "are simply a mechanic inserted by GW top let us play the game and start small armies that eventually turn into full armies" , you are clearly naive and deluded. The reason they have added Allies is to get people to buy more models and increase profits. It's as simple as that. Like a lot of the new rules in 6th edition, they are designed solely to make money: Flyers, Allies and recently the way they have FAQ'd a lot of special codex rules out of existence (see the Lumbering Behemen scratch) are all rule changes with the sole purpose of shifting the more expensive models and a wider variety of models.

"Generally, you should use allies to cover your armies weaknesses or to add punch to your list." Wow, do you work for GW? Sounds like it. That, or you are incredibly naive.
Why play - say for example - Imperial Guard or Tau if you don't like their weakness in CC? Go play something else, rather than attempting to patch them up with Allies. You are ruining the character of the army, and what's worse, if Allies becomes the norm it's not fair on the rest of us who aren't WAAC or TFG and who just want to play to our armies strengths, not patch it up with pure cheese.

Of course, Allies can give us cool ideas too like Traitor Guard, Tau Human Auxillaries, Daemons and Chaos Tzeentch armies, Inquistion forcs etc etc. But you just know this is going to be impossible to regulate or prove and it's going to spiral into TFG bs where it's all WAAC and no one can be remotely competitive without allies.

I wish people would wake up and see the truth under the 'cinematic narrative experience' (haha, yeah right), but most people won't. Bunch of fething TFG who should've been drowned at birth if you ask me....