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.

I was just wondering if anyone else is bothered by the fact IG and chaos space marines can ally? Fluff wise this makes no sense. Who would they be fighting against that they would find it appropriate to fight together? In the case they did fight alongside chaos it surely would be their last. They'd be declared heretics by the inquisition and the GK would be unleashed upon them or they would have to turn to the powers of chaos.

It ,makes perfect sense. They are no longer Imperial Guard, they are Traitor Guard. It makes even less sense that Space Marines would turn regegade yet they do so its shouldn't be a suprise to find that Guardsmen will turn to Chaos..

They could also represent troops raised on militaristic deamon/captured worlds.

Traitor guard.
It's a perfect match up.

Yeah I could understand that if it was the army was called renegade, but it's not. Their imperial guard and as part of the imperium they're greatest enemy is chaos.

The idea of the allies system is for you to use your imagination. Allowing the Imperial Guard Codex to be used as Allies to Chaos Space Marines is perfect for representing traitor guard.

It's exactly the same as counts as

ianj253 wrote:
Yeah I could understand that if it was the army was called renegade, but it's not. Their imperial guard and as part of the imperium they're greatest enemy is chaos.

Considering traitor guard use everything regular guard uses; I don't think it merits a new army with a new name and a new book just to fix a slight inconsistency in the allies matrix.

I think calling IG 'traitor guard' when it's allied with chaos is good enough.

"Imperial Guard" is just a name. Those little models on the table can be anyone the player wants. They can be IG, renegade, maybe a PDF unit, or a genestealer cult. The great thing about this game's setting is it's vastness, no need to stick to titles.

Fighting tyranids i can see a loyalist regiment teaming.up with chaos marines if Nids were about to make planetfall they could turn on the marines once the nids are dispatched

ianj253 wrote:
Yeah I could understand that if it was the army was called renegade, but it's not. Their imperial guard and as part of the imperium they're greatest enemy is chaos.

Considering that there isn't a renegade guard codex and considering further that renegade guard would have the IG equipment, it still makes perfect sense.

Traitor guard are going to be more and more popular over the next year, I'm thinking.

Play Dawn of War or Space Marine. Traitor Guard are in them, and have the same gear. They usually wear black and have their Aquilas scratched off. The ones in Space Marine have the Cadian enviornmental gear with green goggles.

I was actually hoping for the IG to be battle brothers of CSM so... yeah, don't see any problem there

Traitor Guard and heretic militia have been established to follow very similar structure/practices/equipment to regular IG, especially seen in the siege of vraks lists, where commissars, priests, conscripts, and psykers were almost exactly replaced by enforcers, disciples (IIRC), mutants, and rogue psykers. About the only serious difference (besides proto-allies rules) was ogryns were better in melee and had no ranged weapons.

If Marneus Calgar can count as Chapter 345 Chapter Master Ron, then Yarrik can count as evil corrupted arch-enforcer Fred.

I'd rather GW used that than try to make a new list to represent the same basic thing... about the only thing that's actually missing (and not simply a nice addition/variant, like the above ogryn variant) is marks, and there are lots of workarounds for that.

IG = Traitor Guard.

No problems whatsoever.

It's been mentioned time and again that there are traitor guard regiments that are just as, if not better, equipped and trained as loyal IG regiments. The sons of tanith repeatedly fight against the blood pact, a highly trained and well equipped khorne following traitor regiment, which even has tanks and artillery. In another book they're beseiged by a chaos army that has almost 3 times as many leman russ tanks as they do. as well as other seige machines and walkers that far outclass what the defenders have.

So yeah, with a little imagination, it makes perfect sense that IG and csm can ally.

I think it's brilliant, even to the point as I don't think CSM + IG would ever be brotherhood as CSM isn't likely to lead a Traitor guard unit.

ianj253 wrote:
Yeah I could understand that if it was the army was called renegade, but it's not. Their imperial guard and as part of the imperium they're greatest enemy is chaos.

The Renegades and Traitors which follow the Dark Gods are no different than their Loyalist counterparts.

So yeah. It makes perfect sense, as it allows for people who want to do "Traitor Legionnaires and Traitor Guard" to do it without having to complain that "The Lost and the Damned" is invalidated.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:
I think it's brilliant, even to the point as I don't think CSM + IG would ever be brotherhood as CSM isn't likely to lead a Traitor guard unit.

Most CSM see Traitor guards at best as weaklings and nothing more than cannon fodder, and at best some see them as selectable for becoming another CSM if they do well in battle.

It all depends on the group.

If it was meant for traitor guard they would be battle brothers, but they are not.

haroon wrote:
If it was meant for traitor guard they would be battle brothers, but they are not.

In your opinion, I see traitor guard as being nothing more than a blunt object for the CSM to use. Not worth being a brother

I'm not to keen on the Allies rules for 6th ed. Like I get it, I know it can make for some great one-off narratives, but I think most of the WAAC players will just spam the best of everything they can get their mitts on and it will just kill your average game. I kinda wished they imposed some kind of point penalty on top of the restrictions/rules for alliances (i.e, raised costs, even if nominal). Although as a plus, I do like how it makes it easier to collect and build multiple armies if you're into that sort of thing. Except for Nid players.... I feel bad for them, they've been getting shafted in 6th

IG stand in for "normal humans as auxiliaries" both for CSM and Tau. Sure, you can come up with a scenario where loyalist Guard and Tau forces fight against a common foe, but the primary purpose of that alliance in the rulebook is to field Gue'vesa forces.

 Kaiserbudheim wrote:
I'm not to keen on the Allies rules for 6th ed. Like I get it, I know it can make for some great one-off narratives, but I think most of the WAAC players will just spam the best of everything they can get their mitts on and it will just kill your average game. I kinda wished they imposed some kind of point penalty on top of the restrictions/rules for alliances (i.e, raised costs, even if nominal). Although as a plus, I do like how it makes it easier to collect and build multiple armies if you're into that sort of thing. Except for Nid players.... I feel bad for them, they've been getting shafted in 6th

Interestingly enough, competitive (not WAAC, there is a massive difference) tend to shy away from allies for that exact reason. The 'tax' on bringing allies is quite high, in that you usually have to bring a troops and a HQ choice for your allies before getting what you want. Even if you use minimized troops, you'll usually find yourself paying at least 100 points on top of whatever else you want your allies to bring. Those points could instead be used to buy powerful things from your own codex. The only time you ever see allies brought at a competitive level are in cases where you bring them to try to patch a weakness in your own army (which you usually aren't spamming), or because either the troops or the HQ choice is attractive (such as in the case of Eldrad or Deathwing Terminators with Beliel). Overall, I think that allies as a whole are a fairly safe addition, and that considering how they were implemented I doubt there will be any particularly broken allies combos in the near future.