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.

Sigvatr wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

Only low tier codices benifit from it as they can patch holes in their army..

Tyranids might want to have a word with you

Furthermore, I disagree. IG and SW make up for nasty stuff.

Oh god I can vouch for this firsthand.

CalgarsPimpHand wrote:There's a huge missed opportunity with 'Nids - let them be Allies with IG, even if it's only Desperate allies. This could easily represent a Genestealer cult rising up to fight alongside the invading Tyranids (shortly before the Tyranids turn and nom them).

What. No.

 TheCaptain wrote:

CalgarsPimpHand wrote:There's a huge missed opportunity with 'Nids - let them be Allies with IG, even if it's only Desperate allies. This could easily represent a Genestealer cult rising up to fight alongside the invading Tyranids (shortly before the Tyranids turn and nom them).

What. No.

No for fluff reasons or no because it'd be strong?

rigeld2 wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

CalgarsPimpHand wrote:There's a huge missed opportunity with 'Nids - let them be Allies with IG, even if it's only Desperate allies. This could easily represent a Genestealer cult rising up to fight alongside the invading Tyranids (shortly before the Tyranids turn and nom them).

What. No.

No for fluff reasons or no because it'd be strong?

It's pretty loose fluff wise. But more importantly, can you imagine how strong a Tyranid assault force would be with an IG gunline!

rigeld2 wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

CalgarsPimpHand wrote:There's a huge missed opportunity with 'Nids - let them be Allies with IG, even if it's only Desperate allies. This could easily represent a Genestealer cult rising up to fight alongside the invading Tyranids (shortly before the Tyranids turn and nom them).

What. No.

No for fluff reasons or no because it'd be strong?

Given the way they steamrolled over fluff regarding Eldar/Dark Eldar, Black Templar/Eldar and other heresies, I'm not sure anyone is really believing GW's literary purity.

If they really wanted to allow nids to have some allies, it'd be easy to finagle a fluff excuse. Mind control spores, a particularly powerful Hive mind synapse creature that enlaved some local forces, brain parasites.... after Necrons went from omnicidal mindless automata to eccentric dynast-kings from the past, everything is doable.

 Sephyr wrote:
-Eldar forgiving Dark Eldar for the whole 'squicking satan into existence and killing 99% of out civilization in the deal' thing.

The Eldar empire as a whole did that. After the fall, the some Eldar went their way in craftworlds and other Eldar retreated into the webway to keep the party going. Both are as much to blame, but in the growing darkness of the galaxy, they'd rather help each other than someone else. They're all still Eldar.

Eldercaveman wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

CalgarsPimpHand wrote:There's a huge missed opportunity with 'Nids - let them be Allies with IG, even if it's only Desperate allies. This could easily represent a Genestealer cult rising up to fight alongside the invading Tyranids (shortly before the Tyranids turn and nom them).

What. No.

No for fluff reasons or no because it'd be strong?

It's pretty loose fluff wise. But more importantly, can you imagine how strong a Tyranid assault force would be with an IG gunline!

Objecting because it'd be strong is one thing... But objecting because of fluff is moronic.
Genestealer Cults are deep in 40k fluff.

Sephyr wrote:If they really wanted to allow nids to have some allies, it'd be easy to finagle a fluff excuse. Mind control spores, a particularly powerful Hive mind synapse creature that enlaved some local forces, brain parasites.... after Necrons went from omnicidal mindless automata to eccentric dynast-kings from the past, everything is doable.

There already are "mind control spores" in 40k, even. It's some plant from a Deathworld, one WD had rules for it. People that go nearby get "indoctrinated" and guard the area, attacking any trespasser until they die from not having eaten or drunk anything for days.

Iirc, there also was some sort of brain slug or worm that crawled into people's ears, but that one was only mentioned in passing...

But I still think the best solution would be the Genestealer excuse. The Index Xenos mentioned that they also infiltrate the local PDF, so all you need is to have an infiltrated regiment get tithed by the Munitorum. Would even make a cool scheme for the 'nids as this would enable the 'stealer cult to "spread" to another world using the Imperium's own ships.

"Many of these hybrids are able to exercise the human intelligence stolen from their genestock, learning quickly how to utilise conventional weaponry and infiltrating military and political institutions to further the aims of the sect. Worshipping their Patriarch as a god, they stop at nothing in their corruption of the dominant command structure. To this end, leaders of the cult direct their purestrain brood-kin to impregnate influential figures within the local authorities and planetary defence forces. Those implanted subsequently lose all free will, lying, murdering and blackmailing to further their power, the better to tear down organisations from within when their true masters descend from the stars.
When the cult has grown to significant size, the psychic beacon that emanates from the cult's Patriarch ensures that a hive fleet will finally descend upon the doomed world. As the cult comes into range of the Hive Queen's psychic control, it becomes utterly subservient to the Tyranid invasion, and the underground cult will explode in bloody and violent revolution."
- White Dwarf #266

DarkHound wrote:You've got that backwards. The Sisters don't like "the men". They don't get along with any of the Space Marines, and the Black Templar are a different sect of their religion on top of that. Catholics and Protestants killed each other for a couple hundred years.

He's got a point, even though I would never call the Black Templars "Ecclesiarchy Marines" - to my knowledge, they still do not acknowledge the Emperor as a god. Then again, neither do the other Marine Chapters, and with them the Sisters get along better (which is especially silly for the Space Wolves - a bunch of heretic mutant werewolves whose homeworld they just attempted to invade in response to the SW murdering a bunch of priests?).
As has been mentioned, there have been several instances of Black Templars and Sororitas working together just fine, and the BT have a battle banner honouring them. Furthermore, the fluff also states that whilst ideological differences exist, both the Space Marines as well as the Sisters of Battle respect each other's combat prowess, and find themselves fighting side by side against the Imperium's enemies again and again.

To me, the "Catholics vs Protestants" comparison only sounds like a half-hearted attempt at justifying GW's mess-up with the chart. Every time I have seen it thrown around on dakka, it has never been supported with anything from the existing material and just thrown out as a possible excuse.
Mind you, I like looking for excuses for when GW writes strange things, too. But there comes a point where I draw the line, and all that I've read about the SoB and the Templars so far conflicts with that chart, not to mention the silliness with the Space Wolves or some of the other combinations. Some pairings are cool and fluffy, but a number are just weird and SoB+BT / SoB+SW are two examples of that.

I do like the general idea of allies, though. It's a fun mechanic allowing for some cool mixed armies.

 illuknisaa wrote:

 htj wrote:

 illuknisaa wrote:

 htj wrote:
It puts proper daemons back into CSM armies. That's enough for me to hail it as a good thing.

Nope.avi

CSM has an item that allows deepstriking without scattering. Sounds awesome for deamons right? Wrong as pre 6th ed csm dex it was faqed that it only applies to units from it's own codex. This was done for both deamons and csm codex. Now in the 6th ed csm dex is still the same thing.

The most obvious codex synergy is taken away.

Er, what? I'm talking about the 'lesser daemons' rubbish from the old CSM dex now being supplanted with being able to take proper daemons from the CD dex.

Yeah, you can't aid DSing, but so what? Doesn't synergise as nicely, but they're still really good allies.

Not perfect is not synonymous with worthless. Very good, complement each other well, and is more enjoyable in terms of flavour. Can't really make it any clearer than that, you're on your own from here on out.

 tuiman wrote:
At first I thought it would be awesome to get some guard or necron allies for my grey knights, but in all honesty, there is so much of a tax with allies that sticking to pure gk is much better.

well if you are going after another codex because it has better choices in certain spots, you are going to have to expect that that other codex' choices for HQ and troops slots are exactly uber choices. Lets see I like Vendettas and LRBTs but I have to take a CCS and Vet squad to get them. Is it a fair trade I would say so.

I personally would like the allies option IF I played Imperium!!!!

I hate the double force org 2000pt stuff personally.

The only reason I like it is because you get to paint other models and add them to your army and also I like it when allies actually make sense. Like maybe Ultramarines with Imperial Guard Allies of the Ultramar Defence Force, or Death Guard with Nurgle Daemon allies. When it's something like Tau allied with Chaos, or Eldar allied with Orks, I just shake my head.

^ Dawn of War II, Eldar manipulating Orks vs the SM and the IG.

I actually like the idea of allies. It allows me to have GKs and SoBs in one army.

Problems typically only arise from allied codices when one of the two codices is overpowered already. Or when one needs allies in order to survive (which is, again, a problem with certain codices being overpowered).

But in all honesty, yes, Tyranids should have been able to have allies. At the very least, they should have been desperate allies with the Necrons (after all, isn't the whole point of Desperate Allies that you're only allying with this guy temporarily to fight an even bigger threat, and will then start shooting each other afterwards?).

I liked big team games, in that each person takes one big army and then you go into teams.

I can see why people dislike it, I'm more of a fluff bunny so I don't mind it if people at least have a reasonable bit of fluff explaining it, failing that if they actually admit they are doing it to be a powergamer then I let it slide.

The people who argue that it is to balance out the weaknesses in their codex's etc annoy me as the bulk of them (not all) are power gamers in disguise, albeit a very poor disguise. Also this concept annoys me too, I've been playing since 3rd ed with a lot of old codex's, I still use the Black Templars one now as horribly dated as it is, and I've never needed to add unts from another army to get me a victory and I can't see me doing so anytime soon.

 TheCaptain wrote:
Purists don't like it.

Hmmm. Taking allies dates all the way back to 2nd edition. Not being able to take them was the change this old schooler remembers going through.

I'm not really a fan of the ally matrix.

I believe that everyone should be able to ally with one another regardless of the fluff.

Nids are forever alone.

sounddemon wrote:I believe that everyone should be able to ally with one another regardless of the fluff.

Basically this. It would be better than the current version where some combinations are as they are because of fluff, and some combinations are as they are in spite of fluff.

When it comes down to it, you can explain just about anything with a good-enough excuse, though. Needless to say, some combinations would work better than others - but in the end, the only ones who would have to judge and decide for or against it are the players partaking in a game. Maybe your excuse for army X + Y is so good that it just sounds cool. Or maybe your opponent simply doesn't care as long as it's a good game. And GW could still use limitations for official events and conventions / leagues.

I don't like the idea, in my experience allowing combining of two armies just tends to result in massive power-combinations. In a table-top game like WH40k it'll just take that much longer for it to be fixed, if it ever is.

OhNoItsNot wrote:
I don't like the idea, in my experience allowing combining of two armies just tends to result in massive power-combinations. In a table-top game like WH40k it'll just take that much longer for it to be fixed, if it ever is.

Players have been begging for allies since they took them away. Now we have them back with a vengeance. I agree that some power combinations are pretty fierce, but I'm a fan of it. If you're not first, you're last.

 Byte wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:
Purists don't like it.

Hmmm. Taking allies dates all the way back to 2nd edition. Not being able to take them was the change this old schooler remembers going through.

Army-purists, I suppose I should say.

 Omfgorzzz wrote:
Am I the only one that doesnt like the whole allies choice in 6th ed? I know some of you will use it to your advantage having something good from another codex(Just feels like a cheap and easy way out). But I rather just stick to one army and one army only. Find a way to counter your opponents useing one codex seems like the way to go....Anyway just my opinion. Do any others feel the same?

Nothing wrong with sticking with one codex. Also nothing wrong with using allies either. They are restricted enough that they aren't going to just completely fill in the gap in a given army. Your close combat only Blood angels army isn't going to be able to add 3 units of long fangs to give it the long range punch it is otherwise lacking. You just can't do that. 1 of any type of unit in an allied army is hardly going to be unbalancing.

In my group I have long played chaos armies that are a mix of units from codex chaos space marines, chaos daemons and the Eye of terror codex and started adding in some of the forge world chaos forces as well. All geared towards making totally varied and chaotic themed forces that are never quite the same from game to game. I have such a large collection of chaos minis and like to see them all get table play from time to time. In general our approach to allies is to build theme/story armies or to take advantage of varied collections of minis.

The only real issue I have with allies is how some forces get to ally with nearly every other force on the table, while others get little to no allied options. Yeah the options on the table do make "fluff" sense, but it doesn't seem fair to some, though. Tyranids don't play well with others, but allying with tyranids would also allow them to include a 3rd HQ, or a 4th elite, fast attack or heavy unit to match other armies that have allies options.

Generally I don't see the allies rules adding anything into the mix that my group hasn't already been doing for years. I guess it helps that my group is made up of older players with the maturity to not continually build broken WAAC armies since we are all friends and playing to have fun.

As with everything else YMMV, and this is no different than people complaining about people using forge world modesl to "gain and advantage", when only a certain type of people do that. I own forge world models because they are cool models. Since I own then I want to use them. You can ask any of my regular opponents and not one of them will claim or believe that the forge world models are overpowered in any way. Heck I have some forge world units I've used on the table that have NEVER done anything except die over and over and over again every time they are used. So it isn't the rule itself that is broken, but the people abusing them.

Skriker

I always figured they could have changed the allies table to show a bit more perspective.

For example, lets use Black Templars, this is not reflected by the current chart just a thought by me and probably stupid and easily dissected as such but hear me out.

Black Templars don't tend to get on well with anyone outside the Imperium. Which is understandable as they are well known for not exactly having good relations with Xenos and Heretic scum, so for example Black Templars would not work with Eldar. Yet Eldar providing it serves their cause or the need is great enough would fight alongside or at least use the Black Templars to achieve this end.

This would mean that as a Black Templar player I cannot have an Eldar allied detachment. However as an Eldar player I can have a Black Templar allied detachment although it may be an Ally of Convenience or maybe even Desperate Allies.

This would help break it up and could make the table more interesting or at least fix some of the ones that don't make sense. Although to put this in a table would probably be overly complex and it'd be a case of making a list for each army or adding it to each codex.

Probably convoluted and stupid but I like the idea of the perspective of the main force determining the allies, although it probably is unworkable.

Actually, that wouldn't be too hard to implement at all - just listing viable allies in the army's Codex. Only problem that occurs is the slow release schedule of the 'dexes. Many factions would go years and years without access to allies.

 htj wrote:
Actually, that wouldn't be too hard to implement at all - just listing viable allies in the army's Codex. Only problem that occurs is the slow release schedule of the 'dexes. Many factions would go years and years without access to allies.

Unless, of course, they have an Errata to bring the codex up to date.

If I may go on a tangent, I think the way of the future is digitally distributed rules. That lets the parent company patch out any issues on the fly, and leads to a more engaged community. I think concerns of piracy misplaced; I've pirated the rules for every army I don't play, and still the machine keeps turning. Owning those additional rules has led to purchases I wouldn't have otherwise made. Where before that was with Apocalypse and Cities of Death in mind, now it's for allied armies. Like that old phrase says, you give them the crack pipe for free.

I like the Allies system, but I don't get most of the allies matrix. The biggest gripe I have with it is that Nids can't ally (despite having fluff that says they "mind-control" other factions), but Necrons can. Necrons are supposedly just semi-sentient belligerent machines, out to eradicate all forms of life. (See Discworld Auditors )

Despite HATING the whole 'Nid thing, I'd love a 'Nid/IG force, just for all the awesome conversion opportunities. (Guardsmen with face-huggers or an extra pair of arms with claws on them, etc.)

 SgtSixkilla wrote:
Necrons are supposedly just semi-sentient belligerent machines, out to eradicate all forms of life.

No, they are not. Please read Codex Necrons.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 SgtSixkilla wrote:
Necrons are supposedly just semi-sentient belligerent machines, out to eradicate all forms of life.

No, they are not. Please read Codex Necrons.

No thanks. I think they're d*cks. But I have read a lot of BL novels that feature them. I guess they're outdated now. Still makes sense for 'nids to be able to ally with at least IG, Tau and Chaos. (Possibly also Elves and Dark Elves.)

 Locclo wrote:
People complain about Tyranids not getting allies, but are there any realistic justifications for Tyranid allies in the first place? I can't come up with any, myself.

I hope they reintroduce Genestealer Cults, which would be an awesome and easy way to get Allies for the bugs.

As a long time player, who remembers 2nd edition when 25% of every army could be allies, I'm glad they're back. The old Deamon- and Witch Hunter codexes allowed them for the Imperium, which was fun, but his way is probably better.

As far as the fluff goes, no matter how little sense it makes, you can always make SOME sense out of things, and isn't that enough?

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 SgtSixkilla wrote:
Necrons are supposedly just semi-sentient belligerent machines, out to eradicate all forms of life.

No, they are not. Please read Codex Necrons.

Depends on whether you read the cool codex or the "Ward-just-took-a-sh....oe-on-this-fluff" that cool players ignore anyway.

Some combos make sense. Some dont. But there would be more bitching if the Imperium could all ally with each other and Xenos races couldnt all with anybody. So I think they made a compromise.

Nids should be proud they have nothing to do with this nonsense.