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.

Question:
For primary detachment you can have 3 heavy
For Allied you can have 1 heavy

So is it legit to have 4 heavies?
3 in primary and 1 allied, or is 3 still the max?

KonTheory wrote:
Question:
For primary detachment you can have 3 heavy
For Allied you can have 1 heavy

So is it legit to have 4 heavies?

This assessment is correct.

sweet,
3 anni barges and a dreadknight here I come!

Yes that is the correct ruling on allies.

It is crazy imo that allies lets you basically ignore the limits of the force chart.

It also lets you create fluff ignoring monstrosities like necrons with grey knight allies.

rohansoldier wrote:
Yes that is the correct ruling on allies.

It is crazy imo that allies lets you basically ignore the limits of the force chart.

It also lets you create fluff ignoring monstrosities like necrons with grey knight allies.

Because Grey Knights would never team up with another Chaos-hating army...

Where does it say Necrons hate Chaos?

I remember reading that the Silent King I think it was believes that Tyranids are the most powerful threat to the Necrons ever transferring back to organic bodies and that Necrons as a whole don't get on with the Eldar/Dark Eldar but don't remember anything about Chaos.

Sorry if it seems like I am trolling the OP, it's not intentional, I am like a lot of people a big fan of the 40K fluff and feel that the allies matrix lets people take armies that are completely against it.

It also doesn't make sense in some cases, like Templars and Sisters being desperate allies when they basically have the same outlook on things.

rohansoldier wrote:
It also doesn't make sense in some cases, like Templars and Sisters being desperate allies when they basically have the same outlook on things.

Straying off topic here, but you might want to review the 30 years war for a brief history on how 2 groups, that hold the same fundamental faith with differences on some details, were willing to throw out a basic tenant of both belief systems (e.g. don't kill...) in order to, well, kill each other over who was "right".

I always think of Inquisition armies of exemplifying the maxim: "the ends justify the means" That is why you get Inquisitors allying with [FILL IN THE BLANK] to stop their enemy of the day or using Xenos technology to fight Xenos.

Homer

rohansoldier wrote:
Yes that is the correct ruling on allies.

It is crazy imo that allies lets you basically ignore the limits of the force chart.

Remember that you also need to invest points in paying the "HQ tax". You've also got to take an allied Troop to get access to that 4th HS. It's not completely free.

Well, does this mean you can take 2 HQ's from the primary and 1 from the allied? lol

and its still pretty good

Yes, you can do that.

this is ridiculous

It's really not that amazing in general. Yes, some interesting lists can come out of it but rarely because you can stack an extra FOC slot somewhere.

KonTheory wrote:
this is ridiculous

Why?

You're still limited by points limits, and everyone is on the same playing field. That field it's just a little differently shaped from last edition.

 insaniak wrote:

KonTheory wrote:
this is ridiculous

Why?

You're still limited by points limits, and everyone is on the same playing field. That field it's just a little differently shaped from last edition.

Everyone except Tyranids.

Well, yeah, except for them...