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 know lots of people that feel allies kind of ruin tournaments but every time it comes up people are "You can't not allow allies no one would come". Do you think this is true? I'm wondering if this would actually dissuade people from attending so I go to the masses for help.

I love allies, pretty much everything in 6th besides 2xFoC(though flyers and challenges are very poorly written rules) but it would be nice to see real 40k armies again.

I am cool with either format.

Allies allow for some very powerful combinations but I kind of miss the older days when your army was just what you had in your codex.

Either way, I'd go to any format, though a no allies format might be fun and refreshing from time to time.

I wouldn't mind not seeing allies, particularly as all I've yet to really see them used for is to create unintended synergies or plug gaps in capabilities some armies were never supposed to be able to plug. I know I'm probably not the norm here, but I'm much less likely to attend if the event does not allow Forgeworld as opposed to not allowing allies (as you can still play any non-superheavy model made under the auspices of any facet of GW, as it was originally intended to be used, without allies, but you cannot without Forgeworld). Allies just mess with too much stuff that fundamentally don't really seem to have been thought about particularly much when they made the Allies rules, they feel very "after the fact" but allow for very powerful combinations, and really detract from immersion in the universe when you have sillyness like Tau fighting alongside Space Marines as Battle Brothers no different from the Imperial Guard and whatnot.That said, it does throw a bit of a kink in the works for the Inquisition, so that's something to think about.

Either way is cool. I mean I runa mean ork army and adding space wolves from time to time is just silly.

I play orks, which mean I cannot rely on MSU usually and my allies options are less useful than people with battle brothers.

So I am all for tossing the allies matrix, because it is arbitrary and unfair to some codexes who don't have complete access to them. We survived before without them and the new codexes are hardly balanced for them or designed to require them... In fact, it seems like allies is something they have totally ignored in balancing with new codexes.

The allies matrix is VERY skewed.

My local tournament allows allies, but i almost never run them, as i prefer my armies to actually make sense,...


Of course my Orks are a bit hosed on the allies front, as are my daemons. My DE can ally up with CWE, but I'm not really a fan of that.

There are a whole lotta double negatives in that poll. Wouldn't you not go without if they didn't not do... etc. A much simpler question would be:

Would you go to a tournament that banned allies? Yes. No.

Yes the poll is quite confusing, poorly written and probably will skew the results.

There I made it more clear but I don't want to know if people would go, I'm more interested to hear how many people wouldn't attend because allies were banned.

I wouldn't attend if allies aren't allowed. You're changing the core rules.

Better idea: Custom scenario rule for one or more games.

If there is not a primary and allied HQ alive and on the board battle brothers degrades to allies of convenience and AoC degrades to desperate.

I love allies because of the modeling possibilities that keep me from getting bored.

That said, I would still attend a no ally event. Not as a regular thing but as a once in a while this is cool kind of thing. Like 1500pt tournaments

I'd still technically attend a non-ally event, but I'm not sure I much see the point. You'd still see the same armies at the top.

 schadenfreude wrote:
Better idea: Custom scenario rule for one or more games.

If there is not a primary and allied HQ alive and on the board battle brothers degrades to allies of convenience and AoC degrades to desperate.

That would actually be a really interesting mechanic, and it makes sense fluff-wise. When the chain of command is severed, so do the synergies between the two factions.

The one thing I do like about this question is it gets at the heart of a lot of tournament debates.

While everyone has preferences about tournaments, and some of them strong, relatively few things would actually keep people from attending an event. There just aren't enough that people can be so choosey.

I would attend both (and voted such). I have run allied and 'pure' lists.