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.

Hi,
I was wondering how to effectively measure the advantage to have allies, maybe with a point cost.
I mean, a list with allies has advantages compared to the same list without allies, well beyond the point cost of the allied units.
For example:
A 1800 pts tau army vs a 1800 pts ork army.
The tau has the advantage when it's about shooting, but looses in hand to hands.
Even if the tau player add some more units, he will still be beaten in close combat, just even better in shooting.
But if he allies with the Inquisition, he will have good close combat units, as crusader/death cult etc
And the orks would no longer be able to dominate the assault phase.
So we can see that 200 points of allies are a lot better than 200 points of in-codex units.
So, how can we fix it ? Add 10%-15% to their point cost ?
Limit them to 20% of the army ?
Any idea ?

I think just get rid of battlebrothers, stupidest thing ever, why would/should craftworld eldar ride in a dark eldar raider or skitarii get in a blood angels drop pod.

I was initially against allies altogether but as someone who doesn't have one big army its nice to merge 2 small armies together and play a big game.

but things like casting psychic powers on allies and characters joining allied squads or units using allied transports shouldn't be a thing IMO.

I think the answer should be within the specific unit rules. Units that do not have at least a 3+ armour save should not be able to board a Drop Pod (reentry/landing would kill them). Psykers should only be able to affect 10x their Psychic Rating in models with buff powers. Stuff like that.
That being said, I am fine with various Eldar using each others' stuff. The Eldar do not make the distinction between factions the same way humans do. They all exist within a gray area, and would rather work with each other than pretty much anyone else. It's also a good way to represent a pirate force that isn't associated with a craftworld or kabal.
As for OP's concern; one unit of specialists rarely covers an army's weak points sufficiently. A few Inquisition CC speed bumps won't stop a committed Ork assault. Simply load up on Slugga Boyz, drown them in greenskins, and let statistics do the rest.

Taffy17 wrote:
I think just get rid of battlebrothers, stupidest thing ever, why would/should craftworld eldar ride in a dark eldar raider or skitarii get in a blood angels drop pod.

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaah...
The problem isn't Battle Brothers there. It's the fact that vehicles that were previously Dedicated Transports are able to be purchased in the Fast Attack slot.

With all the detachments and formations coming out, allies have gotten even more muddied. Two best things that can be done to mitigate the stupidity that comes out around allies are:

1) Remove battle brothers completely. Let no one get it. Even in the Imperium when you read the fluff and the stories none of the Imperial forces work nicely together, EVER. So they would not share equipment, a marine psyker would not cast powers on IG units, etc. While Eldar and Dark Eldar might both be elder, they are diametrically opposed to each other morally so would not be battle brothers either. Even the various chaos forces work fine as not being battle brothers because in that world the strong force lords it over the weaker anyway.
2) Allow every army to ally with every other army plain and simple. Get rid of any favoritism on the allies table, because it just makes it even easier for Imperial forces to break the allies concept. Get rid of the lowest level of allies as well, and just let everyone ally together, no hatreds, no sharing of anything except the battle field together.

These two things would get rid of most of the allies shenanigans that happen in games these days. As soon as 7th edition made Tau and Eldar no longer battle brothers, Taudar went away. Blood Angel/Mechanicum drop pod nonsense would disappear over night. They would also give an allied boost option to armies that are currently lagging due to old rules AND few ally options as well. Once this is done, get rid of unbound and call it a day.

You know what else would make "Drop Pod nonsense disappear overnight"?

Acknowledging that the friggin' problem has nothing to do with Battle Brothers and everything to do with the friggin' Drop Pods being in Fast Attack slots.

At this juncture, this topic has been discussed to death so many times and inevitably the people who complain about Battle Brothers do not seem to understand that by removing Dedicated Transport options from the Fast Attack slots?

You fix the biggest issue they complain about.

There are problems with Battle Brothers beyond just Drop Pods.

Allies allow for units to take advantage of abilities they were never intended to have. Wraithguard jumping out of a Webway portal to alpha-strike something with D-weapons, TWC's running around with FNP and Skilled Rider and an Invisibility casting Librarian through allies with BA and SM's, and the like.

 Kanluwen wrote:
You know what else would make "Drop Pod nonsense disappear overnight"?

Acknowledging that the friggin' problem has nothing to do with Battle Brothers and everything to do with the friggin' Drop Pods being in Fast Attack slots.

At this juncture, this topic has been discussed to death so many times and inevitably the people who complain about Battle Brothers do not seem to understand that by removing Dedicated Transport options from the Fast Attack slots?

You fix the biggest issue they complain about.

That kills one head, now on to the Ravenwing/Librarian Formation on bikes shenanigans, Eldar/DEldar shenanigans. Battle Brothers allows more than just transport shenanigans, namely Psychic shenanigans.

 Vaktathi wrote:
There are problems with Battle Brothers beyond just Drop Pods.

Allies allow for units to take advantage of abilities they were never intended to have. Wraithguard jumping out of a Webway portal to alpha-strike something with D-weapons, TWC's running around with FNP and Skilled Rider and an Invisibility casting Librarian through allies with BA and SM's, and the like.

TWC is an easy fix. Monstrous Cavalry instead of Cavalry; Monstrous Cavalry cannot be joined by ICs unless they also have the rule.

Wraithguard jumping out of a WWP involves a purchased FA DT being involved; once again there's the issue cropping up again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
You know what else would make "Drop Pod nonsense disappear overnight"?

Acknowledging that the friggin' problem has nothing to do with Battle Brothers and everything to do with the friggin' Drop Pods being in Fast Attack slots.

At this juncture, this topic has been discussed to death so many times and inevitably the people who complain about Battle Brothers do not seem to understand that by removing Dedicated Transport options from the Fast Attack slots?

You fix the biggest issue they complain about.

That kills one head, now on to the Ravenwing/Librarian Formation on bikes shenanigans, Eldar/DEldar shenanigans. Battle Brothers allows more than just transport shenanigans, namely Psychic shenanigans.

Psychic shenanigans are only so powerful because the Psychic abilities this time around are so powerful. Psychic abilities need to be toned down, period.

So once again: The issue is not simply Battle Brothers.

Forgive me, but it would appear that if the response to every problem brought up is to come up with a unique fix to each issue, rather than just removing removing the abilities of Battle Brothers as a universal fix, it would seem the proper solution would be the the latter, as opposed to having to do things like create new unit types simply as a response to a single issue that isn't a problem within the army itself.


And, at least as far as I'm aware, the WWP issue isn't FA transport dependent (at least the couple times I remember it being used), you attach an allied DE character to the Wraithguard and they come in from reserves and Deep Strike without scatter.

Sigh. And here I was excited that this thread might be a productive discussion about the merits of including allies in your lists, and weighing the cost-benefit of doing so. Reasonable discussion? Silly me.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
There are problems with Battle Brothers beyond just Drop Pods.

Allies allow for units to take advantage of abilities they were never intended to have. Wraithguard jumping out of a Webway portal to alpha-strike something with D-weapons, TWC's running around with FNP and Skilled Rider and an Invisibility casting Librarian through allies with BA and SM's, and the like.

TWC is an easy fix. Monstrous Cavalry instead of Cavalry; Monstrous Cavalry cannot be joined by ICs unless they also have the rule.

Wraithguard jumping out of a WWP involves a purchased FA DT being involved; once again there's the issue cropping up again.

Wraithguard don't need a DT of any kind to WWP in, just an allied HQ with a WWP. That being said, if we get to a point where that's the combo that's breaking 40k, I think we'll have gotten pretty close to balanced.

Allies allow new and different combos, some of which are completely unprecedented. The lack of experience people have with them can lead to an overestimation of how "broken" certain combinations are. Usually, when there is a combo that's truly broken, I've found that this is the case because one of the constituent ingredients is broken on its own, before the Allies even got involved.

That being said, I've been accused of "just combining detachments to break the game" when I started doing Freakshow lists, so I'm probably biased.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Forgive me, but it would appear that if the response to every problem brought up is to come up with a unique fix to each issue, rather than just removing removing the abilities of Battle Brothers as a universal fix, it would seem the proper solution would be the the latter, as opposed to having to do things like create new unit types simply as a response to a single issue that isn't a problem within the army itself.

And it would seem that removing the abilities of Battle Brothers is ridiculous because then why bother having different levels of Allies to begin with?

Seriously. If you think the issue isn't Psychic abilities or the fact that "Cavalry" (a fairly rare unit type in 40k to begin with) are not delineating between "Monstrous" and "Standard", that's fine and dandy.

But y'know what? Those both are significant issues.

And, at least as far as I'm aware, the WWP issue isn't FA transport dependent (at least the couple times I remember it being used), you attach an allied DE character to the Wraithguard and they come in from reserves and Deep Strike without scatter.

The most popular one that gets bandied about requires an Archon, Wraithguard, and a Raider.

So yeah, it is FA transport dependent.

An Archon, Raider, and Wraithguard is an illegal combination. The Wraithguard are bulky, and a minimum unit will fill the Raider with no room for the Archon.

 Jimsolo wrote:
An Archon, Raider, and Wraithguard is an illegal combination. The Wraithguard are bulky, and a minimum unit will fill the Raider with no room for the Archon.

Then why the hell do people keep talking about it as though they plan on using it?! Do people just not read their own books or something?

Anyways

People using the Archon with Wraithguard are either putting them in a Wave Serpent (since the WG can still disembark before firing) or doing it on foot. Although I've heard of one or two folks using a Tantalus.

That being said, I have no problems throwing my Wraithguard in a Raider sans Archon and taking my chances with the Deep Strike.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Forgive me, but it would appear that if the response to every problem brought up is to come up with a unique fix to each issue, rather than just removing removing the abilities of Battle Brothers as a universal fix, it would seem the proper solution would be the the latter, as opposed to having to do things like create new unit types simply as a response to a single issue that isn't a problem within the army itself.

And it would seem that removing the abilities of Battle Brothers is ridiculous because then why bother having different levels of Allies to begin with?

This would be a far better place to start. Creating new unit types, dealing with Psychic powers, etc they're all treating symptoms rather than the core problem.

Seriously. If you think the issue isn't Psychic abilities or the fact that "Cavalry" (a fairly rare unit type in 40k to begin with) are not delineating between "Monstrous" and "Standard", that's fine and dandy.

Psychic powers have their issues, however, there's a more fundamental problems. Certain armies have access to certain disciplines. When you introduce allies, they can get access to disciplines they wouldn't otherwise have. What might work without issue in one army may be absuseable when made available to another. Likewise,with Cavalry, the only place this is an issue with with TWC's and allies. It's not an issue within its own book, and there are no other Cavalry units that function similarly or that have similar issues, and we'd be creating a whole new unit type to address an issue that exists solely because of Allies and nothing within the army itself.

The most popular one that gets bandied about requires an Archon, Wraithguard, and a Raider.

So yeah, it is FA transport dependent.

Only if you insist there's only one way to run it. Ultimately, removing the BB benefits would solve any incarnation of the problem.

Tyranids don't even get Battle Brother benefits. Heck, they don't even get normal ally benefits. Benefits are for armies that matter.

The issue with allies is that the chart and benefits were NOT made from a game balance perspective. It's all fluff, and even that is going out the window now with Dark Angels sharing drop pods with Space Wolves because they're SUPER BEST FRIENDS.

Removing Battle Brothers would help the game balance in each of the areas mentioned and still maintain a level of beneficial allies for the armies involved. Yes yes, argue that BB isn't the problem, but if you think so go play Tyranids.

I disagree. I find that allies are more fun to play with. It lets me come up with fun combinations and doesn't make me have to field units im not crazy about. I play y eldar with DE and my Skitarii allies with Cult IK and sometimes even necrons. Maybe there could be a second ranking thats between battle brothers and allies of convenience, because all of astra are battle brothers lol, but i mean the game is already unbalanced and all armies have theyre pros and cons, so you can go play with your 6 flyrents and i can play with my Seer Councils in Raiders and who cares


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As far as deciding if allies are worth it, its all a personal choice. Look at what your army needs and see if the ally works with that. I run a harvest with my skitarii because they can stay far enough away from eachother for it to work. If i played a CC Skitari list with the harvest it wouldnt work. And there is still taxes from using battle brothers unless you play unbound, so its not completly op realistically


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It can be if you can happen to find all the units you wanted to use in a formation though... hehe

 Kanluwen wrote:
And it would seem that removing the abilities of Battle Brothers is ridiculous because then why bother having different levels of Allies to begin with?

My point is toe get rid all but the middle level of allies and let everyone ally with whatever other army they want. The allies system is completely unbalanced because some lists get a ton of allies, while others get little to none. Some get somewhere in the middle, but few Battle brother links. The Imperials are painfully unbalanced when it comes to allies because every imperial list is battle brothers with half of the armies available. It is just ridiculous. It is not just about transports being FA choices. It is about the fact that Imperials get way too many unfair advantages from the allies table that no one else can come close to which really goes wholly against the entirety of the fluff and back story where the different Imperial military forces are separate factions that do not integrate with the others in any way.

The only way to offer some balance to allies for everyone is to let any list ally with any other list at a basic level that does not allow character, unit or power crossovers.

Solo 2016!

I know some folks who would argue that Eldar variants get more benefit from the Allies table than Imperials do, Drop Pods and Inquisitors nonwithstanding.

(I dont particularly have an opinion one way or another, just noting.)

The best use of Allies is to cover glaring problems in your army.

My Tau have 2 problems: melee and psykery. Both can be dealt with via allies - good'n fast melee units (TWC, Wraiths, etc) and good psyker units (Eldar, CSM, Librarian Conclave). I plan to add Wraiths to my Tau army in the future, as a bit of Eldar as well to help me survive enemy psykers.

Other use is to look for combos, like the Uber Angels (giving 6 drop pods tro any Imperial Army), or an Archon with WWP and Wraithscythes. This is way dickery-er, but the system allows it.

It's not dickery-er. If you only had one army, you'd STILL look for units and options that had synergy with each other, rather than just throwing a hunch of random crap together.

Using your allies to set up an force which is better than either one is separately is (mechanically) the primary function of allies.

(The actual primary function being a business one, of course: to allow you to start a new army without having to by the whole army at once.)

lets address the real problem

That some people want to win at any cost or WAAC

no matter what rules or system you develop outside of chess will have that

Fluffy army vs fluffy army are fairly balanced.

Eldar/Deldar and CSM/Daemon are both cool battlebrother combo's, the latter is hamstrung by caveats that remove many bonus' to being BB in the first place. The IoM clusterflock is stupidity dialled to 11.

I too think Battlebrothers are the problem, regardless of how often certain posters repeat the same argument about transports.

I agree with the point tax concept, but I disagree with the notion of allies. Honestly, I'd rather each army could do everything, but the things they weren't proficient at had a "point tax" such that it would be a choice you had to make as to whether you'd go all in on your army tactic or be more well rounded but more expensive.

Just imagine how cool Vespids could be if they were a little over priced in points, but had strong CC stats. Not only would they see more play, but they'd also act as a point sponge that filled a niche you otherwise couldn't D:

I think allies make for some interesting games and armies, but I'd rather see all armies as allies of convenience to make it fair for everybody.

I don't even think Battlebrothers itself is the problem, just how liberally it is doled out. I could see Guardsmen deploying from a smurfs THawk. I can't see Eldar just hitching a ride in a Tantalus half full up with a squad of warriors from some cutthroat Dark Eldar band.

The basic idea of codexes is that there are limitations built into each book that are compensated internally by points costs, availability and effectiveness of different units.

The Allies system as you have pointed out destroys this concept.

My view and many other people's, expressed at the time that Allies were introduced, is that Allies was a serious mistake and it would be better to change the rules back and get rid of the whole concept.

So, do you think we can make a list of all the dickery that the alliance allows ?
What I can see here are the followings:

- Flesh tearers
- the archon with wwp and wraith
- Is Draigo with centurions and Tigurius still a thing ?

And one last question: does it exist in your countries an "official" system to evaluate the competitivness of a list ?
I mean, a system used by a lot of gamers/tournaments, like the majority, or is everyone making their own stuff ?

In France something called CPM system ("coût en points de monstruosité" : point cost monstrosity, I guess), which try evaluates lists for competitive environnements, is growing.
An example: you organize a tournament.
You annonce 3 CPM max.
3 drop pod = 1, Tigurius = 1, and an allied detachement = 1 too.
So you have your 3 points, you can't play 2 more pods (which you would have paid 1 CPM).

I think it helps reduce this kind of "allies abuses", because if you take allies, you have less CPM for other stuff.