annoyed by allies?

[company veteran]

as i look through this thread i see a lot of people (myself included) asking for advice on army lists or fighting particular foes.. and often there are several replies along the lines of 'take long fangs' 'ally in some ravenwing' 'take vendettas as allies' etc.

 

does anyone feel like this is kind of a cop out?

 

i know that allies are perfectly acceptable in the rules and i dont begrudge anyone for taking them but i cant seem to stomach taking them...it makes my army feel 'wrong'

 

i might just be being stupid but i would like to know if anyone feels the same.. or conversly if you love allies i would like to know why (but i'd rather not hear if its for powergaming or cheese)

[Drunken Angel]

Yep I am guilty of that I run pure BA in my tourney lists but mess around with allies in friendly games.  I talk about it but cant quite bring myslef to take that last step.  Probably because BA are a better unit to use for allies in other armies, most of the allies out there we can take I have trouble fitting in points wise unless its skanky cheap guard. 

[the jeske]

single codex armies do not exist anymore , with maybe the exaption of chaos demons and even those work well only because WD update. If an army becomes better by using an ally , it would be stupid not to take them . just like it would bestupid to not take the most optimal set up of gear for units .

[Sinful eyes]

single codex armies do not exist anymore , with maybe the exaption of chaos demons and even those work well only because WD update. If an army becomes better by using an ally , it would be stupid not to take them . just like it would bestupid to not take the most optimal set up of gear for units .

This is not true at all. "Single codex armies" (SCA) are not even close to becoming extinct. In fact, on the whole, SCAs outnumber allied armies by a lot. Most of the armies I see with allies in tournaments are older codexes (Tau, Eldar, some Orks etc.). 

 

These days I usually play my Necrons, and I wont seriously consider using allies any time soon simply because I do not see any need to do so. My codex is awesome on its own, and I do not feel the need to include any other race in my armies. 

 

However, when I do pop out my Blood Angels I love allies. The thought of my Elite Angels backing up a horde of guards (which I can get for cheap!) is cool, the idea of my angels assisting an inquisitor in his inquisitive deeds is awesome, and through allies I can include awesome units that don't exist in our codex (Thunderfire cannons and Tech priests with the independent character rule for instance). Sure there are some power gamers who employ the allies rules in fluff-contradictory ways to simply win the game. However, people do that with SCAs also (Long fang spam, Screamer/Flamer spam, Necron flyer spam etc. etc.). 

 

Edit: There are also quite a few codexes that work better on their own then they would with allies anyways, such as Nids, Necrons, Daemons,  GKs, and Ravenwing/Deathwing Dark Angels. 

[Snejk]

as i look through this thread i see a lot of people (myself included) asking for advice on army lists or fighting particular foes.. and often there are several replies along the lines of 'take long fangs' 'ally in some ravenwing' 'take vendettas as allies' etc.

does anyone feel like this is kind of a cop out?

i know that allies are perfectly acceptable in the rules and i dont begrudge anyone for taking them but i cant seem to stomach taking them...it makes my army feel 'wrong'

i might just be being stupid but i would like to know if anyone feels the same.. or conversly if you love allies i would like to know why (but i'd rather not hear if its for powergaming or cheese)

I dislike allies, and I'll most likely never play with them, unless I use dirt cheap IG infantry as meat shields. I know their Vendettas are bad ass, since i play against an IG player on regular basis. But my FE army just says "Ally with you? Forget about it, you ain't from Karpathia". And our reputation for causing collateral damage and barbequing them afterwards is just way to bad for anyone wanting to ally up with us.

[company veteran]

single codex armies do not exist anymore , with maybe the exaption of chaos demons and even those work well only because WD update. If an army becomes better by using an ally , it would be stupid not to take them . just like it would bestupid to not take the most optimal set up of gear for units .

The jeske.. you seem to presume that every person who plays 40k only wants the optimal loadout.. but this is far from the truth,

my Lamenters army is far from optimal.. it is composed of models i like and units i enjoy fielding. i guess that makes me stupid so im sorry for being such a terrible hobbyist....

and single codex armies do exist, maybe not at uber competitive levels, but they certainly exist.. i own one.

i will agree, obviously, that if you want the most optimal list then you should take allies.. but i take offence at your assumption that i am stupid for not taking an 'optimal loadout', i would rather have my army be induvidual thanks.

[Morticon]

Company Vet,

 

I hear you 100%.  I cant shake the feeling of playing "dirty". 

 

But the thing is that the game has changed.  

 

Also, with the way the game balances from dex to dex and edition to edition, this is a really good leveler of the playing field. 

BA have certain specialist units that are really good, but our core is sometimes a bit lacking, I feel or leaves us with some holes or if no holes, then it leaves us with stale or one-dimensional builds.

 

Allies fill those holes well, and opens us up to variation.  When done with some creativity, you can stick well within the theme and aesthetic of the BA :) 

[dswanick]

Company Vet,

 

I hear you 100%.  I cant shake the feeling of playing "dirty". 

I'm in the opposite boat-

- I inherited my Space Wolves army from a friend several years ago.  He started building them many years ago.  He had a Leman Russ Exterminator (from when this was a valid H.S. choice in C:SW), which I can now field using allies.  He had a kit-bash dradnought armed with two Wolf Claws, which was an illegal build until I could field it using  BA allies.  How is any of this "dirty"?

[Morticon]

I think both of your examples fall into the "creativity" clause I mentioned at the end of my comment.  

 

The "dirty" part was a reference to some ingrained and quite possibly misplaced notion of "loyalty" and fidelity to a pure dex. Completely irrational, but evident none-the-less.

[Xenith]

He had a Leman Russ Exterminator (from when this was a valid H.S. choice in C:SW), which I can now field using allies.  He had a kit-bash dradnought armed with two Wolf Claws, which was an illegal build until I could field it using  BA allies.  How is any of this "dirty"?

 

Using both of them at the same time is cheating?

 

 

Allies are good, allies are interesting. They can be abused, but so can everything else in the game.

 

It just feels unnatural, because there has been a whole generation of people that have never known being able to use allies in games (3rd ed removed them in 1998, iirc).

[Ushtarador]

I think both of your examples fall into the "creativity" clause I mentioned at the end of my comment.  

 

The "dirty" part was a reference to some ingrained and quite possibly misplaced notion of "loyalty" and fidelity to a pure dex. Completely irrational, but evident none-the-less.

 

I really didn't like the idea at first as well, but then I started liking it to the point where I'm gonna build some allied detachments specifically for my blood angels :) the idea of a ravenwing scout squad accompanying my army is just awesome if done right.

[company veteran]

if the allies are done creatively it can look/feel awesome...  its just throwing other units in that bothers me i guess.... i know ravenwing are miles better... but i cant help but feel i should use the bikes from the BA dex.

 

oh and i have an ork army with guard allies.. the commisar is a converted ork 'commisar yarrork' and he has a bunch of shackled and manacled guardsmen that he bosses around and a deathstrike missile launcher that has been looted into a giant pulsa rokkit... this list doesnt feel 'dirty' to me... its not OP and extremely characterful.

 

i gues my issue is 'allies for advantage'.. kind of a dumb issue i guess.

[Brother Xeones]

When I found out about allies, I was totally stoked. I've always been more interested in carving my own niche in the 40k universe by creating my own chapter and fluff than in adhering to existing factions. The added freedom and creativity afforded to us by the allies rules is actually extremely liberating. Now I can add other models that I think look cool (or have fun rules) and play them in a totally legit list that doesn't require a friend's permission to use.

 

Combining the allies rules with "counts-as" allows a hard-core modeler guy like me a chance to really make a unique force.

 

From a game balance perspective, as Morticon mentioned, allowing more players access to the same units across multiple codices, means that those few "top tier" codices have less inherent power of over older, or more conservative codices. From a competitive viewpoint, I think this homogenization is a fantasic addition to a game that struggles systemically from faction balance.

 

Unfortunately, all this allies goodness doesn't come without its cost. I think the biggest problem with allies is the tendency for people to too quickly jump on the bandwagon of net lists and start spouting whatever everyone says are "the best friggin' units in the game". Rather than promoting MORE variety, allies can actually have a tendency to restrict it, because every kid with no imagination is going to be pushing you to wedge in a formation of Vendettas or a Rune Priest and a pack of Long Fangs --"'cuz now everybody can take them, and you know they are just the shiznit so if you want to win, you'll take 12."

 

That's not to say that some units aren't inherently better than others, but the human mind being the lazy thing that it often is, people are more likely to suggest the same over-used units from the same over-used codices rather than objectively looking at the army list with fresh eyes and saying "What does this army really need?

 

For me, I'll take the good with the bad and accept the allies rules as new and interesting way to add variety to our hobby.

[Chaplain Admetus]

The problem with allies is that it pushes the min-max builds of old that they worked so hard to get rid of. There's too much of a leap to just allying with 'the best' units and not enough thought given to it. The argument that annoyed me the most was people claiming that Tyranids deserve to be overpowered when they get their new book purely because they can't ally. I doubt alliances are going to be part of the game forever.

[tomjoad]

I doubt alliances are going to be part of the game forever.

 

I disagree there. Alliances were a major part of the game in 2nd (presumably Rogue Trader, but I didn't play then) and were then a part of the game for as long as the Deamonhunter and Witch Hunter books were out. Allies have been around probably as long as they haven't been, nobody really complains about them, a lot of people like them a lot. Plus, I'm sure it sells minis, so there is only the downside of fringe complainers, which isn't enough to convince anybody of anything.

[dswanick]

 

I doubt alliances are going to be part of the game forever.

 

I disagree there. Alliances were a major part of the game in 2nd (presumably Rogue Trader, but I didn't play then) and were then a part of the game for as long as the Deamonhunter and Witch Hunter books were out. Allies have been around probably as long as they haven't been, nobody really complains about them, a lot of people like them a lot. Plus, I'm sure it sells minis, so there is only the downside of fringe complainers, which isn't enough to convince anybody of anything.

Agreed, Allies is the "Gate-way" rule.  It lets someone dip a metaphorical toe into another army, which will then bloom into a full-fledged modeling opportunity/obsession.

[company veteran]

When I found out about allies, I was totally stoked. I've always been more interested in carving my own niche in the 40k universe by creating my own chapter and fluff than in adhering to existing factions. The added freedom and creativity afforded to us by the allies rules is actually extremely liberating. Now I can add other models that I think look cool (or have fun rules) and play them in a totally legit list that doesn't require a friend's permission to use.

 

Combining the allies rules with "counts-as" allows a hard-core modeler guy like me a chance to really make a unique force.

 

From a game balance perspective, as Morticon mentioned, allowing more players access to the same units across multiple codices, means that those few "top tier" codices have less inherent power of over older, or more conservative codices. From a competitive viewpoint, I think this homogenization is a fantasic addition to a game that struggles systemically from faction balance.

 

Unfortunately, all this allies goodness doesn't come without its cost. I think the biggest problem with allies is the tendency for people to too quickly jump on the bandwagon of net lists and start spouting whatever everyone says are "the best friggin' units in the game". Rather than promoting MORE variety, allies can actually have a tendency to restrict it, because every kid with no imagination is going to be pushing you to wedge in a formation of Vendettas or a Rune Priest and a pack of Long Fangs --"'cuz now everybody can take them, and you know they are just the shiznit so if you want to win, you'll take 12."

 

That's not to say that some units aren't inherently better than others, but the human mind being the lazy thing that it often is, people are more likely to suggest the same over-used units from the same over-used codices rather than objectively looking at the army list with fresh eyes and saying "What does this army really need?

 

For me, I'll take the good with the bad and accept the allies rules as new and interesting way to add variety to our hobby.

 

THIS.

 

fantastic answer.

[Jsmarriner]

OK,

Since this topic is about allies and such I figured I would hop on here and ask this question rather than starting a new thread. I am getting back into the hobby and am in the process of repainting (already stripped and now primed) my old salamanaders into mighty Blood Angels. I bought a box of regular Marines to fill gaps in my line and then realized I had 5 guys still on the sprue. I have decided to make them Legion of the Damned. 

 

Here is the question. It used to be that Legion of the Damned showed up where they were needed by any Space Marine unit. With the Allies rule, would I have to take them as Allies or are they still "organic" to my list and hence allow me to take another ally? I dont have any other ally models yet but its nice to know for planning purposes.

 

Thanks

Jim

[dswanick]

OK,

Since this topic is about allies and such I figured I would hop on here and ask this question rather than starting a new thread. I am getting back into the hobby and am in the process of repainting (already stripped and now primed) my old salamanaders into mighty Blood Angels. I bought a box of regular Marines to fill gaps in my line and then realized I had 5 guys still on the sprue. I have decided to make them Legion of the Damned. 

 

Here is the question. It used to be that Legion of the Damned showed up where they were needed by any Space Marine unit. With the Allies rule, would I have to take them as Allies or are they still "organic" to my list and hence allow me to take another ally? I dont have any other ally models yet but its nice to know for planning purposes.

 

Thanks

Jim

Legion of the Damned would be an Allied C:SM Elite cholce, necessitating a C:SM HQ and Troops choice to field them legally.

[Jsmarriner]

dang thats an awful lot jut to put Legion of the damned on the field. Something tells me that I will not be using them. I will probably still make them because of the painting fun but not put them on the field.

[The Yncarne]

Maybe your opponents will let you use them as chaplains or a Samuel Jackson level Van/Sternguard unit? 

 

I'm wondering about the allies and 'count-as' opportunities mash-ups. IOW, if I can ally with a battle brother doesn't that mean parts of my army can 'count-as' another codex via the ally rule?

 

Example: a Blood Ravens player wants a librarian heavy hitter list. He takes Blood Angels as the main codex to get Mephiston. He takes a Dark Angel ally to get a cheaper librarian and 2 troops from that codex. He can paint them all up as Blood Ravens too. Just needs to indicate what units are which. 

 

I'm not citing anything specific here, just pointing out a way allies could be done without obviously running two different armies. You'll have a more difficult time mixing xenos and marine army allies though.

[tomjoad]

Maybe your opponents will let you use them as chaplains or a Samuel Jackson level Van/Sternguard unit? 

 

I'm wondering about the allies and 'count-as' opportunities mash-ups. IOW, if I can ally with a battle brother doesn't that mean parts of my army can 'count-as' another codex via the ally rule?

 

Example: a Blood Ravens player wants a librarian heavy hitter list. He takes Blood Angels as the main codex to get Mephiston. He takes a Dark Angel ally to get a cheaper librarian and 2 troops from that codex. He can paint them all up as Blood Ravens too. Just needs to indicate what units are which. 

 

I'm not citing anything specific here, just pointing out a way allies could be done without obviously running two different armies. You'll have a more difficult time mixing xenos and marine army allies though.

 

In that example, I would recommend taking two different types of troops entirely. IE, don't take tac marines from both books.

[TheSauce]

In that way, having allies opens up a lot of fun fluffy lists, which is pretty awesome.

 

The problem is when "power gamers" try to use allies to come up with cheesy combos to win. Which is bad.

 

I played a game the other day where I took a cheap guard foot blob to man a comms relay for my two Stormravens packed with death company and dreadnoughts. While not the most competitive list (thought it's not the worst with two of the best fliers), I love the idea of the guard hunkering down and calling in air support from the Blood Angels.

[The Yncarne]

I agree that it is a fine and subjective line.

 

As a Xenos player, allies seem to be the only way to make a decent list in the current meta.

 

For me it comes down to "it is in the rules, so I have to accept that, but I don't have to use it." So I try not to complain when somebody else does use the rules.

 

Allies are another reason I don't meet many new people as well, but that's a different thread.

[JamesI]

I don't use allies for the simple reason that I don't want to spend money to add allies.

 

I'd love some Chaos Demon allies for my Chaos marines, though I'm not sure how much I would add to my BA.