Whats your opinion: Allies?

[tjdudey]

Hi All,

 

I am a fanatical wolves player, and I hate the idea of 'dirtying' my army with any kind of ally, but I would like to know the communities opinion.

 

I know with the lack of AA and Fliers, they can be popular,

 

Who likes what allies (Fluff wise, who is the most appropriate?).

 

Tom

[No Foes Remain]

Deleted, nevermind.

[Leif Bearclaw]

Personally, I agree with you. I dislike the introduction of allies (only real exception to this is CSM and daemons, but they used to the same codex, which is probably why I give them a pass) and fortifications this edition. I think that you shouldn't need to go to universal, generic buildings or another codex to play the game. The codex of your army should be enough.

[Vash113]

Well there's a difference between allying with Tau or Eldar, which from a purely fluff perspective I'd never want to do, vile xenos deserve only to be shot on sight!

 

However it can make for a fun, fluffy army to combine detachments from other forces, Imperial Guard forces your Company is fighting alongside, allied Space Marine Chapters engaged in the same campaign and so forth.

 

It is also easy to use allies to represent unorthodox or unusual detachments from your own Chapter. I use Blood Angels allies to represent my pack of Wulfen left over from my old 13th Company list. For years I've had ten of the old metal Wulfen sitting on a shelf gathering dust until I got the idea to use allies and the Blood Angels Death Company to field them again. Are they super-awesome uber-powered allies? Not really, but it's great to finally be able to field them. I bulked out the detachment with a Chaplain (Counts-As Wolf Priest), Stormraven Gunship (stolen from the Grey Knights) and a Furioso Dreadnought (Gifted from the Blood Angels). I also have a small detachment of Imperial Guard allies that are modeled as Skaerls, the armed serfs of the Space Wolves.

 

I also field my Imperial Fists 1st Company as Deathwing and often field that force as an ally to my Imperial Fists 3rd Company list or vice-versa.

Just because the Space Wolves codex doesn't include Stormravens, Stormtalons, Hunters/Seekers, Thunderfire Cannons or Centurion Warsuits does not mean the Chapter does not have any access to those units. Some might be salvaged from a forgotten battlefield, gifted for particularly valorous acts or critical assistance or might even lie in forgotten vaults deep within the Fang itself. Just because the Chapter does not field these units on a large scale doesn't mean a few might not turn up here or there so if there is something that takes your fancy that we don't currently have access to there's no reason you can't craft some fluff to justify your Great Company having a small number of whatever it is in their armory.

[tjdudey]

I enjoy the challenge of dealing with perceived 'weaknesses' in our codex. Despite the hurt a Doom scythe can put on us, I have never lost to necrons...They keep getting up and I keep knocking em down lol

 

Tom

[Vash113]

Personally, I agree with you. I dislike the introduction of allies (only real exception to this is CSM and daemons, but they used to the same codex, which is probably why I give them a pass) and fortifications this edition. I think that you shouldn't need to go to universal, generic buildings or another codex to play the game. The codex of your army should be enough.

 

The codex of our army is enough, Fortifications and Allies are not "must" takes. Sure a lack of AA can be irksome but there are ways around that. Allies and fortifications simply add more options and flexibility into how you want to field your army.

[tjdudey]

Well there's a difference between allying with Tau or Eldar, which from a purely fluff perspective I'd never want to do, vile xenos deserve only to be shot on sight!

 

However it can make for a fun, fluffy army to combine detachments from other forces, Imperial Guard forces your Company is fighting alongside, allied Space Marine Chapters engaged in the same campaign and so forth.

 

It is also easy to use allies to represent unorthodox or unusual detachments from your own Chapter. I use Blood Angels allies to represent my pack of Wulfen left over from my old 13th Company list. For years I've had ten of the old metal Wulfen sitting on a shelf gathering dust until I got the idea to use allies and the Blood Angels Death Company to field them again. Are they super-awesome uber-powered allies? Not really, but it's great to finally be able to field them. I bulked out the detachment with a Chaplain (Counts-As Wolf Priest), Stormraven Gunship (stolen from the Grey Knights) and a Furioso Dreadnought (Gifted from the Blood Angels). I also have a small detachment of Imperial Guard allies that are modeled as Skaerls, the armed serfs of the Space Wolves.

 

I also field my Imperial Fists 1st Company as Deathwing and often field that force as an ally to my Imperial Fists 3rd Company list or vice-versa.

 

Just because the Space Wolves codex doesn't include Stormravens, Stormtalons, Hunters/Seekers, Thunderfire Cannons or Centurion Warsuits does not mean the Chapter does not have any access to those units. Some might be salvaged from a forgotten battlefield, gifted for particularly valorous acts or critical assistance or might even lie in forgotten vaults deep within the Fang itself. Just because the Chapter does not field these units on a large scale doesn't mean a few might not turn up here or there so if there is something that takes your fancy that we don't currently have access to there's no reason you can't craft some fluff to justify your Great Company having a small number of whatever it is in their armory.

I like your thinking,

 

I obviously see no harm in allying with other imperial forces, and it would be fun to work on some fluff surrounding this.

 

Tom

[alpro]

I dislike the whole allies thing.

 

codicies were designed for that army only and as such we all have our weaknesses. The allies matrix just allows us to plug those gaps which is wrong.

 

Fortifications is another rules book that shoould have been kept away from the game. Lets fit, not play sim city, which is what some games have come down to when you have one or even two fortresses of redemption.

[Vash113]

I dislike the whole allies thing.

 

codicies were designed for that army only and as such we all have our weaknesses. The allies matrix just allows us to plug those gaps which is wrong.

 

Why is plugging gaps wrong? It's hardly a new thing, 2 vs 2 games were and still are common and entire tournaments and competitions were built around doubles teams where choosing two complementary armies and lists was key to success. Allies simpy allows that to be done in a single army but the effect is really no different to simply playing 2 vs 2 games.

 

Fortifications is another rules book that shoould have been kept away from the game. Lets fit, not play sim city, which is what some games have come down to when you have one or even two fortresses of redemption.

 

If that's the case why should there be buildings or terrain at all then? Should shooty armies be discouraged? I admit two FoR facing each other would be awkward but also funny but I have yet to see that kind of thing and if a player pays the points then so what? Objectives still must be captured, enemies defeated, Fortifications don't trump the mission objectives and if a player wants to turtle up there are advantages and disadvantages to that as well.

 

Before Fortifications I'd see players hold up in lagers of Rhinos and Tanks. Or bring in a circle of Drop Pods around an objective and use the pods as a ring of cover, essentially a fortress. Fortifications simply allow players to do that with a proper building or string of buildings but tactically the effect is much the same and it is as easy to counter now as it was before.

 

All told I just do not understand the dislike of Allies or Fortifications. Players who abuse the rules are going to abuse the rules no matter what they are, there were annoying WAAC players before 6th Edition and they are always going to be here. There were players who wanted to turtle up before 6th and they are going to keep doing so Fortifications or not. If you have a problem with the results I'd blame the players who abuse the rules rather than the rules themselves, and simply don't play those people.

[The Rose Princes]

If long fangs had Flakk missiles, I wouldn't need my Aegis and I'd be done with them.

 

(I do create fortifications for my tyranid army, but that's because i like building crazy models)

 

I don't use allies in any army, but i can see the bye on CSM and Daemons and it makes complete sense.  personally i think every one should be able to ally with IG; who has not had a planet's armed forces help whoever the dominate force was there storyline wise.  corrupted chaos army, tau human auxiliary, genestealer cults, pdf in compliance.... where you go the planetary army is there in some aspect.

 

i still wouldn't use them, but it would be correct.

[Baulder]

I dislike the whole allies thing.

 

codicies were designed for that army only and as such we all have our weaknesses. The allies matrix just allows us to plug those gaps which is wrong.

 

Fortifications is another rules book that shoould have been kept away from the game. Lets fit, not play sim city, which is what some games have come down to when you have one or even two fortresses of redemption.

 

I couldn't disagree more. I really like the idea of fortification. Just as some ppl love to scale up their tank/MCs etc and other love flying units. I like the idea that you can field a "tough nut to crack" sort of army rather than just scaling up your weaponry like some folks do. It is just another side of the dice and allows for more dynamic in the game. If your army wasn't able to hold a fortification to re-enact a battle of days gone by, where would the fluffy fun be? I like to hope that in the year 40,000 not every building in the universe is in ruins.

[DanPesci]

Im with Vash and Baulder on this one.

 

Although ive nver run allies or fortifications, I have no problem with people who choose to do so...for me its led to some interesting games..oohhh my flatmate has decided to drop two squads from his last list and take a bastion instead...how am i now going to deal with that...etc etc. 

 

However we may just as easily run a game where we say 'no allies/fortifications' to see how the stan d alone codexes rack up.

 

One thing i would say is that i much prefer it if someone has a good fluff excuse or proxy idea to use them (such as 13th company, kaerls etc as noted by vash), and isnt just playing a taudar list cos theyve read online that it will beat everything easily (chances are, theyre not the kind of person ill be sitting round with, having a few beers and playing 40k with anyway)

 

The other good thing to allies is that it means if you particularly like a set of models...you don't necessarily have to spend hundreds of pounds putting together a full army just to field those models.

 

End of the day, you dont like allies/fortifications, dont play with them, and organise a tournament yourself where they aren't allowed. Hiring a space and several tables for a weekend aint that hard ;)

[tjdudey]

Im with Vash and Baulder on this one.

Although ive nver run allies or fortifications, I have no problem with people who choose to do so...for me its led to some interesting games..oohhh my flatmate has decided to drop two squads from his last list and take a bastion instead...how am i now going to deal with that...etc etc.

However we may just as easily run a game where we say 'no allies/fortifications' to see how the stan d alone codexes rack up.

One thing i would say is that i much prefer it if someone has a good fluff excuse or proxy idea to use them (such as 13th company, kaerls etc as noted by vash), and isnt just playing a taudar list cos theyve read online that it will beat everything easily (chances are, theyre not the kind of person ill be sitting round with, having a few beers and playing 40k with anyway)

The other good thing to allies is that it means if you particularly like a set of models...you don't necessarily have to spend hundreds of pounds putting together a full army just to field those models.

End of the day, you dont like allies/fortifications, dont play with them, and organise a tournament yourself where they aren't allowed. Hiring a space and several tables for a weekend aint that hard

Dont get me wrong, I have no issue with others using allies, and I don't mind fortifications at all,

my personal choice is not to field allies with my wolves.

I would never complain about someone else using them

[Baulder]

fair enough, it is really a personal preference thing. The most important thing is that provide the optional stuff (allies/forts etc.) don't become essentials then they work well. Soon as you're in a situation where you must take the optional extras then it becomes less about choice. My understanding with wolves drawbacks (if you can call them that) is that we're out of date a bit. Fingers crossed  that the rumour mills are right and we get an update to be more in-line with the options available elsewhere.

[Leif Bearclaw]

 I also have a small detachment of Imperial Guard allies that are modeled as Skaerls, the armed serfs of the Space Wolves.

How did you go about modelling these?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally, I agree with you. I dislike the introduction of allies (only real exception to this is CSM and daemons, but they used to the same codex, which is probably why I give them a pass) and fortifications this edition. I think that you shouldn't need to go to universal, generic buildings or another codex to play the game. The codex of your army should be enough.

 

The codex of our army is enough, Fortifications and Allies are not "must" takes. Sure a lack of AA can be irksome but there are ways around that. Allies and fortifications simply add more options and flexibility into how you want to field your army.

True enough, I say 'must' primarily because I'm heartily sick of ADLs, and that colours my perception of the entire Fortifications concept.

 

You make some good points in this thread, but at its heart these new additions simply feel 'off' to me. While I may well be overly pessimistic, it seems to be moving 40k towards a degree of homogenisation that I don't really like.

 

Allies was a good idea in principle, CSM-Daemon combos, a true 'Army of the Imperium' are good ideas that aren't strange by the fluff, but I feel it was executed really badly. At lower points games (less than 2000), trying to build a proper pair of 'mini armies', which I think was the intended idea, isn't really viable in many cases, as you don't have enough points available to do it properly. This seems to favour ally contingents of bare bones troops and (sometimes) HQ, then the twisted things from the dex you're allying to (Heldrake, Riptide, Commander Crisis Team, CS relic using Chaos character, Vendettas etc.). Plus the whole 'self ally' thing with SMs and supplement dexes doesn't really sit right with me. At 2000 and up, a better system would be just taking one FOC from one dex, and another from the second dex, but I don't know how improve the way it works in smaller games.

 

Additionally, the allies matrix itself could have been implemented a lot better imo. Currently its very forgiving, with most match ups being possible, with very little downside. I'd prefer to see more 'come the apocalypse' match ups, or the penalty for desperate allies being more of a penalty. While I have seen this rule lose people games, it doesn't really go far enough in representing the match ups that, fluff-wise, are astronomically rare and unlikely (Tau-Daemons, Orks-DAs, DE-Sisters). Maybe have 'One Eye Open' be done on LoS instead of 6'', or something closer to the fantasy Orc animosity.

[Valerian]

As I've said before, 6e is the edition of "anything goes."  Some folks really enjoy it, but for those of us that don't play that often it has gotten exceptionally complicated, with the official incorporation of everything Forge World, dataslates, supplements, primary and secondary detachments, allies, and fortifications.  I know, I know, GW is just giving us what many have been clamoring for, but to me it is too much, and the old boundaries of the game have largely evaporated.  I like games in which all you need to play is the core Rulebook, your codex, and your opponent brings his/her codex; I hate having to try to manage an entire library of books and associated documents to know what everyone has, and what everything does.

 

So, no, I'm not a fan of allies.  I like knowing that there are strengths and vulnerabilities/weaknesses associated with every army, and what you've got to choose from in your codex, is what you've got, for better or worse.  Certainly, we've always had the opportunity to play 2v2 games, and Vash pointed out that there have been whole tournaments dedicated to that style of play, and that, of course, is perfectly acceptable.  However, the existence of that method/style of game doesn't mean that it has to be the new standard/default.

 

If it were up to me, I'd have developed the game such that there were no allies in standard games with very few specific exceptions (e.g. Chaos Marines and Daemons), where the advantages of allowing it clearly outweigh the disadvantages, and allowing an alliance of multiple codices is simpler and less apt for conflicts than trying to incorporate redundant Daemon units within the Chaos Space Marines codex.  Despite a few clearly defined exceptions, the standard would be one codex per player in a typical game.

 

For fortifications, I'd include them in the codices, with each army having their own, mostly unique, handful of choices.  Certainly, there would be some duplication of options among the Imperial factions, but again this would lead to the same overarching design mechanic of "what you've got in codex is what you've got to play with."

 

Anyway, these are simply my preferences, and obviously I understand that many of you won't agree with my position on this.  

 

Regards,

 

V

[Grey Mage]

I dont do Allies for my wolves. I dont feel we need any, I dont like how theyve affected the game, and I enjoy being able to hold all the rules I need in a single book.

If I did take allies, they might be some IG, in rather large games it would seem appropriate. Though at that point I might as well look at my opponent and say 'how do you feel about playing a 4k apoc game good sir?'

I do like fortifications, though I find the aegis defenseline is undercosted and may be one of the largest problems with this edition of the game right off the bat. I do however like the concept of Void Shield Generators, and intend on making one soon.

[Rift Blade]

I have no problem with things so far except that simple fact that GW could alleviate a lot of player hate on our part simply by FAQ us Flakk missiles. Everything else is what you might see on a battlefield & I take great pride in the fact that I usually give my opponents a run for their money even if I don't have some of the new fancy toys. AS for Allies, I started in 2nd ed & you were allowed allies then so it's nothing really new. I do agree with Valerian to an extent on fortifications. There should be some race specific ones. I have not broken down as of yet & played with allies but I have some I could. Just to stubborn believing that a few good heroes in the right spot can get things done.

 

Appropriate allies to me would be other SM(I so want to field the Contemptor Mortis & the Conversion Beamer Contemptor) as well as Imperial Guard(Wolf's Dragoons of course) but my wallet can't handle it so I avoid it. One Army is bad enough! LOL!!!

[Lord Ragnarok]

Hi All,

 

I am a fanatical wolves player, and I hate the idea of 'dirtying' my army with any kind of ally, but I would like to know the communities opinion.

 

I know with the lack of AA and Fliers, they can be popular,

 

Who likes what allies (Fluff wise, who is the most appropriate?).

 

Tom

I think allying is fine whether it's for angling on a game advantage or from a fluff point. Depends on the player and their group. For me, it's fluff first. I love the fluff story potential of allying. Whether it's through creative modeling or actually using two or more codices or data slates. And since it is MY army nobody can tell me it's wrong. :)

[Rune_Priest_Rhapsody]

As someone who plays from a very strong fluff and or casual direction, I have no issues with allies. I like the fact that I can forge a fun narrative in a game or campaign. But I will say that sticking to mankind for this purpose is imperative for me, as I cannot see any sane son of Russ fighting alongside xenos. With IG, or whatever they're called now, I rationalize them as Aettguard. Defenders of the Fang and the meat shields of the Sky Warriors. And you can think of thousands of reasons why other chapters of Astartes would go to war alongside the Space Wolves.

 

I have a small UM force, an Imperial Knight and soon some little humans to go along with my wolves, if I need or want to field them. To be honest, I rarely ally anything with my wolves as I can field a lot of points worth and it keeps the army pure.

 

End of Line

[ORKILL]

I have a friend that runs Eldar with SW allies. His SW contingent includes Njal. I tease him constantly about taking away his "wolf card".

[Skeld Ironthews]

I like the idea of allies, personally I wouldn't use the more outlandish ones like Eldar etc.

 

However; most of the time I don't have the points spare from picking things from my Vlka to spend on anything else.

 

At the end of the day it's your army to do what you want with.

[d@n]

I find it hard enought to get the units I want into my army from the wolf codex, most of the time. I have been toying with the idea of using the forge world space shark, chapter tactics as blood claws . Cheaper points for better rules, using the same models, it seems sensible. Plus there's a few units, I think would plug gaps nicely mostly the anti flyer and fliers. As soon as I saw the massive gun on the hunter/stalker tank I had the idea of mounting a thunder wolf pelt on it and I would also like to make the ultimate Zimmer frame in long fang centurions.

[Thunderhawk3015]

I would be fine with allies if so many people around me were not abusing the allies rules. I like the concept, especially with my chaos having some demons on the loose every once in while. Where issues start are the downright stupid combos people are running for "normal" games in my area. If people were not so bent on that maybe my opinion would be different but currently i think allies/extra force org, formations should not be alowed untill 2500+.

[Fytharin]

The only reason I've been looking at putting together some allies has been for 2000 point games or the 2 headed apoc games that have been getting played lately in my area. I don't like allies (or fliers for that matter) in casual games or for lower points, it just seems like it's too easy of a win button for those codex's that have it. But once you hit 2000pts is when I feel like you're gaming with a more advanced group of people who are better prepared and wanting to face the challenges that allies or dataslates bring to the table. That's when I start to see models from outside the codex being brough in so that's why I've been looking to counter it. Just my two cents.