Are allies a faux pas ?

[Finkmilkana]

I'm old enough to remember when even in the tournament scene WAAC players were really frowned upon. Now its easier than ever to basically netlist something and you have a larger portion of the community saying "yea ok" and generally the same people upset that its ok.

 

I feel that is a general thing that just came with the easy (and for many people natural) access to the internet. Even 10-15 years ago people didn’t immediately look for tutorials etc when they are new to something/have questions, today it’s a normal fact of everyday life in all areas. So even people that do not necessarily want to WAAC and maybe don’t know the game that well often end up with ”netlists” just because they googled “how to play X”. In times past, people at best asked friends/their local community.

[PeteySödes]

 

I'm old enough to remember when even in the tournament scene WAAC players were really frowned upon. Now its easier than ever to basically netlist something and you have a larger portion of the community saying "yea ok" and generally the same people upset that its ok.

I feel that is a general thing that just came with the easy (and for many people natural) access to the internet. Even 10-15 years ago people didn’t immediately look for tutorials etc when they are new to something/have questions, today it’s a normal fact of everyday life in all areas. So even people that do not necessarily want to WAAC and maybe don’t know the game that well often end up with ”netlists” just because they googled “how to play X”. In times past, people at best asked friends/their local community.

 

 

Yea absolutely true! My other point though which may essentially be the same thing as a result of the rapid meta shifting release schedule was just how I never really ran into people who jumped army to army to the degree thats almost common now.

 

It just makes me sad since I'm a hobbyist first and comp player second. I don't mind going to tournaments and going 50/50 if i was able to see some really cool armies and try for the hobby skill type awards.

 

I definitely don't want to push my world view onto people but I for sure get feels bads when i play someone who slapped together a WAAC army with the 3 color min and just kinda doesn't care as long as their winning. But i'm seeing more and more of that.

[Panzer]

To be honest there aren't nearly as many people looking up lists on the internet as some make it sound.

The forum community is relatively small and the army list sections in forums is one of the less active ones as well. People just generally talk more about what's good instead of what's cool in general threads. And even that is only half true since even while I give lots of feedback about what's good when someone asks about it it doesn't mean that my own lists are min maxed to the end. I still take lots of less efficient units like Crisis Suits (before CA18) but I'd never ever advice someone on the forum to take Crisis if he struggles to win.

If you want to read about what's cool then army project threads are great since there the talk is almost never about what's actually good but general threads aren't like that usually.

[PeteySödes]

To be honest there aren't nearly as many people looking up lists on the internet as some make it sound.

The forum community is relatively small and the army list sections in forums is one of the less active ones as well. People just generally talk more about what's good instead of what's cool in general threads. And even that is only half true since even while I give lots of feedback about what's good when someone asks about it it doesn't mean that my own lists are min maxed to the end. I still take lots of less efficient units like Crisis Suits (before CA18) but I'd never ever advice someone on the forum to take Crisis if he struggles to win.

If you want to read about what's cool then army project threads are great since there the talk is almost never about what's actually good but general threads aren't like that usually.

 

Im actually almost excluding the B&C just because we have a lot of really passionate people here that really model what i love about the hobby. If you listen to the larger podcasts, looking at youtube, and looking through BCP data it paints a pretty clear picture.

 

Even if it's not netlists and just massive parallel thinking the finger can still be squarely pointed at the way allies are implemented right now. The stats on how many people showed up with effectively the same army to NOVA is just crazy to me.

[Trevak Dal]

I love the idea of allies... but I believe they should make sense. Obviously most Chaos should ally with Chaos, Imperium with Imperium, etc... but there's exceptions of Legions or Chapters or what have you that despise one another or other races like Blood Axes allying with almost anyone, Kroot mercs (fingers crossed they get their own Index at least). Most of what I see (outside of my inner circle of fluff bunnies) is people attempting to just throw together whatever armies they can to beat the tar out of whoever is across the board from them.

Really though, in a straight competitive mode, like ultimate Tryhard mode like itc, why they keep faction restrictions at all is beyond me.

 

When you got guys playing "chaos marine" armies with, what, two chaos marines in them and 10 bucket loads of lock-in-a-sock boys, and ultimate competition is the goal, why have lines? Open it up I say and save the fluff for narrative and normal points play with itc being anything can side with anything and so long as it's your army all psychic powers and strats can work on your guys.

 

Let the galaxy burn as it were.

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

To be honest there aren't nearly as many people looking up lists on the internet as some make it sound.

The forum community is relatively small and the army list sections in forums is one of the less active ones as well. People just generally talk more about what's good instead of what's cool in general threads. And even that is only half true since even while I give lots of feedback about what's good when someone asks about it it doesn't mean that my own lists are min maxed to the end. I still take lots of less efficient units like Crisis Suits (before CA18) but I'd never ever advice someone on the forum to take Crisis if he struggles to win.

If you want to read about what's cool then army project threads are great since there the talk is almost never about what's actually good but general threads aren't like that usually.

Im actually almost excluding the B&C just because we have a lot of really passionate people here that really model what i love about the hobby. If you listen to the larger podcasts, looking at youtube, and looking through BCP data it paints a pretty clear picture.

 

Even if it's not netlists and just massive parallel thinking the finger can still be squarely pointed at the way allies are implemented right now. The stats on how many people showed up with effectively the same army to NOVA is just crazy to me.

I also think it’s become more prevalent because (certainly for me in this edition) it’s much easier to just glance at a units rules and have a pretty good idea if a unit is going to be bad, good or outright OP. It means players have to do less trial and error in their army builds.

 

I don’t know whether it’s the mechanics of 8th, the way the rules are written, the lack of USRs, maybe even it’s just something individual to me or maybe the gap between great units and poor ones is much larger this edition. But it seems a lot easier to put together a very handy list just from reading the codex rather than having to actually buy models and test them.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

GW did a terrible job with allies the past two editions but now it’s more reasonable.

[TheTrans]

 

 

To be honest there aren't nearly as many people looking up lists on the internet as some make it sound.

The forum community is relatively small and the army list sections in forums is one of the less active ones as well. People just generally talk more about what's good instead of what's cool in general threads. And even that is only half true since even while I give lots of feedback about what's good when someone asks about it it doesn't mean that my own lists are min maxed to the end. I still take lots of less efficient units like Crisis Suits (before CA18) but I'd never ever advice someone on the forum to take Crisis if he struggles to win.

If you want to read about what's cool then army project threads are great since there the talk is almost never about what's actually good but general threads aren't like that usually.

Im actually almost excluding the B&C just because we have a lot of really passionate people here that really model what i love about the hobby. If you listen to the larger podcasts, looking at youtube, and looking through BCP data it paints a pretty clear picture.

 

Even if it's not netlists and just massive parallel thinking the finger can still be squarely pointed at the way allies are implemented right now. The stats on how many people showed up with effectively the same army to NOVA is just crazy to me.

I also think it’s become more prevalent because (certainly for me in this edition) it’s much easier to just glance at a units rules and have a pretty good idea if a unit is going to be bad, good or outright OP. It means players have to do less trial and error in their army builds.

 

I don’t know whether it’s the mechanics of 8th, the way the rules are written, the lack of USRs, maybe even it’s just something individual to me or maybe the gap between great units and poor ones is much larger this edition. But it seems a lot easier to put together a very handy list just from reading the codex rather than having to actually buy models and test them.

 

 

Haha, lack of USR's :P.. we have USR's nowadays, they are just on the sheets with different names. I don't think GW has once only changed 1 on 1 sheet.. so far they seem to have been sweeping changes just as if they are USRs :P.

 

On the allies thing, I absolutely loved when 6th ed dropped and I could use guard and marines together to form a non-FW Tyrant's Legion (as even then people where scared by the FW bogey man), had everything modeled in the correct way. But then I saw the downside to it.. with a guy running a similar list to mine.. with some random salamanders and ultramarines...as ultramarines.. with allied in hodge-podge guard to get the best of both worlds.

 

It really comes down to the opponent and mind sets, some people will have allied :cuss in that looks amazing and builds them sort of theme for their force (and may be a bit OP), but if it looks baller/has amazing backstory or what ever.. go for it! To me this game is about hobby first... this is what it should be, if work was put in, enjoy it!

 

It's when (as said above) some old mate has found the latest gimmick, has some hasitly spray painted stuff.. no named characters, no back fluff, not even similarly done basing..and is using it as a pure gaming mechanic.. well..yeah... go play magic the gathering or something man.. hobby should be important.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

 

 

To be honest there aren't nearly as many people looking up lists on the internet as some make it sound.

The forum community is relatively small and the army list sections in forums is one of the less active ones as well. People just generally talk more about what's good instead of what's cool in general threads. And even that is only half true since even while I give lots of feedback about what's good when someone asks about it it doesn't mean that my own lists are min maxed to the end. I still take lots of less efficient units like Crisis Suits (before CA18) but I'd never ever advice someone on the forum to take Crisis if he struggles to win.

If you want to read about what's cool then army project threads are great since there the talk is almost never about what's actually good but general threads aren't like that usually.

Im actually almost excluding the B&C just because we have a lot of really passionate people here that really model what i love about the hobby. If you listen to the larger podcasts, looking at youtube, and looking through BCP data it paints a pretty clear picture.

 

Even if it's not netlists and just massive parallel thinking the finger can still be squarely pointed at the way allies are implemented right now. The stats on how many people showed up with effectively the same army to NOVA is just crazy to me.

I also think it’s become more prevalent because (certainly for me in this edition) it’s much easier to just glance at a units rules and have a pretty good idea if a unit is going to be bad, good or outright OP. It means players have to do less trial and error in their army builds.

 

I don’t know whether it’s the mechanics of 8th, the way the rules are written, the lack of USRs, maybe even it’s just something individual to me or maybe the gap between great units and poor ones is much larger this edition. But it seems a lot easier to put together a very handy list just from reading the codex rather than having to actually buy models and test them.

 

 

Haha, lack of USR's .. we have USR's nowadays, they are just on the sheets with different names. I don't think GW has once only changed 1 on 1 sheet.. so far they seem to have been sweeping changes just as if they are USRs .

 

On the allies thing, I absolutely loved when 6th ed dropped and I could use guard and marines together to form a non-FW Tyrant's Legion (as even then people where scared by the FW bogey man), had everything modeled in the correct way. But then I saw the downside to it.. with a guy running a similar list to mine.. with some random salamanders and ultramarines...as ultramarines.. with allied in hodge-podge guard to get the best of both worlds.

 

It really comes down to the opponent and mind sets, some people will have allied in that looks amazing and builds them sort of theme for their force (and may be a bit OP), but if it looks baller/has amazing backstory or what ever.. go for it! To me this game is about hobby first... this is what it should be, if work was put in, enjoy it!

 

It's when (as said above) some old mate has found the latest gimmick, has some hasitly spray painted stuff.. no named characters, no back fluff, not even similarly done basing..and is using it as a pure gaming mechanic.. well..yeah... go play magic the gathering or something man.. hobby should be important.

 

 

 

Well said!

[Indefragable]

I think Allies get a bad rap lately because from a competitive perspective, there's no reason not to take advantage of them.

 

If there were additional buffs (like secondary chapter tactics or such) to mono-faction armies, then it would be much more even keel: do you want to shore up the weakness in your primary faction by taking a ying to your yang? Or just double down and go whole-hog on the yang? If either option were equally viable it would be a much different story. But right now it's all ying all the time.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I play in leagues and am one of the few doing okay playing Marines. I am playing three factions, one is Blood Angels which is by far my favorite faction. My army has some theme but it’s not a fluff bunny list.

[Droz_64]

Off-topic (ish), but what are the Lucky 32 mentioned in the OP?

[Shield-Captain MacGucci]

3x10 guardsmen

2x1 company commander

 

Currently the cheapest battalion you can make at 185 points and 5cp

[N1SB]

Off-topic (ish), but what are the Lucky 32 mentioned in the OP?

 

 

3x10 guardsmen

2x1 company commander

 

Currently the cheapest battalion you can make at 185 points and 5cp

 

And the Astra Militarum have a Warlord Trait, Grand Strategist, that lets you refund the command point on a 5+ every time you spend one!  It's really good!

 

It's so good that I've really been thinking about this topic.  It's a good topic to consider now, after all but the Genestealer Cult Codex has been out and a 2nd Chapter Approved.  Interesting points, everyone.

[CaptainMarsh]

You are limited to only one such ability and refunding one CP a turn, IIRC. Then again I played against type and never took the CP regeneration stuff

[Dracos]

I miss the original Demonhunter Codex. I really liked using Stormtroopers and later Guard with my Grey Knights. I'd use a loyal 32 tody if they had updated Tallarn models. I had plastic Cadians but what I want is true scale human infantry that don't look like a caricature of a real Marine oorah.

[Lexington]

I think Allies are great in concept, but don’t love the way they work in 8th. Some armies are restricted to their own Codex, while the Imperials can ladle our soup like nobody’s business.

 

As for the CP, I maintain that CP generated by a Detachment should only be able to be spent on Strats of the Detachment’s Type. It’d solve lots of problems with the game.

[D3L]

Same as named special characters to me, they have no place on the tabletop

[Beams]

Same as named special characters to me, they have no place on the tabletop

I mean, that would be fine if GW didn't explicitly make armies to be allies.

 

Like, sorry, the Sisters of Silence don't have an HQ or troops, so your basically suggesting that if you bought them, you don't get to use them? Same with assassin's.

[Dracos]

Not that I totally agree with him but I think his point may (?) have been pointed toward tournament play as opposed to beer and pretzel play. Super heavies and honestly characters I always have had unbalanced effects on game play. Special characters can be such a freakishly effective force multiplier in additions as far back as 2nd that bringing them to a take all comers scene has always been an issue. You use to have to ask your opponents permission to use them. Think on that. They do their best but Bobby G kept getting his points nerf because of this issue and the Ynarri are along the same lines. I’m shocked the Loyal 32 haven’t been hit. Happily shocked but still.

 

I loved my Demonhunters and mixing Grey Knights with Guard back in the day but I am not a proponent of today’s soup in tournament games. If a Codex can’t compete on its own ... then fix it. Improve the rules, adjust the points, do what it takes. I played Eldar for a couple years and gave them up. Too easy to win with even without allies. I feel for the Orcs and Necrons and other codex that can’t ally and cherry pick from the best units. It’s fone for fun with buddies who know each other but putting a Knight with Guard and a Custodes character in a tournament against a Tau players ... party foul ;)

 

Understand. I have Space Marines and I have Knights in a pile of shame waiting their turn and one day I’ll probably get my hand back in the Guard because it’s fluffy as hell. It’s fun. It’s just not fair competition.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Special characters are off topic in regard to this discussion .

[Interrogator Stobz]

I love allies, they really add a certain character to armies.

But I’m in the same camp as those here who don’t like CP abuse. That’s where the main problem lays, alliance forces should get less CPs not more, the command and control outside the normal structure is harder than within and that should be reflected. And smaller ( unit numbers) armies should get more CP than large ones as they are more tactically agile.

My 2c

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

GW has really toned down abusing CPs with the last FAQ. I have to disagree that armies with overall less units should get more CP - that is just as open to abuse.

[Panzer]

GW has really toned down abusing CPs with the last FAQ. I have to disagree that armies with overall less units should get more CP - that is just as open to abuse.

 

I lol'd.

[Interrogator Stobz]

Me too.

 

The points drop mean I can now add the Loyal 32 as Allies