Allied forces etiquette?

[Mr Mystery]

Afternoon.

Just read a thread about a specific allies situation, where a Dark Angel player wants to field Centurions.

Having contributed to that specific instance, I want to explore peoples general attitudes to the fielding of allied contingents, including your local 'do's and dont's'

Personally, I have't used allies. No real reason for it, other than I just haven't got round to really figuring out the rules for it. Plus, as a Necron player I don't feel I need any.

But I know many gamers do use them, and just as many see the whole thing as a bit of an abomination.

How about you? Is it case dependant? Does it matter whether the allies are fluff based, or just power based? Does it depend on the gaming environment? Would you rather see the concept just binned?

Just one caveat. Yes Tyranid players, we know you can't ally. Yes, it does suck. But no reason to go on about it in a thread discussing something which sadly your army can't do.

[Wolfshade]

I don't have an issue with them per se. But there is a problem with space marines allied with a different sort of space marine.

The trouble comes where the allies are all the same colour and have no discernable differences, so it is very hard to know if you are dealing with blue ultramarines or blue salamanders as what chapter tactics the units have. And it can be asy to lose track of it from both a controlling player and the opponent, especially when it comes to choosing target priorities.

The thing with the fluff is that in most cases there is an example, my own bane is common place look at Armageddon 2 & 3, the black crusades etc.

I sometimes thing that the armies have a specific strength and weakness to balance them. Consider the Tau, arguably the best ranged force in the game. Point and click it is often described as, yet get in to CC and they crupple, so imagaine if they could ally with the undesputed masters of CC, tyranids. *shudder*

I think Nids are unable to ally because they are so good at CC the only thing that makes them balanced is their "weakness" in ranged shooting.

[YorkNecromancer]

Love allies. Think they're great. Don't care if they're fluff or power based, because it reminds me of old-skool 40K where everyone could ally with everyone. I love the idea of themed armies, especially the bonkers ones that make no sense (like IG with Blood Axes) because coming up with reasons why these factions who hate each other have allied is great fun. If someone doesn't get why it's fun, fair enough. If you don't like it when Judge Dredd shows up in Gotham, that's your perogative; no judgement here.

If everything's the same colour scheme, well, again, just be clear so everyone knows what is what. My Deathwatch do look spectacularly similar to my Iron Hands, and have the same colours as my Sisters of Battle, so it can be confusing.

As for no Necron allies; madness. Use IG and run an SG1 themed army! Go'auld FTW!

As for Tyranids, the problem to me seems that for reasons unknown to me, people don't do 2000 pts games any more, so Tyranids can't benefit from the double Force Org, which would really help them out a lot. Six Elites units for Tyranids means they don't need Allies ever again.

[Denzark]

In tournaments I expect to see power based combinations. I don't like it, but i expect it - I just prefer people not to try and give some bonkers fluff reason for it. You have taken that combo (in the vast majority of cases) to enhane your wins. You just don't get a bunch of nob bikers following a necron army around. Ever. Neither would imperials ever take stock with xenos unless against some hideous threat - ie chaos or tyranids.

As to colours, I think you saw a thread recently about GW making a guy play his Ravenwing as Whitescars becuase fo the paint scheme. They are being quite clear at their own events that counts-as is verboten. DA in random made up colours is good, DA as an absolute identical codex authorised Whitescars paint scheme is confusing (allegedly).

I think that is fine. The ability to represent mixed imperial forces is however quite good and yes I like tio harken back to 2ed.

I guess best allies ettiquette is be honest. Blood Axe with IG is clearly human bond troops. Nob bikes with 367.5 doom scythes is power gaming.

[euansmith]

The appropriate etiquette is, "Tau always dress to the right".

With the new supplements coming out I think 40k may finally collapse in to a grey goo where all armies are the same, with no weaknesses.

[Popsical]

GW couldn't care less for etiquette of that kind, as it would limit sales. Expect the allies matrix to become more lax over time to accommodate more sales.
They simply let the gamers themselves decide what is acceptable. This is fine in principle but allows for disagreements in groups that can fester and cause bitterness, afterall not everyone can just walk away and find another group. Us hobbyists are just impossible to please it seems.
Personally the allies idea is great for me but the matrix is far too open. Id prefer a far more limited choice. The 2000pt second org is just another sales gimmick also, as GW realised few people wanted to buy 8 troop choices to get a second set of elites etc. Sadly these two things benefit power gamers far more than other types of hobbyists.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

i personally do not mind the concept of allies i do not always want to have to make a full collection just to be able to field a few squads of a particular army. I like that i can ally with an imperial guard to represent my auxilla. Now certian armies are painted with that criteria in mind so on the battle field my auxilla and SoR match up paint scheme wise but you can tell one is a guardsmen and the other is a space marine. Now when you get into combo's to each their own while it will annoy me at times this is a game that literally has aspects that work for everyone. you can be the collector and painter the casual gamer or the competetive gamer. So while i loathe the tau eldar combination i cannot hold it against some one for using them. i just know you wont see my marines allied with dirty tau maybe eldar corsairs but thats even highly unlikely lol.

[Chris Copeland]

It's case dependent. I fully expect to see allies for powerful combos at tournaments. I'm less interested in playing such combos in friendly pick up games. That being said, I LOVE playing against fully painted armies... so if I have a chance to get in a game against someone with a fully-painted army it's unlikely that I'll turn up my nose at anything...

I also love a good narrative. I think a lot of my mates around here feel the same way. It's cool to see an allied force that has a good story behind it (and is fully painted). Examples might include a Sisters/Gray Knights force, a Blood Angels/Dark Angels force (harkening back to the old Angels of Death codex), or even a Tau/IG force (maybe one where the humans have gone over to the the side of the Tau and marked their uniforms and gear as such). I can think of a LOT of allied combos I'd love to see and play against.

[Deadlift]

Going to the original question. I think if someone were to use allies, but wanted to take the time and effort to convert and paint these allies in the same theme as the rest of their army. More power to them. I'd love to see a Dark Angels version of Centurions. Especially if they were painted like Deathwing or had robes, or what ever. If it's a unique conversion but I can still tell what it is then who cares. Its far better to see cool painted stuff, then dodgy grey plastic and if it's done a bit differently. Even better.

[Aventine]

You just don't get a bunch of nob bikers following a necron army around. Ever. ..... Nob bikes with 367.5 doom scythes is power gaming.

I don't know... a Warboss and a Destroyer Lord have pretty similar prerogatives...

[Arkhan Land]

Im for the wackiest of alliances so long as you make an effort to make the following work: Fluff, Models/Representation, Deployment
the deployment part refers to how you actually organize your allies. Just because your Orks and Rines are allies doesnt mean they should setup close to each other and hold hands. I accept that sometimes in a war between several races in pitched battles warlords often accept the mose dire of alliances but they should still be represented as two separate forces engaging against the same opponent.With the exception of course with imperium allies I see most other alliances about two forces arriving on the battlefield seperately and striving for the same outcome, not necessarily bonding together cohesively.

[Anggul]

I think the issue is that allies are used for power gaming silliness far more than they're used for fluffy coolness.

Imperials allying with Imperials, that's pretty much always cool. Chaos and Chaos. Also good. Eldar and Imperial/Tau, yeah, the Eldar are known for turning up and helping others with something because further down the line it benefits them (or in the case of Biel-Tan, the very obvious fact that they don't want Orks messing up the place).

Necrons... I can't really see any allies seeming right with them. Allies of Desperation is fine, but they have far too many Allies of Convenience. They'll ally at a push (a really, really big push) but they really aren't the friendliest of sorts even in the context of 40k. Also they just don't look right next to most other armies. Something about the Necron aesthetic just doesn't gel with other forces, every allied Necrons/whatever army I've seen just looks really out of place and silly in my opinion. They really don't look right next to Orks, that's for sure.

Allies of desperation needs to be more widespread. It means the armies have to work together but still keep their distance from one another, which is exactly what they would do in the backstory.

[Sizzly]

I have to say that I love the allies rule set. Granted, they bite me in the behind when I'm playing with my Dark Eldar (and have to add CSM to make the points) but I totally endorse the concept. I know it's used for power gaming and all that but it allows for some really slick combinations. I mean, without it I couldn't field traitor guard with my CSM army. Without it, my daemons would be kinda flat. I love the rules and whilst I'm not in agreement with all of the pairings (really! Dark Eldar are desperate allies with CSM?!?!? So unfair) I think it's a superb addition to the game. Especially with all the supplements they're releasing.

I say more!

[daboarder]

the allies chart would work much better with a couple of changes.

asymmetry: this would add another layer of interest, for example I can easily see a chaos warband employing dark eldar raiders as mercenaries (convenience) but its hard to imagine dark eldar relying on chaos (desperate)

and the other change would be to make it fairish for everyone.

At the moment the entire chart basically gives the imperium a huge advantage in that they are pretty much BB with half or more of the books and definitely shouldn't be with some of them (BA and cron should be Con at best)

Chaos should have some true battle brothers instead of the glorified convenience allies.

[Ursa]

Chaos by its very nature makes allies very difficult.
As a player I have to say I'm pretty ambivilant about allies. I hate the power gamers but like the fluffers. I personnally got Tau allies for my Marines and even fluffed up my chapters fluff just to incorporate them.
Now as a painter / modeller i love allies! Before the allied rules I didn't buy Tau or Eldar because I didn't want an entire army. I wanted a wraith knight. Just wanted to put together and paint a wraith knight or Riptide. Now they are useful for a game and not just collecting dust.

[Charistoph]

Going to the original question. I think if someone were to use allies, but wanted to take the time and effort to convert and paint these allies in the same theme as the rest of their army. More power to them. I'd love to see a Dark Angels version of Centurions. Especially if they were painted like Deathwing or had robes, or what ever. If it's a unique conversion but I can still tell what it is then who cares. Its far better to see cool painted stuff, then dodgy grey plastic and if it's done a bit differently. Even better.
Sadly, Centurions wouldn't be in the Deathwing, nor would they be wearing the robes of the Inner Circle (at least, none but the Sergeants would), as they are not Veterans, but regular Battle Brothers.

But as others have said, paint it good, and somewhat easily identifiable from your Primary Detachment, and I'm good.



Necrons... I can't really see any allies seeming right with them. Allies of Desperation is fine, but they have far too many Allies of Convenience. They'll ally at a push (a really, really big push) but they really aren't the friendliest of sorts even in the context of 40k. Also they just don't look right next to most other armies. Something about the Necron aesthetic just doesn't gel with other forces, every allied Necrons/whatever army I've seen just looks really out of place and silly in my opinion. They really don't look right next to Orks, that's for sure.

With an in game weapon like the Mind Shackle Scarabs, you can't figure out how they could be "Allies of Convenience" with anyone?

Still, you have a point. My Templars are on better terms with the Eldar and Tau than they are with the Sisters of Battle! Never mind differences of opinions on how to venerate the Emperor, they are at least human have a vested interest in the Imperium, the others are freakin Xenos!

[Aventine]

Necrons... I can't really see any allies seeming right with them. Allies of Desperation is fine, but they have far too many Allies of Convenience. They'll ally at a push (a really, really big push) but they really aren't the friendliest of sorts even in the context of 40k.

I think people are stuck on the old Necron fluff from before the new Codex, when they were lifeless and just wanted to destroy everything (ie boring). The current Necrons are a lot more nuanced; they are trying to rebuild their ancient empire and will do anything they can to further that goal. I like to think of them like ancient armies who would use levies in their armies, though the general and most of the rest of the army would have a silent disdain for them.


...and definitely shouldn't be with some of them (BA and cron should be Con at best)

They're Desperate right now...

[Aspire to Glory]

I agree with those saying that it really depends on someone's intention. Allies are amazing for narrative, campaign type players.

Good: Cool, well thought out alliances. Even the unusual ones. A little effort goes a long way.

Bad: People exploiting the system to power combo like TauDar. Or, even worse, people with a DIY marine chapter who ally with themselves to cherry pick chapter tactics, especially when there are no differences to easily pick what the detachments are.

[Archon Charybdis]

Power gamers abusing crap has been and will always remain a part of the fabric of war gaming. Allies make give WAAC players a new avenue to exploit, but you don't need allies to spam Heldrakes or Wave Serpents. WAAC'ers gonna WAAC. I think the options Allies open up for regular players in terms of fun, fluffy new ways to expand your army are more of a benefit to the hobby as a whole than WAAC players doing their thing is a detriment.

[Cactus]

I don't care for allies myself, but I do expect to be able to see a difference in allies when my opponent is playing with rules from different armies or chapters. As I mentioned in the Dark Angels thread, I think it's only considerate for your opponent to be able to distinguish, at a glance, which rules apply to that unit.

Now that Marines have sub-allies within their own book, players want to take advantage of as many rules as possible, so a lot of bikes are White Scars, Sternguard are Salamanders and Scouts are Ultramarines. However, when the entire army is painted red, players (both players!) will have a tough time remembering which unit has twin-linked meltas and which unit is "vanilla." I know having a uniform paint job is desirable, but there needs to be some sort of token or distinguishing feature just so players know what's what.

[Katharon]

My local store just had one "golden rule" that we tended to follow: "Don't be a douche."

[madlants]

Chaos by its very nature makes allies very difficult.

Waaaaah? (not to be confused with WAAAAAAGH!) Chaos is one of the MOST ally friendly armies, because so many races can be corrupted by Chaos, and Chaos takes so many forms. Just look at Ork allies. They could be corrupted orks (which are canon:cool:), they could be "counts as" mutants using Ork rules, or they could be hired ork mercenaries. Chaos ain't picky!

As for the bigger question, I love the IDEA of allies, but the execution is a bit dodgy. As it is, the allies list seems to be more concerned with catering to power gamers than fluff gamers. Some armies ('rines of all flavors) get a crapton of options, even when it's not really fluff justified, while others (nids, SoBs) got the shaft. Since GW is about whatever sells the most models, I guess c'est la vie. I really don't see why they couldn't let Tyranids take IG allies in some form, to throw a bone to the Genestealer Cultist fans. And having Black Templar be chummy with Eldar and Tau while not having Sisters as Battle Brothers is ridiculous. They're emprah lovin' fanatics!

That said, I'm approaching 1850 pts. with a Daemon/IG army, so I can't complain too much. As a big Lost and the Damned fan, the allies list has been good to me. I'm just happy to be able field a legal army again! But I still feel the 'stealer cultists pain, cause I've been there.

[dirkspair]

I like the idea of allies but like anything it will be abused, and that is something we just have to deal with. I think it is great to finally field proper demons with a CSM army and there are a few cool things in the SM codex that I incorporated into my BA army, like a scout squad led by Telion. It is nice to see people make an effort to fit allies into their army though instead of just slapping stuff together for maximal pwnage.

[chicop76]

It depends. I have problems with Tau and Marines allied together or a Farsight army allied with Orcs. However I have no problems with DA allying with Space Marines. DA seemed to be screwed and taking marine allies fixes their codex up.

All in all I haven't really seen really devestating over the top allainces, CSM and Daemons is rather good alliance. However when using allies some armies really suffer like Tau and Eldar. Tau losses shooting for something else for example. It makes the army more rounded, but it takes away from it's shooting. Like a guard an Ig alliance would seem good, but you are watering down one army with the other.

Which people start takint alliances for key units. Besides Inquisition you don't have many allied elements where the key units would really help out unless it is an HQ and Troop. The restrictions of 1 of each other choice for troop really tone down potential op alliances, like only one Riptide.

That being said joining your faction as a ally is rather bad. For example with Tau they can ally with OShova which can be rather overbearing, or marines with marines for example. I haven't heard too many complaints about eldar with eldar. I think allying with yourself is where it becomes over bearing.

All that being said I wouldn't hesitate to ally, even though I rarely do besides with guard and sisters.