Allies - Likey or No Likey?

[YorkNecromancer]

Well?

[Mr Mystery]

Long as there's a narrative I'm happy!

[Archon Charybdis]

I don't see an "I like allies - all of the above."

[Dimitrios]

I do like the concept of allies and I like the fluff elements they bring in; the Ultramar planitary defence force, Imperial Guard bolstering a besieged Fortress Monestary, Chaos working with Ork Freebooters to loot an imperial world.

My main issue with it however is that it is too open for abuse and doesnt really introduce a real penality. I appreciate the constraint comes in the form of the FOC restriction but this is too easy to circumnavigate and it allows for some truely unbalanced combinations.

If it were up to me I would have put in a points cost restriction to ensure that allies only consisted of 25% of any army value.

[Katharon]

Several of the decisions made in organizing which army is what level of allies with whom were severely skewed. Much as we discussed in the DE/E Troop choice thread.

[YorkNecromancer]

I don't see an "I like allies - all of the above."

That's what the comment boxes are for. :rolleyes:


Much as we discussed in the DE/E Troop choice thread.

Well, that was the inspiration for this thread. :)


Several of the decisions made in organizing which army is what level of allies with whom were severely skewed.


Specific examples? (Genuinely curious, not trolling. Again, hence this thread. :) )

[silashand]

I don't see an "I like allies - all of the above."

I need one that says "I dislike allies - all of the above." :)

Despite all the claims to the contrary by some players, 99.9% of all the allies I have seen are nothing but the most effective element the player can find. Has nothing to do with maintaining the backstory or forging a narrative. It's all about ways to build the most effective combo possible and violate the force org chart restrictions. Allies are great from a fluff perspective, but they are the worst thing to happen to this game from a gameplay one. JMO...

[YorkNecromancer]

I need one that says "I dislike allies - all of the above." :)

That's what the comment boxes are for. :rolleyes:

[Lexington]

Love allies as a concept, but they've obviously not been handled too well in the execution. Toning down the advantages gained by Battle Brothers status would go a long way towards fixing this.

[Katharon]

I'd have put this choice in the poll: "Good -- but needs to be more fluffy." That's my view. Here's what the Matrix would look like, in my mind, if they tried to be as close to the fluff as it could be.

Crazy Fluff Allies Matrix Idea (http://imageshack.com/a/img585/3939/zhg4.png)

[Dlatrex]

I am a Nids player, and i almost selected the last option, but even with the Tyranids getting no love (which makes perfect sense) I think that Allies are great both from a story making perspective, and from a gameplay perspective.

[Pssyche]

Despite all the claims to the contrary by some players, 99.9% of all the allies I have seen are nothing but the most effective element the player can find. Has nothing to do with maintaining the backstory or forging a narrative. It's all about ways to build the most effective combo possible and violate the force org chart restrictions.

That is EXACTLY my experience of allies.
So far, I have never once felt the urge to ally my Eldar with anyone.

[spaceman91]

I like allies but have never felt the need to take them as my marines can deal with most things on their own.

[Anggul]

Good if the person is using them to make a cool, fluffy army, bad if the person is just being a dick with them.

Can we put this to bed yet and stop asking it yet?

[Vangrail]

I like allies , i really do. Just wish it was a bit more restricting on who could ally with who. Like there should not be necrons and grey knights. I just with more people made armies that made sense. Or actually tried modeling in a theme. I hate seeing chaos then completely normal guard walking with them.

[Cactus]

"Suffer not the alien…"

I wouldn't mind them if the allies chart were modified a bit; there are some really unlikely combos out there.

[Houghten]

That's what the comment boxes are for. :rolleyes:


That's what the comment boxes are for. :rolleyes:

Except it stops you from getting the proper numbers on your poll.

[robosmurf]

I think they need to be better written and still not allowed to break the FOC. I played a necron flying circus with an allied chaos detachment of a naked chaos lord, 10 cultist and a heldrake. I let him know it was dumb plus it was casual game night.

[YorkNecromancer]

Except it stops you from getting the proper numbers on your poll.

Well, you be sure and let me know once they've recoded the poll feature to have more than ten options. :rolleyes:

[silashand]

The way things are going with allies, the new formations, etc. they may as well just remove the force org chart altogether and just tell people to bring whatever they like from whatever army they want. It's what it's moving to anyway...

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

allies can be a good thing its just their implementation that is wrong IMO. There are some combinations that just do not work and just do not make sense. If they were tweaked or amended then there wouldn't really be much of an issue as some combinations are fluffy others do not make any sense to me what so ever.

[TB0N3]

I need one that says "I dislike allies - all of the above." :)

Despite all the claims to the contrary by some players, 99.9% of all the allies I have seen are nothing but the most effective element the player can find. Has nothing to do with maintaining the backstory or forging a narrative. It's all about ways to build the most effective combo possible and violate the force org chart restrictions. Allies are great from a fluff perspective, but they are the worst thing to happen to this game from a gameplay one. JMO...

This.

[Vautravers]

I don't see the option

"I like allies because I started playing in the 2nd. edition and missed them a lot" :D

[phil035]

personally I think that allies should have a good reason for working together. though the conversions people have come up with are amazing

[Lucidum]

Sometimes they are awesome and fluff-driven, sometimes they’re complete cheese BS for winning tournaments. It really depends on who’s running what. Imperial Guard with Space Marines? Sure, makes sense and works great. Chaos Space Mariens with Necrons? …No, just….just no.

[Maelstorm]

For fun pick-up and planned games they can be a great deal of fun for both players.

For tournaments - Allies are so full of broken cheese in grey plastic that it makes me a sad panda for the state of 40k.

Your mileage may vary (YMMV)...

[Lord Byte]

I like Allies BUT remove the bloody Allies chart, it's not fluffy at all (nor is it balanced). Just allow anyone to ally anyone and make up the fluffy reason why. I can think up several reasons for every possible combo. (SM and CSM? Traitor marines!)

[FTGT]

I had to choose the Tyranid one because it kinda made me laugh. In reality I generally like allies. In not sure I can get behind it being fluffy all the time, but pretty much every other reason.

[Archon Charybdis]

Crazy Fluff Allies Matrix Idea (http://imageshack.com/a/img585/3939/zhg4.png)

So wait, Sisters are Come The Apocalypse with Eldar, but Desperate with Dark Eldar? Hate the witch, but be Desperate for some of that depraved hanky panky?

[Nabterayl]

I have mixed feelings about the matrix. On the one hand, it does feel very shaded towards, "We allow it if anybody can come up with any conceivable situation in which these two factions might do anything other than shoot each other on sight." It doesn't feel "unfluffy" to me so much as casting its net very widely, and I understand that when most people talk about "fluffy" they mean "in a typical scenario." The allies matrix clearly doesn't confine itself to the typical scenarios.

On the other hand, when my group of friends started playing in early 5th edition, many of them immediately came up with fairly far-fetched ideas for the specific force they wanted to play. Sometimes it was based around combining the aesthetics of specific models or model ranges, and sometimes it was inspired by messing around with the typical lore to deliberately do something atypical. These weren't veterans, and in many cases they didn't even know how to play the game when they got these ideas. We generally allowed it, even though it wasn't "actually" legal 5th edition. So the allies matrix was actually written exactly to cater to people like my friends and their desire to tell stories of outlandish, unnatural alliances.

[Archon Charybdis]

On the other hand, when my group of friends started playing in early 5th edition, many of them immediately came up with fairly far-fetched ideas for the specific force they wanted to play. Sometimes it was based around combining the aesthetics of specific models or model ranges, and sometimes it was inspired by messing around with the typical lore to deliberately do something atypical. These weren't veterans, and in many cases they didn't even know how to play the game when they got these ideas. We generally allowed it, even though it wasn't "actually" legal 5th edition. So the allies matrix was actually written exactly to cater to people like my friends and their desire to tell stories of outlandish, unnatural alliances.

I have something of a similar experience with my group that also started in 5th edition. We'd frequently play large team games, and you'd end up with odd combinations like Eldar and Chaos Marines on a side versus Necrons and Tau. It was a fun sort of meta-game activity to come up with justifications for why these odd pairs would be working together, and likewise for our Apocalypse games. Sometimes these justifications were really tenuous and silly, but sometimes you could come up with an interesting and compelling story for some of the more plausible pairs.

Coming from that background, I have no problem with the Allies matrix. As you mentioned above, it seems more geared for all plausible fluff eventualities, rather than the typical sort of encounter between 40K factions (otherwise really only Chaos and the Imperial Factions would have anything above Desperate Allies). Some of the potential combos are kind of silly, but to say they're unfluffy or there can be no justification is to have a failure of imagination.

[Nabterayl]

I think that a lot of this comes down to context. Like, my friends and I play specific factions of our specific factions. Like, I don't field orks. I don't even field the orks of Waaagh! Blitzkrag, or a specific tribe within Waaagh! Blitzkrag. I field very specific warbands within a specific tribe within a specific Waaagh!. I don't field space marines. I don't field the space marines of the Violet Avatars. I field the 4th battle company of the Violet Avatars. And all the friends in that group I describe similarly have specific stories about their actual armies. We might not have a narrative for every battle we play, but we know exactly who our models are and the strategic situation their parent forces are in. In that kind of context the fluff is made first, in the context of the stories that everybody is else is telling, and that shared authorial responsibility is what keeps people from fielding combinations for which they have no justification. But there are plenty of other valid ways to play 40K that don't have that kind of built-in it-has-to-make-sense brake on the use of allies.

[Katharon]

So wait, Sisters are Come The Apocalypse with Eldar, but Desperate with Dark Eldar? Hate the witch, but be Desperate for some of that depraved hanky panky?

Editing mistake. Should both be CTA with both DE and E.

[Griffotronmachi]

I actually love the concept of allies and they currently work within the force organization framework. What i don't like however is the fluff inconsistencies they create like with the Grey Knights/Necrons option, the Imperial/Orcs option or the Eldar/Dark Eldar option. They completely contradict the established fluff and for me personally, make me really mad when i have to look at this from the other side of the table. I also don't believe that a single instance of two sworn enemies allying together justifies the inclusion of the option to ally these opposing factions in the core rules of the game. Leave it to casual games and apocalypse.

[Nabterayl]

the Imperial/Orcs option or the Eldar/Dark Eldar option.
To be fair, Imperial-Ork alliances have always been a thing. That's straight from the ork codex. Orks are perfectly happy to work as mercenaries as long as you understand their kulture well enough to negotiate with and pay them in ways they value, and there are plenty of reasons why an Imperial commander of one stripe or another would value a semi-tame force of orkish allies.

Eldar/dark eldar is also fluffy as long as you view Codex:Eldar as Codex:Eldar, not Codex:Craftworld Warhost. We've always known that Commorraghans and craftworld-born corsairs will work together. The official warhost of a craftworld might feel differently, but I don't think the eldar codex has ever been meant to represent only the official warhosts of the craftworlds.

[Archon Charybdis]

Even Craftworld.forces will work with DE. There's fluff for Iyandrn, Saim Hann, and Biel Tan all fighting alongside DE.

[Katharon]

Even Craftworld.forces will work with DE. There's fluff for Iyandrn, Saim Hann, and Biel Tan all fighting alongside DE.

Can you give me specific examples?

[Nabterayl]

Can you give me specific examples?
I can think of two.

The eldar codex cites Eliac Zephyrblade, a Saim-Hann autarch, "crippl[ing] the planet's industrial zones before leaving Gnosis Prime to a cruel and lonely fate at the hands of his Dark Eldar allies" on page 22.

The dark eldar codex cites dark eldar coming to the aid of Iyanden against Waaagh! Rekkfist on page 23: "Just as all seems lost, the Wraithkind Kabal and the Cult of the Flayed Hand burst through the webway portal at the Craftworld's rear. Fighting alongside Iyanden's Aspect Warriors and their Ghost Warrior allies, the Dark Eldar drive off the Orks. When asked by Iyanden's Council of Seers as to why they intervened, the Dark Eldar reply that they find Iyanden's angst-ridden forays into the world of necromancy extremely entertaining."

[Nabterayl]

As to orks fighting alongside the Imperium, page 15 of the ork codex says:


They trade openly with the Imperium, parley with the foe and will even consider retreating from battle if faced with insurmountable odds. ...

In fact, most of the Blood Axes' reputation is undeserved. True, they have made the most contact with the forces of the Imperium, occasionally fighting as mercenaries and making extensive use of Imperial war materiel, but then every Ork can see the funny side of extorting weapons from human planets only to use them against their former owners.
and again, on the same page:


Should a human ever be caught trying to swindle a Blood Axe, he will be hacked to death where he stands.
Both of those indicate that orks dealing with and fighting alongside humans is a fairly regular occurrence.

[Katharon]

I can think of two.

The eldar codex cites Eliac Zephyrblade, a Saim-Hann autarch, "crippl[ing] the planet's industrial zones before leaving Gnosis Prime to a cruel and lonely fate at the hands of his Dark Eldar allies" on page 22.

The dark eldar codex cites dark eldar coming to the aid of Iyanden against Waaagh! Rekkfist on page 23: "Just as all seems lost, the Wraithkind Kabal and the Cult of the Flayed Hand burst through the webway portal at the Craftworld's rear. Fighting alongside Iyanden's Aspect Warriors and their Ghost Warrior allies, the Dark Eldar drive off the Orks. When asked by Iyanden's Council of Seers as to why they intervened, the Dark Eldar reply that they find Iyanden's angst-ridden forays into the world of necromancy extremely entertaining."

The first example is of an autarch who seems to have conquered or crippled an Imperial world for no real reason, acting as a reaver or plunderer. To imagine that such a character would have Dark Eldar ties or assistance in some manner is easy to believe. Hardly the kind of alliance that Battle Brothers is suppose to be demonstrative of, wouldn't you say?

The second example is also another kind of lesser, momentary alliance. The Dark Eldar Kabal and the Cult in question must have gained something by their assistance of the Iyanden force -- perhaps unconsciously pushing them towards further necrotic research, or even a descent into the hedonistic ways of Commorragh.

These types of alliances seem, to me, to only warrant "Allies of Convenience" at best, or "Desperate Allies" at worst. Nothing that would suit the appellate of "Battle Brothers."

[Nabterayl]

The first example is of an autarch who seems to have conquered or crippled an Imperial world for no real reason, acting as a reaver or plunderer. To imagine that such a character would have Dark Eldar ties or assistance in some manner is easy to believe. Hardly the kind of alliance that Battle Brothers is suppose to be demonstrative of, wouldn't you say?
Well, no, I wouldn't. Gnosis Prime is claimed by Saim-Hann as an eldar world. We've had this story from at least two different sources now (Codex:Eldar and Planetstrike), and the whole campaign was clearly planned with the assistance of the dark eldar from the beginning. That definitely says "battle brothers" to me.


The second example is also another kind of lesser, momentary alliance. The Dark Eldar Kabal and the Cult in question must have gained something by their assistance of the Iyanden force -- perhaps unconsciously pushing them towards further necrotic research, or even a descent into the hedonistic ways of Commorragh.
That's entirely possible, but they still fought "alongside" the forces of Iyanden. The allies matrix describes levels of coordination, not motives.

I've always felt that Blizzard does a really good job of illustrating the thinking that I believe underlies the allies matrix. The underlying question is not, "How much do you like each other?" but, "When a third party threatens both you and someone you hate, how do the two of you respond?" Consider the Mists of Pandaria trailer. The orc and the human do not like each other. They are survivors of a sea battle, shipwrecked on an unknown land, and they immediately begin to hunt each other. When an unknown third party enters the fight against both of them, they stop fighting. That elevates them to Desperate Allies, right there. They proceed to fight against the third party together, though they don't actually coordinate their attacks. That's Allies of Convenience. When that doesn't work and they realize that **** has gotten real, the human hands the orc his makeshift spear and they attack in concert. That's Battle Brothers. But they're still going to go back to fighting each other later.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvYXoyxLv64

[phreakachu]

I like allies , i really do. Just wish it was a bit more restricting on who could ally with who. Like there should not be necrons and grey knights. I just with more people made armies that made sense. Or actually tried modeling in a theme. I hate seeing chaos then completely normal guard walking with them.
Indeed. Space wolves should have "Desparate Allies" bit with ANYTHING inquisition... Grimnar simply does not like those dudes, and vice-versa.

[Blackcloud6]

I like the Allies concept very much. It allow one to get a lot of different things on the table and you can build a complimenting force.

[Aspire to Glory]

I'd have put this choice in the poll: "Good -- but needs to be more fluffy." That's my view. Here's what the Matrix would look like, in my mind, if they tried to be as close to the fluff as it could be.

Crazy Fluff Allies Matrix Idea (http://imageshack.com/a/img585/3939/zhg4.png)

I noticed that you kept the TauDar best bros haha

[Katharon]

I noticed that you kept the TauDar best bros haha

Of any two separate races the Tau and the Eldar seem the most likely to cooperate on an (almost) even playing field.

[YorkNecromancer]

By cooperate, do you mean "ruthlessly exploit" versus "naively acquiesce"? :)

"Oh, absolutely, we Eldar are all about the Greater Good. By which we mean the survival of our race. If you'd like to send all your wonderful meat shiel... I'm sorry, where are my manners? You highly trained, professional soldiers off to face those Tyranids? Oh, we'll absolutely back you up."

Eldar. Manipulative *******s without exception.

[Nabterayl]

Well, to be fair, they'd probably trip over each other trying to get the other to be their meatshields. When the Tau say you can serve in the armies of the Empire, they don't mean you can be part of the fire caste, or that you get fancy battlesuits, or even necessarily Tau gear to fight with.

"We're glad to hear that you share our conception of the Greater Good. Now, seeing as your forces excel at close quarters combat, why don't you just deploy ... oh, here. We'll be back here. What? Oh, providing fire support, absolutely. Of course."

[YorkNecromancer]

I like this idea so much, I almost want to run it. It kind of needs a converted HQ of a Tau Commander and a Farseer linking arms and smiling forced grins and giving the thumbs up for the sake of the PR campaign.