Sunday, June 24, 2012

On Allies

Perhaps the image is fitting since Tyranids can't ally with anybody

So one of the big points of nerd rage around the webs these days in anticipation of 6th Edition is the addition of an ally matrix to 40k. This is something that has been around in other versions of WHFB and has recently re-emerged in WHFB 8th Edition. 
I'm going to provide a few of my own thoughts and then provide some from an email chain between the authors of this blog. First, I really would like to paraphrase something Carl said on The Independent Characters: you're worried about ridiculous combos being created through allies, but we already have ridiculous combos - see the 22% at Adepticon.

Sure, you'll see EVEN MORE Grey Knights on the board with allies, but we're used to Grey Knights now, especially in the Mid-Michigan meta. What this allies rule does is allow you to put together new models, paint new schemes, and change the way you play. Options! The best thing.

Clearly it is pretty transparent that GW just wants to sell more models, but they're a model company. I really really really like the 'narrative' focus they mentioned a few times in WD. This will help provide narratives. I can see myself painting up a small Lamenters force (the Lamenters were allied with the Tyrant in the Badab War) and use them (Codex: Blood Angels) or just paint up an assault squad and throw them in with my chaplain and Storm Raven and use Blood Angels rules for them. Or I could paint some sweet sweet Steel Legion models from the IG range. I could expand my Chaos Space Marines army (~1850 points) with some daemons.  So many different options.

This offers us MORE options. This is BETTER. More narratives. More ways to have a fun game. Yes you may have to deal with some shenanigans but we've been dealing with that since the last few power codexes have come out. If I paint GK marines somebody punch me in the face.

Other authors' opinions:

Valace2:
So one of the things that has me really stoked about 6th is the idea of allies. As most of us have multiple armies I was wondering what you guys are thinking about this? The idea of posting up Tau Broadsides or Long Fangs behind my Grey Knights sounds pretty damn sweet. 
As someone on 40k forums mentioned most codexes are balanced between great units and lame units, I am thinking using allies kind of gives GW a free pass in the future on codexes. So your army stinks at CC ally with an army that isn't, or your army can't shoot ally with Space Wolves or Guard and get yourselves some tanks. Now I believe the ally system only allows 1 HQ and then 1 Troop, but after that you can take 1 of each of the rest. I can bump up my Tau with Paladins or Thunderwolf Cavalry. 
Only problem I see with this change is the size of standard games, to really take advantage of having allied troops games are gonna have to prolly be bumped up from 1750 to 2000 or maybe even 2500. 
Geneguard:
I'm not really interested in making the most broken ass combo I can though I'm sure lots of people out there are crunching the numbers. I love the idea of making cool fluffy armies, like a joint Marine/IG task force. Neat opportunity to stretch out into other armies I'd never invest in otherwise. Nids got shafted- no allies at all. Even though there's stuff like Marines/Dark Eldar. Seems weird, when you could justify it by citing all the fluff about genestealer cults and whole regiments getting infiltrated by 'nids. Oh well.
Dustin:
I love the potential fun with fluff on the new allies list.  Daemons can team with Dark Eldar, so that's nice.  But then IG too.  So, that means I could model some awesome evil looking IG to tag-team with my CDs?  Schweet. I really like too how GW is pushing for more fluff and less competition.  They are highlighting "building the narrative" and encouraging people to immerse themselves in the fun, with IC challenges.   It's like they are making it okay to lose, but also switching up the rules a little (randomizing stuff?) so that anyone can get a string of lucky rolls and win. The one thing that burned me out more than anything on 5th edition was pulling up to a table only to see an army that was customed built to never-fail.  Playing Daemons, this happened whenever I saw more than one vehicle :) 40k is a silly hobby and a way for grown men to hang on to a little bit of our childhood.  I don't want it to be much more than that.
Phil:
I have ton of Imperial Guardsmen (Cadians) on the sprue, partially assembled, and a ton painted. If anybody wants them, let me know. I'm basically getting rid of anything that isn't Chaos (not really planning on renegade guard, and if I did, I'd go with the FW models.)
I of course, loved what I read in the White Dwarf about the design approach with 6th edition. It's like I've been saying all along, 40K is about cool models and cool narratives. Warmachine has a a much better ruleset for competitive play. I've actually come to appreciate both games and play styles, but I'd just rather play 40K for the 'cool shit' factor. 

22 comments:

  1. One of the reasons I started Tau was because they had "allies" included in the Codex with Kroot and Vespid. I really liked the idea of an alliance of alien races fighting back against the Imperium. I guess I could add some Eldar but I think I am still a new Codex away from making my original army theme.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To clarify, it's not like I don't like the idea of renegade Guard working with Chaos, I just like the idea of cultists and cannon fodder better. OH AND DAEMONS/SOUL GRINDERS WILL BE AMAZING ALLIES for the ruinous powers. Now I can focus on shooty units with my Chaos Marines, Thousands Sons and Obliterators core, and then throw in some 'named' daemons now. Awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The more I think of the ally rule, the more stoked I get about 6th edition. Can't wait till Saturday.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really think you will see allies used regularly in 40k as much as you do in Fantasy ... which is nearly never, except in doubles games and those Apoc games some people enjoy ;) I do not think it is meant to be a part of the standard play where you would just have parts of other codices available in your list building process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would generally agree, but I think it opens up new avenues to play, which is always a good thing.

      Delete
    2. I hope this is the case. A neat optio, but not something for every game

      Delete
    3. I plan on playing with Allies every game going forward. I cannot see why you would limit your type of play...

      Delete
  5. Also it should be noted that they are playing up allies as a huge aspect of sixth edition, so the comparison to fantasy in this case might not be the best. I'd compare it to them launching Storm of Magic and trying to get gamers to buy new allied armies / monsters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would say it is likely they "dipped their toe" into the concept in fantasy - saw how it played out and then jumped in. We shall see in 4 days anyway!

      Delete
  6. Genestealer cults would have been nice, the coven limousine allows for some pretty open and fun modeling. From what I have read on the rumors though, it looks like GW may be unnerfing (there is a good word) monstrous creatures. If this is true than the return of carnifexen and the increased usefulness of harpies with the new flyer rules along with the other monstrous creatures in the nid' lineup should prove interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well I have also heard that Orc Deffcoptas are now considered flyers so they will be alot harder to kill.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I believe it is going to encourage Wallet-Hammer (again). Those who can afford to purchase units from multiple armies to add as allies to their current army will have an advantage. All to the benifit of GW's bottom line.

    Alas, I'd still rather play in a Warmachine/Hordes Tournament than a GW tournament of any kind. Playing chess vs. playing checkers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chess vs. checkers....wow. Maybe a more apt analogy is that 40k is like 3.5 D&D, and Warmachine is 4e D&D. It's a much better game, and less broken, but it GOT NO SOUL, MAN. For the record, I like Pathfinder.

      Eh, I like Warmachine for the game and strategy and 40K for the shiny models and BLOWING THINGS UP. So I sort of agree, really.

      Delete
    2. Warmachine is Checkers in that analogy. Different strokes for different folks. I play both myself.

      Delete
  9. I think I'll head over to the Warmachine Blogs and tell them how much more I enjoy 40k than Warmachine/Hordes.

    While I am doing that though - I will be playing TONS of games with Allies. To be honest this is the way I WANT to play 40k. Allies, Forge World, expansions - the whole nine yards as they say.

    See you there!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you'll see that most of us will be there with you. Super excited for 6th edition.

      Delete
    2. I enjoy playing 40k - but its current ruleset (5th edition) and Codex balance is not written with tournament play in mind.

      Delete
    3. And yet thousands of people do it every year... and it continues to draw huge crowds. Go figure. I agree it's not the tightest ruleset ever. But people seem to enjoy it.

      Delete
  10. Nice to read a posting and comments regarding 6th ed. with a generally positive, thoughtful vibe to it. The more I digest all the new rules trickling out, the more I'm liking the sounds of 6th ed.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm excited too. In fact, I'll probably be at Gamers Sanctuary the moment it opens on Saturday.

    The only problem I see with allies is fitting them into my current paint scheme.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Scott,

      I believe they'll be selling their copies whenever they get them, so if you're available Friday night to pick it up you should!

      Re: allies - I'm considering using Blood Angels as an ally (Storm Raven and an Assault Squad!) but painting them in my chapter colors.

      Delete