Allies yes or Allies no?

[Primarch]

This was on BoLS.
Check out the last point.

This weekend Games Workshop's Studio Openday was held with some interesting tidbits regarding 6th being touched on:


Full article ~via Natfka

The main points:

- Hull points added to help reduce the randomness of the old vehicle rules, so vehicles degrade along a more regular curve, instead of being impossible to kill, or instantly dead.

- Psyker rules added to give them more impact in game compared to their watered down bland versions in 5th.

- Challenges added to give heroes a feel of leading units in battle and offer chances for in-game heroics.

- Six 40k projects are in the works right now.

- Company goal of releasing a major project for the game every month ongoing.

- Alessio was cited as making 5th edition a bit "flat and generic" by pushing towards a balanced competitive-worthy ruleset. GW has moved in a different direction for 6th

The full article is here:
http://natfka.blogspot.jp/2012/07/faeit ... tudio.html

[Danguinius]

All valid points (except Mike the Pike`s "Wah, wah, wah"). Although it`s interesting that MIJ used the phrase "shouldn`t be used to shore up holes in their army" and BOLS has an article today that specifically says, "How to used Allies to shore up holes in your army!" I don`t think it`s only the Hiroshima area groups that are going to start doing this. I`d be interested in hearing about what percent of Nagoya area battles (at 1500 points or more) DON`T have allies. I`m going to bet it`s a minority. And yes, we have all read a novel or two with Marine & IG team ups or Chaos Marine & Dameon team ups...but EVERY battle? EVERY list? These fluff justifications don`t validate the allies rule in my opinion.

MIJ, you may be right. Maybe this is GW`s way of saying: "we don`t care who wins...we don`t care even what armies you play or what models you are using...just buy a bunch of models, paint `em and have a good time playing toy soldiers." And maybe this is how we are "supposed" to play 6th Edition 40K. But, what I`m saying is:" a lot of ...or maybe, most of the 40K players out there don`t play 40K that way. They have played it competitively. They care about winning and losing. They care about balance." In that case, this new direction of 6th edition 40K will be a radical departure from how that game has been played. I`m saying this may turn off a lot of players. Thus, it may indeed break 40K...or at least cause a lot of the long-time players to give up/try other games/etc.

No matter how you look at it, it is a major change that I think will have a big impact on the 40K player base.

Danguinius

[me_in_japan]

It will certainly have a big impact on how the game is played. If that means the cheesemongers get fed up and leave, then fair enough. You won't see me crying about it. As for BOLS, their approach to 40k represents everything that is wrong with the game, in my opnion. The kind of person who goes to BOLS, reads up on the best way to melta vet spam the life out of their opposition, then runs out and buys the models they need to do so is exactly the kind of person I think the game can do without.

And as for IG/marines teaming up, or CSM and daemons, yes, I would say every time is OK. It's very rare for those armies to operate without their other halfs. Marines might board an enemy cruiser or something without IG, but that's pretty scenario specific. Likewise, a few CSM legions don't have any truck with daemons, but the vast majority use em all the time.

[Primarch]

BoLS articles are poorly written and focus very heavily on how to use the copy/paste function to build an army. On the plus side, they do tend to do good summaries of 40K news.

[Spevna]

It will certainly have a big impact on how the game is played. If that means the cheesemongers get fed up and leave, then fair enough. You won't see me crying about it. As for BOLS, their approach to 40k represents everything that is wrong with the game, in my opnion. The kind of person who goes to BOLS, reads up on the best way to melta vet spam the life out of their opposition, then runs out and buys the models they need to do so is exactly the kind of person I think the game can do without.

And as for IG/marines teaming up, or CSM and daemons, yes, I would say every time is OK. It's very rare for those armies to operate without their other halfs. Marines might board an enemy cruiser or something without IG, but that's pretty scenario specific. Likewise, a few CSM legions don't have any truck with daemons, but the vast majority use em all the time.

Yes. Yes, indeed.

[Konrad]

I'm not thru all the rules yet, (good lord what a tome), but in principle, I like allies. They add some flavor to your list, allows you to get some different figs you like without having to buy a whole army (GW intention) and what the heck, shores up some holes in your army. There have always been "killer builds". The specific builds depend on what's the latest codex and what's the latest edition. The competitive guys who have time and money to chase the latest killer build will do so no matter what. So this time around they'll be mixing and matching cheese from different armies. We'll be eating Swiss and cheddar in the same sandwich, but it's still cheese.
Seeing how hordes are getting nerfed, I might have to dust off my IG to run with my Boyz. Since I convert my Orks to look like Squats and my IG are old R.T era Squats, can they be Battle Brothers?

[Admiral-Badruck]

Sure as long as my ork and grot IG can be.

[me_in_japan]

Both Konrad and badruck's proposals pass the MiJ's odeur de fromage test. I do declare em:

OK!

[Miguelsan]

I´m going to refrain from taking allied troops for now and boost my trusty infantry squads, but some Chaos Termies with max-mini anubis heads and shoulder pads might not be that far away :

M.

[Admiral-Badruck]

Those would look great with your ejercito.