PDA

View Full Version : Imperial Guard Purists UNITE !



Max1mum
08-12-2009, 07:13
I have something that annoys me.

( yes, good for me..i know ;-) )

And that is the amount of "Imperial Guard" armie lists out there that feature units from the Witch hunters and or Deamon hunters codicies.

Why would you people who do this, tool your armie up with tricks that are not a part of your armie? I know it's rule legal. But it's also a gimmick GW is writing out of its books. Just look at the fantasy chaos books. No more crossmixing in those lists. Hooray for that, now accept that it's a thing of the past. And the only reason you can do it now is because of GW's lack of intrest/time/money to update those codicies. The fact that our codex is called imperial guard, and NOT Forces of the Imperium of man.
Should be a indication of what you should and what you should not play in that armie.

The imperial guard is fine as it is. It doesn't need more stuff from different codicies to make it better.

Learn to play your armie, without feeling the urge to ad stuff that isn't part of your armie. If you can't win without adding stuff from a different codex. It's not the armie, its you who is lacking. Go find your self a commissar and have your self shot.

..

....

this turned into a angry rant almost..time to ad something diplomatic.

my apoligy's for anybody who feels offended.

owen matthew
08-12-2009, 07:24
Should has nothing to do with it.

Plus, its not the past until its past.

Inclusion of these units should not be seen as a mark of a person who needs to learn their book, but one of a player who knows its limits.

My 2c (as a long time IG player).

Hypaspist
08-12-2009, 07:27
The fact that our codex is called imperial guard, and NOT Forces of the Imperium of man

...And as such falls under the Jurisdiction of the Inquisition. Your comments have been noted private Max1mum, you are to report to the local Officio administrorum where you will be questioned. Failure to comply will result in more direct methods.
/Fluff



Learn to play your armie, without feeling the urge to ad stuff that isn't part of your armie. If you can't win without adding stuff from a different codex. It's not the armie, its you who is lacking. Go find your self a commissar and have your self shot.

I suspect very much that is somewhat unfair, after all the Imperial Guard *do* fall under the jurisdiction of the Inquisition as and when they feel like it, and people compose army lists for many reasons, some people compose army lists because they like the fluff of an inquisitor, or some Grey Knights, requisitioning the likes of the Imperial Guard to assist in some form of purgation or attack on heretical or daemonic forces.

I would imagine in fact that many people, albeit this is pure conjecture on my part, use the Daemonhunter and Witch Hunter codices in alliance with the IG codex because they consider it *fun* as opposed to trying to stomp all before them. (Sure some people probably try and cheese it up, but this isn't really any different to power-building from within a codex)

Perhaps you should consider letting other people worry about their own army composition and not force your ideals on others?

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 07:35
...And as such falls under the Jurisdiction of the Inquisition. Your comments have been noted private Max1mum, you are to report to the local Officio administrorum where you will be questioned. Failure to comply will result in more direct methods.
/Fluff


.....marches of, back straight and a defiant.



I suspect very much that is somewhat unfair, after all the Imperial Guard *do* fall under the jurisdiction of the Inquisition as and when they feel like it, and people compose army lists for many reasons, some people compose army lists because they like the fluff of an inquisitor, or some Grey Knights, requisitioning the likes of the Imperial Guard to assist in some form of purgation or attack on heretical or daemonic forces.

I would imagine in fact that many people, albeit this is pure conjecture on my part, use the Daemonhunter and Witch Hunter codices in alliance with the IG codex because they consider it *fun* as opposed to trying to stomp all before them. (Sure some people probably try and cheese it up, but this isn't really any different to power-building from within a codex)

Perhaps you should consider letting other people worry about their own army composition and not force your ideals on others?

Allright, you have a very strong point. Fluff is offcourse always a point that should be considerd. And if it is a fluff reason people do it. Then yes, please i have no objections to it. In fact, i would lend anybody my IG force if they want to mix and match there witch hunters and or deamon hunters in there for some giggles.


But ..all the posts that inspired me to post my rant. Are posts of how sweet it will be to have Terminators in your IG armie. Because they kick ass.

And why you should include inq lords and psychic powers in there to kick ass ! and how assassins work wonderfull in combination with Psyker battle squads to achieve the most amount of cheese possible !.

Those are the posts that have me anoyed !. That is what anoys me, those players do not want to play a fun game. They want to play a game to win. And if they could they would ad a gimmick that would spell Turn 1 win.
Please note that this post is not based on people who post in 40 K general. But based on posts in 40k tactics. Maybe i'm just hanging around with the wrong crowd.

meno1
08-12-2009, 07:51
And who are you to say what should and what should not be done? Really, all forces of the Imperium should be able to ally, such as all forces of chaos. Even all xenos, and even the Imperium with xenos, such as the Marines with Eldar. There are many fluffy reasons why the Imperial Guard should ally with the Inquisition.

Saying this, I do agree with your statement, "OMG guyz look at my shooty IG GK termie baneblade army of do0m!!!111!1!" I too, hate this, but if it's what we have to put up with to allow a reasonable, fluffy rule, then so be it I say.

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 07:59
I am the same as anybody with a strong will or opinion.

I believe in something and i say that. I believe something should or should not be done. That particulair point is mute.

And if you want to really go into the fluff of imperium units being used along side deamon hunters.

Then you should also have all your deamon hunters KILL your imperial guard.

Afterall, a simple human could be tainted by the deamons they just killed. For the sake of savety, kill the humans. So the next time somebody includes Grey Knights in their IG armie and claims its for fluff.
They should ad the end of the game also kill of any unit that is holding a objective and concede any remaining kill points in the form and shape of IG units to the enemy player.

Then your a fluff player.

~ edit ~ my posts are coming on unreasonably strong today, not sure what it is...i'm not in my clam-zone-state-of-mind-zen thing i guess ;-).

dangermouse425
08-12-2009, 08:15
Different people want to achieve different things. Some want to have an army that will crush all beneath the boots of the Imperium (purist, or not), and therefore take super-efficient armies that sound would accuse of "cheese" or "power gaming".

Whereas, on the other hand, (myself included) some just take 2 Masters of Ordnance and a Deathstrike "for the lols". Scatter dice ftw. ;)

But in all seriousness, different people play different styles of games, so why force someone to play like you? If the rules say it's legal, then it's legal, until stated otherwise.

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 08:18
I'm not forcing anybody ...am i ?....

dangermouse425
08-12-2009, 08:23
Apologies, perhaps a bad turn of phrase. I meant the sentiment to be "just leave people to their own powergaming little world, and enjoy being fluffy like me".

Brother Loki
08-12-2009, 08:33
I personally think that pretty much all Imperial forces should be able to ally as and when you feel like it. Back when I started in Rogue Trader, the game was virtually written on the assumption you would do this - a Rogue Trader's army typically consisted of Imperial Army troops, a couple of squads of marines and some squat and/or eldar mercenaries. I really miss an army like that - it was a great way to just collect models you liked without having to worry about collecting a large army of the same thing. Having something like that would probably cut the number of 'what army should I play' threads on warseer by 50% as well. ;)

In the background it's pretty rare for Astartes to operate without Guard support. Then again, Grey Knights should never really be fielded if there aren't Daemons present. However that would mean that armies featuring them would only ever get used in special scenarios, which isn't the best incentive to collect them.

Similarly chaos marines, daemons and Lost and the Damned (who should make up a majority of chaos forces) should all be able to ally freely.

So I fundamentally disagree that players should stick to one codex - as far as I'm concerned there should be one Imperial codex and one Chaos codex, each the size of the main rulebook and including all arms of their respective militaries. Whether to collect all the Xenos into one book, or give them their own smaller ones, I'm not sure. I doubt it would be possible to flesh out each race to the point where they can fill a 300 page book of their own.

I do see your point though about mixing and matching for effect:
"Hello deep-striking chaos terminators - meet my mystic standing next to a LR demolisher!"
"Hello expensive high toughness fearless unit who've just been dropped to Ld 2 by my psykers, meet Miss Callidus and her Neural shredder!"

I could see how these might seem to be powergaming in the extreme (although I'd quite like to try both of them once - just to see the look on my opponent's face), but then again, if you hang about in the tactics forum you're likely to see a lot of stuff like this for all armies - that's sort of what that forum is for.

grissom2006
08-12-2009, 08:44
Oh i love it you rant because of the posts that go along the lines of Terminators are the bees knees. I've lost track of the number of players who play and think this and then run home in tears as they die to the man.

The DH & WH Codices are still valid as such the armies used are legal don't like don't play them after all that a part of the rules. Or do you suggest your fellow gamers all throw their collections in the bin because you happen to not like the idea of allied forces.

owen matthew
08-12-2009, 08:50
Max, I think people will always react strongly to the word "SHOULD". That is just the way it is, especially since none of us are the ones who actually dictate/write the fluff and rules, we just talk about them. Rules are only open to interpretation for lowly souls like us.

Murphy's law
08-12-2009, 09:00
I like mixing army's.
I think all imperium forces should have the ability to mix.
I also think chaos should have a possibility to mix. Even with (traitor) guard.

It's more fluffy and it gives extra character to allready existing army's
It will also atract powergamers, but they will allways find ways to create cheesy lists.

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 09:09
Oh i love it you rant because of the posts that go along the lines of Terminators are the bees knees. I've lost track of the number of players who play and think this and then run home in tears as they die to the man.

The DH & WH Codices are still valid as such the armies used are legal don't like don't play them after all that a part of the rules. Or do you suggest your fellow gamers all throw their collections in the bin because you happen to not like the idea of allied forces.

did i type that ? :eyebrows:

i din't think i did....

interesting how this post attracts people who are Pro-mixing units into the IG armie.

while i asked for the purists to unite :angel: :P

Spider-pope
08-12-2009, 09:13
I have something that annoys me.

( yes, good for me..i know ;-) )

And that is the amount of "Imperial Guard" armie lists out there that feature units from the Witch hunters and or Deamon hunters codicies.

Why would you people who do this, tool your armie up with tricks that are not a part of your armie? I know it's rule legal. But it's also a gimmick GW is writing out of its books. Just look at the fantasy chaos books. No more crossmixing in those lists. Hooray for that, now accept that it's a thing of the past. And the only reason you can do it now is because of GW's lack of intrest/time/money to update those codicies. The fact that our codex is called imperial guard, and NOT Forces of the Imperium of man.
Should be a indication of what you should and what you should not play in that armie.

The imperial guard is fine as it is. It doesn't need more stuff from different codicies to make it better.

Learn to play your armie, without feeling the urge to ad stuff that isn't part of your armie. If you can't win without adding stuff from a different codex. It's not the armie, its you who is lacking. Go find your self a commissar and have your self shot.

..

....

this turned into a angry rant almost..time to ad something diplomatic.

my apoligy's for anybody who feels offended.

You do realise that in the majority of cases, you have it completely backwards. Most mixed Guard-Daemonhunters/Witch Hunters armies start off as Daemon/Witch Hunter forces with a couple of platoons of IG added, which then starts to escalate into a full blown IG army with a few Inquisitorial allies.

I have yet to hear of anyone make a mixed force for the reason you suggest, to somehow prop up the IG army. Hell, most mixed players would probably have a stronger list if they just left the vestigal remains of their Inquisition force out and spent the points on more tanks/guardmen.

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 09:16
you should check out the Tactics area of this forum...

that should give you plenty of examples.

Bunnahabhain
08-12-2009, 09:28
I assumed this was going to be a rant about those players who use foul abhumans in their Guard forces, rather than those guard forces that have come to the aid of his most holy Inquisition.


Hell, most mixed players would probably have a stronger list if they just left the vestigal remains of their Inquisition force out and spent the points on more tanks/guardmen.

DH inquisitors with mystics for dealing with deep strikers, Sisters with Books of St Lucius in infantry heavy forces, Psychic hoods, and things done with assassins.
If kept in moderation, these can all add something to a standard guard force you simply can't get otherwise, and very powerful.
If you mean people spending 700pts on grey knights, and similar things, then yes, I agree.


I have no problem with using Inq elements in a guard army, it is entirely fitting, and legal by the core rules. I happen to have a DH inq and mystics modelled up as Guard officers and pair of NCOs with Binoculars looking up...

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 09:30
*smiles* i supose the word choice does leave room for some interpertation :D

Murphy's law
08-12-2009, 09:31
You do realise that in the majority of cases, you have it completely backwards. Most mixed Guard-Daemonhunters/Witch Hunters armies start off as Daemon/Witch Hunter forces with a couple of platoons of IG added, which then starts to escalate into a full blown IG army with a few Inquisitorial allies.

I have yet to hear of anyone make a mixed force for the reason you suggest, to somehow prop up the IG army. Hell, most mixed players would probably have a stronger list if they just left the vestigal remains of their Inquisition force out and spent the points on more tanks/guardmen.

Well, i'm pretty sure most people don't take a squad of allied grey knight terminators for the fluff but for a strong close combat punch(which the IG don't need, because they can rely on their guns)

Bloodknight
08-12-2009, 09:46
I have yet to hear of anyone make a mixed force for the reason you suggest, to somehow prop up the IG army. Hell, most mixed players would probably have a stronger list if they just left the vestigal remains of their Inquisition force out and spent the points on more tanks/guardmen.

At some point, I added an Inquisitor with mystics to my tournament list because he's pretty useful there. In friendly games, I just field the guy to be able to field an Assassin as a fun unit. I still wonder about the asinine decision of making Assassins only fieldable when shepherded by an Inquisitor. Somehow I would expect that the Assassin knows what to do from his briefing, but well...

That said, in most of the cases you're better off buying just more Guard units.

MegaPope
08-12-2009, 11:56
If always played for just points efficiency, then yes, I probably would just do pure Guard.

But I play with fluff in mind as well, and I like the fact that these allied units exist and make my army physically more colourful and varied than just endless ranks of Guardsmen.

Yes, they do bring something different to the table - where would the attraction of purchasing these pieces for gaming purposes come from if they didn't?

'Pure' =I= are designed with Guard rather than SM allies in mind (you can't use chaber militant and allied SMs in the same =I= force). Moreover, most SM armies are so well self-contained that they benefit far less from =I= allies than IG.

It's the only way us Guard players get to fool around with some more exotic toys for a change, even if we do pay a premium for them :p. Other armies have such things written into their codicies already. Please give us a break now and again ;).

Sir_Turalyon
08-12-2009, 12:08
Paint some 150- 250 Guardsmen and you'll be longing for something else to do. Not to mention there will be no point in geting another 50 Guardsmen that you'll never use in standard size battle (unless you fancy playing 1st platoon mondays, 2nd platoon tuesdays and so on). Inquisitional forces are great way or expanding your models collection, paint something different and add another variant to your Guard army all at once.

Bunnahabhain
08-12-2009, 12:14
Paint your 250 or so guardsmen, then have some more about, still on sprue.

Then, when you see an interesting idea, you can quickly knock up a squad, so have something different to paint. My current one is Ski Troops (counts as rough riders)

Wanting to paint Inquisition for variety, and for pointless toys like psychic hoods is clearly greedy of us.....

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 12:23
Paint your 250 or so guardsmen, then have some more about, still on sprue.

Then, when you see an interesting idea, you can quickly knock up a squad, so have something different to paint. My current one is Ski Troops (counts as rough riders)

Wanting to paint Inquisition for variety, and for pointless toys like psychic hoods is clearly greedy of us.....

Were did that rant come from ?

and where is the "i want to paint bright shiney stuff for a change" points coming from anyway.

If you want to paint something for the sake of painting it. Be my guest.

Again, i did not say anything about that either...did i.

All i posted was a rant against people who wish to take away inherent IG weaknisses by adding stuff that isn't in the IG codex.

You people are sure going out of your way of trying to find ways to justify this. Without actualy adressing the points i made.

Instead a couple of you try to make a grand gesture and point out how silly i am by going in a completely unrelated direction.

Or am i missing a point.... ? is my grasp of english failing me again :rolleyes:

Murphy's law
08-12-2009, 12:37
The point is this, there's two kinds of people who use allies.
There's those who do it for fluff/fun and then there's those who do it to take maximum advantage of it.
The problem is you're just talking about the last group of people, ignoring the other group.
Some people propably feel a bit insulted/offended by that.

I'm not one of those.

Sir_Turalyon
08-12-2009, 12:42
Then, when you see an interesting idea, you can quickly knock up a squad,

... and while you're waiting for interesting idea you still have to do something with your painting time. Something called side project. Not to mention interesting ideas have probably already been covered with guardsmen #151 - #250.

Personaly when I'm out of interesting ideas for Guard I just start other unrelated armies, but I understand if someone wants his side project to tie in with his main force. Until recently, =I= units could be used to represent Guard formation uncovered by Codex, or old models without adequate rules - extra stormtrooper squads, along with Grenadiers doctrine, allowed full strength stormtrooper commando force, while (non Lord) Inquisitor was best way to represent Primaris psyker before current codex. It's still best way to represent Confessor or Missionary.




You people are sure going out of your way of trying to find ways to justify this. Without actualy adressing the points i made.

Instead a couple of you try to make a grand gesture and point out how silly i am by going in a completely unrelated direction.

Or am i missing a point.... ? is my grasp of english failing me again


Point I'm trying to make is that advantage of taking =I= allies is negligible and main advantage of allies is variety they bring to games and miniatures collections. While some people may believe they are working around Guard's weaknesses they are most often unbalancing their armies with units that don't really fit in, or won't bother with your thread. These people eighter believe their Guardsmen can properly support Terminators (they'll learn they are wrong soon enough, just give them time), or if they know what they are doing and pull out combos like jumppack Cannoness leading armoured company, they are power gamers who don't care what army they play anyway as long as it's strong enough and will ignore you, so you may as well do the same. Most of Guard players here seem to understand this.

BWT, I don't use allies with my Guard (I'm of "red platoon mondays, blue platoon tuesdays" variety), so oyu may consider my posts as answer to your call.

freddieyu
08-12-2009, 12:47
Taking allies is also a gamble really, as usually these have specific purposes in mind which may not be in your opponent's army in a tourney situation, thus you waste points.

For example, I played in a tourney last week and took an inquisitor and a psychic hood + mystics. Played 5 games, and how many turns did they get to do what they were supposed to? A grand total of 1 turn. Thus in retrospect and hindsight I should have gotten another veteran squad, or used my time to paint them to paint my PBS instead. So it was a gamble on my part, and they ended up being expensive units which in hindsight should have been used for something else. However, they did add to the esoteric look of my army, as the minis themselves are beautiful!

Ironhand
08-12-2009, 12:58
I absolutely agree with you. Our playing group requires army lists for our regular games to be from a single Codex only, and only permits allies in Apocalypse games.

Arakanis
08-12-2009, 13:28
Allies are awesome. I wish there was like a book that covered ally rules (amongst some other stuff, I'm sure)

In fact, in this fantasy world we'd have the following

Imperium of Man
+++++++++++++++++
Codex: Space Marines
Codex: Chapters of Legend (Variants such as DA, BA, BT, etc)
Codex: Imperial Guard
Codex: Inquisition
Codex: Adeptus Mechanicus

Chaos
+++++++++++++++++
Codex: Lost and the Damned
Codex: Chaos Space Marines (renegades)
Codex: Legions of Terror (actual legionnaires)
Codex: Chaos Daemons

Eldar
+++++++++++++++++
Codex: Eldar
Codex: Craftworld Eldar
Codex: Exodite
Codex: Harlequin
Codex: Corsairs
Codex: Dark Eldar

Xenos
+++++++++++++++++
Codex: Orks
Codex: Necrons
Codex: Tau
Codex: Tyrannids
Codex: Barhgessi
Codex: Hrud


Eldar, Chaos and Imperium of Man would have rules of allying inside their own structures, and then there would be some rules for Eldar allying with other Xenos and the Imperium of man, and how the Xenos work together if at all.

Yes, my dream is impossible, hush. I'm basking in the moment.

CauCaSus
08-12-2009, 13:32
How dare people put things in their army that are not only completely fluffy but also legal per the current rules?! :mad:

Thud
08-12-2009, 13:37
How dare people put things in their army that are not only completely fluffy but also legal per the current rules?! :mad:

I'm shocked and appalled! Personally I never mix the two; it's one or the other!

LordMoriar
08-12-2009, 14:00
I dunno where i read this, but a 40k match of 1500-3000pts is, in most cases, ment to represent a section of the frontline rather then the whole frontline it self. If you want to field Eldar in your IG force just play a small scale apocalypse battle. Or just ask your opponent if you can bring a squad of Space Marines in a friendly game. I for one stick to my IG. Not for fluff, not because i dislike DH or WH's. I just love my IG more.

Id object tho if someone was running 1500pts IG with 1000pts of "allies".

MarshalFaust
08-12-2009, 14:02
I don't think it is your sentiment that angers some people but the manner in which you chose to present your idea. whether or not is was intentional you come across very confrontational and accusatory in your OP which is not very helpful when trying to sway others to your argument but somehow I doubt you had any intention other than stirring the warseer pot a bit.

im pretty open with what people want to bring to a game as long as it not a tournament setting I just don't see the point in getting all bent out of shape about what other people want to do with their armies, especially those people who you will never play against in your lifetime.

madprophet
08-12-2009, 14:14
I like taking allies where I can because of the modeling opportunities. I play Guard (Valhallans) and I have made Ork, Tyranid, Tau and CSM opposition forces (though none are anywhere near as large as my guard collection) - sometimes I want to paint an Inquisitor just because it's a cool model or add some grey knights because I am tired of painting guardsment or add some sisters just because (but I really wish they would make some female models for each regiment - even if they sold it as a separate box of female torsos and heads that can be used with any of the plastic kits or as the basis for conversions of metal kits).

I might field allies if I am facing daemons or other chaos entities - I mean, if I know I am fight such unwholesome things, wouldn't it make sense to ask the Holy Orders of the Ecclesiarchy for help?

Vhalyar
08-12-2009, 14:27
Awesome! I didn't think other armies had to deal with that kind of trainwreck thoughts like Nidzilla players do :p

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 14:29
To be honest i did intent to stir the pot, although since English is a second language, the nuances are still hard for me to grasp ;-)

Somehow i just can't seem to end up as diplomatic and friendly sounding as a "Lord Cook ";-).

So no, i did not have any intention to anger people.
And yes, stirring the warseer pot was my intention :D.
( not to troll around mind you ;-) )

Anyway, to recap now that i have my points clear.(for my self mostly :P)

1 : this post was based on the Tactics people who ad stuff to the IG based on the IG armie weaknesses.

2 : This post was not targeted at people who do this out of a hobby or fluff perspective.

However, if it is hobby and or fluff that drives you, then you don't need the rules do you ? I don't think anybody would mind if you model a inquisitor and a full unit of henchmen to represent a IG Company Command squad with added Advisors and veterans with appropriate equipment. And who is stopping you from using a Assassin model and using Marbo's Rules.

It would make things so much clearer also for your opponent. Considering your only using one codex, with easy explanations instead of adding a codex with a host of special rules.

Interestingly enough, nobody posts these options.
The only options and explanations that i see people post ( maybe I’m looking in the wrong place ?) are the options and explanations that are based on Game play effectiveness.

Maybe that gave me the wrong impression that this is the only reason why people do this.

Bloodknight
08-12-2009, 14:38
And who is stopping you from using a Assassin model and using Marbo's Rules.

Nobody. The thing is that Marbo's rules fit only the Eversor, if any, and then I'd rather have an Eversor assassin that will actually fight his "victim" at some point instead of just throwing a demo charge (that will probably do more damage than an Eversor ever could) and getting gunned down afterwards.


Tactics people who ad stuff to the IG based on the IG armie weaknesses

I wonder why they'd do that. Most additions that look like they adress a weakness will just open up another one that might be worse, like spending oodles of points on Grey Knights to solve a perceived "CC weakness", thus weakening the Guards' shooting, giving the GK a job (or making them a necessity) in the first place instead of just sacrificing a couple of 5 point guardsmen.

Inquisitor_Tolheim
08-12-2009, 15:05
Allies are awesome. I wish there was like a book that covered ally rules (amongst some other stuff, I'm sure)

In fact, in this fantasy world we'd have the following

Imperium of Man
+++++++++++++++++
Codex: Space Marines
Codex: Chapters of Legend (Variants such as DA, BA, BT, etc)
Codex: Imperial Guard
Codex: Inquisition
Codex: Adeptus Mechanicus

Chaos
+++++++++++++++++
Codex: Lost and the Damned
Codex: Chaos Space Marines (renegades)
Codex: Legions of Terror (actual legionnaires)
Codex: Chaos Daemons

Eldar
+++++++++++++++++
Codex: Eldar
Codex: Craftworld Eldar
Codex: Exodite
Codex: Harlequin
Codex: Corsairs
Codex: Dark Eldar

Xenos
+++++++++++++++++
Codex: Orks
Codex: Necrons
Codex: Tau
Codex: Tyrannids
Codex: Barhgessi
Codex: Hrud


Eldar, Chaos and Imperium of Man would have rules of allying inside their own structures, and then there would be some rules for Eldar allying with other Xenos and the Imperium of man, and how the Xenos work together if at all.

Yes, my dream is impossible, hush. I'm basking in the moment.

You forgot letting the Necron's ally with rogue elements of the Ad Mech (and possibly the tau, depending on your stance with Farsight). :)

It's already been said, but the options to absolutely cheese out a guard army via allies are very limited, and each one is really a one trick pony that can be countered by a competent general. I'm both a DH and Guard player, I regularly use allies in my casual games, but my competitive list is straight up guard. In my experience, diluting the army works to the disadvantage of the player nine times out of ten.

Ask yourself, what does it matter to you whether that inquisitor and his/her retinue is a modified company command squad or an allied inquisitor? Why do you care if a guard player blows 1/3 to 1/2 of his/her available points on a squad of terminators rather then another tank? You've asked everyone else to justify why they think allies is an acceptable option, but you really haven't justified your opinion in return.

Really, if you're looking for the final word on the matter here it is: It's legal. So long as the codex stands, any player with a guard and inquisition army is free to ally them per the rules. It doesn't matter if it's for fluff reasons, or for power gaming reasons.

williamhm
08-12-2009, 16:59
I used to play guard with the old codex with the doctrine rules have not played the new one and would have to completley change my entire force to do so, however when I did play I always brought some grey knights in. Those storm bolters could come in handy, and properly used were a great addition to my forces couple of battles were turned my way due to those units, besides they were fun to paint and play around with.

Lordsaradain
08-12-2009, 18:36
Yeah, I agree with OP. Why should IG be able to add troops form WH and DH when CSM cant have DoC allies? :P

Ozendorph
08-12-2009, 20:27
Personally I love using allies. In my Apoc force I use Dark Angels, IG, Inq (sorta), and AdMech. Hopefully I'll be adding Naval forces as well.

I recently added Inq to my standard IG force, mostly because I got the Inquisitor Lok model and he's too cool not to paint up and field.

Max1mum
08-12-2009, 21:42
Yeah, I agree with OP. Why should IG be able to add troops form WH and DH when CSM cant have DoC allies? :P

That is actualy a very good point.

And a point towards the other point i made.

GW is ending the entire Allie thing in normal battles.

I guess all there is left to do for all of you, is enjoying it while it lasts.
And please don't be to upset when the hammer comes down.

e2055261
08-12-2009, 23:46
To the OP: here here!

I'm not keen on using abhumans either...

Inquisitor_Tolheim
08-12-2009, 23:50
That is actualy a very good point.

And a point towards the other point i made.

GW is ending the entire Allie thing in normal battles.

I guess all there is left to do for all of you, is enjoying it while it lasts.
And please don't be to upset when the hammer comes down.

It is a good question, but I would have gone the other way and given DoC the ability to ally with Chaos Marines (and Imperial Guard for some renegade fun).

When/if it gets taken out, then you'll have a point. Until then there really isn't any reason to hate on it, any more then there is a reason for some guard players to hate players who use abhumans.

MegaPope
09-12-2009, 00:03
GW is ending the entire Allie thing in normal battles.

Point 1: How do you know this?

Point 2: The Allies rule is the only reason we got =I= forces in the first place. They never really worked as standalone armies, and the concept didn't fit either. I've heard that Battle Sisters especially came close to being Squatted (I realise that there might be something vaguely...wrong...with how that statement sounds) before someone hit on the idea of making them the Witch Hunter Chamber Militant. I for one don't want the colourful side of the Imperium boiled away to nothing for the sake of 'moar Space Marines'.

Also, the Allies rule is a GOOD rule - it enables you to have a bit of variety in an army that you can't otherwise have (as well as probably generating sales that might not have occurred otherwise). It should've been broadened a bit - the example of the DoC/CSM is a good one. Maybe if that had been done, there would've been less hatred and more positivity from players who'd just had their existing armies torn in two with the flick of a pen for the sake of short-termist greed rather than a coherent idea fit for future developments.

If they axe it or kick it upstairs to 'Apoc only (a surefire way to send it to the game-rule graveyard IMO) then they will have once more demonstrated their talent for both stabbing themselves in the back AND shooting themselves in the foot. It takes a special kind of cack-handedness to do those at the same time.

But, it's a good rule - quite sensible, adds a bit of variety, not too open to spamming...therefore it MUST BE DESTROYED! ;)

e2055261
09-12-2009, 02:46
I think the main purpose of the original rant was that people trying to make megadeath armies using allies are idiots. Eg those assassins are pretty bad ass i'll put some of those in my SW army...

Let's not sit on the fence. That kinda stuff annoys me too.

505
09-12-2009, 06:19
I run both hunter units in my IG from time to time (NOT at the same time) but mainly cause I think grey knights look cool and so do seraphim.

not always but soemtimes I do just for the looks of it

Wednesday Friday Addams
09-12-2009, 06:27
To the OP: here here!

I'm not keen on using abhumans either...

Calling inquisitors, sister ans grey knights abhumans?
Please report yourself to the local commissar for heresy.

Max1mum
09-12-2009, 07:04
Point 1: How do you know this?
I don't -know- this for sure. I'm just analysing present GW behaviour and projecting it on the future.

And my analysis are based on the mortal Chaos books
and 40 deamon books.

Also GW has stated that they want -one- book per armie. And they want to make it all idiot proof and as simple as possible. Currently mixing units from two different codicies into one armie is neither simple or idiot proof. And it requires two books.




Point 2: The Allies rule is the only reason we got =I= forces in the first place. They never really worked as standalone armies, and the concept didn't fit either. I've heard that Battle Sisters especially came close to being Squatted (I realise that there might be something vaguely...wrong...with how that statement sounds) before someone hit on the idea of making them the Witch Hunter Chamber Militant. I for one don't want the colourful side of the Imperium boiled away to nothing for the sake of 'moar Space Marines'.

'you have heard' yes, a very solid point to make. I heard the dark side of the moon is made of cake.

-Edit-
(originaly it said candy instead of cake, but warseŽrians like cake more :angel:, so here is to me hoping for populair support )
-/edit-

The forces of the inquisition are more then capable of standing on there own. They don't need anything from different codicies to be able to compete. In fact they don't need the IG to compete, and the IG doesn't need them.



Also, the Allies rule is a GOOD rule - it enables you to have a bit of variety in an army that you can't otherwise have (as well as probably generating sales that might not have occurred otherwise). It should've been broadened a bit - the example of the DoC/CSM is a good one. Maybe if that had been done, there would've been less hatred and more positivity from players who'd just had their existing armies torn in two with the flick of a pen for the sake of short-termist greed rather than a coherent idea fit for future developments.


Actualy, those armies have never been torn in two. The CsM book still has the same options as they had before. And the DoC book is just a book filled with stronger deamons then the CsM book can field. How is this splitting the two in halve ?

And further more this was a coherent idea to fit future development. They want easy to use codicies, so that you only need a rulebook and your codex to play. Not several codicies, with possible conflicting rules or powerbuilds.




If they axe it or kick it upstairs to 'Apoc only (a surefire way to send it to the game-rule graveyard IMO) then they will have once more demonstrated their talent for both stabbing themselves in the back AND shooting themselves in the foot. It takes a special kind of cack-handedness to do those at the same time.


Do you have any examples of how apocalypse achieved this ?

Of how Apocalypse was both laserpoints between GW eyes, and a land mine under there foot ?



But, it's a good rule - quite sensible, adds a bit of variety, not too open to spamming...therefore it MUST BE DESTROYED! ;)

Congratulations, you are the first person to pull something out of its ass.

I never said anything about rules that had to be destroyed, i would have posted this in the rules development forum.

I was ranting, and i think this is the third time that i'm going to say this. About people who want to ad stuff to a IG codex to take away those weaknisses it might have. Instead of learning how to play the codex and work around those weaknisses. I never said anything about killing the rule that made this happen. I never said anything about stopping people from doing so.

I will repeat what i wanted to find out, and that is if i am alone in this or if other people agree with me.

And so far i have found, i am not alone in this.

And those who do not agree with me are trying to proof me wrong by dragging things into this thread that i intentianely left out of it because it has nothing to do with the point i was trying to make.


( a note for all you inquisitors and commissars out there, i see no flaw in the IG, and as we are offcourse in services of the inquisition we do need anything more then what the emperor has given us to full fill our duty. )

Max1mum
09-12-2009, 07:11
Calling inquisitors, sister ans grey knights abhumans?
Please report yourself to the local commissar for heresy.

And you are letting a heretic walk out of here, hoping that he will actualy listen to your request ?
:angel:

Wednesday Friday Addams
09-12-2009, 07:31
And you are letting a heretic walk out of here, hoping that he will actualy listen to your request ?
:angel:

If he is stupid enough to call a inquisitor a abhuman then yes I think there is a high chance.

Tomalock
09-12-2009, 07:36
As someone who started doing this recently I'll toss in my thoughts here as well! I have been a DH guy since comming back to 40k after taking off most of 3rd and all of 4th ed. I have lots of GKs, bunchs of the nifty assassions (I used to run 9 deathcult assassions) and all the other fun stuff. I even have 5 land raiders for the bunch.

I had always planned on taking inducted IG at some point. I like the idea of giving my inquisitor lord some spare bodies to throw on the table. However with all the cool toys in the new IG codex I ended up going the other way. I got a bunch of the cool new stuff and added my Inquisitor Lord and some stormtroopers to the IG list. However because I am loyal to the Inquisition, everything IG is being painted with the Inquisitor Lord's colors and getting the markings of the Inquisition.

So in my case I am indeed taking DH allies with my IG force, but my IG force is being treated as inducted for fluff purposes and has the color scheme and forge world brass etchings to back that up. This obviously upsets you, but its hard to resist having a list with Vendettas, Leman Russes, Bane Wolfs, and a Land Raider. I know as an IG player you want to hoard all of your shiny new toys GW gave you, but don't be selfish! Us DH players are stuck with assault cannons that don't rend, storm shields that don't save us, and 50 point mandatory squad leaders! It is IG after all, there are more than enough toys being produced accross the Imperium for everyone to play with.

Max1mum
09-12-2009, 07:37
If he is stupid enough to call a inquisitor a abhuman then yes I think there is a high chance.

Good point...

i could offcourse start a whole new sub discussion in here that there are indeed inquisitors who could qualify for the term 'abhuman' but that would depend on your point of view and how much of a 'purist' inquisitor you are ;-).

Revlid
09-12-2009, 08:29
Speaking purely for myself, I include a Witch Hunter Inquisitor Lord and a Culexus Assassin in my Imperial Guard at 1500pts. This is mainly for fluff reasons (380pts could buy me two Executioners, for god's sake), as my army is the Gellerian 049th, the pet project of the Radical Inquisitor in question, "blessed" with a much higher proportion of psykers than normal (plasmagunners count-as psykers with plasmabolts. Gets Hot counts-as Perils). Hell, a Callidus would be a much better choice, especially combining Weaken Resolve with the Neural Shredder.

So, fluff and fun.

sucramreverse
09-12-2009, 09:01
Actualy, those armies have never been torn in two. The CsM book still has the same options as they had before. And the DoC book is just a book filled with stronger deamons then the CsM book can field. How is this splitting the two in halve ?

As a chaos player, It's required for me to disagree with this. CSM 4th ed has nowhere near as many options as 3rd. especially in regards to daemons. I haven't taken the time to count how many less options, but I would say that the codex has been cut in half. and then they added the Chaos Daemons which has more options for daemons than before.

And this is my only complaint with the alliance rule; IG shouldn't get special treatment. Of course GW will never support another faction as much as they do the Imperium, so complaining has no effect.

And I seriously doubt they are going to try and make it so you only have to have one codex to play your army. GW likes money, and codex's are expensive. By putting this option in there for Imperium players to mix armies, people are more likely to branch out, so it would be very unlikely for them to stop this IMO.

(Besides, from a chaos point of view, we'd rather the IG not have guns or tanks either, it would make you a lot easier to slaughter :skull:)

Max1mum
09-12-2009, 12:18
my point about the single codex thing was purely based on statements from GW.

Lord Solar Plexus
09-12-2009, 13:02
I don't think anyone has said anything against using nice, shiny, well-painted models. This is not an issue at all. More power to anyone who is able to paint well, my envy included. ;)

If however someone tells me that IG in its current incarnation is dull and monotone in any way or shape or form, I find it very difficult to believe him. That cannot be a reason to look elsewhere, not when we have more options and variety in all phases of the game than ever before, and the possibilities for painting are mind-boggling.

I do agree with Max1mum to a large extent. I think I am a purist, even though I have used allies in the past. There are far too many players dropping lines the like of "Take an Inq + mystics, dummy, problem solved", not only here but on Dakka and many other fora as well. Yes, you might play games where they don't play a role but it's such a small investment that you very rarely handicap yourself. I do recognize that perceptions vary but after a while, this becomes quite stale and lame. It's like listening to a broken record - and before you say anything, this isn't specifically aimed at allies. Having VeltaMets or Executioners or Vendettas recommended over and over and over and over...you get the gist.