Last two games I played at the local club were against 4 Knights and Njal, and a Tyranid list with 9 Monstrous Creatures in 1850pts. Not really my idea of fun, and any game system that requires agreements between players as to what they will and will not take in order for both players to have a chance is a broken system as far as I'm concerned.

I'm definitely coming to this conversation late, but it was interesting reading through everyone's thoughts and thinking about my own (which I hadn't really thought through as of yet).

I agree that allies, in most situations, are dumb. Both for balance and fluff. I think it wouldn't be as bad if the restrictions were worse (like if you made battle brothers operate as allies of convenience, and downgrade everyone else a step, but make come the apocalypse just not able to ally). It seems like GW might even use allies to get lazy (i.e. Ad Mech have no transports, why bother making some for them when they can just ally in SM for rhinos or drop pods?).

As for formations, I kind of love/hate them. I love the idea and I love a lot of instances of them. I don't mind the huge strict formations either. What I do mind is the lack of options. SM have like a dozen options in their codex, and Dark Eldar get one, and it's your whole army. That's just plain shitty. When I read the C:SM, I just thought every faction would have as much variety, but they don't, and it's hugely disappointing.

Good thread! These discussions come up fairly regularly at my local gaming group, and it's great to have some more input.

Fortunately we don't seem to have too many issues with allies (the only two armies in my collection are Raptors and Tyranids, and I deserve whatever I get for trying to play those together) the only allied player we have tends to throw down with Grey Knights and Space Wolves (Yes, highly unfluffy, we've tried explaining) and I can thoroughly testify that theres a REASON Grey Knights don't get drop pods (Combat squadded purifiers spamming novas are OUCH, gg nids)

With regards to formations and super detachments (decurions), I generally like them, though some don't seem very well thought out.

First and foremost, I tend to find it depends on who you're playing. If you take a full super detachment set of rules against a 6th edition codex, it can sometimes feel a little one sided. Its entirely possible that I've just faced off against bad lists in these engagements (predominantly orks and nids), but those are my thoughts for a penny. (pay me, pay me now.)

I find running purely formations quite restrictive, and as this is a requirement for the super detachments, by extension I find those equally restrictive. My preferred method (I'm assuming this is far from uncommon) is running a CAD with Formations in support. Admittedly formations like the battle demi-company are ridiculously close to CADs themselves, but having the flexibility to throw say, a single anti-flyer tank (my favourite example) into the list is what makes always taking a CAD shine for me.

Releasing larger formations with shiny rules and components than you might be missing does encourage you to buy models you don't already own, but so do box sets and heck even new model releases, neither of which get slapped with the "pay to win" sticker as often as formations do. Although admittedly alot of box sets seem inclusive of formations these days.

At the end of the day, you're supposed to have fun together.I'll play against anything (except fire raptors, grrrrr), but the dice gods have a special place for people who bring death stars composed of characters from 8 different codices, and if you bring this level of Stilton repeatedly / against newer players, don't be surprised if they find better things to do.