Allies!

I use allies a lot. They add character, colour and additional tactical depth to some armies, or they can offset weaknesses in others. Here are some of my favourite examples of the many that I have used on occasion:

I/52b Spartan, with 1/52f Athenian allies - to add variety and a seaborne surprise,
II/52 Dacians, with II/26 Sarmatian allies - to add some punch in open terrain,
III/39 Southern Han, with Tibetan allies - who wouldn't want 3x 4Kn//Sp allies?
IV/54b Kalmar Union, with German allies - a well balanced force with 3x 6Kn wedges!

Also, I like variety in an army, and allies also encourage me to use armies that I would not ordinarily consider. Outside of its historical battles, I don't find the Alexandrian Macedonian list (II/12) particularly interesting from a game perspective, but add in some Thessalian allies (II/5d) and you retain the historical flavour, while adding to the army's flexibility. A similar example is the Army of Maroboduus (II/47e), which is a lot of fun to use when you add in his II/47d Batavian allies, with the prospect of a littoral landing.

Finally, some armies just cry out for the inclusion of their colourful allies - pick almost any Roman list as an example: add in camels, warband, knights, light horse, even Batavian littoral landing allies.

Allies add a great deal of interest to the game and in my view, their limitations provide a reasonable balance so they are definitely worth the extra effort when building armies.

We maybe use allies 1/10 of the time.

My general feeling is that the lists themselves tend to have their historical "allies" reflected in many of the element options already. I feel like more ally options is just a way of being able to morph an army to combat any other army. Which is fine. ( I guess).