Hello. This is a newb question. What benefit does an alliance card offer over an inexpensive unit, other than it might be slightly harder to nuke? It seems like multifaction decks still lean a bit more heavily towards one primary faction with one or two other factions in support. It also seems like an alliance card does more good in providing the loyalty icon to the secondary or tertiary faction than it does the primary. These cards do better in the kingdom or quest zone. Would a unit costing 2 or less total resources that provides power and defensive capabilities be as good, worse, or better?

When I was starting out, I also underrated alliances. In my declining years I've come to love them (& I hope they'll get reprinted at some point).

1) It's harder to get rid of, as you point out.

2) You net 2 loyalty symbols, not one.

3) A 1 loyalty, 2 cost unit (the default for a small unit) will cost you 3 if it's your "bridge" into an allied race. The alliance only costs you 2 in the same situation.

1) "its harder to get rid of" is the best thing going for it. Units die constantly in competitive play right now.

Thanks, guys. I appreciate the input!

I can only agree with the above. The way I look at it, if you're playing empire, but want to splash some out of faction tactics, I would play a dwarf/elf alliance. These would discount both factions cards at the same time. Potentially allowing you to play great cards from both. If you're playing some of the higher loyalty cost items for your faction; Johannes, Twin tailed comet, just about any old elf tactic, playing with alliances that have your symbol would be to your advantage. Imagine, an empire alliance in the kingdom would be all you need to play Thyrus gorman on your second turn. Four resources and two loyalty on the table. Good players will try to target your alliances with support destruction first. It may not have but one power on it's own, but it is a significant force multiplier.