|
Ok, some explanations on my "ditch the new races" position.
My problem with them is that they dilute the character of an existing army. As Warmaster Nice said earlier in this thread, pre-Tyranids we already had two CC-centered armies (Orks and Chaos). The bugs somewhat "invaded" the niche of these two. With the bugs in, we have now three mostly-CC armies. How many variations of the same thing you can do and still leave some decent characterization?
Same goes with "shooty armies", "specialist armies" etc. You can't just pile variant upon variant and hope the various niches get preserved. Besides, with each new army you instantly add to the "I must have an equivalent of that spiffy new troop type" syndrome.
End result --> every army is the same; everyone has everything, the only real difference is the specific troop composition you will choose in a given game; particularly bad matchups resulting in a game decided before the first turn. Rock-scissors-paper syndrome; WFB 4th edition, anyone?
Now, I'm the first one to admit that ditching armies with existing minis is bad; those at least we have to keep. Still... do we need a whole army list for Exodites (with all of 4 troop types, and with perhaps less than 20 people in the world able to field them)? Do we need a different army list for each and every single freaking imperial detachment ever to be fielded in battle? I mean... SM, IG, TL, Sisters, Pdf.... What's next? The salvation army? Oh and there was that five-car police squad deployed yesterday on Riotous Prime to deal with the assault on the Imperial Garrison there. We must surely develop an appropriate army list for those, too?
As for aliens.... yeah, the galaxy is big and it can accomodate lots of xeno-scum. However, I don't get why each and every race must be fielded alone in a free-for-all galaxy-wide deathmatch. Ever heard of federations?
Now before anyone takes this the wrong way: I'm not in any way, shape or form dissing the work which has been put in the several variant lists which have been published over time in the NetEpic framework. But I do feel strongly that if we want a game in which fielding army A involves more than cosmetic differences from fielding army B, then we can only support so many lists before the inevitable overlap becomes too much. Not to mention the resulting playtesting nightmare.
Variants can be added in the form or limited-scenario or limited-campaign "historic re-enactments", but the core game should concentrate on few, well-developed armies, IMO.
|
But I had to get the L. Russ Rec. Veh. from Doug in Munich ! 
