frogbear wrote:
b. People are bored with established lists and the lack of development on them
Established lists don't need any more development. Or not a great deal, at any rate.
Death Korps of Krieg is an example of an established list, for example. Or AMTL. Or Dark Eldar, or Necrons. All of those are known quantities which have known weaknesses and strengths, and so a battle report against each will be easier to draw conclusions from.
Picking two of the most highly experimental lists to test against each other will undoubtedly be fun... but it won't be carrying out strict stress-testing of either list.
Quote:
If the balance of Epic:A was changed to the most recent experimental lists (that had consistent support from an AC), calling the shots on what was balanced, I would not have a problem with that at all.
dptdexys wrote:
Also if both lists are overcosted similar,or both are undercosted similar,then a game between them may feel balanced but not show up problems that would crop up in games against an established list.
This is known as "Swordwind Syndrome", and it took several years to fix!

This is not "GW dogma", this is a playtesting protocol developed by the community after all 3 Swordwind lists came out a little too good.