It's literally heaps of work to do that dpt~. And the current lists need to be straightened out a fair bit to. And minimums worked in and thought out. (Infantry and artillery for IG as an example).

And when it comes to making good scenarios, that's even more work. But a bunch of them in their own book would be splendid. That way they can be found out to be "fair", "unfair", "unfair but not if combined" etc. That would be totally lovely. Esp for GT playing, real tournament battling.

The army lists are only for use with the Grand Tournament scenario (designed especially for tournament play as the name suggests).

It is also ideal for pick-up games against unknown,new or regular opponents to help give a balanced game (even if players have never played each other before).This is one reason for the limited type of army lists that are seen in Epic A.

If you own the rule book you should have read the design notes that state players are encouraged to change anything they want to suit their own gaming group.This includes Army lists even for the GT scenario.

You can produce any Army list you want with as much(full codex with every conceivable unit or formation in it) as little (Only 1 type of formation allowed,say Tacticals for a marine list) if that's what you want.You only have to get your opponents permission to use it not GW's or anyone here.

If you all know what type of list/codex you want then just produce it for your on use it doesn't have to have an official stamp here or anywhere.I personally prefer the more limited official list (BIEL-TAN/STEEL LEGION/GHAZGKHULL MAG URUK THRAKA’S
WAR HORDE etc.)
...
To those who want full codex list's I would say just go ahead and produce them.That's the beauty of epicA it's your game when you play it at home or with friends so you can (to quote a regular on the forum) DO WHAT WORKS FOR YOU .

To conclude... DWWFY doesn't fly. Not if we want Epic to live.
To make Epic fly we need credibility and stability. Some ease of use would work too.

Either you want gobs of options or good balance. You can't have both.

If you want non-competitive options just mash two or three E:A lists together and voila. Good to go. But expecting to balance all that mess together is sheer folly.

All of this is a moot point anyway. There is no desire to make a core list for the armies other than what's already been done.

People seem to like the idea of 40k 3rd-4th edition border customizable lists but forget that they were a total mess balance-wise.