Quote:
My rambling point is IMO I believe first and foremost when creating a variant list (particularly for wide distribution at tournaments/etc) bringing a new playstyle to the army is paramount, paying homage to an existing GW background army is a distant second.
My plucking the Cadian's as a IG example is from how I percieve them in GW background- they have become the Ultramarines of the Guard world (plastic infantry played a big part) whilst their background explains they have many, many regiments across the Imperium fighting in many, many conflicts in many, many combat styles. A descriptive of a broad army that could justifiably use any IG variant Epic list.
Chroma's list attempts to demonstrate the Cadians at their most iconic: The defence of Cadia itself.
Fighting on Cadia, they were a non-mechanised infantry-based force with access to siegeworks, but of a far higher general level of technology than the Baran Siegemasters or even the Death Korps of Krieg.
So that is their niche.
Of course part of the problem is that the "Steel Legion" army list for Epic does a pretty good job of representing a "generic Imperial Guard regiment", but
doesn't do a particularly exemplary job of representing the Armageddon Steel Legion!
Quote:
In the Epic UK Marine list-set (which determines many tournaments in the UK) I would have voted Scions (or a similar mechanied/armoured SM playstyle) long before DA/BA with token new units.
The EUK Marine "Codex" was quite conservative in the changes it made I think.
The only list there that offers a distinctly different playstyle (Rather than just a few tweaked unit types) is the Black Templars list, and even that was pared back in variance when you compare it with the original NetEA list that served as its template.
So uh, in summation, I agree that you should find the core theme of a variant list when developing it and work hard at highlighting it.
