speaking in general terms, how happy are people currently with

1) editing existing lists to include newly released units by GW or Forgeworld
2) adding newly released units to new developed lists
3) adding units that exist in the background but without an official interpretation
4) creating brand new units to fill out a newly developed list

_________________
My shifting projects

I think it's really conditional - on the prominence of a new unit, the way in which list behaviours are changed, etc. everything should be judged on an individual basis with a general bias in favour of only changing established lists if the need is great (For example I consider the new space marine Stormtalon to be a unit that definitely does deserve to be in the codex marine list).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I concur with E&C's concise statement. It is most assuredly a case by case situation.

In a more specific theme:

As much as we all have mixed feelings with 40k, it is a living IP and much of what they produce is interesting (at least to me) and the inclusion of new units by FW especially has overall been a good thing for the hobby. The inclusion of units where appropriate helps attract new players (like the Stones said, "What a drag it is getting old") and I've seen inspire some of the greatest scratch builds by players (the magnum opus of custom work no doubt being Epic Raiders).


We don't hesitate to discuss whether existing lists need tweeking to balance them better for included units so I fail to see why we would categorically reject a new unit for an existing list as a concept? Granted inclusion of a new unit unit is going to require a far effort to justify, as it should, than say dropping the price of a vindicator detachment by 25 points, but that's to be expected. I think that in practice inclusion of new units for the most part will be to cover gaping holes in existing lists/fluff that can be filled with new units (Marine aerospace units being the topic de jour).


It'd be helpful to have an example but in general I don't see this being too far different than creating a new unit for an existing list, albeit with an even higher bar for inclusion. If there's a throw away line in some crap BL publications (looking at you Mr Goto) it's probably not going to fly (and frankly why would you want to include that to begin with???) as opposed to something well described by a respected author like Abnett. Still I don't have anything concrete to come up with other than the obligatory Ordinatus mention which isn't exactly the best fit (being a concept vs a specific unit)


This one is mighty tricky and in principle should be avoided without groundswell opinion. However come before the synod to make your justifications and let judgement to passed!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

Given the scale of the game and the scope of some of the models involved it would be difficult to say for any certainty except on a case-by-case basis.

I'd be hesitant to mess with any existing lists for fear of balance issues but it might be useful to test new models in some of the developmental or experimental lists to see how they work

My thoughts, as well.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

Development of stats should probably take place in dev/exp lists but once the unit is baked incorporating to an established list is best done by wide agreement vs rejecting it outright. Case in Point: Thunderbolts should be destined to be removed from a pure astartes list. They only exist due to lack of resources when codex marines were first published vs any fluff or design need (or better put only got shoehorned into marines as they needed a flyer). Something like the lynx from IA11 should not be added to an exusting list.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

As a general rule, there are a number of factors I consider before I even begin worrying about the next questions.

First, does the unit in question have a model? If not, can one easily be converted by the average hobbyist. If the answer is no to both, then I usually don't think it's a good idea to start including it in lists. There are some exceptions (such as the Storm Eagle and the Storm Talon), but as a rule I'll think it's a bad idea.

Second, does the unit desperately offend me through some combination of its rules, background, appearance or purpose? The Storm Raven and Storm Talon, for example, are both so ugly (and have weak enough background) that I'm less interested in including them in Epic.

Third, does the unit actually do something moderately interesting in Epic? If not, it's not worth including. For example, there are enough Russ and Land Raider variants that new ones are less compelling than they might be.



Depends on the unit and the list. The Space Marine lack of non-ally superheavies and flyers might lean toward the inclusion of new SM flyers or superheavies. Biel-Tan, on the other hand, are a pretty solid list as-is. As a rule, editing established stuff for shiny new money-grabs without models is a Bad Idea.



Fine, so long as it serves a purpose and isn't just for the shininess.



I'm generally OK with it, but dislike it out of the suspicion that an official interpretation will eventually appear to ruin everything. Thus, I prefer its avoidance where possible.



As a rule, no. There's a lot of 40K background, and if you can't cobble together enough units for a list you're probably doing something wrong. Depends what you mean by "brand-new", of course.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

1) In general this is a bad idea, IMO. Lists are developed and balanced with a certain set of units; adding new units (potentially) disrupts the balance enough to require major playtesting.

2) This is fine.

3) As long as the unit is developed enough in the fluff to make reasonable guesses as to it's capabilities. We can certainly add units that are not in Epic or 40k, but need to be wary of creating a unit of of just a name or short description. Even the Heresy era Space marine transport (Stormbird?) really has too little info to make a proper unit, for instance.

4) In general you'll find a lot of pushback on this. I would be willing in certain circumstances to consider a variant of an existing vehicle that fits what could be expected (Eldar Rending Hammer or Macharius Hydra, for instance), but would be uneasy about a vehicle created from whole cloth.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

1) If the new unit fits a hole which shouldn't be there then i have no problem with this.

2) Even less of a problem.

3) The unit in question should be described in multiple sources with matching capabilities.

4) Clearly a no if there is a way around this.

On a side note: Availabilityof a suitable modelin Epic scale isn't an issue for as on this site a multitude of proxies appear regularily.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/