Honestly I think it needs the ERC to get involved to give direction for supplements.
Especially the supplements ERC member, but also the relevant ERC "race" members too.

As we've seen, if it's left to the whims of individual champions, supplements get murdered.

It would take a serious change in attitude (or membership) from the ERC to get me interested in list development or supplement writing again.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

@cybershadow, i would love to help with a new book supplement. I can paint or model.

Another point in what should be in the book, i agree completely with whoever said chaos. A lot of people like chaos, including conversions in the supplement would be huge. Chaos items go for a lot on ebay, but i think having a customize your army section, with basic customizations and advanced would be nice. It leaves something for everyone. Not everyone can sculpt or customize to a high standard so having something for both would be key to getting the less skilled interested. The 13th black crusade would be amazing, tons of different armies went into this fight.

Blind-

When this topic came up I wasn't surprised to see some of the comments.
From a players point of view, I am not a fan of most of the fan written lists, I just don't understand why they are even needed. But as it has been pointed out anybody can write a list, from an idea they have. What relevance it has in the 40K universe is neither here nor there. Which I feel is a bit of a problem in it's self. Some of the fan based lists are way out there.

For a game that is 9 years old, I don't think it is lagging behind, it is a division scale game, so adding something in that is new to the 40K'verse, could happen, but does this affect the balance of the game, 9 years ago 40K was 3rd ed going to 4th ed. The game was about combat and Maneuver, larger battles were to be had, the fluff was smaller battles set in larger engagements. Now the game is all about Platoons, air units, and what ever else they have come up with (still to play a game of 6th ed). To keep up with that is an arm's race, that just wont be won.

Personally I would like to see an update to the rules first, changing the scenario for Tournament play a little. Giving the generic force's a way to be a flavored force. Like a Marine force being flavored like a specific chapter, with out have 16 different lists. Making sure the people that are meant to be looking at this stuff are active.

At the end of the day I am still going to play Epic. But there possibly needs to be less I want, and more what does the game really need from the community.

On a side note, i know it's not common to cross BFG over, but i think a combo campaign with space battles and dropping on the planet would draw interests together. I love combined arms, i've also heard of people playing BFG having effects round by round on the planet below. Whoevers winning in space the ground commander gets to call in lance strikes or reinforcements. I would love to watch something like this... more so though i would love to take part in something like this. Maybe create the scenarios so they can be played in order and have an ultimate objective. Maybe Abaddon wins?

Blind-

Yeah, horizons statement is also my opinion. Combining BFG with Epic would be a nice thing. Personally I play both and it would be fun to mix them.

There was talk of running an online EPIC campaign - something I would be very interested in helping with

_________________
My EPIC and BFG Blog: https://epicaddiction.wordpress.com/

I have been reading this thread for a bit now and i can appreciate many of the opinions expressed. Before i even delve into a post on where i see development i want to ask;

Is it viable to have a split netea system? For this i mean a 41st millenium group of lists that represent the old boys and caters for all the available miniatures - hence a stable and non-changing system as opposed to the 41.5 millenium lists that represent the current and ever changing 40k universe.

Work is done to close out the 41st millenium and all development is merely done on 41.5 onwards and we do not look back. That way players have a clear representation of what list belongs where.

Thoughts?

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Eh.

I think that split is more of a design philosophy decision than a split that needs to be made concrete. We all know which lists are "modern" and which are legacy, but that doesn't mean legacy lists should be finished and abandoned.

_________________
SG

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

I would be very cautious about further sub-dividing development, creating a new category of list, and potentially splitting the game into incompatible halves (would we expect balance across both sides, for example?).

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

In general here I agree with pretty much everything that Spectrar Ghost and jimmyzimms have said here.

Almost all the ACs were motivated/vocal when they were working at getting lists ready for the compendium but some have gone fairly quiet lately. I don't think a drastic overhall should be done, perhaps a polite kick in the ass for some wouldn't go amiss.

What I mean is that the discussion on a lot of lists has died a death(nids anyone?), some things that drew a lot of discussion when they were brought up initially haven't seemed to generate feedback or discussion since. To give 2 examples there were proposed point cost changes for some imperial guard & space marine upgrades/formations that haven't really come up at all since the initial discussion. I presume the ACs themselves are testing these things, why not share their own findings to generate some discussion? It might prompt others to share their own findings, sure sometimes it will generate a circular discussion but at least it keeps people aware to test it.

this has already happened to an extent with epicUK and netEA (at least in the UK) at least the lists are still mostly compatible, and identical in the case of the Tau....

I've been thinking about this a lot and I think that being more adventurous with the NetEA lists could be good.... or how about having a section of experimental, in development and approved units in a list? that way you could cut the wheat from the chaff quite easily when arranging a game, playtesting would be very easy, and the whole process would be quite organic as the units which work would be gradually approved, whereas the more esoteric or unneccessary units would fall by the wayside, it would be quite simple to introduce units as experimental, with the AC setting the initial stats for example....

I'd also be very interested in working on a forum-wide supplement, I think playing a large campaign and recording the results could be the basis of a great storyline and guys with a talent for writing strong narratives like E&C and Moscovian could take ownership of tying it all together without having to invest their own personal vision as much as before

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

If we are to consider trying to keep up with W40k in any manner, we will have to consider how we introduce the new units into E:A whist resolving the inevitable risk of imbalance and power-creep that derives from the different philosophies of the two systems.

I echo the suggestion that we should develop the purist 'Unit' lists separate from the army lists that use them, not least because that is generally how the development of E:A armies and lists actually works, while it also enables the developers to pick and choose the appropriate units and formation appropriate to their particular army.

However, I would also suggest that the army lists should also consider the additional dimensions of location and time. At the moment W40k and E:A are somewhat one-dimensional when compared against the 'fluff', because there is no sense of time or history in the army lists. For example, shouldn't there be significant differences in organisations and structure before and after Horus Heresy, before and after the 'Nid invasion etc? I am sure you can all present other examples.

Adopting the concepts of time and location in the lists would allow greater flexibility in developing lists and balancing lists against each other, because each list would only need to balance against the relevant sub-set of opponents; "Horus heresy" lists need only consider those lists, not necessarily the 'Nid invasion lists, or those from other time-zones or galaxies.

Indeed, this approach might also assist the other excellent point of creating campaigns, story lines and even supplements

As a final, left field thought, we could possibly try campaigns that work a little like the stratgic computer games where the various participants start with basic resources, and can 'develop' (introduce) new units and formations though particular actions (the capture of specific resources, locations, technologies etc). . . . .

I don't think it would be a good idea to split NetEA (even further).

Here is the strength of the EA list system - want to include modern units in a marine army? make a list with them in it. Honestly, I think the lists from Swordwind and Armageddon should be frozen, except for balance concerns. They are what they are, and they work. Instead of taking something that isn't (significantly) broken and padding it with new units, build a new list from the ground up. Epic as a rule system handles a Codex Astartes (2003) and Codex Astartes (2012) just fine. The only problem is that some people get their panties in a bunch if they can't point at one list and say that that list is THE core list.

Okay, a bit hyperbolical here. But there's no reason that all lists have to exist in the fluff at the same time. Rename the Codex Astartes list if that is necessary, call it Astartes Armageddon, a list representing the various Space Marine chapters present at Armageddon. Then make a new list, find an appropriate campaign to set it in, and put in Land Speeder Storms, Storm Talons, Thunderfire Cannons and all that.

Start naming the lists for specific places, and I think you'll find that there is a lot of space for lists.

Dingdingding!

[Insert obligatory reference about finishing what we've started first here]

_________________
SG

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

QFT.

Game balance MUST trump keeping up with GW's business requirement to sell new toys to eager players. Many/most/all of the approved lists are balanced and finished. The lists work.
For exampkle, if someone wants a Storm Talon in their Marine army, buy the model (if/when it ever becomes available) and use the proxy rule (as a Thunderbolt) until someone comes up with a variant/alternate themed army list that has these new shiny toys in it and when it's balanced.

GW will always come up with new units that change everything. It's their world and it's their right to continually invent new things to sell. If we try and keep up with this, there will be no such thing as a finished (balanced) list.

Here's an old quote from one of the main protagonists in this thread:
Out of context... maybe. Makes a point - yes.
That same person now thinks that Marines have always had fighters and that they will be a staple of every Marine list from here to eternity.

At some point, a list has to be stamped FINISHED. If lists are always in a state of development, there will be no way to ensure that they are balanced and ready for competitive play.
There's little point in calling for NetEA army champ heads to roll if the list they are steward of is finished and has been in use for a long period of time without balance issues. If the army champ is stifling development of new lists to incorporate the latest cool toys for 40K then there's an issue.

As always, this is just how I see it. I'm not trying to convince anyone to change their minds or say that my way is the only way.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.