Now it would be helpfull firstly to have a list of the people that could be the head author and a list of the previous army books they’ve done…
But ignoring that for the moment, who would you like to have as the head author of our book?
A few things you might want to consider:
Firstly they must have sufficient interest in dwarfs/ chaos dwarfs to actually build up interest within the design team and get a book done at all!!
Second, ideally, they should be someone with a good record for creating balanced armies.��With the potential variety the CD could have, it might be all to easy to make them hideously over powered.
Lastly it should be written by someone who truly understands what it would be to have an evil industrial army, and to bring this through properly in the fluff and rules.
Now top of my short list so far is Pete Haines (7th Ed Dwarfs, latest codex space marines, I think he’s also ‘head guy’ for 40k, he loves dwarfs).
Very close behind is Matt Ward (7th ed O&G).��Now I’m not so sure on him as I’m not sure exactly what else he’s done.��He does seem good at building an evocative background from what I can recall.��Not sure he likes CD, but I think he’s a fan of evil armies in general.
Unfortunately my last one is VERY controversial…��The Prince of Darkness, the man who feels no pain, Stone Cold Gav Thorpe himself ;).��Now looking at my 3 things to consider above for him;
1) He probably has the biggest interest in Chaos Dwarfs of anyone in GW design team,��So much so that he included them in his book (and in sufficient detail that he has already put a bit of thought in).
2) Here I think Pete Haines would do a much better job, I think if Gav throws in what HE wants without much arguments from the rest it could be a disaster.
3)��Grudge Bearer shows he can think sufficiently about building depth and giving a very good impression of the race.��He’s not the Loremaster for nothing.
Look at the list Gav Thorpe have made he totaly suxx and have no idere on how to play at all just look at the dark elf. I’ll much prefere the RH list to anything he can come up with
Alessio have made 2 of the best armys (undead and skaven) so it have to be him.
Look at the list Gav Thorpe have made he totally sucks and have no idea on how to play at all just look at the dark elves. I'll much prefere the RH list to anything he can come up with
Alessio have made 2 of the best armies (undead and skaven) so it'd have to be him.
qwe50
DE were good before the update, now they're even better
An Skaven are so balanced :rolleyes: vamps are a little overpowered as well
If we get complaints about an unbalanced list now, just think what it would be like if we were as unbalanced as skaven
On Gav T; I remember the days when he was a CD hate figure for kepping us out!��However I certainly don't object to his ideas and think he would make a good job as long as he doesn't take his crazy ideas too far
I’d probably say Alessio. I know he has a tendency to go slightly overboard (only slightly ;)), but IYAM he’s most definitely one of the only sods left at GW who knows how to make proper connections between list and background. The other one is Gav, but his lists suck.
Phil Kelly is... Not one of my favorite developers to say the least. Yes, it's true that he actually did a good, sound job on the Ogres, but the list was hurried and not thought through.
the ogre list is probertly the worst army of them all
qwe50
I agree and disagree.
While I agree that it has the worst army list around (i.e. weakest, with least potential for cheese and not enough unit choices)
I disagree, however, because the background, theme, theming possibilities, art, layout, and (aside from the Yhetees and the Gorger's pose) models were all excellent. I certainly wouldn't mind the same treatment as Ogres in that respect.
Maybe in the WAAC environment prevalent in the UK and to a lesser extent the US ogres are weak but in Australia people have no problem achieving consistent top ten placings with them… I think that they are not an easy army to win with but are by no means a bad army.