As is inevitably the case, the minute the 40k meta settles into something approaching balance GW pulls it’s patented “Blow up the tournament scene with a busted army” routine. While the idea of banning whatever army GW decides to boost this month have always been hotly discussed, we’ve seen the first concrete steps taken with some tournaments in Germany banning the League of Votann (LoV). Is this an over-reaction? Or is this a valid response to poorly written rules?
Argument Against Banning:
In my mind the strongest argument against banning the LoV is that we don’t really know how well they will play. As GW lacks any public beta testing (and after rumors of them cancelling contracts with many established play-testers) we don’t fully know how the army will perform in the meta. They appear to have some very strong mechanics, and certain rules that are open to abuse. However, much of this is still hypothetical. There have been other scares in the past with certain armies having strong mechanics that turn out to be over-blown due to points costs, secondaries or other limitations. No army is written without some form of weakness (at least in GW’s mind), and it may be that these limitations equal or exceed the army’s strengths. Since we are in an environment that is still quite information-poor we may benefit from holding off on bans until they are established as a problematic army.
Argument for Banning:
Honestly, think one of the strongest arguments for banning them is that players currently have very little power to shift GW’s actions. Given that many people will buy miniatures and never play, or avoid tournaments means that the competitive community has little recourse in curbing GW’s excesses. A public and wide-reaching ban is one of the few methods of recourse that players have to express their discontentment. We have seen a similar effort take place over the 2″ engagement range in ruins play out. When GW saw that the majority of events didn’t like their new rule they quietly pulled it in the latest FAQ update. And while we don’t know how much of the market competitive players make up it would threaten the sales of a new army if it were widely banned. Being a niche hobby GW knows that it has heavily cornered the market but hat also makes it vulnerable to customer pressure campaigns as it has a smaller customer base (at least for now).
Conclusion:
I really do not know what is the best course of action in this regard. I do feel that some members of the community are in hysterics over the LoV, but that might be warranted. GW as a company has a relatively low commitment to the balance of it’s flagship game and seems to indulge in it’s worst excesses frequently. The LoV aren’t going to be the last army that looks over-powered before release and thus even a small victory here wouldn’t guarantee or even prolong a balanced meta. That being said, collective action has been effective in bringing companies to heel in the past, but it must be thoughtfully and carefully executed.
And remember, Frontline Gaming sells gaming products at a discount, every day in their webcart!
