Ok so I left N3 to wait for the MRRF (which was my main army) update that looks like it never came. Now the like is out of print and no stats till Nov? Is this sectorial dead and I should count my models as a loss?
Define dead? FRRM have been playable up to the finish of N3 with several small updates along the way. All your models will be playable using profiles updated to N4 in November. The models are mostly out of production as CB have started rotating Sectorials out of production to keep their catalogue manageable. Some FRRM troopers will also appear in Kosmoflot on Friday (Mirage-5, Paracommandos). CB have committed to keeping all the out of production Sectorials playable in perpetuity, and have left the door open for a comeback in the future. They planned to bring back the first of them with a Shasvastii style revamp in 2021,though they haven't announced/finalised which of them or will be yet. Bottom line is that come late November you'll be able to use the models you own in N4, either in Vanilla, FRRM, or parts of Kosmoflot.
It's dead. Stop pretending that some nebulous commitment of "WE MIGHT BRING IT BACK!" exists. They've not committed to that. Merovingia has basically been on life support since the start of fricking N3. They continue to be plugged in, it's as simple as that.
As @colbrook noted, you'll be able to play them in November, which is, admittedly, less than ideal. CB does have plans and hopes to bring them back... the when is the kicker. However, if they come back half as strong as SEF have? Well, that'll be fun to see.
CB has said they have plans for years now. Ain't shit to prove they actually do, beyond the limited garbage we saw with Kosmofail.
Noting and immediately moving past the fact you managed to contradict yourself within a post. Yes, they're on life support, but they're still playable as an official ITS faction, they still get adjacent updates (new 112 and HMG Anaconda) and they've not been removed from the game or shunted to an "opponents permission" or "casual games only" twilight. A poster here won a mid size 400pt tactical window tournament shortly pre COVID lockdowns so I'd definitely say rumours of their death have been rather exaggerated. Can a new player jump in easily with them? No (though there's a guy on FB who's got a great FRRM force using proxied/converted USARF minis) but are those of us with the models left with a bunch of useless pewter stuck in models cases for eternity? Also no.
The only problem is that CB comes up with new, sometimes unnecessary sectorials, instead of getting back to the older ones. But this doesn't mean they won't. Successful Shas rework is a good example that they can, and I'm sure the French will be back. There are some reasons to be jaded about their approach, but there are also reasons to believe they'll do right by us.
Shock Army says what? Because Shock Army has been shelved for how many years now? The Shas rework is a fluke. It is the only one of the 'shelved' sectorials we have seen return.
It's a garbage concept, capitalizing on their Russian line rather than actually doing right by their own lore that had Merovingia becoming an emerging space-capable power. Plus, for whatever reason the Spanish are infatuated with Russia.
Says you. ASA sits on the shelf for two years, is still in a very good shape, rules-wise, and while its models are OOP most of them - save GdA - are a good, modern sculpts.
All I’m saying is that I was pretty disappointed that Onyx didn’t have EI Aspects in it, and it definitely hurts my enjoyment of the sectorial, but I don’t go around telling people that it’s a terrible failure of a concept. I just focus instead on playing the parts of the faction that do appeal to me.
And I, personally, could see a resculpted Guarda de Assalto as an S5 if they don't count the Tik as the larger troop for SAA.
Eh, the cruddy NA2- style roster just puts me off Kosmoflot completely. Same with Onyx, actually. It can be a bit of a pain when CB just don't release anything you care about for years, especially if prior fluff makes mention of it. Not really apologising for the object of the conversation's attitude, but sometimes you can't just look past the flaws and you get stuck with the same army for years. I actually got into MRRF just before it went OOP, simply because that older style of Sectorial design with high AVA and versatile units appealed to me over the more modern Fireteam soup guff. Best I can tell, there's no option in N4 that fits my preference if they're all being updated to modern standards, and that saddens me.
I'm a big fan of SHI, so yeah. Though I'm half-decided to drop PanO altogether, if N4 update won't convince me that CB's vision for the faction won't be fun for me. Same. Though my first impression from seeing some of the previews - MAF and CJC rosters, to be precise - was positive. Thay look flexible, but not over the top. In general, my feeling is that CB design team has a bit too short attention span, and prefers to streak forward to the next new thing they came up with, instead of slowing down and reviewing some of the older stuff. Instead of Kosmofłot, Svalarheima, half of NA2 and O12 in its entirety, I'd prefer them to bolster YJ, review Ariadna sectorials properly, and revitalize Tohaa. They come up with cool concepts with potential to be a great balancing tool, like Surprise Shot L2, and leave it on what, two troopers in the game? While half of the new releases get some combination of MSV, Mimetism, and/or NWI+Shock Immunity. And it'd be so easy to shake things up, come up with more interesting stuff...
Well, to be fair, while their attention span might be short, it’s not an uncommon thing among gamers either. Always looking for the new shiny, always racing on to the next army, etc. Is that a good or the right thing? Perhaps not, but it does make it so there are few good answers.
One thing is certain, complaining that their ideas don't line up with mine won't be fun for me. And fortunately, the choice is wide enough that I have no trouble finding army that will be fun to play until the previous one will change for the better.
