Or this thread could be called 'Why Brets and WE still have a long wait'.
So what follows is my theory of how GW have chosen whic harmies to update. If you think it is complete nonsense, please hear me out, then call me on it.
We all know that there are certain elements of 8th ed which are very useful and certain elements which suffer.
Useful - big units of infantry, monstrous infantry, monsters, cannons and magic (depending on how the winds blow for you).
Underpowered - cavalry, skirmishers, small elite units.
Now look at the armies which have been updated:
O&G - hordes, monsters
TK - hordes, monsters
OK - monstrous infantry, monsters
VC - hordes, magic
And with Empire rumoured to be next and likely to see big blocks of infantry backed up by warmachines, the trend continues of armies suited to the stronger elements of 8th ed. And so the likes of Brets and WE, who already suffer under 8th ed are likely to continue to do so, because how do you make them work in the current rules without completely altering their army dynamic and playstyle? In short, I think GW have picked the 'easy' armies, the ones they knew they could make work without radical alterations whilst the more dificult ones are left to languish. And if i am right, it begs the question - why come up with a ruleset that make some amies obselete when you have no idea how to fix said armies?
What does the community think? Is ther logic to GW's choice of army updates? What does this mean for the less able members of the warhammer world?