Black Sword said:

The themes are very cool.  They actually induced me to buy the Cygnar book.   I like themed lists, and I like the fact that they have specific units so that I don't have to feel like I have to buy everything in the faction to figure out what to play (although I do tend to be a "completist" on units, not painting of course).

It's work waiting until the Khador book comes out to see what her themes are.

The themes are nice and can be fun but honestly they really wont generate a list that is strong by themselves.  Ive been playing cygnar/highborn for the past 3 years or so and when I saw the theme lists in the new book I was a bit dissapointed with their composition.  While I imagine that they are fun in a casual setting where I tell my opponent Im taking a theme list, they would significantly hamper my effectivness in a tournament/ competative enviornment where players are really trying to take their A game.   

In regards to deciding what models to purchase, MK II has done a pretty good job in balancing the units.  With only a few execeptions most of the models are pretty well point costed.  That isnt to say that some models like the Black 13th arent overpowered for 4pts but not to the level where I cant forsee a case where I wouldnt take them.  Some casters will have units that work better with them (ie widowmakers with sorscha or mechanics with Karchev) but generally you could take almost any unit with any caster and it wont hurt your army like it used to.  Once the Khador book comes out it will be pretty easy to see what units work best with the casters you own/plan to play with. 

Winterguard are ok for 4/6.  The problem I have with them is that they have what I refer to as "trencher syndrome"… they base unit alone is just ok but not anything amazing. In order to turn it from ok to amazing you have to buy UA, Gregorvich, Esorcha, etc. So instead of 6pts they are 6pts base +2pts UA +2pts Gregoravich +2 pts rocketeers. At that point they are awesome but they also cost 12pts plus narrow down your caster choice.

On a side note having played against Khador quite a bit Ive found that the most threatening model to me is Beast 09.  It is worth every point of the 11 it costs with any of Khadors casters and is especially great if you are going to play sorscha.  The imprint with thresher and reach alone makes the jack worth 11pts not to mention its huge speed with a heavy boiler and hyper aggression.

Well now, that's a matter of perspective. I personally don't need to power-twink a list to "take my A game" – I try to do that every time I put models on the table, whether it's a boxed set or what used to be a 750-point tournament army. The "A game" is all about the player, not the models.

Hyper-optimization in army lists contributes to homogeneity and repetitive play IMO. It's much more rewarding for me to put a fluffy, fully-painted force on the table and actually play with it than copy a Top 8 tournament list off the forums and follow directions for the turn 3 'caster kill. I suspect that cookie-cutter approach to list-building is why PP came up with theme lists in the first place.

I guess that's why I lost my taste for tournaments…I got bored with seeing the same 'casters and the same lists time after time after time. PP tried to mitigate that with Steamroller, but fewer than half of my Steamroller opponents paid any attention to the scenario at all – they went straight for the 'caster kill in every game, just like always. Yawn.

As to "trencher syndrome" – I think Winterguard are a solid value at 4/6, without all the add-ons. Why? Because they're a cheap utility unit and your opponents are likely to underestimate them. It's not their job to be awesome threat powerhouses – you have plenty of other Khador units for that.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the "tournament mindset" is wrong or bad, and I don't mean to disparage players who enjoy that style of play. I simply want to point out that it's not the only mindset out there and IMO shouldn't be used as the sole barometer for army composition in any miniatures game.

I think we just have a different definition of what "A game" means. 

In regards to the theme lists, I see where you are going and perhaps I wasnt clear.  I dont think you need to "power twink" at all to play a stronger list. I was just pointing out that in many cases the theme lists out of the cygnar book do not create well balanced lists that will be easy to play or win with.  Many of the requirements dont even make any sense from a general list design perspective (like taking multiple lancers with caine when you would already have a min range of 11" on your spells.) or may just not create lists that are flexible for multiple scenarios (like a Nemo list with multiple fireflys, stormsmiths, and lots of stormguard). I dont deny that they may be fun but they just arent a generally well balanced list designed to take all comers and the "fluff" behind them is questionable at best (caine was all but kicked out of the ATGM academy and in every story favors the charger light jack yet his tier gets unlimited gun mages and no bonus for taking chargers).  This is especially problematic for someone new to the game as buying models specifically to create an unbalanced theme list may discourage them from playing as they are more likely to lose. It also limits their future options by forcing them into specific model limitations.

I still think winterguard are just ok by themselves. I like the 4/6 cost which is why I play sword knights frequently but winterguard stats and range are too underwhelming and I just havent seen them perform well without a lot of spell or other external support.  Personally, and I know it is all playstyle, I would rather take doomreavers which run (and crush everything in their path) without any support or pay 2 more points to take assault kommandos as they are far more flexible: they can decrease def, have multiple attacks, and can sheild wall so they dont die as easily on the approach.