This is a great question. The short answer is that there's an awful lot moving parts associated with a game and its associated armies or factions. So many moving parts that it's not easy to simply let folks enter whatever army they want to. Alas, that means that in order to support a new game or army you have to let iToysoldiers know about it. The good news is that it's pretty easy to do. Just complete the Request for New Game form and we'll jump on it.
Now, if you're curious, here's the longer answer:
Whilst there's a lot of moving parts, the big reason is that in order to provide relevant stats for your games there has to be a certain amount of consistency in how armies are formatted. For lots of the battle meta, I let each player pretty much enter the information however they see fit. This is good because it makes adding new missions, victory conditions, units, commanders, and the like super easy. The draw back, is that players can enter whatever they want. So some people enter "Slay the Warlord" and others enter "Warlord Slain" and mean the exact same thing. With missions, most valuable unit, special rules, etc I circle around from time to time and clean up some of these inconsistencies. It's not a huge deal. It's a trade off that I think is acceptable.
With armies and games, however, it is a big deal. The structure is important for two reasons: 1) Without the structure, as the list of games and armies increase, the interface will become unweildy. 2) People can't spell. *snicker. Since statistics with the army as the defining element are probably the most interesting to players it's iimportant that erroneous data isn't introduced. The only way to prevent this (right now) is to lock down the armies and factions for each game and hope that folks'll let me know when something changes.I hope that clears it up a bit. If you have a suggestion on an approach to allow for new armies on the fly, I'm all ears.