Going back to a little earlier in the thread, I do want more official class options/variants. For instance, in various episodes of Happy Fun Hour, Mearls has stated that some of the classes should have had their subclasses at 1st level, but those classes were finished before the designers had settled on their design goal. Some of the design goals include the following: First, "When you choose your subclass, ideally, you are not changing your equipment" and your class should support the character you want to play at first level; Second, a subclass at first level should say something about your identity; Third, your base class should support "melding" into your subclass.
1. "When you choose your subclass, ideally you are not changing your equipment." "The character you want to play should be the character you play at first level." The example that he provided was, if they had designed the Fighter class to rely on strength and heavy armor, this would have posed an issue for many fighter types.. Had they did that, the guy wanting to play an Archer has no reason to not use strength and heavy armor until getting a subclass and then switches to bow and leather armor.
The Valor Bard breaks this design goal according to Mearls, in the Kraken episode. If I recall correctly, the feeling was that, as a result, the Bard should have had its subclass at first level.
2. A subclass received at 1st level says something about your character's starting identity compared to a subclass at 3rd.
Mearls stated that Wizard was, originally, going to receive their Tradition at first level. However, it was moved to second level to give the Wizard Arcane Recovery at first level. In a Psion or Mystic episode of Happy Hour, he stated that he now thinks that they should have given the Tradition at first level (and move recovery to 2nd (?)). I am curious as to what moving the Tradition to first level would provide.
3. The core class abilities should support "melding" into the subclass.
In the most recent episodes of Happy Hour, Mike was working on an Urban Ranger subclass. The problem was that the base class does not support a transition to the subclass. Thus, there is an issue of not playing the character you want at the start and changing how you play the character upon taking the subclass.
To resolve the issue, Mike made notes for an urban ranger variant for the Ranger class including a variant of Natural Explorer. Personally, I felt some skill swaps were also necessary (which is what I did for my own Urban Ranger variant).
From my point of view, the Rogue Scout introduces similar issues to the rogue. The subclass was intended to fill the role of a non spell casting ranger. However, using the rogue introduces elements not fitting for someone whose idea is being a wilderness scout or hunter and not a thief that transitioned into a wilderness rogue. The rogue needs a class variant to aid the transition into wilderness based subclasses much like the ranger needed a base class variant to support urban based ranger subclasses (Note: Yes, I have also created my own wilderness rogue variant as a choice at first level. However, it does change the need to officially address these classes failure to meet WOTC's own class design goals).
Personally, I would like to some other classes receive official class variants based upon 1 and 3. I would also like to see some variants for certain class abilities (e.g. the Thief's Use Magical Device and some Monk abilities (personally, I would love to see a complete redesign of the monk, but that is not going to happen)).