Well would they sell less well?

Also, the game has been out for 2 years now. Its growing in popularity. It would be going gangbusters if there wasnt a stock hickup at the release of wave 2.

Now there are a lot of people that are not playing the game. Granted not everyone has seen it being played and said thats cool, but if you regularly go to an LGS, and you havent made the plunge, then something is missing.

Will a new faction be that thing that gets people to commit? Maybe. Maybe not. But I cant see how it would hurt.

Although I'd rather play a fringer faction than either Rebel or Empire, can I at least have another non-imperial ship as part of the Empire faction to fly with my Firespray? That's all I ask. You don't really need a third faction to do that with the Rebels, you can just use a YT-1300, YT-2400, HWK, Z95, and Y-wing and you've got your balanced smuggler fleet. Your only option on the imperial side is 2 Firesprays or 3 Firesprays. We're not all ex-Warhammer gamers here, some of us are new to wargaming and got into this because we like the star wars theme. Give that theme the full treatment. The scum & villiany was heavily featured in the movies, it was the primary motivation/story arc for one of the main characters. It needs to be in the game. Honestly, the Phantom, Defendor, & Decimator all seem cool, but I've never heard of them before FFG made models of them, and will only buy them because thier machanics seem interesting. At least everyone here knows who IG-88, Bossk, Dengar, etc are, regardless of whether or not we recognize their ships.

We're all fanboys of one variety or another. I only take issue with the ones who want to take an already great game in a new direction, potentially satisfying their own particular inclinations at the expense of the game's overall health. I have no less faith in FFG than anyone else, but my mantra has ever been "if it's not broke, don't fix it." If the game was flagging then I might be on board for some radical change, but my impression is that participation has never been higher. And when a game is already doing this well, change can only take it one direction - downward.

Well, I'm an RPGer, and I do want the game to reflect the SWU. I also like fringiness, though I fear that some of the fringe -stuff, like Black Sun or Zann Consortium may come out of some of the more sketchy parts of the EU. (I will admit that I prejudge, because I'm not too familiar with the Shadows of Empire stuff, though I have to cock my head at some of it.) Nevertheless, it seems like the game is already on board with elements out of the SoE.

As an RPGer, I do want more room for narrative stakes and different missions that portray the galactic civil war as a civil war rather than a conventional war. It doesn't mean that I want the game to turn into an RPG. I just want options to expand my enjoyment, and I think that bringing in a third faction would be a good avenue for that.

I don't see why it would break the fun of those who are playing the game as is already. I think it would expand the realm of fun to be had. Are you just afraid of unwashed RPGer masses rubbing shoulders with you?

Expansion to a 3rd faction in the current structure of the game wouldn't be a major change, the way adding a third player to chess would. Many of those arguments (I think you've made them, correct me if I'm wrong) are straw-man, and are in no way implied by what we third factioners are arguing for.

But the bigger point is what if anything would a third faction actually offer that more ships for the current 2 wouldn't.

The idea is that a third faction could offer a third distinct play style that is different from the styles offered by Rebels and Imperials. This therefore makes the game more diverse, less predictable, and more interesting.

But I cant see how it would hurt.

Well there would need to be new rules, new tokens, new packaging design, ect... So adding a 3rd faction will cost money, money they won't be making back again. So by asking for a 3rd faction you're asking for FFG to take a potential loss, if a 3rd faction doesn't add more players or sales.

Then there's the issue of them having a delay in getting new Imperial and Rebel ships out, that means for those of us who aren't interested in a 3rd faction we could be looking at 6 months with nothing new to buy.

So there's a fairly meaningful risk on FFG's part to introduce something that has very little chance of improving their bottom line in any way.

The idea is that a third faction could offer a third distinct play style that is different from the styles offered by Rebels and Imperials.

I've heard this said, but yet to hear a single concept of how it would actually be different...

We're all fanboys of one variety or another. I only take issue with the ones who want to take an already great game in a new direction, potentially satisfying their own particular inclinations at the expense of the game's overall health. I have no less faith in FFG than anyone else, but my mantra has ever been "if it's not broke, don't fix it." If the game was flagging then I might be on board for some radical change, but my impression is that participation has never been higher. And when a game is already doing this well, change can only take it one direction - downward.

Well, I'm an RPGer, and I do want the game to reflect the SWU. I also like fringiness, though I fear that some of the fringe -stuff, like Black Sun or Zann Consortium may come out of some of the more sketchy parts of the EU. (I will admit that I prejudge, because I'm not too familiar with the Shadows of Empire stuff, though I have to cock my head at some of it.) Nevertheless, it seems like the game is already on board with elements out of the SoE.

As an RPGer, I do want more room for narrative stakes and different missions that portray the galactic civil war as a civil war rather than a conventional war. It doesn't mean that I want the game to turn into an RPG. I just want options to expand my enjoyment, and I think that bringing in a third faction would be a good avenue for that.

I don't see why it would break the fun of those who are playing the game as is already. I think it would expand the realm of fun to be had. Are you just afraid of unwashed RPGer masses rubbing shoulders with you?

Expansion to a 3rd faction in the current structure of the game wouldn't be a major change, the way adding a third player to chess would. Many of those arguments (I think you've made them, correct me if I'm wrong) are straw-man, and are in no way implied by what we third factioners are arguing for.

I edited my previous post to include some general RPG comments, if you're inclined to re-read it. No, I have no problem with people who like to play RPGs. I've done it myself a few times. I just feel like if you want to play an RPG, go play an RPG. If you want to play a dog fighting game, that's what we have X-Wing for. Let both types of games do what they're best at. The most successful businesses are the ones that do one thing and do it well.

Now that we're back on topic, maybe you can actually address my argument in post #93, rather than ignoring it and focusing on my satire instead. Let me help you out by quoting it:

You're reading EU plot devices into the original trilogy that were never there. Han owed money to a gangster. That's all any of movies ever hinted at, and is in no way indicative of a "third faction."

OK, I'll do you the courtesy of addressing your argument (such as it is) - a courtesy you yourself have attempted to avoid right throughout the thread in favour of snark.

Are you seriously trying to say that the entire narrative arc of Han's debts to the Hutts was nothing more than a "hinted at EU plot device"? Really?

The first film hinted at Han's debts, I'll give you that. The second film established - via the eclectic collection of independent contractors that Vader hired to try and succeed where his own forces had failed - that were were agencies OUTSIDE of the Empire that could cause a major threat to the Rebel heroes. And the third film opened with the Rebel heroes having to turn their attention away from the omnipresent threat of the Empire to deal with them. They literally had to fight against a third, independent faction to rescue their friend.

None of the above is EU material. These are canon events from the first three films. Now of course, if we DO decide to delve into the EU (which FFG have already done with many of their releases for the X-Wing Miniatures Game), we see a HUGE variety of independent paramilitary forces - mercenaries, privateers, bounty hunters, planetary militias and more - which have worked for both and against the two existing factions already in the game.

If FFG are willing to dig into the EU to expand their two existing factions, there's absolutely no reason why they can't or shouldn't use that material to expand the game even further.

Now that we're back on topic, maybe you can actually address my argument in post #93, rather than ignoring it and focusing on my satire instead. Let me help you out by quoting it:

You're reading EU plot devices into the original trilogy that were never there. Han owed money to a gangster. That's all any of movies ever hinted at, and is in no way indicative of a "third faction."

OK, I'll do you the courtesy of addressing your argument (such as it is) - a courtesy you yourself have attempted to avoid right throughout the thread in favour of snark.

Are you seriously trying to say that the entire narrative arc of Han's debts to the Hutts was nothing more than a "hinted at EU plot device"? Really?

The first film hinted at Han's debts, I'll give you that. The second film established - via the eclectic collection of independent contractors that Vader hired to try and succeed where his own forces had failed - that were were agencies OUTSIDE of the Empire that could cause a major threat to the Rebel heroes. And the third film opened with the Rebel heroes having to turn their attention away from the omnipresent threat of the Empire to deal with them. They literally had to fight against a third, independent faction to rescue their friend.

None of the above is EU material. These are canon events from the first three films. Now of course, if we DO decide to delve into the EU (which FFG have already done with many of their releases for the X-Wing Miniatures Game), we see a HUGE variety of independent paramilitary forces - mercenaries, privateers, bounty hunters, planetary militias and more - which have worked for both and against the two existing factions already in the game.

If FFG are willing to dig into the EU to expand their two existing factions, there's absolutely no reason why they can't or shouldn't use that material to expand the game even further.

I see. So Jabba represented a third faction, capable of contending with both the Rebels and the Empire militarily. That's why he had to hire out for independent help, the same help that the Empire also hired to find Han. Never mind the fact that those same bounty hunters would have had nothing to do with each other otherwise. I must be remembering the script differently than you are.

That's a lot of dot connecting for a handful of lines of dialogue and a minor plot that focused around rescuing a friend from a gangster (owing more to the machinations of the Empire than anything else), all without so much as a word about this supposed third faction. You're reading something into the script that wasn't there, and Jabba's personal grudge with Han certainly isn't evidence of a pervasive Hutt faction, let alone any of the other EU factions.

I edited my previous post to include some general RPG comments, if you're inclined to re-read it. No, I have no problem with people who like to play RPGs. I've done it myself a few times. I just feel like if you want to play an RPG, go play an RPG. If you want to play a dog fighting game, that's what we have X-Wing for. Let both types of games do what they're best at. The most successful businesses are the ones that do one thing and do it well.

I can't speak for other RPGers, but I'm not looking for this to be an RPG. I'm looking for narrative stakes and an operational level to the game, above the tactical. So, rather than being an RPGer, I guess you could call me a simulationist. I do think that RPGerism and simulationism go well together, because both require a richer understanding of the game world.

The fringe offers that richness.

As for the RPG comment, it was an admittedly vague allusion to contemporary trends in gaming. Everyone is clamoring for more abilities, more classes, more factions, more spells, and more weapons in everything that they play. In short, they want to feel like what they're playing is special and unique. I'm not sure if it's human nature to want more options, or just the advent of encroaching modernity, but it's making its presence felt everywhere - and that's not necessarily a good thing. Again, X-Wing is immensely successful for what it already is: a simple dog fighting game. Add too much and it stands to become something else entirely. A third faction brings nothing practical to the table, except to tickle the fancy of a handful of people who want to pretend that they're pirates and smugglers.

I hear what you're saying - but FFG is supplying that 'more stuff' regardless. The only difference is how many categories they plug that stuff into. Two or three.

So Jabba represented a third faction, capable of contending with both the Rebels and the Empire at the galactic level. That's why he had to hire out for independent help, the same help that the Empire also hired to find Han. Never mind the fact that those same bounty hunters would have had nothing to do with each other otherwise.

That's a lot of dot connecting for a handful of lines of dialogue and a minor plot that focused around rescuing a friend from a gangster, all without so much as a word about this supposed third faction. You're definitely reading something into the script that wasn't there.

Maybe 'third faction' does not really embody what I'm arguing for. Maybe 'unaffilliated third party ships' that can act as plot devices is a better statement. That said, a third faction would probably accomplish what I'm looking for.

Maybe 'third faction' does not really embody what I'm arguing for. Maybe 'unaffilliated third party ships' that can act as plot devices is a better statement. That said, a third faction would probably accomplish what I'm looking for.

Can you be happy using the Firespray, YTs, HWK, etc as unaffiliated ships in house rules? Must FFG release a third faction that everyone else has to deal with?

Maybe 'third faction' does not really embody what I'm arguing for. Maybe 'unaffilliated third party ships' that can act as plot devices is a better statement. That said, a third faction would probably accomplish what I'm looking for.

Can you be happy using the Firespray, YTs, HWK, etc as unaffiliated ships in house rules? Must FFG release a third faction that everyone else has to deal with?

Must FFG release a third faction that everyone else has to deal with?

That is a good point, why does this need to be an official release?

Between the Firespray, YT's, Z-95, HWK and so on, there's more then enough ships out there that you can effectively play a 3rd faction if you need to.

It seems more likely that FFG would release neutral ships and rules to take them into either a rebel or empire force. It is what they have done with some LCGs (which I consider the closest related product to xwing in their catalog). I prefer straight up rebel vs empire myself.

I was the OP and have changed my mind since the 14th I think I like 2 factions in some ways means more units to play and every release apart from huge ships will always have a release for 'my' faction

I see. So Jabba represented a third faction, capable of contending with both the Rebels and the Empire militarily. That's why he had to hire out for independent help, the same help that the Empire also hired to find Han. Never mind the fact that those same bounty hunters would have had nothing to do with each other otherwise. I must be remembering the script differently than you are.

No, Jabba represented an independent antagonist, one unaffiliated with the Empire, that the Rebel heroes to deal with. X-Wing is not - to use your own point of reference - Axis and Allies. It is not about galactic conquest. It is - again, to use your own point of reference - a dogfighting skirmish game. And while a pirate or mercenary group would pose little threat to an entire Imperial or Rebel task force, at the levels we play the game at - 100 squadrons, or even 300 point Epic games - they would be more than capable of competing.

A couple of Rebel ships being pursued half a dozen Black Sun raiders. Smugglers attempting to escape an Imperial customs patrol. These are thematic examples, sure, but they represent the potential for in-game diversity. As I stated (and you conveniently ignored) earlier, FFG have already drawn from the EU to add diversity to their existing factions. There is no reason why FFG can't do the same to add even more diversity to the game as a whole .

Anyone know how dust tactics handles factions?

I was the OP and have changed my mind since the 14th I think I like 2 factions in some ways means more units to play and every release apart from huge ships will always have a release for 'my' faction

YAYYYYYYYYYYY!

I edited my previous post to include some general RPG comments, if you're inclined to re-read it. No, I have no problem with people who like to play RPGs. I've done it myself a few times. I just feel like if you want to play an RPG, go play an RPG. If you want to play a dog fighting game, that's what we have X-Wing for. Let both types of games do what they're best at. The most successful businesses are the ones that do one thing and do it well.

I can't speak for other RPGers, but I'm not looking for this to be an RPG. I'm looking for narrative stakes and an operational level to the game, above the tactical. So, rather than being an RPGer, I guess you could call me a simulationist. I do think that RPGerism and simulationism go well together, because both require a richer understanding of the game world.

The fringe offers that richness.

As for the RPG comment, it was an admittedly vague allusion to contemporary trends in gaming. Everyone is clamoring for more abilities, more classes, more factions, more spells, and more weapons in everything that they play. In short, they want to feel like what they're playing is special and unique. I'm not sure if it's human nature to want more options, or just the advent of encroaching modernity, but it's making its presence felt everywhere - and that's not necessarily a good thing. Again, X-Wing is immensely successful for what it already is: a simple dog fighting game. Add too much and it stands to become something else entirely. A third faction brings nothing practical to the table, except to tickle the fancy of a handful of people who want to pretend that they're pirates and smugglers.

I hear what you're saying - but FFG is supplying that 'more stuff' regardless. The only difference is how many categories they plug that stuff into. Two or three.

So Jabba represented a third faction, capable of contending with both the Rebels and the Empire at the galactic level. That's why he had to hire out for independent help, the same help that the Empire also hired to find Han. Never mind the fact that those same bounty hunters would have had nothing to do with each other otherwise.

That's a lot of dot connecting for a handful of lines of dialogue and a minor plot that focused around rescuing a friend from a gangster, all without so much as a word about this supposed third faction. You're definitely reading something into the script that wasn't there.

Maybe 'third faction' does not really embody what I'm arguing for. Maybe 'unaffilliated third party ships' that can act as plot devices is a better statement. That said, a third faction would probably accomplish what I'm looking for.

I think that, at a certain point, this becomes a matter of semantics. You want more narrative elements which, to me, are synonymous with the RPG experience. I won't begrudge you that, but when you look at the game and the direction FFG is taking it in, it becomes clear that this is a game meant to be played in tournaments as much as it is the kitchen table. That's not the sort of environment that's conducive to narrative gaming. Couldn't both sides be satisfied if the people who want a third faction just adopted some house rules?

<shrug>

I think a Rebel shuttle Tyderium is more important than a third faction that shares other ships. Until that happens, I just don't see any potential third faction sharing existing ships. Which makes it an EU only faction. Now, as much as I love the EU, I'm not blind to the fact that there is mixed reception to EU content. I just don't think an EU only faction would justify its existence with sales or gameplay.

I see. So Jabba represented a third faction, capable of contending with both the Rebels and the Empire militarily. That's why he had to hire out for independent help, the same help that the Empire also hired to find Han. Never mind the fact that those same bounty hunters would have had nothing to do with each other otherwise. I must be remembering the script differently than you are.

No, Jabba represented an independent antagonist, one unaffiliated with the Empire, that the Rebel heroes to deal with. X-Wing is not - to use your own point of reference - Axis and Allies. It is not about galactic conquest. It is - again, to use your own point of reference - a dogfighting skirmish game. And while a pirate or mercenary group would pose little threat to an entire Imperial or Rebel task force, at the levels we play the game at - 100 squadrons, or even 300 point Epic games - they would be more than capable of competing.

A couple of Rebel ships being pursued half a dozen Black Sun raiders. Smugglers attempting to escape an Imperial customs patrol. These are thematic examples, sure, but they represent the potential for in-game diversity. As I stated (and you conveniently ignored) earlier, FFG have already drawn from the EU to add diversity to their existing factions. There is no reason why FFG can't do the same to add even more diversity to the game as a whole .

I conveniently ignored that point because other posters have already addressed it. You can add diversity to the game without including every two-bit gangster as a complete faction unto itself. And, if that's the case, why should FFG take unnecessary risks with their business model?

Can you be happy using the Firespray, YTs, HWK, etc as unaffiliated ships in house rules? Must FFG release a third faction that everyone else has to deal with?

Sure, I can be plenty happy with house rules. I'm not planning terrorist attacks (Hi, NSA, how are you doing?) if FFG doesn't do a thrid faction. I just think it would be a great way for them to put more fringy ships out there, which also double as civilian/on-combatant ships as plot devices in missions.

I think that, at a certain point, this becomes a matter of semantics. You want more narrative elements which, to me, are synonymous with the RPG experience. I won't begrudge you that, but when you look at the game and the direction FFG is taking it in, it becomes clear that this is a game meant to be played in tournaments as much as it is the kitchen table. That's not the sort of environment that's conducive to narrative gaming. Couldn't both sides be satisfied if the people who want a third faction just adopted some house rules?

Well, let's not argue about semantics and definitions. I don't know what FFG's original intent was, nor does it matter to me.

Personally, I think they put out the welcome mat to a more narrative style of ply by going out of their way to offer missions. So, from my perspective it's manifest that narrative was part of the original intent, not a byproduct of RPGers, like myself, trespassing on your game. YMMV

If it is taking a certain direction, it's because there is more demand from the people who play 6-asteroid-100-point-deathmatches. Now, maybe it's because that's the preferred style of play, or maybe it's because of a collective action problem. Playing narratively is more work, and it requires leadership to make it happen. I hear people wanting more narrative, but they're not sure how to make it happen. They play 6-A-100-P-DMs out of default, not preference.

With my work on the campaign engine that I'm still working on (playtested in on Saturday; already paid for the server space to host it), I'm hoping to solve the collective action problem.

Can you be happy using the Firespray, YTs, HWK, etc as unaffiliated ships in house rules? Must FFG release a third faction that everyone else has to deal with?

Sure, I can be plenty happy with house rules. I'm not planning terrorist attacks (Hi, NSA, how are you doing?) if FFG doesn't do a thrid faction. I just think it would be a great way for them to put more fringy ships out there, which also double as civilian/on-combatant ships as plot devices in missions.

I think that, at a certain point, this becomes a matter of semantics. You want more narrative elements which, to me, are synonymous with the RPG experience. I won't begrudge you that, but when you look at the game and the direction FFG is taking it in, it becomes clear that this is a game meant to be played in tournaments as much as it is the kitchen table. That's not the sort of environment that's conducive to narrative gaming. Couldn't both sides be satisfied if the people who want a third faction just adopted some house rules?

Well, let's not argue about semantics and definitions. I don't know what FFG's original intent was, nor does it matter to me.

Personally, I think they put out the welcome mat to a more narrative style of ply by going out of their way to offer missions. So, from my perspective it's manifest that narrative was part of the original intent, not a byproduct of RPGers, like myself, trespassing on your game. YMMV

If it is taking a certain direction, it's because there is more demand from the people who play 6-asteroid-100-point-deathmatches. Now, maybe it's because that's the preferred style of play, or maybe it's because of a collective action problem. Playing narratively is more work, and it requires leadership to make it happen. I hear people wanting more narrative, but they're not sure how to make it happen. They play 6-A-100-P-DMs out of default, not preference.

With my work on the campaign engine that I'm still working on (playtested in on Saturday; already paid for the server space to host it), I'm hoping to solve the collective action problem.

I wish you luck with that. I see no reason why well thought out house rules couldn't be formalized for like minded people, while still remaining at the periphery for the "6-A-100-P-DM" crowd. Look at EDH for a similar and successful paradigm.

EDH?

EDH?

Elder Dragon Highlander, now known as Commander. It was a custom variant of Magic that gained so much traction with the community that Wizards co-opted it.