It still boggles my mind that arguments like this even happen.

I mean really...saying that you are required to buy a LUXURY item. If you play at home or on Vassal, you don't have to buy ANY ships. If you want to play at an official tournament (which is again, by choice) you need the relevant upgrades. But again, this is for LUXURY ITEMS. As in things you don't need, but just want.

Now, if you have an original card x, there should be no reason why you couldn't say these three ships all have a card x in them. Apart from creating an admin nightmare for any opponent, yourself or TO. Keeping things simpler actually allows for more fun.

Legally, I agree with you (except about not being able to use what we puchased - we did not purchase a license from FFG, we purchased the product

If I may direct you to the fine print on page 24 of the rule book that came with the product.

But we're not talking about percentages, or some abstract ideal, we're talking about the practical cost of fielding an actual list. It's not even an analogy, it's a comparison of what you can reasonably expect to spend on various miniatures games.

Sure. So if I want to buy an army in 40K I need a rulebook, codex and the models. If I want to run a faction in X Wing I need multiple copies of every model, regardless of whether I intend to use those models or not.

One is fair. I'm required to buy what I intend to use. The other is not.

I'm actually amazed that after all this time you still haven't learned to watch your language. Want want want want want, you want this, you want that.

You keep repeating this like you think it's important. Protip, it's not.

Yeah it's more expensive to get started in 40K or Warmachine, but it's even more expensive to stay up to date with the rules in X Wing.

As absurd as that is, I'll humor you for a second. Show me how much money it would cost for a rule book, every codex, and enough models to field an 1850 point list for every faction, and then compare that to the cost of four of every ship currently released for X-Wing. I'm serious, do the math and present your evidence, then make that assertion again.

Here's one right back at you. For my Vampire Counts army I have more than 800 models. Do the math for how much it would cost to buy 800 ships for X Wing and get back to me.

And the kicker? I can apply the rules for my 800 models any number of times. I don't need to buy a new model each time I want to add a rule to a different model.

Bundling valuable upgrade cards into expensive ship 'expansion packs' purely as a way to drive sales is a **** move. It is totally unreasonable to expect a consumer to buy a Ferrari so they can get a spare wheel for their Ford.

If fifteen dollars is expensive to you, you may want to consider a new line of work. You want a real analogy? It is totally unreasonable for you to expect a Ferrari for the price of your Ford. You may want the former, but wanting something doesn't make you entitled to it.

I don't want a Ferrari. I have no interest in a Ferrari. I want a new wheel for my Ford. Why would anyone think it's reasonable to pay the full price of a whole other car, just for the spare wheel for my Ford?

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Bundling upgrade cards into expensive models just to drive sales is a **** move. That's not me being 'entitled', that's just a statement of fact.

It's not that you want a Ferrari, it's that you want the wheel nuts that come with a Ferrari.

Mind you, the rules on upgrade cards aren't standard rules like how to perform combat and how the maneuver step works, but specific things this specific card does that alter the basic gameplay. So, what, FFG should expect us to buy not only the models (likely for very near the same price, because we'd still need tokens and pilot tiles), but also at least one new rule book for each wave containing the rules for all the new upgrades that come with that? That, instead of being able to look down at in a second and see what it does, I'd have to leaf through to find the relevant rule, possibly a dozen times in a given match? I'll take the simplicity of, "Oh, you have a Fire Control System and I can see what it does right there in front of me."

Now, if you have an original card x, there should be no reason why you couldn't say these three ships all have a card x in them. Apart from creating an admin nightmare for any opponent, yourself or TO. Keeping things simpler actually allows for more fun.

Legally, I agree with you (except about not being able to use what we puchased - we did not purchase a license from FFG, we purchased the product

If I may direct you to the fine print on page 24 of the rule book that came with the product.

If you want to check the outside of the packaging, then we can talk.

That is a different issue yet again from what is being discussed here. All I will say on it is that while I sympathise, there's nothing that can be done about it. If I could go back in time and get onto the original design team for X-wing, I would make the upgrade system work in a more user friendly manner. But that ship has sailed, and the game now is what it is. Either abide by it or don't play at a tournament level. Simple as that.

I have absolutely not intention of playing in a FFG tournament. I know it seems odd to be posting in a thread specifically dealing with FFG tournaments, but the issue of rules, proxy cards and lists is kind of close to my heart at the moment.

As for FFG not giving you a way to buy the cards: they have repeatedly said that they cannot make a profit from card packs. And that truly is the beginning and end of the discussion.

If that's what they think, then I can only suggest they haven't done their homework.

I would suggest that they have likely done more homework than you on the subject. It amazes me how many more "experts" are posting on FFGs forum boards than are actually working for FFG.

It still boggles my mind that arguments like this even happen.

It's easy enough to spot the only reason they do so.

That's true, game companies are flawless and have never made any mistakes and no one is in a position to critique the sales model of Atari who will last forever!

Errr... No one's saying that game companies are infallible. What we are saying is that FFG has access to a lot more data than any of us, and they have the resources to perform things like focus group testing to provide a reasonable prediction of consumer behavior. Combine those two, and they can get a lot more accurate information than we can.

But see you don't need these "rules" or "pieces" to play for fun. Now if you want to play for a premier event, you gotta have all the stuff. Because well that's the way it is.

But why? If the reason that you support being required to have the cards rather than the rules that are on them is because FFG says so, should 'because' be a good enough reason when the rule restricts players?

I acknowlege that there would be some things to figure out, but anyone claiming that confusion and uncertainty would be a serious obstacle is either not taking a second to come up with one of the numerous solutions that are available or is being disengenous. Other than that, the is the mixed faction dial debate all over again (just with people collapsing their arguing and posting memes). Just like now, players were makimg outrageous claims that confusion would halt games (since FFG changed that rule to the player's benefit, I am yet to see a thread complaining of the confusion that so many were adamant would result).

If people acknowledge that the game can exist without an administrative rule, then the rule might be changed. If people have to modify what they bring to a game, like a list of numbered ships and what upgrades each ship has, then that might be worth the added freedom that it provides to players.

Because wizards of the coast has done so terribly with their administrative rules. You signed up to play this game. And these are FFGs rules, and the way they are able to pay people to keep making new stuff for this game.

I do commend you for digging your heels in and trying to defend this idea.

With regard to my assumption that people generally have a working knowledge of the games rules, I do not think that it is incorrect. There really are not that many upgrade cards in this game. Besides, the cell phone in someone's pocket can bring up the official card in less than 30 seconds.

I think you over-estimate people's familiarity with the individual cards.

The few times I've gone to a tournament, I've relied on the TO to know that the lists were good (and points were accurate), and half the time need to repeatedly refer to my own cards, much less know exactly what my opponent has.

The example of changing proxy cards for cheating purposes would work GREAT on me.

You have every card in the game memorized, great... Most people don't.

yeah i need to make that card that gives my decimator 3 evade tokens!!!! yeah bro its an "official" card it came with the upgraded imperial decimator pack.. Then why does it look like its printed on notebook paper? oh thats the new FFG standard now they make them thinner so folks can sleeve them easier!! See FFG listens to it peeps!!

That's true, game companies are flawless and have never made any mistakes and no one is in a position to critique the sales model of Atari who will last forever!

Errr... No one's saying that game companies are infallible. What we are saying is that FFG has access to a lot more data than any of us, and they have the resources to perform things like focus group testing to provide a reasonable prediction of consumer behavior. Combine those two, and they can get a lot more accurate information than we can.

So, when FFG says card packs would not be cost effective for them, it's perfectly reasonable to take what they're saying at face value, especially when it's not terribly difficult to figure out why they came to that conclusion.

we can't just keep pointing to ffg's secret knowledge as an infalible source that you can't argue against.

True, but it has to factor into the discussion. We have no way of knowing what they did or how accurate what they came up with is.

So unless you can provide some evidence that shows FFG's numbers are incorrect or their interpretation of them are wrong. I see no reason not to accept what FFG says at face value.

Sure they could be wrong, and under the right circumstances a pig can fly. Just because something can happen doesn't mean we should accept it as the default.

@WonderWAAAGH

Ha. This has nothing to do with whether people can afford the cards.

It has everything to do with whether people can afford the cards. Why else argue? When I was a child, I expected to have everything given to me for free. Then I grew up, got a job, and now I pay for the things I want. I'm not sure I understand which part of that is so difficult to grasp.

We are discussing whether the rule is worth having.

And we seem to be unanimous in our thoughts on the matter, with the exception of you and one other unenlightened soul. Interesting side note: I saw that our good friend Chucknuckle was reading this thread earlier this morning.

Surely people could afford extra S&V sets for matching dials, but they should not have to buy more when what they have is perfectly sufficient. FFG agreed.

Again, one must question why you'd bother arguing in the first place if money wasn't an issue. We can go back a few pages and begin discussing anew which elements are actually necessary to play this game, if you'd really like. If you don't need a physical copy of the upgrade cards, then what do you need? The ships? Nope. The bases? If you can print out an upgrade card, you can cut out a square piece of cardboard. Range rulers and templates? Same as the bases. Dice? Any 8-sider will do. All of those elements are "perfectly sufficient" to play the game. If that's what you want to do then by all means, knock yourself out. I expect you won't complain when someone else does the same.

As for the dials, I like how you keep using that to justify your argument. Never mind the fact that you'd be laughed out of the room if you seriously tried to suggest to FFG that the current rules be revoked; they're a business, and they're not about to endorse a business model that loses them money rather than make it. The decision regarding dials was FFG's and FFG's alone to make, and while the community may have had some influence, we can't be certain to what degree that was true. It's also not an apples-to-apples comparison, since using proxies of cards that you don't already own isn't anywhere near the same as using dials that you do. Come play me and I'll let you use every upgrade you want, that you own, that you received in a blister that wasn't the same as the ship you're attaching it to.

Where do you work? Since you want people to share, why shouldn't you start?

"Uh, this thread isn't about how much money I make, so, uh... yeah, you tell me first and then I'll share!" Okay, buddy. I'm pretty sure you've just told me everything I need to know right there.

Also, this thread is not about netdeckers. He is participating in a discussion, so he should expect his arguments to, conveniently, be taken in the context of that discussion.

This thread isn't about net-deckers, but the post you responded to was. If you're going to quote or address somebody specific, your response should probably relate to theirs on some level. Otherwise you just end up looking ridiculous when you start ranting about something that wasn't even being discussed.

Also, this thread is not about netdeckers. He is participating in a discussion, so he should expect his arguments to, conveniently, be taken in the context of that discussion.

This thread isn't about net-deckers, but the post you responded to was. If you're going to quote or address somebody specific, your response should probably relate to theirs on some level. Otherwise you just end up looking ridiculous when you start ranting about something that wasn't even being discussed.

Look, you can try to frame it however you want. This thread has a purpose and it is not to further demonize the concept of 'netdecking.' If you think that it is unreasonable to assume that people join a discussion to talk about the topic of that discussion, then I don't know what to tell you.

With regard to not looking ridiculous, don't be surprised if I do not take advice from you.

I get thet you feel superior to other people because you feel that you are economically successful. I can't say that I am impressed, but that is just my opinion. However, this isn't a question of paying for what will be used, it is a question of a game system requiring additional purchase that I don't see as necessary for the gameplay or the player experience. Maybe you don't see that as an issue, but I see it as protecting my own investment, in my time and money, in a game that I want to thrive. The more accessible a game is, the better off it and the players will be.

I could work at McDonalds, part time, and still be "economically successful" enough to purchase a $15 ship for the upgrades. And anything I can't afford, well, I'm mature enough to learn to be happy with what I've got.

However, this isn't a question of paying for what will be used, it is a question of a game system requiring additional purchase that I don't see as necessary for the gameplay or the player experience.

You know what, that's the first thing you've said that I can agree with. You absolutely do not require those upgrades, so why don't you go ahead and play without them?

I suggest that you look that word up, because I think that your threshold for what qualifies is off.

My mistake, I didn't realize I was arguing with an English professor. Where did you say you got your degree from again?

With regard to you tracking the activity of another forum member and trying to bully him by commenting on it, I am afraid that that is the least interesting side note that I have heard in quite a while. Maybe he left his computer on. Maybe he has a relative/roomate who is into X-Wing and is using his computer. Maybe he is just as caught up in you as you are in him and he want to try to quote your computer use in an effort to discredit you - who knows? More importantly, who cares?

I'm not "tracking" anyone; it just so happens that I have eyes and a brain, and I'm tickled that a person who claimed to have no more vested interest in this thread decided to check in to see how things are going. Not favorably, I imagine, considering his continued silence on the matter.

I suppose that I can say it again. The ships are an important part of the player experience, so they are necessary.

But upgrade cards, which appear to be so easily dispensable to you, have nothing to do with the "player experience." Just so I get this straight, maintaining that player experience is "necessary," but the physical elements which actually have an impact on gameplay are not. Does that sound right to you? It doesn't to me.

The bases are obviously a critical component because they are used for measuring. The same goes for templates and rules. Which, by the way, you will notice that people regularly use third party versions of. What would the difference between a third party template and a third party upgrade card be to the players? Probably a copyright violation, but how would it impact the game?

Those are some awfully convenient excuses, but they still don't address my questions. Yes, those elements are "obviously necessary," and they're also easily reproduced, just like your upgrade cards. Let me know when a third party starts making legal upgrade cards and then we'll cross that bridge.

I don't expect them to endorse a business decision that will hurt the company, but I do expect them to closely consider more than just whether a rules requires an additional purchase. As FFG's flip-flop with the faction dial rules shows, there is more to maintaining a successful game company that just requiring purchases. Maintaining a healthy and happy player base is critical and that reversal shows that FFG is not into upsetting players in exchange for some pocket change.

All the rules require purchases; unless you a) spend money or b) proxy the ships, bases, templates, dice, dials, and upgrade cards, you can't play the game at all. Nobody is forcing you to do the former, or stopping you from doing the latter. The dials, though, the dials! That must prove that you're right, since you keep bringing it up. You wanna link me that "flip-flop" you keep talking about? Because all I remember is an interim ruling, dispensed via e-mail, that was issued before S&V even released. What is the value of an irrelevant and premature ruling in the context of this conversation? **** little, I'd wager, considering that your comparison still falls short. You already owned dials, did you already own the upgrade cards you want to proxy? Please think about that before you bring up dials again.

Please don't try to marginalize me by accusing me of not making a level of income that you deem adequate or for choosing not to share personal information with you.

I'm not marginalizing you, I'm marginalizing your opinion. For a more thorough rebuttal, please revisit paragraph one of this post.

Also, I did not say that I would tell you where I work if you tell me where you work. I won't tell you that for the same reason why I won't tell you my shoe size - I don't see how it matters.

Oh, I think there are a couple things you aren't seeing.

Besides, I don't care to know anything about you. My question was rhetorical.

Everything here is rhetorical. It just so happens that a great deal of your comments are also dissembling, and these sentences in particular.

More importantly - think. You are essentially saying that I am obviously poor because I won't tell you where I work. I asked the same question of you and you refused to answer. So, either you know that you are not making sense, or we should both be waking up early to push shopping carts around the K-Mart parking lot.

I am not going to tell you where I work. I won't even tell you that I am not poor. You can make whatever flimsy assumption that you want, but for the purposes of our discussion, how about we focus on the actual arguments?

I'm saying that $15 for an upgrade card isn't an especially steep price to pay, and that said card poses no other barrier to enjoying this game unless a person somehow can't afford that $15. Nothing more.

I asked the same question of you and you refused to answer. So, either you know that you are not making sense, or we should both be waking up early to push shopping carts around the K-Mart parking lot.

I am not going to tell you where I work. I won't even tell you that I am not poor. You can make whatever flimsy assumption that you want, but for the purposes of our discussion, how about we focus on the actual arguments?

A rhetorical question, as you pointed out, and one you clearly asked in order to avoid answering my own. I find your continued silence on the matter every bit as satisfactory as it was before, so thank you.

Look, you can try to frame it however you want. This thread has a purpose and it is not to further demonize the concept of 'netdecking.' If you think that it is unreasonable to assume that people join a discussion to talk about the topic of that discussion, then I don't know what to tell you.

With regard to not looking ridiculous, don't be surprised if I do not take advice from you.

I'm not framing anything. I'm telling you, factually, objectively, what the post you responded to was about. How you choose to respond to such a post is your business, of course, but what is not your business is telling others which opinions they can and cannot forward in a given thread.

Ignore my advice if you like, it's not my reputation that's going to suffer for it.

I think it would be much less bothersome if the big upgrades were at least available in each faction (not everyone plays all three). It would be great for example if Autothrusters were available in an Imperial and Rebel box. Engine upgrade is finally appearing elsewhere but is still exclusive to two factions and large ships.

Say what you well in regards to compairng FFGs and GWs business models. But even GW does not expect you to buy Eldar minis to unlock the full potential of your Space Marines.

we can't just keep pointing to ffg's secret knowledge as an infalible source that you can't argue against.

True, but it has to factor into the discussion. We have no way of knowing what they did or how accurate what they came up with is.So unless you can provide some evidence that shows FFG's numbers are incorrect or their interpretation of them are wrong. I see no reason not to accept what FFG says at face value.Sure they could be wrong, and under the right circumstances a pig can fly. Just because something can happen doesn't mean we should accept it as the default.

So no, unknown and unknowable opinions of faceless employees do not need to factor into the discussion.

I think it would be much less bothersome if the big upgrades were at least available in each faction (not everyone plays all three). It would be great for example if Autothrusters were available in an Imperial and Rebel box. Engine upgrade is finally appearing elsewhere but is still exclusive to two factions and large ships.

I'm sure they will be, eventually. Give it time.

Say what you well in regards to compairng FFGs and GWs business models. But even GW does not expect you to buy Eldar minis to unlock the full potential of your Space Marines.

Well, I guess there's some silver lining to spending thousands of dollars then, isn't there? You're only half right, at any rate. GW does expect you to buy Forge World models (if you want to win), and you can always mix detachments to min/max your lists.

I'm tickled that a person who claimed to have no more vested interest in this thread decided to check in to see how things are going. Not favorably, I imagine, considering his continued silence on the matter.

Oh, I'm still interested. But there's no point arguing with simpletons that conflate rules with gaming pieces. I don't care at all what you think about the topic, so I'm more than happy to just keep reading what other people have to say. I'm "a bit tickled" that you're wasting your energy on me though.

Have a nice day

I'm tickled that a person who claimed to have no more vested interest in this thread decided to check in to see how things are going. Not favorably, I imagine, considering his continued silence on the matter.

Oh, I'm still interested. But there's no point arguing with simpletons that conflate rules with gaming pieces. I don't care at all what you think about the topic, so I'm more than happy to just keep reading what other people have to say. I'm "a bit tickled" that you're wasting your energy on me though.

Have a nice day

If upgrades merely served as reminders, there'd be no reason to ever buy any other Magic card, or LCG pack, or what have you ever again. Looks like you were right about one thing, at least: some people do have to have the last word.

I think as long as its just a card or two from the expensive packs its fine, I would never buy the big dumb ship I don't need just for C3PO, I am not paying FFGs $99 for one card and a ship no one wants to play with, If I can't proxy the card I will play else where, 1 store I go to doesn't pay enough attention to see one card.

Where did ffg say that this was the best possible way?

In a number of interviews with the CEO and Alex and Frank. They said that card packs don't make sense for them financially... Not sure how you can read that as anything other than the best possible way.

Unless you're going to suggest that FFG would've found a more profitable way then the current system and just ignored that.

It means that their valuing profits. I'm amazed, really, that you translated that to best when it's quite explicit to only be valuing one of many possible measurements.