The @FFGOP Twitter account has confirmed that by the time of Worlds, there will be new maps in the rotation. I spent way too long tonight looking at the various maps and I have some ideas of what the future may hold.

First of all, the maps we probably will not see because of 4x4: Core Set, Darth Vader, Rebel Saboteurs, Chewbacca, R2D2/C3PO, and Boba Fett. All of these maps incorporate grabbing things and running them to places to score victory points. The 4x4 list breaks these maps, so I doubt we will see any of them. Twin Shadows I also doubt, as it is the only one to use new tiles, and I don't think FFG is ready to force all tourney players to buy it yet.

Of the current maps, I think we are most likely to see RGC stay in rotation, if any of them do. IG 88 scenarios are incredibly simple, and Luke's map has been in two rotations already.

Of the remaining maps, I think Han is the least likely. The Sabacc table mechanic is potentially very confusing. This is unfortunate, because both scenarios encourage gathering in and securing the Cantina, which will lead to awesome firefights. If the RGC map remains in rotation, Han will definitely not have his time of day this time around. If RGC does not, unfortunately I still don't think we'll be seeing much of Corellia.

The second least likely, I think, is Kayn. Both scenarios are really interesting and break the rules in simple, yet deep ways. Unfortunately, the map itself is really large and does not flow well as a play area. It seems more separated into 2 maps than one coherent whole, and is overall not that fun to play on.

At least one of the last two remaining, Rebel Troopers and General Weiss, are almost assuredly going to be in the new rotation. Both of the Rebel Trooper scenarios have evenly spaced objectives that emphasize either good decision making (Experimental Weapons) or an all out Assault (Destroy the shield generators). Additionally, the symmetrical map with three avenues of attack emphasizes smart planning and does not favor either start zone, meaning that the game has little riding on the initiative toss at the start of the game.

Weiss, on the other hand, has an interesting dichotomy similar to the RGC map where each player has to weigh how he will split his squad, as the two "Objective Zones" are on opposite sides of the map, but they are both needed to score points and both will be hotly contested, leading to fun, tense gameplay.

TL;DR: I believe the next rotation will be Rebel Troopers, General Weiss, and either Kayn, Han, or Royal Guard Champion (I'm hoping Han). What maps would you like to see, and which do you think most likely?

Makes sense. I'll be curious to see how your prediction turn out.

The maps currently in the tournament package is really well balanced, so I hope they don't mess that up :/

It doesn't feel like these maps have been in play all that long. How often do they intend to cycle the maps? 4 times a year?

Would be cool. Winter, spring, summer, championship season

Just a little bit expensive for TOs, that print out the maps for their players...

FFG Releases more than 12 new maps per year. Why not use them?

FFG Releases more than 12 new maps per year. Why not use them?

If all of the maps are well-balanced, then I agree with you 100%.

But if some of them are too abusable in one way or another, then I would definitely not want to see them in competitive play. The 15VP pick-up-and-deliver-crates "Smuggled Goods" mission immediately comes to mind.

Speaking of maps; has anyone seen PDFs of the Twin Shadows/Wave 2 skirmish maps?

My money is on them adding in one of the maps from Twin Shadows to the rotation just to force skirmish players to purchase that expansion.

FFG Releases more than 12 new maps per year. Why not use them?

Because using them forces people to buy crap that they don't want just to get the maps?

I think it very bad habit chaniging the maps just before the championship like they did before gencon... people want to familiriaze now it by heart and know exactly what is the optimal choice on deployment ...if you have only a couple of days...how can you do that for 6 missions? (4 if they keep an old one)

That's probably precisely why they do it right before tourneys, to reward players who can think fast and adapt to changing situations, making it more a test of skill than memorization.

I rather enjoy the fact they're waiting to announce maps. A skilled player should be able to win by thinking on his feet no matter the scenario. Some practice should be good on the maps when they are announced, but there are only a few scenario archetypes (Capture and Hold, Grab and Deliver, Modified Deathmatch, and Destroy the Thing), and practicing on any scenario with that type is good practice, even if not on the map that ends up in rotation, as long as you practice with the objective type and know what figures are best at what objectives.

FFG Releases more than 12 new maps per year. Why not use them?

Because using them forces people to buy crap that they don't want just to get the maps?

Do you seriously know of any competitive skirmish players who have not bought at least 1 of every expansion? Whether you like the Heavy STs or Tuskens or not, as a skirmish player you know that there might come a day when you'll want access to those pieces, and so you'll most likely buy them.

Campaign players are different, because they only buy for the campaigns they're going to play. But in my experience, skirmish players are almost universally also completionists.

"At least 1" is the polite version of "sometimes even 4"?

no it dont buy the twinshadows expansion and skip out on wave three...nothing there that helps my 4/4 or rebel blast so saving the money...if the maps rotate into the tournmanent calendar I just use the vinyl print...and I consider myself a very competitive player

"At least 1" is the polite version of "sometimes even 4"?

I have 4 Rebel Saboteurs. But only 2 Cores. And 2 Rebel Troopers.

4 Cores, 2 Saboteurs. (I have to admit, I've used SWM proxies for training games. That way I've used up to 6 Saboteurs.)

Waiting for Hired Guns, Wookies, Smugglers ...

I use SWM proxies all the time. I even use them in place of actual IA minis that I have, when those IA minis aren't painted yet. I'm still using my SWM Boba Fett, since I haven't painted my IA version yet.

FFG Releases more than 12 new maps per year. Why not use them?

Because using them forces people to buy crap that they don't want just to get the maps?

Do you seriously know of any competitive skirmish players who have not bought at least 1 of every expansion? Whether you like the Heavy STs or Tuskens or not, as a skirmish player you know that there might come a day when you'll want access to those pieces, and so you'll most likely buy them.

Campaign players are different, because they only buy for the campaigns they're going to play. But in my experience, skirmish players are almost universally also completionists.

I'm fine with buying expansions if there's something in the box that I want to run. I'm not going to buy a box that is mostly campaign crap unless there's something in it that I really want. I think IA Skirmish players get kind of screwed with the way FFG packages stuff. I think it hurts building local Skirmish communities.

I must respectfully disagree. I think there has been a good balance of Skirmish and Campaign content in the expansions. Sure, there are some that have almost entirely campaign focused content (RGC and Stormtroopers come to mind), but then there are the packs like Rebel Troopers, Rebel Saboteurs, and Hired Guns that have amazing Skirmish content. In my estimation, the x-pacs are about 40%Skirmish, 50%Campaign, and 10%have both (R2/Threepio).

I must respectfully disagree. I think there has been a good balance of Skirmish and Campaign content in the expansions. Sure, there are some that have almost entirely campaign focused content (RGC and Stormtroopers come to mind), but then there are the packs like Rebel Troopers, Rebel Saboteurs, and Hired Guns that have amazing Skirmish content. In my estimation, the x-pacs are about 40%Skirmish, 50%Campaign, and 10%have both (R2/Threepio).

I'm not complaining about the Ally/Villain packs. It's the core set and the boxed expansions that I have beef with. Having maps from blisters in rotation wouldn't bother me if FFG would just put out a PDF with the instructions for assembling the maps and the mission text and allow that to be used instead of requiring each player to have the cards. It is the possibility of having to buy a $40 expansion just for a couple of map tiles that are required for play that bothers me.

The way the boxed expansion sets and Ally/Villain packs are setup is problematic for Skirmish players. The figures and cards should be distributed so that we are buying a single boxed expansion and multiple blisters for the units/cards we want to use. That's not currently the case. As it is multiple boxed set expansions will need to be purchased to run multiples of generics, with a handful of gray cards being the only needed from the third and fourth copy. Meanwhile, many of the blisters are uniques so no one will ever buy multiples of them (outside of painting and modeling).

If a map from Twin Shadows is included in the rotation then Skirmish players are required to buy Twin Shadows and the Core Set ( about $140 MSRP) before they can even start playing. It is entirely possible that after spending that $140 that they still don't have any of the models that they want to field. Compare this to X-Wing. $40 for the core set is the only required purchase. The $100 that is left over goes a long ways toward building your squad. If Imperial Assault had a similar buy in to X-Wing, I think it would be a more popular game.

Skirmish players that want to play in organized events are the only players that need to follow any of FFGs rules. Everyone else can proxy figures and cards and use any sort of house rules that they want. Campaign players will likely have one person per group that is buying product. It seems to me that FFG should be treating Skirmish players better than they are.

I must respectfully disagree. I think there has been a good balance of Skirmish and Campaign content in the expansions. Sure, there are some that have almost entirely campaign focused content (RGC and Stormtroopers come to mind), but then there are the packs like Rebel Troopers, Rebel Saboteurs, and Hired Guns that have amazing Skirmish content. In my estimation, the x-pacs are about 40%Skirmish, 50%Campaign, and 10%have both (R2/Threepio).

I'm not complaining about the Ally/Villain packs. It's the core set and the boxed expansions that I have beef with. Having maps from blisters in rotation wouldn't bother me if FFG would just put out a PDF with the instructions for assembling the maps and the mission text and allow that to be used instead of requiring each player to have the cards. It is the possibility of having to buy a $40 expansion just for a couple of map tiles that are required for play that bothers me.

The way the boxed expansion sets and Ally/Villain packs are setup is problematic for Skirmish players. The figures and cards should be distributed so that we are buying a single boxed expansion and multiple blisters for the units/cards we want to use. That's not currently the case. As it is multiple boxed set expansions will need to be purchased to run multiples of generics, with a handful of gray cards being the only needed from the third and fourth copy. Meanwhile, many of the blisters are uniques so no one will ever buy multiples of them (outside of painting and modeling).

If a map from Twin Shadows is included in the rotation then Skirmish players are required to buy Twin Shadows and the Core Set ( about $140 MSRP) before they can even start playing. It is entirely possible that after spending that $140 that they still don't have any of the models that they want to field. Compare this to X-Wing. $40 for the core set is the only required purchase. The $100 that is left over goes a long ways toward building your squad. If Imperial Assault had a similar buy in to X-Wing, I think it would be a more popular game.

Skirmish players that want to play in organized events are the only players that need to follow any of FFGs rules. Everyone else can proxy figures and cards and use any sort of house rules that they want. Campaign players will likely have one person per group that is buying product. It seems to me that FFG should be treating Skirmish players better than they are.

You make some good points in this post.

I can imagine how the steep buy-in cost might be a barrier to some potential players. But speaking as an avid skirmish player myself, I have absolutely no problem buying at least 1 of every IA release that we get. I think where it really hurts the game (and where you make your strongest point) is that the current model for IA skirmish hinders the casual or potential skirmish player. And I can totally see why that would be an issue for those people.

But for people who are already "in" (ie, such as me and others who play regularly) I still can't see how this marketing model is a problem. Furthermore, as a long-time miniatures gamer (SWM, WoW Minis, DDM, X-Wing), I generally don't pay too much attention to the cost of these games. If the game looks like it's challenging and engaging and exciting, then I tend to go "all in" pretty easily. It's still cheaper than beer in the long run, and also much better for my liver.

Beer!