Oh dear. What a storm this has produced. For me, there are a few fundamental issues here.

The first is the undermining of your lead designer brought about by this u-decision. Alex has been very vocal and happy about the new damage deck. He has explained in great length why he did and how he feels it allows him and his team to address issues they never knew would exist when they designed the original deck with the core set. Thinks like the blinded pilot/ accuracy corrector issues and such. By OP allowing you to chose between either it seems like a big middle finger at Alex and the team who have worked hard to rebalance the core game without any major overhauls to bring it in line with rules and concepts that simply didn't exist the first time around.this alone gives me reason to be sad with FFG over this decision, and we've not even gotten into the mechanical implications of the ruling yet.

My second major concern is we will now have multiple cards with the same name with different gaming implications. Two blinded pilots. Two damaged sensor arrays ect. This is just untidy from a game perspective. It creates unneeded confusion and if anything hinders newer players even more. For those of us with a GW background, the convent of this feels like having two different editions of armies legal at the same time. Well I preferred the vehicle rules for guard from the 4 th edition book so I'll run that book for my mech guard whilst at the same time my opponent liked the new infantry rules from the 5th edition book so he's running that against me. So now my identically names unit has different rules to remember that his!? What!?!

As for which deck is legal, I don't care. But I do want consistency. Of course I'm pro choice and options, but this isn't an option is it. There's no incentive to take the deck which is worse for your list. There's no stratergy. There's no opponent interaction. It doesn't feel like part of the game in the same way list building does. There every choice I make influences me and my opponent. So does choosing asteroids, if effects the board and game as a whole. Choosing my damage deck only effects me and I'm not going to lie, I already feel dirty as I go through my potential tourney lists for next year thinking 'deck a for then, b for that one, b again for that one...,

I can't help but feel that surely there's a better way than this

Why is this such an issue?

Do all you new damage deck only proponents (NDDOPs) oppose a super dash or quad accuracy corrector list player drafting 3 debris fields that they can ignore? Or turret players drafting a bunch of huge asteroids that they can orbit around?

No, you guys don't. And being able to play 3 debris fields with Super Dash is much more game altering than picking the old damage deck for your 8x academy pilot list and getting a dead draw or two.

Why does it even matter? So generics benefit a little from the old damage deck, that's not a bad thing. It's not like you hyper ship players don't autokill 1-2 TIEs a turn anyways.

^^

What he said

The worst thing is that the lead designer was on a podcast telling the excact reason for a new deck, was that the old one was not balanced.

Exactly.

Which just makes FFG look like liars. Which is why it's an annoying thing to have done.

If the two decks had always been the plan, then fine. No worries, pick you deck and take your chances.

But ffg saying "you need to buy this because its better and will be needed (for competition)" and then going "lol! Psyche!"

Just reminds me to much of a certain GW, and that is a very unfortunate comparison.

No the comparison with GW was making people buy the TFA starter set just for a deck of small cards.

Reversing this one decision is a good move as now it will buy FFG time to package the new damage deck in a blister of it's own

My second major concern is we will now have multiple cards with the same name with different gaming implications. Two blinded pilots. Two damaged sensor arrays ect. This is just untidy from a game perspective. It creates unneeded confusion and if anything hinders newer players even more. For those of us with a GW background, the convent of this feels like having two different editions of armies legal at the same time. Well I preferred the vehicle rules for guard from the 4 th edition book so I'll run that book for my mech guard whilst at the same time my opponent liked the new infantry rules from the 5th edition book so he's running that against me. So now my identically names unit has different rules to remember that his!? What!?!

Using different 40K editions is a poor example here

You can't mix your damage decks. You either use the original OR the new one.

The text is on the card in front of you. You don't need to memorize all the cards.

Your worried that if say for eg, player A has the original deck and player B has the new deck and both players have Blinded Pilot on a ship each could cause some confusion...ok it could but it's your responsibility to keep track of what's going on during the game

My second major concern is we will now have multiple cards with the same name with different gaming implications. Two blinded pilots. Two damaged sensor arrays ect. This is just untidy from a game perspective. It creates unneeded confusion and if anything hinders newer players even more. For those of us with a GW background, the convent of this feels like having two different editions of armies legal at the same time. Well I preferred the vehicle rules for guard from the 4 th edition book so I'll run that book for my mech guard whilst at the same time my opponent liked the new infantry rules from the 5th edition book so he's running that against me. So now my identically names unit has different rules to remember that his!? What!?!

Using different 40K editions is a poor example here

You can't mix your damage decks. You either use the original OR the new one.

The text is on the card in front of you. You don't need to memorize all the cards.

Your worried that if say for eg, player A has the original deck and player B has the new deck and both players have Blinded Pilot on a ship each could cause some confusion...ok it could but it's your responsibility to keep track of what's going on during the game

The lead developer has already clearly states the new deck was not about adding choice to squad building. It was about addressing some of the fundamental issues with the old deck. His words, not mine. That's why this stinks. Nothing to do with money or choices.

The 40k example is a good one. Saying you can't mix codex editions doesn't stop two opposing editions of codex facing each other unless the old, not updated on is removed from legal play. This is exactly the same thing. You argument against my example is unclear to me

As for partial 'immunity'. A-wings and TIE Interceptors can practically ignore "Loose Stabilizer" in the new deck.

A-wings, Squints and anything w/ R2 Astromech. So basically Loose Stabilizer really hurts all_LargeShips and Scum & Villainy. I can live with that. Still more balanced than a complete null topdeck crit in the old deck.

Just sell the bloody damage deck.

Don't you get it by now? With this decision, new_players_interested_in_tournaments have the reverse problem you neutrals and anti's had in the forward_decision(new only). Now, if they want to fly squint/awing ACES competitively, they're *required* to buy the old core (unless they plan to leech/borrow their entire tournament career). This is a brilliant decision for avoiding unsold old core(s) *and* if they did simply sell the damage decks--as you assume would be a river of chocolate--what happens to the millions of new core(s) that might wont be sold? There are so many extra movement templates at a decent sized tournament. But dmg decks? I don't lend my extras out unless I'm giving them away... It's just too much to keep track of on top of tourney pools meta.

Not so hidden upside: We loudmouths get to argue endlessly with squeaky wheels. Pressure gauge and such.

Now, if they want to fly squint/awing ACES competitively, they're *required* to buy the old core

Why?

Now, if they want to fly squint/awing ACES competitively, they're *required* to buy the old core

Why?

Because there are a lot of lists that will function noticeably better with the old damage deck.

Now, if they want to fly squint/awing ACES competitively, they're *required* to buy the old core

Why?

Because there are a lot of lists that will function noticeably better with the old damage deck.

But that still no requirement.

In the case you get a crit through, if it is something that might hurt might that ship, then I might've been better off with the old deck (or the new). Assuming I'm not already clearly in a losing or unbeatable position.

That's a lot of ifs, buts and maybes.

Now, if they want to fly squint/awing ACES competitively, they're *required* to buy the old core

Why?

Because there are a lot of lists that will function noticeably better with the old damage deck.

^ This. Adding; when you fly a 25-36 pt ACE without a single SHIELD, a null topdeck crit is always preferred. Prepare to slide down the scale of overall losses--Imperial ACEs list--if you're allowed the old deck and not using it.

Is ACE an acronym I'm not familiar with or is your caps lock stuck?

I think, by the way, that the way FFG has been treated with regards to this decision is beyond proportionate, undeserved and very unlike the Fly Casual, sporty way we all purport to be as a community.

They've been called stupid, idiots, cowards, liars. By people who, two days earlier, would've sworn FFG was the best company in existence and creators of the best miniatures game in the history of ever.

If a game makes you react like that, ask yourself if you want to keep playing that game.

The rule stands, for the time being, deal with it and move along.

It took months for the phantom to be nerfed, and like a year for turretwing to get nerfed.

Yet there is an instant backlash over this decision by FFG that's good for the game's player base. Are you guys insane or what? This is such a hyper non-issue.

None of you have any god **** sense about what's good for this game. Not everyone likes having to buy a CORE SET for a game they already have a god damned core set for. Catering to those players is much better for the game's community as a whole than catering to NDDOP's who get huffy when their opponent's Academy Pilot loses their non-existent EPT.

Copy paste this if you don't like it and let them know(change names and some such)

Hi

I am writing to you in regards to your new decision to let players decide what damage deck to use in competetive tournamnnet play.

I really hope you will reconcider that stance and once again enforce the new damage deck for competetive play.

I could give you a long list of my own arguments but Alex Davy himself made the point much better, than I could, when he was on the Scum and Villany podcast:

Paraphrasing he said that the idea was to create an even and balanced damagedeck. One that that would make it relevant for all ships to get a critical hit and make it more or less equally relevant no matter what squad you fly with. People should fear a critical hit no matter if they are rookie or named pilots and whether they have a secondary weaponupgrade or not.

What happend that made you throw that reasoning out the window? and could you please rethink it and revert to your original descicion. stick to your guns, it was the right call to make and nothing prevents people from using their old damage deck in casual play.

Also, Blinded pilot, the same card in both decks, has different effects wich is really a mess.

Best regards,

----------------------------------

And let us hope for like 3 release articles on Monday so this can all be over with

I think, by the way, that the way FFG has been treated with regards to this decision is beyond proportionate, undeserved and very unlike the Fly Casual, sporty way we all purport to be as a community.

They've been called stupid, idiots, cowards, liars. By people who, two days earlier, would've sworn FFG was the best company in existence and creators of the best miniatures game in the history of ever.

If a game makes you react like that, ask yourself if you want to keep playing that game.

The rule stands, for the time being, deal with it and move along.

When people buy a specifiq damagedeck, becasue they are told it will be required for competetive play, they earn the right to be salty when they are later told that the purchase was redundant.

It´s unprofessional by FFG and is what I would have expected from GW, not from FFG.

I think, by the way, that the way FFG has been treated with regards to this decision is beyond proportionate, undeserved and very unlike the Fly Casual, sporty way we all purport to be as a community.

They've been called stupid, idiots, cowards, liars. By people who, two days earlier, would've sworn FFG was the best company in existence and creators of the best miniatures game in the history of ever.

If a game makes you react like that, ask yourself if you want to keep playing that game.

The rule stands, for the time being, deal with it and move along.

I think it's a serious threat to game balance--much bigger than TLTs or the Emperor, for instance. And I don't think it was a necessary change at all.

FFG is a company that makes great products, but companies are made of people, and people make mistakes. I'm not interested in calling names, but I am interested in seeing people let FFG know--clearly, politely, and briefly--what their most invested players think of the decision.

It is not at all a serious threat to game balance, that's ridiculous.

I think, by the way, that the way FFG has been treated with regards to this decision is beyond proportionate, undeserved and very unlike the Fly Casual, sporty way we all purport to be as a community.

They've been called stupid, idiots, cowards, liars. By people who, two days earlier, would've sworn FFG was the best company in existence and creators of the best miniatures game in the history of ever.

If a game makes you react like that, ask yourself if you want to keep playing that game.

The rule stands, for the time being, deal with it and move along.

I happen to agree with you. There is absolutely no need for name-calling.

But as long as the pot is being stirred; the round and round we'll go. My debate skills improve with every post.

I am FOR NDO (New Deck Only). But I don't hate Fantasy Flight Games at all.

It is not at all a serious threat to game balance, that's ridiculous.

Your posting history is full of what I'd describe charitably as ill-informed hyperbole. So you'll understand if I keep my own counsel on this point.

I think it's a serious threat to game balance--much bigger than TLTs or the Emperor, for instance. And I don't think it was a necessary change at all.

I think you overestimate the impact, but you could be right.

But do you also not agree that announcing in September, with worldwide release maybe taking another few weeks is too short a time for the required penetration?

The holiday season is starting and lots of sets will be sold, old and new to be given as gifts. Luke Skywalker is the most recognizable name in any of the core sets.

As repeatedly stated, this week even, that this game has a very low entry to organized play, can you imagine getting the core set and finding out you can't enter the tournaments in January because you have the wrong one?

Now, I agree that FFG could've handled it better by packaging the new deck with the old set, or setting up an exchange program, but they haven't.

That doesn't mean they didn't have to take action, probably based on feedback from stores and distributors.

We here are not representative of the average players, we are far more invested in the game. We think it normal to buy multiple starter sets, expansions not for the ships but the upgrades and third-party tokens and templates.

We must not forget that. We can be used as a test bed for the meta and to indicate problems in balance, but not as the purchasing behaviour of the average person.

I support the new rule.

I support the new rule.

Of kim jong-un we know, don't see how that's relevant to this topic really.

I think the new deck is the same as a new ship, a new mechanic to the game, a new FAQ, a new Errata... so yes, you do need to go and get a new core set to get the damage deck (or go to Worlds and get a free one!!!) but if you were a serious competitive player, you were going to do that anyway. It has new rocks, new ships, new upgrades, and the damage deck. Its not a big deal.

Not a "Big Deal" except it requires me to purchase $40 dollars of stuff that I do not want and do not need except to play in tournaments- something that I do on occasion (and quite enjoy) but is not what keeps me playing X-wing. If it is no big deal, Sir, I will forward you my address so you can send me my complimentary TFA Core Set

Now, the *new* damage deck may be superior to the *old* damage deck but the game is quite playable w/o the improvement and has been since Wave 1. And, frankly, by FFG's own admission, the *new* deck is/was only required to play in their (FFG) "officially sponsored" tournaments and how many of those, really are there? Regionals? Worlds? Of all the X-wing players across the world, how many is that really? What is the percentage?

As I have no intention of ever going to Worlds or probably ever competing in a Regional level tournament, I would have no objection to requiring the *new* deck or not. I care not what happens there. I do, however, object to such a rule for every tournament/event.

/Signed.