Toss in a few new ships as well and I would call that a viable product. Hell, maybe even price it aggressively and make it $5 cheaper than those 3 ships would normally be. Three ships, a new damage deck, new scenarios and a bunch of tokens, now that would be a heck of a deal.

I know you think you're being clever, but:

• some of us don't want anything to do with those ships
• $5 cheaper really only applies in America, up here a core will run 60-65 unless you're talking online prices, at which point it's still roughly equivalent to 3 ships if you buy blisters at online as well
• the last thing I need is more tokens.
• FFG scenarios are usually pretty bleh, honestly.

personally I think it should be sold separately, especially if its mandatory for tourneys, and here in the uk its not so cheap or easy to get on its own

Wow. Thats tough, FFG.

Its a sign of uncernity, internal struggles and no plans for an updated old core box.

So, no real planning on how to deal with 2 core boxes in future.

I can imagine that Disney messed with your original plans, by a sudden demand of merchandizing stuff for the new films.

It feels like this was all done in an unhealthy hurry.

OK, no need for the new core box anymore. This news came a bit too late for me. I got one a week ago, sadly.

I could have bought a bunch of Khiraxes for the money....

personally I think it should be sold separately, especially if its mandatory for tourneys, and here in the uk its not so cheap or easy to get on its own

Looked on eBay there were four none had a buy it now option all had gone over the £5 Mark that I consider the most I'd be willing to pay.

So yeah buying it separate from eBay not a great option.

If you bought a new core just for the damage deck without any intention of using the ships, it's your fault. Could have ebayed or traded for one.

I can imagine that Disney messed with your original plans, by a sudden demand of merchandizing stuff for the new films.

It feels like this was all done in an unhealthy hurry.

The design, playtesting and production of the ships would've taken much longer than playtesting and debating the implementation of a new damage deck, I think the 'sudden' demand by Disney came well over a year ago.

I can imagine that Disney messed with your original plans, by a sudden demand of merchandizing stuff for the new films.

It feels like this was all done in an unhealthy hurry.

The design, playtesting and production of the ships would've taken much longer than playtesting and debating the implementation of a new damage deck, I think the 'sudden' demand by Disney came well over a year ago.

I wasn't referring to the new damage deck, which is better then the old one imho btw.

Pls read my complete post again.

If you bought a new core just for the damage deck without any intention of using the ships, it's your fault. Could have ebayed or traded for one.

Unless you live in a part of the world where buying off ebay comes with hefty postage fees and/or postal service unreliability or your local community is not interested enough in the new ships for anyone to buy multiples.

Then your only option if you want to keep going to tournaments is buy the new core.

I really don't like the flip flop.

I hope S&V/NOVA/other podcasters get to ask the question AND get a solid answer.

My biggest fear is this another distribution/production issue/setback with a twist of mouse meddling.

With more mouse meddling our marvelous models might meet danger.

You all act like flip flopping is new, have you all forgotten faction dials and playmats?

Cause i don't remember people insulting ffg when they flipped on those issues.

I don't suspect mouse involvement here. Doesn't make sense, they would be pushing the new core exclusively. This is FFG reacting to outrage of people who didn't want to buy the new core to play in tournaments. It is a consumer friendly descision, but I think it is bad for the game, since blank crits are just stupid and have annoyed me ever since I started playing the game. For the record: The new deck favours no one, the old one does, and damage shouldn't have that effect.

On the other hand, isn't the new deck friendlier to lists that are already at the top of the food chain (aces and stuffbwith secondary weapons)?

Allowing the old deck is IMO a buff to swarms and generics, which might be a good thing for the game.

You know, you can write Disney,it isn't a bad word.

For the record: The new deck favours no one, the old one does, and damage shouldn't have that effect.

Demonstrably untrue, I'm afraid. The new deck does not allow a Munitions Failure crit to turn a TLT-toting HWK into an expensive and under-armed bundle of points, ripe for your opponent's plucking. It also doesn't allow an Injured Pilot to turn Captain Oicunn's Magical Kinetic-Energy Battlewagon into Second Lieutenant Field-Promotion's Point-piñata.

For the record: The new deck favors some lists, the old one favors some lists.

[*]the last thing I need is more tokens.

[*]FFG scenarios are usually pretty bleh, honestly.

I agree, but the post I was responding to specifically mentioned new missions and tokens.

For the record: The new deck favours no one, the old one does, and damage shouldn't have that effect.

Demonstrably untrue, I'm afraid. The new deck does not allow a Munitions Failure crit to turn a TLT-toting HWK into an expensive and under-armed bundle of points, ripe for your opponent's plucking. It also doesn't allow an Injured Pilot to turn Captain Oicunn's Magical Kinetic-Energy Battlewagon into Second Lieutenant Field-Promotion's Point-piñata.

For the record: The new deck favors some lists, the old one favors some lists.

No, the old deck favours some list and puts some at a disadvantage, while the new one has a level playing field.

Squads that have no secondary weapons or elite talents to lose should use the old deck because they'll ignore certain critical damage effects. To me, it's a question of how much that will matter.

We know what happens when those kinds of squads are forced to use the new, more balanced, damage deck. The fact is that they perform just like they did using the old deck. Squads with generic ships didn't suddenly get a lot worse when people started playing with the new damage deck. They won't suddenly get a lot better now that they're more likely to be using the old deck. Even if they get slightly better (which I doubt) in the new meta, elite ships aren't going away.

That's nothing to get worked up about.

For the record: The new deck favours no one, the old one does, and damage shouldn't have that effect.

Demonstrably untrue, I'm afraid. The new deck does not allow a Munitions Failure crit to turn a TLT-toting HWK into an expensive and under-armed bundle of points, ripe for your opponent's plucking. It also doesn't allow an Injured Pilot to turn Captain Oicunn's Magical Kinetic-Energy Battlewagon into Second Lieutenant Field-Promotion's Point-piñata.

For the record: The new deck favors some lists, the old one favors some lists.

However, in the old deck, some lists straight up ignore four of the cards, making the deck about 13% less effective from that alone. No list could be built that outright ignores that much of the new deck.

Good Admiral, this:

The new deck favours no one, the old one does, and damage shouldn't have that effect.

is, I very much fear, not the same statement as this:

No, the old deck favours some list and puts some at a disadvantage, while the new one has a level playing field.

The first statement paints the old deck as containing only positive or neutral outcomes, the second shows the old deck as being highly variable both positively and negatively, and the new deck as being a lower, but more consistent, threat level. With that statement, I fully agree.

The way I'd put it is this: while the new deck may still favor some lists if everyone has to use it, the difference is pretty small and every card does something to the ship taking it, or at least has a chance to.

However, in the old deck, some lists straight up ignore four of the cards, making the deck about 13% less effective from that alone. No list could be built around that outright ignores that much of the new deck.

Well put, sir! The Loose Stabilizer was about to be my counterpoint to the good Admiral, but you've constructed a solid argument- it does, at least, have a chance to do something to the ship taking it. I would simply remind you that as I've emphasized above, and as seems to be rather repeatedly overlooked in this thread, there are also lists that are hit far, far harder by the old deck than the new, or that can ignore some of the cards while being penalized more harshly by the remainder.

I remain unconvinced that removing the ability for me to make the tactical decision to take my chances with the more variable, high-stakes version of the deck is the appropriate choice to make for a 'healthier' metagame. That removing that choice would simultaneously force me into an expensive and otherwise-currently-unwanted purchase is, as the children of the gentry say, 'icing'.

I just can't get all worked up over this. At most my disappointment was not having two decks, one for reach player without have two cores.

Yes I wish they'd come out with a damage deck as a separate blister pack. But what I would get excited about was upgraded packs. To me not having this is far more of burden to players

I just can't get all worked up over this. At most my disappointment was not having two decks, one for reach player without have two cores.

Yes I wish they'd come out with a damage deck as a separate blister pack. But what I would get excited about was upgraded packs. To me not having this is far more of burden to players

Well it looks like they won't be selling the damage deck individually. However it does seem while both decks are legal for competitive play the new one will be required for premier. So probably next year every participant at a regionals nationals and worlds will get a new damage deck as an alternative to guying a new core set.

As for the complete change over to the new one, that might come in 2017.

I just can't get all worked up over this. At most my disappointment was not having two decks, one for reach player without have two cores.

Yes I wish they'd come out with a damage deck as a separate blister pack. But what I would get excited about was upgraded packs. To me not having this is far more of burden to players

Well it looks like they won't be selling the damage deck individually. However it does seem while both decks are legal for competitive play the new one will be required for premier. So probably next year every participant at a regionals nationals and worlds will get a new damage deck as an alternative to guying a new core set.

That doesn't mean it's the same next worlds or nationals, let alone regionals. Maybe, maybe in the US. But I doubt every distributor in the world would make the effort.

For people whining that others don't want to spend £30 on a new damage deck, how would you feel if the only way of getting hold of the new damage deck was to buy a large ship from a faction you had no interest in playing? And then to be told that you would be banned from tournaments until you bought that ship? That is the problem people have been having, not in the being required to buy the new damage deck itself.

Personally, I think the right thing to do will be for FFG to release separate damage decks, the same as they do for dice and maneuver templates (in Armada at least). Not only will this allow FFG to update the damage deck in a manner that it fair to competitive players, but it will also give an affordable option to people who have lost a card from their previously bought damage deck. Hell, it could also be a benefit to the upper levels of competitive play: Worried that it's too easy to subtly modify the damage deck for a tournament with little risk of getting caught? Simply issue all competitors with sealed damage decks at the start of the tournament. Doing so should only up the cost of entry by a couple of dollars, which with the higher level tournaments (such as Nationals or Worlds) shouldn't be an issue at all.

For people whining that others don't want to spend £30 on a new damage deck, how would you feel if the only way of getting hold of the new damage deck was to buy a large ship from a faction you had no interest in playing? And then to be told that you would be banned from tournaments until you bought that ship?

Engine upgrade, Autothrusters, and the title that makes the TIE Advance not crap would all like to say hello. Requiring people to purchase things they have zero desire for to get a couple cards so they can be tournament legal is not something new to X-wing, it's a core marketing strategy...

Good Admiral, this:

The new deck favours no one, the old one does, and damage shouldn't have that effect.

is, I very much fear, not the same statement as this:

No, the old deck favours some list and puts some at a disadvantage, while the new one has a level playing field.

The first statement paints the old deck as containing only positive or neutral outcomes, the second shows the old deck as being highly variable both positively and negatively, and the new deck as being a lower, but more consistent, threat level. With that statement, I fully agree.

Doesn't make the first statement wrong, though, unless you want to argue that the new deck favours someone, which is not true unless you compare it to the old, unbalanced deck.

In the end I don't mind the new ruling as much, it is the more consumer friendly one and everyone should appreciate that. I do however regret that the new deck will not be the standart, since in my opinion it offers a vastly better experience. I would like that to be consistent. In one of the thousand other threads concerning this (FFG, give us some real news alreasy!) I said that I hated being forced to use the more dangerous new deck whenever I would run aces or secondary weapons, but I realize that is not true now. I hate being forced to use the old, outdated, less exciting and highly skewed deck (as I have always felt) whenever I run a squad that benefits from it, since otherwise I would be at a disadvantage.