Well congratulations, for all of those who wonder if FFG reads these forums well you can rest and be assured that there is at least someone reading them. (Although I sort of find htis revelation to be rather disquieting) 
We've made the news.
BoLS are bloggers (and clickbait bloggers, no less!), not news, hope that helps~
Edited by TipperaryDid you read the article? He pretty much says, "No. Not it is not pay-to-win." I don't think it's an awful article.
Wasn't a bad article though really.
Did you read the article? He pretty much says, "No. Not it is not pay-to-win." I don't think it's an awful article.
Which in contrast with the title is blatant clickbait.
Also my ad/script-blockers kill FIFTY PERCENT of the site, what are they even doing that requires that much tripe to run.
Worth a quick read. Basically just a summary of what most of the pseudo sane folks here say. FFG's business model is not perfect but it's just about the best thing going for games of this type.
The skill-factor in this game is very, very high. Hard (read: impossible) to quantify but if you say that chess is a theoretical 100% win rate for the "better" player in that particular game and Candyland is 0% skill based. Where does X-wing fall? 75? 80?
From the comments:
"By sheer coincidence, that top list costs about what a MTG standard player would pay for just a Jace playset. Which most of the top decks use."
As of today I have spent over $1700.00. Therefore by the articles reasoning I am 6 times better than Paul Heaver.
Sorry you guys I am going to worlds next year and should easily grab the crown. It will be a walk in the park.
Cross posting from the top 8 pricing thread:
Given the recent interest in costs, I thought I'd calculate the cost for the four lowest scoring squads (based on Swiss rank) from Worlds 2015 for which we have data.
Rank 257: $179.60
Rank 258: $224.60
Rank 261: $159.75
Rank 263: $249.55
Infer what you will from this information.
The title can probably be blamed on the editor rather than the writer. Writers just submit a draft and usually have zero control whether the editor is gonna "improve" the article with a meme or add a clickbait or contradictory title. Or exclamation marks! Editors! Love! Exclamation marks!
The article itself is good when you ignore all the "improvements".
I bet all the people in the tounament had the cards and ships to make anyone of those list.
I bet all the people in the tounament had the cards and ships to make anyone of those list.
All except one. Cause who the hell buys 3 K-Wings.
All except one. Cause who the hell buys 3 K-Wings.I bet all the people in the tounament had the cards and ships to make anyone of those list.
I don't have 3 K-Wings. I have SIX.
Jim
Now "Fat Hans" to boost the price because of that single C-3PO card. In the near future we may have something similar with the TIE Advanced and the Raider requirement that will be needed to make them playable.
All except one. Cause who the hell buys 3 K-Wings.I bet all the people in the tounament had the cards and ships to make anyone of those list.
BoLS are bloggers (and clickbait bloggers, no less!), not news, hope that helps~
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
The reason why journalists use that style of headline is that they know the story is probably b******t, and don’t actually have the sources and facts to back it up, but still want to run it.
BoLS are bloggers (and clickbait bloggers, no less!), not news, hope that helps~
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
The reason why journalists use that style of headline is that they know the story is probably b******t, and don’t actually have the sources and facts to back it up, but still want to run it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines
Yup, I agree but scary enough the source was from here. 
Talk about a world with all questions and no answers where public forums and twitter posts are considered credible sources for journalism. It just makes you want to QUESTION EVERYTHING in terms of credibility: from FOX NEWS to MSNBC, from CNN to Al Jazeera, from ABC to BB... well, I think you get the point. 
I thought it was a very good article. That said look at anything in your life, its all pay to play "from a certain point of view". Playing a video game costs 2x as much as our lists, i spent just shy of $700 to play battlefront 3 with my kids. thats a refurbished xbox 1 two more controllers the game an xbox live membership and minecraft might have been in there too. thats not including the tv and cables so if you want to cry that some players have been playing the game since inception yeah we have a lot of cards and ships. I personally try and buy 100pts of each ship unless i just dont see me playing it that much, sorry Imperials, but this is also to play with my friends and my two kids so i can support three to four players by myself. Again my choice and I have to work some side jobs and dont get other things like cable tv its all about the choices ive made that allow me to buy that much useless stuff to have fun. Just my two cents.
Yup, I agree but scary enough the source was from here.
Yes, I feel the same way. In fact, I've probably taken it too far. I just don't read the news anymore because I just don't know what I can trust. The correct response is probably to read all the sources so I can form my own opinion, but I don't have time for that. Instead, I'm an socially/culturally uneducated nerd whose idea of news is what comes off the FFG homepage.
Also wasn't the Champ running a Y-Wing?
I mean come on... Pay to win? With a Y-Wing? Nah. I've spent as much as the top 8 combined on a certain game - mostly painting! - and let me tell you... Hoo-boy! Pay to win? Ha! Whoo boy.. Aha, hahaha ha :cough: whew! Ha-ha! ...
...
Heheh...
... Ha. Okay. Sorry. I am okay now. No, X-Wing is definitely collect and win. As in you collect the ships in a sane manner and proceed to enjoy your new hobby. Just imagine what else you could spend your dough on! I mean I'd almost have rather tried smoking amphetamines. It might have been cheaper.
Edited by Darkcloak
All except one. Cause who the hell buys 3 K-Wings.I bet all the people in the tounament had the cards and ships to make anyone of those list.
I don't have 3 K-Wings. I have SIX.
Jim
Reminds me of my Aerotech collection. I literally owned enough copies of the Dante class Frigate model so I had the same number of Dantes as were built in the setting even though they were never all part of one force and could never be part of one fleet. (The first three were built for one faction while four and five were built by a splinter group of that faction but the first trio were all destroyed before either ship from the final pair was operational) Then Dad passed away and I inherited two more Dante models.
Just out of curiosity, any idea what the winning netrunner lists cost?
Honestly, I'm more likely to believe the NOVA squadron podcast stance on this: he practices...... A LOT...... he thinks about it...... A LOT....... Flat out, he wants it more than the rest of us. I played Paul Heaver once, and he wiped the floor with me. I have also beaten people who have beaten him. If I was willing to put in the time and effort to do it (not to mention playing the same list more than once lol) .I could potentially win worlds. It's not pay to win... It's PLAY to win.
I'm not entirely sure what the point of this thread is? BoLS has been running fairly regular X-Wing coverage for a while now (I had an article on there myself when the new core set came out).
Is someone worried that this specific article has a particular point that needs discussed? I'm just not clear?
On the subject of the article's contents. that was an incomplete analysis. for the data to even come close to having meaning we would need at minimum the costs of the bottom 8 lists as well, ideally the costs of all 270 some lists, and THEN analyze performance vs cost. for all we know, the bottom half of the lists were all $400+.
Just out of curiosity, any idea what the winning netrunner lists cost?
I don't know. It is much harder to find netrunner news and information on current events unlike X-wing which is all over the place. All i know is for 3 core sets all data packs and big box expansions comes out to ~$600.
I'm not entirely sure what the point of this thread is? BoLS has been running fairly regular X-Wing coverage for a while now (I had an article on there myself when the new core set came out).
Is someone worried that this specific article has a particular point that needs discussed? I'm just not clear?
On the subject of the article's contents. that was an incomplete analysis. for the data to even come close to having meaning we would need at minimum the costs of the bottom 8 lists as well, ideally the costs of all 270 some lists, and THEN analyze performance vs cost. for all we know, the bottom half of the lists were all $400+.
Well the point of this thread is that in some strange case these forums has become a part (a very small one) of X-wing coverage. It specifically referenced a thread on this forum.