Actually, it is precisely FFG's fault. They have created a sales model based on bundling, which is becoming more and more untenable as time goes on. It's also one that consumers are becoming less and less willing to accept - ask Comcast how bundling is working out for them these days.

Woah, woah woah woah - more untenable as time goes on? Last I checked, the X-Wing Miniatures Game was producing record sales for FFG, and rapidly becoming one of the top-played tabletop miniatures games worldwide.

More untenable as time goes on? I've seen threads this week talking about how this is a golden era for the game, how it's never been so varied and balanced.

And who are these consumers that are "lesss andless willing to accept" FFG's sales model you're talking about here? Do we have names,numbers? Have you coknducted any opinion polls or gathered any relevant data from the fanbase that you can share? Or are we just using the hyperbolic quote consumers unquote here?

Do you know who doesn't use a bundling sales model? Games Workshop. How are they getting on nowadays?

It will be interesting to examine the state of the game in 5 years. There's a huge player base that's getting larger all the time. FFG may change their model to maks new ships coming out competitive without resorting to cards released in the early expansions. The "rose by any other name" tactic.

With the new life that Disney breathed into Star Wars, the interest won't die for quite sometime.

Um, last time this topic came up we had some guy who spammed like half a dozen of the same topic griping about FFG forcing him to buy a hundred dollar raider in order to play Vader.

It did not end well.

Um, last time this topic came up we had some guy who spammed like half a dozen of the same topic griping about FFG forcing him to buy a hundred dollar raider in order to play Vader.

It did not end well.

But hey, I'm sure it's only a matter of time before FFG comes knocking on someone's door, asking to hire them as a business analyst.

Um, last time this topic came up we had some guy who spammed like half a dozen of the same topic griping about FFG forcing him to buy a hundred dollar raider in order to play Vader.

It did not end well.

To be fair, including a mandatory fix for the TIE Advanced in a $100 epic ship that most people don't want and won't use was a bit of a d ick marketing move. I would have gladly purchased an Imperial Aces II that patched up the Advanced at $30 MSRP.

To be fair, including a mandatory fix for the TIE Advanced in a $100 epic ship that most people don't want and won't use

There's a whole lot of subjective statements about what other people want in there... Because to be fair... You know jack about what what most people want and will use.

And if you don't want to do that either i'm sorry you will just have 2 Guidance Chimps, there is no solution for you, but that's not FFG's fault nor anyone else's. You want to play the game, then buy their stuff!

Actually, it is precisely FFG's fault. They have created a sales model based on bundling, which is becoming more and more untenable as time goes on. It's also one that consumers are becoming less and less willing to accept - ask Comcast how bundling is working out for them these days.

Holy freaking crap dude, you just compared FFG to Comcast. That's a ludicrous comparison and I think you know it, regardless of how much you might hate "bundling". Your point may have been specifically about bundling but Comcast just went to somebody's house and kicked their puppy in the time it took me to write this.

You've been around this game long enough to know that a popular upgrade like this will almost certainly be released in future waves. Case in point Advanced Sensors first with the shuttle and then with the E-Wing. I'm sure there are other examples but I'm not going to go searching.

You have always had a strong handle on rules issues and contributed well in those regards which is why I have tolerated the more curmudgeonly aspects of your posts over time but this one might take the cake. Comcast? For shame!

For the record, I wanted the raider and since I play largely casual/narrative, don't give a flying **** about owning the cards. I own them, if i ever get the time to attend a tourney i'll even bring them. But I wanted the raider for my private collection and for narrative.

I will never understand why people buy so many copies of a ship. 4 bombers? Really?

Because Epic is the one true Star Wars miniature game

GHAD-DHAM-RIGHTS IT IS!

Go play your CCG's and have fun... meanwhile the rest of us are playing REAL STAR WARS.

Woah, woah woah woah - more untenable as time goes on? Last I checked, the X-Wing Miniatures Game was producing record sales for FFG, and rapidly becoming one of the top-played tabletop miniatures games worldwide.

More untenable as time goes on? I've seen threads this week talking about how this is a golden era for the game, how it's never been so varied and balanced.

And who are these consumers that are "lesss andless willing to accept" FFG's sales model you're talking about here? Do we have names,numbers? Have you coknducted any opinion polls or gathered any relevant data from the fanbase that you can share? Or are we just using the hyperbolic quote consumers unquote here?

Do you know who doesn't use a bundling sales model? Games Workshop. How are they getting on nowadays?

We'll take these in reverse order and start with the dumbest first - GW has problems that have nothing to do with whether their sales model is bundled or not. That seems so blindingly obvious that your straw man is obviously lacking a brain, and should probably get on that yellow brick road ASAP. And even then, they DO still have the top-selling miniatures game on the market, even with that game being almost 30 years old. So as much as I dislike them, they must be doing something OK. Which means that if you're going to go by pure sales (which you do in your first paragraph) then they're doing AWESOME. So something in your entire argument isn't adding up - it's almost like you're just picking and choosing random data points.

Do I have scientific data on the burnout? No, but no more than you do. What I have is a sense that we've seen more and more concern and complaint around here. You do a good job of enforcing the echo chamber, harassing and abusing anyone who has an issue until they leave, so it doesn't show up here much. I do know that about 90% of the players at our shop have dropped X-wing for a massive surge in Malifaux interest. Totally anecdotal, of course, but I suspect that's what you're going off of as well.

You argument about the good comments on the current state of the game aren't really relevant. Even if we ignore the echo chamber again, the sales model doesn't have anything to do with how well balanced or playable the game is. Players who decide not to get into the game because they can't play only one faction, or leave the game because it's not worth keeping up with the race, are not going to be here commenting. Not saying that counts as evidence for a problem, but you're essentially saying "Every left thinks a completely different part of the game is awesome!" Well, OK, sure, but what does that have to do with anything?

Now, looking at the actual argument, I think the idea that it gets less tenable as it goes forward is rather self-evident. As the number of ships grows, the spread of ships you have to buy to get upgrades increases. If we take a look at the cost summaries for the top Worlds lists, most of them have upgrades account for 75% or more of the cost of the list. Even the best - KO's triple K-wing list - just barely breaks even, with 57% of the cost of the list being for ships. That seems to be a pretty big shift from GenCon 2013, where the top 3 of the top 4 lists were 100% covered by the cost of their ships. The last of those was 67% upgrades, but that was driven entirely by the triple Shield Upgrades that were only available from the Falcon at the time (and no, an example of how the problem always existed does not preclude it getting generally worse).

The other half of the argument - that over the long term the release model will give players more and more ships they don't use - seems equally obvious. Existent players will generally buy what they feel they need in terms of ships. When an Aces/Veterans/Epic/Whatever pack comes out, you buy more ships, which goes over top of that. I've seen any number of people comment on that effect already.

So, care to make any actual reasonable points here? Or are we just looking at a return to the glory days of the first page of this thread?

I would have nothing against Card booster packs sold separately from the ships. But this will not happen as far as i can see.

I was under the firm impression that X-Wing sales were going pretty well, and they have now been the second biggest miniature game behind 40k for at least a year. So they probably have no reason to change their sales model!

Sadly, I agree - we certainly won't see card packs.

And sales are going great, and they're making a ton of money on it. But that can't hold forever. This sort of pain only increases over time, and will affect more and more players. The reprinted ships can also only work so many times - as mentioned above, a big part of what burned me out was the realization of just how many ships I pay for that I never use, and Imperial Veterans would just be more of the same.

Will it kill the game? I honestly have no idea. I have a very high threshold for acceptable cost, and I'm pretty amazed that anyone is still OK with it once I hit my limit. But nothing about this model improves over time - useless ships, spread of ships you have to purchase to be competitive, and the way the sales model paints them into a corner on a major game revision all point to a deteriorating state for the game. I'm thinking relatively long term here, but while X-wing may currently be overtopping other minis games, I expect the others on top of the list will outlast it.

Warmachine? Maybe...

40k and Age of bull? Well if you think FFG's policy is bad, i really don't know what to tell you about GW's

I have been a long term 40k and Fantasy player and i knew a large community of players.

NOW i am an ex-player and i know only other ex-players really.

GW milks the last money out of its few remaining customers before it either radically improves its policy again or the CEO's retire with a big bank account and let the company go down in flames... That's my theory!

To be fair, including a mandatory fix for the TIE Advanced in a $100 epic ship that most people don't want and won't use

There's a whole lot of subjective statements about what other people want in there... Because to be fair... You know jack about what what most people want and will use.

Is it really that controversial to state that most players do not play epic and stick to 100 point matches? I'd bet that 95% of players never play a single game of epic. Granted, on these forums its likely quite a bit higher due to selection bias, but I would still bet the vast majority would never find an in game use for the Raider.

To be fair, including a mandatory fix for the TIE Advanced in a $100 epic ship that most people don't want and won't use

There's a whole lot of subjective statements about what other people want in there... Because to be fair... You know jack about what what most people want and will use.

Why does this only ever get pulled out when people dislike something? Because to be fair, you know exactly the same amount of jack about what most people want and will use, but you seem to consider your opinion far more valid than his.

If we look at the actual evidence, do you really think no basis to the idea that Epic is a less popular play format? In the first five pages of the Organized Play forum, there are two posts about epic events (at least by subject). Skimming the first page of the list discussion forum, I found two for epic lists. There's also the presence of the standard play cards being in there in the first place - if everyone wanted epic so badly, there wouldn't be a need to entice people with the standard play stuff. I think it's pretty telling that the first wave of epic ships included the X-wing with the (smaller) Transport, but the recent one added more ships to the Raider and Gozanti. At least to me, that seems to indicate that they felt the need to incentivize the epic ships more than they already were.

So on the whole, I think there's far more support for people not wanting epic ships than there is for the opposite. If your point really is that we just can't know anything for sure, then you're probably right. But what evidence we do have certainly points to it being a less desirable format, and ignoring that just comes off as shouting down someone who disagrees.

Warmachine? Maybe...

40k and Age of bull? Well if you think FFG's policy is bad, i really don't know what to tell you about GW's

I have been a long term 40k and Fantasy player and i knew a large community of players.

NOW i am an ex-player and i know only other ex-players really.

GW milks the last money out of its few remaining customers before it either radically improves its policy again or the CEO's retire with a big bank account and let the company go down in flames... That's my theory!

I'm not saying that GW is good - I dislike them as much as anyone, and refuse to touch any of their products.

But at the same time, they create a contradiction in your argument. If everything with X-wing is fine because it's selling so well, then the same should hold for GW, shouldn't it? 40K does still top the charts. And if GW can be milking its customers before going down in flames despite holding the top sales spot, then it seems that there's at least some potential for FFG to be doing the same despite X-wing holding in #2?

I wanted the Epic ships even before I was sure of how often I would be able to play them. They are pretty models to display, which is a good chunk of the reason I buy what I buy.

but you seem to consider your opinion far more valid than his.

No I'm the one who isn't claiming to speak for most other people one way or the other. I'm also not the one who's making up statics with no possible way of supporting the claim being made.

I have no idea how many people play epic, I don't know how many people would buy the Raider if it didn't offer the Advanced fix. I'd feel fairly safe in saying fewer would be sold without it.

But anyone who makes a statement like "I'd bet that 95% of players never play a single game of epic." Needs to be called on the BS they're spreading.

I don't care what side you take, or even what your argument is. When you make statements like that with no possible way of backing it up, then you should and will get called on it.

I can say however, that every person I personally know who plays X-Wing, has in fact played at least one game of Epic.

I wanted the Epic ships even before I was sure of how often I would be able to play them. They are pretty models to display, which is a good chunk of the reason I buy what I buy.

I can imagine that, but there lies the problem - there is really nothing that suggests the customer who wants an upgrade for his TIE Advanced is the same customer as the one who wants to display a cool Raider model. So to package the X1 title in the same box as the Raider is not exactly (and I am phrasing this as respectfully to FFG as I can) putting the customer first. Some people are lucky and want both, some don't.

The business goal, I think, is to create a demand for huge ships because customers buy the Raider. You buy one thing and are then motivated to buy more because one expansion contains stuff that works well with the next.

I would love to see Card Booster Packs sold separately.

Most of us would... Which is perhaps the strongest argument why it won't happen any time soon.

No matter how true I don't like this answer:

There is an absolute limit of how many ships FFG can make that will really sell well. I think the K-Wing and Tie Punishers are at that point now... I have both and like them, but by and large they are pushing the outer edge of what people consider Star Wars.

TFA has little more to offer in the way of new ships, neither does Rebels. So at some point and I think that point may come sooner than latter, that expansion packs will stop selling quite so well and at that point the economics of card packs will start to look better and better.

For me the K-Wing and TIE Punisher was is pretty much the limit or fairly close. I didn't like the looks of either and mostly wanted the cards. At least the StarViper was in the Empire at War so I recognized at least it but didn't get any buzz droids. But after that I'm started whining a little more that usual. Do I whine?

Well lets try and get a little data shall we?

http://strawpoll.me/6460436

I don't care what side you take, or even what your argument is. When you make statements like that with no possible way of backing it up, then you should and will get called on it.

And yet I never seem to see you calling out anyone who supports the game by making equally unsupportable statements. I'm sure I'm just missing them...

... ships you have to buy...

This right here is the problem. Nobody has to buy anything. They may want it really bad, but it is not required by FFG, which is the silent implication of the entire argument whether it's made by you or someone else.

Likewise, claiming that epic ships must be bundled with standard play cards to entice people to buy them might just be getting it all backwards. Maybe FFG added the standard play cards as a bonus for buying into Epic. I mean, if they really wanted to be jerks about it, they could have put only one Tie Advanced X1 title in the Raider instead of four. After all, there's only one TIE Advanced in the box.

Thinking strictly economically about as the entry fee increases and as more fixes come out in separate expansions at some point this may hinder game purchases as well. Perhaps not significantly yet but clearly it has started as exampled more yet more discussing on proxies.

At some point it may be more profitable to reduce the cost (card only expansion packs) to increase over all sales. Again I am only hoping.

I can see a future where card upgrade packs become more viable due to dramatic changes in the game and potential fixes for years-old xpacks. It's going to be a long time, though, provided they don't just relaunch the game from scratch at a slightly different scale (4 x 4 play area?) once the original game has run it's course (wonder if they have a set end-of-life date for the original game?). A form of planned obsolescence if you will.

Edit - give us something to do with those little cardboard proof of purchase tokens in every xpack. Trade it in for an updated xpack!

This right here is the problem. Nobody has to buy anything. They may want it really bad, but it is not required by FFG, which is the silent implication of the entire argument whether it's made by you or someone else.

When people talk about things they have to buy, they mean "Things I have to buy to enjoy playing the game." Could you buy one Core Set and never buy anything else? Sure, you could run right into a tournament with a 40-point list and have a field day. Do you HAVE to buy more? Nope. It's all optional, right? So you don't HAVE to buy more, but you're probably not going to enjoy the experience unless you do. I'm not sure if people don't get that, or just prefer pedantic insults.

Which is where the whole "Nobody HAS to" argument completely misses the point. Discussions like this are players saying "I want to play your game but these decisions are driving me away, please help me stay!!" Now maybe there's nothing that can be done to keep them. Maybe people do have unrealistic expectations. But pedantic replies like this or, exponentially worse, the active cheering and insulting of people who are trying to avoid leaving the game, are sadly disappointing.

I have to buy copies of this ridiculous ship to "fix" ordnance that has been broken for SEVEN WAVES NOW? Trust me, I have too many proton torpedoes to count.

Fully agree.

Felt the same way with the IA card in the T-70 pack.

I don’t understand why these “fixes” only come with 1 card!

At least the raider came with multiple copies of the Advanced title.