https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2016/5/18/swx-fly-casual/

Lets play a game of spot the issue:

"each of the three huge ships designed for Epic Play introduces a full campaign" Isnt there 4 Huge ships?

wdf. What a waste of time article?

wdf. What a waste of time article?

There are very few times I have wished for a dislike button on the forum...

If it was such a waste of your time, why waste more time commenting.

Kris

this must be a case of FFG keeping their distance (but not looking like they're keeping their distance)

wdf. What a waste of time article?

There are very few times I have wished for a dislike button on the forum...

If it was such a waste of your time, why waste more time commenting.

Kris

Because I'm showing my dissatisfaction at a content-depleted article and would like to remind FFG that their article posting and other PR has been particularly poor.

Other reasons include rebuffing the inevitable snarky fault-finding posts like this.

I hate space taking articles...

Now artfully taking space... That's pirate work there

I liked the article well enough. I feel it is definitely a PR move to try to keep the casual folks coming back to the website and coming back to the game after all the tournament focus we've been seeing. But it resonated with me because I would definitely like to play Epic and I do enjoy furballs.

wdf. What a waste of time article?

There are very few times I have wished for a dislike button on the forum...

If it was such a waste of your time, why waste more time commenting.

Kris

Because I'm showing my dissatisfaction at a content-depleted article and would like to remind FFG that their article posting and other PR has been particularly poor.

Other reasons include rebuffing the inevitable snarky fault-finding posts like this.

So every article has to please you?

Why not email them about all of the articles for Netrunner clogging up good X-Wing space?

It's almost like FFGs articles are written to cater for a wide variety of tastes, how dare they not send them to you for pre-approval.

Personally, my group never plays tourney style, its always in a narrative battle as part of our campaign.

Its not that i have any issue with tournament play, its just our group is currently doing a big Star Wars story and we are using X-wing as part of it. Narrative play is just a different type of fun.

I'm not entirely sure what the point of this article is, but I think it's telling that one of the first suggestions it makes to "make your games more fun" is to self-ban turreted ships. Is that ultimately why this was written? Does FFG perceive that people are angry about turrets dominating tournaments and this is their attempt to spin things so that people keep buying plastic ships?

I feel like that thinking totally misses what tournaments mean to games. Tournaments are the most distilled, efficient, highly skilled form of playing any given game. So if something is wrong in a tournament scene then something is wrong with the game overall. If turreted ships are causing trouble on the tournament scene then they're probably causing trouble on more casual rungs of the X-Wing ladder.

So we should all ban turreted ships while playing at our FLGSes? That's not a solution. X-Wing isn't better because people intentionally choose to ban the worst part of the game while playing casually. This article practically admits that the designers have screwed up.

The message of the article is clear and benign: "There are ways to play the game other than tournament-style games. Play X-wing in the way that you enjoy the most."

Is it revolutionary? Maybe not, but the vast majority of community focus seems to be on competitive play. I think they just wanted to remind people there are other ways to enjoy the game. No harm there.

Also, clearly the author is a fan of the Shuttle Tydirium podcast- they even have a picture of our shuttle heading the article!

I'm not entirely sure what the point of this article is, but I think it's telling that one of the first suggestions it makes to "make your games more fun" is to self-ban turreted ships. Is that ultimately why this was written? Does FFG perceive that people are angry about turrets dominating tournaments and this is their attempt to spin things so that people keep buying plastic ships?

I feel like that thinking totally misses what tournaments mean to games. Tournaments are the most distilled, efficient, highly skilled form of playing any given game. So if something is wrong in a tournament scene then something is wrong with the game overall. If turreted ships are causing trouble on the tournament scene then they're probably causing trouble on more casual rungs of the X-Wing ladder.

So we should all ban turreted ships while playing at our FLGSes? That's not a solution. X-Wing isn't better because people intentionally choose to ban the worst part of the game while playing casually. This article practically admits that the designers have screwed up.

I don't get that impression at all. It doesn't take a genius to see that turrets are not well-liked by some players who prefer to focus on maneuvering and lining up arcs. On the same token, some players find turrets very thematic. Both opinions are perfectly valid. Just because they acknowledge that some folks like to play differently, doesn't mean they are admitting to a mistake.

It's a bit ironic that they'd highlight Mission Control, which is 2 waves in debt as far as being updated goes.

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2016/5/18/swx-fly-casual/

Lets play a game of spot the issue:

"each of the three huge ships designed for Epic Play introduces a full campaign" Isnt there 4 Huge ships?

As one of the MF'n KINGS of Dat Casual-Cinematic-EPIC-Play-joint-nic-nic ... this article rings as hollow as F&@#! to me.

Gadge, Plainsman, DB Dratf, Heychadwick's crew, and the other Veteran X-EPIC Star Brahs on here would likely agree with me on this one too.

If you care about the non-turnies then stop pushing new meta this and cool here today hotness which is gone tomorrow type crap-a-zoid stuff.

Just say'n... BOO FFG!

They missed an opportunity to promote HotAC...

If you care about the non-turnies then stop pushing new meta this and cool here today hotness which is gone tomorrow type crap-a-zoid stuff.

Just say'n... BOO FFG!

...huh?! That's literally the opposite of what the article was about. I'm very confused.

They missed an opportunity to promote HotAC...

The truth is that there is no wrong way to enjoy X-Wing because X-Wing is meant to be enjoyed. Period. Accordingly, players are always exploring different ways of putting their ships to new uses. Fans have created fully cooperative campaigns...

I'm not entirely sure what the point of this article is, but I think it's telling that one of the first suggestions it makes to "make your games more fun" is to self-ban turreted ships. Is that ultimately why this was written? Does FFG perceive that people are angry about turrets dominating tournaments and this is their attempt to spin things so that people keep buying plastic ships?

I feel like that thinking totally misses what tournaments mean to games. Tournaments are the most distilled, efficient, highly skilled form of playing any given game. So if something is wrong in a tournament scene then something is wrong with the game overall. If turreted ships are causing trouble on the tournament scene then they're probably causing trouble on more casual rungs of the X-Wing ladder.

So we should all ban turreted ships while playing at our FLGSes? That's not a solution. X-Wing isn't better because people intentionally choose to ban the worst part of the game while playing casually. This article practically admits that the designers have screwed up.

I don't get that impression at all. It doesn't take a genius to see that turrets are not well-liked by some players who prefer to focus on maneuvering and lining up arcs. On the same token, some players find turrets very thematic. Both opinions are perfectly valid. Just because they acknowledge that some folks like to play differently, doesn't mean they are admitting to a mistake.

That was my read too. They're just saying: "If you and other people you know don't like turrets, then try playing without them." Perfectly reasonable, and not necessarily making a statement on game balance. Besides, turrets aren't really dominant right now; the alpha striking U-boats' turrets support the build but don't define it.

They missed an opportunity to promote HotAC...

True enough; although they do mention campaigns you come up with on your own.

They missed an opportunity to promote HotAC...

They did mention HotAC, though!

The truth is that there is no wrong way to enjoy X-Wing because X-Wing is meant to be enjoyed. Period. Accordingly, players are always exploring different ways of putting their ships to new uses. Fans have created fully cooperative campaigns...

They just didn't name it or link to it, and I think it's perfectly reasonable that they didn't.

No they didn't actually. They made a passing reference to the concept but they could have just as easily linked it and said "we love this, you should try it".

Article makes a fair amount of sense. Wargamers often get stuck in the "official" way to play things and it doesn't hurt to remind them that there is much more to the game. "Fly Casual" and all that but compared with other systems, I find X-wing to be quite the opposite in the minds of the players. FFG spends a lot of effort supporting competitive play (and I am grateful they do!) but it isn't a bad idea to give some support to the causal or narrative players. Of course, I'd say some actual content to support that might go a bit further...

I liked the article.

Didn't they get the memo from Paul that fly casual is dead?!?!

If you care about the non-turnies then stop pushing new meta this and cool here today hotness which is gone tomorrow type crap-a-zoid stuff.

Just say'n... BOO FFG!

...huh?! That's literally the opposite of what the article was about. I'm very confused.

They are pretending to care more than their actions convey when it comes to non-turnies peeps.

Dam-Lie... FFG we know you go to town and dress up fancy and make films of your big city nights... then you come back home to our small peaceful little house on the prairie and we are supposed to act like we don't know all about your true love in that dirty city.

You even had the dam-nerve to show a special model of a damaged TIE... after taking down the beloved Painting Forum which was WAYyyy more active than the little List Forum and such.

We KNOW FFG... WE KNOW!

Article makes a fair amount of sense. Wargamers often get stuck in the "official" way to play things and it doesn't hurt to remind them that there is much more to the game. "Fly Casual" and all that but compared with other systems, I find X-wing to be quite the opposite in the minds of the players. FFG spends a lot of effort supporting competitive play (and I am grateful they do!) but it isn't a bad idea to give some support to the causal or narrative players. Of course, I'd say some actual content to support that might go a bit further...

The focus in terms of content and balance should be on competitive play, because that is how you make a balanced game, if for no other reason.

That said, it wouldn't kill them to update Mission Control, or to offer some other tool or product to support alternative game types. There's a lot of ways they can improve Mission Control, if nothing else.

They missed an opportunity to promote HotAC...

They did mention HotAC, though!

The truth is that there is no wrong way to enjoy X-Wing because X-Wing is meant to be enjoyed. Period. Accordingly, players are always exploring different ways of putting their ships to new uses. Fans have created fully cooperative campaigns...

They just didn't name it or link to it, and I think it's perfectly reasonable that they didn't.

No they didn't actually. They made a passing reference to the concept but they could have just as easily linked it and said "we love this, you should try it".

All Star Wars content that they publish has to go through LFL so I doubt they will push a 3rd party non profit on the official page as much as they may love it.

Kris