Something that was mentioned above - the Escalation tournament - any thoughts on why that's not more popular ?

I've never played in one, but it feels like just the thing to provide an alternative to 100/6 - the lists you build surely have to be quite radically different as there has to be a balance between spending all or saving at each stage...is there any way IT could be a bridge between 100/6 and other formats ?

List building is hard in escalation. You start at 60 points, minimum of two ships. Easy enough. When you go to the second round it's now 90. Everything in the 60 points list carries forward. You can add upgrades to ships, but not remove anything that was already there. So do you add just one new ship and additional upgrades to the others? Do you bank some points in preparation for the next round say running 86 during that round so you can add 34 points when you make the jump to 120? Lots of room for errors too.

This is all complicated by the fact that there are no established metas at the 60, 90, 120 and 150 point levels. What is a good 60 point list? Soontir and Omega Leader? Five Academies? Unsuper Dash plus a Z?

Well actually NASCAR used to be about racing stock production model cars and in fact if you wanted to enter a car into NASCAR you had to sell a certain number by a certain date leading to the term "Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday". NASCAR was really cool back then.

Neat tidbit of stock car info for ya, but anyways...

One last time, just so I can be sure I've said it clearly. If FFG wants to capitalize on the more casual side of X-Wing then all they need to do is release a stand-alone rules add-on to X-Wing that caters to those players. You wouldn't need to buy any repackaged ships or replace anything in your current collection, just a book with new rules and scenarios that allow players to explore the Star Wars universe more openly in the context of spaceship combat. If I was a betting man I'd say something like this is already probably in the works.

Hence stock car racing, but I didn't know the rest

In truth, I think the casual players would be happier (well, OK, I would) to see a release of a set of models with supporting rules that are geared for Epic (ergo, not 100/6) play. Heck, they could even be tournament illegal.

I have played both tournaments and large cinematic games with friends. My personal preference I is 400pt. X 4 players with moving asteroids can be really fun. This is a great rules system. But, don't let the tournament play limitations get in your way for casual play.

I play this way at least 1/2 the time. I find it very enjoyable. Sure, one game takes all night, so you can't try out multiple lists, but the fun is in cooperating, coordinating, and playing against/with different styles at the same time. Ships that might suck elsewhere (e.g., the TIE Punisher), are suddenly viable, if not desirable.

Something that was mentioned above - the Escalation tournament - any thoughts on why that's not more popular ?

I've never played in one, but it feels like just the thing to provide an alternative to 100/6 - the lists you build surely have to be quite radically different as there has to be a balance between spending all or saving at each stage...is there any way IT could be a bridge between 100/6 and other formats ?

List building is hard in escalation. You start at 60 points, minimum of two ships. Easy enough. When you go to the second round it's now 90. Everything in the 60 points list carries forward. You can add upgrades to ships, but not remove anything that was already there. So do you add just one new ship and additional upgrades to the others? Do you bank some points in preparation for the next round say running 86 during that round so you can add 34 points when you make the jump to 120? Lots of room for errors too.

This is all complicated by the fact that there are no established metas at the 60, 90, 120 and 150 point levels. What is a good 60 point list? Soontir and Omega Leader? Five Academies? Unsuper Dash plus a Z?

I would think the lack of an established meta would be the attraction--it makes the game "new" again.

Perhaps it was because the internet was still a baby then, but I find it interesting that Magic: The Gathering did not seem to suffer from this Tournament vs. Casual schism.

Also noteworthy that eventually M;TG did embrace Definitely-Not-For-Tourney releases like Unglued and Commander.

Something that was mentioned above - the Escalation tournament - any thoughts on why that's not more popular ?

I've never played in one, but it feels like just the thing to provide an alternative to 100/6 - the lists you build surely have to be quite radically different as there has to be a balance between spending all or saving at each stage...is there any way IT could be a bridge between 100/6 and other formats ?

List building is hard in escalation. You start at 60 points, minimum of two ships. Easy enough. When you go to the second round it's now 90. Everything in the 60 points list carries forward. You can add upgrades to ships, but not remove anything that was already there. So do you add just one new ship and additional upgrades to the others? Do you bank some points in preparation for the next round say running 86 during that round so you can add 34 points when you make the jump to 120? Lots of room for errors too.

This is all complicated by the fact that there are no established metas at the 60, 90, 120 and 150 point levels. What is a good 60 point list? Soontir and Omega Leader? Five Academies? Unsuper Dash plus a Z?

I would think the lack of an established meta would be the attraction--it makes the game "new" again.

Exactly this...surely it would re-introduce the variety a lot of people seem to think has been 'lost' from the regular tournament matches, thus at least part satisfying the casual players desire for more 'off-the-wall' builds...but it is a FFG-approved tournament format, so should also satisfy competitive players, and challenge them even more than the regular 100-point builds to find optimal builds for each stage...so why don't FFG push this format as much as the 100-point one ?

...I'd also say that it feels [to me, anyway] closer to the kind of thing the casual 'scenario' and 'thematic' players are looking for, as it might suit building single-ship type squads or a particular rpg-type group [rebel cell / scum pirates / Imp Elite Squadron ?] up over the stages.

Sorry if this maybe belongs in a separate thread...

Cheers

but the idea that tournaments are the be-all and end-all of this game is short-sighted and narrow-minded nonsense.

How many people actually think that? I think there is an argument that could be made that there are casual players who would truly love the tournament environment if they gave it a try, and so there's nothing wrong with encouraging people to give it a try.

I have no idea how many but those that do are very vocal about it (pretty much per the origin of this thread) which can always contaminate the discussion. I have seen this attitude as recently as today on these forums, as well as multiple times previously.

This discussion made me think about it from the pov of my main hobby, RC cars. Everything you see on most forums or media is about racing. You would think that racing was what RC cars are all about. The truth is, the vast majority of people in the hobby don't race. They are casual runners, called bashers. They make up over 90% of the people in the hobby and yet, the companies don't cater to them. It's a very short sighted thinking from the manufacturers. I see X-Wing being this way too. The most vocal people tend to be those who play in tournaments, but the vast majority are those who play casual. I don't have an issue with either, except the tourney players who think their way of playing is the only way. This is such a fantastic game and has the potential to really grow and become something in it's own right. I want both casual and competitive to flourish. At the end of the day, it's a game. People forget sometimes that the reason we play in the first place is to have fun.

It's true, from a certain point of view.

You can feel the conflict in a gaming environment when some players enjoy pushing their plastic toys around a map, while others act as though their value as a human being will be judged according to their win/loss ratio.

I try and promote a Fun-At-All-Costs (FAAC) attitude so that Win-At-All-Costs (WAAC) players can stay the FAAC away.

Having stated that, X-Wing is a game that does suit competitive play. The rules are tight and the game play is fairly clean. Though it is unfortunate to see some grown adults who need tissue boxes next to them during a tournament.

win at all costs is misused a lot. its a way to describe people who bend rules, argue everything even when in the wrong until the other guy gives up, cheat etc in games to win at all costs literally. if yuo win a lot by the book, without being the kind of person no one wants to play twice you arent waac, you are just good at x wing.

some people who say they are playing casually, and f lying casual or w/e, get really mad at losing a clean game like that and yell about it. those guys arent actually "fly casual" or whatever but they use it like a club to beat people they dont like over the head and justify their losses to themselves because they dont like (jumpmasters/poe/han/dash/something that doesnt get countered by their list)

the most casual flying to me is flying your best, with your best, but not being a ****. i think thats the ideal. stomping newbies is the exception dont do that, everyone should win their first game of x wing oir at least come close

thanks for reading my blog post

Chucknuckle, you say it's on me to change the way I play so that you can play too, but you are the one who won't play a game unless I meet your standard. Do you see the problem in that?

Ok, just pump the brakes there big guy. No one is demanding anything, no one is refusing anything.

You have a way you like to play.

I have a way I like to play.

But we both have to play together, and one of us is going to be disappointed. Because the ways we like to play are different.

Now, the way you like to play is ubiquitous. It's extremely common. The way I like to play is less so.

So yes, I'd like to see you display some generosity and curiosity and try something different. If you don't like it, I promise the next guy to come along will give you a 100/6 game.

I'll still play you if you insist on sticking to the 100/6 format. It just won't be as much fun for me.

I'm under no obligation to do anything with my time other than what I want and that's a pretty casual attitude. I don't browbeat people with it in real life, I just do what I want to do and if I don't want to participate then it's fine. It's not a reflection on anything but what I desire at that moment. In person I'm often willing to open up around others and try new things after a time of getting to know everyone, but that's not a given. I'm not obligated to do that. But it seems like this casual attitude expects that I should cater to it right now, under it's terms. So what if the casual attitude dictates that I can't play double Phantoms? Do you really think it's acceptable to ask another person to walk back home and get different toys to play with, otherwise they can't play?

*sigh*

There's no need to be so defensive! No one is attacking your life choices or placing you under any obligation to do anything. I'm just saying that it would be nice if sometimes people in the 100/6 crowd could maybe throw us casual players a bone, and try something different. There's SO MANY of you, there'll never be a shortage of people wanting to play that way, but people who play the way I do don't always come to games stores and when we do no one wants to play with us because they'd prefer 100/6. It'd just be nice if the crowd was friendly enough to step out of their comfort zone and try something new, instead of getting all defensive about it and closing ranks.

Because breakfast is a fantastic topic, and we like to discuss it frequently. That is why.

@ heychadwick

That part you quoted was in respond to someone making some pretty ridiculous statements about my actions forcing people into competitive play, so please bear that in mind when you digest that post.

OK....I'll admit I came in a bit drunk. I had a few spare moments to check the thread and responded through limited perspective. My ability to see sarcasm was a bit restricted.

@ heychadwick

No, I may have been letting the stress of the topic show through in my reply. I think about a topic and I get heated, usually with the idea and not the person. I'm glad you've taken the time to discuss this though as it allows me to really look at the situation.

@ heychadwick

No, I may have been letting the stress of the topic show through in my reply. I think about a topic and I get heated, usually with the idea and not the person. I'm glad you've taken the time to discuss this though as it allows me to really look at the situation.

Not a problem at all. I like it when people can remain civil and discuss ideas like adults.

I will say that the overall impression I'm getting from you is that 100 pt tournament is "the real game". The game is designed for it and it is working for tournaments. Don't rock the boat. If you want to play whatever you want....away from the tournament scene, that's fine. That is, as long as it doesn't rock the tournament boat that you like. So, if you are guys playing in your own house, why do you need FFG to tell you anything. Just play what you want. I don't mean this in some sort of negative way, but that's how I see your perspective.

With that, I think there are two main responses. The first is that there are people who like tournaments and such....but find the current format not-ideal. They are looking for a different format to open up alongside 100 pt deathmatch. That can be 150 pts....or missions introduced instead of just deathmatch. Or....I think there were a few options. This is just people that want to see the game move beyond just flying around the same 6 obstacles and trying to kill each other. They want to see the overall tournament scene shaken up a bit.

Now, it's possible to have FFG do this and still do the 100 pt standard now. Just...introduce another style of tournament X-wing. It wouldn't have to mess with the standard now, but add in more tournaments with different rules. Of course, some could argue that by splitting the tournament types, that you split the player base and that this is a bad thing. I'd argue that now you have options to what you want to play and would probably draw in some players that have quit tournaments and you would end up with overall more people playing in tournaments. They also don't have to happen at the same time, though. They could be different days.

The second main response has been from people who see tournaments get all the special cards and attention. They see the FAQ get updated and all sorts of effort put into the tournament scene. Then, they look at things like Mission Control. It needs some updates to be any bit effective. As it is now, you can really look for missions that you want. They need to add in some sort of tagging system. So, you want to find a mission for 3 players....you can search for it. You want to find a mission that allows Scum....you can search for it. You want to find an epic mission....you get the picture. As it is now, you can search on the author and that's about it. There is no real way to find different missions other than blind luck or finding an author you like.

FFG could also perhaps hire one person who could make up various missions to put out there. Or...they could even just part time sift through Mission Control and find good ones to highlight and write articles about. This would be just the salary of a guy to look, play test, and then write up articles. It wouldn't require that much effort for a company that just displaced Warhammer 40k as THE biggest mini game in the world. If they really wanted to do something cool, they could make up all sorts of global campaigns and such like Games Workshop did back in the day. It could be really cool. That....or just buy out the Heroes of the Aturi Cluster guys and bring them in house to do something like that.

There are a number of things that FFG could do to cater to the Casual gamer. Yes, guys can always sit at home and make up whatever they want, but there are also dozens of cool things FFG could do for these guys and help promote the other aspects of the game. They might get more people into the game and might even lead to more tournament goers overall, which is a good thing. The only complaint from a tournament perspective that I can think of is that maybe putting resources towards something other than tournament gameplay might somehow take away from tournament game play? I'm....not really sure.

Overall, I don't get the resistance that some people have for FFG making efforts to help the Casual guys out and have some fun. Maybe people are really terrible at making their own missions. If that's so, good luck finding something on Mission Control. Why can't FFG make up something....or even just highlight stuff others have made? These things wouldn't really take away from tournaments. It might also help these guys find other people that would be willing to try something other than 100 pt death match when they go to the local stores. Sometimes just finding someone to play something other than tournament style can be a hard thing to do. Any bit of support than one article thrown out there would be a big help.

Just one more thing.....Why bother helping people play Casual X-wing? Well....from FFG's own article, they want people to play whatever format they like. It's not just about the 100 pt tournament game. Yes, that is the main game and it's format that people play around the world. I will say that it's not for everyone, though. I've known a dozen guys in the past year or two that just don't like tournament games and the tournament prep games and have dropped out of the game. Some have sold their stuff. They play other games and don't want to bother keeping up with the latest news and meta and read all the cards. Tournament format just isn't fun for them. When they go to the local store, they have a hard time finding someone who doesn't want to play tournament level. The general attitude is play tournament or go home. These guys don't even really know how to articulate it at times. I've talked to them and know. They know there are a couple of players they enjoy playing against, but they aren't always available for a game. They take up a game with someone who is free, only to find out that it's not a fun game for them. Probably not for the other guy, either.

I've set up the local night and I set it up as "Play what you want - not just tournament game play". There are guys that only play tournament games. There is just one X-wing night. I don't want to force anyone to play any type of format that they want, but I do know that some of the serious guys would probably give Casual games more of a chance if they thought about it more. If FFG had articles or a few other things out there to draw attention to it, then these guys might be more willing to try it out. We could have more players in my local area that wouldn't quit due to not having fun.

For those that will say that perhaps X-wing just isn't the right game for these people, I say that's narrow minded thinking. FFG says there are more ways to play the game than just tournament games. They just don't bother to promote other formats. I know a lot of people that try all sorts of other ways and have a great time with the game. I just worry about other local game stores that don't have someone like me to try to organize and promote Casual X-wing in some format. How are these guys suppose to find Casual games? If the general idea is out there that there are a lot of cool ways to play the game, they might have an easier time finding games. Doing this doesn't take anything away from tournament X-wing, but lots of tournament players seem resistant to the idea.

Overall, I don't get the resistance that some people have for FFG making efforts to help the Casual guys out and have some fun.

Are there many people who actually show resistance to it?

One other thing to consider is ROI. It could be that FFG has looked at it and accurately or not, decided that investing in the casual gamer may not be the best way for them to spend their time and money.

You mention hiring someone to make missions, perhaps they've considered that, but have decided that doing that would actually add very little to the bottom line and so is poor use of their resources.

We all have things we'd like to see in this game, but we also have to be willing to consider it from FFG's perspective and what makes the most sense for them.

Overall, I don't get the resistance that some people have for FFG making efforts to help the Casual guys out and have some fun.

Are there many people who actually show resistance to it?

One other thing to consider is ROI. It could be that FFG has looked at it and accurately or not, decided that investing in the casual gamer may not be the best way for them to spend their time and money.

You mention hiring someone to make missions, perhaps they've considered that, but have decided that doing that would actually add very little to the bottom line and so is poor use of their resources.

We all have things we'd like to see in this game, but we also have to be willing to consider it from FFG's perspective and what makes the most sense for them.

All true; but I would wager that holding onto the casual players would be worth (in terms of $) hiring one or two more game slaves at FFG

There does seem to be some people on the forums who are resistant to it. Or some local guys. Maybe not a lot, but there are some.

Yes, I understand that FFG might have looked at things and decided against it. I'm hoping they haven't. Or...they didn't see the demand for it, but would change their mind if there seemed to be enough. I still have to think that GW did a lot more along these lines and did well enough.....back when they actually made money. I'd think that now they are the largest mini game in the world that they could throw a guy at it.