I wish it was possible to create a data comparison between X-Wing and Armada but it just is not. Any data gathered has two inherent issues.

There's another threat to validity in terms of any inferences made from comparisons, which is really the elephant in the room: Armada emerged in the context of X-Wing already existing.

There are upsides and downsides to that:

The biggest downside is that they do compete for players' time and money. As a player of both I have to decide which I am going to spend my time doing. Also, because my resources are scarce, I have to decide where I'm going to spend my money. I've chosen to economize by buying Empire only for both games.

The first upside is that Armada was able to make use of the lessons-learned from X-Wing - not in terms of FFG being able to make an improved product, but with the consumer base having an understanding of how to build their community based on how the communities were built in X-Wing.

The related upside is that Armada has been able to piggy-back on the community networks created by X-Wing. Now, along with the downside (from above), that's a two-edged sword, because some X-Wingers will dabble in Armada and then go back to X-Wing. While it may seem like a loss then they do, I think it's worthwhile to observe the net balance. While those X-Wingers played Armada, they gave Armada a dose of starting fluid to help new entrants to FFG miniatures have people to play with, while they found one another. Also, people getting out of the hobby help people getting in by giving them a cheaper source of the products and the former unload their unused Armada gear on the latter.

There are other upsides and downsides that might be mentioned, but overall I think X-Wing is a positive for Armada.

But, it does make a lot of direct comparisons have tenuous validity in terms of inferences made.

@Mikael

It's out of respect to the store, and there's a certainly amount of confidentiality when posting sensitive data like "average attendance". It might skew opinions of the store and I'd rather not do that. This is commonplace when gathering data like this e.g. same way Yelp analyzes data trends without naming a specific restaurant for example.

I can tell you right now just looking at some data I have in front of me:
Social Media (FB page, regional): 1151 X-Wing members to 236 Armada (4.87:1), 14 new:1 new monthly, 13 new events: 4 new events, 67 Armada are in the same group as X-Wing
Last store champs from 3 different stores: 41:12, 67:8, 45:11

Regionals: 95:11, 101:30, 89:21

I have all this data compiled at home, but the trends and ratios are the same across the country I think. I don't know, I would need your help in gathering that kind of data. Take a look at schmitty's regionals vs. list juggler (compare regionals attendance for example) to see some correlation to the trends I see.

It's out of respect to the store, and there's a certainly amount of confidentiality when posting sensitive data like "average attendance". It might skew opinions of the store and I'd rather not do that. This is commonplace when gathering data like this e.g. same way Yelp analyzes data trends without naming a specific restaurant for example.

As someone who has had to go through the rigamarole of an institutional review board (IRB) when using data gathered from human subjects (especially high-profile ones like I did in my research), I fully understand.

I can tell you right now just looking at some data I have in front of me:

Social Media (FB page, regional): 1151 X-Wing members to 236 Armada (4.87:1), 14 new:1 new monthly, 13 new events: 4 new events, 67 Armada are in the same group as X-Wing

Last store champs from 3 different stores: 41:12, 67:8, 45:11

Regionals: 95:11, 101:30, 89:21

I have all this data compiled at home, but the trends and ratios are the same across the country I think. I don't know, I would need your help in gathering that kind of data. Take a look at schmitty's regionals vs. list juggler (compare regionals attendance for example) to see some correlation to the trends I see.

Okay, HUGE threats to validity!! The sort of data you're using helps you get false positives for your (still unstated) hypothesis.

Even when you compare X-Wing at 4 years to Armada at 1 year, you can't compare Schmitty's data to Sozin/MajorJuggler's. List Juggler, is deeply institutionalized with a website that lets people report an import their data. (I did it this last after I ran an X-Wing tournament.) Poor Schmitty has to rely on people's imperfect recollections of what they saw.

Hero, can you show your data per month with a standard x axis scale, rather than what you have.

It looks to me like you have an annual cycle, nothing more.

It's out of respect to the store, and there's a certainly amount of confidentiality when posting sensitive data like "average attendance". It might skew opinions of the store and I'd rather not do that. This is commonplace when gathering data like this e.g. same way Yelp analyzes data trends without naming a specific restaurant for example.

As someone who has had to go through the rigamarole of an institutional review board (IRB) when using data gathered from human subjects (especially high-profile ones like I did in my research), I fully understand.

I can tell you right now just looking at some data I have in front of me:

Social Media (FB page, regional): 1151 X-Wing members to 236 Armada (4.87:1), 14 new:1 new monthly, 13 new events: 4 new events, 67 Armada are in the same group as X-Wing

Last store champs from 3 different stores: 41:12, 67:8, 45:11

Regionals: 95:11, 101:30, 89:21

I have all this data compiled at home, but the trends and ratios are the same across the country I think. I don't know, I would need your help in gathering that kind of data. Take a look at schmitty's regionals vs. list juggler (compare regionals attendance for example) to see some correlation to the trends I see.

Okay, HUGE threats to validity!! The sort of data you're using helps you get false positives for your (still unstated) hypothesis.

Even when you compare X-Wing at 4 years to Armada at 1 year, you can't compare Schmitty's data to Sozin/MajorJuggler's. List Juggler, is deeply institutionalized with a website that lets people report an import their data. (I did it this last after I ran an X-Wing tournament.) Poor Schmitty has to rely on people's imperfect recollections of what they saw.

Well, I think in terms of people attendance, it's pretty difficult to get that number wrong.. especially from a Store tournament standpoint because the TO and pairing sheets will have that.

While I don't think the data is perfect, I will say that it's the best we have right now. If they are wrong, I doubt the numbers are off by more than ~5% deviation. At this point, I doubt that even FFG knows the kind of numbers I'm pointing towards.

Hero, can you show your data per month with a standard x axis scale, rather than what you have.

It looks to me like you have an annual cycle, nothing more.

I think I have even less, ~9 months or so. Which set of data points are you referring to? What's the Y in this case?

Hero, can you show your data per month with a standard x axis scale, rather than what you have.

It looks to me like you have an annual cycle, nothing more.

I think I have even less, ~9 months or so. Which set of data points are you referring to? What's the Y in this case?

Who knows, you didnt label on the previous graph either.

@Mikael

It's out of respect to the store, and there's a certainly amount of confidentiality when posting sensitive data like "average attendance". It might skew opinions of the store and I'd rather not do that. This is commonplace when gathering data like this e.g. same way Yelp analyzes data trends without naming a specific restaurant for example.

I can tell you right now just looking at some data I have in front of me:

Social Media (FB page, regional): 1151 X-Wing members to 236 Armada (4.87:1), 14 new:1 new monthly, 13 new events: 4 new events, 67 Armada are in the same group as X-Wing

Last store champs from 3 different stores: 41:12, 67:8, 45:11

Regionals: 95:11, 101:30, 89:21

I have all this data compiled at home, but the trends and ratios are the same across the country I think. I don't know, I would need your help in gathering that kind of data. Take a look at schmitty's regionals vs. list juggler (compare regionals attendance for example) to see some correlation to the trends I see.

Aren't these numbers completely flawed though? You're comparing a 4-5 years old game to a 19-20 something months old game. Plus, we need to take into account both games probably share the same player base. Had Armada been the first game of the 2 to be released, you could potentially have inversed numbers.

Hero, can you show your data per month with a standard x axis scale, rather than what you have.

It looks to me like you have an annual cycle, nothing more.

I think I have even less, ~9 months or so. Which set of data points are you referring to? What's the Y in this case?

Who knows, you didnt label on the previous graph either.

Yeah, it was a rush job. The previous graph's blue was X-Wing vs. Armada's red. I mean, I thought that was self-explanatory given the context of the discussion, but sure, lol.

Hero, can you show your data per month with a standard x axis scale, rather than what you have.

It looks to me like you have an annual cycle, nothing more.

I think I have even less, ~9 months or so. Which set of data points are you referring to? What's the Y in this case?

Who knows, you didnt label on the previous graph either.

Yeah, it was a rush job. The previous graph's blue was X-Wing vs. Armada's red. I mean, I thought that was self-explanatory given the context of the discussion, but sure, lol.

Yes that was, but the x axis was waves, what I want to see is months.

@Mikael

It's out of respect to the store, and there's a certainly amount of confidentiality when posting sensitive data like "average attendance". It might skew opinions of the store and I'd rather not do that. This is commonplace when gathering data like this e.g. same way Yelp analyzes data trends without naming a specific restaurant for example.

I can tell you right now just looking at some data I have in front of me:

Social Media (FB page, regional): 1151 X-Wing members to 236 Armada (4.87:1), 14 new:1 new monthly, 13 new events: 4 new events, 67 Armada are in the same group as X-Wing

Last store champs from 3 different stores: 41:12, 67:8, 45:11

Regionals: 95:11, 101:30, 89:21

I have all this data compiled at home, but the trends and ratios are the same across the country I think. I don't know, I would need your help in gathering that kind of data. Take a look at schmitty's regionals vs. list juggler (compare regionals attendance for example) to see some correlation to the trends I see.

Aren't these numbers completely flawed though? You're comparing a 4-5 years old game to a 19-20 something months old game. Plus, we need to take into account both games probably share the same player base. Had Armada been the first game of the 2 to be released, you could potentially have inversed numbers.

I don't know about inverse numbers.. maybe if you switched the prices around

Also, I'm not entirely sure on age in respects to product maturity when it comes to miniatures games. It look FFG what, 3-4 years to overcome GW in sales when they've been around for like 30 years?

@Mikael

It's out of respect to the store, and there's a certainly amount of confidentiality when posting sensitive data like "average attendance". It might skew opinions of the store and I'd rather not do that. This is commonplace when gathering data like this e.g. same way Yelp analyzes data trends without naming a specific restaurant for example.

I can tell you right now just looking at some data I have in front of me:

Social Media (FB page, regional): 1151 X-Wing members to 236 Armada (4.87:1), 14 new:1 new monthly, 13 new events: 4 new events, 67 Armada are in the same group as X-Wing

Last store champs from 3 different stores: 41:12, 67:8, 45:11

Regionals: 95:11, 101:30, 89:21

I have all this data compiled at home, but the trends and ratios are the same across the country I think. I don't know, I would need your help in gathering that kind of data. Take a look at schmitty's regionals vs. list juggler (compare regionals attendance for example) to see some correlation to the trends I see.

Aren't these numbers completely flawed though? You're comparing a 4-5 years old game to a 19-20 something months old game. Plus, we need to take into account both games probably share the same player base. Had Armada been the first game of the 2 to be released, you could potentially have inversed numbers.

I don't know about inverse numbers.. maybe if you switched the prices around

Also, I'm not entirely sure on age in respects to product maturity when it comes to miniatures games. It look FFG what, 3-4 years to overcome GW in sales when they've been around for like 30 years?

The growth of X-Wing is indeed impressive. But, you brought an important point: Armada cost more than X-Wing. Games take longer and require more space. All these facts play against Armada but even then, I think the numbers are pretty good.

The growth of X-Wing is indeed impressive. But, you brought an important point: Armada cost more than X-Wing. Games take longer and require more space. All these facts play against Armada but even then, I think the numbers are pretty good.

And Hero shows Armada settling out at about half of xwing attendance, which in his ROI criteria seems pretty good.... but nevermind

The growth of X-Wing is indeed impressive. But, you brought an important point: Armada cost more than X-Wing. Games take longer and require more space. All these facts play against Armada but even then, I think the numbers are pretty good.

And Hero shows Armada settling out at about half of xwing attendance, which in his ROI criteria seems pretty good.... but nevermind

No, no, don't nevermind. Don't be cryptic about stuff like this and point it out. Like I've said before, if Armada costs 4x as much and have 1/4th the people playing, proportionally its going to have the same profit margin as X-Wing. Therefore, you can do two things: Increase the price and hope people buy it (LOL GW), or increase # of players playing. Thus, I only really care about player-centric numbers. Any trend that suggests that we're losing players, especially to X-Wing, makes me squirm.

I can tell you right now just looking at some data I have in front of me:

Social Media (FB page, regional): 1151 X-Wing members to 236 Armada (4.87:1), 14 new:1 new monthly, 13 new events: 4 new events, 67 Armada are in the same group as X-Wing

Last store champs from 3 different stores: 41:12, 67:8, 45:11

Regionals: 95:11, 101:30, 89:21

I have all this data compiled at home, but the trends and ratios are the same across the country I think. I don't know, I would need your help in gathering that kind of data. Take a look at schmitty's regionals vs. list juggler (compare regionals attendance for example) to see some correlation to the trends I see.

Okay, HUGE threats to validity!! The sort of data you're using helps you get false positives for your (still unstated) hypothesis.

Even when you compare X-Wing at 4 years to Armada at 1 year, you can't compare Schmitty's data to Sozin/MajorJuggler's. List Juggler, is deeply institutionalized with a website that lets people report an import their data. (I did it this last after I ran an X-Wing tournament.) Poor Schmitty has to rely on people's imperfect recollections of what they saw.

Well, I think in terms of people attendance, it's pretty difficult to get that number wrong.. especially from a Store tournament standpoint because the TO and pairing sheets will have that.

While I don't think the data is perfect, I will say that it's the best we have right now. If they are wrong, I doubt the numbers are off by more than ~5% deviation. At this point, I doubt that even FFG knows the kind of numbers I'm pointing towards.

Right, but you only have one year's worth of store/regional championship data for Armada to go on. You don't have a previous cycle to compare to in order to allege that Armada is shrinking. Or, is that not what you're trying to prove? Again, you haven't stated your research question or hypothesis, so it's hard to gauge what you're getting at.

I don't know about inverse numbers.. maybe if you switched the prices around

Also, I'm not entirely sure on age in respects to product maturity when it comes to miniatures games. It look FFG what, 3-4 years to overcome GW in sales when they've been around for like 30 years?

While I do think that we can establish means of comparing apples and oranges, you're starting to toss grapes into the mix here.

Honestly, both you and Lyraeus, separately or together, need to state what you are actually trying to study. As it is, everybody is talking past one another.

I can tell you right now just looking at some data I have in front of me:

Social Media (FB page, regional): 1151 X-Wing members to 236 Armada (4.87:1), 14 new:1 new monthly, 13 new events: 4 new events, 67 Armada are in the same group as X-Wing

Last store champs from 3 different stores: 41:12, 67:8, 45:11

Regionals: 95:11, 101:30, 89:21

I have all this data compiled at home, but the trends and ratios are the same across the country I think. I don't know, I would need your help in gathering that kind of data. Take a look at schmitty's regionals vs. list juggler (compare regionals attendance for example) to see some correlation to the trends I see.

Okay, HUGE threats to validity!! The sort of data you're using helps you get false positives for your (still unstated) hypothesis.

Even when you compare X-Wing at 4 years to Armada at 1 year, you can't compare Schmitty's data to Sozin/MajorJuggler's. List Juggler, is deeply institutionalized with a website that lets people report an import their data. (I did it this last after I ran an X-Wing tournament.) Poor Schmitty has to rely on people's imperfect recollections of what they saw.

Well, I think in terms of people attendance, it's pretty difficult to get that number wrong.. especially from a Store tournament standpoint because the TO and pairing sheets will have that.

While I don't think the data is perfect, I will say that it's the best we have right now. If they are wrong, I doubt the numbers are off by more than ~5% deviation. At this point, I doubt that even FFG knows the kind of numbers I'm pointing towards.

Right, but you only have one year's worth of store/regional championship data for Armada to go on. You don't have a previous cycle to compare to in order to allege that Armada is shrinking. Or, is that not what you're trying to prove? Again, you haven't stated your research question or hypothesis, so it's hard to gauge what you're getting at.

I don't know about inverse numbers.. maybe if you switched the prices around

Also, I'm not entirely sure on age in respects to product maturity when it comes to miniatures games. It look FFG what, 3-4 years to overcome GW in sales when they've been around for like 30 years?

While I do think that we can establish means of comparing apples and oranges, you're starting to toss grapes into the mix here.

Honestly, both you and Lyraeus, separately or together, need to state what you are actually trying to study. As it is, everybody is talking past one another.

Hypothetically, we picked this conversation up one year from today. How different or alike do you think this conversation will be? You're right, based on regionals data, we don't have a lot of compare on. Even if you took Store Championship data, you need at least 2 years of consecutive data to gather enough coherency. But that's literally all we have to look at, is the minimal data trends that we do have in front of us.

I'm sure you've studied this in school, but the larger the collection of data, the more accurate it will be for studying trends. Right now we don't have that, we just have a minor picture with questionable prediction methods. However, in the last year, based on regional metrics, the # of Armada players have steadily dropped whereas X-Wing has increased. Now, this might be completely proportional to the fact that we've been sitting on a 9-month hiatus for new toys and X-Wing have not, but it's still a trend.

I think we should all take some time and analyze what we're seeing here today: We need more sozins in the world. Anyone here a PHP developer or software engineer?

So to answer your question about what my hypothesis, and it's: What is the health of X-Wing compared to Armada in terms of player gain and retention?

Lyraeus actually made the thread. Then...

It. is. ON !

(Thanks for following my suggestion btw, it's more effective to centralize this discussion for ease of access to the topic and the flow !).

___

On a more topic related note, comparing X-Wing and Armada is assuming that they are comparable. Objectively speaking, they are two different products with vastly different contexts and different analytical points. If HERO's numbers showed anything is that within the field of the analysis, less than 3 Armada players out of 10 play X-Wing. What this digit does mean is that we are looking at different player bases, which implies different consumption behaviors.

There are also many unknowns and making assumptions here will only result to subjective analysis, regardless of how close it is to the reality. We have no clue about the profit margins of each of the product lines, and more importantly we have no clue about the fixed costs attributed to each product line. The latter element is very key because it means that we can't determine how volume will impact profit margins for FFG. Right now, without insider information, for all we know Armada is 100x more profitable than X-Wing. It is unlikely to be the case, but unless we have the official data, this hypothesis is as valid as any.

Moreover, judging whether the game is dead or alive means applying subjective criteria to determine whether the game is dead or alive. Subjective criteria are good when you want a person wants to self-analyze its desires, but it's a dangerous process to base an analysis on because it will be biaised towards the subjective rather than the objective. An objective analysis of the game means acknowledging that SW Armada is neither dead or alive, it just is.

As a consultant, I know that making recommendations based on a subjective analysis (as in based on assumptions regarding the business and its contexts, or even judging them through a value system) means making recommendations that are logical and true within the framework of these assumptions but not necessarily true within the facts. Sometimes luck is on the side of the person making assumptions, but not always, and this is why it's an unreliable recommendation engine.

Finally, we don't know what FFG's plans are for Armada, so every "they should" we write is irrelevant. Why should they release faster ? What kind of problem they will solve by releasing faster ? Is it a problem they have or is it a problem Armada fans have ?

Well MoffZen, Armada is almost 17 months old. If it has a 3 to 10 ratio of players while still in the player flux state (2ish years old games have a more fluctuating player base due to people dabbling and the communities actually growing), I think Armada is doing great.

HERO's data is well gathered and put together but it has flaws as has been stated.

First off the crowd being drawn into Armada is not the same as X-Wing.

X-Wing is set towards a cheaper buy in letting those who want to experience a fast game cheaply. This means it is the EASIEST Miniature game I know of to get into.

The next issue is time. People play X-Wing a lot because they can get multiple games in vs Armada's let game. That is fine. This means it has a different crowd.

The third thing is space requirements. X-Wing requires half the space to play and does not always need people to build tables to play. Many can play on earth 3x3 kitchen table. This will also affect tournaments. For each. Player Armada brings in, that is 2 players of X-Wing.

So 10 Armada players is the equivalent of 20 X-Wing players when it comes to space requirements.

The last point is that X-Wing has not only been out for twice as long, it has also past one of the important stages of a games life, he instability stage that is created when a new game comes out. It usually takes 2-3 years to get past that stage. X-Wing did it by wave 5 which is what I expect FFG wants for Armada and thus why they could be pushing the waves faster.

So due to these barriers Armada has a different crowd that is calls to than X-Wing. Many players here have started on X-Wing and moved onto Armada and left X-Wing behind. Check the off topic section and you will find a few threads on that.

If we want to compare X-Wing to Armada for player to player comparisons we have to account for the play area, length of tournament/games (depends on what the comparison is) and for the instability period that Armada is in vs X-Wing being outside of that period.

As a consultant, I know that making recommendations based on a subjective analysis (as in based on assumptions regarding the business and its contexts, or even judging them through a value system) means making recommendations that are logical and true within the framework of these assumptions but not necessarily true within the facts. Sometimes luck is on the side of the person making assumptions, but not always, and this is why it's an unreliable recommendation engine.

Finally, we don't know what FFG's plans are for Armada, so every "they should" we write is irrelevant. Why should they release faster ? What kind of problem they will solve by releasing faster ? Is it a problem they have or is it a problem Armada fans have ?

I am making those assumptions MoffZen

That is a major point of this thread actually. I want people to understand that FFG has a plan, they have tried and tested methods that they use and people should not the data before the cry out for more.

@Moff

Your post confused me a bit to say the least haha. At one point, I started reading it with a Hugo Weaving V for Vendetta voice.

It's true, we don't know the exact profit margins, but if we're by say.. Amazon prices, if Armada typically costs 3x the amount that X-Wing does but has 1/3 the players, then I would imagine profits are closer than we think. This, however, does not give us a actual representation of how much typically lists are. I mean, how much does your average 400 tournament Armada list run vs. X-Wing? I mean, I bought 3 Nebs just for the XI7s and X-Wing players have shelled out moneys on the Raider just for the Emperor card. So yes, on that bit, it's virtually impossible for us consumers to know the exact numbers.

Here, I'll set myself up as the guinea pig:

AckbarBB

Well MoffZen, Armada is almost 17 months old. If it has a 3 to 10 ratio of players while still in the player flux state (2ish years old games have a more fluctuating player base due to people dabbling and the communities actually growing), I think Armada is doing great.

HERO's data is well gathered and put together but it has flaws as has been stated.

First off the crowd being drawn into Armada is not the same as X-Wing.

X-Wing is set towards a cheaper buy in letting those who want to experience a fast game cheaply. This means it is the EASIEST Miniature game I know of to get into.

The next issue is time. People play X-Wing a lot because they can get multiple games in vs Armada's let game. That is fine. This means it has a different crowd.

The third thing is space requirements. X-Wing requires half the space to play and does not always need people to build tables to play. Many can play on earth 3x3 kitchen table. This will also affect tournaments. For each. Player Armada brings in, that is 2 players of X-Wing.

So 10 Armada players is the equivalent of 20 X-Wing players when it comes to space requirements.

The last point is that X-Wing has not only been out for twice as long, it has also past one of the important stages of a games life, he instability stage that is created when a new game comes out. It usually takes 2-3 years to get past that stage. X-Wing did it by wave 5 which is what I expect FFG wants for Armada and thus why they could be pushing the waves faster.

So due to these barriers Armada has a different crowd that is calls to than X-Wing. Many players here have started on X-Wing and moved onto Armada and left X-Wing behind. Check the off topic section and you will find a few threads on that.

If we want to compare X-Wing to Armada for player to player comparisons we have to account for the play area, length of tournament/games (depends on what the comparison is) and for the instability period that Armada is in vs X-Wing being outside of that period.

I would ask you to stop explaining with a lot of details my extremely well summarized point xD

Well MoffZen, Armada is almost 17 months old. If it has a 3 to 10 ratio of players while still in the player flux state (2ish years old games have a more fluctuating player base due to people dabbling and the communities actually growing), I think Armada is doing great.

HERO's data is well gathered and put together but it has flaws as has been stated.

First off the crowd being drawn into Armada is not the same as X-Wing.

X-Wing is set towards a cheaper buy in letting those who want to experience a fast game cheaply. This means it is the EASIEST Miniature game I know of to get into.

The next issue is time. People play X-Wing a lot because they can get multiple games in vs Armada's let game. That is fine. This means it has a different crowd.

The third thing is space requirements. X-Wing requires half the space to play and does not always need people to build tables to play. Many can play on earth 3x3 kitchen table. This will also affect tournaments. For each. Player Armada brings in, that is 2 players of X-Wing.

So 10 Armada players is the equivalent of 20 X-Wing players when it comes to space requirements.

The last point is that X-Wing has not only been out for twice as long, it has also past one of the important stages of a games life, he instability stage that is created when a new game comes out. It usually takes 2-3 years to get past that stage. X-Wing did it by wave 5 which is what I expect FFG wants for Armada and thus why they could be pushing the waves faster.

So due to these barriers Armada has a different crowd that is calls to than X-Wing. Many players here have started on X-Wing and moved onto Armada and left X-Wing behind. Check the off topic section and you will find a few threads on that.

If we want to compare X-Wing to Armada for player to player comparisons we have to account for the play area, length of tournament/games (depends on what the comparison is) and for the instability period that Armada is in vs X-Wing being outside of that period.

So to piggy-back off Ly's points since he actually laid it out pretty nicely here:

> X-Wing is the easiest game to get into (player gain).

> X-Wing plays faster, more games in (better for tournaments, and player retention from a playing perspective).

> X-Wing takes up less room (better for conventions, venues).

Now add my argument above and some of the numbers we see currently. 3-4x the numbers, comparable prices for competitive lists, = $$$ for FFG, but strongly pointing in X-Wing's direction because of the # of players per event. This means that in the competitive playerbase, X-Wing generates 3-4x the amount of profit that Armada does. From a casual perspective, no idea, but I think it's around the same ballpark because of the reasons Ly has expressed already: X-Wing is an easy buy-in.

The whole idea of X-Wing being an easy buy-in breaks apart as soon as competitive events are introduced due to how much competitive lists cost. In some areas, they even rival 40K/Warmahordes for price range for the most expensive lists. You can thank the Rebel Transport, Imperial Raider and CR90 for that! HNNNNNGG

Found another site with $$$:

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/11/star-wars-is-x-wing-pay-to-win.html

Hypothetically, we picked this conversation up one year from today. How different or alike do you think this conversation will be? You're right, based on regionals data, we don't have a lot of compare on. Even if you took Store Championship data, you need at least 2 years of consecutive data to gather enough coherency. But that's literally all we have to look at, is the minimal data trends that we do have in front of us.

I'm sure you've studied this in school, but the larger the collection of data, the more accurate it will be for studying trends. Right now we don't have that, we just have a minor picture with questionable prediction methods. However, in the last year, based on regional metrics, the # of Armada players have steadily dropped whereas X-Wing has increased. Now, this might be completely proportional to the fact that we've been sitting on a 9-month hiatus for new toys and X-Wing have not, but it's still a trend.

I think we should all take some time and analyze what we're seeing here today: We need more sozins in the world. Anyone here a PHP developer or software engineer?

So to answer your question about what my hypothesis, and it's: What is the health of X-Wing compared to Armada in terms of player gain and retention?

Argh, you began your statement with the word 'hypothetically', and I had high hopes for a hypothesis. But, you did supply a research question.

I think we probably need to refine the question before we try to operationalize it into a hypothesis.

Regarding that research question, why do you think it is relevant to compare to X-Wing? Why should we care? Do you believe there is a production possibilities curve that is effectively a straight line, or one that FFG did not anticipate? Or, are you thinking there is so much competition on the demand side; that the game is drawing from the same pool of customers with fully tapped wallets?

MoffZen seems to be saying that your data says that "3 Armada players out of 10 play X-Wing". I interpret that as meaning that 30% of Armada players also play X-Wing, which is a statement about the overlapping of customers, not about the frequency of each. Is that actually what your data is saying, or has he misunderstood the data?

Now, let's talk about your data. When you say that you're hearing from sources across the country that the number of Armada players are dropping, it begs the question: how are you gathering your samples at t=1 and t=2? Did you get a number at t=1 and went back to the same sources at t=2? Or, did you ask the people at t=2 what their recollections were about the numbers at t=1? Or, was it some other method?

Hypothetically, we picked this conversation up one year from today. How different or alike do you think this conversation will be? You're right, based on regionals data, we don't have a lot of compare on. Even if you took Store Championship data, you need at least 2 years of consecutive data to gather enough coherency. But that's literally all we have to look at, is the minimal data trends that we do have in front of us.

I'm sure you've studied this in school, but the larger the collection of data, the more accurate it will be for studying trends. Right now we don't have that, we just have a minor picture with questionable prediction methods. However, in the last year, based on regional metrics, the # of Armada players have steadily dropped whereas X-Wing has increased. Now, this might be completely proportional to the fact that we've been sitting on a 9-month hiatus for new toys and X-Wing have not, but it's still a trend.

I think we should all take some time and analyze what we're seeing here today: We need more sozins in the world. Anyone here a PHP developer or software engineer?

So to answer your question about what my hypothesis, and it's: What is the health of X-Wing compared to Armada in terms of player gain and retention?

Argh, you began your statement with the word 'hypothetically', and I had high hopes for a hypothesis. But, you did supply a research question.

I think we probably need to refine the question before we try to operationalize it into a hypothesis.

Regarding that research question, why do you think it is relevant to compare to X-Wing? Why should we care? Do you believe there is a production possibilities curve that is effectively a straight line, or one that FFG did not anticipate? Or, are you thinking there is so much competition on the demand side; that the game is drawing from the same pool of customers with fully tapped wallets?

MoffZen seems to be saying that your data says that "3 Armada players out of 10 play X-Wing". I interpret that as meaning that 30% of Armada players also play X-Wing, which is a statement about the overlapping of customers, not about the frequency of each. Is that actually what your data is saying, or has he misunderstood the data?

Now, let's talk about your data. When you say that you're hearing from sources across the country that the number of Armada players are dropping, it begs the question: how are you gathering your samples at t=1 and t=2? Did you get a number at t=1 and went back to the same sources at t=2? Or, did you ask the people at t=2 what their recollections were about the numbers at t=1? Or, was it some other method?

Why do I think we need to compare to X-Wing? Because it's from the same parent company making the product. If one product is drastically driving sales while the other is not, then there will be a shift of resources and business strategy to accommodate supply and demand. X-Wing, despite being the older brother, also allows us to study the trends and success that it has a product and allows us to set the gold standard for Armada. Unless FFG increases resources for both R&D and production for the Armada line due a change to drastic change to business strategy, I don't think anything will change. X-Wing is clearly the money-maker here, so why should they shift agendas? Given, this is based off recent attendance of regionals events + the average cost to make a competitive list at said events.

I also feel the need to compare X-Wing to Armada because they share the same franchise IP being Star Wars. The games are different clearly, but the pool of potential players buying in due to lack of franchise, is arguably much larger than the amount of players buying in specifically for the game, especially from a casual perspective. Maybe this is a foreign concept or something, but just look at other game development studios as well as miniatures developers. The best way to utilize existing headcount is to shift resources to the product that generates the greatest profit margin. It's the most logical choice.

Lastly, I chose X-Wing because it is the most immediate, the most relevant, and it's doing really well. Why wouldn't you want to compare to the next best thing?

I wasn't quite sure what MoffZen was getting at entirely, but the way I took it was for the ratios I provided for regional attendance.

As for my data, it was merely a collection of attendance for 3 key data points: attendance for weekly events for Armada vs. X-Wing, attendance for store tournaments Armada vs. X-Wing, and regionals participation over time. The social media bit I did myself. The same stores showed an increase in participation for X-Wing, and a decrease for Armada, while keeping within the same proportion of players. These are the same stores, so there's no divergence from the source of the actual data pools.

Lastly, and this is just a request, please speak so everyone can understand what we're discussing here. I think that's the point of this thread, and you're not doing anyone a service speaking in a select lingo (I think you're doing it deliberately, but this might be paranoia because your tone changed notably) that only a select few in this thread want to process.

HERO,

A person can compare Warhammer 40k and Warhammer Fantasy (before the great fall). The reason they can is because they share a vast numberr of similarities. Cost, time (painting building), play area requirements, etc.

You could compare Star Trek Attack Wing becuase they share similarities and they compete with each other.

X-Wing and Armada share very little to compare except that they are both made by FFG (though 2 completely different development teams), and the name Star Wars. So I can see comparing those things since their are coming points.

When you don't compare common pints you have to add variables. Since as 2 X-Wing players are the equivalent of 1 Armada player (not in who is better but in cost of entry and play area requirements) and such. If there are no variables you don't have common comparison points.

It is like comparing Mona Kea in Hawaii to mount Everest. Mona Kea is the tallest mountain in the world IF you include it's base which is under water but Everett is the tallest above water though. Their only common point is that they are mountains. Each was formed differently and many other things differ. That is how comparing Armada and X-Wing in their player base is.

I still don't know where you are getting the information Hero of Armada not drawing sales. Care to show that data?

If 30% of Armada players play X-Wing then it proves that they are a minority in Armada. Thus it is not X-Wing sales driving Armada since the other 70% don't play X-Wing (I fall in that 70%, so do many others on the forums)