aYou are correct, I do not know FFG's exact business intent. I do that that the vast majority of businesses enjoy a profit While this is a generality and not set in stone, I'm going to assume that the entire idea of releasing a product is to generate revenue for the company.

So if the idea is to turn a profit, then would you say that my analysis of the 3x people playing X-Wing based on Regional attendance, plus the fact that most competitive lists upwards of 150-250 dollars (data provided), then mathematically, this means that as far as competitive events are considered, that X-Wing players there have at least made FFG 3x the amount of profit than Armada has.

But none of this logically means that it would net them greater profit by focusing even more resources into X-Wing than they already do OR that they must take away resources from Armada even if it does.

If they pour more into X-Wing, it could easily mean that they run into diminishing gains on their return-on-investment. ie. the market for X-Wing becomes flooded and people turn away from it because it seems like there's just too much that they need to keep up with to remain competitive. I hit that point a while ago already. Also, the deeper they scrape into the barrel of obscure EU garbage, the less people are attached to the types of ships that they might put out there.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

. . . Why does Armada need more R&D?

My question on the X-Wing forums is proving that during the first 18 months of X-Wings life as a game it was an uphill battle for players and attendance. That is typical for games. There is a point that it all changes and I think Armada is coming upon that soon. We shall see.

aYou are correct, I do not know FFG's exact business intent. I do that that the vast majority of businesses enjoy a profit While this is a generality and not set in stone, I'm going to assume that the entire idea of releasing a product is to generate revenue for the company.

So if the idea is to turn a profit, then would you say that my analysis of the 3x people playing X-Wing based on Regional attendance, plus the fact that most competitive lists upwards of 150-250 dollars (data provided), then mathematically, this means that as far as competitive events are considered, that X-Wing players there have at least made FFG 3x the amount of profit than Armada has.

But none of this logically means that it would net them greater profit by focusing even more resources into X-Wing than they already do OR that they must take away resources from Armada even if it does.

If they pour more into X-Wing, it could easily mean that they run into diminishing gains on their return-on-investment. ie. the market for X-Wing becomes flooded and people turn away from it because it seems like there's just too much that they need to keep up with to remain competitive. I hit that point a while ago already. Also, the deeper they scrape into the barrel of obscure EU garbage, the less people are attached to the types of ships that they might put out there.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

. . . Why does Armada need more R&D?

My question on the X-Wing forums is proving that during the first 18 months of X-Wings life as a game it was an uphill battle for players and attendance. That is typical for games. There is a point that it all changes and I think Armada is coming upon that soon. We shall see.

You have to understand how different of a company FFG was before X-wing. Especially in regards to tournaments. As I tried to say before OP pre-X-wing was next to non-existent.

X-wing was FFGs introduction to alot of venues, especially when it came to OP. As FFGS first real offering into miniature gaming all of the infrastructure had to be created from the ground up. Armada, by contrast, was introduced with that infrastructure already in place for it piggy back on.

So when you make the comparison between the two games and attendance within the first year or so you have to understand that Armada doing just as good/bad as X-wing was (relative to what you'd expect given the scales of the games) reflects negatively on Armada because Armada doesn't have to contend with building from the ground up, because X-wing already got the venues involved in FFGs lines and OP system.

@Scottie ; Except that it isn't a question of pure logistics. Yes, Armada can build up on the brand image and retail network of FFG, but ultimately what makes or breaks a product is whether or not people want to play it and want to buy associated models. It's as simple as that, and while FFG's previous work ensures a good target audience, everything they previously built is not indicative of market success. Especially considering that at a local area where HERO attends tournaments, only 30% of Armada players play X-Wing.

Let's not try to compare Armada's current success to X-Wings, but rather let's focus on what Armada's success currently is.

@Scottie ; Except that it isn't a question of pure logistics. Yes, Armada can build up on the brand image and retail network of FFG, but ultimately what makes or breaks a product is whether or not people want to play it and want to buy associated models. It's as simple as that, and while FFG's previous work ensures a good target audience, everything they previously built is not indicative of market success. Especially considering that at a local area where HERO attends tournaments, only 30% of Armada players play X-Wing.

Let's not try to compare Armada's current success to X-Wings, but rather let's focus on what Armada's success currently is.

Lys is the one that wants to draw the comparison, I simply trying to inject some context into the comparison so maybe it can be a meaningful one.

The fact that Armada was introduced into an environment in which you have a few hundred venues involved in FFGs OP is a huge leg up compared to X-Wing which was introduced with only a a few dozens shops involved with FFGs OP, which was confined to only LCGs at the time. You'd assume everything else being equal that Armada would not struggle the same way as X-wing did initially.

Which means, the assumptions were wrong, and it circles back to my previous point about assumptions

aYou are correct, I do not know FFG's exact business intent. I do that that the vast majority of businesses enjoy a profit While this is a generality and not set in stone, I'm going to assume that the entire idea of releasing a product is to generate revenue for the company.

So if the idea is to turn a profit, then would you say that my analysis of the 3x people playing X-Wing based on Regional attendance, plus the fact that most competitive lists upwards of 150-250 dollars (data provided), then mathematically, this means that as far as competitive events are considered, that X-Wing players there have at least made FFG 3x the amount of profit than Armada has.

But none of this logically means that it would net them greater profit by focusing even more resources into X-Wing than they already do OR that they must take away resources from Armada even if it does.

If they pour more into X-Wing, it could easily mean that they run into diminishing gains on their return-on-investment. ie. the market for X-Wing becomes flooded and people turn away from it because it seems like there's just too much that they need to keep up with to remain competitive. I hit that point a while ago already. Also, the deeper they scrape into the barrel of obscure EU garbage, the less people are attached to the types of ships that they might put out there.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

I think your post is rather overdramatic. Stating that Armada has a downward trend in player attendance (which I said countless times now is probably because of the 9 months of waiting for a new wave), has roughly 1/3-1/4th the players that X-Wing does at events, and X-Wing generates substantially more profit than Armada is hardly saying DOOM.

A 3:1 ratio of initial buy-ins when the starter is 3x the price for Armada means that it's keeping pace with X-Wing.

Competitive X-Wing and Armada lists are very comparable in price.

X-Wing has 3:1 the amount of players at competitive events than Armada, therefore its evident that there's 3x the profit being generated from this playerbase.

The downward trend of player attendance at local events while X-Wing has steadily risen is most like due to the hiatus in product, as there is a 9 month gap while X-Wing has not.

So to sum up:

> X-Wing generates a ton more money than Armada in competitive events.

> X-Wing has 3-4x the amount of players in said events.

> FFG probably wants to avoid 9-month gap of new releases if they want to keep a upward trend of players, because more players equates to more money generated.

I think something people don't realize is that downward trend of players is more important than people give credit for. Leavers, in a game that require 2 players to play, generates more leavers. So if your product doesn't increase in players when it's already losing profits compared to its more successful big brother, then I think we all know who the red-headed stepchild will be in this equation.

Again, not the end of the world, but accepting this is important. I don't think many people are ready to accept this degree of realism because this is a Armada forum after all. Here, let's just play the wait and see game and see what this year's Worlds look like in terms of attendance. Talked to Biggs recently and there were 23+1 late entry for Nationals. In Wave 2. How many were present last year with Wave 1? Anyone know the numbers?

Again, not the end of the world, but accepting this is important. I don't think many people are ready to accept this degree of realism because this is a Armada forum after all. Here, let's just play the wait and see game and see what this year's Worlds look like in terms of attendance. Talked to Biggs recently and there were 23+1 late entry for Nationals. In Wave 2. How many were present last year with Wave 1? Anyone know the numbers?

Again, a difficult thing to equate, as Nationals last year was at GenCon, and this year, Nationals were at a different event, and there is a second North American Championships at GenCon.

Poor advertising and late releases of information means that not at lot of people knew about the "Nationals", so it is artificially skewed down.

As a further example:

I mean, its difficult to equate with Canadian Nationals, as well, as location and running runs a big deal.

Last year, Canadian Nationals for both X-Wing and Armada were woefully attended... This was mostly because it was being run simultaniously with a Con, on the con grounds, were you needed tickets and access to it, before getting your ticket to your Event. And then, by all terms, the event itself was woefully run. For X-Wing, this was the second year this had happened....

This meant, Canadian Nationals last year had only like, 29 players, and did not even include the reigning champion who boycotted it, from what I've been told.

This year? Its being run separate, on its own grounds... X-Wing sold out at 65, was increased to 140, and by all counts has sold out again.

Armada is almost sold out at 60 players.

...

In short, I agree with looking for correlation. Unfortunately, I believe the game is too young to provide decent data points. Especially with Armada, where this is only the second year for the big-bill tournaments, as the game, and thus, the tournaments, didn't exist before that...

One outlier to the data (and I've provided a couple above), skews it beyond the actual trend you are looking for. Ordinarily, you'd look for more data points to provide a good statistical sample, but at the moment, we simply do not have them...

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

I think your post is rather overdramatic. Stating that Armada has a downward trend in player attendance (which I said countless times now is probably because of the 9 months of waiting for a new wave), has roughly 1/3-1/4th the players that X-Wing does at events, and X-Wing generates substantially more profit than Armada is hardly saying DOOM.

A 3:1 ratio of initial buy-ins when the starter is 3x the price for Armada means that it's keeping pace with X-Wing.

Competitive X-Wing and Armada lists are very comparable in price.

X-Wing has 3:1 the amount of players at competitive events than Armada, therefore its evident that there's 3x the profit being generated from this playerbase.

The downward trend of player attendance at local events while X-Wing has steadily risen is most like due to the hiatus in product, as there is a 9 month gap while X-Wing has not.

So to sum up:

> X-Wing generates a ton more money than Armada in competitive events.

> X-Wing has 3-4x the amount of players in said events.

> FFG probably wants to avoid 9-month gap of new releases if they want to keep a upward trend of players, because more players equates to more money generated.

I think something people don't realize is that downward trend of players is more important than people give credit for. Leavers, in a game that require 2 players to play, generates more leavers. So if your product doesn't increase in players when it's already losing profits compared to its more successful big brother, then I think we all know who the red-headed stepchild will be in this equation.

Again, not the end of the world, but accepting this is important. I don't think many people are ready to accept this degree of realism because this is a Armada forum after all. Here, let's just play the wait and see game and see what this year's Worlds look like in terms of attendance. Talked to Biggs recently and there were 23+1 late entry for Nationals. In Wave 2. How many were present last year with Wave 1? Anyone know the numbers?

Ah, I see. I've misunderstood you entirely, because I misunderstood your direction of causality. I took your posts as meaning: Armada fanbase smaller than hoped for, therefore FFG will take away investment into Armada. I now read you as saying: FFG underinvested into Armada, and therefore is seeing a shrinking fanbase.

I think this must be because I am (and anyone else who had the same misunderstanding is) suffering from Post-AdmiralNelson Stress Disorder.

Well, that changes the conversation entirely.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

I think your post is rather overdramatic. Stating that Armada has a downward trend in player attendance (which I said countless times now is probably because of the 9 months of waiting for a new wave), has roughly 1/3-1/4th the players that X-Wing does at events, and X-Wing generates substantially more profit than Armada is hardly saying DOOM.

A 3:1 ratio of initial buy-ins when the starter is 3x the price for Armada means that it's keeping pace with X-Wing.

Competitive X-Wing and Armada lists are very comparable in price.

X-Wing has 3:1 the amount of players at competitive events than Armada, therefore its evident that there's 3x the profit being generated from this playerbase.

The downward trend of player attendance at local events while X-Wing has steadily risen is most like due to the hiatus in product, as there is a 9 month gap while X-Wing has not.

So to sum up:

> X-Wing generates a ton more money than Armada in competitive events.

> X-Wing has 3-4x the amount of players in said events.

> FFG probably wants to avoid 9-month gap of new releases if they want to keep a upward trend of players, because more players equates to more money generated.

I think something people don't realize is that downward trend of players is more important than people give credit for. Leavers, in a game that require 2 players to play, generates more leavers. So if your product doesn't increase in players when it's already losing profits compared to its more successful big brother, then I think we all know who the red-headed stepchild will be in this equation.

Again, not the end of the world, but accepting this is important. I don't think many people are ready to accept this degree of realism because this is a Armada forum after all. Here, let's just play the wait and see game and see what this year's Worlds look like in terms of attendance. Talked to Biggs recently and there were 23+1 late entry for Nationals. In Wave 2. How many were present last year with Wave 1? Anyone know the numbers?

Ah, I see. I've misunderstood you entirely, because I misunderstood your direction of causality. I took your posts as meaning: Armada fanbase smaller than hoped for, therefore FFG will take away investment into Armada. I now read you as saying: FFG underinvested into Armada, and therefore is seeing a shrinking fanbase.

I think this must be because I am (and anyone else who had the same misunderstanding is) suffering from Post-AdmiralNelson Stress Disorder.

Well, that changes the conversation entirely.

I think the tone of Hero's initial posts probably had something to do with it. He became clearer a few posts into this dialogue.

. . . Why does Armada need more R&D?

Obviously it needs more R&D so they can figure out a good way to get us our Super Star Destroyers! Seriously we've got like 3 of the things (at least) canonized right now off the top of my head, but there's actually at least like 16 that were mentioned in the last book I read. Pirates even have one of them! Lets get some super ultra nasty huge models on the tables!

aYou are correct, I do not know FFG's exact business intent. I do that that the vast majority of businesses enjoy a profit While this is a generality and not set in stone, I'm going to assume that the entire idea of releasing a product is to generate revenue for the company.

So if the idea is to turn a profit, then would you say that my analysis of the 3x people playing X-Wing based on Regional attendance, plus the fact that most competitive lists upwards of 150-250 dollars (data provided), then mathematically, this means that as far as competitive events are considered, that X-Wing players there have at least made FFG 3x the amount of profit than Armada has.

But none of this logically means that it would net them greater profit by focusing even more resources into X-Wing than they already do OR that they must take away resources from Armada even if it does.

If they pour more into X-Wing, it could easily mean that they run into diminishing gains on their return-on-investment. ie. the market for X-Wing becomes flooded and people turn away from it because it seems like there's just too much that they need to keep up with to remain competitive. I hit that point a while ago already. Also, the deeper they scrape into the barrel of obscure EU garbage, the less people are attached to the types of ships that they might put out there.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

I think your post is rather overdramatic. Stating that Armada has a downward trend in player attendance (which I said countless times now is probably because of the 9 months of waiting for a new wave), has roughly 1/3-1/4th the players that X-Wing does at events, and X-Wing generates substantially more profit than Armada is hardly saying DOOM.

A 3:1 ratio of initial buy-ins when the starter is 3x the price for Armada means that it's keeping pace with X-Wing.

Competitive X-Wing and Armada lists are very comparable in price.

X-Wing has 3:1 the amount of players at competitive events than Armada, therefore its evident that there's 3x the profit being generated from this playerbase.

The downward trend of player attendance at local events while X-Wing has steadily risen is most like due to the hiatus in product, as there is a 9 month gap while X-Wing has not.

So to sum up:

> X-Wing generates a ton more money than Armada in competitive events.

> X-Wing has 3-4x the amount of players in said events.

> FFG probably wants to avoid 9-month gap of new releases if they want to keep a upward trend of players, because more players equates to more money generated.

I think something people don't realize is that downward trend of players is more important than people give credit for. Leavers, in a game that require 2 players to play, generates more leavers. So if your product doesn't increase in players when it's already losing profits compared to its more successful big brother, then I think we all know who the red-headed stepchild will be in this equation.

Again, not the end of the world, but accepting this is important. I don't think many people are ready to accept this degree of realism because this is a Armada forum after all. Here, let's just play the wait and see game and see what this year's Worlds look like in terms of attendance. Talked to Biggs recently and there were 23+1 late entry for Nationals. In Wave 2. How many were present last year with Wave 1? Anyone know the numbers?

I would be careful when talking about profit. Specifically that it is impossible to tell where FFG is making its profit. FFG is a private company owned by Asmodee which in turn is owned by a European private equity shop, meaning no one has access to financials to know what is profitable and what is not. Note that I said what is "profitable". Not what is selling more. High sales doesn't necessarily equate to profit. A company can be considered wildly successful and growing like crazy and not turn a profit (unrelated business but an example of this is Tesla).

My personal inclination is that the margins on armada are higher than X-wing, which X-wing possibly makes up for with volume. I'm basing this on my limited experience in manufacturing. Creating prepainted miniatures is expensive and when I look at an X-wing fighter MSRP for $15 compared to an ISD MSRP of $40 I'm leaning towards the profit margins being higher on the ISD in that the materials would only be marginally higher to make an ISD than a X-wing fighter (plastic is cheap, molds are not).

Just because a product isn't as popular as another doesn't mean that its not just as if not more profitable to the bottom line. Without detailed financial statements its impossible to prove one way or the other.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

I think your post is rather overdramatic. Stating that Armada has a downward trend in player attendance (which I said countless times now is probably because of the 9 months of waiting for a new wave), has roughly 1/3-1/4th the players that X-Wing does at events, and X-Wing generates substantially more profit than Armada is hardly saying DOOM.

A 3:1 ratio of initial buy-ins when the starter is 3x the price for Armada means that it's keeping pace with X-Wing.

Competitive X-Wing and Armada lists are very comparable in price.

X-Wing has 3:1 the amount of players at competitive events than Armada, therefore its evident that there's 3x the profit being generated from this playerbase.

The downward trend of player attendance at local events while X-Wing has steadily risen is most like due to the hiatus in product, as there is a 9 month gap while X-Wing has not.

So to sum up:

> X-Wing generates a ton more money than Armada in competitive events.

> X-Wing has 3-4x the amount of players in said events.

> FFG probably wants to avoid 9-month gap of new releases if they want to keep a upward trend of players, because more players equates to more money generated.

I think something people don't realize is that downward trend of players is more important than people give credit for. Leavers, in a game that require 2 players to play, generates more leavers. So if your product doesn't increase in players when it's already losing profits compared to its more successful big brother, then I think we all know who the red-headed stepchild will be in this equation.

Again, not the end of the world, but accepting this is important. I don't think many people are ready to accept this degree of realism because this is a Armada forum after all. Here, let's just play the wait and see game and see what this year's Worlds look like in terms of attendance. Talked to Biggs recently and there were 23+1 late entry for Nationals. In Wave 2. How many were present last year with Wave 1? Anyone know the numbers?

Ah, I see. I've misunderstood you entirely, because I misunderstood your direction of causality. I took your posts as meaning: Armada fanbase smaller than hoped for, therefore FFG will take away investment into Armada. I now read you as saying: FFG underinvested into Armada, and therefore is seeing a shrinking fanbase.

I think this must be because I am (and anyone else who had the same misunderstanding is) suffering from Post-AdmiralNelson Stress Disorder.

Well, that changes the conversation entirely.

I think the tone of Hero's initial posts probably had something to do with it. He became clearer a few posts into this dialogue.

I think that has a lot to do with it too. I was way too heated in my previous discussion with Ly because we were both too busy slapping hands instead of talking about the actual subject.

aYou are correct, I do not know FFG's exact business intent. I do that that the vast majority of businesses enjoy a profit While this is a generality and not set in stone, I'm going to assume that the entire idea of releasing a product is to generate revenue for the company.

So if the idea is to turn a profit, then would you say that my analysis of the 3x people playing X-Wing based on Regional attendance, plus the fact that most competitive lists upwards of 150-250 dollars (data provided), then mathematically, this means that as far as competitive events are considered, that X-Wing players there have at least made FFG 3x the amount of profit than Armada has.

But none of this logically means that it would net them greater profit by focusing even more resources into X-Wing than they already do OR that they must take away resources from Armada even if it does.

If they pour more into X-Wing, it could easily mean that they run into diminishing gains on their return-on-investment. ie. the market for X-Wing becomes flooded and people turn away from it because it seems like there's just too much that they need to keep up with to remain competitive. I hit that point a while ago already. Also, the deeper they scrape into the barrel of obscure EU garbage, the less people are attached to the types of ships that they might put out there.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

. . . Why does Armada need more R&D?

My question on the X-Wing forums is proving that during the first 18 months of X-Wings life as a game it was an uphill battle for players and attendance. That is typical for games. There is a point that it all changes and I think Armada is coming upon that soon. We shall see.

You're ignoring that within the first 18 months of X-Wing that it wasn't just a case of an uphill battle for attendance, but for venues that were willing to get involved with FFGs OP, or honestly even carry anything more from FFG other then boardgames.

You have to understand how different of a company FFG was before X-wing. Especially in regards to tournaments. As I tried to say before OP pre-X-wing was next to non-existent.

X-wing was FFGs introduction to alot of venues, especially when it came to OP. As FFGS first real offering into miniature gaming all of the infrastructure had to be created from the ground up. Armada, by contrast, was introduced with that infrastructure already in place for it piggy back on.

So when you make the comparison between the two games and attendance within the first year or so you have to understand that Armada doing just as good/bad as X-wing was (relative to what you'd expect given the scales of the games) reflects negatively on Armada because Armada doesn't have to contend with building from the ground up, because X-wing already got the venues involved in FFGs lines and OP system.

I am not ignoring that. That is part of how things work. Not every FLGS is willing to stock Armada or hold tournaments. Is it likely to be faress than X-Wing had? Sure! However the metric is there and it is a variable. As such the variable will modify the data without making it useless.

I want a comparative trend and so far 8 am getting one. With play space requirements for Armada to be doubles their 8-12 average tournament attendance is roughly equivalent to Armada's 4-8 attendance.

aYou are correct, I do not know FFG's exact business intent. I do that that the vast majority of businesses enjoy a profit While this is a generality and not set in stone, I'm going to assume that the entire idea of releasing a product is to generate revenue for the company.

So if the idea is to turn a profit, then would you say that my analysis of the 3x people playing X-Wing based on Regional attendance, plus the fact that most competitive lists upwards of 150-250 dollars (data provided), then mathematically, this means that as far as competitive events are considered, that X-Wing players there have at least made FFG 3x the amount of profit than Armada has.

But none of this logically means that it would net them greater profit by focusing even more resources into X-Wing than they already do OR that they must take away resources from Armada even if it does.

If they pour more into X-Wing, it could easily mean that they run into diminishing gains on their return-on-investment. ie. the market for X-Wing becomes flooded and people turn away from it because it seems like there's just too much that they need to keep up with to remain competitive. I hit that point a while ago already. Also, the deeper they scrape into the barrel of obscure EU garbage, the less people are attached to the types of ships that they might put out there.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

I think your post is rather overdramatic. Stating that Armada has a downward trend in player attendance (which I said countless times now is probably because of the 9 months of waiting for a new wave), has roughly 1/3-1/4th the players that X-Wing does at events, and X-Wing generates substantially more profit than Armada is hardly saying DOOM.

A 3:1 ratio of initial buy-ins when the starter is 3x the price for Armada means that it's keeping pace with X-Wing.

Competitive X-Wing and Armada lists are very comparable in price.

X-Wing has 3:1 the amount of players at competitive events than Armada, therefore its evident that there's 3x the profit being generated from this playerbase.

The downward trend of player attendance at local events while X-Wing has steadily risen is most like due to the hiatus in product, as there is a 9 month gap while X-Wing has not.

So to sum up:

> X-Wing generates a ton more money than Armada in competitive events.

> X-Wing has 3-4x the amount of players in said events.

> FFG probably wants to avoid 9-month gap of new releases if they want to keep a upward trend of players, because more players equates to more money generated.

I think something people don't realize is that downward trend of players is more important than people give credit for. Leavers, in a game that require 2 players to play, generates more leavers. So if your product doesn't increase in players when it's already losing profits compared to its more successful big brother, then I think we all know who the red-headed stepchild will be in this equation.

Again, not the end of the world, but accepting this is important. I don't think many people are ready to accept this degree of realism because this is a Armada forum after all. Here, let's just play the wait and see game and see what this year's Worlds look like in terms of attendance. Talked to Biggs recently and there were 23+1 late entry for Nationals. In Wave 2. How many were present last year with Wave 1? Anyone know the numbers?

I would be careful when talking about profit. Specifically that it is impossible to tell where FFG is making its profit. FFG is a private company owned by Asmodee which in turn is owned by a European private equity shop, meaning no one has access to financials to know what is profitable and what is not. Note that I said what is "profitable". Not what is selling more. High sales doesn't necessarily equate to profit. A company can be considered wildly successful and growing like crazy and not turn a profit (unrelated business but an example of this is Tesla).

My personal inclination is that the margins on armada are higher than X-wing, which X-wing possibly makes up for with volume. I'm basing this on my limited experience in manufacturing. Creating prepainted miniatures is expensive and when I look at an X-wing fighter MSRP for $15 compared to an ISD MSRP of $40 I'm leaning towards the profit margins being higher on the ISD in that the materials would only be marginally higher to make an ISD than a X-wing fighter (plastic is cheap, molds are not).

Just because a product isn't as popular as another doesn't mean that its not just as if not more profitable to the bottom line. Without detailed financial statements its impossible to prove one way or the other.

Well, that's the beauty about statistics and proportions right? We don't need to know the exact numbers, we can use projections with what we do know: Which is the ratio of players at events, with how much each list is is on average. This is just one example of course, release cadence (not development) also being in plain sight, and knowledge from other companies to provide insight and direction.

The production cost for Armada is most certainly larger than X-Wing, that's a given, but we don't know the RoI ratio to MSRP so it doesn't matter. The only thing that should matter at this point is # of players, and to monitor Armada's overall health as a community. So I'll ask again, do we know any software web developers that can assist in this ordeal?

I have removed this post because....well I was the one being a jerk.

@Scottie ; Except that it isn't a question of pure logistics. Yes, Armada can build up on the brand image and retail network of FFG, but ultimately what makes or breaks a product is whether or not people want to play it and want to buy associated models. It's as simple as that, and while FFG's previous work ensures a good target audience, everything they previously built is not indicative of market success. Especially considering that at a local area where HERO attends tournaments, only 30% of Armada players play X-Wing.

Let's not try to compare Armada's current success to X-Wings, but rather let's focus on what Armada's success currently is.

Rant to follow...

Do either of you stop to think just for a moment that this pissing match might be bad for a community as a whole? This is the second threat I have read through where Hero and Ly are essentially trolling/flaming each other on an open public forum. A forum where prospect gamers will look to see what the community is about. Now what do they see... Two players who are incapable of acknowledging each other's views and arguing, rudely, that the game is dead, alive, or dying.

For gods sake just table the BS. You each have your opinion and you each have fancy graphs and "expert" backgrounds. How about instead of bitching at each other you focus that attention back on your local gaming community and use that energy to build the game up. If you don't have time to do it then that's fine others might take up the mantle. If there are not a lot of player in your community then go to a game store and teach someone on a night you want to play, you might be surprised by the result and have fun.

FFG built a cool game, one all of us have invested in. It's fun, it's cool, it shares a lot of aspects with other games. Most of us have more than enough ships to field two fleets. Get out there and spread the joy. Just quit making our community look like a bunch of bitchy, whiney, ungrateful, unfriendly, and rude a holes.

I love this game, I want to see it continue. Stop posting crap that makes you two look like uncompromising jerk offs.

Ok I am done...

I don't see any flaming in this thread? Just facts, opinions and explanations. If you can't handle open discussion, especially opinion-based ones, leave the internet.

Keep it all coming guys! More ideology is good. It will help me define more variables

Keep it all coming guys! More ideology is good. It will help me define more variables

Ideology...? Is your phone misbehaving again?

Rant to follow...

[...]

I love this game, I want to see it continue. Stop posting crap that makes you two look like uncompromising jerk offs.

Ok I am done...

A bit late on the rebuke, pal. Lyraeus successfully posted this civil thread, in which some miscommunications have been cleared up.

I think the tone of Hero's initial posts probably had something to do with it. He became clearer a few posts into this dialogue.

I think that has a lot to do with it too. I was way too heated in my previous discussion with Ly because we were both too busy slapping hands instead of talking about the actual subject.

Like this:

Keep it all coming guys! More ideology is good. It will help me define more variables

Ideology...? Is your phone misbehaving again?

Actually no. People's opinions on what information is guiding me in creating my system of ideas so that I have a more defined set of information.

Micheal,

You have my upmost respect within our local community, and if you are calling me out for being out of line then I likely am. I will remove the post in an effort to foster a collaborative and free flowing discussion. My apologies everyone.

The post has been removed.

aYou are correct, I do not know FFG's exact business intent. I do that that the vast majority of businesses enjoy a profit While this is a generality and not set in stone, I'm going to assume that the entire idea of releasing a product is to generate revenue for the company.

So if the idea is to turn a profit, then would you say that my analysis of the 3x people playing X-Wing based on Regional attendance, plus the fact that most competitive lists upwards of 150-250 dollars (data provided), then mathematically, this means that as far as competitive events are considered, that X-Wing players there have at least made FFG 3x the amount of profit than Armada has.

But none of this logically means that it would net them greater profit by focusing even more resources into X-Wing than they already do OR that they must take away resources from Armada even if it does.

If they pour more into X-Wing, it could easily mean that they run into diminishing gains on their return-on-investment. ie. the market for X-Wing becomes flooded and people turn away from it because it seems like there's just too much that they need to keep up with to remain competitive. I hit that point a while ago already. Also, the deeper they scrape into the barrel of obscure EU garbage, the less people are attached to the types of ships that they might put out there.

I'm saying the exact opposite actually. I think they should focus more R&D and production to Armada because X-Wing seem to be doing just fine lol I'm getting greedy for sure, but I would definitely like to see Armada at an accelerated rate compared to X-Wing at this front. Maybe reverse the wave cycles to 6mo for Armada and 9 for X-Wing.

Okay, then I'm confused or you're confusing. All of this time it has seemed to me that you've been a wailing prophet, prophesizing doom, DOOM, for Armada because its fanbase can't keep pace with X-Wing.

I think your post is rather overdramatic. Stating that Armada has a downward trend in player attendance (which I said countless times now is probably because of the 9 months of waiting for a new wave), has roughly 1/3-1/4th the players that X-Wing does at events, and X-Wing generates substantially more profit than Armada is hardly saying DOOM.

A 3:1 ratio of initial buy-ins when the starter is 3x the price for Armada means that it's keeping pace with X-Wing.

Competitive X-Wing and Armada lists are very comparable in price.

X-Wing has 3:1 the amount of players at competitive events than Armada, therefore its evident that there's 3x the profit being generated from this playerbase.

The downward trend of player attendance at local events while X-Wing has steadily risen is most like due to the hiatus in product, as there is a 9 month gap while X-Wing has not.

So to sum up:

> X-Wing generates a ton more money than Armada in competitive events.

> X-Wing has 3-4x the amount of players in said events.

> FFG probably wants to avoid 9-month gap of new releases if they want to keep a upward trend of players, because more players equates to more money generated.

I think something people don't realize is that downward trend of players is more important than people give credit for. Leavers, in a game that require 2 players to play, generates more leavers. So if your product doesn't increase in players when it's already losing profits compared to its more successful big brother, then I think we all know who the red-headed stepchild will be in this equation.

Again, not the end of the world, but accepting this is important. I don't think many people are ready to accept this degree of realism because this is a Armada forum after all. Here, let's just play the wait and see game and see what this year's Worlds look like in terms of attendance. Talked to Biggs recently and there were 23+1 late entry for Nationals. In Wave 2. How many were present last year with Wave 1? Anyone know the numbers?

You're making the assumption that participation at tournament play is directly proportional the global pool of players.

Further you're presuming that as the pool of armada players grows or shrinks so too must the tournament play. I wouldn't disagree that there is a connection of sorts, but how strong that bond is can be easily tested. Further the ratio of this growth or decline be it is again critical to the theory.

Could Armada sell perfectly well if no one showed up at tournaments. Absolutely. I'm sure we all have friends who don't play in such things.

Could Armada sell perfectly well if everyone who bought it was also involved with tournaments. Errr no. Why? Because hobby stores are only so large and there are only so many. Likewise Cons have attendance caps.

So already if follow the logic of this theory, it's not a 1:1 relationship of Armada players to Armada participants at tournaments/Conventions.

Well this is where pulling out sales data and convention/tournament attendance data subject it to some statistical tests. Which is now where the wheels fall off the car because we don't have sales data. (Or maybe we do and I missed it) Without it Hero's theory trends can neither be proven nor disproven.

I think that many many players play at home with friends. We have seen such massive sales with Armada out selling Warmachine, Infinity, and Malifaux in the past that it can be one thing that occurs a lot.

From there, I think we will slowly increase in players as the campaign is rolled out and people get dragged in to one side or another

Micheal,

You have my upmost respect within our local community, and if you are calling me out for being out of line then I likely am. I will remove the post in an effort to foster a collaborative and free flowing discussion. My apologies everyone.

The post has been removed.

"... boring conversation anyway."