Hello everybody.

I'm italian. I play x-wing since less than one year, but I'm really addicted. I like to fly casual, but i like also play competitive.

Is fairly easy to play close dogfights with really outstanding players, to the last shot (usually I lose, but this is another story).

I flown to 5 tourneys so far (one first place and one second at little store events), and two premiers: Kashyyyk Open and Italian National.

BOTH those event had the same winner, who is a FFG playtester (or the TO is a lier, because I ask him if that was true, and he confirmed).

The TO tells me that he was playtesting uboats since one year and half.

So, the point is: we should blame him more for give us an unbalanced (at best) ship, or simply ask him to not keep winning prices for normal people?

I mean, I buy my ships when they comes out, like everybody. IMHO he can partecipate, that's sure, but he should drop when the cut is made to left place. He have an unfair, huge, proven advantage.

No witch-hunt here, just a matter of sportmanshipness. Your opinion?

sorry for typos and bad grammar, i don't use google translate ;-)

Interesting.

You would think FFG would discuss these sort of things with playtesters and at least inform them not to make a big deal about it.

Ultimately, though, no - playtesters are rarely limited in the formats they are allowed to play. I was a playtesters for a small, indy expandable card game and won the Worlds equivalent the first two years it was run.

You have to think about how games, of all size, are made - they are all playtested. Larger games are playtested by hundreds of people at promotion events or in focus groups. Excluding these individuals from premier events would alienate a large group of dedicated supporters.

Oh good this again.

Here is my response: hell f^%&ing no this is a terrible idea!

Complete garbage. There would be no playtesters if this happened.

End thread.

In a game community this small, bad idea.

In general, why shouldn't they be allowed to play?

If you cannot beat them, study them, then beat them. It has been done countless times in countless games before.

Oh good this again.

Here is my response: hell f^%&ing no this is a terrible idea!

Complete garbage. There would be no playtesters if this happened.

End thread.

hey wait. The TO is an employee of the italian brand which produce the italian version of X-Wing. He cannot partecipate. There are no employees then?

You're operating under the mistaken assumption that somehow playtesters get an advantage. Just because they have seen stuff before you means nothing. They've also seen many things that never come to fruition. I playtested multiple games and I would never do so again if this became a thing. It is a terrible idea that has no basis for a reason to exist in reality.

Your first mistake is assuming he is a good player because he is a playtester, when you should be thinking of it the other way around. He is a playtester because he is a good player. It's not like they have some unfair advantage against you. You all have the same tools. You might as well ban anyone who uses Vassal to play with unreleased ships from tournaments.

You're operating under the mistaken assumption that somehow playtesters get an advantage. Just because they have seen stuff before you means nothing. They've also seen many things that never come to fruition. I playtested multiple games and I would never do so again if this became a thing. It is a terrible idea that has no basis for a reason to exist in reality.

sorry but i don't understand which is the terrible idea: playtesting or play tourneys or forbid them to PT.

I admit I'm confused.

Oh good this again.

Here is my response: hell f^%&ing no this is a terrible idea!

Complete garbage. There would be no playtesters if this happened.

End thread.

hey wait. The TO is an employee of the italian brand which produce the italian version of X-Wing. He cannot partecipate. There are no employees then?

If playtesters were not able to play this game in events do you not think that a large amount of them would opt to continue playing events instead of volunteering their time to playtest? And if your playtest team is now devoid of or severely diminished in competitively minded players what would that do to the quality of your playtesting process?

The logical answer to those questions is that many/most/all would choose actually playing over playtesting and if your playtest group loses what is likely it's better players (at least from a tournament setting standpoint) your playtest process would be substantially diminished in it's effectiveness.

If you look in the credits of any expansion you will find a list of people who are passionate enough about the game to want to play extra with unreleased content and provide the developers and designers with feedback. The list may even be familiar names. Keep in mind that things also change between alpha/beta/release, based on that feedback. While other games may institute such competitive bans (Magic, for instance), I don't think x-wing is big enough to warrant this.

The advantage they have is that they play a LOT more xwing than most. I've been wrestling with that idea since getting a worlds ticket, and am preparing by putting in more table time. I think the time matters far more than the list.

So, the point is: we should blame him more for give us an unbalanced (at best) ship? ...

Absolutely not. The responsibility for game balance is exclusively on FFG.

There are many playtesters, with many different opinions, sometimes with strong disagreements. There is a reason why the playtester forums are referred to as "Fight Club".* Many playtesters are notorious for being strongly opinionated.

There are two fundamental rules that a game company using playtesters needs to understand:

1. Listen to your playtesters.
2. Recognize that your playtesters are not experts in game design, and they can be wrong.

Again, ultimately the responsibility is 100% on FFG.

*Note: I am not a playtester, I turned FFG down for playtesting. I have many contacts however who are, so I get the general vibe on how the process is.

... or simply ask him to not keep winning prices for normal people?

No. X-wing is a skill game and some players are just better than others, and as a result consistently win. Asking anyone who is good at the game to stop playing is a bad idea.

I mean, I buy my ships when they comes out, like everybody. IMHO he can partecipate, that's sure, but he should drop when the cut is made to left place. He have an unfair, huge, proven advantage.

Because the game is so popular, there is no shortage of people who want to be playtesters. FFG gets to be picky about who they let in. They generally let in the best players.

As others have said, if playtesters could not compete at the highest levels, then almost all of the really good players would quit playtesting. You need good playtesters to help balance the game, so that is not an option.

If there were substantial cash prizes for winning tournaments, maybe I could see a reason to disallow play testers from tournaments. But we aren't at that point, and I'm kind of hoping we never do get there.

I'm not seeing what advantage the playtester has here: they've got exactly the same tools you do.

With VASSAL, non-playtesters already have months to test out upcoming builds and get a preview of the post-release meta. I don't see the extra lead time playtesters have as being much of an advantage.

You're operating under the mistaken assumption that somehow playtesters get an advantage. Just because they have seen stuff before you means nothing. They've also seen many things that never come to fruition. I playtested multiple games and I would never do so again if this became a thing. It is a terrible idea that has no basis for a reason to exist in reality.

sorry but i don't understand which is the terrible idea: playtesting or play tourneys or forbid them to PT.

I admit I'm confused.

Not allowing playtesters to play in tournaments is a horrible idea.

Having been a playtester (not FFG) I must stress that they are NOT employees. They do not necessarily even get an experience advantage as products may change from tested version to final product.

No, there's no real reason to prevent them from playing in tournaments.

Since FFG only offers acrylic accessories, alternate art cards and plaques, as prizes for their tournaments...none of this matters.

If I was a playtester, I would HATE the FFG if they excluded me from tournaments.

By the way, I think X-wing could reach a level where outside sponsors will offer cash and high-value prizes. It might take a couple more years but I can see it happening. FFG will probably not offer anything but the usual prizes BUT the organizer/sponsor may furnish BIG prizes...

THEN we might see a more strict rule set that may disallow certain players, etc.

Tom Reed (The winnner of Kashyyyk and the Italian Nationals) is a great player, who's been playing U-boats for ages. I don't know if he's a playtester, but he is one of the best, if not the best, X Wing players from the UK. He is that good, because he plays pretty much 7 days a week, and does a lot of practice against many good players.

Even if he is a playtester, he should still be allowed to play in tournaments. He gets no gameplay advantage from having seen the cards for a few months longer than everyone else so there's no reason not to allow him and other playtesters in tournaments.

Reasons Tom Reed is good at X wing:

* Plays a lot, sometimes 7 days a week

* Plays against the other top UK players

* Natural skill (which runs in the Reed family!)

Things that are not reasons Tom Reed is good at X wing:

* Seeing a few cards before everyone else, and helping to decide if they're overpowered or not.

Ask yourself this: would you rather your game was tested by a player who actively participates in tournaments and has hands-on feel for the meta or would you rather have it tested by a bunch of guys who only ever play one another and have no recent tournament experience? Because I sure know what I'd prefer.

Tom Reed (The winnner of Kashyyyk and the Italian Nationals) is a great player, who's been playing U-boats for ages. I don't know if he's a playtester, but he is one of the best, if not the best, X Wing players from the UK. He is that good, because he plays pretty much 7 days a week, and does a lot of practice against many good players.

Even if he is a playtester, he should still be allowed to play in tournaments. He gets no gameplay advantage from having seen the cards for a few months longer than everyone else so there's no reason not to allow him and other playtesters in tournaments.

Reasons Tom Reed is good at X wing:

* Plays a lot, sometimes 7 days a week

* Plays against the other top UK players

* Natural skill (which runs in the Reed family!)

Things that are not reasons Tom Reed is good at X wing:

* Seeing a few cards before everyone else, and helping to decide if they're overpowered or not.

I was essentially writing the same post, but you've summed it up quite nicely. I know Tom personally, he's a great guy and I'm glad to call him a friend, to assume he's only good at X-Wing because he is a playtester is completely laughable. On top of the reasons above, Tom was also running Dash Chewie for all of 2015, the skill overlap between the two lists should be obvious for anyone to see. Tom has also made the cut at every UK national since 2013. If you want to know if anyone is or isn't a playtester, have a look at the names on the back of the last few waves (they're there for everyone to see).

If you prevent playtesters from playing in tournaments you either end up with: no playtesters, or poor playtesters (who can't keep their skill levels up, as they can't attend tournaments).

i think that the OP doesn't go far enough. Playtesters should only ever be allowed to test one wave. after it is complete, they should be locked up, or maybe even executed, so that they are never able to play x-wing again. this way, the playing field is completely fair for everyone, and no-one ever gets an advantage.

furthermore, the OP should be given a little sticker confirming that he is a unique and special snowflake, and that he deserves special treatment, even though no-one else does. this is the most important part, because otherwise we run a serious risk of making him cry.

Since FFG only offers acrylic accessories, alternate art cards and plaques, as prizes for their tournaments...none of this matters.

I agree but I wonder if we would feel the same way if FFG paid the testers in those same acrylics and cards.

What the OP is effectively trying to say is that "Being a Play tester gives you an advantage over other players"

But this is a massively flawed concept. Playtesters are generally really good players, they're asked to play test because they've proven they are good at the game and understand it quite well.

There is actually a solid case to be made that playtesters have a harder time with competitive list creation because they are splitting their time with multiple metas. They have to be familiar with what is going on now in the tournament scene but also try to keep up with what is being playtested at any given moment. They could be several waves ahead for all we know and they have to keep it all straight. They are sacrificing their time to play with unreleased content that could be better spent perfecting a list for the current meta. Think of how much better that player would be if they just focused on what's happening in the actual meta.

Plus to complain about the u-boat meta at this stage is pointless. Anybody could pick up u-boats and play it now... its been out for like 6+ months, any theoretical advantage that a playtester has is long gone. People have caught up. Even if there is an advantage it fades within a month of release (if not sooner due to Vassal).

Ok guys, fair enough.

thank you everybody for time and patience, i do understand.

the whole thing GoodPlayer=>PlayTester not viceversa is fine.

good job, then, Tom