Reasons C & F equally with painting mini's a close second/third. Now I just need to find more time to paint and people who want to play a campaign.

Skirmish all the way

i have played the campaign, but it's not near as much fun or engaging for my family

after some study, I'd say the skirmish game has gotten the short end of the stick from FFG coming out of the gates, and they still haven't created an easy "in" for skirmish, which is too bad for them, because that would make them a lot of money. The campaign is limited in re-playability - skirmish could make the game grow bigger, faster

Skirmish only.

I initially didn't want to get into IA at all, since I have most everything Descent, and felt it did a fine enough job for the campaign part, and I hadn't seen/heard/tried the skirmish for real. But then I started reading a bit about the skirmish mode and got interested and a couple of my friends had bought the game for the campaign, so we tried it out a few times (the Skirmish) and I was instantly hooked.

I picked the Scum faction, thinking I could then do without the Core set, but eventually I got it anyway. I do think, that today, you could go Scum without the Core. You need the basic CC deck and Dice, that's mostly it. You could probably split somewhat with a friend to get CCs and the units, and buy an extra set of dice if you wanted to go cheap. I think Jabba's Realm is a fantastisc box as a core for Scum, so perhaps it would be smart to make equals for Imperial and Rebel? One could argue, that the Core box is a Core for those two factions (especially Imperial - if I wanted to play those, I wouldn't think twice about getting the Core). But currently, only few Rebel figures from Core are competitive in Skirmish (Gideon and Luke mostly).

I have bought a few choice boxes outside of Scum, especially in the early days when there wasn't a good amount of strong scum units. But I feel you can do fine with mostly picking your own boxes and then 1-2 boxes outside for important command cards like Grenade or Highened Reflexes and the like.

As others have mentioned, people already playing other sw mini / strategic mini games compared with the big entry point seems a deterrent. I'm slowly nudging some dudes to join me, but it's uphill.

Yes and that is it, I've got buddies who would like to play the skirmish competitively, and any time we play it with my stuff they have a blast. But they always say they don't want to pay extra for things they are never going to use, like the campaign. They also don't like that they can't just grab a neutral skirmish core and then pick their faction to build from there. It's all crossed over and you end up paying for things you really don't want or need. So again, at its core IA is a campaign game, but if they are serious about the skirmish scene growing and flourishing we need an alternate entry point. At the very least it would be great to see the boxed figures come out in their own blister packs. IE) Royal Guards, HK Assasin's etc..

They could do it in bigger packs like "Core imperial units" or "Hoth scum units" etc..

13 hours ago, buckero0 said:

The campaign is limited in re-playability...

What makes you say that?

a.)

Played campaign only for first year then played Skirmish and haven't looked back since

1 hour ago, Armandhammer said:

What makes you say that?

Yeah, not sure I'd agree either. Let alone that a single campaign can pretty easily amount to over 20 hours of gameplay, missions are dependent on how the previous games went so you're gonna be seeing new story missions pop up pretty frequently- plus, the game has a plethora of side missions, which account for roughly half of the missions in a campaign. And, of course, that's just for the base campaign- further expansions continue to build on it a lot.

To be honest, as much as I play games, I tend to play more of a variety instead of focusing on a single game. I've probably never come close putting in 60 hours into a single game, but I've probably come closest with IA, and I'm still seeing new stuff- and, as of so far, have only played the core campaign.

My group played through two core campaigns, that was roughly 50 hours of play. We only had one mission over lap (besides the intro obviously) the entire time between those two plays, that is pretty good replayability. And 5 guys time, well that is a total of 250 hours of entertainment right there. Pretty impressive for the initial buy in. I would argue that the replayability drops off after 2 play throughs though, we got lucky in that they basically took the complete opposite path of the first play through, but by the time you get to number 3 every story mission is a repeat at that point. Growing your side quest pool definitely helps though.

1 hour ago, FrogTrigger said:

My group played through two core campaigns, that was roughly 50 hours of play. We only had one mission over lap (besides the intro obviously) the entire time between those two plays, that is pretty good replayability. And 5 guys time, well that is a total of 250 hours of entertainment right there. Pretty impressive for the initial buy in. I would argue that the replayability drops off after 2 play throughs though, we got lucky in that they basically took the complete opposite path of the first play through, but by the time you get to number 3 every story mission is a repeat at that point. Growing your side quest pool definitely helps though.

that's all I'm saying, how often do you want to play the same mission, especially as the Imperial player. You can play the entire core campaign, 1-2 times through, but are you really going to do a third? Logistically, the whole thing is a pain trying to get 5 schedules to mesh. I know that's more the people I'm playing with. But, that just adds to my point that FFG went about this wrong. Skirmish is the quick buy-in to get people hooked. I can schedule and play a game in under an hour, I can even play 2 games in less time than it takes to set up and try to fit in a campaign game. It's quick and easy and I m not obligated to try and meet again in a week to keep the campaign going. It only takes 2 people, not 3-5.

55 minutes ago, buckero0 said:

that's all I'm saying, how often do you want to play the same mission, especially as the Imperial player. You can play the entire core campaign, 1-2 times through, but are you really going to do a third? Logistically, the whole thing is a pain trying to get 5 schedules to mesh. I know that's more the people I'm playing with. But, that just adds to my point that FFG went about this wrong. Skirmish is the quick buy-in to get people hooked. I can schedule and play a game in under an hour, I can even play 2 games in less time than it takes to set up and try to fit in a campaign game. It's quick and easy and I m not obligated to try and meet again in a week to keep the campaign going. It only takes 2 people, not 3-5.

You think playing the same missions is bad in campaign, you should try skirmish - I see people playing the same three maps again and again!

I'm obviously joking, but the point I'm trying to make is that even if you've played a mission once it doesn't mean that it's suddenly no fun to play through it again. Different heroes, different imp class decks, different weapons, different open groups, different allies, different threat levels - the list goes on, and each of these things can have a big impact on how a mission plays out. Speaking as primarily a campaign player (I vote "A", by the way) a lot of the fun of a campaign is just trying out different builds and combos to see how they work. Sure I guess you know the story the second time around, but the story is not really this product's strength to begin with. There's enough new content being released for this game (both campaign and skirmish) that we're in no danger of worrying about replayability issues anytime soon.

Back to the OP's original topic, though, I'd like to add that funny enough it's been mostly a time issue that's lead me towards playing campaign more than skirmish. I mostly play the campaign against one friend of mine (with 1 person controlling 4 rebels) so we can be a bit flexible about when we can meet, usually some evening after work. There's actually a decent local skirmish community who have been regularly holding tournaments pretty much since the game was released, but so far it's never lined up that I've been able to free up a whole day on the weekend to attend.

A) Campaign only

but have started to play skirmish in so tournaments. just to make the investment worth while and getting to play some rebels, as im usually the dungeon master. (do we have a name for the imperial assault dungeon master?)

Im enjoying skirmish and its quick turnaround

1 hour ago, Spidey NZ said:

A) Campaign only

but have started to play skirmish in so tournaments. just to make the investment worth while and getting to play some rebels, as im usually the dungeon master. (do we have a name for the imperial assault dungeon master?)

Im enjoying skirmish and its quick turnaround

Emperor.

20 hours ago, Rikalonius said:

I feel like picking up my guitar and knocking out some Limp Biskit (as much as I hate them) I did all for the minis.

I did it for the minis too.

That’s exactly what I was thinking of when I posted it!

B) Skirmish.

I initially started playing campaign with a friend, and had no intention of buying my own copy. Then I found a used collection (core set + most expansions up to that date) for a good price, and bought it since we'd talked about trying skirmish. Since then we've started playing skirmish more and more.

Skirmish is definitely my preference, if only because it's so much easier to coordinate and takes far less time. Both forms of the game took a while to grow on me, but now it's one of my favourite games.

D

Both equally for me.

Probably bought it mainly for the Campaign, after seeing some video reviews (especially shutupandsitdown's one) that made it look really cool.

We are still playing our first campaign, but for me at least, I've found Skirmish to be vastly superior and have bought numerous packs just for the skirmish minis (or just because I like IG-88). The campaign experience is certainly a really cool feature, and I'd like to try Descent 2.0 for the same reason. However, if FFG wanted it to, I think the skirmish mode could become huge in miniatures gaming. I've been painting 40k for a while, but have no interest in actually playing it - Imperial Assault Skirmish on the other hand is just fantastic.

So again even this many more votes later the common theme is, Skirmish is great, in many cases better than the campaign, but the exposure isn't there. The advertising sucks, this game is put forth as a campaign game so the wargamers are looking right through it. How do we increase the exposure of the skirmish? Or how could FFG increase that exposure? It isn't our job to promote or sell a game, but as a community we can still do our part to help it grow. It'd be nice to an official word from FFG in regards to the current state of skirmish appeal and how they see things evolving as we move forward. The game has a healthy following, but is there a plan to take it to the next level? Are there any changes coming down the pipeline to the way the game is marketed?

Maybe one of our podcast friends could ask this in their next interview, or can we submit this question some how to get an official response? That is the real purpose of this thread, trying to open up conversations that facilitate change.

On 2/5/2017 at 11:22 AM, FrogTrigger said:

In this post I am going to completely ignore FFG's business model and pretend this isn't a business for the purpose of trying to solve a problem.

So at our demo yesterday we actually had a few people flat out say that IA not having painted minis is one of the large factors why they haven't jumped in. X-Wing is painted and they love their minis, don't have the time (money wasn't even mentioned) but just literally time to paint. And I hear that, painting the minis does take time but you don't HAVE to paint them to play.. I never thought I would paint mine but got a lot of compliments on them, I must have plugged Sorastro's youtube channel about a dozen times. It's to late for that though, pre painted minis aren't coming for this game so we can't look at that as a solution, and the group that obsessed over the paint was a small fraction of those who said No to the skirmish.

I think it is a combination of what thereisnotry said, X-Wing came out first and grabbed the Star Wars hardcores and hooked them in fast and the wargamers probably aren't a huge fan of the grid (my store has a large Guildball following, which is basically a small skirmish team game like IA but on an open field). I don't think the price is a problem as X-Wing and Warhammer are even more expensive than IA, but I think it might be the entry point price. I kept really hammering home to people that the core is all you need to play, but they would then ask Oh ok so it would have all the maps I need to enter a competitive tournament? Well.. technically no.. you would need this this and this... "Ohhhhh". Once I unfortunately had to explain the map rotation A LOT of people got a sour look on their face, I felt like a used car salesman who just had to admit the car had engine problems. Where as with a game like X-Wing or Guildball, you play on the same mat every time with just obstacles changing. But again, we can't stop help this, IA needs to rotate maps to keep it fresh, there are only so many that are core only. So they came out with the printed maps, and many people thought that was a good idea, but didn't like the price point and the fact they had to buy all three right off the hop (technically right now they don't need to as one is core components, but that could change down the road). And I know people on this forum will say "Well at my LGS we just share.." and that is great for your community, but in a vacuum the map system is a problem for new players. But how do we fix that? Or can we? Can FFG downgrade the mats to a printable format that is much cheaper? Maybe offer a "Current rotation bundle" for a discounted price? I don't know this one is a tough one and I feel like it is the major sticking point for new players.

I'm writing this as someone that got into IA for skirmish played a bit and then hasn't done much since.

The way that units and their cards were added to the core set is to blame for a lot of that. Almost any list you wanted to run required buying 2 core sets (or finding what you needed in the secondary market). If FFG would have printed the elite unit on one side of the card and the standard unit on the other that would have gone a long way in my mind.

The other thing that was a huge turn off was the constant need to buy expansions for map tiles and mission cards to have the the required maps for the tournament rotation. There were plenty of people in my FLGS that would come to X-Wing store-kit tournaments that were playing X-Wing as kind of a secondary game. They only ever bought the stuff they liked and didn't feel the need to stay on top of the newest releases. They could show up and play 4-5 games of X-Wing on a Saturday with the ships they had had for a few Waves and have a good time. Contrast that to IA where they would have had to buy multiple expansions (including boxed ones) just to play the squad they've had for over a year. With multiple games that are all targeting essentially the same player pool you need to accommodate players that are only making occasional purchases because they already have a primary game.

In my area we saw a large amount of interest in IA skirmish when it was first released and it waned rapidly. I think FFG missed their window with IA. They had the attention of the X-Wing player base for a minute and didn't make enough of an impression to keep them as IA players.

Thank you for the response, I appreciate your insight. If I can I'd like to touch on a few of your points and ask a few follow up questions.

11 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

I'm writing this as someone that got into IA for skirmish played a bit and then hasn't done much since.

The way that units and their cards were added to the core set is to blame for a lot of that. Almost any list you wanted to run required buying 2 core sets (or finding what you needed in the secondary market). If FFG would have printed the elite unit on one side of the card and the standard unit on the other that would have gone a long way in my mind.

The other thing that was a huge turn off was the constant need to buy expansions for map tiles and mission cards to have the the required maps for the tournament rotation. There were plenty of people in my FLGS that would come to X-Wing store-kit tournaments that were playing X-Wing as kind of a secondary game. They only ever bought the stuff they liked and didn't feel the need to stay on top of the newest releases. They could show up and play 4-5 games of X-Wing on a Saturday with the ships they had had for a few Waves and have a good time. Contrast that to IA where they would have had to buy multiple expansions (including boxed ones) just to play the squad they've had for over a year. With multiple games that are all targeting essentially the same player pool you need to accommodate players that are only making occasional purchases because they already have a primary game.

In my area we saw a large amount of interest in IA skirmish when it was first released and it waned rapidly. I think FFG missed their window with IA. They had the attention of the X-Wing player base for a minute and didn't make enough of an impression to keep them as IA players.

The tile problem they 'solved' by releasing foam maps, essentially mouse pad material. Every time a new map rotates in you can buy it instead of having to purchase the expansions. However I think they priced it to high, 24.95 is a 75 dollar buy in right off the bat, then it's basically a subscription model after that buying the new map every few months. So that first map you buy for 25 bucks you might get 3 months or 2 weeks of use out of it depending when you buy it. I think they should have went with a printed model instead, less quality but a fraction of the price. Would either of those have appealed to you at that time?

The inherit problem with this model is that players still have to buy the boxed expansions for the figures. FFG should have made the box figures available in their own blister packs from the get go, obviously at this point in the post I can no longer ignore the business side of things, this was no accident. They wanted people purchasing multiples, on many of their games this works, but this time it back fired on them since the cost and waste of extra goods to get 2 sets of elite boxed figures is massive.. and the community responded but just deciding not to play. Yes we have a community, but it is just a fraction of what there is in X-Wing.

It is unfortunate to hear that skirmish went by the wayside in your area, I think 4x4 was the deathblow to skirmish for IA and it has just been trying to recover since. We are on an upswing right now and I'd like to ride that momentum to pick up new and returning players.. but it is definitely an uphill battle.

16 minutes ago, WWHSD said:

The other thing that was a huge turn off was the constant need to buy expansions for map tiles and mission cards to have the the required maps for the tournament rotation.

I'd love to take part in some tournaments, if there were any in my area, but it's a huge (and not obviously necessary) expense that I'd have to buy another two boxed expansions just to enter with the armies that I already have. That, and if the friend that I mainly play with were to come with me, he'd have to spend about £120+ first since I supply all the parts for my group.

Regarding the "skirmish box/starter packs" that have been mentioned in various threads, is it too obvious to just remove the AT-ST and swap in the models of a Rebel Trooper squad and an Imperial unique, and knock £10 off the price? I suspect that the AT-ST adds a lot to the casual appeal of the game by getting people's attention, but it's not like it even fits on half of the maps...

1 minute ago, FrogTrigger said:

Thank you for the response, I appreciate your insight. If I can I'd like to touch on a few of your points and ask a few follow up questions.

The tile problem they 'solved' by releasing foam maps, essentially mouse pad material. Every time a new map rotates in you can buy it instead of having to purchase the expansions. However I think they priced it to high, 24.95 is a 75 dollar buy in right off the bat, then it's basically a subscription model after that buying the new map every few months. So that first map you buy for 25 bucks you might get 3 months or 2 weeks of use out of it depending when you buy it. I think they should have went with a printed model instead, less quality but a fraction of the price. Would either of those have appealed to you at that time?

The inherit problem with this model is that players still have to buy the boxed expansions for the figures. FFG should have made the box figures available in their own blister packs from the get go, obviously at this point in the post I can no longer ignore the business side of things, this was no accident. They wanted people purchasing multiples, on many of their games this works, but this time it back fired on them since the cost and waste of extra goods to get 2 sets of elite boxed figures is massive.. and the community responded but just deciding not to play. Yes we have a community, but it is just a fraction of what there is in X-Wing.

It is unfortunate to hear that skirmish went by the wayside in your area, I think 4x4 was the deathblow to skirmish for IA and it has just been trying to recover since. We are on an upswing right now and I'd like to ride that momentum to pick up new and returning players.. but it is definitely an uphill battle.

I was excited when I saw them release the mats but when I found out that they were made out of expensive material, it put a bit of a damper on my excitement. $75 to $100 as a start up cost for the maps is kind of steep. Still, it's a nice step. I would have loved to be able to pick up cheap paper mats. It almost seemed like it was something that FFG would have been able to include in the store kit. Having image files for the skirmish maps available for download that could be printed on vinyl by one of the many companies that provide that service and permitting those to be used would have been a nice touch.

Buying the boxed expansions for the figures doesn't put me off too much unless I need to buy multiple copies of the boxed expansion.

The printed mats seem like a great idea to address this issue, but I'm looking at the main UK sites and the maps are priced £20-£25, which is nowhere near sufficiently cheaper than the boxed expansions (typically £30-35 for a small box, £40-45 for a big box), considering you might as well just get all of the figures anyway.

It's also about 50% more expensive than their other playmats, such as those recently released for Arkham Horror LCG.

I never even noticed the price difference between the AHLCG mats. Wow they should definitely lower the price of IA maps

Another problem I see is that you need the Core Box for a lot of the command cards (not counting figures/tiles). And many of the iconic heroes in the base game/first waves aren't competitive in the skirmish meta which puts a big damper on getting that as a starting point. They should release a skirmish core box with key deployment/command cards & tile set. Also more packs like the rebel trooper/eStormies for just figures

A

I was mostly excited about the campaign game. I knew I'd eventually try skirmish, just because it was there, but the campaign is what really caught my eye.

I see some discussion about how FFG could have marketed this better; how they went too far advertising this as a campaign game over a skirmish game. What we may forget is that FFG originally intended to market this as a board game. For the first few months after announcement, IA was in the Board and Card Games forums rather than the Miniatures forums. I don't know all the legal technicalities, but as far as I know, they aren't supposed to make board games -- just miniatures games, card games, and roleplaying games. The inclusion of the skirmish mode may have been a way to skirt the issue and demonstrate that this really was a miniatures game, even though the development team was mostly excited about the campaign. When you look at the success of Descent, it's easy to see how they thought the interest in the campaign would be very high. But I think that IA's placement in the Board and Card Games forums helped solidify people's expectations that the skirmish game was just tacked on. (My apologies if someone already mentioned this.)