Surprised? Not really.

I avoided this game because of the Star Wars theme. I figured the playerbase would just be a bunch of neckbeards misquoting my favourite films while throwing bucketloads of dice in a game where you must lose because you haven't been collecting for 25 years or have a nice Mum to buy you 3 riptides.

I only very reluctantly purchased a core set a year ago after reading about the highly competitive rules and tournament format. After stumping my way through years of bad game design and rules bloat I decided that if the game was good enough to play at a higher level with relatively few complaints from the players then maybe it was worth a try.

Honestly I almost wish this game was not about Star Wars and then I wouldn't have to listen to so many whiners. My X-Wing needs a fix! Its my favourite ship from the movies! Well ****, that's nice you have an emotional attachment to an imaginary inanimate object created by someone 30 years ago but wtf does that have to do with the game or maintaining a competitive rules set?

I picked X-Wing so I could play competitively in tournaments. The Star Wars theme is just the icing on the cake.

More like, they acquired a lot of funds to be able to renew the license. And, it generally isn't a good accounting practice to give your head accountant the ability to write checks. Even if he is your brother in law.

Nevermind

Just now, Darth Meanie said:

I was only trying to argue the former point. And if people don't start the game, the second point is moot.

Sure, but that's the wrong direction, you're putting the cart before the horse.

The question is whether the game should prioritize balanced playability or fluff. At that point, we're not worried about why people got into X-Wing, we're worried about helping them stay. Somebody who doesnt know the game at all will be just as likely to buy a beautiful B-Wing mini and a core set from Barnes & Nobles whether or not the latest Regionals had the same build in every one of the Top 16 spots. People who buy the pretty models or the game simply because it's Star Wars care much less about the gameplay experience, and most will be unlikely to ever build 100pt squads, let alone go to a tournament. That's not why they're here. But it is, ultimately, a game, and for the gamers who play it they want gameplay to be the focus, and that in no way threatens the folks who buy in because its Star Wars or play HotAC because its Star Wars, for instance.

10 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Still, we are all indebted to Decipher to eternity. They were just about the sole caretakers of Star Wars, and added more background and detail to the universe than all the EU authors combined. Where would we be without Willrow Hood, or the names and or callsigns for a huge pile of the pilots from our game now? They had the privilege of being able to add fluff to the canon at a time when LFL gave much less of a ****, and they did a very good job detailing the universe we know take for granted.

Hold on tiger. . .let's not forget about West End Games, who scribed tomes of SW lore, not just flavor tweets on cards.

1 minute ago, Darth Meanie said:

Hold on tiger. . .let's not forget about West End Games, who scribed tomes of SW lore, not just flavor tweets on cards.

I'll drink to that. Cheers to WEG and Decipher!

But **** WotC, they added nothing, and also their game was terrible. The Decipher CCG was awful too, but at least it added so much lore and the cards were pretty. Though WotC was on the scene in the new movie (Prequel Era), so I imagine LFL became much more stringent about adding to the lore.

The Attack Wing games suffer from WizKids CCG mentality (cheap models, quick wave output that results in unbalanced gameplay) and Wings of Glory doesn't have a the major distribution that FFG/WizKids can put out.

Absolutely not. I've had bad experiences with FFG in the past. Honestly Star Wars was the only thing that helped me push past my bias against them.

No, my first approach was buying the Tantive, just as decoratión (my group runed the darkstryder campaing for years, when de are young, so I appreciate the ship a lot).

A few weeks later, my girlfriend buyed a core to me.

Without the SW theme y would be full invested in Battleflett Gothic.

13 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

I'll drink to that. Cheers to WEG and Decipher!

But **** WotC, they added nothing, and also their game was terrible. The Decipher CCG was awful too, but at least it added so much lore and the cards were pretty. Though WotC was on the scene in the new movie (Prequel Era), so I imagine LFL became much more stringent about adding to the lore.

Decipher got hit hard with the PT, as well. LFL sort of demanded a lot of things for the Episode I. Even in terms of game design.

I would say yes. I wasn't drawn to the game because of Star Wars, but mostly because it was dogfighting. I've been a fan of jets/planes my whole life, and dogfighting is what brougt me to the game. I always liked Star Wars but wasn't a huge fan. After playing the game my fandom and knowledge has grown to the point that I probably wouldn't play any other dogfighting game (i.e. Wings of Glory).

No!

The reason I got into this was because I was in an LGS and saw someone's Millennium Falcon they brought back from a convention or something. All I wanted then was a few ships for keep-sakes and perhaps display. Now I have a sizable collection and have played from time to time.

After I started collecting Star Wars: X-Wing I wanted to also get Star Trek: Attack Wing as well. When I came out I saw the 'tiny-prise' and the wrong bridge of the Klingon cruiser and changed my mind. I haven't considered them since.

I did get into two other miniatures games with pre-painted miniatures; but they are in themes I like. So it is very unlikely that I would have gotten into the game, not impossible but very unlikely. It would have depended on the theme/universe.

No, because I wouldn't have sunk that much initial money into it without a licence that my sons recognized as being cool. I'm generally thrifty when it's not about X-wing

However, I'm don't care at all if the better ships at any given time cannot be recognized as "Star Wars," I'm in it for the mechanics at this point (and cool minis, whether they look "Star Wars" or not). I do like to put a thematic team together once in a while, but most ships I'm drawn too are not the commonly known ones *glances at the pile of Defenders*.

26 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

I'll drink to that. Cheers to WEG and Decipher!

But **** WotC, they added nothing, and also their game was terrible. The Decipher CCG was awful too, but at least it added so much lore and the cards were pretty. Though WotC was on the scene in the new movie (Prequel Era), so I imagine LFL became much more stringent about adding to the lore.

WotC did make an outstanding RPG though (Saga Edition).

Nope, I play because it's a Star Wars game.

Although it does help everything is painted and assembled already too. I like that after years of 40k playing.

No. I have never been interested in minis. The star wars connection drew me in. I have tried to avoid looking at the star trek version due to budget and space constraints

Nope. I'd never have considered it because I just don't do board games or card games or anything.

I have however, been fascinated by Star Wars. Weirdly I got a starter set heavily discounted as a little thing for myself and the girlfriend to do over Christmas and thought it'd come out once and go straight back in the cupboard.

I was very wrong.

I don't know for sure. I loved the old X-Wing PC games, so when I saw a miniatures game with the brand it immediately caught my interest. Despite that, I didn't pick the game up until after Wave 3.

That said, after playing a few demo games with friends over beers it was an instant purchase.

So, although the Star Wars brand grabbed my attention - and specifically the X-Wing brand - it was the fact that I had a blast with friends that persuaded me to buy in. If my friends hadn't picked it up first and shown me the game, I might not be playing right now.

No.

Starwars also keeps me playing it. But then again I'm a big fan, so I like most ships anyway.

nnnnope!

I'm more of a trek guy but Attack Wing doesn't fit the theme for me. I saw it in various hobby shops (ones that had 40K in them) and at wave 1 or 2 paid no attention to them. It wasn't until it was introduced at a board-game club I went to and I saw it played out that it had finally gotten my attention. This was right before Wave 4 was announced. So around the late Wave 3 after the CR-90 and Imperial Aces were out I got into the game.

The $tar war$ theme didn't sold me on it but it did help. It took both GW acting stupid with their IPs (killing off Battlefleet Gothic the reason why I picked up 40K in the first place) and seeing a better playing miniature game that was easy to get into to make me pick it up. I have seen Firestorm Armada and while I almost picked it up the card mechanics to simulate a fog of war I thought was a little too abstract and did not convey the sense of unknown that dials for X-wing produced.

So no it wasn't the theme that sold me. Although I wonder without the $tar War$ IP would it have done so well to bring it popular enough to catch my attention.

EDIT: Ninja'd.

1 hour ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

We have evidence on this that the answer is NO.

Look at the relative duds that were Star Trek: Attack Wing and D&D: Attack Wing. They use the same flightpath system, licensed from FFG, and almost the same rules and mechanics, but both games are already effectively dead despite being younger than X-Wing. Wings of Glory was very similar as well, and FFG basically just lifted the flightpath system from WoG's card system, which to be fair did streamline it quite a bit. That game was/is well-loved, but only by a small and passionate group of (typically historical wargamer) players.

As a (primarily) historical wargamer I try not to feel a bit offended here .. From any conceivable perspective of representing WWI air combat Wings of Glory misses the mark... As a game it is a simple "beers and pretzels" style dogfight game - and not to be compared to X-wing more than it is to be compared to any other game containing movement templates and firing arcs - X-wings IMHO has as much resemblance mechanics wise with Wreckage (FFG - 2003 https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/8593/wreckage). To be fair X-wing has the huge advantage over WoG that no one really know how a TIE performs compared to an A-wing, There is tons of data telling us how a Sopwith Camel flies and how that compares to a Fokker D.VII(f).. But for me it would also be No.. X-wings works for me because it is a simple system in a simple fictive world (that the simple system is now being bugged down by clunky design decisions, clutter and unnecessary complexity is another discussion).

2 hours ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Now, FFG may retain the Star Wars license for fifty years. Or they may lose it within the next few years. We dunno. And they're the first games company that has had to work with The Mouse, so who knows if that bodes better or worse for license retention. But WEG, Decipher, and WotC all seemed to have the license for around 8ish years, if memory serves.

OTOH, Hasbro bought Kenner who started making the toys in 1977, so there is an unbroken line back to the very first action figure. FFG could end the precedent.