Yeah...uh...no.
FFG's business model is far and away better than many other companies in the same space. I was debating between a list of some of the ridiculous things other game companies have done and a joke. I decided on a joke since there are lists everywhere about what other companies have done. So, a joke.
FFG? I think you misspelled WizKids.
14 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:So no one thinks it's curious that two of the most meta-defining cards of their time (C3PO and Palpatine) were in $100 ships that couldn't be used for standard play?
But all the cards in those epic expansions can be used in epic play.... with the ships in the epic expansion.... I have no problem with them putting powerful cards in the epic expansions. For the people that enjoy epic, it makes it possible because the competitive players will pay the premium for the cards. If they didn't, FFG would sell a lot less of the epic ships and the price would be much larger, or they wouldn't be made at all.
And businesses arnt greedy by nature. They need to make money or they would cease to exist
Pretty bold claim OP.
14 minutes ago, Wilhelm Screamer said:
Pretty bold claim OP.
You have a choice....
You can eat the Snickers in the red wrapper or the Snickers in the blue wrapper. How much of the realty of FFG do you really want to see? The choice is yours, Neo.
36 minutes ago, ViscerothSWG said:Think bigger. Blind boxes for models that include random upgrades and only 2 of a potential 4-6 pilots for that ship (1 ship chit per box). No booster card packs. $$$
With varying rarity degrees!!!
This does sound cynical, and I have no evidence for it, but I strongly suspect that the reason we haven't seen a T65 fix is because they are holding out to ensure that the fix will be as hugely lucrative as possible. But that is capitalism right?
After so much time of playing other games, Warhammer and Heroclix notably, FFG's business practices are a breath of fresh air.
5 minutes ago, sozin said:This does sound cynical, and I have no evidence for it, but I strongly suspect that the reason we haven't seen a T65 fix is because they are holding out to ensure that the fix will be as hugely lucrative as possible. But that is capitalism right?
Incoming Hammerhead/T-65 Rogue One epic combopack?
13 minutes ago, sozin said:This does sound cynical, and I have no evidence for it, but I strongly suspect that the reason we haven't seen a T65 fix is because they are holding out to ensure that the fix will be as hugely lucrative as possible. But that is capitalism right?
I strongly suspect we don't have a T-65 fix cuz these fixes needed to happen first.
To OP:
2 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:I strongly suspect we don't have a T-65 fix cuz these fixes needed to happen first.
Hey Darth can you expand on that? What's the dependency between a T65 fix and a Manaroo/Zuckass/x7 nerf?
27 minutes ago, sozin said:This does sound cynical, and I have no evidence for it, but I strongly suspect that the reason we haven't seen a T65 fix is because they are holding out to ensure that the fix will be as hugely lucrative as possible. But that is capitalism right?
I suspect the T65 fix will be tied to a new product and given all the new ships they didn't want to push it up the lineup too much. Also, the T65 has received fixes before so the question of what does it really even need is there as well.
3 minutes ago, Jetfire said:I suspect the T65 fix will be tied to a new product and given all the new ships they didn't want to push it up the lineup too much. Also, the T65 has received fixes before so the question of what does it really even need is there as well.
Am I the only one that thinks the "T-65 fix" is the T-70? Sure it's a different model/ship pilots (there is your cpatilism) but outside that it does all the things you want: improved stat line, dial, and upgrades. I think the fix was here with the new core.
Yeah, right, most capitalistically evil future timeline is they have some big Hammerhead expansion or something with one T-65 title card per expansion. Thanks for connecting the dots for me :-)
I'd love a Hammerhead expansion to go with all my other Epic ships. A T-65 buff in the same package would just be the icing on the cake like the /x1 fix was in the Raider.
40 minutes ago, Admiral Deathrain said:Incoming Hammerhead/T-65 Rogue One epic combopack?
1 minute ago, Major Tom said:I'd love a Hammerhead expansion to go with all my other Epic ships. A T-65 buff in the same package would just be the icing on the cake like the /x1 fix was in the Raider.
Yeah, the Hammerhead would be a pretty great addition to epic as a small hardpoint ship for rebels to go between the GR-75 and CR-90. Would prefer them not to package a T-65 super-upgrade with it, though...
9 minutes ago, Admiral Deathrain said:Yeah, the Hammerhead would be a pretty great addition to epic as a small hardpoint ship for rebels to go between the GR-75 and CR-90. Would prefer them not to package a T-65 super-upgrade with it, though...
I would buy the crap out of the hammerhead and blue squadron x-wing combo pack if it contains 4+ copies of each X-wing related upgrade. I understand the argument against it though. A "Scariff Veterans" pack with X-wing and Y-wing repaints would be a little more "customer friendly".
42 minutes ago, Rolotamasi said:Am I the only one that thinks the "T-65 fix" is the T-70?
The devs said that the T-70 isn't a fix for the T-65 and both ships should be viable.
42 minutes ago, Rolotamasi said:Am I the only one that thinks the "T-65 fix" is the T-70? Sure it's a different model/ship pilots (there is your cpatilism) but outside that it does all the things you want: improved stat line, dial, and upgrades. I think the fix was here with the new core.
That's what I mean, between the T70 and integrated they have addressed the X-wing a bit... maybe more is coming, I could definitely see an astromech raising the E, X, Y bar but it probably isn't right around the corner.
So basically everybody recognizes that FFG is a corporation going after profit. It makes sense that they would pack powerful cards with 100$ pricetags on ships that are not even ment for regular play, but it doesn't makes sense that they would make new releases strong in order to sell, and after that if there are balance issues, just nerf them.
You are telling me that everything FFG has been doing so far is ok because corporations should be greedy if they can get away with it. Fine, I totally agree. I would do the exact same thing in their place. I am not calling them evil people or anything for doing a great job in making bucks.
I am still trying to understand why, since we 've established that they are your everyday greedy corporation that sells 8 euro dice, you find it TOO greedy that they are willing to push it even more. Heck, you ARE buying those ships, they ARE getting away with it, why would they NOT do it? lol
Edited by haritos
No card has a $100 price tag. The ship it comes with does.
As someone who plays Epic at least semi-regularly I've had my huge ships (and I own all of them) on the table more times than some of my small base ships. Even getting one Epic game in every two to three months I've had more than my money's worth of enjoyment out of them without even thinking about the cards. If you are buying huge ships just to get the cards then you are seriously missing out on a wonderful way to play X-Wing. Give it a go some time.
1 hour ago, sozin said:Hey Darth can you expand on that? What's the dependency between a T65 fix and a Manaroo/Zuckass/x7 nerf?
There are what, 3 guys in charge of R&D? If they are all thinking about M/Z/x7, they are not thinking about T-65. Moreover, to me is seems more pressing to rebalance the "broken" stuff than to puff up the weak stuff, which can happen later once the game is in a better state of balance. Ergo, don't fix T-65 relative to broken Manaroo, fix T-65 relative to nerfed Manaroo.
16 minutes ago, haritos said:So basically everybody recognizes that FFG is a corporation going after profit. It makes sense that they would pack powerful cards with 100$ pricetags on ships that are not even ment for regular play, but it doesn't makes sense that they would make new releases strong in order to sell, and after that if there are balance issues, just nerf them.
You are telling me that everything FFG has been doing so far is ok because corporations should be greedy if they can get away with it. Fine, I totally agree. I would do the exact same thing in their place. I am not calling them evil people or anything for doing a great job in making bucks.
I am still trying to understand why, since we 've established that they are your everyday greedy corporation that sells 8 euro dice, you find it TOO greedy that they are willing to push it even more. Heck, you ARE buying those ships, they ARE getting away with it, why would they NOT do it? lol
If they were trying to do what you are suggesting they would be burning X-wing to the ground.
1 minute ago, Major Tom said:No card has a $100 price tag. The ship it comes with does.
As someone who plays Epic at least semi-regularly I've had my huge ships (and I own all of them) on the table more times than some of my small base ships. Even getting one Epic game in every two to three months I've had more than my money's worth of enjoyment out of them without even thinking about the cards. If you are buying huge ships just to get the cards then you are seriously missing out on a wonderful way to play X-Wing. Give it a go some time.
Bingo, The Emperor wasn't even a card designed to shape tournaments, it was designed to be thematic for epic. You know, riding around in a raider taking up two crew slots. I am guessing he got very little play testing at 8 pts in an acewing setup.
It seems far more likely that they simply did not get enough play testing in for the year that contained all these flaws. I mean they released like 15 ships in a year. I bet that doesn't happen again soon.
3 hours ago, Moneyinvolved said:But all the cards in those epic expansions can be used in epic play.... with the ships in the epic expansion.... I have no problem with them putting powerful cards in the epic expansions. For the people that enjoy epic, it makes it possible because the competitive players will pay the premium for the cards. If they didn't, FFG would sell a lot less of the epic ships and the price would be much larger, or they wouldn't be made at all.
Actually not true. Actually completely true. Made a big post on why that wasn't the case and found out that it actually was.
Again, take the demand curve I brought up in my previous post. Everyone has a maximum price they're willing to pay for a Raider at any one point in time.
Say we're FFG. There are 300 customers who want Raiders. All of them have different prices they're willing to pay for a Raider. If you plot the price of a Raider against the number of customers willing to pay for a Raider and the stuff that comes with it you get a demand curve that looks something like this.
From this curve it's not immediately clear how much you should charge. Charging the optimal price is a balancing act between how many you sell and how much you sell them for. To work out how much to charge you need to work out which price makes the most money.
Let's say each Raider Expansion costs $20 to manufacture and ship (that's making them, shipping them, royalties, VAT) and it cost $2000 to design (that's all the development, playtesting, artwork and license fees). $2000 is our fixed cost. No matter what, that's spent. $20 is our unit cost, which is the price to make another Raider. The price we charge for each Raider Expansion is our unit revenue.
The profit we make is units sold x (unit revenue - unit cost) - fixed cost and it results in a curve looking like this.
The optimal price to sell our Raiders for is $80 based on this. We sell Raiders to 219 of our 300 possible customers, making $11140. The other 81 aren't willing to pay that much for a Raider and don't get one. Charge more and we won't sell enough, charge less and we won't sell for enough. At the extremes we'll lose money.
What about Palpatine and TIE Advanced Aces? I'll refer to this as P&TAA from now on.
To clarify, our first 300 customers want the full Raider package: they play Epic. However P&TAA is present in Standard and the market for Standard is a fair bit bigger. We've got 700 customers who want P&TAA for Standard. They don't really care about Epic and won't buy the Raider if it has no standard cards in it.
The demand curve will probably be steeper than the one for the people who wanted the Raider for the Raider: these people aren't going to be willing to pay as much when they only want the Raider.
This is the demand curve of how much these 700 people will pay for a Raider they don't really want to get working TIE advanceds and Palpatine. Given they come in the Raider bundle our unit costs and fixed costs are the same as before.
The optimal price to sell to these 700 people is about $40: you'll sell 251 Raiders and make $5530. 449 customers want the Standard parts but aren't willing to pay $40 for him. However, this means you're also selling for $40 to the people who want Raiders. At $40 you sell 287 Raiders and make $3750 from the earlier 300 who wanted Raiders. That means you've actually made less than you would have from selling Raiders to the 300 Epic people at $80.
So what about the demand from everyone?
The optimal price for a market with all 1000 customers is now $70, selling 249 Raiders to the 300 player Epic group and 91 Raiders to the 700 player Standard Only group. The total profit is $18400 of which $10450 is from Epic sales and $3450 is from the Standard only group.
Now these numbers aren't meaningful in isolation: they're based on a simplified model where I picked the costs out of the air, drew the curves from what demand curves generally look like and there are only 1000 customers here. However, this does serve to illustrate the effect of a large pool of customers who want to pay less for one component and a small customer base willing to pay more for the full package.
I'll reiterate the assumptions I made:
This means the price the market will bear lies between the price the market of players who play Epic will bear and the price a Standard Only Epic ship market will bear. Where it lies depends on the relative sizes of the markets. Shift the demand curves around and the ideal price for FFG changes but it'll always lie between the price Epic players will bear and the price Standard only players will bear.