Hello everyone .

It's been some time since I posted (actually I rarely post) . I watched some videos from Star Wars Destiny game and although at first it seemed interesting (mainly because of its fast interaction) I was immediately put off when I found out that this is CCG . This was the fact that I sold my entire Magic the Gathering collection in the first place due to the FACT that the money that were required to support and maintain the game was too much for me . The LCG format is the opposite of that , and I believe that Fantasy Flight will be reckless to abandon it . Star Wars the card game is such an excellent game .I 'd probably never going to bother with any Fantasy Flight /product if they ever cancel this.

Hello everyone .

It's been some time since I posted (actually I rarely post) . I watched some videos from Star Wars Destiny game and although at first it seemed interesting (mainly because of its fast interaction) I was immediately put off when I found out that this is CCG . This was the fact that I sold my entire Magic the Gathering collection in the first place due to the FACT that the money that were required to support and maintain the game was too much for me . The LCG format is the opposite of that , and I believe that Fantasy Flight will be reckless to abandon it . Star Wars the card game is such an excellent game .I 'd probably never going to bother with any Fantasy Flight /product if they ever cancel this.

What if FFG makes a second edition version of this game?

10 hours ago, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

What if FFG makes a second edition version of this game?

What for ?

Not necessary.

The game is not perfect; a lot of cards could use some tweaks. A lot of objective sets never see the light of day.

show me one card game where every card sees play.

That's no reason to second edition the game . Regarding the design of the game and the rules it's not necessary to do so .

As for the cards Toqtamish already answered .

The logic of Toqtamish's response is somewhat faulty. It's little more than a retooling of the old "everybody else is doing it" argument.

A.) No two games are exactly equal.

B.) Other games not using some of their cards is not a strong justification for NOT making a second edition of this game.

C.) Due to the objective sets, the amount of unused cards in this game is exacerbated.

And there are other reasons to make a second edition, too:

A.) Newcomers are on the same footing as veterans.

B.) Later additions to the game mechanic--such as Pilot, Influence, Alternate Affiliation Cards, and Affiliation Fate Cards--could be seen in earlier objective sets.

C.) Great cards that weren't created until much later into the game development process could show up in earlier objective sets.

C.) Objective sets themselves could be a discussion. I, for one, like them. But many people do not.

D.) There would not be so many card erratas--at least for a little while.

Now, please keep in mind that this is all just me being a devil's advocate. I recognize that one of the biggest problems with making a second edition is that people who have already invested highly in this edition would be forced to start over or jump ship--I am chief among those people, as my finances are, shall we say, "less than limitless" with having a wife and kids. But, I for one would much rather see more people playing a second edition of the game, as the chances of getting new players into this game are decreasing rapidly. Exceptions still occur, but on the whole, most people don't want to shell out the cash for an LCG that is so many cycles deep already. I just recently got a new player addicted to the game, but that was because he was able to procure almost the entire collection for less than half the MSRP. If not for that, there was no way he would have considered it.

13 hours ago, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

The logic of Toqtamish's response is somewhat faulty. It's little more than a retooling of the old "everybody else is doing it" argument.

A.) No two games are exactly equal.

B.) Other games not using some of their cards is not a strong justification for NOT making a second edition of this game.

C.) Due to the objective sets, the amount of unused cards in this game is exacerbated.

And there are other reasons to make a second edition, too:

A.) Newcomers are on the same footing as veterans.

B.) Later additions to the game mechanic--such as Pilot, Influence, Alternate Affiliation Cards, and Affiliation Fate Cards--could be seen in earlier objective sets.

C.) Great cards that weren't created until much later into the game development process could show up in earlier objective sets.

C.) Objective sets themselves could be a discussion. I, for one, like them. But many people do not.

D.) There would not be so many card erratas--at least for a little while.

Now, please keep in mind that this is all just me being a devil's advocate. I recognize that one of the biggest problems with making a second edition is that people who have already invested highly in this edition would be forced to start over or jump ship--I am chief among those people, as my finances are, shall we say, "less than limitless" with having a wife and kids. But, I for one would much rather see more people playing a second edition of the game, as the chances of getting new players into this game are decreasing rapidly. Exceptions still occur, but on the whole, most people don't want to shell out the cash for an LCG that is so many cycles deep already. I just recently got a new player addicted to the game, but that was because he was able to procure almost the entire collection for less than half the MSRP. If not for that, there was no way he would have considered it.

a+b+c) No two card games are exactly equal but all card games share some same characteristics. The fact that not all cards are of the same power/caliber does not make a card useless. Not all cards have to be at a competetive level . Some cards are more appropriate for thematic decks or for fun decks . Not all people that buy this game play at tournaments.

As for the game featuring new additions that's because the game evovles and therefore some new stuff are added (erratas and adjustments like that are inevitable in all games that keep on going) .

If people do not like objective sets then they probably won't like the game at all.

Anyway , in my opinion there is nothing wrong with the game . Actually it's quite brilliant . FF has a great game in their hands and probably should have focused more on supporting the game . I remember some cycles were delayed and that was a problem. And maybe they should have marketed the game better . And instead of us complaining all the time maybe we should try and bring new players to the game.

Do you have ideas on how to get more people interested in the game, given the current price point? I'd love some suggestions.

That game need a second edition where they will get rid of the pod system. It saved Game of Throne, I dont see why it couldn't help star wars. The Bane of this game compare to Destiny is the community which is nearly inexistant. New players prefer to be rip off in a ccg model instead of jumping into this LCG because they know they will easely find people to play with if they invest into Destiny.

17 hours ago, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

Do you have ideas on how to get more people interested in the game, given the current price point? I'd love some suggestions.

Try the core box . If you like it then , according to your pocket , you keep adding to your collection . I don't get that current price arguement. By that arguement no new player should invest in Lord of the rings lcg or any other game with a vast collection for that matter if they are not rich

8 hours ago, vilainn6 said:

That game need a second edition where they will get rid of the pod system. It saved Game of Throne, I dont see why it couldn't help star wars. The Bane of this game compare to Destiny is the community which is nearly inexistant. New players prefer to be rip off in a ccg model instead of jumping into this LCG because they know they will easely find people to play with if they invest into Destiny.

Actuall I believe the pod system will help new players to card games to build their decks easier ,and as they get to know the game better they will delve deeper into the finer aspects of combining pods together for better effects ..People not finding people to play is FFG fault .But you said it .people prefer CCG rip off ..

6 hours ago, VicRattlehed said:

Actuall I believe the pod system will help new players to card games to build their decks easier ,and as they get to know the game better they will delve deeper into the finer aspects of combining pods together for better effects.

If the pod system is so fabulous, why is the star wars lcg the least popular lcg among the surviving ones?

On 6/3/2017 at 4:52 PM, vilainn6 said:

If the pod system is so fabulous, why is the star wars lcg the least popular lcg among the surviving ones?

Not because of the pod system . Look elsewhere why

On ‎6‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 9:52 AM, vilainn6 said:

If the pod system is so fabulous, why is the star wars lcg the least popular lcg among the surviving ones?

Just out of curiosity, what data are you basing this on? Attendance at tournaments or actual sales? Those are two very different things. A couple years ago, even though the attendance at major events was certainly less than the attendance of other games, FFG announced Star Wars LCG was actually their 2nd largest selling game. It was assumed that many people might just be playing this game casually at home. While that certainly may mean OP for this game may not get as much support as some people like, that doesn't necessarily mean people aren't still buying the product. I play regularly at my house with a friend and we have been playing since the game came out. Even though I go to several local tournaments a year (for a variety of reasons, I do not go to the major events like GenCon, Worlds, etc..), he has only gone to go to 2 tournaments with me but he buys every set. Last Saturday I went to a Store Championship and a father and son came from a couple hours away to play at it. It was the first time they ever went to a tournament, but they said they had been playing the game at home for well over a year. I think people who play competitively can sometimes underestimate the impact of casual players on sales.

On ‎6‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 8:13 PM, Wh0isTh3D0ct0r said:

C.) Due to the objective sets, the amount of unused cards in this game is exacerbated.

I'd like to see the data on this because in my own research I think this is completely untrue. For the past couple of years I have taken it upon myself to contribute to the Star Wars LCG community by tracking the objective sets used in winning decks throughout Store Championship seasons and Regional Seasons and also the Top 16s at major events (Gen. Con., Worlds, etc..) and the percentage of the card pool which appears in those sorts of decks is quite higher than most people ever think. I post that information in cardgamedb regularly. For instance, during the 2016 Store Championship season I collected data from over 90 events. It turned out in those events 64.8% of the sets (nearly 2/3 of the card pool) which were available at any point during that season appeared in WINNING decks. Again, that's not just someone showing up with something janky and playing, these sets were in decks that won the tournaments. If there's another game out there with as large of a card pool as Star Wars LCG now where this happens, I'd love to see someone present the data. I'm not going to compare it to something like Destiny where the card pool is much, much more limited right now, but even then I'd be surprised if nearly 2/3 of the cards appear in Destiny Store Championship winning decks and I play Destiny too so I'm not criticizing it.

In general, people seem to underestimate certain sets in the LCG. While admittedly, not every set can be like Tarkin Doctrine or May the Force Be With You and be staples as 2 ofs in competitive decks, the reality is most of the sets are quite viable competitively if you run them as a 1 of in the right builds.

Objective set system is one of my favorite parts of the game. Less decision points but each has much greater impact on your deck build.

2 minutes ago, Toqtamish said:

Objective set system is one of my favorite parts of the game. Less decision points but each has much greater impact on your deck build.

Exactly, and it's always fun when you run into the situation where you use one of the cards in a set that you typically only pitch into an edge battle or discard, but it ends up having a major impact when you play it.

47 minutes ago, yodaman1971 said:

Just out of curiosity, what data are you basing this on? Attendance at tournaments or actual sales? Those are two very different things. A couple years ago, even though the attendance at major events was certainly less than the attendance of other games, FFG announced Star Wars LCG was actually their 2nd largest selling game. It was assumed that many people might just be playing this game casually at home. While that certainly may mean OP for this game may not get as much support as some people like, that doesn't necessarily mean people aren't still buying the product. I play regularly at my house with a friend and we have been playing since the game came out. Even though I go to several local tournaments a year (for a variety of reasons, I do not go to the major events like GenCon, Worlds, etc..), he has only gone to go to 2 tournaments with me but he buys every set. Last Saturday I went to a Store Championship and a father and son came from a couple hours away to play at it. It was the first time they ever went to a tournament, but they said they had been playing the game at home for well over a year. I think people who play competitively can sometimes underestimate the impact of casual players on sales.

I have been at Worlds a few years before they split it into two week-end and the difference in size between the Star Wars tournament compare to AGOT, Netrunner and Conquest was noticeable. My FLGS had struggle for many years to host store champs with more than 10 players in the good days while the other games always had good turnout. while Of course, you can tell me not all people went to big tournaments but the same thing can be said about the other lcgs. Are the players of the Star Wars more broke than those of Netrunner or AGOT?

With all due respect, I think you missed my point which is that lower attendance at OP events doesn't necessarily correlate to lower sales. I certainly agree that attendance has always been on the lower end for OP events for the LCG compared to other games (even though I only play the Star Wars LCG). But my guess is FFG probably is more focused on sales. After all, when they create OP kits be it for Store Championships, Regionals, etc.. I'm pretty sure the stores that host these events have to pay the same amount for the kits whether 4 people show up or 40 people show up. FFG would be getting their sales money up front. As long as they're selling packs and kits, that probably matters more than how many people show up at events.

Also, I didn't mention cost being a factor for not attending big events. I'm sure it is for some people, but that's not why I don't go. I just am not personally a big traveler and, even if I were, due to the nature of my job, the timing of the larger events basically would make it impossible for me to attend even if I didn't mind traveling. The closest gaming store to where I live is about an hour away. I go there whenever I can and regularly attend any Star Wars LCG event they have (tournaments, leagues, etc..). They hosted a regional last year so I went to that. I can make arrangements to travel the hour back and forth in one day and don't mind doing that. However, because of my reluctance to traveling, I'm never going to make the trip from NC to Gen. Con. or Worlds because of the distance. It doesn't make me enjoy the game any less.

I also have a feeling that for some people, the fact Star Wars had 2 Worlds events only 6 months apart because of the restructuring didn't help. Some people can't find the money and/or time to go to two things like that so close together. I think attendance next year will be a better indicator when there has been an entire year in between the Star Wars Worlds events.

14 hours ago, yodaman1971 said:

Just out of curiosity, what data are you basing this on? Attendance at tournaments or actual sales? Those are two very different things. A couple years ago, even though the attendance at major events was certainly less than the attendance of other games, FFG announced Star Wars LCG was actually their 2nd largest selling game. It was assumed that many people might just be playing this game casually at home. While that certainly may mean OP for this game may not get as much support as some people like, that doesn't necessarily mean people aren't still buying the product. I play regularly at my house with a friend and we have been playing since the game came out. Even though I go to several local tournaments a year (for a variety of reasons, I do not go to the major events like GenCon, Worlds, etc..), he has only gone to go to 2 tournaments with me but he buys every set. Last Saturday I went to a Store Championship and a father and son came from a couple hours away to play at it. It was the first time they ever went to a tournament, but they said they had been playing the game at home for well over a year. I think people who play competitively can sometimes underestimate the impact of casual players on sales.

That . Personally I play this game with my wife

The only way to save this game much less grow it, is to have a 2.0. version. Yes initially it will anger existing players but it will freshen the game and make a good springboard for new players. The reason 2.0 versions of LCG's cause problems for it's existing players is that their cards hold no value in the secondary market like CCG cards do. This make players feel like their investments are simply out the window. I guess the other option is to let things be and allow the game to slowly retire naturally.