Congrats to Imperial Assault on making it to the top 3 spot on Dice Tower's top FFG games!

Wow, not too bad. I wonder if the remarkable Jabba expansion really pushed it over the top. Granted everything else in 2016 was great, but that expansion was key.

Its really Interesting... 3 Star Wars Games make it into the 10... And none of them are X-Wing... Quite a few people are taking that as a really odd sign of the times....

The reason is probably that Tom prefers Attack Wing, and I think the later Dungeons & Dragons: Attack Wing.

Those Dice Wing guys are all over the map, I've also seen them dislike games simply because it has a daemonic or devil component. I find our opinions are wildly different even if we like the same game.

On 4/9/2017 at 8:06 AM, a1bert said:

The reason is probably that Tom prefers Attack Wing, and I think the later Dungeons & Dragons: Attack Wing.

Nah, X-Wing was in his list of "Great Games that we'll never play again". Basically the game has evolved to the point where it's so competitive that it's difficult to find an opponent who won't mop the floor with you, because most people playing the game in a FLGS (for example) are competitive players. I think they make the exact same point about Android: Netrunner, though I may be wrong.

I think IA's broader focus on both supporting campaign play as well as skirmish make it much more appealing both in the current state and long term.

On 4/10/2017 at 1:48 AM, FrogTrigger said:

Those Dice Wing guys are all over the map, I've also seen them dislike games simply because it has a daemonic or devil component. I find our opinions are wildly different even if we like the same game.

To be fair, Tom and Sam are both Christian. It may seem arbitrary to not like a game for a theme like demons, but for many people (myself included), such themes really turn us off the game. It's really the same as not liking any game for the theme; some people dislike farming, and thus dislike Agricola even if they find it mechanically fine.

I don't think you can say they're "all over the map" just because they dislike certain themes; if anything, that makes them consistent. I personally find they're probably the most consistent group of reviewers I've seen, and they're putting themselves out there for everyone to scrutinise.

Well are they trying to give an Objective review or a biased review to their preferences? If it's the latter then I have no use for their reviews as our opinions are so different, if its the former they do a lousy job of it and again I have no use for their reviews as they are so biased

Different strokes for different folks and to each their own, I meant no offense! Peace be with you!

5 hours ago, FrogTrigger said:

Well are they trying to give an Objective review or a biased review to their preferences? If it's the latter then I have no use for their reviews as our opinions are so different, if its the former they do a lousy job of it and again I have no use for their reviews as they are so biased

Different strokes for different folks and to each their own, I meant no offense! Peace be with you!

I think objectivity is kind of impossible in a review, unless you're scoring it on a pre-decided set of qualities using a fair and balanced rating system- and even then... well, "meh."

Everyone is going to bring their own biases to things. That's just how reviews work, they're hardly a science. The best thing you can do is find a reviewer you tend to see eye-to-eye with and trust that you have similar tastes.

12 hours ago, FrogTrigger said:

Well are they trying to give an Objective review or a biased review to their preferences? If it's the latter then I have no use for their reviews as our opinions are so different, if its the former they do a lousy job of it and again I have no use for their reviews as they are so biased

Different strokes for different folks and to each their own, I meant no offense! Peace be with you!

And to you! I didn't mean to come across as enraged, and apologise if I did.

6 hours ago, subtrendy said:

I think objectivity is kind of impossible in a review, unless you're scoring it on a pre-decided set of qualities using a fair and balanced rating system- and even then... well, "meh."

Everyone is going to bring their own biases to things. That's just how reviews work, they're hardly a science. The best thing you can do is find a reviewer you tend to see eye-to-eye with and trust that you have similar tastes.

Pretty much this. Ultimately, we're not machines and we can't do everything objectively. Even people who are aware of a lot of their biases are still affected by them.

On 4/10/2017 at 3:37 PM, EastCoast said:

Nah, X-Wing was in his list of "Great Games that we'll never play again". Basically the game has evolved to the point where it's so competitive that it's difficult to find an opponent who won't mop the floor with you, because most people playing the game in a FLGS (for example) are competitive players. I think they make the exact same point about Android: Netrunner, though I may be wrong.

I think IA's broader focus on both supporting campaign play as well as skirmish make it much more appealing both in the current state and long term.

Also in that list he mentioned X-Wing had been supplanted by Armada for space battles, which did make the best of FFG list.

There's also the fact that Dice Tower is focused on board games rather than miniatures games. The fact that even Armada made it on this list surprised me. Notice that when talking about IA, he focused quite a bit on campaign play instead of skirmish.

That and there is a TON of subjectivity in Dice Tower reviews. I watch them and they can be fun, but I never base my purchases off of them (I find Drive Thru Review to be a more objective and helpful set of reviews). However, there is no reason for descent to beat IA except for personal preference. Don't get me wrong, I love descent, and the app is cool, the game is great to play when you've just had too much Star Wars. Mechanically, however, IA is just a better game insofar as design goes, especially post Jabba's Realm.

And if you needed another example of subjectivity, just look at his #1 game. Anyone who has watched anything from Dice Tower knew from the beginning that this list would be "9 games and Cosmic Encounter." Tom freaking LOVES Cosmic Encounter. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, Cosmic Encounter is a blast and a great way (along with Catan) to transition people from Monopoly and Risk to the heavier side of board gaming. And it's a lot of fun. But it's a tremendous value judgment to call it the best board game FFG makes. I certainly prefer Game of Thrones, for example. Hell, for sheer achievement and scope I would probably put Twilight Imperium (with expansions) in the top spot. Even though I haven't played it in years (since it takes roughly 39 hours to play), you have to admire the ambition and execution.

Anyway, in this industry reviews are almost always at least partially subjective, and as long as you keep that in mind, you won't be disappointed.

Of course there is subjectivity. There is no objective review. There cannot be an objective review. If you try making one, you failed before you started.

Once you know what you like, why and what someone likes or dislikes in the game is useful.