You are attacking the business model as a consumer, not as a seller. If things like the Epics or Ace packs didn't work, then you may have had a good base. But they didn't fail. They really, really succeeded. So, thus, cards stick with ships. As we have been proven to be a gullible market. I say this with my 8 TIE Interceptors.

I think that's really it. If people are going to spend $80 for cards instead of $20, FFG is going to sell stuff for $80.

Maybe they should increase the price? Let's see where this goes....

My bet is if they released card packs it would be like Magic. You buy a pack of random cards and hope to get what you want/need. Selling cards one at a time or just cards from an upgrade would probably cost nearly as much as the ship... well, they'd likely charge more than most people would want/expect.

The cheapest way to get individual cards is to buy them off eBay or friends. It would be nice if you could. It would be a nice option but I doubt there is enough pushback from the current business model for FFG to add this option. You can always sell your models to help cover card costs.

Realistically it boils down to:

Customers says "We want to buy new pilots without the ships at a proportional discount"

FFG says "No, our team of business analysts tells us our current business model works perfectly well for us financially so we aren't going to do that"

Until this problem starts hurting FFG's bottom line, they will not change the status quo, regardless of how many "armchair business analysts" tell them they aren't optimizing their potential revenue through 'Ship-less' expansions.

On 6/24/2017 at 2:45 PM, BadMotivator said:

Appealing to the ''professional' opinions of game designers is a bit of a logical fallicy. Game designers often fall victim to 'cant see the forest for the trees' as they are too clowe to their game.

Well, for the record, neither game designers nor game developers make those sorts of decisions. Hard to miss the forest for the trees when your job isn't to look for the forest but is, instead, to sit inside and hone the blades on the saws.

On 6/23/2017 at 9:56 PM, Sithborg said:

They have repeatedly stated that it doesn't fit their business model.

Really? Please provide links.

2 hours ago, DagobahDave said:

Really? Please provide links.

Here's one from a while ago:

http://www.jodocast.com/2015/02/22/x-wing-qa-with-designer-alex-davy/

13 hours ago, KelRiever said:

To me, you do the best job you can play testing a game before release, and then you simply realize that when it hits public consumption, a player base a hundred times the size is going to find everything wrong with your game better and faster than any test team ever could.

I admit, if there were one change I really wish they'd have done to the current model it'd be to widen up the beta test rules. Yes, you lose out on the 'excitement'/'grand reveal' factor... but there's still plenty of excitement about getting ones hands on the physical models, nonetheless.

Remember: The Jumpmaster's U-boat builds were worked out within hours of the preview. Come launch day, there were refinements based on the unspoiled cards, but the basic chassis of the time (R4 Agro, Deadeye, torps, EM) didn't flinch for a moment. I was one of many who saw Fenn Rau and, even before seeing the dial, sat up and predicted he was gonna be a Big Deal(tm). Others made similar observations with SLAM-bombing the moment the set of cards came out... it's not guranteed to be perfect (Dengaroo was missed by everyone until some time post-release), but it's got a better shot at getting things right.

So would using something like MajorJuggler's formulas, but I suspect the can afford the analyst to run the clockwork even less than they can to hire a couple extra playtest co-ordinators.

4 hours ago, KelRiever said:

I think that's really it. If people are going to spend $80 for cards instead of $20, FFG is going to sell stuff for $80.

Maybe they should increase the price? Let's see where this goes....

That's what Games Workshop did.

It worked.

That doesn't mean I particularly want to encourage them to go down that path.

23 hours ago, KelRiever said:

Generally, they do a good job of correcting too. But the current state has gone on too long and when there is an easy answer, called sell some card pack upgrades rather than waiting for a ship to get designed and go into production...whatever...I think excuses like not wanting to release cards without a ship make a lot less sense.

Do the card thing. People will buy it. Just like they bought that other thing they swore they used and still sits in a box on a shelf. Come on, you know what figures I'm talking about...;)

Here's the problem with fixing the Jumpmaster issue (or whatever) with a card pack release: If you create an updated Dengar card, for example, does the original become invalid?

If yes, you have the wailing and gnashing of teeth because now the $30 Jumpmaster release is literally unplayable without an additional purchase. (For store champs/tournaments/etc, of course.)

If no, than someone with a successful Dengar build that they enjoy has ZERO motivation to make the switch unless the updated card adds something to make up for whatever got knocked out, which really just shifts the problem.

A card pack for updates and fixes, like in this case, is almost more of a courtesy to keep the errata'd cards "clean."

Now, a card and cardboard pack to add new pilots to old ships would be welcome, but seems to be outside FFG's business model.

Gah.

Double post.

All cards are viable unless you are playing a specific organized play tournament. That's it.

As someone stated, serious tournament players are going to by one of everything anyway. And this way, if there's a card they need or want, at least they stick with buying a card pack, instead of you know, a card pack with an Epic ship...said Epic ship they can't play in a regular tournament anyway.

Sure, they'll BUY one of everything, but if someone's heading to a tournament and they have one card that's "broken" and one for the same thing that's "fixed," how likely are they to give up the advantage of the broken version?

If it resulted in a better engagement among friends, the fixed version will still see plenty of time on the dining room table, but in a tournament not everyone is going to throw out the advantage. In fact, I think, MOST players who were prone to play that particular ship in the first place will stick with the broken version, in much the same way that people bring the damage deck that serves their tournament list better.

No, to be clear, the updated card is the only one available for organized tournaments.

It's really simple. Non organized play, use whatever versions you want. Organized tournaments, use only updated cards. People who want to play organized play have to deal with the cycle of updates but you know, they have to do that already.

Sure, but that won't stop the howling of "My $30 ship is now literally unusable unless I purchase this other product as well."

It's the same reasoning why the updated Damage Deck is still only optional.

lol probably! But I think people would buy it anyway.

On 6/25/2017 at 7:48 PM, Sithborg said:

You are attacking the business model as a consumer, not as a seller.

Exactly and that means you have no leverage or power here. I mean this has only come up about 100 times or more over the last 5 years...

Over that time one and only one thing has been proven, that no matter how many people complain the bottom line is still very, very good. What's happening with GW is a prime example of this, because for them the bottom line wasn't what they wanted, so they changed things to be more consumer friendly because they knew that doing so would help.

The prices of the models haven't come down much, but they're offering more Start Collecting boxes which are good deals, and the rules are a lot cheaper in 8th edition, then 7th. They're also being a lot more active on social media and getting information out to people and the retailers ahead of time.

GW of 6th and 7th edition 40k was a company that was truly having their bottom line affected by the way they did things so they changed. FFG won't change how they do things until they're in the same situation.

Edit: and this "it would help the bottom line" that people post is really just nonsense... Because you don't, and can't know if it actually would or not. We don't have access to their forecasting, sales data, manufacturing costs or any of the other data that's needed.

Then they should raise the price of their game.

I think if this is all true, easily every fighter pack should cost $30, and they can sell far more of them than people they'd lose. Possibly $45 per fighter pack? Maybe that's too much, but I'm just going by that logic here.

Probably Epic ships should go for $200-$250 as well. I bet people would still buy them.

And at that, any useful conversation is over. Their market research has shown what they can sell things at. And it has clearly shown that card packs are not profitable enough, likely due to the margins they would have to sell them at and the effect it would have on other, higher priced ships.

Well, I'm only saying that if everyone is so down on the idea of card packs for less, and are going to pick up $80 ships to get a copy of a ship they can't use in a tournament, but a bunch of cards they can, then FFG is smart to raise prices. By a lot.

So I don't see that it's useless. Feedback from fans seems to indicate they should increase prices.

44 minutes ago, KelRiever said:

So I don't see that it's useless. Feedback from fans seems to indicate they should increase prices.

You're either being intentionally obtuse or trolling at this point.

Edit: I decided you're most likely just trolling and I'm not going to bother discussing it.

Oh my god you are so serious!

Lol! Here's the deal...I think it's valid, you either look at the card packs from a purely money making perspective and don't sell them unless they make a profit, or you look at them as something fans want, and come up with a way to do it.

I'm inclined to agree and happy to be proven wrong if people want to keep harping on that FFG is only going to sell ships with cards. But that argument is based on a business/profit first as far as I can tell. And as far as I can tell, then if that's the case, hated as it may be to say, this game should sell for more.

Sounds ridiculous, but how much does Games Workshop sell an, albeit highly detailed, but also totally unpainted model for? Is the higher quality plastic really justifying their price? I bet you a games workshop version of an Epic Ship, if it had the Star Wars IP, would absolutely be retailed for $200 minimum and be unpainted.

GW's IP isn't as good as Star Wars.

So, in a profit first argument, sell Star Wars for more. FFG would do better. And I think fans would still pay it, although they would grouse about the price. I bet they'd even be pleased, ultimately. You know what? Minimum net pay to play would still be lower for tournaments, too. Because you still wouldn't need 100 figures to play.

Your GW argument is flawed because GW is a failed company. They stopped growing for a while now, FFG surpassed them years ago based on the lack of growth and GW literally can't turn back the time, because their established customer base is the only thing that keeps them alive, at those inflated prices.

GW will continue to keep making money, but unless the get out some game line to actually compete with FFG products and attract new customers which will piss of their old customers … they are done for in a slow death. But hey, at least they can keep milking their user base.
Oh and I think their battlefield gothic ships are actually below $200 in price point, while still outrageously expensive

Lol! I guess that's so. I mean, I can tell you I want it to be sort of true the GW model fails because it would simply prove so many things I believe in. Sadly, I'm not sold anymore on that they are a failed company. I feel they are successful at certain things, and if they were truly a 100% failed company, they should have died at least 10 years ago already.

Part of their success is that they price in customer attrition. Whoever they have left pays enough money to make up for whoever they lose. And as awful as that is, I sickly think it works? If Games Workshop could get only 2 people in the world each year to buy all their product for $100 million apiece (maybe each space marine costs $2 million for the same model they made 20 years ago) then are they really a failed company? YES! from the point of view of having any presence in the world. No from the standpoint of profit.

FFG is not GW and on that we can agree, all here I am sure. On the other hand, there is a lesson to be learned called if people will throw money at you, are you a bad person for taking it? Hey, I bet that license from Lucas now Disney is a pretty penny...because I hear it is one of the most expensive IPs to buy into. And if we only care about profit, or profit above all else, then...well then...and since card packs are so sworn by others here to be not a good business model because FFG would have done it already or whatever...then just maybe FFG should charge everyone more for what they make?

Postulating here. I have no skin in FFG or Asmodee because, well, I don't work for them and they aren't publicly traded

On 6/25/2017 at 10:32 PM, Reiver said:

Remember: The Jumpmaster's U-boat builds were worked out within hours of the preview. Come launch day, there were refinements based on the unspoiled cards, but the basic chassis of the time (R4 Agro, Deadeye, torps, EM) didn't flinch for a moment. I was one of many who saw Fenn Rau and, even before seeing the dial, sat up and predicted he was gonna be a Big Deal(tm). Others made similar observations with SLAM-bombing the moment the set of cards came out... it's not guranteed to be perfect (Dengaroo was missed by everyone until some time post-release), but it's got a better shot at getting things right.

The Jumpmaster was specifically designed to be an ordnance carrier. It arrived in a wave that was specifically aiming to buff ordnance. Which seems more plausible: nobody thinks to put extra munitions, deadeye, and the mech on the ordnance carrier when testing the ordnance wave or it's spotted, it's intended, and it's believed (whether by the designers or the testers) to be within reasonable bounds.