2 minutes ago, Kdubb said:Seriously though, it can't be much. Probably a "shame on you" and a cut from the playtest team.
On a serious note; it's probably a few sharp words, removal from playtesting team and maybe a dirty look from Frank Brooks if you're unlucky.
Given the number of playtesters who have friends who have friends who seem to know things I wonder if any of them actually stick by their NDA. And they all drop such wonderful hints that if you've any skill at reading between lines you can work out what's coming with at least some accuracy.
7 minutes ago, Smutpedler said:On a serious note; it's probably a few sharp words, removal from playtesting team and maybe a dirty look from Frank Brooks if you're unlucky.
If this is actually true, then you could probably get away with leaking things by paraphrasing and not showing actual pictures of the documents. Use placeholder names and such. That way they can't track you down with specific wordings, names, or micro dots or whatever.
This is all provided that there isn't legal action, I wouldn't want someone to risk that for a dumb game.
But otherwise, why not go full Wikileaks?
42 minutes ago, SaltMaster 5000 said:If this is actually true, then you could probably get away with leaking things by paraphrasing and not showing actual pictures of the documents. Use placeholder names and such. That way they can't track you down with specific wordings, names, or micro dots or whatever.
This is all provided that there isn't legal action, I wouldn't want someone to risk that for a dumb game.
But otherwise, why not go full Wikileaks?
From what I've heard; Frank Brooks is the king of dirty looks. I sure wouldn't want to be on the receiving end.
Seriously though; I think FFG may have a hard time enforcing legal action overseas at least. I know a couple of the playtesters for Batman Miniatures Game and although they're usually quite tight lipped; they do tell people things. In this instance Knight models don't seem too bothered about little leaks; just so long as it doesn't get confirmed until they release it's no biggie.
Although there are rumors of a Biggs nerf; no one has a clue what said nerf is. It could be misinformation, it could be that a playtester has said about testing a Biggs nerf. It has plausible deniability so I doubt FFG care. Said playtester, however, may care about loosing said perks and privileges and have absolutely no desire to put their time and effort into a full on Wikileaks type of thing. IMHO; there's a big divide between specifics and generalities and I just don't see a motivation for people to break their NDA's in a big way. Nowt to gain; plenty to loose even if there's no legal action involved.
Edited by SmutpedlerThe thing with the playtesting as I understand it* is that they might playtest a whole range of fixes or new mechanics - but they don't know which one gets picked for final publication until it's spoiled or FAQed.
*I'm not a playtester so I could well be wrong.
15 hours ago, ArbitraryNerd said:"To use Illicit tokens, follow the rules on [Jabba's] card."
This does not require Jabba to be in play. The rules on his card are always on his card, regardless of where he is at the moment.
Jabba is the reference card, in this instance.
I've argued this with people until I'm blue in the face.
Some people are just so set on their opinion that Jabba doesn't work that they refuse to accept this no matter how hard you smack them with the C-ROC insert...
Maybe I should start doing it with an actual C-ROC? Might have better results.
8 minutes ago, Stevey86 said:I've argued this with people until I'm blue in the face.
Some people are just so set on their opinion that Jabba doesn't work that they refuse to accept this no matter how hard you smack them with the C-ROC insert...
Maybe I should start doing it with an actual C-ROC? Might have better results.
I'm grudgingly persuaded by the rules insert, but I still think it's an inelegant patch and Jabba should be errated and FAQed to work properly without needing the rulebook to hand.
31 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:I'm grudgingly persuaded by the rules insert, but I still think it's an inelegant patch and Jabba should be errated and FAQed to work properly without needing the rulebook to hand.
This is very true. Tbh I'd have added a reference card. But then they wouldn't be the same FFG we all know and love/loathe if they did something as simple and obvious as that.
I honestly don't see it getting FAQ's unless there's evidence of it getting ruled wrong, as the text exists in a rules insert for Jabba/Illicit tokens to work properly.
Just now, Stevey86 said:This is very true. Tbh I'd have added a reference card. But then they wouldn't be the same FFG we all know and love/loathe if they did something as simple and obvious as that.
I honestly don't see it getting FAQ's unless there's evidence of it getting ruled wrong, as the text exists in a rules insert for Jabba/Illicit tokens to work properly.
It has been ruled wrong at least once. Did you see the big thread in the UK/IRL group on FB?
Still; I'm sure FFG have it in hand. Just like the X-Wing fix
1 minute ago, Smutpedler said:It has been ruled wrong at least once. Did you see the big thread in the UK/IRL group on FB?
True. Though that was before it was pointed out (multiple times) in the group that the C-ROC insert makes it work.
If they're still getting it wrong then they shouldn't be TOing.
There's an article.
It's not an FAQ.
I still have hope.
I got my Wave XI yesterday, and flew 3 Scum Skuurg with Minefield Mapper. Deploying all my mines at the deployment phase worked superbly. But it's not a tactic I can plan on if it's going to be FAQed. (Or, at least, it's a tactic that will need to be tweaked)
So yeah, put me down for asking for a FAQ as well.
FWIW I don't think it's a tactic you can count on at all. Bombs that are on the board can be avoided. Bombs that are dropped directly onto ships cannot.
5 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:FWIW I don't think it's a tactic you can count on at all. Bombs that are on the board can be avoided. Bombs that are dropped directly onto ships cannot.
It's an entirely different strategy. Bombs on the board change the board's terrain, bombs dropped directly on ships are meant to do damage.
2 minutes ago, haslo said:It's an entirely different strategy. Bombs on the board change the board's terrain, bombs dropped directly on ships are meant to do damage.
I don't disagree. But they change the terrain for both players, in a way which except for the opening round, is then known completely in advance for both.
With the excpetion of a couple of dumbass fortress builds I've yet to work out fully, I'd expect Minefield Mapper to be a storm in a teacup. Like Tractor Beams, like Kylo crew, like Boba crew, like several other BIG DEAL upgrades from prior waves, it seems HUGE, but I'd expect that its impact will be very limited in practice.
Minefield Mapper isn't even going to be a storm in a teacup. It's a fart in the ocean.
Has ANYBODY reputable said anything positive about it?
14 minutes ago, Koing907 said:I got my Wave XI yesterday, and flew 3 Scum Skuurg with Minefield Mapper. Deploying all my mines at the deployment phase worked superbly. But it's not a tactic I can plan on if it's going to be FAQed. (Or, at least, it's a tactic that will need to be tweaked)
So yeah, put me down for asking for a FAQ as well.
How did you do that given that the Havoc title, which grants the System slot, is unique? Only one Scurrg at a time can have Minefield Mapper.
9 minutes ago, EdgeOfDreams said:How did you do that given that the Havoc title, which grants the System slot, is unique? Only one Scurrg at a time can have Minefield Mapper.
My bad, not all of them had the minefield mapper upgrade. Just the Havok.
I'm thinking FFG is being nice. They're gonna give us a weekend of fun before they FAQ the heck out of the new Empire ship.
1 minute ago, Fuzzywookie said:I'm thinking FFG is being nice. They're gonna give us a weekend of fun before they FAQ the heck out of the new Empire ship.
TLT is now "Scum and Rebel Only" price reduced by one point.
My two absurd FAQ predictions:
3 minutes ago, EdgeOfDreams said:My two absurd FAQ predictions:
- Something will get nerfed that will cause the forums to say, "Wait, what? Nobody asked for that to be nerfed. It was fine."
- Something will get unexpectedly buffed, followed by absurd forum outrage about how FFG loves Faction A and hates Factions B and C and this proves it.
Attani Mindlink has points reduction, lol
They have said that people have come to realize bombs are awesome...I never have and many on the forums don't like them but some people freaking love them. I bet they make them better in some way like explode at range 2 efficiency.
1 minute ago, smccaughan said:Attani Mindlink has points reduction, lol
More likely a ton of crap from the scum faction is about to be heavily nerfed and the forums will explode in outrage. I predict, Attani, K4, Jumpmasters (Dengar especially), and Asaj and or latz.
I also predict Biggs, Miranda, TLT, and Jess get nerfed a bit
and empire gets a buff
4 minutes ago, Sir13scott said:More likely a ton of crap from the scum faction is about to be heavily nerfed and the forums will explode in outrage. I predict, Attani, K4, Jumpmasters (Dengar especially), and Asaj and or latz.
I also predict Biggs, Miranda, TLT, and Jess get nerfed a bit
and empire gets a buff
Oh I agree, I was being a member of the smart family.......... fill in the blank as to which member.