1 hour ago, Marinealver said:

X-wing is not a card game

also with more pilot and upgrades come more combinations, and more combinations means more builds that become broken Atanni mindlink wasn't anything at wave 8. Accuracy corrector were not an issue in wave 6. Bombs been around since wave 2 and only now are there cries to nerf them.

Card packs are not the X-wing business model. If you want card packs, go to destiny.

Card packs are exactly what FFG sells when it re-releases ships in "Aces" or "Heroes" boxes. And you're assuming a cardpack should include a plethora of ships or upgrades. A pack could simply include updated/errated cards reflecting the FAQ as opposed to carrying around a tome of printed PDFs and forum answers with a couple new cards sprinkled in.

4 minutes ago, Stilgod said:

Card packs are exactly what FFG sells when it re-releases ships in "Aces" or "Heroes" boxes. And you're assuming a cardpack should include a plethora of ships or upgrades. A pack could simply include updated/errated cards reflecting the FAQ as opposed to carrying around a tome of printed PDFs and forum answers with a couple new cards sprinkled in.

The heroes packs come with the models. You don't even need the older expansions.

Again business model is a miniatures game but you run on the assumption that everyone plays like you and collects like you and will just get everything like you. The erratas are another topic and you still have the problem of the old cards unless you are going to do a cycle but the business model isn't set up that way.

So many people on these forums and Reddit says they have the solutions to fix their game, well news it is not your game and no, you don't know how to fix it because bright ideas rarely work in the real world. Just another poorly thought out idea and the person takes it way too personal when the flaws and holes are pointed out.

Don't you ever house rule stuff Marinealver? For me that's always been an indicator of someting being "my game". Fair use ftw!

If you play a game and you love it, it is your game. That was the 70s and 80s way of thinking. Usually the Designer wrote a preface that very often ended with this phrase. From Avalon Hill's games to RPGs.

This is your game now.

It is not about laws or licenses or legal stuff. You put your hands on a game. Study the rules. Play it. Enjoy. And it is yours. Your to do or unfo. To add angle of deflection firing and altitudes and power management... Or to pew pew with your small pretty ships against a Lego monster.

Of course it id not your game to make decisions based on profit. But 100% sure a group of dedicated and experienced players can fix a game to better fit their own needs. And that hours invested upgrading a game are a good inversion. The cost...fragmentation. 10 game communities in 10 States... Each one playing their own game. So better LGS. play "by the book"

I am out of the MMORG way of thinking. "You must play the game as it is. If the Beastmaster is a weak character class wait. Someday a new patch will change it from A to Z and it will be good. New DLC! Starting 00:00 Zulu your Plasma Launcher will be downgraded to 42% damage capacity.

No my way. When I put my hands and brain on a game it is mine to do and undo. In a near future we will not be able to modify our cars because this could overide sensors and autopilot etc.

Nuts. My game my rules. I can not do profit with it. If I go Tournament I must play by the book. But in my house we play our games as we want. Turret R3 green bonus. FD Torpedoes. More complex Supply rules while playing WitP. Or ASL Italian line troops Broken Morale 6 and not 5.

Adapt and Improve

7 hours ago, sozin said:

Don't you ever house rule stuff Marinealver? For me that's always been an indicator of someting being "my game". Fair use ftw!

Dam-right mah Star BrahHHH. I know and love my some STAR WARS but these kids can make what evah as long as the top end plastic models keep coming out. Once the ships are in my Battle Parlor I will decide who does what and and so forth. These twenty and thirty year olds can't tell me nothing that I have not known for years or decades already; when it comes to tabletop wargames... I KNOW WHAT TO DO... just you keep a-make'in more of them wonderful ships kiddies!

Jajaja. I like your sense of humor. I can imagine myself saying these words with a lit cigar, a glass of Scotch, polished boots and Gung Ho actitude.

Give more ships, dammit!. And fast!

Jajaja. Well said Joe. I will restrict my forum activity to Positive Energy threads. And Team Double Epic.

Fun and Cool flights, X Wingers.

14 minutes ago, Hexdot said:

Jajaja. I like your sense of humor. I can imagine myself saying these words with a lit cigar, a glass of Scotch, polished boots and Gung Ho actitude.

Give more ships, dammit!. And fast!

Jajaja. Well said Joe. I will restrict my forum activity to Positive Energy threads. And Team Double Epic.

Fun and Cool flights, X Wingers.

13 hours ago, Marinealver said:

The heroes packs come with the models. You don't even need the older expansions.

Again business model is a miniatures game but you run on the assumption that everyone plays like you and collects like you and will just get everything like you. The erratas are another topic and you still have the problem of the old cards unless you are going to do a cycle but the business model isn't set up that way.

So many people on these forums and Reddit says they have the solutions to fix their game, well news it is not your game and no, you don't know how to fix it because bright ideas rarely work in the real world. Just another poorly thought out idea and the person takes it way too personal when the flaws and holes are pointed out.

you might be taking criticism of FFG too personally dude

21 hours ago, Vontoothskie said:

you might be taking criticism of FFG too personally dude

criticism, of FFG not making card only expansions for X-wing? I think you have jumped into something you are not aware of.

36 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

criticism, of FFG not making card only expansions for X-wing? I think you have jumped into something you are not aware of.

what are you even talking abot here? what am I not aware of? you were getting weirdly personal in your attacks on people who critique FFGs development strategy and getting creepily defensive of a corporation. they sell us cool game components, but they arent your friends. if the components they sell fail to meet reasonable expectations, its okay for us as customers to complain and request a solution. FFG isnt legally obligated to respond, but if they choose not respond, fix issues, or address us as patrons with an actual Frequently Asked Questions page(not errata they call faq), then they are abandoning their user base. I, like many of us, have spent over a 1,000 dollars on this game. I'd like to see my investment not become unplayable every other wave because power creep is insane

Look. I'm all for buying new stuff. Rogue one and other expansions. All I'm asking is that they put in one or two cards that help the older ships too. Not a brand new aces pack. (they save on not making reprints with new paint jobs) That way they sell more of the new stuff and fix the old stuff. It's not that hard of a business model to use and it will sell more new stuff too. It's a win/win/win.

They fix old stuff, they sell more, players are happy with old and new stuff and play more games.

Simple

On 13.8.2017 at 4:13 AM, Marinealver said:

The heroes packs come with the models. You don't even need the older expansions.

Again business model is a miniatures game but you run on the assumption that everyone plays like you and collects like you and will just get everything like you. The erratas are another topic and you still have the problem of the old cards unless you are going to do a cycle but the business model isn't set up that way.

What would be the downside of selling faq-ed cards? Some people prefer to have the correct text on the card, so why not supply that demand?

4 hours ago, Vontoothskie said:

what are you even talking abot here? what am I not aware of? you were getting weirdly personal in your attacks on people who critique FFGs development strategy and getting creepily defensive of a corporation. they sell us cool game components, but they arent your friends. if the components they sell fail to meet reasonable expectations, its okay for us as customers to complain and request a solution. FFG isnt legally obligated to respond, but if they choose not respond, fix issues, or address us as patrons with an actual Frequently Asked Questions page(not errata they call faq), then they are abandoning their user base. I, like many of us, have spent over a 1,000 dollars on this game. I'd like to see my investment not become unplayable every other wave because power creep is insane

How does FAQ errata involve card only expansions?

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

What would be the downside of selling faq-ed cards? Some people prefer to have the correct text on the card, so why not supply that demand?

Well the fact that they would be selling them, IMHO that just sound evil as in microtransactions in a full retail price game that is single player only type evil. Why won't they just start changing every card then, make it so you would have to buy the pack to keep playing the older ships and I'm talking legally play them not effectively playing them. (effectively is an option in tournaments legal is not)?

I agree I would like to have the text on the card match the text in the rules instead. They could have new cards available as prize support or something. Still erratas I think already have introduced a new problem that players have found a work around.

Not that I am against some individual components being sold separately. I have suggested many times that the TFA damage deck should be available so players have an option other than buying a TFA core set. I will admit the business model has flaws, it is vulnerable to power creep through accretion. The requirement of print material at tournaments makes updates difficult if not clunky. There indeed needs to be some changes but some of these proposals (to include the leak) are more prone to futures mistakes similar if not worse to the ones we are currently dealing with.

39 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Well the fact that they would be selling them, IMHO that just sound evil as in microtransactions in a full retail price game that is single player only type evil. Why won't they just start changing every card then, make it so you would have to buy the pack to keep playing the older ships and I'm talking legally play them not effectively playing them. (effectively is an option in tournaments legal is not)?

I might be naive, but I'm talking about non-mandatory card packs.

The downsides to mandatory ones are very obvious. But FFG could keep the original ones as legal cards and simply offer reprints for those who want them. Add some alt art and I'm sure people would buy it.

I can't see downsides there, and neither do you, apparently

Just now, GreenDragoon said:

I might be naive, but I'm talking about non-mandatory card packs.

The downsides to mandatory ones are very obvious. But FFG could keep the original ones as legal cards and simply offer reprints for those who want them. Add some alt art and I'm sure people would buy it.

I can't see downsides there, and neither do you, apparently

Well the alt art cards are technically non-mandatory. Keeping the original ones as legal does have its downsides. People will chose the unnerfed one. Just like with damage decks people chose the one that face up effects will effect them the least (TIE Swarm I'll use the old one, Super Dash I'll take the new one).

I can tell you lack a degree of skepticism.

2 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Well the alt art cards are technically non-mandatory. Keeping the original ones as legal does have its downsides. People will chose the unnerfed one. Just like with damage decks people chose the one that face up effects will effect them the least (TIE Swarm I'll use the old one, Super Dash I'll take the new one).

I can tell you lack a degree of skepticism.

Keeping the old ones as legal cards, but of course it goes without saying that the FAQ applies to all, no matter which piece of paper is chosen to represent the piece of rules a pilot or upgrade consists of.

As a side note - maybe look up the principle of charity. Very useful in written exchanges to assume the best, not worst, interpretation is correct

On 8/12/2017 at 8:33 AM, Hawkstrike said:

I'd be shocked if a Rogue One-based box with some bumps to X and Y wings isn't in the offing near term. There's been enough development time since the Rogue One release to get one out. So many pilots ...

Especially since the U-Wing has proven to be under preforming. Not sure which models would be in the pack, but cards for U, Y, and X (like Most Wanted) would be a nice expansion.

I still need a certain robot who can fly like a leaf on the wind, dang it.

On 8/12/2017 at 3:55 AM, Giledhil said:

Can't say I'm disappointed since this interview just confirmed what I tought (and feared) about the way this game is now handled by ffg.

Now is the time for a community-led xwing 2.0!

I envision something a bit more like an RPG.

A PDF with all the stats for pilots, upgrades, etc. A blank "character sheet" for building a squad.

Everything in one place. All updated to sync with latest FAQ (with balanced poibts costs, etc). Contrived, artificial "rarity" of upgrade cards, etc, tossed out the window. Massive and ungainly piles of cardboard beside the gaming surface cleared away.

Upgrades are basically like Feats from 3.0+ D&D. They have pre-requisites and effects. No need for them to actially be printed out on physical cards.

FFG is very good at making *stuff*. Fiddly bits, plastic pieces, piles of cardboard. They also have a vested financial interest in piling more on the heap. Their job is not to create a fun, well-balanced game. Their job is to sell stuff. Power creep, rules craziness, etc are natural consequences. When the pile gets too high, their job is to make a new version, and sell us the same things all over again.

It would never be in FFG's interest to make a 2.0 version that can make use of the 1.0 pieces.*

Its all understandable. That's how businesses work. There's nothing wrong with it, per se.

I think a community version would be great. Re-balanced in an attempt to account for the large range of models now out, and not haphazardly constructed on-the-fly with selling the next hot thing as the overriding #1 goal.

*It will be interesting as to how FFG treats this game in the future. If its like a board game or a living card game, 1.0 pieces and 2.0 pieces would likely be incompatible. If they see this as a miniatures game, like 40k, they might have new rules for old pieces. Not sure that could be pulled off with a licensed IP situation.

Because they already have so much invested in so many ship molds, etc, they might elect to not change any "hardware", and simply swap out all the cardboard.

Perhaps this is just a wild, one-time ride with no plans to ever re-visit anything old.

Fascinating to think about.

On 8/14/2017 at 2:03 PM, Marinealver said:

How does FAQ errata involve card only expansions?

F.A.Q. means frequently asked questions, but FFG absurdly call their Errata and rules changes an F.A.Q. despite it not being one.

in context of my comment i thought it was clear I meant FFG could use errata to update squad point values. it was one of 3 obvious balancing strategies I was talking about

1 hour ago, Vontoothskie said:

F.A.Q. means frequently asked questions, but FFG absurdly call their Errata and rules changes an F.A.Q. despite it not being one.

in context of my comment i thought it was clear I meant FFG could use errata to update squad point values. it was one of 3 obvious balancing strategies I was talking about

Obvious balancing strategy? More like obviously broken. You do know that it is a physical game where the set up is with cards that are printed. Unless you want them to print out new cards and then ban old cards that is what you are proposing which opens up a whole new can of worms. Unless FFG wants to go to a new book/list system in which pilot and upgrade cards are no longer required for tournaments then it could work.

You say I don't criticize FFG? I do it all the time, I'm a skeptic after all and there are many thing that I find hurting us in the long run in terms of format structure and game mechanics. But all you do is look at a spreadsheet someone else made and complain about the top if it is not your favorite ship. I don't trust FFG to make good decisions on balancing, but I do trust FFG more than I trust you to make those decisions.

they can update a whole slew of ships in a campaign expansion like they did with armada. it's not a card pack, it's a campaign box that happens to have a bunch of cards in it.

I consider a ship's pilot cards to be more or less a shotgun blast. if they are lucky a few hit the target. unlucky and they all miss and the ship is worthless or they all hit way too hard and the ship needs a nerf. either way the models are the important part. so long as they keep those roughly playable they will keep me purchasing.

Also the power creep in upgrade cards is interesting. as the game grows the number of cards in the game gets too large. By releasing a few cards that are beyond the old power curve they have drastically cut the viable card pool. now we don't need to worry so much about the old cards.

45 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Obvious balancing strategy? More like obviously broken. You do know that it is a physical game where the set up is with cards that are printed. Unless you want them to print out new cards and then ban old cards that is what you are proposing which opens up a whole new can of worms. Unless FFG wants to go to a new book/list system in which pilot and upgrade cards are no longer required for tournaments then it could work.

You say I don't criticize FFG? I do it all the time, I'm a skeptic after all and there are many thing that I find hurting us in the long run in terms of format structure and game mechanics. But all you do is look at a spreadsheet someone else made and complain about the top if it is not your favorite ship. I don't trust FFG to make good decisions on balancing, but I do trust FFG more than I trust you to make those decisions.

i dont look at spreadsheets buddy. i think majorjuggler and mathwing have a mentality that doesnt belong in games people play for fun. anyway youre making some really strange assumptions about what I and others think. Im saying that "patching" the games balance with power creep isnt working, and I want a fix. thats it

1 hour ago, Vontoothskie said:

i dont look at spreadsheets buddy. i think majorjuggler and mathwing have a mentality that doesnt belong in games people play for fun. anyway youre making some really strange assumptions about what I and others think. Im saying that "patching" the games balance with power creep isnt working, and I want a fix. thats it

We all want a fix, your proposal isn't that good. If it was so obvious it would have been done by now, but as I said before it brings other problems that I am sure FFG is trying to avoid.

4 hours ago, Vontoothskie said:

i think majorjuggler and mathwing have a mentality that doesnt belong in games people play for fun.

The best and most fun games are supported by math that is downright science. It can really help to think a game through to the deepest level. I'll take that mentality any day, because it indicates a deep love of gaming.