Clearly not something that will happen until rotation but have they done an about face and decided to slow the game down? The indirect damage rather than focused damage and more shields at least with Obi Wan in the core set? Clearly the indirect damage won't be a huge hit with the meta but will this be more the norm post rotation? It seems the mechanic is meant to do just that, slow the game down. I don't think it is a bad thing but won't be a thing until rotation hits. Until then I am not sure how much excitement there will be for the core set.

Also, how many start sets do we really need? Pretty sure will have to buy a second copy of each at $15 for two cards we what to have for a full play set again.

Looks like an identical situation to Awakenings. Two-of both... $$$

I'd agree that indirect damage doesn't do much to change the game, unless there are some fairly drastic changes. If it's big enough damage it'll just compound the problem, otherwise people will just play the old stuff. Though it may have a niche as a damage type that is harder to interact with, in the sense that there's a lot of cards that specify ranged/melee damage or both that won't hit indirect damage.

As for the starters, I'm hopeful that they've learned their lesson and at least the starter dice are all fixed rarity. Based on Han/the Stormtrooper being fixed and the 2 player set, that looks like a reasonable assumption. If that's the case it's not too bad.

6 hours ago, Mep said:

Clearly not something that will happen until rotation but have they done an about face and decided to slow the game down? The indirect damage rather than focused damage and more shields at least with Obi Wan in the core set? Clearly the indirect damage won't be a huge hit with the meta but will this be more the norm post rotation? It seems the mechanic is meant to do just that, slow the game down. I don't think it is a bad thing but won't be a thing until rotation hits. Until then I am not sure how much excitement there will be for the core set.

Also, how many start sets do we really need? Pretty sure will have to buy a second copy of each at $15 for two cards we what to have for a full play set again.

Legacies is the early/first "Changing of the guard set" I feel. Yes Lukas JUST had his last week at FFG but Id bet that he was already Hired by WOTC at least 6-8 months ago. That would be about the time when Legacies was finishing design and starting to head to the printer. My phrasing is bad but what I mean is that Legacies seems to have a slower pace design to it, which is contradictory to what Lukas wanted. Id bet youll see more cards in Legacies and its preceeding set that are more in line with this slower pace.

Destiny should be a fast paced game, but when some match ups can be done in less than 15 minutes, about 30% of the time for a round, thats a little TOO fast. if your targeting 35 minute "Long" games then your average game should be the 20-25 minute mark. We had that time with just Awakenings. But when we got things like Vibro Knife and Force Speed and Fast Hands, along with resolve abilities like Maz, you saw a drastic 10 minute drop in game times. Also notice powerful abilities, Id say Wedges ability is as good as FNs, have been pulled back to be a once per turn action.

Also what sped up the game was "Dice fixing", aka being able to guarantee certain outcomes as opposed to have to rely on rolls. With Legacies it seems they are wanting to put emphasis back on the Random aspect of the game a bit more.

@GamerGuy1984 Unless there was some contract that had to be worked through, one company poaching an employee from another usually doesn't take so long. In fact, it is usually an ugly affair so a "traitor" still at the company for 6 months is very awkward.

Lukas may want a faster paced game but they do listen to feedback. My guess the changes were made when the uproar to such fasted paced games occurred when SoR came out and the turn 1 kills offered a NPE. Either way, I think we will see a slower game post rotation. Those force speeds may become the Time Walk of Destiny.

5 minutes ago, Mep said:

@GamerGuy1984 Unless there was some contract that had to be worked through, one company poaching an employee from another usually doesn't take so long. In fact, it is usually an ugly affair so a "traitor" still at the company for 6 months is very awkward.

Lukas may want a faster paced game but they do listen to feedback. My guess the changes were made when the uproar to such fasted paced games occurred when SoR came out and the turn 1 kills offered a NPE. Either way, I think we will see a slower game post rotation. Those force speeds may become the Time Walk of Destiny.

Well I didnt mean hired as in he was already signed on, more meant WOTC probably has had their eye on Lukas a while so likely at least been talking to him about hiring him for that period of time.

8 minutes ago, Mep said:

@GamerGuy1984 Unless there was some contract that had to be worked through, one company poaching an employee from another usually doesn't take so long. In fact, it is usually an ugly affair so a "traitor" still at the company for 6 months is very awkward.

Lukas may want a faster paced game but they do listen to feedback. My guess the changes were made when the uproar to such fasted paced games occurred when SoR came out and the turn 1 kills offered a NPE. Either way, I think we will see a slower game post rotation. Those force speeds may become the Time Walk of Destiny.

Also Id agree the game will slow down a lot more post Rotation, but I do think we will see some slow down before then. If the newer characters are designed this way then the only "speedy" characters will be the older designed ones. And unless the person is fine with playing Poe/Maz or Rainbow 9s for the next 2-3 years they will move to newer characters which will slow the game a bit. Youll still see people playing speed decks but with the growing pool of interesting characters will hopefully encourage people out of those decks.

indirect damage as of right now seems kinda like a joke to me.

Deals high damage, but is unfocused. Really? From what they've spoiled so far its like 2 more damage on average than a legit heavy hitting deck, but it hits 2-3 characters instead of all on one.
About all i can think of that would make it useful is it allows access to those cards that require multiple foes to be hurt to either work at all or get any real benefit out of. A true heavy hitting deck would kill a character in 1-3 rounds, indirect damage would take 4-6 depending on who were talking about. While it probably leaves everyone at 1hp before someone dies, i'd rather insta-gib someone to remove the dice now than wittle everyone down slowly for a clean sweep.

It also makes the Medical Center a bit more viable since you will have multiple hurt heroes more often. Though there is the issue of passing the battlefield off to do that still.

The new bomber support could have been ridiculous except it goes away after 3 uses. For that cost, eh.... especially since 3 indirect damage is meh on its own.

On 10/10/2017 at 10:35 AM, Vineheart01 said:

indirect damage as of right now seems kinda like a joke to me.

Deals high damage, but is unfocused. Really? From what they've spoiled so far its like 2 more damage on average than a legit heavy hitting deck, but it hits 2-3 characters instead of all on one.
About all i can think of that would make it useful is it allows access to those cards that require multiple foes to be hurt to either work at all or get any real benefit out of. A true heavy hitting deck would kill a character in 1-3 rounds, indirect damage would take 4-6 depending on who were talking about. While it probably leaves everyone at 1hp before someone dies, i'd rather insta-gib someone to remove the dice now than wittle everyone down slowly for a clean sweep.

It also makes the Medical Center a bit more viable since you will have multiple hurt heroes more often. Though there is the issue of passing the battlefield off to do that still.

The new bomber support could have been ridiculous except it goes away after 3 uses. For that cost, eh.... especially since 3 indirect damage is meh on its own.

Indirect is Meh on its own, but when you look at the synergies that is where it becomes a lot better. Bomber plus Wedge equals a possible 9 or even 12 indirect damage, pair him with Hera to possibly get the bomber out for free AND not have to worry about it dying. Aphra's ability plus BT-1 means your always going to have access to six cards every turn. Point being the potential of Indirect damage isnt Directly apparent like normal damage is.

On 10/10/2017 at 10:35 AM, Vineheart01 said:

indirect damage as of right now seems kinda like a joke to me.

Deals high damage, but is unfocused. Really? From what they've spoiled so far its like 2 more damage on average than a legit heavy hitting deck, but it hits 2-3 characters instead of all on one.
About all i can think of that would make it useful is it allows access to those cards that require multiple foes to be hurt to either work at all or get any real benefit out of. A true heavy hitting deck would kill a character in 1-3 rounds, indirect damage would take 4-6 depending on who were talking about. While it probably leaves everyone at 1hp before someone dies, i'd rather insta-gib someone to remove the dice now than wittle everyone down slowly for a clean sweep.

It also makes the Medical Center a bit more viable since you will have multiple hurt heroes more often. Though there is the issue of passing the battlefield off to do that still.

The new bomber support could have been ridiculous except it goes away after 3 uses. For that cost, eh.... especially since 3 indirect damage is meh on its own.

don't forget C-3PO! on average the Indirect values are going to be higher so C-3PO is going to only get better. Then there's a host of other things that purely rely on values: Unkar, Now You Will Die, Friends in High Places, Destiny, Planned Explosion, Determination, Psychometry, As You Command, Anarchy(!!), Defiance, Fierce Resolve, Boba Fett, and that's only including offensive cards. And who knows what cards we'll get in legacies that interact directly with Indirect damage, I'm sure there will be at least something that focuses an indirect face onto a single target.

Speaking 3po, he doesnt force you to keep to the icons on that particular die right? I used to think that but i recently looked at his card again and realized it just says "as if it were showing a different icon" - meaning you could resolve a die as any icon, even if that die normally doesnt have that icon.

That would indeed be powerful. Imagine early on a Hera-based deck with the bomber rolls the 6 indirect damage die. Use 3po to resolve it as resources and get 6 resources for the cost of 1. Probably only need to do that once to get the deck kickstarted with sweet upgrades.
Or for that matter, disrupt to royally shaft enemy resources

When are we likely to see the first rotation and what would drop out? Just awakenings and the initial starter sets? Or would they treat the first 3 sets as a black.

Since it is from set 4 that we are getting new mechanics and dice sides.

2 hours ago, Alphastealer said:

When are we likely to see the first rotation and what would drop out? Just awakenings and the initial starter sets? Or would they treat the first 3 sets as a black.

Since it is from set 4 that we are getting new mechanics and dice sides.

Everyone is pretty much betting that the first rotation wont be until 2018 at the earliest, 2019 possible, and no later than 2020 but Id bet on 2018. Also Id bet they will do blocks similiar to MTG so Awakenings Block would be Awakenings through Empire at War, including the 2P Starter, and they will likely rotate a block out at a time.

3 hours ago, GamerGuy1984 said:

Everyone is pretty much betting that the first rotation wont be until 2018 at the earliest, 2019 possible, and no later than 2020 but Id bet on 2018. Also Id bet they will do blocks similiar to MTG so Awakenings Block would be Awakenings through Empire at War, including the 2P Starter, and they will likely rotate a block out at a time.

I wouldn't use MtG as a measuring stick for FFG. FFG is probably not happy with Wizards right now. The best guesses will be based on what FFG did with Netrunner, which was the first two cycles at once.

1 hour ago, Mep said:

I wouldn't use MtG as a measuring stick for FFG. FFG is probably not happy with Wizards right now. The best guesses will be based on what FFG did with Netrunner, which was the first two cycles at once.

Why arnt they happy with Wizards? Also was just using MTG as an example.

4 hours ago, Mep said:

I wouldn't use MtG as a measuring stick for FFG. FFG is probably not happy with Wizards right now.

So... What? You think they'll find the optimal rotation pattern, decide it's too similar to Magic, and change it just because they're annoyed that WOTC hired Lukas away from them?

2 hours ago, Buhallin said:

So... What? You think they'll find the optimal rotation pattern, decide it's too similar to Magic, and change it just because they're annoyed that WOTC hired Lukas away from them?

Have they ever done anything WotC does? Like maybe support their games with weekly prize support instead of quarterly?

Also, are we sure WotC is optimal with their rotation? Just because MtG does something doesn't mean it is optimal. I am not sure we will ever know what optimal is. Best guess is what they have done in the past, which isn't to say they won't change their behavior.

1 hour ago, Mep said:

Have they ever done anything WotC does?

Yep, Netrunner!!

4 hours ago, Amanal said:

Yep, Netrunner!!

Yeah, yeah, you got me on that one.

On 10/13/2017 at 6:02 PM, Mep said:

Have they ever done anything WotC does? Like maybe support their games with weekly prize support instead of quarterly?

Also, are we sure WotC is optimal with their rotation? Just because MtG does something doesn't mean it is optimal. I am not sure we will ever know what optimal is. Best guess is what they have done in the past, which isn't to say they won't change their behavior.

You said "FFG is probably not happy with Wizards right now", like it was somehow relevant to whether or not we should expect MtG to be a reasonable predictor. That seemed pretty nonsensical, so I was just trying to figure it out.

@Buhallin Okay, the game designers go the the execs and say hey, what we want to do for rotation is exactly what WotC does for rotation. Those execs just got poached by WotC. The last thing they want to hear is their other employees looking at WotC. The conversation after that point really isn't going to have much to do with games or design.

FYI https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Fantasy-Flight-Games-Reviews-E107648.htm

Indirect Damage is nice, it doesn't get affected by many events that remove Melee or Ranged Damage only. Also, you can't allocate it all to a character that would die with excess damage being ignored.

I would add too, that it creates an interesting dynamic in the play or each round as combined with other forms of damage it needs some thought as to the timing of its use.

3 hours ago, Mep said:

@Buhallin Okay, the game designers go the the execs and say hey, what we want to do for rotation is exactly what WotC does for rotation. Those execs just got poached by WotC. The last thing they want to hear is their other employees looking at WotC. The conversation after that point really isn't going to have much to do with games or design.

FYI https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Fantasy-Flight-Games-Reviews-E107648.htm

I dunno. Maybe I'm too accustomed to working in a highly competitive environment like Silicon Valley where talent is very mobile, but I have a hard time seeing Peterson flying into a blind, self-destructive rage over one employee, even one who'd been there a while like Lukas. And intentionally avoiding what you think is a good system because it's too close to WOTC just sounds mental.

I don't like FFG's priorities, but they're not total morons. It's a very corporate culture, and IMHO they've shown themselves to be cutthroat enough that they're not going to make bad decisions over the departure of one employee.