I am OK except for the basic tie fighter, of which I have more than 4.. as should every imperial player.

I thought I had a lot of ships until the conversion kits contents came out, and I realized they cover all my ships with a good number of spares leftover - almost half the dials... Given the cost of my collection, I feel for those of you that have CK troubles.

Am I crazy or are people not completing the form correctly? 251 responses in total but not all the ship entries have the same number of responses nor is there any single part where all 251 people completed a response.

3 hours ago, redxavier said:

Interesting results so far. I suspect that most people put 2 Falcons down not realizing that the ST version will likely be covered by the Resistance conversion kit coming in Wave 2. I just doubt that so many have 2 OT Falcons.

There's a trend towards an oversupply of the large ships. I think this ties into the main complaint about the CKs, giving you too much stuff that you don't need, which is a problem that gets exponentially worse with a second (often needed) purchase.

Does it matter? I have the chassis twice, it would be cool to be able to use two of those with rebels and resistance alike.

13 hours ago, VanderLegion said:

Cause that's all you can get in 2 conversion kits!!!

Sounds like an odd reason for that limitation. Especially when your goal is to see how good the conversion kit fits the actual collection.

Speaking of actual collection. A checkbox for mark your collection as shared would have been interesting as well. I don't think shared connection are that common in the united states, but we Euro's seem to embrace our social democratic heritage and build shared collection with our children/significant others / friends. ?

I answered it all based on what I own, because I never bought a ridiculous number of any ships really. Except for 3 Auzituck. And I’m trading away an Auzi to a friend so I’ll have exactly the 2 I can convert in one pack for another ship I’ll haplily port over in my conversion boxes.

1 hour ago, SEApocalypse said:

Sounds like an odd reason for that limitation.

Well, yeah, but he don't wanna hear it. (I personally think he's putting artificial constraints on because he thinks it will skew the data closer to what he wants to believe. And it will, but not by an amount that will hide how unbalanced the CKs are.)

5 hours ago, redxavier said:

Interesting results so far. I suspect that most people put 2 Falcons down not realizing that the ST version will likely be covered by the Resistance conversion kit coming in Wave 2. I just doubt that so many have 2 OT Falcons.

There's a trend towards an oversupply of the large ships. I think this ties into the main complaint about the CKs, giving you too much stuff that you don't need, which is a problem that gets exponentially worse with a second (often needed) purchase.

The Heroes falcon can be used for rebel just fine. Maybe people want to be able to fly double falcon.

2 hours ago, redxavier said:

Am I crazy or are people not completing the form correctly? 251 responses in total but not all the ship entries have the same number of responses nor is there any single part where all 251 people completed a response.

I didn't require responses on the ships, so if no answer is given for a ship it's treated as a 0.

1 hour ago, SEApocalypse said:

Sounds like an odd reason for that limitation. Especially when your goal is to see how good the conversion kit fits the actual collection.

Speaking of actual collection. A checkbox for mark your collection as shared would have been interesting as well. I don't think shared connection are that common in the united states, but we Euro's seem to embrace our social democratic heritage and build shared collection with our children/significant others / friends. ?

My goal is to see how well the conversion kits fit *for standard play*.

29 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

I didn't require responses on the ships, so if no answer is given for a ship it's treated as a 0.

Sorry, can you explain this for me? The results of the A-wing show a spread totalling 277 responses as per the subheading, which includes 22 responses as 0, but there are 291 people who completed the survey. If no answer is treated as 0, wouldn't the missing 14 answers also be added to the 22?

Good point on the second Rebel Falcon. Even if one has the TFA Falcon one could still use it as an OT era one anyway (eg, Han and Lando).

1 minute ago, redxavier said:

Sorry, can you explain this for me? The results of the A-wing show a spread totalling 277 responses as per the subheading, which includes 22 responses as 0, but there are 291 people who completed the survey. If no answer is treated as 0, wouldn't the missing 14 answers also be added to the 22?

When viewing all the charts for the results on the survey, it'll only show the results for the people who actually answered. So right now, only 280 people have responded on how many a-wings they're converting even though theres 295 total responses. When I export it to an excel spreadsheet though and average the responses for all the ships to make a chart showing the averages, the blank responses get treated as 0s.

Have not read whole thread but I did get bored enough to run the following numbers. Link here if you want to see more.

After 291 responses the only ships that will see a global shortage are

• Rebel Y-wings: short -40 (or -1 for every 7 players)
• TIE Defenders: short -56 (or -1 for every 5.2 players)
• B-wings: short -60 (or -1 for every 5 players)
• X-wings: short -254 (or -1 for every 1.15 players)
• TIE Fighters: short -272 (or -1 for dam near every player)

Meanwhile there are 20 different ships that will average more than 1 extra conversion per player. This took maybe 20 minutes to parse from Vanderlegions data. It's not perfect but the fact that FFG did not even attempt is kinda silly.

Disclaimer: I love the conversion kits and am happy to get them but there is both a lot of wasted cardboard in them and a lot of ships that are going to be very expensive to convert for players that choose to do so.

1 hour ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Well, yeah, but he don't wanna hear it. (I personally think he's putting artificial constraints on because he thinks it will skew the data closer to what he wants to believe. And it will, but not by an amount that will hide how unbalanced the CKs are.)

Ding Ding Ding Ding! Although I will say in Vander's defense, as a wise man said earlier in the thread "Never attribute to malice...".

I don't know any other way to put this. I am either converting every ship in my collection or I am converting no ships in my collection to 2.0. I supply all ships and factions for my kitchen table. The CK's are ok value, but, and this is anecdotal, I don't think they match very well with existing collections. Ideally, in the interests of cutting down on waste, I'd like a CK for each faction, but then I'd like reasonably priced 1 off kits for ships to fill in where needed. I would guess the current CK's do not match the ratio of units of each ship sold.

So before somebody decides to chime in "You can't possibly field all your ships!", "You only need 1 faction at a time!", "You should thank your lucky stars FFG is offering a conversion kit", or whatever nonsense the cult has for today's chant my response is this: "I am converting my entire collection or I am not converting anything in my collection."

FFG can make a healthy profit from me (good for them, the new version looks great), or they can make nothing. As the kit is currently constructed (and I'm patiently waiting for more details), I'm not inclined to convert. Better conversion options will certainly help.

26 minutes ago, gamblertuba said:

Have not read whole thread but I did get bored enough to run the following numbers. Link here if you want to see more.

After 291 responses the only ships that will see a global shortage are

• Rebel Y-wings: short -40 (or -1 for every 7 players)
• TIE Defenders: short -56 (or -1 for every 5.2 players)
• B-wings: short -60 (or -1 for every 5 players)
• X-wings: short -254 (or -1 for every 1.15 players)
• TIE Fighters: short -272 (or -1 for dam near every player)

Meanwhile there are 20 different ships that will average more than 1 extra conversion per player. This took maybe 20 minutes to parse from Vanderlegions data. It's not perfect but the fact that FFG did not even attempt is kinda silly.

Disclaimer: I love the conversion kits and am happy to get them but there is both a lot of wasted cardboard in them and a lot of ships that are going to be very expensive to convert for players that choose to do so.

Great first look, gambler. Bear in mind, I think the TIE Fighter number is understated by the arbitrary restrictions. I have 10 for example, I had 8 initially and 2 more came with the Gozanti. For the people around since wave I, this probably isn't uncommon. X-Wings are another prime example, I had 4 and then got a 5th X-Wing with the Transport.

14 minutes ago, EastCoast said:

I am either converting every ship in my collection or I am converting no ships in my collection to 2.0. I supply all ships and factions for my kitchen table. The CK's are ok value, but, and this is anecdotal, I don't think they match very well with existing collections.

Snip

FFG can make a healthy profit from me (good for them, the new version looks great), or they can make nothing. As the kit is currently constructed (and I'm patiently waiting for more details), I'm not inclined to convert. Better conversion options will certainly help.

I also think that we need better conversion options. The big deficits in common, early ship quantities in the kits plus the lack of information about epic play and conversions are hopefully linked!

I haven't actually filled in Vander's spreadsheet because it doesn't match up any of my intentions: I will convert a certain number of my ships because they happen to be in the kits, not because those numbers are what I want to convert.

E.g. I want to convert all 12 of my TIE Interceptors - but not by using a pile of these kits. Instead, I want to use an epic conversion kit. Likewise for my other swarms. Next month, I will be playing in a 160pt tournament. In theory, I could fly 10 of my Z95s plus 2 cartel marauders but I will probably use 6 of my Kihraxzs. Next year, I want to be able to make similar choices.

That's the current averages at the moment (318 responses). As gamblertuba said, Xwings and tie fighters are the biggest outliers from what you get in 1 kit, with b-wings, y-wings and tie defenders a bit high as well

Current response for saws renegades (affects how many x-wings you can fly in a standard game, if not how many old x-wings you can convert)

Also worth noting that the buy-in for recent waves appears to be much-much lower per player than early waves. Probably had a pretty major influence on the decision to go ahead with second edition.

I'm pretty sure the kit design meeting went something like "Ok, We'll do a kit for each faction. We'll do,... ah... two sets for each ship." "Maybe we should add an extra set for a couple ships in each kit""That sounds good. When will the donuts get here?"

edit: I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing. Their goal should be to boot strap 2.0 and they can add more granular options in the future. I think the kits are a pretty good value as they are and the desire or need to convert specific ships will likely change greatly when the new meta emerges.

6 minutes ago, gamblertuba said:

Also worth noting that the buy-in for recent waves appears to be much-much lower per player than early waves. Probably had a pretty major influence on the decision to go ahead with second edition.

Yeah, I'll give FFG the benefit of the doubt and assume there was some planning going on here. I think the abundance of recent ships in the conversion is by design. Basically, it's a nod to stores that have the newer stuff in stock for first edition. FFG is making sure there's plenty of available conversions for those ships so that inventory can still be moved.

My uneducated guess is that the conversion kit looks less like people's collections and more like outstanding stock ratios in stores... which would kind of make sense. Interesting stuff. Even though I don't agree with the entirety of Vander's methodology, I do appreciate the thread.

22 hours ago, Jeff Wilder said:

My concern is that the CKs (Imperial especially) are wildly imbalanced when compared to actual, real-world, collections.

Can you briefly explain where you think the gaps are and what you would see as an improvement (or link me to a place where you have already discussed it)?

At the end of the day, the kits will never serve everyone perfectly. This one kit per faction will serve most of the people. Those of you who will be short more tha 2 or 3 dials are the exception to people who play this game. I personally am getting everything I need from one scum kit and one rebel kit and so are many others locally.

1 hour ago, McTavish said:

I'm pretty sure the kit design meeting went something like "Ok, We'll do a kit for each faction. We'll do,... ah... two sets for each ship." "Maybe we should add an extra set for a couple ships in each kit""That sounds good. When will the donuts get here?"

It's not even that. It's literally "roughly half of a full list of each ship (rounded up), minimum of 2". If you can run 2-4 of a ship, you get 2. 5-6 of a ship you get 3. 8 of a ship you get 4. Large ships all get 2 (none of them can run 5 to need a third). Pretty sure the developers said as much in one of the interviews (team covenant maybe?) or on stream. Watched too much video, don't remember where it was now.

I posted another survey for people that wrene't happy with the "standard play" limitations on this one: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd4KAk6mzszPneDRR2uj0k4mvHmxZbcF_kuF8rH6T6S5KMxjA/viewform?usp=sf_link

Thanks for the workings gamblertuba (though I assume this does not include non-responders as 0?). It looks like the highest 'even' ratings (where they're providing what's needed) are 50% (Falcon) for the Rebels, 45% (TIE Interceptors) for the Imperials, and 44% (IG88) for scum. The lowest overall even score is the Quadjumpers (2%). The ranges across over/even/under really tell the whole story though. A heck of a lot of wasted extras that are very easily preventable (this is my main issue with the CKs).

There's "never serve everyone perfectly" and this. But the notion that this kit is designed to convert a collection (even the majority of collections) is clearly false. It's designed to convert the entire 1.0 catalogue to half point lists, that's it.

Is it unreasonable to believe that most of all xwing players only own 1 or 2 of each ship?

3 minutes ago, Henshini said:

Is it unreasonable to believe that most of all xwing players only own 1 or 2 of each ship?

Yes. On average based on the data (imperfect as it may be) at least 10 ships have more than 2 in player's collections.

3 minutes ago, EastCoast said:

Yes. On average based on the data (imperfect as it may be) at least 10 ships have more than 2 in player's collections.

To be fair, 5 of those 10 also include more than 2 conversions. And 4 of the remaining aren't over 2 average by much