On 9/16/2018 at 6:04 AM, Boris_the_Dwarf said:

Yeah that’s why. ?

Or, maybe, it’s about the fact that in order to continue playing in sanctioned events, you have to trade a significant amount of cash for cardboard. One of the greatest strengths of x-wing was that for about $100, anybody could play. After that, $10-15 for a small ship and the occasional $30-50 for a large ship every few months kept you going. Some of us bought more, but it wasn’t a requirement.

Those days are over. To have full range of playing all the ships you own immediately, you need to spend somewhere in the vicinity of $300. And that’s just to get started with core sets and conversion kits. That doesn’t include the new $35 falcon or fang fighters (plural) for new cards.

if this was the only game, or even the only Star Wars game out there, it wouldn’t be that big of a deal. But there are so many other games that are as good or better than this one to buy. 2.0 was the right move in concept but the wrong move in execution.

Edit: It’s worth mentioning that with minor tweaks, 1.0 can be played just like 2.0, and without the exorbitant expense of more cardboard. In casual kitchen table games, for example we’ve started allocating Force points to players at the start of the game that can be used for any ship during the game to sway the course of the battle. But once they’re gone, they’re gone.

1: you already traded a significant amount of cash for a wildly smaller amount cardboard. the silencer alone costs as much as a conversion kit.

2: you could just... NOT buy everything immediately. you know, just like how you didn't get your entire 1.0 collection immediately.

23 hours ago, Boris_the_Dwarf said:

If you really believe that, then you haven’t been paying attention to how game companies operate.

I've played plenty of games, and I know it's not crazy to think they release powerful stuff to get you to buy new toys

But unlike 1st Ed, we have an app to cost correct.

Yes, it's pretty scummy business practice, BUT it's one that's widely accepted in online games (in my experience, especially MOBAs) and a practice that doesn't have to have eternal consequences.

Plus, the competitive scene has a format which limits your ship selection to only new (re) releases, meaning new stock won't have to fight conversion kit contents for relevancy

Also!!! New factions!!! We don't need an auto-include Quickdraw anymore now that the FO isn't competing for room in the empire!

PLUS plus, the extent to which **** in 1st edition was broken is near GW levels of bull. You have to really try hard to reach that state of sheer awfulness

Context is very important, gents

3 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

I've played plenty of games, and I know it's not crazy to think they release powerful stuff to get you to buy new toys

But unlike 1st Ed, we have an app to cost correct.

Yes, it's pretty scummy business practice, BUT it's one that's widely accepted in online games (in my experience, especially MOBAs) and a practice that doesn't have to have eternal consequences.

Plus, the competitive scene has a format which limits your ship selection to only new (re) releases, meaning new stock won't have to fight conversion kit contents for relevancy

Also!!! New factions!!! We don't need an auto-include Quickdraw anymore now that the FO isn't competing for room in the empire!

PLUS plus, the extent to which **** in 1st edition was broken is near GW levels of bull. You have to really try hard to reach that state of sheer awfulness

Context is very important, gents

This sums up my objection to the app. It’s the justification for them to be even “scummier,”as you call it with their point costs and upgrade bars when really what they should be doing is holding themselves accountable to their customers. Mistakes is one thing but intentionally overpowering the product just to sell out and then nerf it into worthlessness is about as greedy as it gets.

It’s why so many people left 1.0 in the first place.

7 hours ago, kris40k said:

I haven't played since April/May'ish, but will probably be back. Still come to the forums daily'ish to keep an eye on the state of the game and any cool ideas people are coming up with.

edit: or I might throw up my collection on /r/miniswap if the OP really wants it

Ok, so today was my birthday and my family bought me the 2E Core Set and the Imperial Conversion kit.

So, I guess I'm back in. I mean, it'd be rude not to play, right?

On 9/16/2018 at 8:39 AM, Boris_the_Dwarf said:

I have a large fleet as well, 16 TIEs at last count including Rebels, but I didn’t drop a lump sum on that collection. And what I got with each purchase was a playable component for the game. My purchase of 1 of each product of 2.0 does not even provide a complete game with the ships that were converted.

Or, maybe, it’s about the fact that in order to continue playing in sanctioned events, you have to trade a significant amount of cash for cardboard. One of the greatest strengths of x-wing was that for about $100, anybody could play. After that, $10-15 for a small ship and the occasional $30-50 for a large ship every few months kept you going. Some of us bought more, but it wasn’t a requirement. 

Those days are over. To have full range of playing all the ships you own immediately, you need to spend somewhere in the vicinity of $300. And that’s just to get started with core sets and conversion kits. That doesn’t include the new $35 falcon or fang fighters (plural) for new cards.

I just saw this part and have to say I disagree. The app isn’t the worst thing about 2.0, but it sure as **** isnt the best thing. The most frustrating part of 1.0 over the years was watching the pendulum swing of a new product from OP to boost market sales to total nerf to the point the ship was no longer playable.

16 TIEs?!? So assuming you have been buying more than TIE Fighters, you probably have a collection values at around $2K.. and you are worried about $190 MSRP to convert to 2.0? And how are they a playable component to the game? Last I checked you could only field 8 TIEs at best? Are you buying so 2 players can field max ships? Again I say if you spend that much on a the game, you really can't complain about the cost of the conversion kits.

And your initial argument that you buy ships at $15-$20 and then the occasional $50 purchase. So do 2.0 the same way. Buy a core and 1 conversion kit, then buy an occasional conversion now and then to bring the rest up. I love how price complainers all call it $300 to convert. For a LARGE collection it is MSRP $190 to convert assuming you buy 1 of everything. That is enough to run everything out there besides a few of the swarm lists. Buying Lando's Falcon is not converting BTW.. that is a "playable component" as you call it. And need to buy Fangs?? I'm guessing you have enough Protectorates. If you buy them like TIEs you probably have 6. And don't tell me you are adding in the cost of the F/O and Resistance... they are months away. When the game came out did you say "man, X-wing cost $1500 to start playing!" because you factored in everything you were gonna buy in the future? No, you get what you want at the moment.

And by the way, a player, new or existing can just as easily spend $100 and play. Even in sanctioned events. Tourneys are most likely going to be 2.0 lists only. So players just getting into the game will be on level ground. And if they have legacy events, a new player could still join those with just new ships, while an established player would need to spend $90 MSRP (which if my math is right, is less than $100) to get the core and conversion kit required to play in such an event.

Look, I don't care if people convert to 2.0. But don't claim it is because of price when you have spent hundreds or thousands on the game already. If you just got into the game, own a core and 4 or 5 other ships, yeah, converting isn't worth the cost. But if you have dozens of ships, price is not a factor in this game for you. Your money arguments make no sense. No one is forcing you to upgrade every single ship you own all at once. You can do it just as gradually as you built your collection, especially since there are going to be far less new ships you'll need to buy since the next 10 waves or so will largely be comprised of ships you already own. So you don't need to buy them. And the new stuff that does appear.. well that is "playable components" right?

As for the app.. so you think releasing new cards in kits with ships you already own in new paint jobs was better than being able to modify points? You prefer that they over-correct for stuff like people not using missiles and turrets and we get harpoons and TLTs, which they inevitably over correct for the other way. You call out the pendulum swings of errata and new upgrades, but think points adjustments will be worse? Yeah, 50 Page FAQs and new $40 expansions just to get cards to fix other broken cards is much better than "Hmm.. players don't seem to like upgrade X, I guess it is too expensive. Let's drop it by a point or 2 and see if it can get some play. Also every list seems to use upgrade Y, maybe we up that a point or 2." Yeah, wow.. that is some world ending stuff there.

2 hours ago, Boris_the_Dwarf said:

This sums up my objection to the app. It’s the justification for them to be even “scummier,”as you call it with their point costs and upgrade bars when really what they should be doing is holding themselves accountable to their customers. Mistakes is one thing but intentionally overpowering the product just to sell out and then nerf it into worthlessness is about as greedy as it gets.

It’s why so many people left 1.0 in the first place.

Where is the intentionally overpowered card that they are gonna pull the rug out from under us with? You act like they play test every possible scenario, pull in the worlds best players, and have every variable accounted for before releasing an intentionally over powered or unusable card. FFG tests internally and then puts out cards at a cost they believe is balanced. They are often wrong. The app allows for them to correct with simple adjustments. "Oh but they need to be accountable!!!" what?! so they release a Saw's renegade pack for $40 to fix a ship that was over costed in wave 1 because they didn't know how the game was gonna grow? Is that is being accountable? Ohh.. you sure showed them! I bet they felt the lash of our wallets when we game them money to fix the game's namesake! Yeah, much better than if they had lowered the cost of the ship with an app, and added an upgrade slot for the S-foil configuration. Or do you mean when they were held accountable for the Kihraxz and they released a $40 pack to give it a title which lowered it's cost and added mod slots. Yeah, that was much better than if they.. just lowered it's cost and added mod slots.

On 9/17/2018 at 8:31 AM, Darth Meanie said:

B. No, it doesn't. This game will eventually die, either from the loss of the license or poor sales. Then (as is happening for people in 1.0), you will struggle to find the support needed online to help you play a game that is fragmented into cards and PDFs without the benefit of the app. Because if they lose the license, they are probably going to be legally required to pull the app down.

Good thing there’s already multiple third party squad builders for 2.0 that have compiled the pdf data and you can use those in place of the official one.

3 hours ago, Boris_the_Dwarf said:

This sums up my objection to the app. It’s the justification for them to be even “scummier,”as you call it with their point costs and upgrade bars when really what they should be doing is holding themselves accountable to their customers. Mistakes is one thing but intentionally overpowering the product just to sell out and then nerf it into worthlessness is about as greedy as it gets.

It’s why so many people left 1.0 in the first place.

Just out of curiosity, how does one distinguish between intentionally overpowering and then nerfing to promote something else, and accidentally overpowering something and then nerfing to fix it?

34 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

Good thing there’s already multiple third party squad builders for 2.0 that have compiled the pdf data and you can use those in place of the official one.

Oh, please. Everyone knows that once the official version of something is taken down, it disappears completely from the Internet forever.

2 hours ago, xbeaker said:

Look, I don't care if people convert to 2.0. But don't claim it is because of price when you have spent hundreds or thousands on the game already. But if you have dozens of ships, price is not a factor in this game for you. Your money arguments make no sense.

Say what?

Its absolutely because of price. I don’t want to keep respending to play models I already bought once. Especially when many of the conversion kits have dials that force you to play one pilot or the other, meaning I’d need multiple kits. This is why I left 40k. Why should I spend £200+ updating Xwing to a new version when I could stop now and use that for new Armada and IA stuff? That’s my new SSD right there...or a bunch of cardboard I already bought once.

I’m not saying 2.0 isn’t a better designed product than 1.0. For me personally, I don’t feel I need to convert, and it absolutely IS about price, and I totally disagree that my argument “makes no sense”.

1 hour ago, JJ48 said:

Oh, please. Everyone knows that once the official version of something is taken down, it disappears completely from the Internet forever.

Yes, like all those NES games that have never been available outside of official Nintendo channels.

3 hours ago, xbeaker said:

16 TIEs?!? So assuming you have been buying more than TIE Fighters, you probably have a collection values at around $2K.. and you are worried about $190 MSRP to convert to 2.0?

I agree with a lot of what you said but not this. My personal collection, last time I checked was in the $1500-1700 range and 80% of it was purchased with trade in credit from a decade of collecting mtg, d&d mini’s, dice masters and I think I unloaded some old battletech mini’s too. People can amass large collections without having substantial disposable income and further spending is an unappealing factor. My phone bill is about equal to what I spent on the conversions but my phone is far more necessary than plastic space ships nor would I have had the money to do it without csi having a 25% boost in trade credit. I made $800 on dice masters alone. Probably over 1000 from magic several years ago. So your assumption that player has x ships therefore can afford the upgrade does not apply to everyone.

I'm still undecided, but not due to the fact that they updated the game (I think there are good reasons to do that).

I brought a lot of friends into the game and most of them switched to the competetive scene after a while, but I never did. I don't want to condemn competetive play, but it is just something I don't like. I want to try new funny/strange/whatever lists to have fun, but most of my friends stick to maxed out lists to train for the next event (with the attitude that only the victory is important). In the end I played less and less as I did not find people with the same motivation. In 2017 I think I managed to play one game, this year none up to now.

Therefore I just see the new edition as a good point to stop investing in the game.

And no, you can't have my stuff

5 minutes ago, Ghrik said:

I'm still undecided, but not due to the fact that they updated the game (I think there are good reasons to do that).

I brought a lot of friends into the game and most of them switched to the competetive scene after a while, but I never did. I don't want to condemn competetive play, but it is just something I don't like. I want to try new funny/strange/whatever lists to have fun, but most of my friends stick to maxed out lists to train for the next event (with the attitude that only the victory is important). In the end I played less and less as I did not find people with the same motivation. In 2017 I think I managed to play one game, this year none up to now.

Therefore I just see the new edition as a good point to stop investing in the game.

And no, you can't have my stuff

If you want to experiment with strange and janky stuff, there will never be better time for it then right now, as a competitive meta has not fully formed jet.

32 minutes ago, Ghrik said:

I'm still undecided, but not due to the fact that they updated the game (I think there are good reasons to do that).

I brought a lot of friends into the game and most of them switched to the competetive scene after a while, but I never did. I don't want to condemn competetive play, but it is just something I don't like. I want to try new funny/strange/whatever lists to have fun, but most of my friends stick to maxed out lists to train for the next event (with the attitude that only the victory is important). In the end I played less and less as I did not find people with the same motivation. In 2017 I think I managed to play one game, this year none up to now.

Therefore I just see the new edition as a good point to stop investing in the game.

And no, you can't have my stuff

Ideally though, there would be no difference between competitive and creative casual list building, and hopefully that's what FFG is going for. I've placed well in plenty of tournaments bringing strange and fun lists (FO aces, Scyks & Lancer, Oicunn & TIE Fighters), and now would be a better time than ever to try out interesting homebrew. Funnily enough, most of my odd lists have gotten significant point drops, making them even more playable, and unlike all the netlisters, I already have the practice needed to fly them.

Unfortunately 2.0 does not change the mindset of my fellow players ? That's my problem.

11 minutes ago, Ghrik said:

Unfortunately 2.0 does not change the mindset of my fellow players ? That's my problem.

True, but now you can beat them with your janky HWKs and Quadjumpers.

6 minutes ago, Okapi said:

True, but now you can beat them with your janky HWKs and Quadjumpers.

?

10 hours ago, ScummyRebel said:

Good thing there’s already multiple third party squad builders for 2.0 that have compiled the pdf data and you can use those in place of the official one.

As long as they work. Goodbye sweet Unofficial Squad Builder. . .

9 hours ago, JJ48 said:

Oh, please. Everyone knows that once the official version of something is taken down, it disappears completely from the Internet forever.

I think ScummyRebel's point was that even if we lose the official app, the unofficial 3rd party stuff will be there (hopefully).

6 hours ago, Ghrik said:

I'm still undecided, but not due to the fact that they updated the game (I think there are good reasons to do that).

I brought a lot of friends into the game and most of them switched to the competetive scene after a while, but I never did. I don't want to condemn competetive play, but it is just something I don't like. I want to try new funny/strange/whatever lists to have fun, but most of my friends stick to maxed out lists to train for the next event (with the attitude that only the victory is important). In the end I played less and less as I did not find people with the same motivation. In 2017 I think I managed to play one game, this year none up to now.

Therefore I just see the new edition as a good point to stop investing in the game.

And no, you can't have my stuff

100% thumbs up. This is my world, and luckily my brother (my main opponent) plays the same way.

5 hours ago, Duskwalker said:

If you want to experiment with strange and janky stuff, there will never be better time for it then right now, as a competitive meta has not fully formed jet.

Yeah, but it might. Then casuals will be back in the same boat.

Your asking Ghrik to speculate with his hobby dollars that the thrust of the game is going to change, and from what I've seen so far, that is unlikely.

5 hours ago, Okapi said:

Ideally though, there would be no difference between competitive and creative casual list building, and hopefully that's what FFG is going for.

Ideally, though, the App would have worked when released. I'm no longer hoping for anything from FFG.

5 hours ago, Ghrik said:

Unfortunately 2.0 does not change the mindset of my fellow players ? That's my problem.

IMHO, the advent of 2.0 is causing XWM to lose this kind of player. If you don't care about tournaments, want to play thematic lists, or want a narrative to your Star Wars game, it has never been there and there is no sign it is ever going to be there, at least as an official product. Casual players of this ilk look at where the game has been, find they need to ante up to keep playing, and so decide to just walk away.

Maybe it doesn't matter to FFG's bottom line. The tournament crowd is unlikely to care.

But if someone asked me about playing this game because it's Star Wars, I'd tell them "don't bother, it's just a minis wargame that sucks people in with the IP."

As I have begun to re-explore M:TG after a 15 year hiatus, I was struck by a funny notion: M:TG, which could easily just be a combat card game, struggles mightily to create narrative: flavor text on the cards, backstories for the characters, planes of existence, and blocks of releases that focus on some part of that story.

FFG has been handed a story to go with this game, and does it's best to ignore it and create a vanilla fighting game that really doesn't need to have SW names on the cards at all.

10 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

I think ScummyRebel's point was that even if we lose the official app, the unofficial 3rd party stuff will be there (hopefully).

Yes, which was my point too (although the sarcasm may have been a bit too subtle).

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

Yeah, but it might. Then casuals will be back in the same boat.

"I don't know if I should go out today"

"You should go out, the sun is shining"

"No you shouldn't go out, it might rain tomorrow!"

Of course a meta will form at some point. But it has not now, and the game will never be as interesting as it is at this moment.

20 minutes ago, Duskwalker said:

"I don't know if I should go out today"

"You should go out, the sun is shining"

"No you shouldn't go out, it might rain tomorrow!"

Of course a meta will form at some point. But it has not now, and the game will never be as interesting as it is at this moment.

You're suggesting someone spend $90+ on what might only be a blip in the X-Wing gaming scene.

Maybe it's worth it, maybe not.

Maybe they would rather spend that money on something more reliable than a guess on where XWM is going. And maybe they find 1.0 interesting enough.

Spending $90 on a one-time experience is certainly not a bad thing, but in a game that is supposed to be collectible and a long-term hobby, it would seem like a wasted investment to me.

I am still on the fence. As a 100% scenario/co-op player, there isn't a huge push for me to move to 2.0. I have a massive collection as it is, but since I don't play competitively I am not going to get AS much out of the new edition as a purely tournament player will. Still, I will probably pick up a core and the conversion kits when Amazon has them for bargain basement prices in a few months.

12 minutes ago, Otakuon said:

since I don't play competitively I am not going to get much out of the new edition

Why? if the game is better balanced and more ships are viable, why wouldn't you get a lot out of the new edition? regardless of your preference on how you play. I just don't get this reasoning.

17 minutes ago, PanchoX1 said:

Why? if the game is better balanced and more ships are viable, why wouldn't you get a lot out of the new edition? regardless of your preference on how you play. I just don't get this reasoning.

Because it is clear FFG's intention is to make X-Wing (and most of their products these days) a purely tournament only/organized play sort of affair (or at least, every game should be played with the intention of eventual tournament play). I, and many others, just don't have any interest in this sort of thing. If FFG actually cared about other modes of play, such as scenario play, we would see more supplements that addressed this. But as it stands, the only focus is on supporting organized tournament play. I wouldn't be surprised if 2.0 is also used as an excuse to kill off epic play.

Eventually, it comes down to, why would we support a product that doesn't really add much more value to the way we already play?

8 minutes ago, Otakuon said:

I wouldn't be surprised if 2.0 is also used as an excuse to kill off epic play.

But they’ve said they are working on it and it will continue forward.

I keep seeing this sentiment, yet it doesn’t match up with facts. On what are you basing this conclusion?