I like how they designed this game , it 's mechanics and levels... i cant stop thinking of using this system on a Star Wars LCG game..

I know there was one a few years ago , but was nothing compared to this one ... any possibility in future of having a lcg SW game like this or arkham?

When I watched the AMA with Andrew Navarro this question was asked. He laughed and said we tried to give you a coop SW years ago.

The feeling I had from him and his answer was a flat out no.

Too bad cause I’d love it.

I prefer the co-op LCGs over the competitive ones. There are several themes I'd get excited for. Star Wars would have me intrigued but don't know if I'd buy it.

My interest in Star Wars has been on life support after watching The Last Jedi in theaters. Got rid of most of my Star Wars stuff in the following months.

On 9/30/2019 at 10:32 AM, Ywingscum said:

When I watched the AMA with Andrew Navarro this question was asked. He laughed and said we tried to give you a coop SW years ago.

The feeling I had from him and his answer was a flat out no.

Too bad cause I’d love it.

Well, while there was a big backlash against a co-op SW game years ago, and a (vocal) majority wanted a PvP game, I don't think many were happy with the results of the game. And the co-op LCGs hadn't dominated the scene back then like they do now, so few people knew how much fun they were.

The fact that Andrew would make that comment and laugh shows poor business sense. Now would be a fantastic time to introduce a co-op Star Wars LCG. Star Wars has gained been ignited with new and renewed interest in fans over the past few years. There are plenty of characters to choose from, and they could even do what Lord of the Rings does utilizing both main characters and minor/original characters (like the ones from Imperial Assault) as playable. The only problem I can see is satisfying those players who are determined to only play as Imperial or "Dark Side" characters. But that could be solved by creating a spin-off game (kinda like what Marvel Legendary did by creating a Villains expansion).

On 10/2/2019 at 7:49 AM, Daedalus said:

Now would be a fantastic time to introduce a co-op Star Wars LCG. Star Wars has gained been ignited with new and renewed interest in fans over the past few years.

I think Star Wars is at an all-time low in interest. That could all change with Episode IX and more importantly The Mandalorian. But, The Last Jedi killed the interest for so many people. And, the Resistance cartoon killed it for a lot of kids. I have many friends that were once Star Wars die-hards that are all but done with the franchise now.

As for the LCG. The feedback where everyone, including myself, was disappointed was based solely on the need for there to be a quality SW competitive game. That doesn't mean don't make a cooperative one. But the competitive had to come first, in my opinion. As a player back in the Decipher SW days, there's nothing like collecting a well-designed competitive SW card game. Unfortunately, the LCG they made missed the mark so much that I wish they'd just continued with the co-op plan. Now that Destiny kills the hope of a 'well-designed' competitive game (don't get me wrong, Destiny can be fun but it is hardly a balanced, well-designed game), a co-op is likely the best that FFG could give us for the franchise.

6 minutes ago, gokubb said:

I think Star Wars is at an all-time low in interest. That could all change with Episode IX and more importantly The Mandalorian. But, The Last Jedi killed the interest for so many people. And, the Resistance cartoon killed it for a lot of kids. I have many friends that were once Star Wars die-hards that are all but done with the franchise now.

It is not. The discussions have certainly become increasingly polarized in recent years, but it's still a massively popular franchise, and has more fans now than it did when the original trilogy came out.

And The Last Jedi had one of the top 10 US releases of all time.

4 hours ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:

It is not. The discussions have certainly become increasingly polarized in recent years, but it's still a massively popular franchise, and has more fans now than it did when the original trilogy came out.

And The Last Jedi had one of the top 10 US releases of all time.

The film after TLJ, Solo, lost money. TLJ made money because of hype. It was so awful that everyone abandoned ship. Of course there’s more fans now than the OT, that was 40 years ago.

Target used to have a Star Wars aisle, now it’s a third of one. McDonalds and Burger King used to fight over who could pay a billion for rights to the next movie. Now, Episode IX is going to launch without a fast food sponsor. It’s popularity is headed the wrong way and is a far cry from the Special Edition/Prequel buildup days.

9 hours ago, gokubb said:

The film after TLJ, Solo, lost money. TLJ made money because of hype. It was so awful that everyone abandoned ship. Of course there’s more fans now than the OT, that was 40 years ago.

Target used to have a Star Wars aisle, now it’s a third of one. McDonalds and Burger King used to fight over who could pay a billion for rights to the next movie. Now, Episode IX is going to launch without a fast food sponsor. It’s popularity is headed the wrong way and is a far cry from the Special Edition/Prequel buildup days.

Solo had a ton of issues that were unrelated to The Last Jedi, starting from its very conception. It's rather silly to attribute all of Solo's many, many problems to another movie.

As others have said, at the time the original co-op SW LCG was demoed, the marketplace had more demand for a competitive SW game, because back then there were less options. In the years since FFG have provided just about every possible SW game.

Marvel was a bit out of left field - I had assumed that after the success of Arkham, that the next co-op LCG would have been a SW one. But here we are. I think now that there's both LOTR, Arkham and MC as co-op LCGs maybe there isn't room for a SW one. Plus there's always Destiny if you want a competitive SW card game (although I recognise that it's a CCG).

It could be something for them to do in the next few years - and LOTR is slowing down/has a ton of content.

I think the reasons the co-op SW LCG didn't work is that there is always as many people in SW fandom who love the bad guys and would want to play as them, as there are people who want to play as the good guys.

I'd love to see a SW LCG that was asymmetric, team based co-op. With fully formed 1v1 and 2v2 modes. The hero side, each deck is a specific character like in Arkham/Marvel. But the villain side, the deck represents your army of stormtroopers, vader etc. And then there's a scenario card/deck that sits off to the side.

7 hours ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:

Solo had a ton of issues that were unrelated to The Last Jedi, starting from its very conception. It's rather silly to attribute all of Solo's many, many problems to another movie.

Solo is the Best of all the new Star Wars movies. IMO

Solo’s biggest problem was being the movie that was released after TLJ

13 minutes ago, Ywingscum said:

Solo is the Best of all the new Star Wars movies. IMO

Solo’s biggest problem was being the movie that was released after TLJ

Completely agree here. Solo had flaws, but it was an enjoyable movie and had some standout moments. I attribute 100% of it's failure to TLJ.

I enjoyed Solo for the most part. I just wish they had less eye winking in it. If you ignore stuff like where they attempt to explain the name Solo, The Kessel Run etc. then it's actually a very enjoyable Star Wars heist film. Full disclosure I'm not the biggest Star Wars fan anyway. I watch all the movies and enjoy them fine, but I don't treat anything sacred about the property.

I would have definitely been into a Star Wars coop card game. I had no interest in the competitive Star Wars LCG. That said at the time I was already playing Conquest and Netrunner so I didn't have the gamer budget to support another LCG anyway.

I was part of the group that bemoaned FFG's decision to make the LCG competitive instead of coop. I understood the reasoning, and still do, but I really thought there was enough talent at FFG to figure-out the LS/DS dichotomy problem. That's water under the bridge now, and I suspect all we will get in the SW universe going forward will be board games in the vein of Rebellion and Outer Rim. It's a shame.

On 10/4/2019 at 10:22 AM, gokubb said:

Completely agree here. Solo had flaws, but it was an enjoyable movie and had some standout moments. I attribute 100% of it's failure to TLJ.

So, 0% of the movie's failure had to do with the actual movie?

Well, at least that tells me that there is no point in trying to reason with you.

10 hours ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:

So, 0% of the movie's problems had to do with the actual movie?

Well, at least that tells me that there is no point in trying to reason with you.

That’s not what he said.

He said if Solo was released, say before TLJ, it would have been successful.

12 hours ago, Ywingscum said:

That’s not what he said.

He said if Solo was released, say before TLJ, it would have been successful.

That is further from what he said.

He said, "I attribute 100% of it's failure to TLJ."

Saying that mixed reactions to The Last Jedi contributed to the failure of Solo is a tenable argument.

Saying that 100% of Solo's failure is because of The Last Jedi is not.

No, that’s pretty much what I said. If it came out before TLJ it would have made money, making it a success. It lost money because it came out after TLJ. That alone is the only reason.

Solo failed for a number of reasons. It was released in a crowded month, it had no marketing, it was centered around a character they had just killed off, troubled production etc.

It also was simply a bad movie. It tried to get by by stuffing it full pf references to everything Han said in the OT. Every story Han told happened in the first week of his ten year career as a smuggler. The story had no idea what it wanted to be and kept shifting its cast every act of the story. They had Beckett's interedting crew early only to kill them off. Then they had Lando who left at Act 3.

The Kessel run, Han winning the Falcon, Lando, and even having the Falcon appear was all just stuffed in without adding much.

4 hours ago, Radix2309 said:

Solo failed for a number of reasons. It was released in a crowded month, it had no marketing, it was centered around a character they had just killed off, troubled production etc.

It also was simply a bad movie. It tried to get by by stuffing it full pf references to everything Han said in the OT. Every story Han told happened in the first week of his ten year career as a smuggler. The story had no idea what it wanted to be and kept shifting its cast every act of the story. They had Beckett's interedting crew early only to kill them off. Then they had Lando who left at Act 3.

The Kessel run, Han winning the Falcon, Lando, and even having the Falcon appear was all just stuffed in without adding much.

They also had Han abandon Chewie on Kessel.

When your script makes a well-established character behave unrecognizably, you have systemic problems well beyond release timing.

Disagree Solo was an excellent movie. Han didn’t abandon Chewie

7 hours ago, Ywingscum said:

Disagree Solo was an excellent movie. Han didn’t abandon Chewie

Except he did. He runs off on his own and leaves Chewie to rescue the Wookies. For all Han knows, that’s the last time he’ll ever see Chewie.

On October 7, 2019 at 3:49 PM, gokubb said:

No, that’s pretty much what I said. If it came out before TLJ it would have made money, making it a success. It lost money because it came out after TLJ. That alone is the only reason.

That's still inferring a direct causation that can't actually be proven. And ignoring literally every other factor that went into the production and release of Solo.

15 hours ago, Derrault said:

Except he did. He runs off on his own and leaves Chewie to rescue the Wookies. For all Han knows, that’s the last time he’ll ever see Chewie.

I wouldn’t call spitting up abandoning and out of character.

9 hours ago, Ywingscum said:

I wouldn’t call spitting up abandoning and out of character.

It was portrayed more as them saying good bye for the last time, and only by happy coincidence do they run into each other again.

I know the extended universe was removed from canon (wherein Han explicitly saved Chewie and other Wookies from slavery), but it’s still drastically out of character for what remains in canon.

Chalk me and the dozen players in our regular gaming group as big Star Wars fans and would love a coop LCG. We also all enjoyed Solo but were put off by The Last Jedi and cautiously optimistic about Episode 9. I would say that for us Solo is only second to Rogue One for the last four Star Wars movies in excellence ranking.

Back to the topic at hand I think that if done correctly, which FFG has shown they can do with LOTR and AH, you could definitely have a coop SW LCG that dabbles in some dark side stuff. Would probably have to stick with the Light Side storyline as a primary one but you could also have some villainous characters that could be used against certain Cycles/scenarios. They could have the "Dark Side" trait which means they can only be used if the scenerio allows dark side characters and can't be mixed with any Light Side characters. So you would have the option to play as either Dark Side or Light Side in a given scenario but have to play Light Side if you were say raiding an Imperial shipping yard, attacking a Star Destroyer, etc. But you could make that latter one the exception rather than the rule and design it as a dual LCG which would actually increase deck-building since there are two entirely different forces you could assemble against a scenario/cycle. And there are plenty of examples where it makes sense for both Light and Dark to interchangeably be battling the same foe. Some examples:

Darth Maul's Crimson Dawn

The Hutt Cartels

Pike Syndicate

Hapan Pirates

Black Sun

Lower Level Coruscant Scum

Separatist Holdouts

Clone Troopers that their Order 66 chips went awry and now they are killing Jedi/Inquistors/Stormtroopers/Rebels/Civilians alike

Garm Bel Iblis or more likely Saw Gerrera's Extremist Fanatical Rebels that are killing civilians/citizens of the Empire.

Deathtroopers/Blackwing or Rakghoul Zombies

Nightsister Sith Witches

Crashing on a planet full of monsters/wildlife/indiscriminate locals trying to kill off your survivors (Tatooine, Felucia, Dathomir, Pantora to name a few)

Rogue Imperial Warlord rebelling against the Empire with a super weapon that will kill millions

Killiks attempting domination of the galaxy

Droid Rebellion/techno virus

Yuuzhan Vong

Lost Tribe of the Sith

Abeloth

Ok so some of those are from the pre-Disney Canon but seriously tons of examples of a common enemy. So encounter decks/enemies/locations/treachery cards could be the same for both dark side and Light Side campaigns and just have a different intro or quest card if you want some unique story flavour. Heck I'll write it for you FFG haha. But if that's the only thing holding back some dark side preference fans like myself, the above list should prove there is totally a place for dark side player cards and campaigns alongside Light Side ones, just not normally mixed together decks unless it was really dire.

Come on FFG do it!