15 hours ago, Majushi said:

Yes, but it's optional. Unlike a competitive system like Skirmish in IA where if you didn't get the expansions (Jabba's Realm specifically at the time) you were likely to be behind the meta.

With the non-competitive model the player is under no obligation to purchase the expansion to continue the game. BUT, if they do buy it for a price point that is still less than the core box, they get pretty much double the content.

Also, when is there ever an "expansion" to a game that does not require the base to play? I mean, that's a given all the time right?

Sigh... 😑

All I was saying is that in addition to a pretty pricey game, this is a pretty pricey (yet certainly still worth the value) expansion.

I get we're a board game community, but these semantics and "but aktuallys" are absolutely getting out of hand.

45 minutes ago, subtrendy2 said:

Sigh... 😑

All I was saying is that in addition to a pretty pricey game, this is a pretty pricey (yet certainly still worth the value) expansion.

I get we're a board game community, but these semantics and "but aktuallys" are absolutely getting out of hand.

I wish to explain the error of your position further. But in a friendly and collaborative way. That way it's like a really annoying party your roommate threw, but also invited you to so that you can't get mad.

Perhaps I shall start by building two tables - one for how strongly to disagree with you, and the other for my reasoning why. I'll roll a D20, and if I get an 11 or higher, I'll roll 2D10 to decide what options on the table I should go with. I get bonus points if I can engage you enough to debate whether the method would be better if I used 2D12.

Or, to make things more crunchy, I could do a regression analysis and scatter plot of the wrongness of all your posts over the last 4 years. Then I can create a predictive modeling app that tells me when I should disagree with you with a 3% margin of error. This will be ever so much fun.

3 hours ago, Pollux85 said:

I wish to explain the error of your position further.

I got this far and just started giggling like a moron... the whole post was gold.

4 hours ago, Pollux85 said:

Or, to make things more crunchy, I could do a regression analysis and scatter plot of the wrongness of all your posts over the last 4 years. Then I can create a predictive modeling app that tells me when I should disagree with you with a 3% margin of error. This will be ever so much fun.

I've got a feeling that I'd hate to see how wrong I've been over the last four years... but the "Friday" thread is probably a good place to start 😂

Mean while Legion players paying $75 for a little plastic bunker are like .....

Just because I kinda feel like everything that happens is now sorta weighed against the end of Imperial Assault, at least from our POV. And with all the other games losing support, I'm sure others think the same of their own titles.

How do you guys feel about FFG taking over Dead of Winter?

Personally, I wonder what the scope of that really is. DoW has been out for a good long while, now, and already has a couple expansions. By "Publish and Support" is FFG going to add new expansions? A new edition? Continue the "Crossroads Game" line (seems unlikely, given they didn't also get Gen7).

I guess it just feels like an interesting move, to me. On the one hand, I do kinda resent that FFG has completed abandoned so many of their titles recently. On the other, if this can help them get back on their feet... I guess that's a good thing.

I’d expect a ****-ton of the DoW characters to be released as small expansion packs. Each will have a mini and a couple of item cards in it. Sound familiar?

46 minutes ago, subtrendy2 said:

Just because I kinda feel like everything that happens is now sorta weighed against the end of Imperial Assault, at least from our POV. And with all the other games losing support, I'm sure others think the same of their own titles.

How do you guys feel about FFG taking over Dead of Winter?

Personally, I wonder what the scope of that really is. DoW has been out for a good long while, now, and already has a couple expansions. By "Publish and Support" is FFG going to add new expansions? A new edition? Continue the "Crossroads Game" line (seems unlikely, given they didn't also get Gen7).

I guess it just feels like an interesting move, to me. On the one hand, I do kinda resent that FFG has completed abandoned so many of their titles recently. On the other, if this can help them get back on their feet... I guess that's a good thing.

We'll probably see a new edition with minis or something. I wish they'd bring back Battlestar Galactica (I missed the chance to buy it)

Is Gen7 even a thing anymore, the expansion never made it to my area and nobody really talks about it, so I feel like it underperformed...

1 hour ago, neosmagus said:

Is Gen7 even a thing anymore, the expansion never made it to my area and nobody really talks about it, so I feel like it underperformed...

My friends and I loved DoW and were excited when it was announced that the next crossroads game would be Sci Fi. When it was officially announced a couple years later and we found out it was a campaign we immediately lost all interest. We love campaigns, but there's already enough options and DoW is a favorite without that element.

I've been wondering if others had the reaction, because I don't know anyone who has played it.

(To be honest, I had to look up Gen7 this morning. I remember hearing back a few years ago that other Crossroads games were in the works, but it all fell totally off my radar since then).

5 hours ago, Uninvited Guest said:

My friends and I loved DoW and were excited when it was announced that the next crossroads game would be Sci Fi. When it was officially announced a couple years later and we found out it was a campaign we immediately lost all interest. We love campaigns, but there's already enough options and DoW is a favorite without that element.

I've been wondering if others had the reaction, because I don't know anyone who has played it.

I bought Gen7 when it came out, I have not played it yet as I struggle to get people interested in a campaign, and being minumum 3 players I can't even play it just with my wife. And when I have a few people up for a campaign, it's more likely for Imperial Assault.

On 10/21/2019 at 7:27 PM, Pollux85 said:

To me, the clearest evidence that X wing sold better than IA is that I've seen X-wing for sale at frickin Barnes and Noble. Somebody at FFG and at B&N thinks that this is so easy to sell and makes so much money that they can sell it at a place that its core audience would NEVER go to buy or play games. I ain't never seen no Core Box for IA at Barnes & Noble. In the absence of market data, that tells us all we need to know.

Just for a positive I've seen X-wing, IA, Twilight Imperium and Descent at major bookshops over the years (not whole ranges just key core products, along with 'evergreen' games like Monopoly, Top Trumps, Scrabble, D&D core products....) so maybe there's the cola perspective for the 'did/does it sell well or not?' and 'does it sell less than...?'questions.

There are a couple of very well known brands of cola that sell by the many-tanker-loads.

This doesn't stop other brands being made and sold in large numbers getting good sales- not the same volumes but still selling enough to survive.

For games, a lot depends on if the game is what you could call 'evergreen-' it will continue selling well for a long time maybe forever

Adapt this for something which may have a limited lifespan of sales such as a game that isn't evergreen and maybe eventually you hit the point where demand no longer warrants making more copies or at least doing so more infrequently, or a new expansion sells less well than an earlier expansion, or even becomes a loss-maker.

If you throw in rights factors- A has an agreement with B and C over a product they make- then it can get trickier- maybe the extra costs mean you need x number of sales for it to work, if you hit sales < x it maybe becomes no longer viable. Rights can also make things more expensive for customers which of course also makes it a bit more challenging to sell, although I don't think this has affected IA too much/at all.

So a lot depends on the specifics of such different factors.

Other products that sell more are not really relevant- all that is relevant is does THIS product sell well enough to continue producing/selling or is it somewhere else along that line such as still viable but less so than before. Although of course a company may choose to focus only on its big hitters however well the other products are doing, which could of course be a mistake if these different products have different customers or/and 'buy it all' fans.