6 minutes ago, ForceSensitive said:

But the way these new guys sound is that they're eyeing up something more than the standard point tweak or new mechanic.

I think they're more excited to make a MCP style game with Star Wars characters. Something in between Imperial Assault and Legion with 40mm scale or larger figures. I think the suits would like that sort of thing as well. Two new $30 dollar for two unpainted models expansion a month with just a character card.

The money here isn't selling games it is selling models. The game is just a rationalization mechanism to sell models. Yes, better games sell more models but the trouble with X-wing at the moment isn't that the game isn't good. The trouble is that the game isn't selling models. Count on whatever changes get made to be geared around selling more models.

We can't sit here and bemoan the callous disregard for the livelihood of people at the behest of share-holder value and expect that the marching orders for those newly charged with these miniatures games are not going to be, "Sell more models that cost less to make."

2 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

I really don't agree with this. The developers tried a lot of things throughout second edition to make sure it wasn't JUST competitive or existing players who had something to do. Whether that's stuff like quick builds, the multiple play formats, custom game modes like Battle of Yavin or expansions like Epic Battles etc, they gave plenty of tools for both casual and competitive players alike.

They don't get credit for a lot of this because the community as a whole tends to focus on the competitive side of standard play (exactly what Meanie is doing here).

Or they had to put the quick-builds system in the boxes because otherwise you couldn't open the box and play immediately since points aren't on the cards due to the need to facilitate adjustments for the tourney scene.

24 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

The money here isn't selling games it is selling models. The game is just a rationalization mechanism to sell models. Yes, better games sell more models but the trouble with X-wing at the moment isn't that the game isn't good. The trouble is that the game isn't selling models. Count on whatever changes get made to be geared around selling more models.

Are you saying they aren't selling Republic and CIS models?

I think that FFG did it very well by adding the Clone Wars factions.

They are who have not wanted to release a lot of first edition ships. They ignored the newer players (do you want a Gunboat? look at eBay and good luck).

And who are they? I'm sure that are not the design team.

1 minute ago, S4ul0 said:

Are you saying they aren't selling Republic and CIS models?

I think they did it very well by adding the Clone Wars factions.

They are who have not wanted to release a lot of first edition ships. They ignored the newer players (do you want a Gunboat? look at eBay and good luck).

And who are they? I'm sure that are not the design team.

Total quantity. I bought new stuff for X-wing. I haven't bough any reprint stuff for X-wing. Bunches of guys dropped the game with 2nd Edition. We couldn't draw new players in with 2nd.

Sales cratered in one of my FLGS with 2nd. Those were to a lot of guys who just liked the ships. 2nd didn't start with all the Clone Wars stuff and they checked out by the time it did.

How are ongoing sales of core sets? How are restocks of re-release X-wing ships? That stuff is all languishing in my FLGS. The guys that stuck around buy new stuff but I don't get the new FO or Resistance stuff for X-wing.

Locals shops won't even special order for me due to the change in distributors.

My blood pressure has always been pretty good. I used to be 50 pounds overweight. How healthy was I? That some expansion sells well doesn't mean the game as a whole is at the level folks trying to increase the value of a company want.

34 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

Total quantity. I bought new stuff for X-wing. I haven't bough any reprint stuff for X-wing. Bunches of guys dropped the game with 2nd Edition. We couldn't draw new players in with 2nd

Yeah. Same here. But I think a lot of players actually dropped before 2nd Edition.

The launch didn't help either.

2 hours ago, Frimmel said:

I think they're more excited to make a MCP style game with Star Wars characters. Something in between Imperial Assault and Legion with 40mm scale or larger figures. I think the suits would like that sort of thing as well. Two new $30 dollar for two unpainted models expansion a month with just a character card.

The money here isn't selling games it is selling models. The game is just a rationalization mechanism to sell models. Yes, better games sell more models but the trouble with X-wing at the moment isn't that the game isn't good. The trouble is that the game isn't selling models. Count on whatever changes get made to be geared around selling more models.

We can't sit here and bemoan the callous disregard for the livelihood of people at the behest of share-holder value and expect that the marching orders for those newly charged with these miniatures games are not going to be, "Sell more models that cost less to make."

I just wanna point out that you keep saying the money is in models, but I don’t think I agree. The money is in cards and card packs, cardboard... not plastic. The plastic actually cost them something. Not much, but I think if you asked Asmodee whether they’d rather sell a $20 T-70, or a $20 card pack, I bet they’d rather sell the card pack.

4 minutes ago, Cpt ObVus said:

I just wanna point out that you keep saying the money is in models, but I don’t think I agree. The money is in cards and card packs, cardboard... not plastic. The plastic actually cost them something. Not much, but I think if you asked Asmodee whether they’d rather sell a $20 T-70, or a $20 card pack, I bet they’d rather sell the card pack.

That would make sense, but they’ve only done card packs once in 8 years of making the game. But that could be part of their problem too.

3 hours ago, Frimmel said:

I do think the designers have grown a bit of myopic with regards to new players. It often seems to me that they don't see things through the eyes of someone who has much less time invested in all of this. I think even the designers sometimes show a git-gud attitude to players.

While you said it nicer than I did, this is exactly what I mean.

6 hours ago, FTS Gecko said:

...by which you mean that player that refused to buy into second edition (i.e. support the game they purport to love) for well over a year into it's life cycle, rather than that player who helped grow the X-Wing community to the extent it did?

Ah, yes... "Meanie Problems".

Well, you are exactly right that it's "Meanie Problems."

As more or less an Epic-only player, there was exactly Zero need to upgrade to 2.0 for well over a year into it's life cycle.

FFG left me hanging, working diligently to make sure that 2.0 Standard players would have exactly the game balance they were hoping for immediately upon launch, while hanging me out to dry with the vague promise that "we're working on it."

So really, this only supports my statements that FFG catered to a single style of player.

6 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

Dude, I know you've got your personal preferences but you've got to realise what a terrible take this is.

The strong competitive scene from early in 1e's life cycle is absolutely a huge part of the reason X-Wing got as big as it did. I can tell you that as someone who didn't even get particularly involved in competitive play. It struck absolute gold as being a game that was easy to pick up, pretty to look at in shop windows and robust enough to sustain formal competition.

Just look at the all those pillars of the community. The podcasts, the blogs, the the teams and orgs. They all pushed sales of the game, all promoted awareness and popularised the game in other areas. The good will marketing of the game GSP has done alone is impressive. And all of them have a focus on competitive play.

Without the competitive scene existing to allow players to become dedicated, there would have been no dedicated players to keep coming back to the game buying packs just for upgrades, buying new ships just to try out weird list ideas and buying weird obscure comic book ships just because they had interesting, potentially competitive stat lines.

Without the competitive scene, this game would have died out halfway through 1e once they ran out of movie ships.

I certainly don't deny that any of this is true. But I think the singular focus of the Static Monolith of Standard OP is exactly what is killing the game right now.

As the honeymoon phase of 2.0 has worn off, OT faction players have been left with absolutely nothing to look forward to. Design has proceeded as usual (add ships, shake and rebalance) with the new factions that need to be "filled out" getting all of the attention. And they need to get all of the attention simply to make them viable options in Standard Play.

FFG did make some effort to diversify with Missions and Environments, but those were quickly forgotten when they had zero impact on OP. So here were are, 2 years into 2.0 with the exact same conversations happening about points/power/balance from a mathwing perspective instead of conversations like "how to I cope with a meteor shower environment" or "which objective should I attempt with this list."

So while the game has grown in size, it has not evolved in form, save new ships and new tricksy mechanics.

3 hours ago, FTS Gecko said:

I really don't agree with this. The developers tried a lot of things throughout second edition to make sure it wasn't JUST competitive or existing players who had something to do. Whether that's stuff like quick builds, the multiple play formats, custom game modes like Battle of Yavin or expansions like Epic Battles etc, they gave plenty of tools for both casual and competitive players alike.

They don't get credit for a lot of this because the community as a whole tends to focus on the competitive side of standard play (exactly what Meanie is doing here).

I guess I feel bad for all the folks who want to play with a Huge ship but can't seem to find a play group that is willing.

Whether that's the players' fault for being one-trick-ponies or the developers' fault for not emphasizing alternate play options is a whole new conversation.

What I hope is the AMG begins to put far more weight on these elements of play (Structures, anyone?) rather than just again rebooting balance and mechanics to reinvigorate OP or just "faction filling."

Because right now, when a Standard OP player flames out, XWM is dead to them. There isn't much of a new way to play except the (seemingly overly large) transition to Epic.

1 minute ago, Cpt ObVus said:

I just wanna point out that you keep saying the money is in models, but I don’t think I agree. The money is in cards and card packs, cardboard... not plastic. The plastic actually cost them something. Not much, but I think if you asked Asmodee whether they’d rather sell a $20 T-70, or a $20 card pack, I bet they’d rather sell the card pack.

You can only sell card packs to guys who already have a T-70. You can only sell campaign packs to guys who have a T-70. You can only sell upgrade maneuver templates to guys who have a T-70. If you don't have a T-70 do you want a Resistance Damage Deck? Does the cardboard make more money if it does or does not make guys want to go get another T-70?

Why does the Core Set not have enough models?

2 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

You can only sell card packs to guys who already have a T-70. You can only sell campaign packs to guys who have a T-70. You can only sell upgrade maneuver templates to guys who have a T-70. If you don't have a T-70 do you want a Resistance Damage Deck? Does the cardboard make more money if it does or does not make guys want to go get another T-70?

Why does the Core Set not have enough models?

Both are necessary, obviously. But the greater profit lies in selling cards, I think.

If they keep producing card packs with new pilots in them, I’ll keep buying. If they keep producing the same models, I won’t.

Heralds of Hope kinda pissed me off. I was forced to pick up six models I did not need in order to get enough cards to outfit the ships I already had. That’s silly. If they’d charged 2/3 the price for just the cards, I’d have felt far better about it. And that definitely would have been easier and more profitable for FFG.

7 hours ago, ForceSensitive said:

More importantly, I'm not so sure we should even use the numbers for last spring (or this entire year really) with the release schedule not having done a lot until these last few months, and more notably the pandemic. I don't find it any surprise that when everyone was trying to figure out a way to stay home the top 5 sellers were mostly hobbyist craft types. To play X-wing at home you don't need the models, you need TTS. So sales of course are going to bottom out. That's a lot of confounds in the dataset to consider it usable. Because even just looking around at how many new folk have joined the forum in the past year, and the post frequency still remaining high, X-wing is the farthest thing from death by a long shot.

I consider it to be the opposite. As a industry leader Asmodee must pay attention to what is happening over the last year to the games industry and adapt to it. COVID-19 isn't going away yet, even if they do start releasing a vaccine at the end of December, things aren't going to be back to "normal" for probably another 12 months* and more than likely a few years before people start relaxing and getting back into old habits. They can't just write off two years of bottomed out sales and continue on as if everything is normal. Literally, they can't; Asmodee is owned by an equity firm, and they aren't going to allow that. Action has to be taken to get returns on the investment.

The first two passes at solo play rules was reassuring that they were adapting to the situation on the ground and trying to keep the game relevant, but I don't think the change is enough. People are staying within their bubbles, and solo/coop is where things are going to be for awhile. Had they launched a full fledged solo/cooperative campaign system like HotAC, that could have kept interest in the games and plastic crack they were slinging, but they didn't really make much strides there. Releasing things to shake up a Organized Play tournament meta that no one is really playing doesn't pay the bills, keep the lights on, or make the investors happy.

Personal opinion and anecdote wise, I do agree with your assessment that games that rely more on the modeling side of the hobby are also better positioned to do well over the last year. From my personal experience, my gaming has shifted away from anything competitive and towards a lot of painting and crafting for the hobby, and most game time is spent in solo/coop games that are model agnostic allowing me to spend my hobby time finally getting around to painting up things such as my traditionally competitive WarmaHordes models and use them in a solo/coop setting, like Rangers of Shadowdeep or Brutality.

* I also live in Southwest Washington, which is anti-vaxx country, so even with the vaccine coming out soon, **** isn't going back to normal for awhile around here. My family has immunity disorders so they (wife and some kids) are already in the high risk category, and I know people aren't going to do what they should do. I already have 0 plan to re-engage with my local gaming community for at least another year and I'll take another assessment around this time next year.

5 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

Dude, I know you've got your personal preferences but you've got to realise what a terrible take this is.

The strong competitive scene from early in 1e's life cycle is absolutely a huge part of the reason X-Wing got as big as it did. I can tell you that as someone who didn't even get particularly involved in competitive play. It struck absolute gold as being a game that was easy to pick up, pretty to look at in shop windows and robust enough to sustain formal competition.

Just look at the all those pillars of the community. The podcasts, the blogs, the the teams and orgs. They all pushed sales of the game, all promoted awareness and popularised the game in other areas. The good will marketing of the game GSP has done alone is impressive. And all of them have a focus on competitive play.

Without the competitive scene existing to allow players to become dedicated, there would have been no dedicated players to keep coming back to the game buying packs just for upgrades, buying new ships just to try out weird list ideas and buying weird obscure comic book ships just because they had interesting, potentially competitive stat lines.

Without the competitive scene, this game would have died out halfway through 1e once they ran out of movie ships.

X Wing miniatures is the first game where I left the comfort of my basement and ventured into the competitive tournament scene, and I couldn't be happier that I did. the XWM community is, for the most part, great people who are fun to play with. Even losing (and I lost a lot when I started, like dead last in tournaments) I had a great time.

27 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

Why does the Core Set not have enough models?

I've been pondering this a little. I got into x-wing by accident. My wife bought a core set at Target thinking it was a board game. We liked it, bought some more models but didn't really play the rules 'properly' until I found out that some of my friends played.

I wonder what it would look like if there was some kind of 'deluxe' starter set that included a play mat and enough ships, pilots and upgrades to give a few options for a standard game. You could even do different versions aimed at recreating iconic battles.

Only problem is that it would need an RRP of close to $200. Maybe a sale price of $100 and try and sell it at mainstream stores (Walmart/Target in the US, Tesco/Asda in the UK)?

23 minutes ago, Cpt ObVus said:

Both are necessary, obviously. But the greater profit lies in selling cards, I think.

If they keep producing card packs with new pilots in them, I’ll keep buying. If they keep producing the same models, I won’t.

Heralds of Hope kinda pissed me off. I was forced to pick up six models I did not need in order to get enough cards to outfit the ships I already had. That’s silly. If they’d charged 2/3 the price for just the cards, I’d have felt far better about it. And that definitely would have been easier and more profitable for FFG.

How would have been more profitable to have sold you one $20 pack instead of two MSRP $49.95 packs? Did they make less than the profit on the card pack than on the profit of the two packs?

36 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Well, you are exactly right that it's "Meanie Problems."

As more or less an Epic-only player, there was exactly Zero need to upgrade to 2.0 for well over a year into it's life cycle.

FFG left me hanging, working diligently to make sure that 2.0 Standard players would have exactly the game balance they were hoping for immediately upon launch, while hanging me out to dry with the vague promise that "we're working on it."

So really, this only supports my statements that FFG catered to a single style of player...

Me, me, me, me,. Meanie. That's all that opinion amounts to though Meanie. What you very specifically wanted. Not what was best for the game or the community as a whole. What you wanted.

And YOU didn't immediately get what YOU specifically wanted, so YOU didn't adopt 2nd edition.

Which is totally fine - entirely your choice and all - but it's also very hypocritical to then say that FFG only catered to single style of player when your entire complaint is that they DIDN'T immediately cater to a very specific (and niche) style of player.

What makes it even more hypocritical is that it's been categorically demonstrated that FFG actually DID try to please as many potential players as they could new and existing, competitive and casual - with 2nd edition. This doesn't fit the Meanie narrative however, so it is conveniently ignored.

47 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

Me, me, me, me,. Meanie. That's all that opinion amounts to though Meanie. What you very specifically wanted. Not what was best for the game or the community as a whole. What you wanted.

And YOU didn't immediately get what YOU specifically wanted, so YOU didn't adopt 2nd edition.

Which is totally fine - entirely your choice and all - but it's also very hypocritical to then say that FFG only catered to single style of player when your entire complaint is that they DIDN'T immediately cater to a very specific (and niche) style of player.

What makes it even more hypocritical is that it's been categorically demonstrated that FFG actually DID try to please as many potential players as they could new and existing, competitive and casual - with 2nd edition. This doesn't fit the Meanie narrative however, so it is conveniently ignored.

Yeah, you can lay off with the ad hominem attacks just because I posted in the first person.

ANYONE who loves Epic as their main XWM had the same problems, including some folks I used to love to follow on these forums who quit the game.

Moreover, you miss the whole point that XWM would be well served by creating more niches for players to explore (or making sure those playstyles are better than niche), and that I think that lack of development is what is hurting the long-term future of this game.

I think 2.0 was a failure. The game became more dry because a lot of effects were toned down, but at the same time you have more upkeep because of token management. It´ is only fitting that you now have a meta dominated by swarms of generics.

As a casual player I would strongly prefer 1.0 (if anybody was still playing it) because of simplicity and more colorful combos. I am perfectly fine facing Dengaroo if I can field Palp Aces myself. I find 1.0 Parattani much more fun to play than Boba-Fenn in 2.0. I fail to see how 2.0 Boba-Fenn is somehow a more enjoyable experience to face or play than 1.0 Parattani.

Having bought most of the epic ships in 1.0 for a considerable sum it also felt premature to be going to 2.0 while the epic format was never developed.

I am actually very excited to see what this restructuring move does for X-wing. I think the game has been stagnating during 2.0 and I think there is a lot of room to make the game more attractive to the casual gamer again.

5 hours ago, Frimmel said:

How would have been more profitable to have sold you one $20 pack instead of two MSRP $49.95 packs? Did they make less than the profit on the card pack than on the profit of the two packs?

The cards cost less to produce, ship more to a case, aren’t subject to overseas supply delays, are easier to package... there’s all sorts of reasons why producing cards should be cheaper than producing models. So they may not make as much money per unit sold, but they spend much less as well. Thus, greater margin.

5 hours ago, Frimmel said:

How would have been more profitable to have sold you one $20 pack instead of two MSRP $49.95 packs? Did they make less than the profit on the card pack than on the profit of the two packs?

The other thing being: I’d be a much more satisfied customer if I could have simply bought two card packs with zero models. Also, the money wasn’t much of a concern for me this time around, but some people definitely would not have been willing to pay what I did for the relative utility I got out of it.

14 hours ago, Sixter said:

I think 2.0 was a failure. The game became more dry because a lot of effects were toned down, but at the same time you have more upkeep because of token management. It´ is only fitting that you now have a meta dominated by swarms of generics.

As a casual player I would strongly prefer 1.0 (if anybody was still playing it) because of simplicity and more colorful combos. I am perfectly fine facing Dengaroo if I can field Palp Aces myself. I find 1.0 Parattani much more fun to play than Boba-Fenn in 2.0. I fail to see how 2.0 Boba-Fenn is somehow a more enjoyable experience to face or play than 1.0 Parattani.

As another casual player, I have to disagree. I strongly prefer 2.0, I find it much more streamlined and more varied at the same time. You can freely choose whether to want to play an upgrade-combo festival, or plain and simple.

Quote

Having bought most of the epic ships in 1.0 for a considerable sum it also felt premature to be going to 2.0 while the epic format was never developed.

Why? Epic 2.0 has been fully developed. Conversion kit, new huge ship rules, epic battles with wings, either 2.0 rereleases (where available) or 1.0 leftovers. For me, epic 1.0 was not a great experience. My impression is that a lot of effort went into developing epic 2.0 (but then the further release schedule was cut short). Compared to good board games, the current Epic mode mostly suffers from finding the pieces, having to set up everything on the table, including preparing lists for each player.

That said, Epic (and also Standard) is a bit lacking at entry-level. There is little guidance for introducing beginners. The material, even the core set, appears to be targeted more towards X-wing veterans.

Quote

I think there is a lot of room to make the game more attractive to the casual gamer again.

This is true.

17 hours ago, Sixter said:

As a casual player I would strongly prefer 1.0 (if anybody was still playing it) because of simplicity and more colorful combos. I am perfectly fine facing Dengaroo if I can field Palp Aces myself. I find 1.0 Parattani much more fun to play than Boba-Fenn in 2.0. I fail to see how 2.0 Boba-Fenn is somehow a more enjoyable experience to face or play than 1.0 Parattani.

If you look at tournament results, this doesn't seem to be a universal experience. Boba is good. Great even! But he's simply not as dominant today as the great 1.0 menaces.

And even if he or something else was that dominant (like vultures were 6 months ago), it's inherently more tolerable due to the ability to adjust points every 6 months (or rarely more often in emergencies).

Points adjustments alone make 2.0 more durably fun, imo.

2 hours ago, Canopus said:

Why? Epic 2.0 has been fully developed.

No, it hasn't.

Epic is nothing more than Huge ships + Standard. There are exactly 3 other "Epic-specific" ideas: Dreadnaught Hunter, The Hyperring, and Wings.

Epic could use Aces of its own--pilot special abilities that are created specifically for the poly-ship environment of Epic. Epic could use space stations, turbolaser emplacements, mine fields, and superweapons. It could use upgrades that are Epic specific. ****, it NEEDS named commanders and huge ship titles for 4 out of 7 factions.

FFG did a great job with Huge ships, but Epic 2.0 got a conversion kit and then forgotten.

Which, as usual, isn't much of a surprise.

A general problem I see with many figure games now, is it is not young people or new players it attracts because of the price. In my x-wing group I think we have gotten two new x-wing players and lost a lot more to 2.0. Likewise MCP is played by guys who used to play x-wing. But a cross the boards its mostly older guys (sorry guys 😂) already bitten by figure gaming and with a lot of capital who buys x-wing and MCP. I think these games has priced a lot of people out with their high prices. No way I would start with x-wing if I had to start my collection today. X-wing was my gate way game back into figure games after being grossed out by the GW machine many years ago. It was fast, easy and reasonably cheap to get into. I don't think 2.0 have any of those advantages anymore.

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

No, it hasn't.

Epic is nothing more than Huge ships + Standard. There are exactly 3 other "Epic-specific" ideas: Dreadnaught Hunter, The Hyperring, and Wings.

Well, the epic battles box also contains scenarios, so I would consider the mode fully functional at least. I didn't mean complete.

Likely there has been some epic/scenario expansion in the pipeline. Hints in videos by the dev team, and teasers for products such as solo mode, hyperrings, structures.

Structures are the most interesting hint at new playing modes or objectives (plastic or cardboard), now placed prominently in the rulebook.

However, I can't predict whether the new team will adopt such things or just forget about it.

36 minutes ago, Dwing said:

A general problem I see with many figure games now, is it is not young people or new players it attracts because of the price. In my x-wing group I think we have gotten two new x-wing players and lost a lot more to 2.0. Likewise MCP is played by guys who used to play x-wing. But a cross the boards its mostly older guys (sorry guys 😂) already bitten by figure gaming and with a lot of capital who buys x-wing and MCP. I think these games has priced a lot of people out with their high prices. No way I would start with x-wing if I had to start my collection today. X-wing was my gate way game back into figure games after being grossed out by the GW machine many years ago. It was fast, easy and reasonably cheap to get into. I don't think 2.0 have any of those advantages anymore.

Same here. The local group disappeared a year before 2.0. The price increase for the 2.0 models was the best way of both keeping those veterans from returning and scare away new players.

The best I can hope from the move is that they maintain the current distribution model, but also create rules/models for ground assault, co-op and solo (maybe with an app). Also hopefully they'll still release 2.0 versions of the missing 1.0 ships. Oh, and maintain/move over these forums without deleting the content.

Or, well, maybe they'll just F it up and I'll have two less varieties of plastic crack (XW/armada) to spend my money on.