Ok , you wanted a well organized list , I will even put it through my word processor program .


1) lets talk about your companies willingness to answer questions . Back around July of last year , I had a few simple questions about the product . I had seen it here on BGG , and the info on the FFG site didn’t answer the questions . So being naive , I thought I would email FFG . Using your email inquiry page I asked if the minis would always be plastic , or if your were going to do a mix of plastic and/or metal and/or resin , what scale the figures are , and would they always come base coated . 3 simple questions , none of which dealt with game mechanics , expansions , proprietary rights , or anything that should be a secret . About 2-3 weeks later , the response I got back was very curt , and said that its “against FFG policy “to answer such inquiries , and that the only source for the release of such information is on the official product page ( which even now , doesn’t answer any of those questions ) or on the FFG forums ( that you guys don’t participate on ) .

I sent the same questions to DUST GAMES , and got a friendly response back in about 48 hours .

Now since you guys don’t publicize the release dates of the products to the public . I had no idea when the game was going to come out . But i had a big idea . I wanted to run a charity release event here for a local food bank , and wanted to see if DM would be willing to support it with a model kit or something similar , and they responded back that they are not allowed to participate in any promotions , by contract , FFG is the sole promoter of the game , and they could not violate that . They went on to say that they thought it was a great idea , and would pass it on to you guys . Now I went ahead and sent an inquiry to you guys asking if you would be interested in supporting a charity event , and if you could give me any idea when the release would be , so that I could try to set something up and get other local sponsors . I even had my FLGS “Active Imagination” send an inquiry to FFG see if maybe they could get me help and info from you guys .

We never got an answer from FFG .

And I’m not the only one complaining about either not getting answers , or not getting them in less than 2-3 weeks time . it’s been a common complaint .

In fact , frequently asked questions are the reason FAQ’s are created , and a lot of new players have the same questions that repeat over and over in the forums . Go look at the FAQ sticky on the DT forums on the FFG website , its been up since December 16 of last year , says FFG is creating an FAQ , BUT the entire thread is other PLAYERS answering the questions , because FFG still hasn’t released an FAQ , and doesn’t participate on their own forums to answer those questions , so a lot devolve into arguments .

The fastest , best , source for answers is by contacting Dust models , since they will DEFINITELY get you an answer , usually in 48 hours or less .


2) lets talk about those stat cards from DG that all the players want , but that you guys apparently don’t want them to release with their 1:48 model kits .

If the truth was just that those cards were from some beta test , as Arkangle has said , then there is no reason that DG couldn’t have made new updated cards to release with the models , since people want them . One of the issues people had when I did my demo week , was that they wanted to wait until there was a lot more stuff out for the game , because they wanted variety . DG adding in cards to their 1:48 kits would have helped sell the game , like forge world helps sell WH40K to the crowd that wants the larger heavier armor .

And I recall the announcement that DG put out saying stat cards would no longer be included , at the same time you guys issued a statement that those models would never be official , which sounded a little curt and uptight .

Since then , DG DID give stats to use for the barking dog , on their face book page . They told people to just use the stats for the pounder . People want stats for the barking dog , to use as a barking dog , not ANOTHER pounder .

So if you guys are not stopping DG from releasing stat cards with the 1:48 kits , then why wouldn’t they , it helps them sell models , and helps sell the game THEY INVENTED .

3) lets talk about media promotions . Other than banner ads , and crappy looking ads in “Game Trade Magazine “ , all you have is the website . I and many others only happened onto this game , by coming across it here on BGG .

When I asked my FLGS manager about DT , he only knew it was some how related to the Dust board game . This is something a lot of other people have complained about as well , that FFG has failed to get the info and really pitch the game to game store owners . I am the sole reason my FLGS stocks DT , because I did what FFG should have done . GW on the other hand makes sure retailers have access to lots of information , and is willing to sit and make the sales pitch for their products .

If I click on those banner ads , they take me to your website , which has a product description , but still only a limited amount of info , and a picture of the product box . Go to DG site and look at a model kit , its got a limited product description , and several views of the actual model . Same thing if you go look at a figure or model kit on GW’s site NOT JUST A BOX . And if the info in the ad is not enough , you can call or email either company and get an answer , as opposed to emailing FFG and MAYBE getting an answer in 2-3 weeks .

As for the ads in GTM , most gamers I know don’t actually read or pick up GTM . Looking back at Rackham’s AT-43 , the first time I came across that was when I saw an ad in dungeon magazine . And I saw several ads after the first on other gamer magazines . Those ads had me looking it up on BGG , not stumbling across it on BGG .

Your painting contest , didn’t see mention of it anywhere but on the FFG website , asked my store about it , they had no idea . Now my FLGS had a big WH40K event this last Sunday , and I sat there and listened to what the organizer had to say . He doesn’t work for GW , he is just a local guy that is part of their network of community organizers , and he stood there detailing info for the event , and qualifiers and regional . He had the info , GW made sure he was aware of what whas going on , and used him to get the word out about the events and contests going on . To add to the promotional impact , GW would have also posed pics of the other entries , but I am forced to wonder if the lack of public promotion means there were only a few entries .

Community organizers and game stores can contact GW to get prize support for their events , GW is happy to do it . But anyone trying to set up an event for DT has to contend with maybe some day getting an answer , if FFG feels like it . And there have been complaints by other players about the issue of just getting game note kits for their venues to run FFG organized play events .

4) lets talk about your DT line managers . Back when you were distributing AT-43 and your Mutant Chronicles line was yet to be released , you sent around demo teams , and one came to my FLGS , I over heard him talking about how chaotic the MC line was , because of rotating line mangers , and that the new one didn’t have a plan for it yet . I didn’t think much of it , but it definitely wasn’t looking good for MC .

Back in January , I was contacted by Anton about becoming part of the community program . He was promoted out of the position , and who ever was doing it after him was promoted out of that position , and god only knows how many people had the position before Anton . Looks a lot like what the demo guy was talking about for MC is what is going on with DT .

5) lets talk about the community program . I was contacted in January about it , I had to follow up on it , because Anton was apparently to busy , and told me it was still on , but behind schedule . A month or so later , followed up again only to find out that Anton had been promoted out of the position , was asked to submit an article , after which we would discuss it again . Sent the article and waited some more . Eventually , after trying to follow up 2 more times with no response , I created my BGG blog where I post all the stuff that I had held onto for FFG .

Could be attributed to the whole email issue , could be you just don’t care , either way , it’s not helping your community program .

Now while some would point to [so] rices 2 articles , come to find out , you don’t even pay him for his work , he had to sign a contract saying he would not seek any compensation . Any other major game company would have at least sent him some product , since his efforts help sell yours . So I don’t see a lot of takers for your community program , when you don’t pay people to submit articles , and get ignored and blown off in the process . It very much sounds like you think you are doing him a favor , when he is in fact apparently doing YOU a favor ……since you don’t pay him .

Its one less promotion that could have been , and that other major companies successfully use to excite the people who buy their products .

6) lets talk about gamers .

While there are some die hard exceptions to the rule , board gamers in general will buy a board game , and play in a limited number of times in the course of a month , because it is one board game among many in their collection . So they only need a small amount of support and interaction . Expansions are expected , but not for quite some time after the release of the last .

Miniatures gamers will play the same miniatures game , several times a week , every week , in many cases for years . They play the game so often that they run into questions regarding rules . The nature of their armies means they constantly want info on the next expansion , on the direction of the game , they want to see pictures of WIP , they want to a constant feed and attention from the company .

They are very different groups . While I have no doubt that FFG is good at dealing with the limited needs and wants of board gamers , you have not shown the ability to keep up with the demands and needs of minis gamers .

And to those that harp on DT being a board game , FFG has marketed it to minis gamers and pushed it in that direction from the start .

In fact that’s why you guys publish titles that are based on GW material , because GW knows that in order to keep their products on top and in the stores , they need to give that level of attention to the miniatures games , and other lesser titles are published by their subsidiaries , or outside companies like FFG .

FFG inability to deal with answering emails , the constant change in program leadership , the low level of media promotions , its all ok for board gamers , but not for the minis gamer crowd , if a game is to thrive .

7) I have suggested many times since the initial release of the new points system that you wanted to push this game into being a WH40K jr.

The new skewed points system , and the holes it opens up , and now to find out that the guy doing your table top rules , only has one real rules set in the last 7 years , with 15 to 20 years working successfully on WH40K .

a lot of us got into this game because its not Wh40K , and a lot of people have said I must be wrong , but seriously , Andy Chambers ? How much more proof do people need ?

8) you enacted the new points system with the claim of “overwhelming positive reception “ do you mean by the low number of people that attended your official events , like the regional event that had only 4 people show up ?

If you go by the BGG poll (which I still don’t think is really accurate ) , it was at about 40% in favor of the old points , that doesn’t sound like such an overwhelming positive reception when 4 out of 10 people responded that they like the old points .

The truth is , you did it , because you wanted to push the game into a traditional mini game direction like WH40K , regardless of what the players wanted .

that’s why there was never a poll , or any form of inquiry on FFG part as to how the customers felt .

You could have supported both systems , but you didn’t care what the customers thought and went your own way .

9) the new points system is skewed . It doesn’t fix anything , and opens up holes for abuse that were not there before regarding artillery observer screens , and tank heavy armies .

To listen to Duncan Idaho over on dakkadakka , it was needed to 1) play larger games 2) protect tanks from those horribly over powered infantry , and 3) more accurately represent the differences between the squads . While FFGJeremy has said DI doesn’t work for you , he sure seems to know a lot of inside stuff , so gotta believe that the reasons he gives for the change , are the reasons he was given for the change .

1) I have played 50+point games , which is equivilant to 500+ of your points , so we canplay bigger games with the old points . The only thing larger about the games under the new points is the points number , which brings in close to being inline with games like WH40K that play games with 500+points worth of troops , it’s a cosmetic fix to appeal to WH40K players .

2) I have never heard anyone complain that tanks were just so weak that they needed to be protected from those over powered infantry .

3) the points system only takes into account one factor , and thus doesn’t represent the differences between the unit in average situations , and creates 2 big holes for abuse by allowing undercoated units to abuse a screening strategy , and allowing for more tank heavy armies (ala WH40K) .

10) a years time has gone by since the initial release of the game , and FFG hasn’t fixed any of this , and as much as some may like to think its just me saying this , I get a lot of PM’s from people who agree and tell me to kepp going , but don’t want to deal with the other sides belittling themselves .

NOTICE: i dont call other people names , no matter how much I dissagree with them , but i get called names from time to time when the other side doesnt have facts/examples to back up their arguments . i havent belittled my opponents , even as they seek to belittle me .

oh , and since i deactivatedmy FFG account , could some one tell "Lotus" i love his work . i had a player point out his ulyseese walker , and i love it , made me work on something similar that will be in my blog in a couple weeks .

Christian T. Petersen

( Flightmaster )

Can you provide a link? Some of the response got cut off. Sounds to me that FFG knows what they are talking about when it comes to Dust.

Kris Issue 11: The new point system for DT is terrible, it is bad for the game

We disagree, and so does pretty much every player (but you) that we’ve talked to (and we have many players inside FFG as well). I can assure you this system is critical for DT’s success. Keep in mind the first DT core set was completely made outside FFG’s control, and did not have the benefit of FFG’s insights and experience.

So why is another point system better?

While the old point system (very basic) worked fine within the parameters of the old core set -- or what you could realistically mix from 1-3 core sets, the problem occurs when you start being able to buy the individual units.

We made the tournament point system available early in 2011, which was right before we launched the individual units. This was important to not have the competitive scene collapse on itself.

The fact is this. Every DT unit is not balanced against every other unit, nor do you want it to be, you want certain soldiers to be better than others.

Yet they were all costed the same in the old simpler point system. This works fine within a pre-balanced constrained set (i.e. as provided in the core set) and when both sides are similarly constrained. However, when a player can start buying individual units with no limit, and can essentially make an army of whatever combination of units he/she pleases, then the system simply breaks down.

You can bet the competitive play experience would have started deteriorating. Min-max players would start fielding entire armies of just one unit type (the most effective one), leading to boring, always-similar army compositions, and increasingly poorer play experience, especially to new and more casual players.

Since we care about the game, since we have substantial investment in the games success, we very much want it to succeed, and so clearly it needed a new point system to grow and prosper.

Before we launched the tournament point system, we had two choices: a) create a very elaborate army building system that constrain certain unit types, artificially (via scenarios and restrictions) holding balance in place or b) accurately cost units for ability, and let players build whichever armies they want.

“a” is almost impossible to keep balanced, especially as as more units are introduced monthly. So, in the end, we went with “b”. It is more elegant, and gives players the freedom to experiment with whichever armies they want to build, and it promotes less homogenous armies on the field.

Another important insight into the point system is that of design space. As more, and different, units are created for DT, designers now have more room for specialization and granularity in design. They can create units that are amazingly powerful (but expensive) or overly weak (but cheap). This means more, and more interesting (i.e. different) unit types can be created and played making for a better future for DT.

This is an important point: This system makes DT better as a competitive game, to be better expanded, better balanced, and to give a better, more varied, play experience.

[Hypothetical Kris follow up question] How can you say that “you know what you’re doing”, look at Mutant Chronicles, and AT-43 (and Confrontation: AoR).

Good questions. Vastly different answers, here goes:

Mutant Chronicles
MC had a great game system in our opinion, one that was well supported and documented. Unfortunately, three issues stood in the way of people buying into the system to the levels needed to keep the game going. 1) We tried to do something different in making the minis 55mm (which was our call, and our bad), 2) we chose our first pre-painted figs factory poorly, so the first figs were not as cool as we expected (this greatly improved later, but too late), and 3) the game was marketed as a collectible “blind buy” game -- but we changed this in the last month before release, as it was our feeling that collectible was not the best option for the market. This caused, in hindsight, confusion in the retail base, which did not help the game launch -- but I will argue the insight was correct, collectible games have been in serious decline since.

AT-43 and Confrontation
FFG single-handedly kept those games alive for more than a year-and-a-half. Because we truly believed in these games, we purchased near 90% of Rackham's output and worked hard to completely stabilize their logistics and distribution in the U.S (while Europe burned due to prior decisions by Rackham) and thus kept Rackham alive. Never has there been a better “white knight” story in the industry (at least from what I have heard).

??However, not only did Rackham enter [French] chapter-11 about a month after we started distributing their business (causing all sorts of issues), but FFG was unable to actually do any official marketing for the game. In fact, we were proactively kept at arms length by Rackham -- even as we kept it alive. We were not informed of new releases by Rackham until they were announced to the public, we had no say in releases (despite guaranteeing purchases) which resulted in too-many near-identical products. Rackham insisted their English language sites was to remain the hub for information, essentially robbing FFG of any chance to make a marketing impact. We tried to fix these things mid-stream, but Rackham was too addicted to our sales, to constrained by the courts, and not willing to cede any control. On top of this, FFG was a distributor for the products, not the originator, so our margins were limited. And so we bled.

When Rackham returned from liquidation, we were told by their new management, in so many words, to “take a hike”. Despite the fact that we had more than $2 Million in inventory, and that we had made everything possible for their return.

So we gently removed the knife from our back, and moved on, poorer but wiser. As seems to be norm, this new European company (Rackham 2.0) completely underestimated the complexity, logistics, and the effort required in the U.S. market, and did not listen at all to our recommendations on products before they walked away from us. As they were still under court administration, they even kept FFG from being able to sell any of our massive stock into Europe (causing us not insignificant financial headaches).

History shows that Rackham 2.0 lasted about 2 years as a new company and then went into final liquidation. This “AT-43” story remains one of the most misinformed in the marketplace, and frustratingly seems held against us on many occasions. It is with confidence I can say that FFG’s experiences during its “Rackham period” are hugely beneficial to growing and managing DT now.

Paolo Parente was part of Rackham through the whole period, so if anyone are in doubt of these events, feel free to ask him.

Kris Issue 12: A year has gone by, and FFG has taken it in a terrible direction and/or done nothing to move it forward.
Seriously? We took over a game from another publisher at their request, we launched it, gave Paolo and his wonderful team a chance to expand their vision dramatically. We’ve released and announced more than 25 DT products at great investment, we’ve given it nearly unmatched advertising and promotion. We’ve launched organized play (Game Night) events, regional events, world championship (at GEN CON) and we’re getting ready to launch several international editions of DT.

Saying that we’ve done “little or nothing” is simply bunk. Other than Paolo and his team, we’re the greatest champion for this line. Could we do more? Of course, but we’re doing our best and seeking to continually improve.

I’m really excited about the things that Paolo has created for GEN CON that we’ll show there. We’re excited about the next wave of Dust Tactics releases. We’re excited about Dust Warfare and that two different, but great, game systems will be able to take advantage of these amazing models.

Based on your two next emails, I’ve added a few more grievances.

Kris Issue 13: I don’t want to go to FFG’s site to learn of news and announcements (such as the new FAQ). Other companies send out emails and announcement to fans for every piece of news they have, and those companies go to third party sites to update information and provide the news there as well.
First of all, “they” don’t. There may be some companies that have a weekly emails on single games, and some news may be broadcast by press release, and some smaller companies even update third party sites. But this is not the norm.

FFG provides frequent updates on all our games, and you are able to read all the news for DT easily here:
'>


However, what FFG does do, is provide full RSS support for every game in our catalog. If you subscribe to the RSS feed of your choice, you will get (by email, or whatever RSS feed you have) instant updates on any news, articles, or other information posted about the FFG game you’ve subscribed to. The RSS feeds are very granular, so you can subscribe to all news, news by game, news by forum, by forum thread, etc.

You’re essentially asking that you get all your information about your favorite game without visiting the core website for the game. This is not a very reasonable request, but even so you can use RSS feed to get the news instantly delivered to you.

Kris Issue 14: I ask questions on the FFG message boards, or here on BGG, why is FFG not actively in these places answering questions.

First of all, you’ve missed the message that you got when you signed up for your FFG account, which is:

“We would like to remind you that the Fantasy Flight Games community forums have been created as a meeting point for fans of the games we publish, a place where they can exchange ideas and opinions about these games and meet other people that share the same hobby. It is not intended to be a way to contact FFG directly, nor to ask for rules clarification or support.

Please visit the FFG Customer Service page to send us all your rules questions or contact customer support. To prevent useful rules clarifications from being buried in a forum thread, we will post our responses to frequently asked questions on the Support page for each game.

Thank you, and pleasant posting!”

Neither do we go out to third party forums and answer questions there. ??

So, why is that? Why don’t we do this?

The answer is, that such behavior would, in fact, be poor customer service from FFG.

Huh? How does that make sense?

There are three key reasons for this:

1) We cannot be everywhere. *If* we were to go out and answer questions on forums (on BGG, our own, or elsewhere) then we would likely only be able to catch, say, one in four questions. This means that 75% of our customers would feel directly neglected by FFG -- i.e. “why did you answer this guys’ question on this forum, and not mine (on some other forum thread”. ??We want to serve everyone equally, which is why we provide everyone with a common place to ask question. The fact that I’m answering your questions on this board, is an exception to FFG policy, and something that I’m uncertain is wise, but doing anyway in my capacity as the CEO.

2) If we were to answer questions on various forums, then we’d be setting up an environment where answers would be widely scattered around the internet. This is, in our opinion, not a good service to customers.

A rebuttal to this point could be: “But can’t you gather this information in one place later?” Due to the number of game lines that FFG wants to give quality support to, there would be too great a chance of improper compilation, which would erode confidence in such compilations, essentially sending customers into the corners of the internet to find answers, which again, is not good service.

3) We want the answers to be good and consistent. When we receive quality questions we want to make sure that they’re vetted by the designers, producers, and other knowledgeable parties inside FFG. This means questions need to be consolidated and reviewed to make sure we can give a quality answers.

If we were to have junior staffers patrol all sorts of internet forums (including our own) for questions, we believe the chances of incorrect and inconsistent answers would be too great, and in the long run more damaging to the players.

Does this mean we can't do a better job with DT or other games? No, we can always improve. DT, however, is a special case, as it is actually designed and handled by Dust Studio, and while we help with balancing and testing, we have need to consult with them on questions. Dust Studio are both in China and France, which is part of the issue in clarification delays for this game. I agree that an FAQ should probably have come somewhat sooner than it had (it was just posted for GEN CON).

These responsibilities, however, is scheduled to change this Fall, and I think DT fans will see FFG be able to more rapidly address rules and play environment questions

You’re right that some smaller companies are able to patrol message boards and third party sites, looking to help their customer base there. This is great, and something that FFG once had the ability to do as well.

However, you’ll see no larger companies do this (including GW, which you use as an example) due to the very valid reasons stated above. This is just not good, consistent, or scalable service in the long run as the responsibilities and expectations of a company grows. ??Many people will forgive smaller companies the inconsistencies that such active support provides, but larger companies that must service larger constituencies, simply do not get that luxury of forgiveness and patience from their customers, nor should they.

With many of your complaints, you’re asking for small company behavior while at the same time demanding large company services, promotions, and consistency. This simply is not realistic, Kris.

---

Those are the answers to your issues Kris, as I know them (and guessed some). FFG is not perfect, and we work to improve every day. There are issues with communication that should have been handled better by us, agreed.

However, stating that we’re not doing a great job supporting, promoting, and working for greatness of DT, is just purely false. Don’t take my word for it. Show the list of activities to any other publisher and get their opinion.

I’m not intending to get drawn into a discussion here, and I’ll leave my answers as they are. I’m sure there are some of these answers that you disagree with, which you’re entitled to. However, now you (and everyone else interested) have more direct information, and hopefully an understanding for what you sometimes perceive as “bad service” for DT or other games, is, in fact, the best possible custodianship.

Christian?
FFG

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/680077/dust-warfare/page/2

Wow. Just, wow.

While it's all the same old same, same old from Kris (a few worthy points wrapped in loads of paranoia and a massive persecution complex) I am happy to see an insightful and lengthy response from FFG. After a good read through it's exactly the response I'd expect from a guy trying to run a business talking to a rabid fan. It's not what hard core fans want to hear, but it probably hues closer to facts and reality than spin. I think that Kris just can’t get it through his head that DT is just one of many, many lines that FFG produces. DT is not FFG’s flagship product like GW/40K and probably receives staff resources in accordance with its volume of sales. That said, interactions with FFG have always felt as Kris says “curt”. I’ve had the same experience with FFG since I bought my first game from them back in 2004. While the responses I’ve received from FFG over the years have always been professional, they’ve always lacked any kind of emotion or passion. I’ve always felt that I was dealing with a group detached from the products they sold. Anyhow, here are the things that really got my attention:

1 - The relationship between DG and FFG: I've always been curious who is in charge of the game. Is FFG in charge, Dust studios or if it's a mutual partnership. I'm still confused even after Christian's response. I'm not sure it really matters in the big picture, but it would still be nice to know.

2 - DG collector models and playable stats: I appreciate both sides of the argument and while Christian makes good points, I just don't think it would be so detrimental to the game to allow collectors models in the game. It's a pretty simple fix. Just give the collector model's wimpy stats and/or a very clear "opt out" to opponents’ ala the 40k/forgeworld model (in 40k you can only use FW models with permission from an opponent and they are not tournament legal). On the other hand, I've only got the Jagdluther from DG and I'm not passionate about it one way or another. If it finds its way into the game in the future great.

3 - The AT-43 saga. As a die hard player from day one of the AT-43 launch until it's painful demise and a sentinel (volunteer promoter and demo player), this is the first time I've heard the official FFG side of the story between the Rackham and FFG relationship. While it's totally irrelevant to Dust, I found it fascinating a read that jives pretty well with many of the rumors we had heard from Rackham studio employees.

+If Christain or anyone at else at FFG is reading, MORE communication with fans is always better. Your news blurbs always sound like carnival barking rather than communication. A real post from a real person in company in plain language every once in a while will always be more welcome.

The saddest part of all this? That despite all the effort put into Christian's response, it will fall on deaf ears. 'grandinquisitorkris' will just find new things to complain about. and part of me thinks he just likes the attention, so i take the pledge now that i will never read, respond to or knowingly look at another one of his tirades.

theguildllc said:

+1 for that mate. I know what youre saying...

DoomOnYou72 said:

Just gotta make it a +2 . Per his own top 10 list of games, Dust Tactics doesnt even rate on his list so I really hope that he can find happiness on the forums for the games that he does like.

I was going to change my name to "Fluffy Kitten Fulminarex" so that I could avoid the bad press attached to the GRAND INQUISITOR title, but now I think I will just leave it alone, since my only rant is ever about 1 thing. I do not care about the old point system and its demise, don't care about AT-43, though I did like the giant gorillas, and my opinions about FFG go back many many years before there were ranting Fanboys and forum stalkers in the world.

Well kudos to Christian for sitting on his butt and answering all those questions. I wouldn't have had that kind of patience. My response would have prolly just be "STFU NOOB" and then I'd put him on ignore.

Necross said:

I reposted becouse Christian answer- i think its important for us how FFG see its product what they going to do with it etc.

We know already Kris opinion . And i still think that he had some good points, but at least he provoked FFG to make a stand and he still does a lot good work on his classic blog.

I read that as it was happening on BGG. Thanks for posting it here Poyet so that others might read it. I can understand FFG's stand on not posting here as I believe it would would fall under "give them an inch and they will want a mile". Never the less it was great to hear from Chris.

-Jeff