Mattr0polis said:

Well, considering there is not a single competitive scene for ANY of there other card game in my entire country.. this is a non-issue for me. The LCGs are criminally underplayed and in may case, if you do not play with friends you do not play it.

MarthWMaster said:

Yeah I have to agree here, some board games are crazy set up time… Arkham Horror springs to mind

Tobogan said:

This.

I don't like to be forced to play only one side, when there are more to choose. Imagine the stupidity if Warhammer: Invasion was a co-op game, where you can play only High Elves, because Mr. Game Designer was so kind and decided for me whom I will be playing for.

solo , standalone games are for players with no social life , i prefer games with more than one player so that me and my friends can all enjoy it together

I can't decide if I like this better now or not… Honestly I play LOTR LCG so much that I'm not sure if I wanted another co-op game… And I was turned off by the idea of playing as the Rebellion the entire time. Now if they would have done a Empire controlled co-op game I'd be all for it.

That being said, not really sure if I need another competitive Star Wars card game either… I'm just taking a wait and see approach with the whole game, really. But my hopes aren't exceptionally high, to say the least.

wormiespice said:

This is so cryptic. I'm having a difficult time deciding whether you are expressing approval or disapproval of the PvP remodel. On the one hand, "solo" and "standalone" describes the cooperative incarnation of the game, which could be played by one player versus the Empire Deck, whilst on the other, both versions of the game can be played "with more than one player," though only the cooperative version could be played with the 3+ participants implied by "me and my friends." Regardless, your suggestion is that at least one iteration of the Star Wars LCG is "for players with no social life," which is a hostile comment that will not generate any positive discussion.

Again, let me restate: this is not "ANOTHER" pvp star wars CCG/LCG. There are currently ZERO on the market. Decipher and WoTC have both been out of print for years. By virtue of being out of print they are automatically harder to collect and aquire cards for, let alone find players for.

By the way, yes I played both, and was never that gung-ho about either. I will be giving this game a fair shake, however

clique84 said:

I think what people mean by "another" is that they already sank hundreds of dollars into other PvP Star Wars card games and were hoping for something fresh. The mechanics ARE different but I don't want to pay for yet another card game that I won't be able to find other players for.

I hate admitting this…but if I were to go strictly by that demo, this game looks booooring. It really could have been any game. Star Wars was glued on to a new game mechanic. But, it didn't really feel like Star Wars. I'll stick with Netrunner when it comes out.

Also, did anyone notice a single ship card? One Tie Fighter? One X-Wing? Anything?

Doc9 said:

Yep. You have to look really carefully, but at various points in the video, depending on the camera angle and where Zach's hands are positioned, a Star Destroyer and several X-Wings are clearly visible on the table.

Too bad they could not do both co-op and pvp…..I think there is room for both. As far as a co-op variant they could have done some type of hybrid where one player is light side and the other is dark side and they are both competing/pvping to complete the same mission.

+1 to the topic of this thread. I was really excited to hear about this last year, and went so far as purchase the LotR LCG so that I could familiarize myself with the mechanics of a co-op game. Obviously, I'm disappointed with this news. I won't be getting into this iteration of Star Wars PvP, although I am interested to see what they do with the artwork.

I am a "vet" of previous card games with this license, so my perception of a new game will be different than someone who has never played one of them. If you are excited about this game, good for you. I hope you enjoy it, FFG supports it, and that it is everything you have imagined. I have spent years facing my best friend (met in college) on opposite sides of the Force. The games were fun, but a win for one player always meant a loss for the other. I was looking forward to combining our efforts to overcoming difficult obstacles and winning games together. It's not going to happen, and I'm okay with that.

As an ancillary benefit, the exposure my friend and I have had with LotR has made it our preferred game atm. We are really enjoying it, and it is reasonable to assume that FFG support will continue for as long as the license remains relevant (Hobbit Trilogy). I'm holding out a grain of hope that they will come up with a co-op mechanic, but I'm not expecting anything.

No longer interested now that it's not Co-op.

Eagerly awaiting X-Wing though!

Who is to say they won't do a Co-Op in the near future? FFG has the gaming rights to the Star Wars properties, so it is in their best interest to issue a Co-Op as well as a PvP game.

I don't understand the logic that co-op meant you can't play the darkside. I can, within 20 minutes crank out a preliminary design of a co-op game where you can be EITHER side. And I'm just a dumb engineer who doesn't design boardgames. The argument is moot as this is now a PvP game rather than co-op, but that mindset that co-op = no darkside is an awfully rigid and restrictive mindset.

I also play LOTR, and nobody asks to play as Sauron mostly because his character wasn't really fleshed out very much but if there was a desire, it is possible to crank out a Sauron expansion where you get to be the dark forces for a change.

No living in boxes, expand the mind and be free!

Unfortunately, I've not the time or resources or license to produce my own co-op Star Wars game to sell you, so I can only hope to achieve the status of legendary whiner on this thread.

I play the Lord of the Rings LCG. I too like the format and the co-op nature of it. I'm saddened by the news of no Star Wars Co-op.

I play solo mostly and the thought of playing the Star Wars equivilant of LotR was something I was looking forward to. Albeit with the added expensive of an LCG and I'm already invested in Warhammer Invasion.

Unfortunately a player vs player option is of no interest to me, especially when I hear that land based characters can take out spaceships. I was looking forward to C3PO providing points of diplomacy and R2D2, points towards a technical challenge, Han's blaster taking down some stormtroopers. Add in space element as well and the universe is your oyster.

Maybe there is a co-op version in a galaxy far far away.

schmoo34 said:

While I see where you're coming from, and I agree for the most part, I think that the mindset you speak of stems more from the fact that the flavor of the Empire itself does not mesh particularly well in a fan's mind with traditional co-op and all that entails, in the sense that players are working towards the same goal with no ulterior motives involved. For it to truly feel like you're playing the dark side, there has to be some competitive element occupying the group simultaneously, such as it does in the Clix boardgame, Lord of the Rings: Nazgul. In that game, each player is a minion of Sauron, but only one Nazgul can ultimately be crowned as the new Witch-king, and therefore you must be the one to impress the Dark Lord the most with your vile accomplishments.

Similarly, when you work for the Empire, you and your teammates may be sharing the task of rooting out Rebel vermin, but in the end you want to rise up higher in the ranks of the Imperial military machine than they do. True friendship is hard to foster in a political system crafted by the most evil man in the galaxy. Now, a concept like that is certainly compelling as an alternative Star Wars gaming experience, but it would not foster the same sense of camaraderie that you would find in a Rebellion-based co-op game. And I think this is why most people are dismissing the idea out of hand, whether or not they're realizing it.

MarthWMaster said:

I contributed to a post earlier this year on this topic, and my main issue with Imperial co-op was thematic. As a co-op game, the players need to struggle against an AI that is superior in strength; there has to be a challenge to overcome. This is easy if the players are the Rebel Alliance, the Empire is much better equipped than they are. To swap roles would be difficult. I suppose you could make it a "squish the ants" mechanic where the Empire has to judiciously allocate their resources to prevent the Rebellion from gaining a specified amount of influence in a given system. As it was said earlier, it's a moot point.

@schmoo34, I will always consider you a legendary whiner. :-) <jk>

I was mainly hoping for a Solo/Co-op because I don't know any other people who are into this kind of game that would spring the cash to invest in a new card game. I want to have a CURRENT Star Wars card game, but I can't justify it since I spent hundreds on SW:CCG hoping to get to play in tournaments. Then, when I finally had a car and could drive to tournaments, that's when Lucasfilm pulled the license from Decipher. I got burned majorly in that deal. Then, the new WotC game was terrible in comparison.

MarthWMaster said:

I work for the British civil service, and I have true friends within it! I don't know what you mean!

+1 for disappointed,

I too was hoping for the solo play and coop, I also feel similar to those when they say I already have several star wars pvp games, not a big fan of having to shell out for yet another. This doesnt mean i am against the pvp fans, it just means i was hoping for something different and new. Granted the game will be new and the mechanics of the pvp will be different but its still the pvp. I wanted something to break that mold. I will give the game a try but honestly I dont know if i am gonna wanna keep buying sets from another sw pvp game. I already have nearly every decipher sw card and very much love that game. It feels for me anyway kinda redundant to keep buying sw pvp. I passed on the wizards game after buying 1 set much for this same reason.

As far as this thread is concerned, I think those who r upset by this decision have every right to voice their opinions just as those who didnt like the coop option had a right to voice their concerns. FFG should be able to view all fan feedback and who knows, while I doubt they r gonnna delay and revamp once again, they may decide to give some love to the coop fans and make a secondary star wars lcg. (thats what i am pulling for anyway)

I think it was a mistake for ffg to announce coop and then change it to pvp. Thats like telling us we r gonna get ice cream but then giving us sherbert. (Prolly a bad analogy lol) Point is it got the coop fans hopes up and then shattered them. Like i said i understand why ffg did it, they didnt feel the coop model was good enough, still i think it sucks that they scraped it and changed the entire model to pvp. Anyway those r my thoughts.

Well, I was going to pick up at least the core either way. I do find it harder to get opponents, so the Co-Op sounded good, but I can't say I'm truly disappointed.

I do enjoy that I can play LotR solo to test a concept before meeting up with friends, and with Netrunner coming out we'll have another PvP. But again, I'm still excited and will definitely pick it up!

At least it shows that FFG is truly dedicated to making an a game worthy of the IP.

+1 definitely wont be buying now.. I have good star wars competitive , was looking forward to co op /solo. It works for LoTr.

Just read the announcement , my response was to buy the Star Trek Next Generation Deck Building Game.

I'm not getting it now that there is no co-op/solo.