Again. Who said the ships move? Also, overpriced ships? This is a miniature game…people pay 300 for a collosal red dragon, they even payed 100 bucks to obtain the falcon 2 months before. A limited edition ship that costs 50-80 bucks with missions and new gameplay modes will be appealing to a lot of people. Clubs, stores will buy them to run game nights. Some of you payed 40 bucks for the core set (not enough to have lots of fun) and have bought at least 2 expansions for each…are you telling me you wont pay more for a huge ship (with the paint and details the minis have)??? I call bs. You know you will. In my opinion again the huge ships would be objectives. They dont need to move at all. The area with the asteroids can be the area for a big ship in a new assault or deffend mode. Is it that hard to imagine?
News on Wave 3
Rince said:
4. Cost. FFG currently asks $30+tax for a medium-sized ship. A larger ship would cost much more than that (50-60 dollars, maybe even more), and the more expensive the ship, the less people will buy it. Yet, the cost of developing it is just as high as a small ship's, if not more! So, it would be a risky business venture to say the least, and companies don't usually like taking risks.
5. It would be a tournament nightmare. "Medium" ships can already cost as much as half the standard 100 point squad limit. What would larger ships cost? The entire 100 points? Playing with only one ship sounds like loads of fun… Of course, you could always just increase the point limit. That, however, brings in more toruble than it solves. First of all, you would seriously limit the number of your contestents as not everyone can afford a 2-300 points squadron. Also, what do you do if someone shows up with a 300 point squadron consisting entirely of small ships (perhaps 15-20 of them)? A game like that could easily last 5-6 hours. You just can't allow that in a tournament.
6. A very large ship would not see much regular play (reasons above); its use would likely be situational (as yourself said: played mostly in objective based games). So I ask, who would want to buy a $60 ship just play it in a couple of scenarios, and would it be enough to generate enough profit for FFG? Well, I cannot answer that question, but I am leaning toward 'no.'
Of course, I am not saying we won't see larger ships. FFG might surprise us. I am just saying that I wouldn't hold my breath… 
Rince said:
LedZep said:
…why not make some official ones with official rules?
There are numerous reasons:
1. The medium ships we have already are clumsy enough; now, imagine an even larger ship trying to maneuver through an asteroid field. Not a fun experience…
2. They would be quite vulnerable. Because X-Wing uses the bases for measurement; obviously, larger ships would need larger bases, which would also mean they would move much faster (just think about the difference we have now with a 1" move between a small ship and Slave 1 for instance; Slave 1 moves much more because of its larger base). Therefore an even larger ship would move even faster, making it a pretty good target for an ion cannon. Imagine an ioned large ship going through an asteroid field (it could suffer 2-3 hits in one turn just from asteroids). Or better, imagine a large ship hit by an ion cannon close to the edge of the table: bamm, there goes your large ship and 2/3 of your squad points; it just fled the battle.
3. X-wing is played in a 3' times 3' square, and there is a reason for this. Almost everyone has a table of this size at home; so FFG does not limit their potential customer base. Everyone can pick up the game and play immediately. As the above example illustrates, you would need a considerably larger surface to play comfortably with large ships, and most of us just don't have that kind of space. Heck, probably most game stores don't have that kind of space. I know I don't, and I sure as heck do not want to play on the floor.
4. Cost. FFG currently asks $30+tax for a medium-sized ship. A larger ship would cost much more than that (50-60 dollars, maybe even more), and the more expensive the ship, the less people will buy it. Yet, the cost of developing it is just as high as a small ship's, if not more! So, it would be a risky business venture to say the least, and companies don't usually like taking risks.
5. It would be a tournament nightmare. "Medium" ships can already cost as much as half the standard 100 point squad limit. What would larger ships cost? The entire 100 points? Playing with only one ship sounds like loads of fun… Of course, you could always just increase the point limit. That, however, brings in more toruble than it solves. First of all, you would seriously limit the number of your contestents as not everyone can afford a 2-300 points squadron. Also, what do you do if someone shows up with a 300 point squadron consisting entirely of small ships (perhaps 15-20 of them)? A game like that could easily last 5-6 hours. You just can't allow that in a tournament.
6. A very large ship would not see much regular play (reasons above); its use would likely be situational (as yourself said: played mostly in objective based games). So I ask, who would want to buy a $60 ship just play it in a couple of scenarios, and would it be enough to generate enough profit for FFG? Well, I cannot answer that question, but I am leaning toward 'no.'
Of course, I am not saying we won't see larger ships. FFG might surprise us. I am just saying that I wouldn't hold my breath…
Rince said:
4. Cost. FFG currently asks $30+tax for a medium-sized ship. A larger ship would cost much more than that (50-60 dollars, maybe even more), and the more expensive the ship, the less people will buy it. Yet, the cost of developing it is just as high as a small ship's, if not more! So, it would be a risky business venture to say the least, and companies don't usually like taking risks.
5. It would be a tournament nightmare. "Medium" ships can already cost as much as half the standard 100 point squad limit. What would larger ships cost? The entire 100 points? Playing with only one ship sounds like loads of fun… Of course, you could always just increase the point limit. That, however, brings in more toruble than it solves. First of all, you would seriously limit the number of your contestents as not everyone can afford a 2-300 points squadron. Also, what do you do if someone shows up with a 300 point squadron consisting entirely of small ships (perhaps 15-20 of them)? A game like that could easily last 5-6 hours. You just can't allow that in a tournament.
6. A very large ship would not see much regular play (reasons above); its use would likely be situational (as yourself said: played mostly in objective based games). So I ask, who would want to buy a $60 ship just play it in a couple of scenarios, and would it be enough to generate enough profit for FFG? Well, I cannot answer that question, but I am leaning toward 'no.'
Of course, I am not saying we won't see larger ships. FFG might surprise us. I am just saying that I wouldn't hold my breath…
Collectors item. Who would have thought that people would buy whole wings of tie fighters, interceptors, x wings, A wings and Y wings… 3 firesprays and 3 falcons…and those are regular players. I dont play that much and I have 8 tie/f & 8 interceptors, 3 Y, 2 A 5 X wings and 2 firesprays. And on top of all that I am a student with no extra money. Thing is I play with people so I provide the army. You dont have to be ritch if you know where to look. Thats why I think that Limited Collectors huge ships would sell. It would make proffit. When wave 1 was on the Convention people bought 2 starter sets and 2 expansions and they sold out quick…thats 80 bucks plus 60 bucks on 4 expansions on a game that just started. When wave 2 could be preordered people ordered a minimun of 1 of each ship…they are still sold out on a lot of places and they even pay 20 bucks for an A wing and an Interceptor.
Again, why not for a huge limited edition ship? Even with one game mode like deffend or attack…it would give you a different option from playing dogfights.
Ive been buying miniatures for a long time and I see that it would be viable.
I dunno, part of what makes the game appealing is that casual purchases or so easy. I'm not breaking the bank by shelling out $20 for a fighter, and I know I'll have fun with it. Full scale capital ships being priced higher won't be flying off the shelves as quick, which means a slower return on their investment to make them in the first place.
I'm not actually sure if I would put out the money to get one since $50+ is too high of an impulse buy for me. I would have to see what's in it, and even then I would be discouraged from getting multiple copies.
Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if the 'initial report' for big ships actually meant the decorateive huge star destroyer just for demonstrating.
Norsehound said:
LedZep said:
Has nobody read any of my messages? Why wouldnt a large ship make any sense? Do you expect to play dogfight missions forever? Large ships could be objective based game modes. It would expand the game like the colossal red dragon does in d&d miniatures or the at-st in the star wars miniatures game. Its not about size… You cannot use the collossal red dragon to play a tournament of d&d miniatures game or a normal game with 2 players. Its a mission, a new gameplay mode. Maybe an excuse to feature a new bomb upgrade card? That way the Y wing and the tie- BOMBER, would fullfill their purpose of being bombers at one time. Althou im calling it right now, the tie bomber will be the same as the Y wing with 2 slots for missiles and more hull with 2 evade and 2 attack. Dont be so negative and quick to judge…everyone is making their own big ship proxies…why not make some official ones with official rules?
TIE Bombers are going to be just as desireable without any newfangled "bombing upgrade" cards. I'm happy enough at the prospect of a double-torp carrier for the Empire, and hopefully with new torpedo upgrades to make Y-Wings more attractive.
Also try convincing someone to shell out $50+ for something highly specialized and can never be used in a pickup match.
Folks making their own capital ships is fine because they're agreeing to have the space and restrictions necessary to field one of them, usually in scenarios which are special exceptions anyway.
Just playing devil's advocate for a moment here, but GW sold a whooooole lotta plastic Baneblades for $100 a pop when Apocalypse dropped a few years back. Never even seen one of those in a codex, let alone a tournament.
It's fun to talk about this stuff and think about it and whatnot but ultimately it's just going to boil down to what FFG wants to do. $50-60 seems like a lot for a big ship, but hells bells, they sell boardgames in that price range as their main business, y'know? As crazy popular as this game is, they may very well be of the opinion they can do just about whatever they want at any price point and assuming it's done in a cool way, it'll sell. And you know something? They're probably right. It's obvious there's a demand for big ships- people have been talking about a 'Vette or a Neb B practically since this game came out.
Will they come out? Is it all rumor? How likely is it? Man, who knows- anything could happen. I'm not holding my breath, but conversely, I definitely wouldn't count them out for any of the reasons mentioned in this thread so far either.
Regarding TIE Bumbers, I could see them dropping bombs firespray style and using two missles.
Possible Loadout:
Attack: 2
Defense:: 3
Hull: 5
Missles: 2
Bombs: 2
Movement: Same as the Y-Wing.
Sounds reasonable, though I think it would have protons as well, probably replacing one of the other seondarys to avoid going overboard and hopefully adding some new options for that upgrade type. I think it would also be a little more maneuverable than a y-wing as well, possibly only having 4 hull to compensate.
On that same note I’d say a B-wing is probably going to be something like:
Attack 3 (maybe four but that breaks the established pattern)
Agility: 1
Hull: 3
Shields: 5
Actions: Target lock, Focus, evade
Movement: Slightly better than the y-wing but with the downside of all hard turns being red (The B-wing’s signature rotating cockpit tended to lock up during hard turns in the fluff).
Upgrades: 1 Proton, 1 Missile, 1 canons, 1 either an additional one of the previous or a crew spot as the B-wing had a two pilot variant.
LedZep said:
Again. Who said the ships move? Also, overpriced ships? This is a miniature game…people pay 300 for a collosal red dragon, they even payed 100 bucks to obtain the falcon 2 months before. A limited edition ship that costs 50-80 bucks with missions and new gameplay modes will be appealing to a lot of people. Clubs, stores will buy them to run game nights. Some of you payed 40 bucks for the core set (not enough to have lots of fun) and have bought at least 2 expansions for each…are you telling me you wont pay more for a huge ship (with the paint and details the minis have)??? I call bs. You know you will. In my opinion again the huge ships would be objectives. They dont need to move at all. The area with the asteroids can be the area for a big ship in a new assault or deffend mode. Is it that hard to imagine?
i'd most likely buy a larger ship which could be used more as terrain/scenario with various turrets or targets on it. i don't think i'd try and get anything bigger than the falcon/firespray as part of a squad build but i think it would make things a bit more enjoyable than just standard dogfighting.
Cid_MCDP said:
Just playing devil's advocate for a moment here, but GW sold a whooooole lotta plastic Baneblades for $100 a pop when Apocalypse dropped a few years back. Never even seen one of those in a codex, let alone a tournament.
I think there's two major differences here. First, GW makes hobby games, heavily populated by modelers and hobbyists who enjoy the creative side of it (building, painting, etc) as much as, if not more than, the actual game. Pointing out that they sold a lot of $100 Baneblades is like pointing out that Revell did OK with their $90 Tirpitz model - it's a completely different market.
Second, and there's not really a nice way to say this, but GW players have been conditioned to have an entirely different concept of value than many other gamers. A minimal entry point for their games, books and basic sets, can easily run $300 before you even touch hobby supplies like glue and paint, and a full army may be $800 or more depending on what you're playing. For them, dropping $100 is coming DOWN, not going up.
Would large static set pieces sell? Probably, but I don't think the appeal would be all that widespread. And that's the problem - price goes up as volume goes down. If something that moves with the volume of the Falcon for Firespray goes for $30, then something five times the size (or more, which is what you're talking about) that would only sell a quarter of the units… $100 would be a very optimistic price point under those conditions.
A couple of thoughts;
Tournament play is NOT the center of the Universe, many of us don't or ever will play in a tournament or care about "Meta"..
Who says this game has to be played on 3x3 board? It is entirely possible to expend the board as the game expands to incorporate larger ships.
Larger ship do make sense for this game as an expansion, if you want to keep smaller 100 point games and strictly dog fighting, great. Many of us will find
use for larger ships.
Lastly, this is all speculation
Art Vandelay said:
A couple of thoughts;
Tournament play is NOT the center of the Universe, many of us don't or ever will play in a tournament or care about "Meta"..
Who says this game has to be played on 3x3 board? It is entirely possible to expend the board as the game expands to incorporate larger ships.
Larger ship do make sense for this game as an expansion, if you want to keep smaller 100 point games and strictly dog fighting, great. Many of us will find
use for larger ships.
Lastly, this is all speculation
I just want to point out that while the rulebook endorses doing what you want, it does set a standard of 100 points and a 3' x 3' playing area. So I would say the rulebook says you have to play on a 3' x 3' area. OK, has/have to is probably too strong, but they make it pretty clear that size creates the best balance for a 100 point game. I just see it as counterintuitive for them to release something that requires a bigger play area once everyone has had time to create a standard play space. If they release anything that needs something bigger than 4'x4', I will likely never buy it. I have no area larger than that to play X-Wing. And I only even have 4'x4' because I bought a piece of plywood to make a play space out of.
The game can certainly be played on a larger area. The question is whether it plays WELL. No matter how large the play area is, the movement speeds and ranges are the same. Larger board areas just mean longer periods of non-interactive maneuvering. If you cram more ships in what you get are multiple mini-battles, as ships withing range of each other focus on each other without the ability to affect other clusters.
Larger ships won't change this. You can make the board 6'x6', drop a 2'x2' square of space station or Nebulon B in the middle, and the game will still come down to a relatively small area of the board, with the rest of it wasted space.
I think a lot of people are drooling over the idea of big ships because they like the ships involved or because bigger is always better, but haven't really thought through what it would mean for gameplay. You think it's be really awesome to spend $100 or $150 on a massive, immobile set-piece that does nothing but roll a few dice from static positions? Hey, that's great - nobody's telling you you can't enjoy that. What people are saying is that most people AREN'T going to want that, which makes it unlikely that you're going to see it. Personally, I can't imagine anything more boring than putting an immobile turret factory in the middle of the board, much less spending triple digits on it.
rowdyoctopus said:
Art Vandelay said:
A couple of thoughts;
Tournament play is NOT the center of the Universe, many of us don't or ever will play in a tournament or care about "Meta"..
Who says this game has to be played on 3x3 board? It is entirely possible to expend the board as the game expands to incorporate larger ships.
Larger ship do make sense for this game as an expansion, if you want to keep smaller 100 point games and strictly dog fighting, great. Many of us will find
use for larger ships.
Lastly, this is all speculation
I just want to point out that while the rulebook endorses doing what you want, it does set a standard of 100 points and a 3' x 3' playing area. So I would say the rulebook says you have to play on a 3' x 3' area. OK, has/have to is probably too strong, but they make it pretty clear that size creates the best balance for a 100 point game. I just see it as counterintuitive for them to release something that requires a bigger play area once everyone has had time to create a standard play space. If they release anything that needs something bigger than 4'x4', I will likely never buy it. I have no area larger than that to play X-Wing. And I only even have 4'x4' because I bought a piece of plywood to make a play space out of.
rowdyoctopus said:
Art Vandelay said:
A couple of thoughts;
Tournament play is NOT the center of the Universe, many of us don't or ever will play in a tournament or care about "Meta"..
Who says this game has to be played on 3x3 board? It is entirely possible to expend the board as the game expands to incorporate larger ships.
Larger ship do make sense for this game as an expansion, if you want to keep smaller 100 point games and strictly dog fighting, great. Many of us will find
use for larger ships.
Lastly, this is all speculation
I just want to point out that while the rulebook endorses doing what you want, it does set a standard of 100 points and a 3' x 3' playing area. So I would say the rulebook says you have to play on a 3' x 3' area. OK, has/have to is probably too strong, but they make it pretty clear that size creates the best balance for a 100 point game. I just see it as counterintuitive for them to release something that requires a bigger play area once everyone has had time to create a standard play space. If they release anything that needs something bigger than 4'x4', I will likely never buy it. I have no area larger than that to play X-Wing. And I only even have 4'x4' because I bought a piece of plywood to make a play space out of.
Not sure what your point is? The people who make the game have given a guidline for what they think the best way to play standard games is. Why would they make a piece that requires more space and breaks that standard? That will automatically alienate a percentage of the playerbase. As I already said, if they made something that required more than 4'x4' to play in a balanced way, I'm automatically out because I physically cannot play that piece and I have no where large enough to play it.
Introducing larger ships that require different play spaces is rewriting their rulebook already. I don't see that being received well.
So by your argument the game is not allowed to expand? Dust tactics started off on smaller boards, once larger units were introduced many gamers played on larger tables to accommodate increased point sizes. I never heard any gamers cry because they had to play on a larger table. The entitlement of gamers on this board continues to boggle my mind. Every game should be catered to their budget and dining room table size…
Why rewrite the rules? The asteroid field playing area is big enough for a large ship. The falcon and the slave 1 are a good example of how much people are willing to spend on. You only need 1 of each but people insist on having + 3 of each. Miniatures games are not meant to be made for the cassual player. A casual player would only buy 1 expansion of each and maybe never use every combination. Wave 1 and 2 are sold out because people buy more for different reasons. If they buy 3 falcons when they need 1, and 7 x wings when you only need 3 then I dont think there is a problem with a +$50 well made ship model that works as a new game mode. Its not about if you like it or not, or if you think is overpriced or not. Seriously if you shelved 40 bucks for a starter with 3 ships you are already overpaying in my opinion. Then again thats MY opinion and the core game being sold out untill wave 2 proves me wrong.
Wow we really got off track here but until a mod notices I'm going to chime in.
I understand why some would want larger scale models the TIE Fighter and X-Wing simulator games were able to integrate fighters and ships together and it made for a great and exciting game. The desire to want to replicate this is obvious but for me it isn't why I got into this and enjoy playing. I love that it is little ships rolling around in close fast and tight combat and putting in something like a Corellian Corvette to sit there and be an obstacle or a target I really don't think is necessary. Only my opinion and I accept that some of you would be thrilled with this addition. Perhaps FFG could look at a game that is along similar lines as X-Wing but for fleet combat?
As for buying for collection purposes again not my thing but can see the appeal.
What I'm working on is a way to turn it from a two player game into one that I can play in a group with each player controlling a group of fighters or even single one it should introduce an extra element of randomness into the game and really it shouldn't be too hard to do.
Just play a + 100 game with limited heroes. Its fun
Yeah that is one option I was thinking off but I'd love the idea of a battle that replicates the battle at the end of Jedi where some one quotes "There's too many of them!!!"
"Wave 3" or perhaps "Wave 4" could introduce a ground-based version of this game.
The starter concept would be the Battle of Hoth with speeders and walkers class unts. The scale could change from 1:270 to 1:200 or 1:175 and ultimately you could see spin-off with landspeeders, airspeeders & speederbikes up at AT-ST's and AT-ATs.
The appeal is that this steals nothing from the space combat side of X-Wing.
Admittedly this ground-based concept favors objective scenarios over pure attrition scenarios. There is no horse too dead to beat, so I am sure somebody in marketing is at least thinking of it.
RogueMorgan
With my luck Fantasy Flight will come out with a CR-90 right about the time I finish my CR-90 and for right around the price that I have invested on my project.
More like it will be cheaper, oh wait that would be the case if was building one.
I can see the boffins at FFG trying to come up with a game similar to "Dust" but for the Star Wars Universe but do you go for it to try and expand the market share you have or don't do it to avoid spreading the X-Wing market out? I don't think I'd be that interested in it, I like X-Wing because well it has x-Wing in the title for a start, but also because it is easy to learn, quick to play and most importantly fairly cheap even by Australian standards where we get gouged on books, DVD/Blu-Ray, music etc.
Boomer_J said:
With my luck Fantasy Flight will come out with a CR-90 right about the time I finish my CR-90 and for right around the price that I have invested on my project.
No, man. Theirs will be cheaper and have awesome upgrade cards. ;-)
BTW- I'll get those measurements out to you asap. Been crazy busy at work.
I hate the Idea of ground combat. Let this be space only.
I hate the Idea of ground combat. Let this be space only.