El Tonio pretty well sums up my feelings. Yes, the models are not up to X-Wing standards, but the real focus is the game play. Having gotten several games under my belt, I've found this to be just as fun and there are definitely some bright spots.

We've all commented or agreed that we should see more scenarios. Each expansion ship comes with a mission printed on two of the cards allowing you to play a battle you would have seen that ship in. There's a nice way of making an era distinction. For example, you have two photon torpedo designs with different points costs to match. Also, with the exception of the 1 and 2 bank maneuvers, everything is X-Wing compatible.

Now back to the models. In comparison, yes the Trek models frankly suck. So what, repaint them. If you don't know how, learn, it's really not that hard. And we've all read comments about quality or concept problems with the X-Wing models (crooked guns and engines, the blue Tie-In and Tie-Bs), so FFG's not lily white. $30, and the nicest thing I can say about my Lambda is that it looked rushed.

The best point I can make is see the good things about Attack Wing. Yes it's different, but don't go in with your expectations so hyped that it can never live up to them.

I think the real question is why get a second game that is very similar and fun, rather than a second game that is very different and fun. Why not get Blood Bowl for example.

I don't really feel like spending my money to have 2 very very similar games, especially as one of them has

• Worse models (As someone has said, I've seen better models come out of those egg machines you see in Arcades)
• No scale (I at least want my big ship to be big, otherwise the game rules don't feel like they correspond to the model)
• Worse Balance (Wiz Kids are notorious for bringing out unbalancing models)
• Poorly made pieces, (from what I've heard the cards are murky, the artwork is screen caps and the dials are very likely to rip)
• Is Pay to Win (Khan is now up to $100).

Saying that I hope FFG is making lots of money selling them bases and from the License.

Few points.

1-As someone who came to x-wing from over a decade of 40k, and has won best painted awards at a few tournaments, I've seen what model quality is. Over on that side of the gaming hobby, pre-paints are all lumped together, and there isn't really any point in splitting hairs over them. Sure the paint job isnt as detailed, but x-wing is far from quality work.

I disagree as a painter who loves working at 1/300 scale the X-Wing models are really good. I'm currently working on one of the Bombers, using film and 1/74 models as reference and it's amazing how much of the detail they have got into something this size.

Yes the pre-paints aren't perfect, but they are good enough that I don't mind using them to play. And having worked at Games Workshop I would say better than a lot of hobbyists could do.

For me the important things is the model sculpting in X-Wing is very good for this scale. The Attack Wing ones from what I've seen are really simplistic, missing details, and I think I would feel I was painting a happy meal toy if I was to re-paint one.

This - and this carries a ton of weight coming from you, who has done some fantastic repaints on the X-Wing stuff.

If you're an award-winning miniatures painter, sure, I guess I can see looking down your nose at all pre-painted stuff as being the same, low quality (as per the other guy I'm too lazy to back up and look up).

I guess if you're an award winning, 5-star restaurant chef, going anywhere with less than a 3-star Michelin rating might as well be pig slop. That's great for you. For the rest of us, used to either cooking at home or grabbing a greasy burger, there is a WORLD of difference between grabbing McDonald's and sitting down at a nice family restaurant. To you, maybe it's gourmet cuisine and slop.

Most of the rest of us see a huge gap in quality between Attack Wing and X-Wing. Huge. And I'm not knocking that game. But to carry further my earlier metaphor, if I go pay $400 for a meal, I expect the whole gourmet experience. If I go to McDonald's, and they're charging me the same $30 for a burger and fries that I could have spent getting Red Lobster or the Olive Garden or something, that's unacceptable.

Is Red Lobster "fine dining?" No. But it's what it is for the price point. And for a fast food chain to do away with the dollar menu and charge sit down prices for food in a sack, that's unacceptable. And that's basically what WizKids is doing here. Fast food quality at sit down prices.

In my opinion (maybe not so humble )

Fantasy Flight Star Wars: X-Wing miniatures are fantastic, and for the cost you're getting a great deal.

They are highly detailed and the painting is excellent. Can a pro-modeler do better? Of course and I would expect that; also I'd end-up paying much more for someone to paint a single figure for me (note: I have). But for someone who can't paint without ruining his figures this game is great. Does that take anything away from Attack Wing, well from the game no. But the miniatures for X-Wing can't be lumped together with everything else. They are clearly heads and shoulders about other pre-painted miniatures. The miniatures of X-Wing is actually what got me into the game.

Here is a link to my review at BGG about some key differences between X-Wing and Attack Wing. Other people have added additional differences in the comments that follow.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1044152/top-10-differences-between-x-wing-and-attack-wing

If you don't like the minis due to scale or appearance issues, don't buy the game (I don't love them, but decided to give it a try anyway and I'm glad I did). And, I'm not trying to sell anybody on the game, just provide information that folks may be interested in knowing.

But, I think there are enough interesting differences between the two that Attack Wing is a worthy game in and of itself (some of which improve the game in terms of strategy and options, some of which are just different and are not necessarily better or worse). It's actually a pretty cool game.

Yes it's a good game. But should that give WK a free ticket to cut corners and cheap out and sell us garbage?

The bottom line is if people keep saying, "Meh, Attack Wing is still fun so I don't mind spending just as much money as I do on X-Wing in the long run, even though the product is severely inferior quality-wise" then WK will just keep selling us lemmings garbage.

You've not read everything I've already written about cost. Attack Wing will be cheaper in the long run because you don't need as many of each ship (or as many ships total). Plus, you get more variety for your buck (more cards, scenarios, ships, etc). I also only needed 1 Attack Wing starter since they gave me enough dice to actually play the game in most instances (5 of each rather than 3 of each). And, while the ships don't look as good, the rest of the components are high quality (and, most of these ships seem less likely to break than X-Wing ships, and none seems more likely to break than X-Wing ships). And, there is no real incentive to buy additional starters for the ships themselves. I currently have 40 X-Wing ships. It will be a long time before I need that many Attack Wing ships (and by then I'll have even more X-Wing ships).

I'm not trying to make excuses for WK (some off the models look fine to good to me scale aside, and some look terrible -- i.e., constitution class enterprise is a complete disgrace). I agree 100% with you here. I wish they all looked at least pretty good if not perfect or to scale.

you don't want to buy it because you are mad at WK about the models, that is fine. I like the game, think it adds some nice things that X-Wing does not have, and am happy to have it in spite of the lower quality models (the game itself, especially the additions and changes, as well as the other components are high quality).

Um, no. First, I also have Attack Wing so that isn't it at all.

And once again, Attack Wing is not cheaper in the long run. Wave 3 just came out for X-Wing -- about a year after it was first released. Attack Wing Wave 3 is slated for late November early December if I'm not mistaken. And let's not forget all of the exclusive ships coming down the pipeline in the meantime that are going to cost an arm and a leg on the secondary market.

Sure, with X-wing the ships have lower point costs which can mean purchasing more ships, but Attack Wing isn't really that different. If you want a Klingon swarm, you still will have to purchase 4 or 5 expansions.

Also with X-Wing, you don't NEED multiples of every expansion. You can get by just fine with buying what you want to play with, and it's pretty easy to decide if you're going to play Rebels or Imperials. Make the choice and you take half the miniatures off the table.

You also don't get enough dice in Attack Wing. The big Klingon ships with torpedoes are rolling 6, and that's not even factoring in things like Gowron. It's quite possible to need 7 and even 8 dice, and at least you can buy dice separately for X-Wing. You HAVE to buy another starter of Attack Wing to get down.

Scenarios come with the big X-Wing ships, too, and I wouldn't really consider scenarios a selling point anyway. You don't NEED the cards for them, so you should still be able to find out how they work online pretty easy.

Bottom line: if FFG can deliver high quality miniatures and paint jobs for a certain prIce, then there is ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE for WK to release this shoddy stuff.

I'm not sure why we're all trying to convince each other that we should or should not like something. I like FlightPath and I like Star Trek. Therefore, the game was worth it's value to me. More importantly, though, I enjoy the people I play with and that's the real x-factor. Obviously, it's a complex situation, and most all of us agree in regards to the quality of models. Clearly, that is more important to some than others. It really isn't that big of a deal to me. As for playing a very similar game? That too is subjective. I enjoy the system, and it diversifies it for me. I feel fortunate that two of my favorite universes have games using a system as their foundation that I think is very enjoyable.

You're not going to convince me I shouldn't play it, and I have no interest in doing otherwise to any of you. The only justification anyone should need to play a game or not is whether they enjoy it. If the scale and quality of the miniatures ruins that for you, my loss is that I'll unlikely get to enjoy it with you someday. We can clearly still play X-Wing, so that's fine.

Well my intent, anyway, wasn't to convince anyone to like or dislike, buy or not buy Attack Wing - it's no skin off my back. I just picked up a few ships to see if I could get past the scale issues, and was actually surprised when I opened the packs by how cheap and simplistic the models were.

Not to mention my D'Deridex, which - scale issues aside - has its holder mounted on the bottom so badly that when on a flight stand the ship looks like the Helicarrier after Hawkeye blew out all but one of the engines. That thing looks like it's going down .

My point was simply that a few threads had people discussing Attack Wing, and wondering what it was like or how it held up, and I thought it was worth putting up some side by side pictures so that anyone pondering a purchase got a good close look at what they were spending their money on and were able to make a more informed decision before getting it home, opening it up and going "Oh" like I did.

If the minis aren't a dealbreaker for someone - more power to them. Enjoy. I just know a lot of people are fans of both universes and were intrigued by a more Capital scale version of the game and I wanted to make sure that quality-of-model-wise they knew what they were in for.

It's not my intention to knock on AW - I think that is a really interesting twist on the X-Wing game 'engine,' undercut by a really cheap publisher in WizKids. I would have loved to have seen someone with a little more care take a crack at executing the Attack Wing concept.

I'm not sure why we're all trying to convince each other that we should or should not like something. I like FlightPath and I like Star Trek. Therefore, the game was worth it's value to me. More importantly, though, I enjoy the people I play with and that's the real x-factor. Obviously, it's a complex situation, and most all of us agree in regards to the quality of models. Clearly, that is more important to some than others. It really isn't that big of a deal to me. As for playing a very similar game? That too is subjective. I enjoy the system, and it diversifies it for me. I feel fortunate that two of my favorite universes have games using a system as their foundation that I think is very enjoyable.

You're not going to convince me I shouldn't play it, and I have no interest in doing otherwise to any of you. The only justification anyone should need to play a game or not is whether they enjoy it. If the scale and quality of the miniatures ruins that for you, my loss is that I'll unlikely get to enjoy it with you someday. We can clearly still play X-Wing, so that's fine.

Likewise—nothing against whomever enjoys it. No hard feelings here. There's a lot to be said for gameplay experience, and I admit being the type that has a huge interest in scale and quality. You can absolutely go nuts with AW if it makes you happy.

My problem is that they had the opportunity to do something on the level of X-Wing, but made something... less... instead.

"You don't have to buy it if you don't like it," I'm sure a few of you are thinking. Absolutely true, but I would have preferred to have something Trek-related to like . FFG set the bar high, and the Trek universe is rich with potential.

I suppose I'm not disappointed in the models because I knew even before the 'sneak preview' of them, they were likely to just repackage the HeroClix models. I was disappointed in those models, because there was absolutely no way that system could remotely capture Star Trek, as well as how they were out of scale, poorly modeled and painted. I suppose I'm comparing Attack Wing to Heroclix Tactics as opposed to X-Wing. It's a vast improvement from that perspective. I feel like they could have truly made a FlightPath Trek by advancing the rules for firing arcs. Seems like a simple way to really make it feel different.

The one positive side to WK, and I know this seems like a reach, but if they think it will sell, they will reissue a sculpt. So here's hoping they're paying attention, but let's face it, no one should be surprised regarding the quality from that company. It took them two years to stop painting cartoon eyes on HeroClix.

I personally wouldn't have even minded if they FUDGED the scale (as FFG are doing with the big ships, and have been accused of doing with one or two others that will here remain nameless), so long as they did it consistently . I think the Reliant is kinda sorta in scale with the Enterprise-D, but then why does the original series Enterprise look like a lifeboat?

The refit movie Enterprise was the same basic ship with a styling new overhaul and didn't change significantly in size. The Reliant uses the exact same saucer and nacelles as the Enterprise refit does, so they should be extremely comparable in size. Yet for some weird reason the TOS Enterprise looks like it was a nacelle on one of the other ships and fell off.

They don't have to be exact. Just make them feel close . The D'Deridex should be quite a bit bigger than the Galaxy. If twice the size is too big, make it HALF AGAIN as big. Or scale the Reliant down to the Enterprise size and go from there. Anything that didn't feel completely random and slapdash.

And then, yeah, don't make them maybe look worse than those old Micromachine ships that I collected as a kid.

A D'deridex is almost as big as Deep Space 9, I'd even guess it's larger in overall mass. When you consider the Defiant was an eleventh of it's overall length, scale would most definitely be a difficult thing to do for this game. That being said, something like a D'deridex should have been on a large base, and perhaps there should have been an intermediate size base between the two currently produced bases. The thing that annoys me about this game is the fact that so many models extend out beyond their base and you really have to use the different peg lengths quite often.

And that's what I mean - why not make the D'D a medium base ship if that's what it needed? Make it look like the Falcon next to an X-Wing or something and at least you get an idea of size.

Don't bother with scale, but at least make the ships that are bigger actually be bigger. How they thought the most technically fanatical fanbase would not care about this is beyond me. I used to be able to quote these stats from memory.

The scale doesn't bother me. And it is a bit annoying, as the rules do look like a fun modification of the X-wing rules. The stats and costing do make it apparent that it will be a different experience, but I can't denounce it until I play it. It is just all the other actions that Wizkids are making makes me want to stay away, as much as I would love to fly Dominion and Borg ships.

I'm planning on getting into Attack Wing at some point, but in looking at the expansions at my FLGS I've realized that I have micromachines of almost all of the ships they have. They're better looking minis, and I'm betting it wouldn't be difficult to adapt the stands.

I'm planning on getting into Attack Wing at some point, but in looking at the expansions at my FLGS I've realized that I have micromachines of almost all of the ships they have. They're better looking minis, and I'm betting it wouldn't be difficult to adapt the stands.

Someone posted how you could use the end of a zipstrip by clipping off the strip and the little 'cleat' inside of it. I haven't tried it, but it seems pretty sound.

So after reading a bunch about Attack Wing it appears that besides the ships being crap, ALL the components in the game are cheap and awful. Very disappointing!

So after reading a bunch about Attack Wing it appears that besides the ships being crap, ALL the components in the game are cheap and awful. Very disappointing!

Yeah kinda, sorry. The cards come on this weird linen stock which makes a lot of the images a little dark or muddled, and worse makes them curl very badly. The dice are ok, just this weird sheen to them.

I told someone recently the AW maneuver dials sum the entire (physical) game up for me. Someone thought to put the name and picture of each ship class on the front and back of each dial. That way you can tell at a glance "oh, ok - there's the Galaxy dial."

But then the wedge that is cut out to show the maneuver you pick? They cut that half again as close to the center of the dial as X-Wing does - half again as close to the HOLE in the middle the peg goes through. So you know how every once in a while you're assembling a dial in X-Wing and the bottom part of the peg just does NOT want to pop through the bottom of the dial properly?

Imagine that happens with every dial, and if you're not careful you're twice as likely to actually tear the cardboard around the peg open because it's cut so narrowly. Is it the end of the world? No. But it seems like for every design element of the game somebody got right (different graphics on each dial for each ship class) someone else cut corners and made the components cheaper than they had any reason to be.

Every element of the game is like that. Some great concepts, some shoddy production values. *shrug*

Imagine that happens with every dial, and if you're not careful you're twice as likely to actually tear the cardboard around the peg open because it's cut so narrowly. Is it the end of the world? No. But it seems like for every design element of the game somebody got right (different graphics on each dial for each ship class) someone else cut corners and made the components cheaper than they had any reason to be.

Doesn't that mean that an unscrupulous person could just learn the dial and be able to tell from across the table which maneuver you selected, using the Image rotation relative to hole location.

I can see that being an issue in a game that has prizes that are worth a lot.

I think there is a reason FFG made their decision to have the back blank so you can't tell the orientation of the maneuver half.

The scale problem could have been solved by using the same two-base system FFG does, or maybe three different sizes: ships that are between 30-100 meters get a tiny base, 100-500 meters get the regular base, and 500+ ships get a large base.

But the core of the problem of scale is that there really isn't a problem with scale. Take a look at this size comparison chart:

Notice the size difference between the Defiant and the Galaxy classes, which are more or less the benchmark for attack ship sizes. It's about the same difference mass-wise as the X-wing and Millennium Falcon miniatures for X-wing:

And the X-wing is bigger than the A-wing!

There is absolutely no need whatsoever to fudge the scale. Even if they bring in the Romulans with their enormous Warbird, that's still only twice the length of the Enterprise-D:

You could possibly utilize FFG's system for enormous ships by mounting it on two bases.

If you were playing against Rain Man, I guess, maybe?
Two straight. Yeah. Definitely. Definitely a two straight.

But in seriousness, no, I don't think so. Think about it - the dial is just like X-Wing, two halves, and only the top half rotates. So from your opponent's POV it's just a stationary image on the (unmoving) bottom half of the dial. If you're turning the bottom half of the dial when you're setting your maneuvers, I think you're doing it wrong.

The bottom half has the maneuvers and the image on the back side.. SO lets say the Galaxy was flying so it was pointed to the 5 forward on it's flipside. However you rotated it the 5 Forward would always be the same place relative to the image. Therefore if you looked at it and the gap on the second piece was under the nose of the Galaxy you would know it was a 5 forward.

If you were good you could look at the angle between the nose and the hole on the second piece and know the maneuver every time.

BTW if the image was seperate from the maneuvers so it could be in any orientation relative to the maneuver, then I don't think it would be an issue.. SO I don't see an issue in printing a X-Wing image onto a piece of photo paper, cutting it slightly smaller than the dial and putting it as a seperate layer to help you when playing X-Wing.

I'm just not sure how you're picturing this - even with a picture, ironically. I'll check the dials again when I get home, but the bottom dial is just static and flat and round. It's the top half of the dial that hides the numbers (except for the wedge cut out). I mean I guess, maybe, you could try and peer at the side of the dial on the table, try to figure out where the wedge is cut out on the face-down side, and try to extrapolate from that where the dial is set to.

But you refusing to put down your own maneuver dials, while sitting there peering closely at HIS maneuver dials trying to spot the cut-out is going to look a wee bit shady. Plus I'm not convinced you couldn't do the same thing (in crazy person theory) with the X-Wing dials since there is an image on the back, even if it's not as easily oriented as ship art. And just once I'd love to see someone clutching their dial while leaning in, peering closely at the side of the other guy's dial, telling him "I'll put it down in oooooone sec." Not to mention, if you just face the wedge away from him, at best he'll know which HALF of the dial you selected from.

Anyway you may be overthinking it a bit. That would be both a bit paranoid and a lot more work than I think it would be worth. Unless you're sitting across the table from Rain Man or James Bond I'd think you'd be ok.

Just for the fun of it.

The scale problem could have been solved by using the same two-base system FFG does, or maybe three different sizes: ships that are between 30-100 meters get a tiny base, 100-500 meters get the regular base, and 500+ ships get a large base.

But the core of the problem of scale is that there really isn't a problem with scale. Take a look at this size comparison chart:

Notice the size difference between the Defiant and the Galaxy classes, which are more or less the benchmark for attack ship sizes. It's about the same difference mass-wise as the X-wing and Millennium Falcon miniatures for X-wing:

You compared a Defiant to a Galaxy and then compared a Galaxy to a Warbird. Compare a Defiant to a Warbird. Even if the current Defiant model's size were cut in half, the Warbird would still be what FFG considers a large ship. Sorry, but if you start asking people to pay $30 on average for each model, and especially the $80 or so that FFG is chargine for the Tantive? You're not going to have a game that sells at all.