I have more SoG photos, which I'll post shortly, but I know there are a number of us here that also play Star Wars X Wing. There was a big announcement today at the show. I'll let the pictures do the talking. Wave 4 on the way....
SW X Wing and FFG discussion
I have more SoG photos, which I'll post shortly, but I know there are a number of us here that also play Star Wars X Wing. There was a big announcement today at the show. I'll let the pictures do the talking. Wave 4 on the way....
Last edited by Nightmoss; 01-21-2014 at 16:21.
Right -- I *think* they've hit upper-limit on mini-size for that game....Originally Posted by Nightmoss
Not until the star destroyer comes out. lol
Pansy... call me when they sculpt Executor, then I'll be impressed. (Never mind that I have the LEGO Super Star Destroyer, and nowhere big enough to fully assemble it...)
SW and FFG are both dead to me, but if they start releasing Star Destroyers I'll buy one of each for that collection. (GRUDGINGLY, since I still believe FFG Blue Falconed Andrea & Co. and it is my personal belief that there is a special level of Hell reserved exclusively for buddy-effers to share with oath-breakers and traitors...)
I have seen _Executor_ done at that scale -- the only practical use for a "mini" that size: Hollow it out, and use it to carry the other minis and game accessories. (SOB was a solid 6' long.)
Like I said: I think they've hit "upper-limit" for what they can do at that scale.
Chris, you say that like it'd be a BAD thing... LOL
IIRC, Executor wsa like 19km long to a regular ISD's 1.6... so I'd suggest, IF FFG and I were still on speaking terms and I felt like offering them advice, that anything much bigger than a Corellian Corvette be reduced to 1/2 the scale of everything else, and then take the uber-huges like SSDs and Mon Cal MC90s down to 1/4. Death Stars and Torpedo Spheres and the like... MUCH smaller.
...That's no Moon!
I dropped a few dubloons at the FFG booth. My X-wing Mini's have a few new prototypes.
You and me both. I have always liked the design of the Imperial shuttle, especially the drop wings. Reminds me of the Corsair ww2 fighter for some reason?
I've just ordered a new vehicle to transport the model around when it arrives
DON'T LAUGH -- I have the _Transformers Star Wars_ "Darth Vader/Death Star" figure I can bring to a gaming table.......That's no Moon!
The problem is: Most gaming halls and tables have limited space -- and the smaller the con, the smaller the available space. The really big units may as well be classed "terrain features"; they sure won't be able to move.
I don't mean to be a downer, but are those going to be production pieces in the new wave?
WARNING- OPINIONS FOLLOW
My friend wants to get into Xwing, but the reviews I read really made it seem that FFG wants it to be a tournament type play game, which means very obsessed with balanced forces and hard sticking to rules and pausing the game to debate or look it up. That turned me off as that is the chief reason I don't like 40k (though I have it) is that endless rule debate and very generic force selection (versus having the mission goals balance the difficulty so that uneven forces can deploy, which is much more likely in battle).
Anyway, recently he brought it up again and I thought I might give in, but if they are going that way... Xwing will be another expensive to collect and difficult to transport game (like 40k) which is a real shame and a turn off.
I try to budget my games all similarly. When I got into WoG, I set aside the same amount of money I would pay for a nice board game and theoretical expansions ($130). I can't imagine any of those new models costing less than $30 a piece and probably more like $50 a piece.
END RANT
I must say that they look absolutely beautiful and they still have 40k beat as long as they are pre-painted and assembled.
The Tantive IV is going to set you back $90 and I cannot recall the price listed on the shuttle (one new paint style X-Wing included). Supposedly these are not part of the tactical game or current production waves. I gather from what I've read they're going to be bringing us a more 'epic' and strategic level of game play outside of the one on one battles I'm familiar with. Having watched some of the FFG post con video reports don't be surprised if you see Imperial counterparts to these two ships coming within the year (I'm going to guess Star Destroyer and maybe some Star Destroyer variant)? By the way these larger ships are not in scale with the tactical game, which may point to another direction that FFG is going with the SW license? I sure hope FFG doesn't have visions of a 40K future for their SW rights, but it wouldn't surprise me?
All that aside I do think the game is geared towards tourney play in large part, but I also think it's just a fun game to play with "friends" who aren't rules lawyers and out to win every game they play. I believe their GenCon champion won using a 100 point swarm of basic tie fighters against someone who fielded Luke, Wedge and Biggs. I may be wrong but all of those fighters, characters, etc., are included in the basic set.
I share your concerns and I'm also worried that SW collectors might drive the game in directions not at all related to play? I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/ed....asp?eidn=4312
I'd still say that if FFG were smart, they'd design the big ships to have integral storage compartments inside of 'em so that the volume they take up in storage isn't totally "dead space".
I think it would be more accurate to say that FFG have, from the outset, designed the game so that it would be highly attractive to the tournament community, and indeed launched the game with a worldwide(ish) tournament series and have continued to promote events like this. That builds an instant and continuing fan base.
However, it is a style of play that I abhor and personally will have no part in. But thats fine too since the local groups with which I play are like-minded, so we play interesting scenarios rather than tournaments. It does help though having a points system that sees to work well. I think if WoW/G had been designed from the start with such a system and a simple tournament system its attractiveness would also have been enhanced in those vital early years.
I'm not sure it will be expensive to collect, certainly not more expensive than WoG. I get the impression that FFG is better able to keep models in production than Ares is at the moment (and it helps that the product range is not as wide). And there is ample scope to expand your forces using proxies through the old Micromachines ranges and others. Here's my proxy collection. I think the average cost of the models was something like £2 each, in fact probably less as the MM fighters were mostly from Ebay or toy sales for a quid each or so. The most expensive model here was the corvette, picked up at a car boot sale for a fiver.
Things like this make me wish I weren't burned out on SW and boycotting FFG on principle...
Re "tournament rules", personally I'm OK with a game that's designed to have a tournament OPTION, as long as it's an optional side-bar and not the end-all-be-all of the game *stares pointedly at Warhamster and ALL Whizzkids releases*, and as long as that structure has sensible support systems. Like, when I was GMing WK Pirates and we had "everybody gets one" prize support, I noticed that people had a lot more fun... but then when it switched to only the GM, the winner and whoever was GM favorite that day got goodies things beame a lot more cutthroat and less fun... I watched friendships fall apart over the resulting "screw your buddy before he screws you" culture of Munchkindom.
Yes, look at what is happening with the "Star Trek" version of the FlightPath game system - certain cards (IIRC one for KHANNNN!!!!!!) and models that you can only get if you participate in tournaments (and maybe only if you win - I'm not sure if this is the case but it would not surprise me). Although I expect images of any cards will appear online and proxies will be available so a casual player who wanted to use them woudl find an unofficial way to do so.
Yep, been there with WizKids and I'll never forgive them for what they did to a number of their IP's. Cutthroat sums it up nicely.
Yeah, "participation prizes" are one thing (I'm fine with those, it gives you an incentive to get out of the house a little more :) ), but IMO Winner Exclusives should be things like trophies or medals and such--for games that have a strong collector component, one should pay attention to keeping "getting a complete set" possible. (This is why I won't buy into the Munchkin card-game--with how many cards I'll never be able to get, what's the point? And with how WK Pirates packed the "Screw Your Buddy" prizes into cases, probably trying to force people to sell more cases at the LGS, I in the end started cheating and buying entire cases for myself.)
And yeah, my crew we'd run Munchkin Tourneys, but they were always done strictly for laughs, or as research exercises to try to find broken features in the game--like a ship with double-range cannons that has a 50/50 shot and at normal range only misses on a 1, or abusing links (like a Buy One Get One Free for crew space) to try to cram a ship as full of power-crew as possible, or fun things like "build the absolute crappiest fleet you can, and you're trading fleets with someone else".
David, I really don't need to see pictures like that. I vowed to only play WWI WoG, and then went to Origins. Within two months, I acquired every box set and card booster pack, and over 60 planes. I have, purposely, not looked at anything Star Wars, and then you post such a picture.
With the exception of some of their boardgames I suppose everything FFG produces is really geared for tournament play, which I dislike for many reasons. Too old, too slow and not cutthroat enough to even care.
Ironically enough FFG did not have any Y-Wing fighters available for sale at GenCon. OOP with no expected date for the next shipment. There was much wailing by certain folks who needed them for tourney play.
Don't suppose you've ever been tempted by ACW naval? I have a picture or two that could turn you there too
Actually, you already tempted me thusly. I have been looking at ACW minis.Don't suppose you've ever been tempted by ACW naval? I have a picture or two that could turn you there too
You posted a picture once, but more would be appreciated.
By chance, has anyone ever called you evil, in a friendly sort of way?
Now that you come to mention it, yes :)By chance, has anyone ever called you evil, in a friendly sort of way?
Pics of goodies here at the 1/600 ACW tag:
http://dtbsam.blogspot.co.uk/
I remember seeing these before, but forgot they were in your blog. Really great stuff there. Of course, I had to scroll through the War Rocket pics….
Are they all Thoroughbreds?
http://www.thoroughbredmodels.com/Ironclads.htm
[Edited] I just went back through the ACW thread and saw the different lines you used.
Are you familiar with this line? http://www.historicalminiatures.com/...ships.html#USS
Last edited by 7eat51; 09-09-2013 at 18:17. Reason: Saw the different mini lines
The other problem with winner or Con exclusives (the latter I'm OK with too, since there's usually a fair chance at those even if it means asking a boardmate who's going to snag the swag for you) is that they're usually overpowered... the winners get better and everyone else might as well not even show up for all the chance they have of beating those power-pieces.
Though I think a WGF/WGS Con Exclusive could work, if it were like 1-2 exclusive repaints (maybe a new pair of Duel Packs for whatever that year's current set is) or just a "pre-release" like they did with WGS Series 5 this year.
haven't come across those before. Thanks, I shall take a good look.
I am most definitely enjoying War Rocket!
Figured that one out, too, huh? :)
I don't mind having a point system -- it helps to prevent situations where The SO doesn't want to play again because it takes thirty minutes to set up a game which ends in five -- provided it's actually properly balanced, and doesn't have idiocy like "infinite orcs syndrome" (when a unit has a "cost" of 0 or less, which permits a player to have infinite numbers of them).
I guess it was a good thing I like Y-Wings, and got mine when I could.... :)
I would suspect this is part of why Wings of War was always a "sideshow" for them... it's seen mainly as a "board game", and if their main thrust is big tourneys at GenCon...
Good point. WoW definitely got pushed to the side by FFG at GenCon only after a year or so. At one point I think they were even previewing some computer version, but that disappeared the following year, IIRC.
I'm with you on that one, plus my big issue with the X wing game, having played a few times, is I can't go up or down, apparently FFG's idea of space is 2 dimensional...
Well actually that's the case with WoW/WoG basic game as well. Many people are fine without the altitude rules as it is still a fun game. Same with X-Wing, although FFG does give some design explanation, it is basically for playability I suppose. I have fun playing it with the game club. I ran the Death Star Run scenario with six people and it was a blast. The points system is good for quick pick up games as well.
Eric
Did I miss something? Is FFG scrapping Y-Wings b/c tournament players don't use them! I like them too and I have read accounts of Y-Wings being used to good effect even in tournaments. Should I grab more now while I still can? (before they show up on e-bay for $$$ like Richthofen's DrI)
Eric
Most of the most popular SF starship and star fighter combat rules are also 2D. There are a few 3D systems that have decent followings, but most opt for playability over "realism" and stick to two dimensions.
I usually play with a Y Wing - uninitiated players tend to think of them as mere targets, but they are mean brutes when loaded with missiles and an ion cannon :)
Just checked out the FFG site and they are going to issue a release of the initial wave by the end of the year. Also noticed that the new large ships are similar to the Y-wing, not very maneuverable but outfitted with secondary weapons they can be deadly. I did note that the Imperial shuttle has a '0' maneuver as well.
I've not checked the new releases (I'm using F Toys models for my shuttles) - any idea if they have an option for a tail gunner?
You too, huh? :)
I believe you can equip the shuttles with a turret. The Imperial shuttle comes with a bunch of new crew and upgrade cards. There is an article posted on the news section of the FFG website that gives you a good idea of the capabilities of each new ship.
Eric
Initial reaction to playing X-wing
Okay, so I finally did get to play Xwing at one of my board game clubs last night.
I showed up ready to host/teach/play a board game of Gears of War (great coop game, fyi). I was especially excited since I recently painted the figs. Anyway, I maxed that game (4 players) and we hung on for a while but overwhelmed by the Locusts and the stack of cards won that day. After that, I mentioned my interest in xwing and (whaddayaknow) a guy I just played with has a pretty big set. He pulled it out and another guy and I each controlled a TIE Interceptor against the owner's Awing and Xwing.
I can't fully comment on time as we were learning while playing, so don't put much stock into this - It took about 40minutes for the first ship to go down (mine)*.
Impressions I can put stock in -
1- The game will be longer than WoG (as I thought) because there is passive (dice based) and active (decision/ability based) defense, whereas, WoG has no defense. It is also because there are more steps to each turn with more midturn book keeping.
2- The game has some improvements on the ergonomics of WoG (don't flame me for this, you should know by now that I love WoG). These improvements are nice for me as my injury does make standing uncomfortable for periods of time. The bases are smaller, so the game can be a bit smaller overall, even though the pieces move farther. There are little nubs that you center the move card, er I mean, the totally new and different move marker. Finally, the board can be smaller (they suggest 2'X2' - 3'X3'[60 - 91cm] max for a normal game. All of these three things combine to make it so that you can play seated. As much as I love WoG, the nature of the cards and bases requires that I stand while playing.
3-The models are plastic, so there is some warping which is a shame because they look beautiful. Of the models I saw (the guy had about 15 that I saw) there were a few points of warp, just like you would expect of thin plastic. The paint and detail on the models were great, but the warping really did kink the look. Example - my TIE interceptor's 'wings' weren twisted at the connection spar so that one wing pointed slightly up and out. One Awing had slightly bent fins. The guy took care of his stuff, so I am sure it came like that.
4- Maneuver dial. Moves are selected by rotating a dial so that the move you want (slow left turn etc.) is visible in a window. I would prefer and might modify dials so that you are rotating an arrow to point at the maneuver, because as it stands you have to turn the dial to see each option. This is hard, when you aren't sure what all you can do and looking through a WoG deck is much more informative.
5- Reactive play is the name of the game. Each turn consists of a single maneuver so you only need to commit to what you do next then you can plan again. This lends itself to more reactive and less strategic movement since you only need to anticipate you opponent's next move. WoG WWII does this more than WWI (which is why I don't like it as much) and xwing does this more than WoG WWII.
Overall, I am still interested in the game. The gameplay was still pretty fast paced and there was still plenty of strategy. I think that this game will fill a gap in my gaming in the following manner.
I would still keep WoG in for the fast paced, quick game, fun, easy to teach/play game.
I would keep 40k (grudgingly because the friend I got into it loves it and I would feel like a jerk if I sell my pieces) for the way too long, not fast paced game that DOES have a satisfying army building component.
I would insert Xwing between these. I really like the army building mechanic of it and especially like that it is so many less models. So, I see it as a more playable 40k style game. No painting/assembling, not many models to buy (could have an army and game set for $100). Still doable to play in a couple hours.
I think SoG (from what I've read) will be in the same spot as xwing. I think it will take longer than WoG because of the book keeping and more thought about movement (because of wind condition). I don't think it will have as much build time, but will have more than WoG because of Cpt. and Crew abilities. SoG has a similar buy in (though I already secured that as an EB CPT) and offers pre paint/pre assemble.
Now I just have to get my friends into it and into SoG as well. Unfortunately, my one friend isn't into WoG, which greatly diminishes its use to me since that cuts games down to 1v1 or 1v2 and the nature of the game is much more fun (for me) to only play one plane per person. Hopefully they will like SoG and then Xwing can satisfy our flying game needs.
*As far as total game time / outcome - We only had an hour left in the community center when we started so we went in knowing we might not finish since two of us three were learning. We played until a ship went down and then called it. That took most of the hour.
Not sure if you've seen over on the Aerodrome, but I've been experimenting with "reactive" play in WGF - single card play rather than guessing three cards in advance. Still a few minor issues to resolve but we've found that the speed of play is retained but the feel of play is MUCH more like a dogfight than the three card system. Three cards will, of course, remain as our normal style of game but for a really tense game amongst experienced players the single card trick is a gripping way to go
Certainly sounds like a more realistic take on dogfighting; tense and fun to boot.Not sure if you've seen over on the Aerodrome, but I've been experimenting with "reactive" play in WGF - single card play rather than guessing three cards in advance. Still a few minor issues to resolve but we've found that the speed of play is retained but the feel of play is MUCH more like a dogfight than the three card system. Three cards will, of course, remain as our normal style of game but for a really tense game amongst experienced players the single card trick is a gripping way to go
Congrats on 1,000+ posts btw!!
I haven't seen that. Alas, I haven't been as active in the game. Partly due to work, partly as I have had some trouble scaring up locals to play with (sadly, since that means I will be out of the game if this persists).
Can you link the thread here or you can send me a PM on Aerodrome at your convenience, no hurry? I have the same name both places. Actually, if you ever see this handle on the internet, it is me.
Hm -- my experience has been the opposite; with fewer maneuver options and less need to think two jumps ahead, The SO is much faster about determining her movements (she has problems when confronted with large number of Choices -- it's a recurring joke in the house). The only real slowdown in play came when trying to find the bit in the rules about which special-rule takes precedence when two or more conflict (note: Always take characters with "can't" specials; they trump all others).
The main problem I see is: The Imperials will almost-always be taking 2 units for every 1 on the Rebel side, so the number of units increases drastically as the points increase, which leads to need to make a lot of decisions for a lot of units (The SO did not do well as the Imperials; she kept getting units confused, and spent a lot of the games tripping over herself).
As to "reactive play in _WoG_": See my movement rules for _Crimson Skies of Glory_ for my solution to that problem.
That is, of course, entirely in keeping with Star Wars canon:
I suppose that a Death Star will be the size of a house?
I am sticking with 'Wings of Glory'.
If done to the same scale as the fighters the Death Srar would be twice the diameter of London's Olympic stadium!
We noticed as well. :)That is, of course, entirely in keeping with Star Wars canon:
Yikes! Now that certainly puts everything in perspective. And wasn't the second unfinished (but fully operational) Death Star bigger than the first?
I see what you mean about quick planning and I agree. I only meant a slow down due to dice based attack and defense. I know this has been generally covered before, so I am not here to reignite that debate. I just mean that it isn't unheard of to roll poorly or amazingly all night so you could potentially have a small (1 or 2 ship) game where the attacker can't seem to deliver damage whether due to poor attack rolling or amazing defense rolling. I know that won't happen all the time, but when it does happen in can make for an unexpectedly long game. A card damage system tending to always deliver a set amount of total damage per draws when draw count equals the number of cards in the deck.
Thanks for that info. That is something I will keep in mind and pay attention to the next time I get to play and test out the system. Cheers!
Last edited by OmegaLazarus; 09-16-2013 at 08:08. Reason: forgot to address second point.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks