I was responding to your praise for their land reform (collectivization).  The death toll is much higher if you add in the purges, the gulags, the re-education, and cultural revolutions.

Perhaps you should read the Human Rights Watch report on Cuba.  Here is the link:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/11/26/cuba-fidel-castros-record-repression
Or read up on Cuba's history of discrimination against blacks and the LGBT population:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-11147157
Soviet collectivization killed 6 to 13 million, but yeah people were equally miserable by the end of it and the USSR ended up a net food importer:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2938412?seq=1
But the Soviets were pikers compared to the Red Chinese, who killed 18 to 45 million:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#:~:text=The Great Leap resulted in,introduction of mandatory agricultural collectivization.
I am a little surprised you did not trumpet the success of the Khmer Rogue, who managed to kill a higher percentage of their own citizens than either China or the Soviets.
Finally, the embargo against Cuba is terminated by statute when the Cubans hold free and fair elections.  So to the extent that the U.S. embargo is preventing Cuba from becoming a Socialist powerhouse, it is due to Cuba's leaders choice of oppression over freedom.
You need to read some history other than Howard Zinn.  Your criticisms of the United States are a slightly less subtle and truthful than Soviet propaganda.

I wouldn't go that far. The grass is not that green here either.
That shouldn't stop you from wishing change, just that it has it's own problems too. (Also comparing hapiness is not too wise imo, it's too subjective)
 
Peaceful is also debatable.

As i see so far at this moment, The app comes when the game designers cant express with ideas some board gsme mechanics. In my opinion, the games that uses apps feels "prosthetics", the implementation is very very poor. 
 
Also, the real magic, IMO, in board games is the analogic sense, the "human" component is vital.
 
Apps? not for me, and romantically speaking, not for anyone: the apps can kill the tabletop.
 
Cheers everyone

Well, this announcement saved  $175. I had been stoked for this since the teaser at the end of the inflight report. The art work is just not clicking for me and I doubt it will grow on me. It's great if someone else likes it but to me it is too cartoony and does not fit the theme. 
 
Regarding app only, I am neutral on this. I have and enjoy mansions 2nd edition. But I make the decision to play a board game for a reason vs a video game. I know app can work but I am not interested in a large portion of games having this feature. Especially since it is proven that co-op dungeon crawls can work with a smart game design. If they came up with some cool app integration i would take that for its own merritt's. But I still can't get over the art. 

Well, this announcement saved  $175. I had been stoked for this since the teaser at the end of the inflight report. The art work is just not clicking for me and I doubt it will grow on me. It's great if someone else likes it but to me it is too cartoony and does not fit the theme. 
 
Regarding app only, I am neutral on this. I have and enjoy mansions 2nd edition. But I make the decision to play a board game for a reason vs a video game. I know app can work but I am not interested in a large portion of games having this feature. Especially since it is proven that co-op dungeon crawls can work with a smart game design. If they came up with some cool app integration i would take that for its own merritt's. But I still can't get over the art. 

I'm fine with full coop Descent game. I would rather prefer the one with OL, but I guess that's not what most people want.
App is... meh, I guess, that's where FFG is going
But art... In my opinion, it just sucks. But that's not very objective. Art doesn't work well for Terrrinoth - that's a fact.
Anyway, I'll wait for 3rd edition, by the looks of expanstion to TI4 not everything is bad in FFG

exactly... in this game ffg makes a bad copy of cmon's massive darkness... forgetting his own great style.
Its a bad attempt in take a new art style.
 
Objectivly speaking, this gane is bad in each aspect.
 
 

Hi! Disclaimer. I do not work for the company.
Hard pass for the obligatory app, the comic art (not to mention the terrain), the forced incompatibility. The price is not a problem for my wallet, had I liked it I would have bought it. Maybe I am the one disconnected with the target audience. Or! The bet of holding a product in secret for almost a year without getting exposed to the FREE feedback of crowdfunding leads to a product wanted by just a fraction of your old players and not a whole lot new ones. And that’s the end of Descent. Act 2 may not even come. So pleased with my 1st and 2nd edition. Good luck everyone. 

I would be really sorry if FFG members are hurt because of this, but there is month now that I retain my angryness : This game is awfull, is a real insult to all FFG fans, Descent fans who buy all of their games, spend time to make live the Descent 2nd edition, and now, with this horrible thing, they are gonna just throw us out, close the forums, and sell an over too expensive game no compatible with ancient games, ugly and boring, just because they want to make money and face some games like Gloomhaven ?

I'm so disapointed, hurt, that I miss words to explain my pain.

My only hope is that this game will be a total fail, and that they will have to do a real V3, or maybe a revival of the second edition.

So. Is this an out of season april fools joke?

I hate to start a new forum for a new game with a negative, but this is going to be a hard pass for me, at least for the time being.  They didn’t even finish 2E.  I’m also not a fan of the artwork, and the characters aren’t even the same. 
 
i don’t know. I’m sure someone is excited about this, but at that price tag I’m just wishing more of those resources would have been put into 2E. 

Without wishing to delve too far in to the politics of it all (although it is a political issue) I have always felt that it was a huge mistake for Obama and Cameron to cosy up to China in the delusion that they would become 'like us'.  Their naked abuse of the global trade system and their active takeovers of strategic industries through huge state subsidies (such as the steel and rare earth industries) was a problem long before the Guardian, New York Times and the other bien-pensants woke up to the Uighur problem and tried to frame the whole China issue in terms that it suits them to emote about.  And straying even further in to politics, I don't remember them givinng a fig when Apple moved its production to China and thousands of skilled jobs left the shores of the US, or when British Steel (as was) was forced out of business due to China dumping steel on the world markets at below production price and those skilled workers were made redundant.  But now they have a new minority to express solidarity with it's a hot topic.
I think it's imperative that production of as much as possible  leaves China and returns to Europe and the US and I would tolerate paying a premium for this.  I already look out for products that aren't made in China and avoid buying Chinese wherever possible.

To a greater or lesser degree.  It's degrees of corruption and some systems are more corrupt than others.  The systems we live under in the West are probably the least corrupt any human has ever lived under.  A system which persecutes a doctor and 'disappears' a journalist for trying to warn people about a killer virus - THAT'S a corrupt system.
 
 
Do you have to lie to your wife and kids that you read a book so that you can be sure that one of them won't denounce you to the secret police, who'll send you off to the gulag? No, it's nothing like the Trump administration.  Is your every utterance monitored by the state for incorrect thought?  Are your words online policed by the state and will you lose your job and be sent for re-education if you criticise the government?
 
I was reading a book a few months ago and a true story in it stuck in my mind.  A man, who had relatives behind the Iron Curtain, was relating a visit that his father made to him in London towards the end of the Cold War.  He welcomed his father at the airport and for a treat, took him to tea at Harrods.  His father had never seen such splendour and wealth and asked his son if the shop was only for Party Workers.  (Under the Soviet system there were special shops for members of the Communist Party, and special roads for the most important people to drive on).  His son told him it wasn't.  They had a fine meal and went back to the son's flat, and the next day, which was Sunday, the son asked his father what he wanted to do.
The father says "I want to go back to that shop today".  They went back, and the father said "But it's still here."  He had believed that the entire shop was an elaborate facade, created by the state, to convince tourists like him of the wealth of London.  Because that's what the state in Russia did.   And he couldn't believe that in Britain such shops could exist, and that anyone could go in them, and that they weren't reserved for a powerful elite.
 
None of us live under a system like that, for which we should be profoundly grateful.
 

Well quite.  The number of people who uncritically parrot the press releases from the Chinese State Media and then turn around and say "You can't trust anything our politicians say" is mind boggling.  Everything about the communist system is built on a lie.  The system lies, the media lies, and people lie to each other and themselves every day.
 

This didn't age well. 

Oh man... lmao

FFG:

"**** Intel!"

I find it quite a different, when you compare the MC80 (that looks similar to the Starhawk) to an ISD.
It really depend on the cost of the ship.

It would have been nice if they could have just put the game on hold for a few months or years until they have time and resources for it again.  Announcing it is done is a bit depressing.  It really takes the wind out of the communities sails.
I still am up for doing community created expansions, but have a lot of other games and hobbies that require attention as well. 
Runewars will always be special to me because it was my first real wargaming miniatures game, which got me into painting, kitbashing, and batrepping (I know, it's been too long since the last madlands tale).
Heres hoping the dozen or so active members can still pull a community driven future together for this brilliant game.

Ha the FFG in flight report during Q&A question was asked about Runewars and it was confirmed that nothing new coming out and it is completed at this point. 

Well it's good to know I just purchased the base game this week only to find out it looks like it is not being supported at all.  I just scrolled through the upcoming products list and there was not a single Runebound item being printed/ reprinted.  ****, do I hate Star Wars.  Pushes everything else off the table.

I could see her secondary ability being useful on rebel ships that can't take ECM and want to move forward into big firing arcs and have double braces - especially the Liberty, but potentially a Nebulon.  Using a Liberty, if I got a 7-8 damage shot from an ISD 2, with 2 accuracies, I could see discarding a token to brace, especially if I can do it again and hope I can move out of there soon.  Maybe with her and the auxiliary shield teams they will have more durability head on.
 

Looks like creatures from Journeys in Middle Earth. They said in Q&A Runewars is a completed game at this point. 

Ok... i don't think anyone is arguing that with you? We explained it is a technicality.
Feel free to email FFG and express your frustration with the classification :P

This is an analysis of how well Miskatonic Horror solves the dilution problem. First of all, a tip of the hat to ricedwlit, who started a great conversation on this topic a couple of weeks ago. Here’s the link:
http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=5&efcid=1&efidt=525714&efpag=0
Instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, this post complements his thread. As ricedwlit pointed out, dilution isn’t much of a problem with Miskatonic if you only use one or two other expansions. In this thread, I’m looking at what happens if you combine Miskatonic with every other expansion.
By the way, I’m not going to look at Next Act Begins cards, or cards that involve Exhibit Items, at least not yet. The dilution of those cards has been mostly solved, though I still have some nagging doubts. For example, if you play with every expansion, I suspect it will be very, very rare that you’ll actually *need* an Exhibit Item to protect you from the effects of a mythos card. But for now I’ll assume that there is no dilution of Next Acts or Exhibit Items.
I’m looking the dilution of Dunwich cards and Innsmouth cards. Specifically these scenarios:
1) Using the Dunwich board, but not the Innsmouth board
2) Using the Innsmouth board, but not the Dunwich board
3) Using both the Dunwich board and the Innsmouth board
 
For each scenario, I ran the percentage chance of drawing a Dunwich card, an Innsmouth card, a card that opens a gate in Arkham, or an “other” card (Strange Sightings, Double Doomer, etc.). In each case, the top row is the probabilities that you get if you use only the base game and the relevant expansions (DH, IH, or both DH and IH). In the second row, I add Miskatonic Horror. With each additional row, I add one expansion. The bottom row contains the percentages that you get if you use every expansion in the game.
Also, in ricedwlit’s thread, Tibs and Waddball each suggested house rules for dealing with dilution in Miskatonic Horror:
Tibs’ rule: “draw one, and draw again if it's not Dunwich or Innsmouth”
Waddball’s rule: “if you draw an AH gate or a non-gate, then if the last mythos card was an AH gate, draw and apply a new card”
Just for fun, I analyzed what would happen if you used either rule. I should say right off the bat that I have a general concern about Waddball’s rule. With his rule, drawing an Arkham location would reduce the probability that the next location will also be in Arkham. If you could make an educated guess about what the next Mythos card will be, it may give you an unfair advantage. Having said that, Waddball’s probabilities are often quite favorable.
 
In case you’re getting impatient, here’s what I found:
If you’re using Dunwich and Innsmouth, dilution is only a minor problem. If you use one board but not the other, dilution is still a major problem, even with Miskatonic. If you use Innsmouth, but not Dunwich, either Tibs’ rule or Waddball’s rule will mostly take care of things. If you use Dunwich, but not Innsmouth, then neither rule will help you. In that case, the only solution I know of is prepping the mythos deck before the game, which I’ll explain below.
 
Also, no matter which scenario you use, there will be a problem with two cards: “The Story Continues” and “Old Debts Come Due.”
The Story Continues was designed to be used with a 67 card deck. Old Debts Come Due was designed for a 103 card deck. If you play with everything, you have a 295 card deck. That means that, in 15 turns, the chance of drawing Old Debts Come Due decreases from 15% (with 103 cards) down to 5% (with 295 cards). If you play with a very large mythos deck, then you may want to ignore the Wizard’s Hill encounter where the Dark Man offers you a deal. The encounter has no teeth, since the Dark Man will very rarely collect on his debt.
Also, with a large mythos deck, The Story Continues will only be drawn about 5% of the time. This is obviously an issue if you use Bast. Even if you don’t use Bast, the original purpose of the Story Continues was to make it possible that you could get the same mythos cards twice. With a 67 card deck, there was a very real possibility that you could draw The Story Continues, reshuffle the deck, and (for example) get nailed with a particular Rumor card twice in one game. With 295 cards, that could still happen. But it’s very, very unlikely.
 
1) Playing with the Dunwich board, but not the Innsmouth board
24.51% Dunwich, 75.49% Arkham, 0.00% Other: just base game and Dunwich
27.59% Dunwich, 67.59% Arkham, 4.83% Other: add Miskatonic
24.54% Dunwich, 69.33% Arkham, 6.13% Other: add Dark Pharaoh
21.05% Dunwich, 68.95% Arkham, 10.00% Other: add KiY
18.87% Dunwich, 70.28% Arkham, 10.85% Other: add Kingsport
17.02% Dunwich, 71.06% Arkham, 11.91% Other: add Black Goat
16.88% Dunwich, 70.46% Arkham, 12.66% Other: add Innsmouth*
15.44% Dunwich, 72.97% Arkham, 11.58% Other: add Lurker
*Even you’re not playing with the Innsmouth board, you might add the mythos cards from Innsmouth Horror that don’t directly relate to the Innsmouth board. All two of them: Strange Sightings and the Innsmouth Plague. I didn’t include “Plans In Motion” because it advances the DOR track. Not much point in including that card if you don’t use the Innsmouth board.
As you can see, if you play with Dunwich, Miskatonic, and only one or two other expansions, then dilution isn’t too much of a problem, like ricedwlit said. However, if you play with all the expansions, the chance of a gate opening in Dunwich goes down from 24.51% to 15.44%. The chance of a gate opening in Arkham also goes down, but not by much.
Basically, with all the expansions, about 10% of the cards are “other” cards. In order to make room for them, Dunwich takes a 10% hit. So, if you play with just the Dunwich board, Dunwich will be a very sleepy town, even with Miskatonic Horror added.
If Tibs’ rule was implemented, it would result in these probabilities:
28.55% Dunwich, 61.66% Arkham, 9.79% Other
With this rule Dunwich would be okay. But Arkham itself would take a 14% hit in order to make room for “other” cards. Instead of Dunwich being sleepy, Arkham would be sleepy.
Waddball’s rule fares a little bit better:
25.19% Dunwich, 64.47% Arkham, 10.34% Other
Arkham still takes an 11% hit, though. Personally, I still think that’s too much.
In order to take care of these problems, and the problem of the “Old Debts Come Due” card, I recommend you prep the mythos deck as follows:
• 24 Dunwich cards
• 72 Arkham cards
• 5 “other” cards
• The Story Continues and Old Debts Come Due
103 cards total
23.53% are Dunwich cards, which is 96.00% of its undiluted value.
71.57% are Arkham cards, which is 94.81% of its undiluted value.
4.90% are “other” cards, which is 101.49% of its undiluted value.
The "undiluted values" are what you get if you use only the base game and Dunwich.  Except for "other" cards, which assumes base game, DH and MH.
Of course, the Dunwich cards could come from DH and/or MH.
 
2) Playing with the Innsmouth board, but not the Dunwich board
33.33% Innsmouth, 64.71% Arkham, 1.96% Other: just base game and Innsmouth
37.93% Innsmouth, 55.86% Arkham, 6.21% Other: add Miskatonic
33.74% Innsmouth, 58.90% Arkham, 7.36% Other: add Dark Pharaoh
31.61% Innsmouth, 61.49% Arkham, 6.90% Other: add Dunwich*
27.95% Innsmouth, 62.19% Arkham, 10.45% Other: add KiY
24.66% Innsmouth, 64.13% Arkham, 11.21% Other: add Kingsport
22.36% Innsmouth, 65.45% Arkham, 12.20% Other: add Black Goat
20.52% Innsmouth, 68.28% Arkham, 11.19% Other: add Lurker
*These are the 11 cards from Dunwich Horror that open gates in Arkham.
We see pretty much the same story as with the Dunwich board. If you play with only one or two expansions, you’ll be okay. If you play with all the expansions, the Innsmouth board takes a big hit in order to make room for the extra “other” cards. Also, Arkham itself becomes slightly more active. I assume this is because of the 11 extra cards from Dunwich Horror.
With Tibs’ rule, the probabilities work out to:
32.42% Innsmouth, 58.06% Arkham, 9.52% Other
In this case, Arkham still takes a hit, but it’s only about a 7% hit. That’s pretty good.
With Waddball’s rule, it would be pretty much the same:
31.73% Innsmouth, 58.66% Arkham, 9.61% Other
If (like me) you play with only the Innsmouth board, I recommend that you use all the expansions and use either Tibs’ rule or Waddball’s rule. Obviously, Old Debts Come Due won’t be a problem since Wizard’s Hill isn’t in the game.
However, if you want the probabilities to be exact, or if you use Bast a lot, you can prep the mythos deck as follows:
• 32 Innsmouth cards (potentially including Plans In Motion)
• 64 Arkham cards
• 6 “other” cards
• The Story Continues
103 cards total
31.37% are Innsmouth cards, which is 94.12% of its undiluted value.
62.75% are Arkham cards, which is 94.12% of its undiluted value.
5.88% are “other” cards, which is 94.72% of its undiluted value.
 
3) Playing with both the Dunwich board and the Innsmouth board
First of all, it’s not clear what the probabilities even should be. In my opinion, the ideal distribution of probabilities is this:
18.44% Dun, 25.08% Inns, 52.74% Ark, 3.74% Other
This is what you get with the expansions:
18.12% Dun, 24.64% Inns, 55.80% Ark, 1.45% Other: just base game, DH, and IH
22.10% Dun, 30.39% Inns, 42.54% Ark, 4.97% Other: add Miskatonic
20.10% Dun, 27.64% Inns, 46.23% Ark, 6.03% Other: add Dark Pharaoh
17.70% Dun, 24.34% Inns, 48.67% Ark, 9.29% Other: add KiY
16.13% Dun, 22.18% Inns, 51.61% Ark, 10.08% Other: add Kingsport
14.76% Dun, 20.30% Inns, 53.87% Ark, 11.07% Other: add Black Goat
13.65% Dun, 18.77% Inns, 57.34% Ark, 10.24% Other: add Lurker
If you play with just Dunwich and Innsmouth, it’s actually really close to the ideal distribution. If you add all the expansions, it also isn’t too far from the ideal. Dunwich and Innsmouth are a little sleepy, and Arkham is a little busier than it should be, but it’s not too bad.
Here’s how I got the ideal distribution:
The ideal distribution is where the undiluted probabilities are shrunk proportionally until they add up to 100%. If you’re playing with just Dunwich Horror, Dunwich cards have a 24.51% chance of being drawn. If you’re playing with just Innsmouth Horror, Innsmouth cards have a 33.33% chance of being drawn. The chance of Arkham cards being drawn is 75.49% (with Dunwich) and 64.71% (with Innsmouth). Those chances average out to 70.10%. There is also a 4.97% chance of drawing “other” cards. I got that last number by calculating the chance of getting “other” cards if you combine DH, IH and MH.
So, the “raw ideal” distribution is: 24.51% Dun, 33.33% Inns, 70.10% Ark, 4.97% other. In order to get those probabilities to add up to 100%, you need to shrink them down to 75.24% of their original sizes. That results in the “ideal” distribution.
Anyway, with Tibs’ rule, these are the results:
22.91% Dun, 31.50% Inns, 38.68% Ark, 6.91% Other
In my opinion, those results are not good. The values for Dunwich and Innsmouth are inflated, and the chance of drawing an Arkham location is way too low. On the other hand, when I showed Tibs these numbers, he seemed to like them. He says that it makes sense that gates are nearly identically frequent between all three regions. If you agree with Tibs, then his rule is a good way to go.
Waddball’s rule:
18.97% Dun, 26.08% Inns, 46.63% Ark, 8.32% Other
These results aren’t bad at all. Arkham frequencies take a 6% hit, which is tolerable. By the way, Waddball himself reported this distribution: 49% AH, 18% DH, 24% IH, and 9% non-gates. His numbers are close to mine, but I’m not sure why they don’t match exactly. It could be because I consider “Plans In Motion” to be an Innsmouth card, not an “other” card.
If you play with both boards, I recommend that you just use all 295 mythos cards. Dunwich and Innsmouth would be *slightly* sleepy, but it probably wouldn’t be enough that you’d notice. If you used Waddball’s rule, the probabilities would be even closer, though Arkham would be very slightly quieter than it should be.
However, if you still feel like things are off kilter, or if you want “The Story Continues” and “Old Debts Come Due” to have teeth, you can prep the deck as follows.
• 19 Dunwich cards
• 26 Innsmouth cards (potentially including Plans In Motion)
• 53 Arkham cards
• 4 “other” cards
• The Story Continues and Old Debts Come Due
103 cards total
18.45% are Dunwich cards, which is 75.26% of its undiluted value.
25.24% are Innsmouth cards, which is 75.73% of its undiluted value.
52.43% are Arkham cards, which is 73.76% of its undiluted value.
3.88% are “other” cards, which is 78.14% of its undiluted value.