Jump to content

player3679152

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Oh, huh. I didn't know. That's pretty cool.
  2. Oh, piffle. Literally not everything you do hurts someone's feelings, and the sort of moral relativist explanation one has to undertake to say that all actions are the same is uninteresting and incorrect. Please don't confuse my stance on this with the sort of thoughtlessness exhibited by some in this thread. There are more than two sides - my own stance is that I do not care a whit about competitive play, NOR do I care a whit about cosmetic exclusives. Compounding that is that anyone who wants a cool paint scheme, and argues that access to a cool paint scheme should be wider, has already demonstrated (by virtue of buying these minis) that they have the disposable capital (be it in time, or money) to either paint one or commission one to be painted. One other thing is that there is this sentiment running through some of the thread that somehow geographic attendance limitations are more unjust than event winning restrictions... but from where I'm standing, they're both unjust. For better or worse, all things any of us buy - especially as collectors' items - are behind some sort of wall, and a wall which is in accessible to most people who exist. All things that any of us win - especially in this sort of casual game background - is behind a skill wall, and that skill wall can't be crossed by everyone because the vast majority of us don't happen to be in the right situation to spend hours getting good at something that is, at the end of the day, trivial. The argument from an accessibility standpoint on this particular cosmetic exclusive fails, thusly, on multiple grounds. First, is exclusive in a different way than other other exclusives, but the nature of exclusion hasn't changed. Second, a focus primarily on the cosmetic qualities of the product, rather than a social or mechanical experience of the game piece, would be better fulfilled by comissioning unique paintjobs (and it would support your local artistic scene, and avoid rewarding the non-productive activity of scalping). Now, there's a possibility that someone who truly can't afford the cost of buying a stock Vulture and having it commission painted, but CAN afford multiple stock Vultures, is left out, but that demographic seems vanishingly small.
  3. ...no? I mean, there's no Rebel or Resistance ships coming in the wave, so you might as well just wait till the one after for the new Resistance ship. Unless an ARC in a different scheme is appealing, and you have a spare dial and cardboard from conversion kits.
  4. Passing first player at the end of each round makes sense - while I'd rather have integrated turns where at the I5 step, players alternate, that's significantly more complex than simply just changing who goes first at top of each round, so I've come around to passing the token. When the decision of going first or second is so heavily weighted to the latter, and that decision either relies on either a straight coin-toss or literally playing less (ie. bringing fewer points) that's a problem in my books. I'm going to see if my group will consider house ruling the first player thing.
  5. And that's really the issue, I think. The weightage of going first or second so heavily favours one option, and that the game actively rewards you playing less of it (that is, smaller points) in order to get a good shot at preferred option.
  6. Pretty much this. Any of us could decide to run an event, and you could decide to run it under whatever set of rules you choose to, and they can can be enforced as much or as little as you want to. Games are - and I really do think the main drawback of the age of the internet is that gaming culture seems to have just forgotten this - a matter of negotiation, and nobody is in a situation where they are forced to play a game with another person. Organising an event is a situation where the agreement is that participants agree to the (clearly expressed, one hopes) rules of the organiser. A given organiser might have specific aims - accessibility, or hobby showcasing, or what have you - and any given potential participant can make their own decision about whether the specific aims in mind are something they wish to engage, or not.
  7. Flipping it each turn doesn't seem that fiddly - plenty of board games, and other miniature games, do so. Now, it might not actually be a bad thing per se that deep bids exist - but it does feel weird.
  8. Literally called him a name. Anyhow, if you don't care about the choice of being first player, then it makes sense to take up as many points as possible. In my albeit limited experience, I've found that more people want to go second than first, as flying the sort of swarm of I1 and I2 is, in some ways, more effort than flying a few high I pilots. So even if you build to 200, and the other person turns up with a large bid, they're still more likely than not to give you first player.
  9. I think that's fine though, given that it is a casual format; people interested in organised play almost by definition aren't as invested in it. It's fun for quick thematic games at home though.
  10. Do you... really not see the problem with your behaviour? You create an OP calling some other guy names (which you also got wrong), and then proceed to call the core elements of the rules stupid (or worse), but then you want the rest of us to be nice to you because your life is complex? Which, yes, we should generally be nice to each other because life is frigging complex. But be nice to that other guy, and to the game designers.
  11. If paintjob rotation is a thing (and it might be, given the Decimator, B-Wing, and Scum Z-95 re-releases) FFG is already favouring a certain type of player over others - namely, those who were keyed into the game, and had the funds available, when those paintjobs were out. Anyone who isn't, and is also not willing to spend the time/money to find what are now OOP paint schemes, is a have not who has to suck it up.
  12. If you're enjoying the game as it is, don't bother. If you find it's getting a bit clunky, or you want to put the ships on the table and have a slightly different experience, then you can pick them up over time. My group of four friends switched over to 2nd, and given each of us just bought one conversion, it was the right decision. If you're footing the whole bill yourself, and you don't care about Very Important Organised Play, it doesn't matter.
  13. I am utterly uninterested in the idea, but it doesn't make it bad. Indeed, judging by the people who seem to like getting alt art, it might even be that the idea is good. Specifically, I think that your assertion that hobby model people are one category of people who would monolithically dislike this idea is incorrect - hobby model are finer-grained in their variation than that. It's akin to Darth Meanie's prior assertion that casual gamers are turned off by twice-annual points updates. Some might be, to be sure. Some are not. The claims about dice and "really cool" alts presume that anybody who's okay alt art Hyenas have some sort of tipping point past which their opinion about alt art would change. I don't think that that's necessarily the case, either. For some, there would be - people saying they'd be really miffed if Black One was such an exclusive, for example. But there are also those of us who wouldn't be bothered if dice or Black One were simply more alt art. I went out very slightly out of my way to get Porkins' Red 6, but I did that in the same way that I might go out of my way to try a new flavour of ice-cream - out of joy and not fear. Come to think of it, if one feels that exclusive alt art should be less significant, it would be nice to see MORE alt art for different cons - and indeed, Jedi Starfighters would be the ideal option to have produced for them, given the idiosyncracies of the order - so that Adepticon doesn't become some anomalous supercon.
  14. Nonsense. I'm a model hobby person; as such, factory paint schemes don't matter to me, because if I care enough I'll paint my own, and if I don't care enough... then I don't care. If FFG released exclusive alt dice - as long as readability is the same, I wouldn't care. Just as much as I don't care about alt art cards. If they released, say, Plo's scheme on an aethersprite at a con I don't go to, I'd be a little sad for all of five seconds or so, as long as there were no game mechanical elements locked behind an event.
  15. I'm fully a casual player (at home, with the same 3 other people, with an occasional fifth, sometimes multiplayer, sometimes not), and we play tens of other games so it's hardy like any of us have the time to give a hoot about the meta and keeping up with the Important Tournament People, and I'm FULLY in support of this model. I dabbled back in 1E and then stopped because the game felt too gamey for my tastes, and so far I've quite enjoyed what 2E has brought to the table in terms of actually flying my ships. It truly does not seem like any work whatsoever to adapt to the new changes since the app I use (shout out to LaunchbayNext!) just updated, and for a lark I dug around a bit to see what the changes were in comparison. I guess I can see how, if you insisted on only flying the same list for multiple games, the incremental points changes might add up so your list isn't the same. But playing the same thing over and over to improve your performance incrementally each time isn't what I'd think of as casual - it's the pinnacle of competition (which is to say, it's focusing on the ONLY thing you have control over, which is to not make mistakes). And if someone turned up because they'd been without an internet connection for a few days, we'd either make time for them to build a new list, or just play the old list, and fix it for next time. It's very easy.
×
×
  • Create New...