Conflict Article

[Admiral Slackbar 122]

The other really nice thing about campaigns in general is that items that are strong in tournament play are not necessarily what is strong in campaign play.  Since you know that your opponent will be the opposing faction, you can tailor your list towards that faction's weaknesses as well as your own personal strengths.  Those corner cases where a VSDII or an AfrigIIA is the optimal choice?  Upgrades that only work against a particular squad/ship/build? Admirals that suck in Blue on Blue engagements?  This is the time when those are more likely to come up.  This leads to a far more diverse play experience even when you are playing the same old opponents.

  Ugh.  Not looking forward to facing Kallus, though...

 

[Madaghmire 7,274]

Nope. Nope nope nope. This thread just got back on track.

 

Are you more excited about the new squadrons or the mission cards?

Mission cards. I hope they are well crafted. The ones I've seen so far look good. And not just because new ways to play are great, although they are.

I feel like for a lot of fleets right now, you take three objectives and your opponent has a clear and obvious choice which one is going to work best for him either because he built a fleet that one happens to work for (like he has a bunch of bombers/apt's and you took precision strike) or one just doesn't confer a real advantage to second player (almost any fleet that can't make real use of Superior Positions. I exaggerate a bit but you know what I mean). It is my fervent hope that these new objectives will allow different archtypes to do a better job of leveraging the second player advantage through objective inclusion.

I'm also hoping that maybe some objectives that rarely see play now might get played more because players will be able to force the choice with the right combination of objectives. Right now I feel red objectives in general are rarely chosen, because they often confer really easy to understand and leverage tactical advantages to the second player. We see it sometimes, sure, but I've played a whole mess of contested outpost and not so much advanced gunnery in wave 2. Hopefully the new blood breathes some life into some of the lesser used objectives we already have as well.

Also, at a glance things like station assault might breathe some life into VSD's, as though Konstantine wasn't gonna do that already.

Really looking forward to that preview article.

 

Right.  This point right here covers this point exactly.  The way that missions are currently is that I never, and I really do mean never, feel that my opponent will have to think hard about which mission that will be most optimal for him.

 

If the decision was much more difficult or the lines more blurred, maybe it will even subtlety reduce the need for initiative bids (which I feel are absolutely huge in this game).

There are a few squadron fleets that manage to do it. Truthiness runs a rieekan aces fleet which forces rhe choice between gunnery, fire lanes and supeior positions where there is an actual choice to be made. But as I said already, on the whole I agree. So often the decision of which objective i want takes all of 20 seconds.

If he runs Superior Positions with potential zombie Rieekan ships to score from, he's braver than I thought.

I see your point but he generally wins the squadron fight. I don't think he has it backfire often/at all.

[Salted Diamond 591]

Not looking forward to facing Kallus, though...

 I'm thinking the campaign will prob see many cards that often get left behind.  Thinking Kallus and quads/point def reroute on an ISDII.  "Are you sure you want to send your fighters after my ship?"  Even ships that are considered ineffiecent will prob find uses, Interceptors for Ace hunting for example. Send Y-wing swams after a named target with a  GR-75 with bomber command.  Stuff that is to nitch or not cost effecient enough might become viable tatctics in the campaign.

[mcworrell 810]

Not looking forward to facing Kallus, though...

 I'm thinking the campaign will prob see many cards that often get left behind.  Thinking Kallus and quads/point def reroute on an ISDII.  "Are you sure you want to send your fighters after my ship?"  Even ships that are considered ineffiecent will prob find uses, Interceptors for Ace hunting for example. Send Y-wing swams after a named target with a  GR-75 with bomber command.  Stuff that is to nitch or not cost effecient enough might become viable tatctics in the campaign.

Very true. I think it will open up all sorts of different tactics and thinking very hard about throwing demolisher, for example, into the middle of a Rebel fleet to try for that kill. You might get it, but will it be worth losing demolisher?

[Lyraeus 4,759]

This intergalactic pissing match has been quite entertaining.  I am just glad I can see it from work.  Passes the midnight hours well.  I am looking forward to the damage carry over rules and how FFG intends to work the system.   I am curious if it will be a fixed repair value, a percentage value, a time dependent/number of games per point, or something else.

 

 

I have a lot of hope for the campaign.  I think this is just what the players looking for the narrative play experience are looking for and it will reinvigorate the standard format players as well by giving everyone new challenges to work out.  I also truly hope that the rules are written in such away that we as a player/fan base can easily adapt them to other sectors in the Star Wars Universe.  In our local area we have been toying with the idea of narrative play and infact the annoucment of the CC came on the day we sat down to start work on our own campaign rules. 

 

All in all I think this is going to be great.  oh and....

 

 

DEATH TO THE REBEL SCUM!

It looks like you get points based on what sectors you hold.

[Church14 2,495]

Also. Campaigns tend to leave you with whatever you have. Not whatever you want like a skirmish. So Demolisher may be on the table, but without EL/APT/ACT or engine techs. Ships that rely on lots of upgrades or specific upgrades will be hurting.

I also figure squadrons, GR75s, Gozantis, Cr90s, and raiders will be easy/easier to replace. So here is to little ships as a meat shield for Home One or Relentless.

[Mooniac 17]

This is the first time since I joined these boards where the snark started to be boarder line rude. Correction...the Admiral did his fair share.

We as a community are better then this....agree to disagree and move on. Enough already.

Let's focus on this awesome looking campaign and keep the discussion on that.

Nonsense like that doesn't help. If you don't like arguments, stay off the web. If you think someone said something offensive then quote it, criticize it, and do it without attacking anyone. If you try to attack without getting involved, you aren't helping anything except the trolls.

The nonsense that doesn't help is the three of you arguing the same points over and over again, just wording everthing a little differently. You have hijacked a thread that is supposed to be about the new campaign and turned it into a petty argument, which also spilled over into another thread. Like someone mentioned on the other post, take it to private messages and get back on topic.

I'm moving on.

The discussion certainly did get off topic. Instead of whinging about it, and continuing the problem, why not be constructive and point out where people have actually said something to cause the problem. It seemed to me someone was expressing unhappiness with how long it's been for these new products to come out and how it is hurting the game. Slightly off topic, but not trolling IMO. Then, there was an over reaction (to what may be an over reaction in the first place but it's all good until someone gets insulting).

Seems to me the fault lies with the complaint on the original complaint that also got insulting. Seems also that you and others want to blame everyone involved, but THAT NEVER WORKS. If a dog steals a steak off the table it doesn't do to yell at all the dogs. You either go after the culprit or get used to losing steaks. If you come after me, you better have a good case because otherwise I'm coming back at you every time so you or others don't make it a habit.

If you don't want to read any posts from me then don't provoke me. If you want me to respect your feelings then be respectful of the feelings of others here. This whole thing started because one side is frustrated, sad, and thinks the game hasn't been getting the attention from FFG it deserves. There were responses to that I thought were terrible so I jumped in. I'm not going to take trash from you about it just because I was there.

It's not your forum, McWorrel.

Edit: A you Lyreus, weren't you the real provocateur?

Edited July 26, 2016 by Mooniac

[Daht 481]

If someone posts a short message to encourage people to stop arguing like children,  and you belt out 3 paragraphs of passive agressive retort WITH CAPS for emphasis to argue that you aren't the one arguing like a child... 

 

Edit: also adding an edit to take a parting shot at someone..

 

guess what that means?

Edited July 26, 2016 by Daht

[Lyraeus 4,759]

This is the first time since I joined these boards where the snark started to be boarder line rude. Correction...the Admiral did his fair share.

We as a community are better then this....agree to disagree and move on. Enough already.

Let's focus on this awesome looking campaign and keep the discussion on that.

Nonsense like that doesn't help. If you don't like arguments, stay off the web. If you think someone said something offensive then quote it, criticize it, and do it without attacking anyone. If you try to attack without getting involved, you aren't helping anything except the trolls.

The nonsense that doesn't help is the three of you arguing the same points over and over again, just wording everthing a little differently. You have hijacked a thread that is supposed to be about the new campaign and turned it into a petty argument, which also spilled over into another thread. Like someone mentioned on the other post, take it to private messages and get back on topic.

I'm moving on.

The discussion certainly did get off topic. Instead of whinging about it, and continuing the problem, why not be constructive and point out where people have actually said something to cause the problem. It seemed to me someone was expressing unhappiness with how long it's been for these new products to come out and how it is hurting the game. Slightly off topic, but not trolling IMO. Then, there was an over reaction (to what may be an over reaction in the first place but it's all good until someone gets insulting).

Seems to me the fault lies with the complaint on the original complaint that also got insulting. Seems also that you and others want to blame everyone involved, but THAT NEVER WORKS. If a dog steals a steak off the table it doesn't do to yell at all the dogs. You either go after the culprit or get used to losing steaks. If you come after me, you better have a good case because otherwise I'm coming back at you every time so you or others don't make it a habit.

If you don't want to read any posts from me then don't provoke me. If you want me to respect your feelings then be respectful of the feelings of others here. This whole thing started because one side is frustrated, sad, and thinks the game hasn't been getting the attention from FFG it deserves. There were responses to that I thought were terrible so I jumped in. I'm not going to take trash from you about it just because I was there.

It's not your forum, McWorrel.

Edit: A you Lyreus, weren't you the real provocateur?

Well said.

Now sure I understand your edit but I provoked no one. I defended Armada because most people don't know historical trend analysis or refused to do so. I was trained in such.

[mcworrell 810]

You are right, these are not my forums, I am not a moderator. I will focus on the topic of the posts from now on.

[Mad Cat 2,250]

 

So what other campaign boxes can ffg throw at us!

Super stoked! I hope this isn't a one time thing, but is like the aces packs from x wing!

(Aka a series focusing on improving the game and THIS IS 10X BETTER THAN I WAS EXPECTING WOOOOO)

 

Something leading up the Battle of Endor!!!

 

With special rules for the DS2...

 

I would like to see an escape from Hoth campaign pack. It could include:

• Convoy rules.
• Planetary assault force delivery scenario.
• Rules for big planetary based Ion Cannon.
• Asteroids with space slugs in them.
• Rules for treating frostbite, tying AT-AT Shoelaces together and washing the smell of tauntaun innards out of your parker without resorting to a boil wash.

[Mooniac 17]

If someone posts a short message to encourage people to stop arguing like children,  and you belt out 3 paragraphs of passive agressive retort WITH CAPS for emphasis to argue that you aren't the one arguing like a child... 

 

Edit: also adding an edit to take a parting shot at someone..

 

guess what that means?

When you call them children, what do you expect will happen? Seriously?

[HERO 842]

 

 

 

 

This is the first time since I joined these boards where the snark started to be boarder line rude. Correction...the Admiral did his fair share.

We as a community are better then this....agree to disagree and move on. Enough already.

Let's focus on this awesome looking campaign and keep the discussion on that.

Nonsense like that doesn't help. If you don't like arguments, stay off the web. If you think someone said something offensive then quote it, criticize it, and do it without attacking anyone. If you try to attack without getting involved, you aren't helping anything except the trolls.

The nonsense that doesn't help is the three of you arguing the same points over and over again, just wording everthing a little differently. You have hijacked a thread that is supposed to be about the new campaign and turned it into a petty argument, which also spilled over into another thread. Like someone mentioned on the other post, take it to private messages and get back on topic.

I'm moving on.

The discussion certainly did get off topic. Instead of whinging about it, and continuing the problem, why not be constructive and point out where people have actually said something to cause the problem. It seemed to me someone was expressing unhappiness with how long it's been for these new products to come out and how it is hurting the game. Slightly off topic, but not trolling IMO. Then, there was an over reaction (to what may be an over reaction in the first place but it's all good until someone gets insulting).

Seems to me the fault lies with the complaint on the original complaint that also got insulting. Seems also that you and others want to blame everyone involved, but THAT NEVER WORKS. If a dog steals a steak off the table it doesn't do to yell at all the dogs. You either go after the culprit or get used to losing steaks. If you come after me, you better have a good case because otherwise I'm coming back at you every time so you or others don't make it a habit.

If you don't want to read any posts from me then don't provoke me. If you want me to respect your feelings then be respectful of the feelings of others here. This whole thing started because one side is frustrated, sad, and thinks the game hasn't been getting the attention from FFG it deserves. There were responses to that I thought were terrible so I jumped in. I'm not going to take trash from you about it just because I was there.

It's not your forum, McWorrel.

Edit: A you Lyreus, weren't you the real provocateur?

Well said.

Now sure I understand your edit but I provoked no one. I defended Armada because most people don't know historical trend analysis or refused to do so. I was trained in such.

 

 

ROFL!  Started off my morning with a hearty laugh.

 

 

 

 

This is the first time since I joined these boards where the snark started to be boarder line rude. Correction...the Admiral did his fair share.

We as a community are better then this....agree to disagree and move on. Enough already.

Let's focus on this awesome looking campaign and keep the discussion on that.

Nonsense like that doesn't help. If you don't like arguments, stay off the web. If you think someone said something offensive then quote it, criticize it, and do it without attacking anyone. If you try to attack without getting involved, you aren't helping anything except the trolls.

The nonsense that doesn't help is the three of you arguing the same points over and over again, just wording everthing a little differently. You have hijacked a thread that is supposed to be about the new campaign and turned it into a petty argument, which also spilled over into another thread. Like someone mentioned on the other post, take it to private messages and get back on topic.

I'm moving on.

The discussion certainly did get off topic. Instead of whinging about it, and continuing the problem, why not be constructive and point out where people have actually said something to cause the problem. It seemed to me someone was expressing unhappiness with how long it's been for these new products to come out and how it is hurting the game. Slightly off topic, but not trolling IMO. Then, there was an over reaction (to what may be an over reaction in the first place but it's all good until someone gets insulting).

Seems to me the fault lies with the complaint on the original complaint that also got insulting. Seems also that you and others want to blame everyone involved, but THAT NEVER WORKS. If a dog steals a steak off the table it doesn't do to yell at all the dogs. You either go after the culprit or get used to losing steaks. If you come after me, you better have a good case because otherwise I'm coming back at you every time so you or others don't make it a habit.

If you don't want to read any posts from me then don't provoke me. If you want me to respect your feelings then be respectful of the feelings of others here. This whole thing started because one side is frustrated, sad, and thinks the game hasn't been getting the attention from FFG it deserves. There were responses to that I thought were terrible so I jumped in. I'm not going to take trash from you about it just because I was there.

It's not your forum, McWorrel.

Edit: A you Lyreus, weren't you the real provocateur?

 

 

The only reason why I've been arguing with Ly is because data flies right over his head and I'm trying desperately to make him understand.

 

You see, at this point, you can't.  Why?  Because his "training" tells him there's only two metrics that matter:

>Total number of products received from Core to Wave 4 in X-Wing vs. Armada

>Total number of products received up to Wave 3 with respect to time (where Armada has actually received more product than X-Wing during the same time frame)

What he has completely ignored from me is:

>Player gain over time. (showing decline)

>Player retention over time. (showing loss)

>Player participation in events over time. (showing decline)

>Social media attention over time. (showing decline)

>Regular vs. irregular release cadence. (showing hiatus)

>Player participation with respect to franchise (same players attending X-Wing events vs. Armada)

>Release cadence and product velocity (X-Wing has a upwards trend of more product in shorter time vs. Armada which is declining recently for whatever reason)

 

So, if you were a business stakeholder, which metrics are more important to you?  Honestly speaking.

 

Not sure if you saw, but I made a post here:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/225791-both-wave-iii-and-wave-iv-are-scheduled-to-arrive-at-retailers-later-in-august/?p=2326725

 

 

Ly seems to be stuck, absolutely transfixed on those first two metrics I spoke about.  Where he's oblivious to or doesn't want to see, are the other metrics that make up a product from a business perspective.

I saw FFGJosh pop in this thread on Sunday, so hopefully he has a clearer picture of what's going on and has big things planned for Armada.  I'm not saying its a sinking ship, no way.  I'm just saying that it's not all peaches and cream and that this Pleasantville people are living in is really The Truman Show.  I'm not some doomsayer, I'm a realist.  It's time to be real or don't bother bringing up any data in an argument.

[Mooniac 17]

I think I've made my point. Sorry, Lyreus if you were not out of line. I don't have any more energy to go back and look myself anymore. Sheesh.

[Madaghmire 7,274]

This is the first time since I joined these boards where the snark started to be boarder line rude. Correction...the Admiral did his fair share.

We as a community are better then this....agree to disagree and move on. Enough already.

Let's focus on this awesome looking campaign and keep the discussion on that.

Nonsense like that doesn't help. If you don't like arguments, stay off the web. If you think someone said something offensive then quote it, criticize it, and do it without attacking anyone. If you try to attack without getting involved, you aren't helping anything except the trolls.

The nonsense that doesn't help is the three of you arguing the same points over and over again, just wording everthing a little differently. You have hijacked a thread that is supposed to be about the new campaign and turned it into a petty argument, which also spilled over into another thread. Like someone mentioned on the other post, take it to private messages and get back on topic.

I'm moving on.

The discussion certainly did get off topic. Instead of whinging about it, and continuing the problem, why not be constructive and point out where people have actually said something to cause the problem. It seemed to me someone was expressing unhappiness with how long it's been for these new products to come out and how it is hurting the game. Slightly off topic, but not trolling IMO. Then, there was an over reaction (to what may be an over reaction in the first place but it's all good until someone gets insulting).

Seems to me the fault lies with the complaint on the original complaint that also got insulting. Seems also that you and others want to blame everyone involved, but THAT NEVER WORKS. If a dog steals a steak off the table it doesn't do to yell at all the dogs. You either go after the culprit or get used to losing steaks. If you come after me, you better have a good case because otherwise I'm coming back at you every time so you or others don't make it a habit.

If you don't want to read any posts from me then don't provoke me. If you want me to respect your feelings then be respectful of the feelings of others here. This whole thing started because one side is frustrated, sad, and thinks the game hasn't been getting the attention from FFG it deserves. There were responses to that I thought were terrible so I jumped in. I'm not going to take trash from you about it just because I was there.

It's not your forum, McWorrel.

Edit: A you Lyreus, weren't you the real provocateur?

Well said.

Now sure I understand your edit but I provoked no one. I defended Armada because most people don't know historical trend analysis or refused to do so. I was trained in such.

 

ROFL!  Started off my morning with a hearty laugh.

 

This is the first time since I joined these boards where the snark started to be boarder line rude. Correction...the Admiral did his fair share.

We as a community are better then this....agree to disagree and move on. Enough already.

Let's focus on this awesome looking campaign and keep the discussion on that.

Nonsense like that doesn't help. If you don't like arguments, stay off the web. If you think someone said something offensive then quote it, criticize it, and do it without attacking anyone. If you try to attack without getting involved, you aren't helping anything except the trolls.

The nonsense that doesn't help is the three of you arguing the same points over and over again, just wording everthing a little differently. You have hijacked a thread that is supposed to be about the new campaign and turned it into a petty argument, which also spilled over into another thread. Like someone mentioned on the other post, take it to private messages and get back on topic.

I'm moving on.

The discussion certainly did get off topic. Instead of whinging about it, and continuing the problem, why not be constructive and point out where people have actually said something to cause the problem. It seemed to me someone was expressing unhappiness with how long it's been for these new products to come out and how it is hurting the game. Slightly off topic, but not trolling IMO. Then, there was an over reaction (to what may be an over reaction in the first place but it's all good until someone gets insulting).

Seems to me the fault lies with the complaint on the original complaint that also got insulting. Seems also that you and others want to blame everyone involved, but THAT NEVER WORKS. If a dog steals a steak off the table it doesn't do to yell at all the dogs. You either go after the culprit or get used to losing steaks. If you come after me, you better have a good case because otherwise I'm coming back at you every time so you or others don't make it a habit.

If you don't want to read any posts from me then don't provoke me. If you want me to respect your feelings then be respectful of the feelings of others here. This whole thing started because one side is frustrated, sad, and thinks the game hasn't been getting the attention from FFG it deserves. There were responses to that I thought were terrible so I jumped in. I'm not going to take trash from you about it just because I was there.

It's not your forum, McWorrel.

Edit: A you Lyreus, weren't you the real provocateur?

 

The only reason why I've been arguing with Ly is because data flies right over his head and I'm trying desperately to make him understand.

 

You see, at this point, you can't.  Why?  Because his "training" tells him there's only two metrics that matter:

>Total number of products received from Core to Wave 4 in X-Wing vs. Armada

>Total number of products received up to Wave 3 with respect to time (where Armada has actually received more product than X-Wing during the same time frame)

What he has completely ignored from me is:

>Player gain over time. (showing decline)

>Player retention over time. (showing loss)

>Player participation in events over time. (showing decline)

>Social media attention over time. (showing decline)

>Regular vs. irregular release cadence. (showing hiatus)

>Player participation with respect to franchise (same players attending X-Wing events vs. Armada)

>Release cadence and product velocity (X-Wing has a upwards trend of more product in shorter time vs. Armada which is declining recently for whatever reason)

 

So, if you were a business stakeholder, which metrics are more important to you?  Honestly speaking.

 

Not sure if you saw, but I made a post here:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/225791-both-wave-iii-and-wave-iv-are-scheduled-to-arrive-at-retailers-later-in-august/?p=2326725

 

 

Ly seems to be stuck, absolutely transfixed on those first two metrics I spoke about.  Where he's oblivious to or doesn't want to see, are the other metrics that make up a product from a business perspective.

I saw FFGJosh pop in this thread on Sunday, so hopefully he has a clearer picture of what's going on and has big things planned for Armada.  I'm not saying its a sinking ship, no way.  I'm just saying that it's not all peaches and cream and that this Pleasantville people are living in is really The Truman Show.  I'm not some doomsayer, I'm a realist.  It's time to be real or don't bother bringing up any data in an argument.

How much of that should show as expected based on unavoidable production/distribution issues? (Dock strike; China Factory Boom Booms)

Not trying to argue, I have no professional training in this field and am simply trying to digest.

[Reinholt 1,719]

A few key points as someone who knows more than I am able to say / willing to type out on these forums:

1. Were any of the production issues specific to Armada, or was Armada a casualty of other issues? Correlation (which I assume is going to eventually be a title for a CR90) != causation.
2. Given the amount of operational upheaval in the interim period (Asmodee merger, revamp of certain policies by the mouse, dock workers strike, Chinese factory issues, etc.), if X-Wing had instead been released in a similar period, would it have had a smooth release cycle?
3. Given the relative popularity of X-Wing vs. Armada, if you are constrained via some bottleneck and have to prioritize, what do you do?

I would suggest the following as general points when evaluating the above:

• FFG is not unsophisticated as a company and knows that putting all of their eggs in a single basket (X-Wing) is long-term foolish.
• International production / distribution is an order of magnitude or two more complicated than most people assume, and there are lots of areas for it to produce outcomes that appear strange from the outside even if they are actually optimal from the inside (given that the possibility space is constrained by many different elements that are non-transparent to outsiders). This comment is not specific to gaming.
• In times scales, Armada is still very early on, so let us all be modest and take into account the fact that we are extrapolating from a very limited data set.

Edited July 26, 2016 by Reinholt

[Lyraeus 4,759]

This is the first time since I joined these boards where the snark started to be boarder line rude. Correction...the Admiral did his fair share.

We as a community are better then this....agree to disagree and move on. Enough already.

Let's focus on this awesome looking campaign and keep the discussion on that.

Nonsense like that doesn't help. If you don't like arguments, stay off the web. If you think someone said something offensive then quote it, criticize it, and do it without attacking anyone. If you try to attack without getting involved, you aren't helping anything except the trolls.

The nonsense that doesn't help is the three of you arguing the same points over and over again, just wording everthing a little differently. You have hijacked a thread that is supposed to be about the new campaign and turned it into a petty argument, which also spilled over into another thread. Like someone mentioned on the other post, take it to private messages and get back on topic.

I'm moving on.

The discussion certainly did get off topic. Instead of whinging about it, and continuing the problem, why not be constructive and point out where people have actually said something to cause the problem. It seemed to me someone was expressing unhappiness with how long it's been for these new products to come out and how it is hurting the game. Slightly off topic, but not trolling IMO. Then, there was an over reaction (to what may be an over reaction in the first place but it's all good until someone gets insulting).

Seems to me the fault lies with the complaint on the original complaint that also got insulting. Seems also that you and others want to blame everyone involved, but THAT NEVER WORKS. If a dog steals a steak off the table it doesn't do to yell at all the dogs. You either go after the culprit or get used to losing steaks. If you come after me, you better have a good case because otherwise I'm coming back at you every time so you or others don't make it a habit.

If you don't want to read any posts from me then don't provoke me. If you want me to respect your feelings then be respectful of the feelings of others here. This whole thing started because one side is frustrated, sad, and thinks the game hasn't been getting the attention from FFG it deserves. There were responses to that I thought were terrible so I jumped in. I'm not going to take trash from you about it just because I was there.

It's not your forum, McWorrel.

Edit: A you Lyreus, weren't you the real provocateur?

Well said.

Now sure I understand your edit but I provoked no one. I defended Armada because most people don't know historical trend analysis or refused to do so. I was trained in such.

 

ROFL!  Started off my morning with a hearty laugh.

 

This is the first time since I joined these boards where the snark started to be boarder line rude. Correction...the Admiral did his fair share.

We as a community are better then this....agree to disagree and move on. Enough already.

Let's focus on this awesome looking campaign and keep the discussion on that.

Nonsense like that doesn't help. If you don't like arguments, stay off the web. If you think someone said something offensive then quote it, criticize it, and do it without attacking anyone. If you try to attack without getting involved, you aren't helping anything except the trolls.

The nonsense that doesn't help is the three of you arguing the same points over and over again, just wording everthing a little differently. You have hijacked a thread that is supposed to be about the new campaign and turned it into a petty argument, which also spilled over into another thread. Like someone mentioned on the other post, take it to private messages and get back on topic.

I'm moving on.

The discussion certainly did get off topic. Instead of whinging about it, and continuing the problem, why not be constructive and point out where people have actually said something to cause the problem. It seemed to me someone was expressing unhappiness with how long it's been for these new products to come out and how it is hurting the game. Slightly off topic, but not trolling IMO. Then, there was an over reaction (to what may be an over reaction in the first place but it's all good until someone gets insulting).

Seems to me the fault lies with the complaint on the original complaint that also got insulting. Seems also that you and others want to blame everyone involved, but THAT NEVER WORKS. If a dog steals a steak off the table it doesn't do to yell at all the dogs. You either go after the culprit or get used to losing steaks. If you come after me, you better have a good case because otherwise I'm coming back at you every time so you or others don't make it a habit.

If you don't want to read any posts from me then don't provoke me. If you want me to respect your feelings then be respectful of the feelings of others here. This whole thing started because one side is frustrated, sad, and thinks the game hasn't been getting the attention from FFG it deserves. There were responses to that I thought were terrible so I jumped in. I'm not going to take trash from you about it just because I was there.

It's not your forum, McWorrel.

Edit: A you Lyreus, weren't you the real provocateur?

 

The only reason why I've been arguing with Ly is because data flies right over his head and I'm trying desperately to make him understand.

 

You see, at this point, you can't.  Why?  Because his "training" tells him there's only two metrics that matter:

>Total number of products received from Core to Wave 4 in X-Wing vs. Armada

>Total number of products received up to Wave 3 with respect to time (where Armada has actually received more product than X-Wing during the same time frame)

What he has completely ignored from me is:

>Player gain over time. (showing decline)

>Player retention over time. (showing loss)

>Player participation in events over time. (showing decline)

>Social media attention over time. (showing decline)

>Regular vs. irregular release cadence. (showing hiatus)

>Player participation with respect to franchise (same players attending X-Wing events vs. Armada)

>Release cadence and product velocity (X-Wing has a upwards trend of more product in shorter time vs. Armada which is declining recently for whatever reason)

 

So, if you were a business stakeholder, which metrics are more important to you?  Honestly speaking.

 

Not sure if you saw, but I made a post here:https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/225791-both-wave-iii-and-wave-iv-are-scheduled-to-arrive-at-retailers-later-in-august/?p=2326725

 

 

Ly seems to be stuck, absolutely transfixed on those first two metrics I spoke about.  Where he's oblivious to or doesn't want to see, are the other metrics that make up a product from a business perspective.

I saw FFGJosh pop in this thread on Sunday, so hopefully he has a clearer picture of what's going on and has big things planned for Armada.  I'm not saying its a sinking ship, no way.  I'm just saying that it's not all peaches and cream and that this Pleasantville people are living in is really The Truman Show.  I'm not some doomsayer, I'm a realist.  It's time to be real or don't bother bringing up any data in an argument.

How much of that should show as expected based on unavoidable production/distribution issues? (Dock strike; China Factory Boom Booms)

Not trying to argue, I have no professional training in this field and am simply trying to digest.

I have no idea where he got those metrics. Nor do I care. One reason I blocked him.

That chart has no information based on how that was created. What is the line graph based off of? If it is the release then "Release 1" should be a bit more chaotic.

If he is basing that off of metrics of attendance I will have to call foul due to as some have stated, X-Wing was in flux until wave 4-5

[BrobaFett 4,209]

You know, even though the title of the thread was "Conflict Article" y'all didn't need to take it so literally.

[Madaghmire 7,274]

A few key points as someone who knows more than I am able to say / willing to type out on these forums:

• Were any of the production issues specific to Armada, or was Armada a casualty of other issues? Correlation (which I assume is going to eventually be a title for a CR90) != causation.
• Given the amount of operational upheaval in the interim period (Asmodee merger, revamp of certain policies by the mouse, dock workers strike, Chinese factory issues, etc.), if X-Wing had instead been released in a similar period, would it have had a smooth release cycle?
• Given the relative popularity of X-Wing vs. Armada, if you are constrained via some bottleneck and have to prioritize, what do you do?

I would suggest the following as general points when evaluating the above:

• FFG is not unsophisticated as a company and knows that putting all of their eggs in a single basket (X-Wing) is long-term foolish.
• International production / distribution is an order of magnitude or two more complicated than most people assume, and there are lots of areas for it to produce outcomes that appear strange from the outside even if they are actually optimal from the inside (given that the possibility space is constrained by many different elements that are non-transparent to outsiders). This comment is not specific to gaming.
• In times scales, Armada is still very early on, so let us all be modest and take into account the fact that we are extrapolating from a very limited data set.

Oh man thank god. I was hoping you would put in a few words given your line of work. Hopefully I'll catch you at an event soon. The strat keeps running theirs when I'm out of town.

[Reinholt 1,719]

You know, even though the title of the thread was "Conflict Article" y'all didn't need to take it so literally.

 

Josh can you please just change the thread title to this picture:

 

[Lyraeus 4,759]

A few key points as someone who knows more than I am able to say / willing to type out on these forums:

• Were any of the production issues specific to Armada, or was Armada a casualty of other issues? Correlation (which I assume is going to eventually be a title for a CR90) != causation.
• Given the amount of operational upheaval in the interim period (Asmodee merger, revamp of certain policies by the mouse, dock workers strike, Chinese factory issues, etc.), if X-Wing had instead been released in a similar period, would it have had a smooth release cycle?
• Given the relative popularity of X-Wing vs. Armada, if you are constrained via some bottleneck and have to prioritize, what do you do?

I would suggest the following as general points when evaluating the above:

• FFG is not unsophisticated as a company and knows that putting all of their eggs in a single basket (X-Wing) is long-term foolish.
• International production / distribution is an order of magnitude or two more complicated than most people assume, and there are lots of areas for it to produce outcomes that appear strange from the outside even if they are actually optimal from the inside (given that the possibility space is constrained by many different elements that are non-transparent to outsiders). This comment is not specific to gaming.
• In times scales, Armada is still very early on, so let us all be modest and take into account the fact that we are extrapolating from a very limited data set.

Oh man thank god. I was hoping you would put in a few words given your line of work. Hopefully I'll catch you at an event soon. The strat keeps running theirs when I'm out of town.

Yup. Reinholt has it right. Multi country releases are a bit more difficult. Add in that asmodee seems to want to release as close together in all countries as possible which is good but a difficult task.

Armada is doing fine. It suffers the same issues other wargames face who have a similar buy in value.

[HERO 842]

 

A few key points as someone who knows more than I am able to say / willing to type out on these forums:

1. Were any of the production issues specific to Armada, or was Armada a casualty of other issues? Correlation (which I assume is going to eventually be a title for a CR90) != causation.
2. Given the amount of operational upheaval in the interim period (Asmodee merger, revamp of certain policies by the mouse, dock workers strike, Chinese factory issues, etc.), if X-Wing had instead been released in a similar period, would it have had a smooth release cycle?
3. Given the relative popularity of X-Wing vs. Armada, if you are constrained via some bottleneck and have to prioritize, what do you do?

I would suggest the following as general points when evaluating the above:

• FFG is not unsophisticated as a company and knows that putting all of their eggs in a single basket (X-Wing) is long-term foolish.
• International production / distribution is an order of magnitude or two more complicated than most people assume, and there are lots of areas for it to produce outcomes that appear strange from the outside even if they are actually optimal from the inside (given that the possibility space is constrained by many different elements that are non-transparent to outsiders). This comment is not specific to gaming.
• In times scales, Armada is still very early on, so let us all be modest and take into account the fact that we are extrapolating from a very limited data set.

 

 

1. I do not know, but most likely due to what the trend suggests.  The hiatus and irregular release cycle is probably bottlenecked somewhere overseas (which is a typical risk e.g. Imperial Aces).

2. X-Wing did have a dock delay for Imperial Aces, enough that FFG actually made an official statement somewhere I think.  This is something that happens pretty regularly in their industry, but when they did release, they still did it with other products in line.  Meaning, they didn't call it Wave 3/4, it was released alongside Wave X.

3. X-Wing, for sure.  All the metrics points towards supporting the development and production of X-Wing because of the upward trends.  If something is flying off the shelves, why not keep up with supply and demand?  Especially when there's a skyrocket of new players and returning players with the release of every new product (commonly known amongst the game/entertainment industry).

 

@Mag

 

God, I remember how difficult it was to actually use to this forum efficiently.  Multi-quotes just makes everything screwy.

 

Well, you see, there's no way to actually determine that.  That's what I'm HOPING the hiatus was, and that the reason why it turned into 2 products for Wave 3 and 2 in Wave 4 symbolizes that there was a probable delay (whatever reason, explosion sure).  They also combined the releases on the same date, which merely suggests that they were possibly part of the same release, but the fates haven't been kind.  I would expect the unmarked SKUs to be part of what was Wave 4, is now Wave 5-on.

 

 

I have no idea where he got those metrics. Nor do I care. One reason I blocked him.

 

You see, this is why I gave up.  He's fine living in the world where the grass is green and the girls are pretty.  But that's not the reality of things:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/225596-conflict-article/?p=2324986

 

If the data gathered from NorCal, SoCal, Arizona, Nevada (basically the major populous areas in the West Coast) vs. NY/NJ/Penn/Delaware (basically the East Coast) is not enough of a data point, then hell, I might be doing this wrong for years.  Btw, I did similar metrics for GW when I actually worked there, but it was mainly for sales-related data.

 

But yeah, enough is enough.  I'm wasting time and energy on someone who's possibly insane.

Edited July 26, 2016 by HERO

[Lyraeus 4,759]

You know, even though the title of the thread was "Conflict Article" y'all didn't need to take it so literally.

Alas it is the Internet. Conflict is bound to happen. No one is always right and some people just like to complain. I just dislike people who spout nonsense because that will indeed push people away. It does not look good to argue either but if no one defends something you will just let them win and everyone loses.

[Dosiere 478]

Also. Campaigns tend to leave you with whatever you have. Not whatever you want like a skirmish. So Demolisher may be on the table, but without EL/APT/ACT or engine techs. Ships that rely on lots of upgrades or specific upgrades will be hurting.

I also figure squadrons, GR75s, Gozantis, Cr90s, and raiders will be easy/easier to replace. So here is to little ships as a meat shield for Home One or Relentless.

 

This is actually something that I like about these things.  You get to play something other than netlists, and not every battle is going to be entirely "fair".  It will make experienced ships with the right upgrades fun to acquire, and rewarding when it happens.  Obviously we don't have all the details, but the idea at least of not everything being optimized/balanced in the same way as skirmish play doesn't bother me for a campaign.

[ThatRobHuman 1,794]