Jump to content
Pewpewpew BOOM

Opinion: Better to leave names the off base inserts.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I think it would have been way better for FFG to have us use more generic base inserts that give an initiative # and all the arc info but without pilot names.  We would differentiate pilots with the number inserts.

Without the need for base inserts, they could issue much cheaper pilot card sets in booster packs and such.

Edited by Pewpewpew BOOM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point isn’t that people can’t disagree with how FFG does stuff, @Vontoothskie... in fact I don’t disagree with how @Pewpewpew BOOM has written his post. I may not agree with his point, but there’s a worthy discussion there.

I have issue only with the title of the thread which is trollish, baiting and confrontational. It sets a tone which is not catering to discussion, but instead just another thread for the “FFG apologists” and “FFG haters” to fight within. I’m tired of that stupid battle. It's not even worth fighting since there are no 'winners,' just a bunch of folk who look like idiots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Pewpewpew BOOM said:

I think it would have been way better for FFG to have us use more generic base inserts that give an initiative # and all the arc info but without pilot names.  We would differentiate pilots with the number inserts.

Without the need for base inserts, they could issue much cheaper pilot card sets in booster packs and such.

 

You mean without the thing that makes it possible to identify the pilot without having to check and see what numbered chit it's attached to and which pilot card that chit is on?  Seems suboptimal...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Pewpewpew BOOM said:

I think it would have been way better for FFG to have us use more generic base inserts that give an initiative # and all the arc info but without pilot names.  We would differentiate pilots with the number inserts.

Without the need for base inserts, they could issue much cheaper pilot card sets in booster packs and such.

Can’t say I agree. It provides more opportunities for confusion and slows the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Pewpewpew BOOM said:

I think it would have been way better for FFG to have us use more generic base inserts that give an initiative # and all the arc info but without pilot names.  We would differentiate pilots with the number inserts.

Without the need for base inserts, they could issue much cheaper pilot card sets in booster packs and such.

Considering there are people who can't tell if one of their damage cards is face up without a token reminding them, I think you're fighting a losing battle here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MasterShake2 said:

 

You mean without the thing that makes it possible to identify the pilot without having to check and see what numbered chit it's attached to and which pilot card that chit is on?  Seems suboptimal...

Pretty much.  It's a trade-off.

There's a benefit in terms of quick identification of ships due to pilot names.  How much of a disadvantage is it?  Not too huge, since if Initiative doesn't overlap, someone like Nien Nunb might be the only Init 5 X-Wing, and among generics, they'll all need numbers anyhow.  But identification is quicker and easier with names on the tokens.

There's a benefit to leaving off pilot names since that'd make it a bit easier to release extra pilot cards. How much of a disadvantage is it?  Apparently not too huge.  A lot of the cards in Hotshots and Aces have charges, maybe also Reinforce tokens, and there'd probably need to be a cardboard sheet for stray tokens anyhow.  Consider: Hotshots and Aces has 63 cards (not tokens, just cards), and is $20 USD MSRP.  What does $20 MSRP get you in Legend of the Five Rings, where you're not also getting cardboard tokens? 78 cards.  That's only a 15 card difference.

In this comparison, I'll come down on the side of ease of identification of ships, since the cardboard doesn't actually seem like a huge deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, MasterShake2 said:

 

You mean without the thing that makes it possible to identify the pilot without having to check and see what numbered chit it's attached to and which pilot card that chit is on?  Seems suboptimal...

Not a lot of swarms or generic mixes in your meta?

For me personally the game has exceeded my ability to memorize all of the pilots, especially since I no longer fly every faction I have to ask, "what can that RZ-2 do again?" because I don't know what Greer does. It would make little difference to me if there was no identifying info at all on the base plate, I'd be happy with just arc and midpoint lines with the number chits to tie it to the cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

My point isn’t that people can’t disagree with how FFG does stuff, @Vontoothskie... in fact I don’t disagree with how @Pewpewpew BOOM has written his post. I may not agree with his point, but there’s a worthy discussion there.

I have issue only with the title of the thread which is trollish, baiting and confrontational. It sets a tone which is not catering to discussion, but instead just another thread for the “FFG apologists” and “FFG haters” to fight within. I’m tired of that stupid battle. It's not even worth fighting since there are no 'winners,' just a bunch of folk who look like idiots.

I agree regarding the title.  However, I considered it after it was too late to change.  

My grumpy middle-aged eyes can’t read that itty-bitty font anyway. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Pewpewpew BOOM said:

I agree regarding the title.  However, I considered it after it was too late to change.  

My grumpy middle-aged eyes can’t read that itty-bitty font anyway. 

 

The title can be edited if you choose to. Just click edit on your initial post, the thread title can be changed from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't even imagine the number of missed opportunities from people forgetting that #4 is X pilot with Y ability...I forget pilot abilities when I'm staring at the cardboard on the base and KNOW the ability tied to that name, let alone when its just a number chit. No thanks, personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Pewpewpew BOOM said:

Without the need for base inserts, they could issue much cheaper pilot card sets in booster packs and such.

Deluxe Premium Gold-plated Chinese High Fidelity Cardboard 2000 strikes again.

The sets and ships and everything else cost as much as they do because FFG sees we will pay as much. It's not the price of misprinted cardboard or cheap plastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Why not both?

  • Have generic bases so that you only need to pack one per pack and save cardboard.
  • But add smaller Name inserts that go where you place the number inserts now. (There are two slots for ID number inserts already. You can still have the number and the name by only using one ID per base)

That has some benefits:

  • Much less stuff to carry around or collect. You don't need storage for so many base inserts. Just one per ship type (instead of 1 per every two pilots).
  • Cheaper production costs, especially for medium, large, or huge ships. I wish ships like the K-wing or the Lambda had many more named pilots. But I understand they would need to pack lots more cardboard for that.
Edited by Azrapse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not agree.... the name of the pilots is quite important to easely recognize them. Personally to semplify things and having less stuff on my bases i painted a number on both side of plastic bases. The vertical  token with numbers makes difficoult to see firing arcs and i play better without them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You want to take even more information off the ship tokens? I'm still looking at them for ship stats and actions. 

They've already given you part of what you want here by removing the stats.

They can give us a new version of Luke in an X-wing or other unique pilots or even generic pilots without needing a new ship token. They can simply provide a new pilot card with a new ability. Also since they've taken the actions and stats and such off they can tweak those as well. Granted a new Luke in such a case would need to remain at I5 but they can add actions or up his force or whatever without needing a new ship token. 

There is a need to be careful with how much information is removed from the play area. I still tend to think 2nd Ed. took too much though now with these card packs I see some benefit. Four I3 T-65 X-wings can be any one of four different lists. You'll be constantly checking which one is Biggs. And of course no one would ever try to move the number chits around on their cards to move an ace out of harm's way or into a better position. 

As noted sub-optimal to save one ship token or two. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Frimmel said:

You want to take even more information off the ship tokens? I'm still looking at them for ship stats and actions. 

Although I want bases with only the arc lines I am with you on missing the action list, I do a lot more walking around the table now days to just see what my opponents ships can do, but at this point I'm already asking what any card does half the time.

7 hours ago, Frimmel said:

...And of course no one would ever try to move the number chits around on their cards to move an ace out of harm's way or into a better position...

Not a lot of swarms in you meta either? If this was going to be problem it would probably already be a problem. 5A, 4B+, and especially TIE swarms would benefit greatly from cheating in this way, it's not only aces that would benefit.

Edit: it just occurred to me that if we're talking about cheating: The existing setup can be cheated just as easily by just moving the damage cards around, or assign them to the wrong ship in the first place :(

Edited by nitrobenz
Added thought

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Frimmel said:

You want to take even more information off the ship tokens? I'm still looking at them for ship stats and actions. 

Yeah, this.  I already hate that there is almost no info but the name and IN.

****, let's go whole hog here.  Take off everything but the lines.  Each faction gets a color.  Initiative is shown by the intensity of the color starting with a whimpy pastel for I1 and progressing to a very deep shade of the color for the Dark and Dangerous I6.

Totally generic.  Just one set of bases 4ever.  And as a free bonus:  Ooooooooooooo, pretty.

Edited by Darth Meanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Pewpewpew BOOM said:

I think it would have been way better for FFG to have us use more generic base inserts that give an initiative # and all the arc info but without pilot names.  We would differentiate pilots with the number inserts.

Without the need for base inserts, they could issue much cheaper pilot card sets in booster packs and such.

Okaaay... and how would we tell who's who between these?

IG-88D & IG-88DIG-88C & IG-88CIG-88B & IG-88BIG-88A & IG-88A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Vector Strike said:

Okaaay... and how would we tell who's who between these?

1, 2, 3, and 4 ID markers?  (For Big Acrylic addicts, like me, Curled Paw even has A, B, C, and D ID markers.)

IMO, your illustration actually makes the OP's point clearer: that's four squares of cardboard (with literally the only difference being a single letter), where two would have easily sufficed.

There's definitely a balance to be walked between making cardboard specific and fungible.  I agree with the OP that FFG fell just on the wrong side of the line.  (It's irrelevant, now, of course.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, LagJanson said:

My point isn’t that people can’t disagree with how FFG does stuff, @Vontoothskie... in fact I don’t disagree with how @Pewpewpew BOOM has written his post. I may not agree with his point, but there’s a worthy discussion there.

I have issue only with the title of the thread which is trollish, baiting and confrontational. It sets a tone which is not catering to discussion, but instead just another thread for the “FFG apologists” and “FFG haters” to fight within. I’m tired of that stupid battle. It's not even worth fighting since there are no 'winners,' just a bunch of folk who look like idiots.

Confrontational??????

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...