Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The rules are interesting, the paintjobs shown are incredibly uninspired.

They're trying to get the look from the films, while also not doing anything too intricate as they're not used to selling things that aren't prepainted

 AduroT wrote:
The rules are interesting, the paintjobs shown are incredibly uninspired.

The white plastic disks they're passing off as basing do not help.

Princess Leia, and General Veers are out, as well... I don't know if anyone mentioned it, yet....

Both look pretty good.

I have Leia on my desk now. The pose is good but the face is weird. They've all got big lips, overly sharp brows and cheekbones, and too-deep eyes (basically hollow sockets).

Do we know if they have the rights to make minis based on the Imperial Army troops from Solo? I'd love to buy some so I can finally stop gluing my precious WGF samurai heads onto Wehrmacht bodies.

They almost certainly do since they just previewed Lando's version of the Millenium Falcon for X-Wing. Also announced premium bases for Legion. No mention of material, but probably safe to assume it's going to be plastic

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2018/6/7/charge-into-battle-2/

I'd much prefer heavy weapons without the Hoth troopers/snowtroopers. Not practical dress for Tatooine, Endor or Scarif.

What size are the trooper bases? Those might be useful for non-Legion use.

 lasgunpacker wrote:
What size are the trooper bases? Those might be useful for non-Legion use.

Sadly 27 mm and likely taller than most.

With Netrunner now dead, I have concerns about Legion. It’s not like wildly popular Star Wars games before weren’t prematurely ended due to licensing issues. It was a concern before with me, but if something as big as Netrunner can be taken down...

 Sqorgar wrote:
With Netrunner now dead, I have concerns about Legion. It’s not like wildly popular Star Wars games before weren’t prematurely ended due to licensing issues. It was a concern before with me, but if something as big as Netrunner can be taken down...

If FFG loses star wars, it takes an incredibly huge chunk given X-wing, Star Wars Destiny, and just.. everything really.


Netrunner being taken down at this point is not surprising, WOTC is losing overall market share for MTG and they likely bumped up licensing, or figured FFG might be a threat with it's own card games at this point. It's akin to when they started hitting the miniatures market and then GW pulled out as well.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
If FFG loses star wars, it takes an incredibly huge chunk given X-wing, Star Wars Destiny, and just.. everything really.

Exactly. Losing the SW license could cripple FFG, and that alone gives competitors like Hasbro a real reason to outbid them for the license. Decipher lost the SW license due to WotC taking it, and West End Games lost the license as well. Also, the Disney Infinity series was unilaterally ended when Disney decided that they didn’t want to make games anymore and focus on licensing - Disney is known to be fickle about this sort of stuff. I feel like the SW license is even more prone to being lost than Netrunner.

Netrunner being taken down at this point is not surprising, WOTC is losing overall market share for MTG and they likely bumped up licensing, or figured FFG might be a threat with it's own card games at this point. It's akin to when they started hitting the miniatures market and then GW pulled out as well.

We don’t know why either of those licenses broke down. That’s just speculation. But the fact is, FFG has lost two major licenses in 2(?) years, and it has been pretty devastating to their catalog. I’d start eyeing the SW games with a bit more suspicion, if I were them.

Given how much FFG has invested in Star Wars games, I'd be surprised if they don't attempt every avenue of possibility to keep the SW License. I wouldn't worry about it just yet.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
WOTC is losing overall market share for MTG and they likely bumped up licensing, or figured FFG might be a threat with it's own card games at this point.

Maybe or maybe FFG have looked at the numbers and decided that Netrunner has run its course. Surely there comes a point where sales just arnt cutting it when compared to development costs of new sets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rybackstun wrote:
Given how much FFG has invested in Star Wars games, I'd be surprised if they don't attempt every avenue of possibility to keep the SW License. I wouldn't worry about it just yet.

Surely with releasing 2 new/refurbished Star Wars games this year they would have 2+ years (minimum) remaining on the license to achieve profit levels. As you say, i wouldnt worry about it any time soon.

Maybe or maybe FFG have looked at the numbers and decided that Netrunner has run its course. Surely there comes a point where sales just arnt cutting it when compared to development costs of new sets.

I genuinely don't believe it was on FFG's end given the sudden drop of a pack, a new second edition version of core that just dropped, and new tournaments were already in plan along with a set. This entirely speaks of WOTC's end.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I genuinely don't believe it was on FFG's end given the sudden drop of a pack, a new second edition version of core that just dropped, and new tournaments were already in plan along with a set. This entirely speaks of WOTC's end.

Fair call, I wasnt aware of those things. I could see a single set being released close to expiration date due to the months of development/printing/distribution time but a 2nd ed as well certainly points to the belief that the game would be further extended.

 MangoMadness wrote:
Surely with releasing 2 new/refurbished Star Wars games this year they would have 2+ years (minimum) remaining on the license to achieve profit levels. As you say, i wouldnt worry about it any time soon.

But what happens after 2 years? Do you only play a miniature game for 2 years?

See, one of the things that makes the Star Wars license a liability is that Disney could buy Hasbro (which is WotC's parent company). There were rumors to that effect a few years ago, and Hasbro makes the toys for Star Wars, Marvel, Disney Princess, Frozen, and a bunch of others. If Disney were to purchase Hasbro or if FFG somehow pissed off Disney (apparently really easy to do), FFG could lose the Star Wars license in a heartbeat.

For instance, here is an article from February in which it discusses a Hasbro/Mattel merger that has been rumored since November. Here's the relevant part about how petty Disney is and how important Hasbro's business is to them:

Mattel, for example, had been a longtime maker of dolls for Disney, and said it generated about $300 million annually from the Princess line (though analysts peg the number closer to $500 million). But it made a fatal mistake of developing a competing line of princess dolls, one which never amounted to much in terms of sales, but angered Disney, which then gave Hasbro the right to make the dolls.

It was the same problem that arose when Hasbro and DreamWorks Animation were rumored to be in merger talks. Disney had to consider that its toymaking partner might become a major movie-making competitor.

Now, I'm a pessimist by trade, pessimist by heart, so this worrying is probably for naught. But, like I said, I've been burned by the Star Wars license unceremoniously being snatched away before.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 MangoMadness wrote:
Surely with releasing 2 new/refurbished Star Wars games this year they would have 2+ years (minimum) remaining on the license to achieve profit levels. As you say, i wouldnt worry about it any time soon.

But what happens after 2 years? Do you only play a miniature game for 2 years?

See, one of the things that makes the Star Wars license a liability is that Disney could buy Hasbro (which is WotC's parent company). There were rumors to that effect a few years ago, and Hasbro makes the toys for Star Wars, Marvel, Disney Princess, Frozen, and a bunch of others. If Disney were to purchase Hasbro or if FFG somehow pissed off Disney (apparently really easy to do), FFG could lose the Star Wars license in a heartbeat.
.

Isn't this just complete supposition? Certainly no reason not to buy into a SW game (and this is the game that many wargamers dreamed of, in terms of the minis, for many, many years) on the offchance that it might go pair-shaped.

 Sqorgar wrote:

 MangoMadness wrote:
Surely with releasing 2 new/refurbished Star Wars games this year they would have 2+ years (minimum) remaining on the license to achieve profit levels. As you say, i wouldnt worry about it any time soon.

But what happens after 2 years?

IF (big IF) FFG had the rights for 2 years then all they would care about is maximizing profit on the license in that 2 years.

 Sqorgar wrote:
Do you only play a miniature game for 2 years?

They dont care how long you play the game for once they cant sell it anymore, they dont even care if you never play the game, all they care about is you buying the game what you do with it from there is your business

As a side note people play games that havent been sold in over 20+ years while many games get released and then discontinued before you can blink. Its just a product, what the customer does with it it their concern but from a business point of view they need a compelling profit to continue to support game lines and the rights (if needed) to do so

I felt burned by FFG's 40k Conquest game so I'm definitely not hopping on any of their games until it is venerable.

It is silly, I admit. I'm just really out of sorts because of Netrunner's end. I mean, FFG has ended good, popular games without licensing issues before as well (BattleLore 2E, Runebound 3E), so it isn't like a license vulnerability is really any more dangerous than FFG's regular operations. Hell, I play Runewars, and up until a few weeks ago, I was sure that FFG had abandoned it like they abandoned everything else.

I'm curious to see how Legion grows and changes over the years. It's a good, fun game, though probably not even in my top 10 Star Wars games. It's not even the best squad level Star Wars skirmish game I own. So I'm eager to see what FFG does with the game. A few really good expansions could move it up the list a bit.

Netrunner ended???

I aint going anywhere near FFG's 5-years-and-you're-gone, seriously wut

ph34r wrote:I felt burned by FFG's 40k Conquest game so I'm definitely not hopping on any of their games until it is venerable.

I am not saying you are wrong here, but I don't understand the statement. Wasn't it GW who pulled the license from FFG? So how is it FFG fault? Shouldn't you be mad at GW and not FFG? If this is not the case, how come you felt burned? Just trying to understand.

Davor wrote:

ph34r wrote:I felt burned by FFG's 40k Conquest game so I'm definitely not hopping on any of their games until it is venerable.

I am not saying you are wrong here, but I don't understand the statement. Wasn't it GW who pulled the license from FFG? So how is it FFG fault? Shouldn't you be mad at GW and not FFG? If this is not the case, how come you felt burned? Just trying to understand.

That one's understandable because GW pulled about the time that FFG decided to make their own miniatures game (Runewars) and then announced Star Wars Legion as well that could potentially deal with the market share they were after. That may have been a bit much for GW to handle as it seems they were fine when they were doing everything else.

Though if you want to stay safe, go for the FFG properties they own. L5R is now 100% theirs for example, and I really don't know what you can do to get a Cthulhu license pulled from you.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
That one's understandable because GW pulled about the time that FFG decided to make their own miniatures game (Runewars) and then announced Star Wars Legion as well that could potentially deal with the market share they were after. That may have been a bit much for GW to handle as it seems they were fine when they were doing everything else.

That's just speculation. I doubt Runewars would've caused GW to do anything except laugh (I say this as a big RW fan). If it was anything, it was X-Wing Miniatures or potentially Legion, if GW found out about it early. But there's a lot of other things that could've caused it. GW's new leadership may have just not liked the terms FFG was offering (like the exclusivity) and maybe one of the FFG guys slept with a GW guy's wife and you know how those things go. It's all speculation.

Though if you want to stay safe, go for the FFG properties they own. L5R is now 100% theirs for example, and I really don't know what you can do to get a Cthulhu license pulled from you.

FFG owns the Arkham Files IP, but apparently, they license some stuff from Chaosium from the Call of Cthulhu RPG. I've heard other variations of this agreement too (like FFG owns it all and Chaosium gets to use it), so I'm not sure what to believe. But the Arkham Files has been with FFG longer than anything else. Game of Thrones and LotR have also been there a while.

L5R, Android, and Terrinoth are FFG-owned properties, so there's no license vulnerability there. Android now no longer has a flagship product, but I'll tell you what, I wouldn't say no to an Infinity-like skirmish miniature game set in the Android world. Android has a woefully limited number of miniatures dedicated to it.

What I found interesting is that FFG did not license Wings of War. Originally, they were going to (even designer credit to the WoW designers), but apparently got into a fight with the publisher and they decided to go ahead without the license. Not sure how that works. But X-Wing, like Legion, is beholden only to Star Wars.

Davor wrote:

ph34r wrote:I felt burned by FFG's 40k Conquest game so I'm definitely not hopping on any of their games until it is venerable.

I am not saying you are wrong here, but I don't understand the statement. Wasn't it GW who pulled the license from FFG? So how is it FFG fault? Shouldn't you be mad at GW and not FFG? If this is not the case, how come you felt burned? Just trying to understand.

I mean yeah maybe it's on me for not anticipating that a game would last such a short amount of time... I'm used ti Magic The Gathering where you can step away and come back in a decade and it will still be there. I basically spent all my time in Conquest waiting for them to print some Iron Warrior or Adeptus Mechanicus generals and cards so I could make a deck with a theme I like, but it was not to be.

 ph34r wrote:

Davor wrote:

ph34r wrote:I felt burned by FFG's 40k Conquest game so I'm definitely not hopping on any of their games until it is venerable.

I am not saying you are wrong here, but I don't understand the statement. Wasn't it GW who pulled the license from FFG? So how is it FFG fault? Shouldn't you be mad at GW and not FFG? If this is not the case, how come you felt burned? Just trying to understand.

I mean yeah maybe it's on me for not anticipating that a game would last such a short amount of time... I'm used ti Magic The Gathering where you can step away and come back in a decade and it will still be there. I basically spent all my time in Conquest waiting for them to print some Iron Warrior or Adeptus Mechanicus generals and cards so I could make a deck with a theme I like, but it was not to be.

Magic's longevity is a rarity. There are few hobby games I've seen that have lasted more that five years (I'd say most games usually survive around 2 years with support) without interruption or without major alterations.

As for the GW - FFG split up, I think it was a case GW wanted to take its ball home and keep all the profits for themselves. FFG had Star Wars, so losing GWs games was probably a small bother, if any. I mean, they do have their own versions now.

I had heard that part of the agreement was that FFG wouldn't make a 40k/Fantasy competitor, which was why they weren't doing a unit based Star Wars game in the past.