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.

Anyone playing this?

I've played a few games of this now and its very good, easy to learn, but a lot in it if you play the complete rules. Not played X-Wing myself but the 2 people I played recently are both big X-Wing Players and both thought this game played better. Half the game you are trying to guess what your opponent is going to do as each turn you commit to your manoeuvring before knowing what your opponent is doing. You both reveal your moves at the same time. All your moves are from a pre-set pack of cards to choose from, but you can also change altitudes and speeds for various bonuses or penalties.

I think it’s following the X-Wing business model in that if you want the ‘Starbuck’ Pilot card with Starbucks special rules, you need to buy the Starbuck Viper. Which is the same model as all the other Vipers but has Starbuck’s name printed on it and comes with the Pilot a card. Same with the Raptors (not released yet), you can buy a standard one, or ‘Boomers’ Raptor.

I've been curious about it since it was initially announced but haven't played it.

Saw it when it was first announced but if they're trying to go after the X-Wing market they might have some problems. As a one-off, self-contained boxed game I think it would have been great but it seems they are going for the "whole bunch of expansions" approach. That's odd given how limited the types of ships are in BSG. Locally the problem with it seems to be it's not X-Wing. It's a bit of a hard sell for people already invested in X-Wing and, if you're not already invested, going for the very similar game that actually has lots of players is usually the easiest choice.

"I'm not going to play this game because it looks like X-wing but it's not."

Worst excuse ever to not play a new game.

Imagine playing X-wing with inertia and drift. Where you can change your altitude and it heavily modifies the combat. In a lot of ways, X-wing is all about building your squad, where if you have the right cards, it doesn't matter how you play. You'll win. The meta dominates X-wing. In this game, with such few cards, how you play matters. I hate the idea that a game can be won or lost before it's even played.

 Tamwulf wrote:
"I'm not going to play this game because it looks like X-wing but it's not."

Worst excuse ever to not play a new game.

Imagine playing X-wing with inertia and drift. Where you can change your altitude and it heavily modifies the combat. In a lot of ways, X-wing is all about building your squad, where if you have the right cards, it doesn't matter how you play. You'll win. The meta dominates X-wing. In this game, with such few cards, how you play matters. I hate the idea that a game can be won or lost before it's even played.

I don't think anyone actually said that in this thread. The "it's not x-wing" reason is much more complicated and nuanced that what you're joking about there and involves things like finding a game/available players, investment of additional non-compatible time/money, etc. As for the second part, it's clear that the company is trying to go for the x-wing release model with largely the same sculpt and just a slightly different paint scheme with additional variant cards for additional purchases. Just because this company doesn't have the money/playerbase/time/whatever to flood the market with a dozen releases right away in order to generate a meta doesn't mean they don't want to. Your strategy might win the game now because there simply is no other option but that doesn't mean it'll stay that way if/when future releases come out. With the limited options available in the source material as well as the game not seemingly not going gangbusters like X-wing did initially (admittedly, at least in my area, X-wing 2.0 isn't either) it's not likely that it'll ever get to the point where there are enough real options beyond repaints/variant pilots that a wide enough "meta" of what rocks vs what sucks will ever exist.

Please note that the above cynicism doesn't mean that I'm not curious about the rules/game but rather that I'm simply perhaps overly cautious. I have no experience with it beyond just skimming the rules when it came out last year.

 Tamwulf wrote:
"I'm not going to play this game because it looks like X-wing but it's not."

Worst excuse ever to not play a new game.

Imagine playing X-wing with inertia and drift. Where you can change your altitude and it heavily modifies the combat. In a lot of ways, X-wing is all about building your squad, where if you have the right cards, it doesn't matter how you play. You'll win. The meta dominates X-wing. In this game, with such few cards, how you play matters. I hate the idea that a game can be won or lost before it's even played.

It's not really an excuse though - it's a valid reason, and I'm just reflecting the reality as I see it locally. It's not restricted to this game either. Plenty of games have failed to take off because other games have more of a foothold already and people don't want to invest time, money and effort into a game with an uncertain future. Games like Gates of Antares or Maelstrom's Edge failed to get much of a foothold in most places because 40k is so much bigger. It's the reality of gaming for most people, IME. Crucially, it often has nothing to do with the quality of the game itself and perception plays a part too. Part of that perception around BSG is that it's very similar to an existing, popular game and people would rather spend their money and time on the game they already play that has dozens of players locally. We have some players who've played things like Wings of Glory who actually dislike the more complex system of altitude and inertia in favour of the more abstracted rules for X-Wing and that's come up a few times in conversations I've had both in person and online.

I've also not really experienced the level of list imbalance you mention regarding X-Wing, certainly not to the point where wins are entirely decided in list building. Even the recent strong lists in the meta weren't unbeatable and that's now been shaken up with the recent points updates. Even taking that into account, there's not necessarily any reason to think BSG won't end up in the same place once they get their expansion model going. Who's to say Starbuck won't just be monumentally broken when she comes out?

To be fair, you could ignore the altitude rules in BSG - I already do in Wings of Glory, where it's actually relevant - and it still works.

For me, the benefit BSG has over X-Wing is drastically reducing the fiddly options. The six-inch-thick stack of warhead, tech, crew, skill, pilot, etc upgrade cards put me off X-Wing, and it looks like BSG doesn't have that level of cruft. Just pick two or three planes and fly 'em.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:


For me, the benefit BSG has over X-Wing is drastically reducing the fiddly options. The six-inch-thick stack of warhead, tech, crew, skill, pilot, etc upgrade cards put me off X-Wing, and it looks like BSG doesn't have that level of cruft. Just pick two or three planes and fly 'em.

For now.

With only a very limited selection of ships initially, how are they going to get you to buy more? By adding it fiddly bits and putting out new card packs.

If this was set in the original TV show, I’d be all over it regardless. While I liked the new BSG, it’s not enough to get me to buy.

2 reasons I won't play:

Very limited in environment for expansion. This may seem weird, but everyone having the same thing rather bores me. This includes options for factions as well, which is one reason I never started X-Wing or SW Armada. Dropfleet BARELY qualifies.

The action is to small, and at too low a level. Oddly enough, while I do like fighters, I don't like this level of fighter combat. Honestly, I'd rather see physical models of Deadlock and progress from there. Now if there were only more than just the two factions to work from.

They're going to add stuff from blood and chrome in 2020. Like the viper mk III. And ships from the original show were already announced. Plus capital ships like the galactica itself. This game has some of the best pre painted models i've ever seen too. It's definitely more of a game for fans of the show above all else. The gameplay is designed to be more fun and casual as opposed to the x wing min max competitive style.

I'm receiving a demo of this next month; anyone have more to add after playing the full rules? I'm keen on the pre-painted aspect as well as the aesthetic.

Obviously this is thread necro but it didn't seem any better to make a whole other thread to announce the death of the game. Apparently they couldn't come to an agreement to renew the license and it clocked out with 2020. From the tone of the text, it seems unexpected.

https://www.aresgames.eu/27843

Ares Games is very sorry to announce the Battlestar Galactica - Starship Battles combat miniature game is going to be discontinued, due to the end of the license agreement with Universal Brand Development. The contract is due to expire on December 31st and all negotiations to extend it failed to reach a satisfactory outcome.

The expansion Faster Than Light and the Additional Counter Set, announced for early 2021, will be released only as free downloadable PDFs, and no further models will be released. Sales of existing inventory will continue until June 30th, 2021.

Battlestar Galactica - Starship Battles Starter Set.

The end of the game represents a significant loss to us – not just because of the loss of all developed models in the pipeline, now canceled, and of all the work we dedicated to the project for several years - but also because we will not be able to provide to the dedicated player’s community which supported the game the new releases they were waiting for.

Battlestar Galactica Starship Battles was launched in December 2018, when the Battlestar Galactica - Starship Battles Starter Set was released, featuring four ready–to–play miniatures - two Colonial Vipers Mk. II and two Cylon Raiders. Three waves of Spaceship Packs followed, bringing all the main small ships in the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica series from 2003: Viper Mk.II, Viper Mk.VII, Cylon Raiders, Raptors and Heavy Raiders. The game received multiple awards, including UK Game Expo awards as best miniature rules and best miniature line, in 2019.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Apparently others have lost their licenses as well according to Andrea midway down the first page of comments on BGG. Maybe they're cleaning house in terms of licenses before the supposed re-reboot for streaming?

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2568529/ares-announces-battlestar-galactica-starship-battl

Andrea Angiolino
Designer @angiolillo
Posted, Dec 31, 2020
First thing - I read around that the license to Slitherine for the Battlestar Galactica Deadlock videogame has not been renewed. Nor the license for Moebius/Pegasus' models.
We are not alone.

Here (in Italian) some details on what happened:
http://www.gioconomicon.net/modules.php?name=News&file=artic...

After checking with Ares Games, they write: "Moulds were already made for the Classic Series fighters (three variants of Viper MK.I and two of Classic Cylon Raider) and prototypal models were reay for Battlestar class starships including the very Battlestar Galactica and for the Cylon StarBase Cylone, together with new models as Viper MK.III, Raptor MK.I and Cylon Razor."

We had already playtested more, like the Blackbird whose rules we released here yesterday:
https://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/showthread.php?33750-Black...

Two expansion/accessories sets have been planned but not approved for printing by Universal, so they will be made available as PDFs: Battlestar Galactica: Starship Battles – Faster Than Light and Battlestar Galactica: Starship Battles – Additional Counter Set.

Really is a bummer, this game had some of the best pre painted minis for the cost.

 Thargrim wrote:
Really is a bummer, this game had some of the best pre painted minis for the cost.

Yeah, they seemed nice but I just think there never was enough variety in the source material to support anything more than a base game and a few supplements. I thought the scale was an odd choice in that it was incompatible with X-wing. Once I saw what seemed like too many planned repaints, I lost the interest I had left and only followed it peripherally a couple times a year.

Oh man am I ever glad I never got around to buying this.

Such is the way of games in the Golden Age. :(

I was intrigued by the ruleset though as I'm always curious about how elevation is incorporated into 2d tabletop games mechanically speaking. I should probably redowload the free rules assuming they're still up now that the license ended.

 Easy E wrote:
Such is the way of games in the Golden Age. :(

Also the way of licensed IPs, which seems to have been a bandwagon over the last few years for a lot of companies.

While doing a licensed, popular IP might be good for initial draw, there's definitely the issue of "how long will they keep the license" and how much that license costs in the first place. If the license is too expensive with respect to the actual sales of the product, then the company is going to have no choice but to cancel it eventually. And likewise, if the license holder decides they're not getting enough in royalties due to low sales, they can cancel the license.

It's fun to play games in some of those settings, of course, which is why people buy the stuff. But I think in the long term, most licensed games are going to have a much shorter lifespan than games set in original settings.

 Valander wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
Such is the way of games in the Golden Age. :(

Also the way of licensed IPs, which seems to have been a bandwagon over the last few years for a lot of companies.

While doing a licensed, popular IP might be good for initial draw, there's definitely the issue of "how long will they keep the license" and how much that license costs in the first place. If the license is too expensive with respect to the actual sales of the product, then the company is going to have no choice but to cancel it eventually. And likewise, if the license holder decides they're not getting enough in royalties due to low sales, they can cancel the license.

It's fun to play games in some of those settings, of course, which is why people buy the stuff. But I think in the long term, most licensed games are going to have a much shorter lifespan than games set in original settings.

Agreed. I also can shake the feeling that there is more profit in "original" games, but I could be very wrong.

Still most companies do not last more than 5 years, so I tend to think games themselves are no different, Licensed IP or not.

As far as "more profit in original games" goes, well, the margins are undoubtedly better.

There are several companies/games with a longer lifespan than 5 years that I can think of (other than the obvious big one): Privateer Press, Corvus Belli, Wyrd, Mantic... but yeah, I get your point. There are probably many more smaller companies that can't sustain longer than a few years, unless they "get lucky" and make a hit (which is far easier said than done).

I think that quest for a hit is part of the reason we've seen an increase in licensed IPs. Trying to have an "instant audience" no doubt attracts some to this. Of course, most of those are going to have to be bigger companies who already have enough capital and market proof to be able to say "we can deliver" in order to get the license, I think.

I did, however, see the potential for using the Colonial Range in some sort of other dogfighting game. I just couldn't get behind the lack of ship variety in the BSG game.

 Valander wrote:
As far as "more profit in original games" goes, well, the margins are undoubtedly better.

There are several companies/games with a longer lifespan than 5 years that I can think of (other than the obvious big one): Privateer Press, Corvus Belli, Wyrd, Mantic... but yeah, I get your point. There are probably many more smaller companies that can't sustain longer than a few years, unless they "get lucky" and make a hit (which is far easier said than done).

I think that quest for a hit is part of the reason we've seen an increase in licensed IPs. Trying to have an "instant audience" no doubt attracts some to this. Of course, most of those are going to have to be bigger companies who already have enough capital and market proof to be able to say "we can deliver" in order to get the license, I think.

"That's quite a catch; that Catch 21!"