+1 for disappointed,

I too was hoping for the solo play and coop, I also feel similar to those when they say I already have several star wars pvp games, not a big fan of having to shell out for yet another. This doesnt mean i am against the pvp fans, it just means i was hoping for something different and new. Granted the game will be new and the mechanics of the pvp will be different but its still the pvp. I wanted something to break that mold. I will give the game a try but honestly I dont know if i am gonna wanna keep buying sets from another sw pvp game. I already have nearly every decipher sw card and very much love that game. It feels for me anyway kinda redundant to keep buying sw pvp. I passed on the wizards game after buying 1 set much for this same reason.

As far as this thread is concerned, I think those who r upset by this decision have every right to voice their opinions just as those who didnt like the coop option had a right to voice their concerns. FFG should be able to view all fan feedback and who knows, while I doubt they r gonnna delay and revamp once again, they may decide to give some love to the coop fans and make a secondary star wars lcg. (thats what i am pulling for anyway)

I think it was a mistake for ffg to announce coop and then change it to pvp. Thats like telling us we r gonna get ice cream but then giving us sherbert. (Prolly a bad analogy lol) Point is it got the coop fans hopes up and then shattered them. Like i said i understand why ffg did it, they didnt feel the coop model was good enough, still i think it sucks that they scraped it and changed the entire model to pvp. Anyway those r my thoughts.

 Well, I was going to pick up at least the core either way. I do find it harder to get opponents, so the Co-Op sounded good, but I can't say I'm truly disappointed.

I do enjoy that I can play LotR solo to test a concept before meeting up with friends, and with Netrunner coming out we'll have another PvP. But again, I'm still excited and will definitely pick it up!

At least it shows that FFG is truly dedicated to making an a game worthy of the IP.

+1 definitely wont be buying now.. I have good star wars competitive , was looking forward to co op /solo. It works for LoTr.

Just read the announcement , my response was to buy the Star Trek Next Generation Deck Building Game.

 I'm not getting it now that there is no co-op/solo.

I am getting it now that it isn't co-op.

I think a big thing that influenced the decision by FFG is the tournament scene. PvP is easy to design and run a tournament for. Co-op, not so much. Despite at the initial release of LoTR:LCG FFG said there would be tournaments for it, they have yet to produce tournament rules/guidelines.

I agree with many posters here. I watched the video and the game looked pretty boring. The only thing I thought was pretty cool and interesting was the different ways to win and the "death star" mechanic.

I usually play games with my wife and another couple. We play games for the social aspect, and enjoy/prefer talking and working together towards a common goal. We play Nazgul pure co-op, for example, and it is a blast. We were excited when SW:LCG was announced as co-op.  With it being PvP, we have no interest in it.

Luckily, I suppose, FFG just announced a co-op boardgame, Legends of Andor. We'll buy that instead.

Personally, I think after they say LoTR's sales tank after the initial set(s), the choice was easy.  *shrug*  I know a TON of people who played LoTR for awhile but got bored and the chapter packs didn't add enough variety to keep them in it. 

Counter that with Game of Thrones, which by all measurements has had the best sales and participation level ever (with the possible exception of the very first year, back in 2003).  Obviously the HBO show helps there, but there is also the example of the success of Netrunner (sold out in 8 minutes or something silly like that).  Warhammer hasn't had a lot of success in the States, but has a big following in Europe. 

FFG is going to vote with profits, and there isn't a ton of room for card-game co-op games (board games are a different matter). 

I demo'd the game and really enjoyed it.  It looks like the deck-building aspect is going to be very unique as well.  A game that I wasn't goign to touch (the co-op) I will be a big fan of, I belive. 

"I agree with many posters here. I watched the video and the game looked pretty boring. The only thing I thought was pretty cool and interesting was the different ways to win and the "death star" mechanic."

You watched a game that you have really limited knowledge of and really no vested interest in, and thought you'd find it anything but boring?  I'm sorry but frankly watching any card game with out some knowledge about what is going on and some understanding of the swings or tactics involved is always going to be boring.  I do not know what your expectations were, but they seem unfairly set.

If I didn't play and understand AGoT, even as a fan of the series, I'd find watching a game of it completely boring. 

ScottieATF said:

And yet it seems you're in every thread defending a game to the grave that you dont play / have limited understanding of / dont understand / etc.

To be honest, besides  a few FFG fanboys and maybe team Covenant i dont see much positive feedback. And Covenant always feels like they're reading from script when they make videos.

I actually played the game.  More then once.

And honestly I haven't mounted very much in the way of defense of the game, I'm just pointing out the gaping holes in other people arguments.

Co-op viable for tournaments?  Come on.  The game isn't Star Wars enough?  What exactly are you expecting?  They could have done Co-op and PvP in the same game!  Not in the release with out tanking the game.  I watched a video demo and it was boring?  So would any card game that you had never played, it's not dramatic without understanding.  Why release a PvP game when we already have the Decipher game?  An out of print game with no current competitive play doesn't count, some people weren't playing card games back in the 90's.  Etc.

You aren't seeing positive feedback because it's the Co-op fans turn to whine.  Around this time last year I remember a very long thread from PvP fans looking much like this one.  I remember alot of threads with people feeling like the game wasn't worth it if you couldn't play the Dark Side.  FFG re-evaluated their position and all you are seeing is the other side of the coin voicing their grievances.

I played both versions.  And I play both LotR and AGoT.  And while I enjoyed LotR for a time, it goes stale.  AGoT at least always has the dynamic of an opponent.  It is by default less static.  It actually works in tournament play.

So yes the fact that the game is going to be PvP is clearly going to alienate some people, and some of those people are going to be quite vocal about it.  Some of their opinions are going to be completely valid but some of them are going to range from reaching to completely inane.

 ScottieATF said:

Bolfa Fluffbelly said:

I hope this is sarcasm.

MarthWMaster said:

Sarcasm? On the internet? I would never…

What a pitty…. Co-Op would have been really interesting… now its like any other Magic game..

 So can someone explain to me is it a PvP - 2 player only? or is it PvP 2-4 like Game of thrones?

If its strictly a 2p only game then yeah i'm probably skipping it, however if its in the same vein as AGOT then i will definately pick this bad boy up!