Author Topic: CGL Gencon (Read 17817 times)

Drag....just kidding!

Anyway, I think the serious answer of what is coming out is probably more of the small PDF's and the two new game boxes. It seemed like the BattleTech team is putting a lot of effort into getting the Intro and GoAC boxes finished and pushed into the production pipeline. While they may not be out much sooner than ilClan, I'd bet there is a lot of effort being spent on them at the moment. I think those, along with ilClan and any supporting items that go with it, are the 'next big things' right now. I'm guessing they will push through some of the smaller PDF products and keep cranking out the Legends novels (which I personally enjoy as I haven't read most of them!). I'm personally hoping that some of the smaller PDF stuff starts to ramp up to an ilClan release, but no one actually promised that.

Force of Nature · « **Reply #66 on:** 28 August 2017, 20:43:45 »

Quote from: Sartris on 22 August 2017, 21:38:27

CGL is developing a D&D-themed deckbuilding game for Wizards of the Coast.

Why is CGL making a deckbuilding game for another company? It will most likely not do well, even the Battletech CCG didn't do well, like sooooo many other CCGs. Many companies have tried and failed against Pokeymon and M:tG.

Apparently Richard Garfield was not available to make a D&D-themed deckbuilding game for Wizards of the Coast. Even he knows it will not do well against M:tG... if that is not a red flag, what is?

Shouldn't it be: Battletech, Battletech, Battletech ...... Battletech...... Battletech. Oh and Battletech.

It is a sad day when CGL is focusing on and pushing another companies product and not on their own new products for their fans/customers/gamers.

Danger UXO · « **Reply #67 on:** 28 August 2017, 20:53:51 »

Quote from: Force of Nature on 28 August 2017, 20:43:45

Why is CGL making a deckbuilding game for another company? It will most likely not do well, even the Battletech CCG didn't do well, like sooooo many other CCGs. Many companies have tried and failed against Pokeymon and M:tG.

Apparently Richard Garfield was not available to make a D&D-themed deckbuilding game for Wizards of the Coast. Even he knows it will not do well against M:tG... if that is not a red flag, what is?

Shouldn't it be: Battletech, Battletech, Battletech ...... Battletech...... Battletech. Oh and Battletech.

It is a sad day when CGL is focusing on and pushing another companies product and not on their own new products for their fans/customers/gamers.

Dunno, seemed like they were selling the crap out of it. Every time I stopped by the booth somebody was having to go get more Dragonfire.

Scotty · « **Reply #68 on:** 28 August 2017, 20:54:55 »

Wizards of the Coast wanted to use the Shadowrun: Crossfire system. This is a Catalyst produced game using the D&D license, not Catalyst producing a game for another company. It sold very well at GenCon, and was excellently received critically and popularly. "Deckbuilding" is not what you think it means, if you're comparing it to Magic: the Gathering at any phase.

William J. Pennington · « **Reply #69 on:** 28 August 2017, 21:09:16 »

Quote from: Force of Nature on 28 August 2017, 20:43:45

Why is CGL making a deckbuilding game for another company?

Because they had the game engine someone liked, and someone obviously liked the idea of the partnership, and it probably worked like this: you do the work, we supply the costly art and enormously popular IP and tie ins, and together, we make sweet, sweet money.

Quote

It will most likely not do well, even the Battletech CCG didn't do well,

Its not a CCG, but a co op card game. Those are really popular now. and D&D has more recognition that Battletech. As they improved the crossfire game rules with the release, so I expect it to sell well, and its expansions.

Quote

Shouldn't it be: Battletech, Battletech, Battletech ...... Battletech...... Battletech. Oh and Battletech.

No. Catalyst makes quite a few products other than Battletech. Making a big selling, cash producing game is good for Catalyst..which, in turn, is good ultimately, in the long run, for Battletech.

Quote

It is a sad day when CGL is focusing on and pushing another companies product and not on their own new products for their fans/customers/gamers.

I call it a good day when Catalyst releases a popular product that sells well and is well received. They did produce a product for their customers. Everyone who buys a set of Dragonfire is their customer. They make money. Keeps the developers in ramen noodles. Keeps money in the bank. Gives them the money needed to do things like..make new box sets, or make other new products for release. Keeps the lights on.

They have produced many other products not Battletech. Shadowrun. Valiant RPG. Crossfire. Duke. Wrath of Dragons. Balance of Power. The Masters of Orion game. The Shadowrun Encounter (and the push your luck dice game) released at Gencon. The Vikings game. Other things I'm forgetting. More in the pipe most likely.

ColBosch · « **Reply #70 on:** 28 August 2017, 21:58:00 »

Quote from: Force of Nature on 28 August 2017, 20:43:45

Why is CGL making a deckbuilding game for another company?

This is very common in the modern games industry. There are a LOT of crossover titles out there these days, and the public loves them. Some companies even specialize in matching IP owners to games publishers. As has been pointed out, the smaller company gets access to the bigger company's fanbase, and the bigger company doesn't have to develop their own mechanics. It's really a very cool thing and is part of why the tabletop gaming market expanded an impressive 21% last year alone.

Quote

It will most likely not do well, even the Battletech CCG didn't do well, like sooooo many other CCGs. Many companies have tried and failed against Pokeymon and M:tG.

The BattleTech CCG was a huge success, with millions of cards printed and several years of releases. It still has an active player community. There have been many CCGs that have done quite well for themselves, even if they never reach Pokemon or Magic sales numbers.

But Dragonfire is not a CCG. Non-collectible deckbuilding games are very popular right now.

Quote

Apparently Richard Garfield was not available to make a D&D-themed deckbuilding game for Wizards of the Coast. Even he knows it will not do well against M:tG... if that is not a red flag, what is?

This makes no sense. Richard Garfield didn't design the Crossfire system, so why would he be involved at all?

Quote

Shouldn't it be: Battletech, Battletech, Battletech ...... Battletech...... Battletech. Oh and Battletech.

Hell no. At the very least, there's Shadowrun, which is experiencing a major surge in popularity. CGL also publishes, or has published, a number of other games, from entire RPG systems to casual games like The Duke. If anything, BattleTech is a bit of an albatross around CGL's neck, due to its limited fanbase and expensive (to produce) products.

Quote

It is a sad day when CGL is focusing on and pushing another companies product and not on their own new products for their fans/customers/gamers.

Dragonfire is a CGL product. Just because it uses D&D imagery doesn't make it any less of a Catalyst game. And you know what other property CGL is licensing? BattleTech.

It's a sad day when a fan calls out a company for producing something popular just because it's not something they personally want.

Sharpnel · « **Reply #71 on:** 29 August 2017, 00:44:43 »

Quote from: Force of Nature on 28 August 2017, 20:43:45

Why is CGL making a deckbuilding game for another company? It will most likely not do well, even the Battletech CCG didn't do well, like sooooo many other CCGs. Many companies have tried and failed against Pokeymon and M:tG.

Apparently Richard Garfield was not available to make a D&D-themed deckbuilding game for Wizards of the Coast. Even he knows it will not do well against M:tG... if that is not a red flag, what is?

Shouldn't it be: Battletech, Battletech, Battletech ...... Battletech...... Battletech. Oh and Battletech.

It is a sad day when CGL is focusing on and pushing another companies product and not on their own new products for their fans/customers/gamers.

Actually, it's probably more like Shadowrun, Shadowrun, Shadowrun and let's not forget Battletech.

ANS Kamas P81 · « **Reply #72 on:** 29 August 2017, 01:49:55 »

Quote from: ColBosch on 28 August 2017, 21:58:00

It's a sad day when a fan calls out a company for producing something popular just because it's not something they personally want.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ButForMeItWasTuesday

sadlerbw · « **Reply #73 on:** 29 August 2017, 15:11:44 »

I have never really managed to get my gaming group into BattleTech, but they do like Shadowrun Crossfire, and were all pretty excited to see Dragonfire. I bought a copy because I enjoy Crossfire as well, and was able to demo Dragonfire at Origins. In fact, one of my buddies in the gaming group went out and bought it as well because he had heard about and enjoyed his demo at GenCon enough to pick up a copy. Honestly, it's a fun game and I hope it does well enough that they can keep producing the little expansions for it. I still want BattleTech as well, but I'm not at all unhappy they made Dragonfire.

YingJanshi · « **Reply #74 on:** 29 August 2017, 16:26:28 »

Quote from: Sharpnel on 29 August 2017, 00:44:43

Actually, it's probably more like Shadowrun, Shadowrun, Shadowrun and let's not forget Battletech.

What he said. As far as I'm aware, since CGL took over both properties, Shadowrun has by far been the most viable property. It simply makes more money than BattleTech does.

As for Dragonfire, if it sells well and adds more to the company coffers I'm all for it. (Even if I may not get it anytime soon). The only way any company can grow is to diversify. So the more ways CGL finds to make money, the better it is, even if that means my personal interest in their products has to wait on other products.

And I'm certainly not going to insult fans of Shadowrun or the Valiant RPG or Cosmic Patrol by demanding that CGL ignore them just to please me. That's just not...cool at all.

GRUD · « **Reply #75 on:** 31 August 2017, 00:45:05 »

Quote from: mbear on 22 August 2017, 08:46:42

Well GHQ Miniatures has a lot of 1/285th scale armor that you can use. Their M113s are perfect tracked APCs.

OR, you can point players to IWM's tracked, hover and wheeled APCs. 8) You know IWM, the company that makes the Official BT minis? O0

cpip · « **Reply #76 on:** 31 August 2017, 12:46:34 »

Quote from: GRUD on 31 August 2017, 00:45:05

OR, you can point players to IWM's tracked, hover and wheeled APCs. 8) You know IWM, the company that makes the Official BT minis? O0

I must note that one can acquire micro armor APCs in packs of 5 or more for less than a price for a pair of IWM tracked APCs.

GRUD · « **Reply #77 on:** 01 September 2017, 17:17:46 »

Quote from: cpip on 31 August 2017, 12:46:34

I must note that one can acquire micro armor APCs in packs of 5 or more for less than a price for a pair of IWM tracked APCs.

I must note that I can't understand why people don't want to support the company that makes the Official BT minis. ???

ColBosch · « **Reply #78 on:** 01 September 2017, 17:33:48 »

Quote from: GRUD on 01 September 2017, 17:17:46

I must note that I can't understand why people don't want to support the company that makes the Official BT minis. ???

Because nobody should feel forced to buy something they feel is overpriced.

Pat Payne · « **Reply #79 on:** 01 September 2017, 17:35:55 »

Quote from: GRUD on 01 September 2017, 17:17:46

I must note that I can't understand why people don't want to support the company that makes the Official BT minis. ???

And I must note this is a game whose TPTB have told us that if we want to we can use bottlecaps, slips of paper or dead cockroaches as tokens. While wanting to send money IWM's way is admirable (and I'm in no way saying we shouldn't), it's not absolutely required to play -- this ain't 40K... ;)

Sellsword · « **Reply #80 on:** 01 September 2017, 17:57:57 »

Quote from: Pat Payne on 01 September 2017, 17:35:55

And I must note this is a game whose TPTB have told us that if we want to we can use bottlecaps, slips of paper or dead cockroaches as tokens. While wanting to send money IWM's way is admirable (and I'm in no way saying we shouldn't), it's not absolutely required to play -- this ain't 40K... ;)

Of course TPTB say that. They don't make any money off of IWM sales.

GreyWolfActual · « **Reply #81 on:** 01 September 2017, 19:49:42 »

Quote from: Sellsword on 01 September 2017, 17:57:57

Of course TPTB say that. They don't make any money off of IWM sales.

"They've" been saying it since Ral Partha was part of FASA and before that even.

Sellsword · « **Reply #82 on:** 01 September 2017, 20:38:28 »

Quote from: GreyWolfActual on 01 September 2017, 19:49:42

"They've" been saying it since Ral Partha was part of FASA and before that even.

True enough. My snark about CGL motives was brought about more from my current disgust with them than with any sort of internal policy on their part. Apologies.

DarkSpade · « **Reply #83 on:** 01 September 2017, 21:50:45 »

There are two things that get me excited about Dragonfire.

1) what they learned from developing it is being passed over to Crossfire and word has it they'll be great changes to an already great game.

2) It brings us one step closer to a Shadowrun Reskin of Lords of Waterdeep. I mean we're looking at the distance between here and the sun, but still, it is one step closer.

Phobos101 · « **Reply #84 on:** 02 September 2017, 01:08:52 »

Dragonfire, if succesful, will do the following:
- Raise awareness among D+D's huge fanbase for CGL, bringing in new players for Shadowrun and Battletech
- Open up a revenue stream leading to more staffing, better online store facilities, and a better development cycle for all CGL titles
- Provide something of a cushion against certain legal proceedings taking longer than expected or even going against CGL.

I don't see how, even if you aren't interested in Dragonfire yourself, any of these things are bad outcomes for Battletech fans.

Captain of C-21 · « **Reply #85 on:** 02 September 2017, 07:53:10 »

So was there any big gaming event for Battletech this year? Like 2015's battle of Terra?

DarkSpade · « **Reply #86 on:** 02 September 2017, 09:10:25 »

Quote from: Phobos101 on 02 September 2017, 01:08:52

Dragonfire, if succesful, will do the following:
- Raise awareness among D+D's huge fanbase for CGL, bringing in new players for Shadowrun and Battletech
- Open up a revenue stream leading to more staffing, better online store facilities, and a better development cycle for all CGL titles
- Provide something of a cushion against certain legal proceedings taking longer than expected or even going against CGL.

I don't see how, even if you aren't interested in Dragonfire yourself, any of these things are bad outcomes for Battletech fans.

We're talking about a card game, not an act of god. ;)

sadlerbw · « **Reply #87 on:** 02 September 2017, 21:06:21 »

Quote from: Captain of C-21 on 02 September 2017, 07:53:10

So was there any big gaming event for Battletech this year? Like 2015's battle of Terra?

This year was, I believe, a battle from the Capellan Crusades. I think it was the Hastatis Sentinels vs. the Red Lancers on Liao. I KNOW this is what the event was for Alpha Strike, and I think it was the same general battle that was being run in Total War, but I'm not sure since I only played the AS version.

faithless · « **Reply #88 on:** 02 September 2017, 23:14:20 »

It was Capellan Crusades using TW rules too. I played in two sessions on Friday of Gencon and it was a great time.

I am Belch II · « **Reply #89 on:** 03 September 2017, 06:08:04 »

IT was the Capellan Crusades. It started Thurs and went all the way until Saturday. 9 sessions, thru he whole con.

I played 2 of them.

Don't really know who won.