"A Guide to Westros"

Breaking this out into it's own thread as the Mystery box one is heading in a different tangent.

Had a sticky nose at FFGs site over the new Battles of Westros game and I'm liking more and more what I am seeing. Then I noticed this article which was just put up; a Q&A with Christian about whats going on. It does seem a bit damage control-ish, but it's surprisingly frank (for the modern FFG anyway) and had a lot of great stuff in it.
Link is here: www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_news.asp?eidn=1121

I'll pull out the interesting bits for me.

Q: Does Battles of Westeros use the same game system as BattleLore?
CP: No. While both are games of medieval army battles and have some slight similarities, they are different games.

Q: How are they different?
CP: In the coming months we’ll post a number of previews on this site that will delve into the details, so I can’t (and won’t) spoil them here. The classic BattleLore game is based on Richard Borg’s “Command and Colors” game system, while Battles of Westeros is an entirely new engine, one that is significantly more involved than C&C and more in tune with FFG’s design principles. We’re really excited about this system and we think that players will love it.

All of this in my mind is EXELLENT news. This wont be a fourth sixth rehash of C&C. A more complex tactical game is just what the doctor ordered, and almost puts this on my buy list. But...

Q: Why call it “A BattleLore Game”?
CP: We acquired BattleLore to be our core brand for medieval tactical warfare games (in the scale represented in the classic BattleLore game). The BattleLore name is not necessarily tied to Richard’s “Command and Colors” system.

What. The. Fuck?
What the hell is the point of that?
I'm sorry, but to consumers Battlelore is the name of the game, not a brand of a scale or whatever it is that CP going on about here. If they really paid for 'Battlelore' just to be that then they WASTED THEIR MONEY!
Not only does this make no sense, but as far as I'm conserned its a negative. The playful battle logo does not fit AT ALL with Martin's bleak world and it sitting there on the cover of the game reminding me of undisputedly the most overhyped game of the modern era is what is stopping me from purchasing this.
I doubt it will impress battlelore fans (all 3 that remain) either. They are just going to feel ripped off for waiting so long for battlelore to fulfill the bullshit promises DoW made before the game was even released. And if this game is mechanically a new engine they are going to feel like they are being taken advantage of.
Now that I think about it, if this anouncement was in NO WAY ASSOSIATED WITH BATTLELORE I would have blown my load over this announcement. A westeros battle game is awesome. A battlelore westeros game stinks on ice.

If Flightmaster is lurking around here, as we know he occasionally does, and is currently reading this post screwing his nose at my immature swearing and poor English skills then put all that aside for the moment and take my advice - ditch the battlelore logo from the box! If the game is different enough to stand alone then remove the albotross that is battlelore from around it's poor stuggling neck!

Q: Speaking of BattleLore, the main BattleLore game has been out of print for a while. Will this come back into print?
CP: There have been, and continue to be, some very serious issues in reconciling the production methods and expectations in the way Days of Wonder produced the BattleLore main game with those of FFG. We understand the lack of availability is an issue and we’re working on a solution. This issue has also affected the German version of BattleLore, while there are still good supplies of the French edition.

There’s a particular trap in manufacturing games, and it’s one that applies here. The initial printing of a game is typically printed in large volumes, which means that certain efficiencies of this volume are not able to be replicated in a smaller (i.e. reprint level) production. This is a trap that FFG works hard to avoid in its own manufacturing, but the original BattleLore printing was of course not in our production control. Not only was BattleLore caught in this trap, but the game was priced aggressively to begin with, even assuming the best of production efficiencies. On top of that, the factory that DOW used for this production essentially admitted to pricing their manufacturing of the original BattleLore “to get the business in the door” -- which means that the costing levels on the first run was eminently underpriced.

This, set against the overall backdrop of an already steeply escalating cost in game manufacturing, has made the core game a serious issue. Reprinting the core game “as is,” would essentially result in a near $150 retail price point, which is obviously unacceptable.

I know I have a reputation as a Days of Wonder basher - probably because I am - but by god those guys have 1 release a year and they still manage to screw it up? They built up Battlelore as a 'core' system that they were going to expand like there was no tommorow (RPG elements! New creatures every month!) and didn't ensure they could keep the core game in print? WTF?
I always thought DoW's reasons for selling the property were a bit rubbish, I suspect we are now closer to the truth.

The problem FFG are going to have with a reprint is battlelore is very easy to get on the secondary market. So who the hell is going to pay $150 for the game new if you can get it second hand for a third of that easily? Coupled with the fact the expansion model the game has doesn't fit with FFGs and frankly pales in comparison (is anyone happy with the pricing of it?) in hindsite they should have just done a second edition after getting it.

The classic BattleLore game (which we purchased from Days of Wonder in ’08) had an eclectic mix of a Fantasy and historic medieval theme that FFG has never been comfortable with.

Hahahaha!
No more goblin arabs.

Q: Why call it “A BattleLore Game”?
CP: We acquired BattleLore to be our core brand for medieval tactical warfare games (in the scale represented in the classic BattleLore game). The BattleLore name is not necessarily tied to Richard’s “Command and Colors” system.

Does not compute.

I feel one of the reasons to call it a "Battlelore game" is the high price point of the reprint of the original Battlelore. I guess they're saving some money if they print their own iteration of a game with similar components, but this is pure speculation...

Also, I haven't been pleased with the development of Battlelore since the beginning. They began with an incomplete and clearly flawed game, both in design and theme implementation, and try to complement it with even more fluff and not with a rules change that makes the game better. FFG bought a flawed game and the only way they thought to make it better, instead of a Second Edition, was to make their own game. I can't imagine how the business decisions came to this point or how a game design became a completely different game, all I know is that FFG is trying to sell us something totally different but with with the name "Battlelore" attached to it to say to the Battlelore fans that they're working on something new. This is completely and utterly idiotic.

What originally came across as a bad business decision now seems like a really bizarre irrational one.

It seems like they have decided they need to cut their losses and run with Battlelore, but don't want to give the perception that they may have made a mistake with purchasing the license. It is not as though they haven't admitted they have made mistakes before, such as with the Arkham Horror figures and the Mutant Chronicles CMG.

Didn't people play this up at their superstore release over the weekend? Then how are they going to keep it from being "spoiled". Can't we just find one of those players to come out and talk about the game without all this cloak and dagger?

Hmm...I don't know, I have to say that this sounds very much like damage control/spin control. Judging by the handful of reactions there, it looks like if anything making comments that amount to "this isn't really a BATTLELORE game" when it says "A BATTLELORE game" on the box or statements that it's based on the "classic BATTLELORE system" is probably more hurtful than helpful. Add to that the fact that we're now saying- somehow- that BATTLELORE isn't connected to the C&C system, and it just looks like a rushed attempt to settle the BATTLELORE fans and prevent this from turning into a PR disaster at worst, customer confusion at best.

Also, I don't know the particulars, but the suggestion that BATTLELORE would be $150 today needs some sort of qualification for me to believe that. If that were the case, why aren't ALL of DoW's game twice the price they are today? Or does it have something to do with FFG's manufacturing expectations or sources? I'm not saying that FFG is at fault there at all, it could very well just be a contracting issue or the simple fact that DoW's production budget was higher or something of that nature...but it doesn't add up to me.

But it does reveal something...if BATTLELORE was purchased and FFG discovered post facto that it was going to be $150 coming from their sources ("oops"), then it TOTALLY makes sense that they're doing something else with the property and it TOTALLY makes sense that they'd use an existing license to monetize it.

FFG is a great company, and I believe Mr. Petersen is a great businessman...that doesn't mean that either can't make mistakes or bad decisions, and I'm sure they'll certainly continue to succeed and bring out great games. But still, this whole thing is pretty disappointing to me, I just expect more from them. I've always stood by them, and will continue to do so...the whole thing with MUTANT CHRONICLES and the ARKHAM HORROR figures were goofs, and they corrected them as best they could. And if this doesn't pan out for them, I'm sure they'll make good on it as well.

I think Frank is right here- take BATTLELORE off the box, call it your very own Westeros battle game, and either announce the end of the BATTLELORE product line or continue to support it 100% without confusing customers with competing lines with the same brand. I think that would have solved a lot of issues that some are having with the game. If I had seen this game as BATTLES OF WESTEROS and not a BATTLELORE game set in Westeros, I probably wouldn't have had such an allergic reaction to it myself.

Michael Barnes wrote:

Also, I don't know the particulars, but the suggestion that BATTLELORE would be $150 today needs some sort of qualification for me to believe that. If that were the case, why aren't ALL of DoW's game twice the price they are today? Or does it have something to do with FFG's manufacturing expectations or sources? I'm not saying that FFG is at fault there at all, it could very well just be a contracting issue or the simple fact that DoW's production budget was higher or something of that nature...but it doesn't add up to me.

I'm not sure why you don't believe that. What other reason would FFG have for not reprinting it? What other reason would DoW have for not selling it (oh wait, they didn't have time to make expansions! Yeah, that made sense...)
Maybe you forget how many copies of Battlelore were floating around at release. That first print run was massive.

As far as why other DoW games aren't twice the price - what else have they got that is comparable? Small world is just a bunch of cardboard and wasn't exactly cheap, and the expansions are about the biggest ripoff there is. M44 is probably the closest to battlelore, but that was not nearly as big and I have no idea when it was last reprinted. Ticket to smackers shares components throughout the series so big print runs on certain components like trains are not a problem. What else is there?

MWChapel wrote:

Didn't people play this up at their superstore release over the weekend? Then how are they going to keep it from being "spoiled". Can't we just find one of those players to come out and talk about the game without all this cloak and dagger?

Like this guy?

www.heroscapers.com/community/showpost.p...19268&postcount=2008

I know it's ridiculous even to bring this up, but it's "Commands and Colors." I realize GMT doesn't remember this either about two-thirds of the time, but ... oh, never mind.

Anyway, I agree pretty much all around that this is an effort to make something out of essentially nothing and that the end result will likely please relatively few. But I could be wrong.

So, judging from this guy's post, it's not a completely different game, but different enough that they didn't really need to use the BattleLore name.

Not only do none of Peterson's answers make sense, they're contradictory in places.

The classic BattleLore game is based on Richard Borg’s “Command and Colors” game system, while Battles of Westeros is an entirely new engine, one that is significantly more involved than C&C and more in tune with FFG’s design principles. We’re really excited about this system and we think that players will love it.

So if it's not in line with your design principles, why buy it?

...to be our core brand for medieval tactical warfare games (in the scale represented in the classic BattleLore game). The BattleLore name is not necessarily tied to Richard’s “Command and Colors” system.

OK, so now the BattleLore name basically means "anything that's somewhat similar to BattleLore. The implication here is that there will be more "BattleLore" games which won't use the C&C rules OR BoW's.

I don't get it, if there's not a common system for all the games, why bother slapping them all with a brand name that people have not historically had much faith in?

The classic BattleLore game (which we purchased from Days of Wonder in ’08) had an eclectic mix of a Fantasy and historic medieval theme that FFG has never been comfortable with.

Again, WTF? If you bought the name to be a brand for medieval games, and you're not comfortable with mixing fantasy in, why is all the new BattleLore stuff fantasy-themed[/i]?

I'm not sure why you don't believe that.

Tell me why, then, a game like TI3 or DESCENT that has _twice as much stuff_ as BATTLELORE hasn't doubled in cost with FFG's manufacturing sources? Is it the 80 page, bound rulebook that's adding $50 to the pricetag? Maybe FFG was having a hard time sourcing that bendy, ash-gray plastic or something, I don't know.

We're not going to get full disclosure here on any of this, so there may be costs associated with a BATTLELORE reprint that we don't know about. Maybe transferring dies and molds over to another manufacturer is difficult or even impossible.

But based on conjecture, to say that BATTLELORE is a $150 retail game now when BATTLES OF WESTEROS has MORE COMPONENTS and probably a comparable level of quality and is $80 is pretty hard to accept.

But there again, BATTLELORE had those little figure trays, stickers, those stupid lore buckets...maybe those things cost a bunch to make or something, I don't know.

Ultimately, Frank may be right though- they made A LOT of BATTLELORE, and it may simply be that DoW manufactured it in a quantity that drove the price down sufficiently to bring it out at $70.

Regardless I just don't understand why FFG would purchase a property that costs $150 per unit in the first place, let alone one with a flagging reputation. Did somebody just not do the due dilligence before the papers were signed? It's pretty clear that FFG _did not_ buy BATTLELORE with the intention of turning it into a Westeros game. I don't buy that for a minute.

This is all very, very interesting because it's revealing some things about the business we don't usually see...but again, if it weren't a "mystery box" thing, I'm not sure we'd be scrutinizing it so closely.

It does worry me that Mr. Petersen seems awfully defensive about this one...I think this FAQ wasn't a good idea. They work better when they're tight-lipped about things and play it close to the vest.

I think if you read the whole bit about the $150 pricing I think it is clear that they found out about the costs of making new models after they bought the rights. They thought they could do a better job than DoW, then found out Dow fucked up big time and now have to work their way out of the mess. Rather than trying to settle it straight away, they release a similar game, using both the Battlelore and Westeros brands to sell it, while they have their hands free in terms of production.

Not sure whether mould technology is the same for all plastics, but you don't make molds for individual miniatures, but moulds containing several (the spruces in GW boxes). You can do that very effciently, but also wery inefficiently depending on your production line. It may have worked reasonably well to put a lot of basic games out, but may have sucked for smaller runs needed for expansion sets. This is where I think FFG thought they could do better.


Emphasis added by me.

There’s a particular trap in manufacturing games, and it’s one that applies here. The initial printing of a game is typically printed in large volumes, which means that certain efficiencies of this volume are not able to be replicated in a smaller (i.e. reprint level) production. This is a trap that FFG works hard to avoid in its own manufacturing, but the original BattleLore printing was of course not in our production control. Not only was BattleLore caught in this trap, but the game was priced aggressively to begin with, even assuming the best of production efficiencies. On top of that, the factory that DOW used for this production essentially admitted to pricing their manufacturing of the original BattleLore “to get the business in the door” -- which means that the costing levels on the first run was eminently underpriced.

This, set against the overall backdrop of an already steeply escalating cost in game manufacturing, has made the core game a serious issue. Reprinting the core game “as is,” would essentially result in a near $150 retail price point, which is obviously unacceptable.

Q: Was this a surprise?
CP: When we took over BattleLore, the key value to FFG was the BattleLore brand. Which, as you can see, we’re carrying forward with Battles of Westeros.

We were concerned that the classic BattleLore base game, as had been created by Days of Wonder (“DOW”), was going to be troublesome on a production level. We did not, to be honest, expect it to essentially be non-manufacturable, as is the case.

So, as I said before, we’re working on a solution to this problem, and we have some short-term solutions that I think will work very well for players looking to get into BattleLore.

Hopefully, FFG will handle the game like they did Talisman 4 and that franchize. They'll release a Battlelore patch for $20 so that you play the Westos with the original Battlelore set. I'd buy that and pull out my Battlelore set that's been collecting dust for the last 2 years.

Wow. I'll pretty much second every "WTF" in the earlier posts that this Q & A has generated. It certainly comes across like hindsight rationalization. I'm one of those people who had high hopes that FFG would invigorate BL and take it fully in the fantasy direction the game seemed to need to embrace if was really going to hold up in the long run. At the very least, I hoped that the company that can put out things like WotR and Descent - games w/ lots of great minis - would be able to expand BL's universe at a more reasonable price point. But the creature and dragon expansions signaled loud and clear that FFG either would not or could not do that and so I cut the cord and traded my copy away a couple of weeks ago. It's hard for me to imagine who's going to start investing money and effort in BL now that it appears to have been officially designated a red-headed stepchild in the FFG catalog.