$10.00
Alwin Derijck
Netherlands
Utrecht
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
The rules state that one should "use both new decks instead of the Stage I and Stage II cards provided with the original game" (SE page 9).

I don't see why one could not mix the old and new Stage I's and II's?

Presumably, the "conflict encouraging" aspect of the new cards will go to waste upon mixing with the old ones. On the other hand, when combined with the Age of Empire variant, a mix of "war" and "non-war" objectives sounds appealing.

Has anyone tried such a thing?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Martin
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
We've mixed them. It works fine.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Figgins
United States
Woodland
California
flag msg tools
http://lyrislaser.com
mbmbmbmbmb
Sounds tempting, especially if you were playing The Long War. I think more unpredictability in objectives is good - I'm surprised FFG just created a replacement deck, rather than supplemental cards.

You know what might be fun?
Before the game, each player chooses 2 Stage 1 Objectives, from either deck. (Start with the speaker, go once around the table, then backwards, like building the galaxy, until everyone has chosen 2 Objectives.) Take those 10/12/16 objectives, shuffle them together, draw 6 (or however many for Long War) and use those. Do the same for Stage 2, but with each player only choosing one objective.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evan Champie
United States
Arcata
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I was thinking about doing this. Now it's done!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Markus Kaut
Germany
Berlin
Berlin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
We mixed them... and got the "spend 10 influence" and the "spend 10 influence or 10 resources" and on Stage II the "spend 20 resources" objective. That was kinda lame...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Glenn Russell
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mb
Well, if you get ones like that that are similar, then that just means that this time the game will be very focused around resources/influence/planet control.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Mac
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm interested in this, myself. Do many of you keep the objective decks seperate entities like the SE rulebook says or do you just go ahead and mix them up? If you keep them seperate, do you just play one type depending on your group's mood?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom McCarthy
United States
Parkville
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
My group mixed both sets and has had no problems. I think the new cards tend to make the game a bit more aggressive. Most seem to center around conquest.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin DeOlden
United States
Chino
California
flag msg tools
3D printing available for service at: http://www.3dhubs.com/los-angeles/hubs/martin-chino
mbmbmbmbmb
I mix the two and remove any doubles. Never had a problem with them and it makes each game different with a better mix of objectives.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
RoC Commander
msg tools
Twilight Imperium (Third Edition): Shattered Empire » Forums » Rules
Re: Stage I and II Objectives, old set Vs new
We played with the mixed version (mostly b/c we didn't read the rules correctly) and we didn't like it alot.

We don't like having very simular objetives showing up. (Like 10 Influence + 10 Influence or 10 Resources).

We had a few very turtle heave games, which wasn't that much fun. We rather kill each other, so getting VP for winning fights are nice.

I'd even go that far to say, that I'd like to even raise the amount of ships you need to kill for the "I killed 3 Ships" objetiv. Either to none fighter or to 5 Ships.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.