$18.00
The Hotness
Games|People|Company
The Hotness has gone cold...
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 121.25

7,290 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
45.9% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
4 Posts

Star Wars: Rebellion» Forums » Variants

Subject: A modest combat variant rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Yiannis Hadjikyriakou
United Kingdom
Brighton
East Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I just played another game on the weekend, and while I can live with the combat system, I'd like it to be a bit more streamlined. While I've looked at the other variants here, I really want something that is going to play as close to the original as possible and not disturb play balance. Here is my suggestion:

1. Leaders' tactical values for each theatre are compared, and the one with the higher value gains the difference in tactical cards. For example, leader A has space value 3 and ground value 1, and leader B has space value 2 and ground value 3. That means leader A would get 1 (3-2) space card and leader B would get 2 (3-1) ground cards in total.

2. Crossed lightsaber die rolls would first cause the opponent to discard one of their tactical cards of the relevant theatre. If they had none, then the playing rolling the die could draw a card. (The player can of course always use the crossed lightsabers to activate one of their cards instead as per usual.)

3. Shield generators act the same as crossed lightsabers with regard to discarding and drawing.

I think tactics cards that require another card to be discarded to be used would probably have to be removed from the deck as they will be difficult to use.

Overall, while not having a big impact on the game, it will shave some time off combat: in the above example, assuming 2 combat rounds in both theatres with an average of 6 combat dice, it would mean the battle would go from having roughly 11-13 tactics cards on average to perhaps around 2-3 (depending on the variable circumstances surrounding the use of crossed lightsabers).

The rationale here is that the cards often provide extra hits that are nullified by blocks provided by opponent cards, so why not just net this off before the battle starts and save everyone some time.

I haven't tested it out yet apart from a few thought experiments, but I think it will speed things up without changing game balance. Comments welcome.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Constans wrote:
assuming 2 combat rounds in both theatres with an average of 6 combat dice, it would mean the battle would go from having roughly 11-13 tactics cards on average to perhaps around 2-3 (depending on the variable circumstances surrounding the use of crossed lightsabers).

How did you calculate 11-13 tactics cards? That seems like far too many.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Yiannis Hadjikyriakou
United Kingdom
Brighton
East Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sdiberar wrote:
Constans wrote:
assuming 2 combat rounds in both theatres with an average of 6 combat dice, it would mean the battle would go from having roughly 11-13 tactics cards on average to perhaps around 2-3 (depending on the variable circumstances surrounding the use of crossed lightsabers).

How did you calculate 11-13 tactics cards? That seems like far too many.


I took the two leaders in the example, 3-2 and 3-1, which makes 9 cards, then with 4 throws of 6 dice you should expect 4 lightsabers, so that's a maximum of 4 card draws (making 9+4=13), but the low side case assumed that 2 were for card draws and 2 were for activating cards (making 9+2=11). Remember also that these are total cards, not per player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Ah, I thought you meant per player. Carry on.
 
 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.