$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 129.87

7,655 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
48.2% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Star Wars: Rebellion» Forums » Variants

Subject: Restriction of first action in a multiplayer game rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I love the 2 player game, I think its fantastic.

I have played 1 3-player game and found that as the rebels (the side I was on) you lose a lot of what you can do with your first action because the admiral must go first.
Want to play do a spec ops mission with chewien you cant.
Want to rescue a leader with obi wan, or even leia, too bad.
I am sure this also affects the empire, but since they have 2 successive actions it might be mitigated, although I can see that if the empire wants to capture a leader and then interogate him in some way it will also be unideal.

Thoughts?
Has anyone tried allowing some leeway on this regard?
Perhaps allowing the rebels to start with any one leader, and maybe to balance it out allow the empire to switch the order on their first go around
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis de Vries
Netherlands
Deventer
flag msg tools
Ah, doctor, that aneasthetic is perfect!
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, you could put 2 leaders on a mission. That way, you'll have your main ('general') leader out on the first turn.

You will use another leader, but you can have mutlitple skill icons to almost make sure that mission will succeed.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clinton Rice
United States
Chino
California
flag msg tools
mbmb
Were you playing a three-player game with two rebels? From your post, that's what it sounds like.

If so, there's no need to fix this. If I remember correctly, the three player game always puts the extra player on the imperial side. You only play team on the rebels in a four player game. So if the game doesn't work for you, try playing the game as it was intended to be played.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug DeMoss
United States
Stillwater
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
You still play the Rebels as if there were two players in a three-player game. So this still applies.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
demoss1 wrote:
You still play the Rebels as if there were two players in a three-player game. So this still applies.



Correct.

This is also true:
Quote:
Well, you could put 2 leaders on a mission. That way, you'll have your main ('general') leader out on the first turn.


But I feel like its too much of a disadvantage just because of the start with admiral rule.

Anyone play 3-4 players as the rebel and not get frustrated with this?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug DeMoss
United States
Stillwater
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
There's a flip side - the Rebels can guarantee a Sabotage with no ability for the Empire to follow it up with R&D on turn 1; all they have to do is use a General's leader. It's not a disadvantage specific to the Rebels, it's just a difference that provides both advantages and disadvantages.

Besides, Jan Dodonna is usually the guy you want to use for those kinds of things early on anyway.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a good point, I concede that.
I just know that as the Rebels in that 3-player game i kept being flustered by this 1 new limitation, that I couldn't do THE mission i wanted to start the round off.
But I understand that the last mission is also important.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Clinton Rice
United States
Chino
California
flag msg tools
mbmb
demoss1 wrote:
You still play the Rebels as if there were two players in a three-player game. So this still applies.



You're right. I was forgetting that. I always play 2 player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guy Rodgers
United States
Arizona
flag msg tools
jooice wrote:

I am sure this also affects the empire, but since they have 2 successive actions it might be mitigated, although I can see that if the empire wants to capture a leader and then interogate him in some way it will also be unideal.


This is balanced by the fact that most of the Imperials spec-ops are on generals. The best they can manage on a Admiral is two for Soonjtir Fel. Additionally, most Intel icons and Palpatine are Admirals. It makes it difficult to chain a capture and a mission that requires capture back-to-back.

I think restricted actions balance a lot of leaders otherwise percieved as weak. Want to activate "One in a million" first action? You need Wedge not Luke. I think Admirals in general are weaker to balance the fact that they can take first action. It's one reason I prefer using team rules in two player.

Another example, I almost always pick Chewie over Lando for "An Old Friend" in the base rules. Team rules make me strongly consider Lando.


Also, I agree with what's been said above. Team rules favor Rebels, because they now get first and last action.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I haven't played enough 3 or 4 player games to know all the intricacies but the added depth is just something you have to figure out. You can't play the exact same way you play a 2 player game. And I think that's great. if the 4 player game were just like the 2 player game people would complain.
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.