$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 52.04

3,853 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
24.3% of Goal | 30 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
31 
 Thumb up
 Hide
30 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Star Wars: Rebellion» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Star Wars: Rebellion... hype or true gem? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Roel van Tiel
Netherlands
Nijmegen
Gelderland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Again, it's been a while since my last review, as time seems getting more and more precious as you grow older (and have kids). But here is my 12th attempt at helping people decide whether a game is for them.

Target audience of review

So you’re thinking of this game and want to read whether it is interesting enough to buy. This review is meant for you. Bear in mind, every review is an opinion, and this is mine. I’ll try to be objective but it’s bound to be skewed to what I like. You might like different things in a game!

This review is built in a certain structure which I hope to maintain for every review I write.
First, this is my main conclusion: This is a solid hybrid game of bluff, wargaming and adventuring. It SO MUCH helps being a Star Wars fan. If the coolness of the miniatures is lost on you, if you don't dig the characters, if you have a hard time wrapping your head around non-intuitive combat, you dislike long games and don't have unlimited pockets, this game is probably not for you. If on the other hand, you dig Star Wars, dig strategy, dig bluffing, dig wargaming and - deep down - always really wanted to take part in the Star Wars universe, then this game will blow you away. And your wallet.

Second, I’ll be going into 5 sections:
- Target Audience of the game who will be attracted to this game? Who is it for?
- Components quality, playability of components and art.
- The Game Itself the basic idea, as short as possible. No rules.
- Other Traits playing time, setup time, price/quality, etc.
- Conclusion what’s to like? What’s to not like? Overall verdict.

Target Audience of the game

This is a game for the following people
- you dig Star Wars. cool
- you like adventuring games in which a single adventurer can do cool stuff. meeple
- you like to look someone in the eye and bluff. Or call a bluff. Or double-bluff. goo
- you dig blowing planetary systems to dust. Death Star, anyone? sauron
- you like light wargaming with a twist. arrrh
- you have deep pockets. bag

Components

Components are top-notch. Which you might expect from FFG and a game priced like this. Cool, sturdy miniatures which really, I mean REALLY help breathe the game alive. As a Star Wars fan (ok, I'll admit, I DO dig this theme) the feeling of deploying your Star Destroyers on the map is just SO cool. Let alone putting a Death Star out.

Dice are etched, cards are sturdy, leader stands allow for art which otherwise wouldn't be there. Also, it helps keeping leaders apart on the map, an important thing as this game is meant to take in information at a glance as you wouldn't want to give away clues. Two minor caveats: the map is in two pieces, whereas I would've preferred just one 6-fold so it would never slide, and the symbols ON the dice are not quite logical. But these are minor quibbles.

The rulebook comes in two pieces: a good 'learn to play' and a decent (but very dry) rules reference. Drawback is that it is not always logical to use a rules reference for lookups (you might search for the incorrect keywords) and that might result in some flipping to see where the information you need is. To be honest: I had this not happen but I'm used to search by index. Not everyone is.

All in all, quality you'd come to expect from Fantasy Flight. thumbsup

The Game Itself

Basic idea can be summed up by choosing one side in a galactic conflict: an imperial, empire like dictatorship that supresses almost all of the galaxy, bent on wiping out all resistance, or - naturally - that very resistance, being under pressure all the time and trying to survive.

The two sides play very differently, and have different victory conditions. As imperial, you need to find and destroy the Rebel base. Which is easier said than done, as finding it is tough. As Rebel, you need to stay hidden, survive and make the turn-marker meet a predestined 'reputation' marker. While the experience itself is very enjoyable, that last end-condition is a bit of a let-down. thumbsdown
Better (expansion idea?) would it've been to trigger an end-story, be it Luke that shoots the emperor, Darth Vader that is won for the Rebels, a sabotaged Death Star crushing into Coruscant thereby destroying the complete base of power or just a general galaxy wide loyalty shift of 1 per system. Perhaps triggering that a turn or two before the now 'fixed' end-condition of 'you win' is reached.

Now, there are plenty games in which you need to reach a goal and if you do, you win. So why is this a let-down in this game? Theme, people. This game is SO engrossed in the Star Wars theme. You are doing epic stuff ALL THE TIME. Blowing planets up, capturing your opponents' heroes, putting them in carbonite, freeing them only to have a homing beacon be applied, putting Death Stars, Star Destroyers, Darth Vader and Han solo out. Bullying a system by letting the emperor himself visit it and 'make suggestions'. And so on, and so forth. thumbsup
With a game that permeates theme so well, the end-condition should also be themed. For the imperial player, it defenitely is. It is such a joy finally finding that S****d base and killing it OFF only to grab victory. For the Rebel player.. not so much.

That being said, the game itself flows very smoothly. For most gamers, this is not a difficult game: you pick your leaders, assign them to missions (or hold them in reserve for countering or logistic stuff) and after both players have done this, start resolving those leaders one by one. After that, there is some bookkeeping and mustering and we get back to the action again.

The action usually consisting of one of two things:
a) attempting a mission with your leader
b) moving a fleet (with/without ground units) to a new system and perhaps triggering combat.

Now, attempting a mission is pretty straightforward: it always succeeds unless your opponent opposes it. If he does, it is a straight roll-off (with ALL leaders in the system, so also any previous placed) to see if it gets through. This alone allows for some very tactical play, as your opponent does not yet know what OTHER missions you're about to perform. Can he allow to let this slip? Or should he wait until later?
Also, because of the rule your units may not move out of a system containing one of your leaders, this can be used to block someone off from moving for a turn.. or not, if he doesn't resist. This mechanic allows for a delicious 'catch 22' decision: screwed if you do, screwed if you don't. Great.thumbsup

Because the Rebel player always starts first, he wil be continously forcing these choices upon the Imperial player. Not making himself more popular in the process.

Now, moving a fleet is where the Imperial fun comes in. This is because the galaxy is YOURS. YOURS ALONE!!! Or it should be, seeing all those units of you scattered around the galaxy. It almost feels as a 'mopping up' phase of a wargame: you have crushed your enemy and all you have to do is wipe him out completely. But that will only be a matter of time.
Time... that very thing of which you don't have an unlimited amount of.

So for the Imperial player, it is all about speed. Hurry up to find that base and kill it before it relocates, spread across the galaxy to limit spaces it can be relocated to and narrowing down until there is no place to go, before something bad happens (like you losing the game) that prevents you from finishing it off. It is a strange sensation of feeling all-powerfull and at the same time, rushed. Good design choice here. thumbsup

But being overly powerfull means at least you get to do some battles, right? Well, drawback coming up: these are pretty non-intuitive affairs (rulebook doesn't help here either) that just don't flow as well as the rest of the game. I find this only minor as just one play will teach you the intricacies of battle (big guns only target big stuff, small guns target small stuff and a good leader can make all the difference at the start of combat) in no time. But this is one aspect that could (should?) have been better designed. The dice being non-intuitive sure don't help here either. thumbsdown

That being said, battle turns are quick and as it is a 2 faction-game, everyone will be involved in every battle, long as it may take (due to it having a lot of turns if no-one retreats).

Finally, it is hard to get your Death Star into the right position to blow something up. I think it should be, as otherwise it would be a boring game of 'blow up system, move, repeat' or (more likely) we wouldn't have a Death Star at all to play with. It is complicated as you have to move it towards where you want it to be, possibly taking multiple turns to get there - and as moving is done by leaders, each move is very precious - as well as draw the right 'fire!' card from your projects deck. What it does very well by this mechanism is putting out a feeling of dread... on the Rebel player, that is. As a Death Star is one of the few ways an Imperial player can make SURE there is no relocation... if he blows up the right system. Otherwise there is just a great disturbance in the Force, and a very disappointed Emperor to go with it (now, where did we see this before). Again, thematic, spot on. thumbsup

And that theme runs deep. Miniatures, Death Star, iconic movie-like actions from the action deck replaying key-events in the movies, relocating a Rebel base, capturing a leader and putting him in carbonite or having him escape only to lead you to the base.. the list goes on and on. Absolutely amazing. BIG thumbsup here. thumbsupthumbsup

Finally, the turn structure helps to bring out tension in this game. The first phase is what we call the 'scheming' phase. In which you make tough choices, but also try to staredown the other player. Can I pull it off? Is it worth committing so many resources to this? What is he doing? What should I do? It really helps to build tension for the turn. The second part is all about tactic play: in what order should I reveal? Can I lure him out? Should I wait or do it now? Finally, the build queue in the third phase ALSO helps building up tension. Seeing those stacks of units move down on the Imperial build queue surely signals life won't become easier later on for any Rebel player! Great design choices again. thumbsup

That all being said, this is a solid hybrid game of bluff, wargaming and adventuring. It SO MUCH helps being a Star Wars fan. If the coolness of the miniatures is lost on you, if you don't dig the characters, if you have a hard time wrapping your head around non-intuitive combat, you dislike long games and don't have unlimited pockets, this game is probably not for you. If on the other hand, you dig Star Wars, dig strategy, dig bluffing, dig wargaming and - deep down - always really wanted to take part in the Star Wars universe, then this game will blow you away. thumbsupthumbsupthumbsup And your wallet. bagsoblue

Other Traits

Playing time after a few plays is about 3 hours. Which is great for a game this epic. Though it might be long for some, it fits in a midweek evening and for me, that is a huge plus. thumbsup

Setup and bagging time depends on your preparation. I have bagged all components in labeled zipbags, putting Rebel, Imperial and 'common' components in their own big bags, reducing set-up time to about 10 minutes, and bagging time to about twice that amount. Which is quite good, as you'll be talking on the game while collecting the components. Good. thumbsup

Price/quality is two-fold. A retail price of €99 is HEFTY. If you are no Star Wars fan, I'd call that overpriced. For me, as a Star Wars fan, it was still on the pricey side but worth it.

Player count is 2. Don't believe the box. [EDIT: Though some actually enjoy the mechanics of 2vs2 as a cooperative experience. I personally find it detracts from the theme as 'galactic evil mastermind'. Maybe it's just my crave about ruling the universe, though.]

Conclusion

What’s to like
+ Star Wars theme
+ Leaders doing iconic stuff
+ Feeling all powerfull but rushed
+ Feeling underpowered but SNEAKY
+ Death stars. Blowing up planets.
+ Star Destroyers, X-wings, Tie Fighters. Did I mention theme?
+ Hidden 'find mister X' mechanic
+ Variety in missions: you never know what is coming up
+ Tension building: scheming phase, build queues.
+ Galactic scale. And Star Wars. The entire theatre, people.
[EDIT]+ In 2p, ruling the galaxy as an evil mastermind.
[EDIT]+ Even coop players can join in on the fun (4p, 2vs2).

What’s not to like
- Combat
- Unintuitive dice
- Price-tag
- Rebel victory condition
- Movement. Though relevant for design, it is unintuitive not to place leaders with your troops but instead function as 'hey I'm here, come pick me up' or 'wait, I'm not finished boarding yet so don't go'.

Overall verdict: I give this game a 9/10. I have a blast playing it, currently can't wait until my next episode. That being said, I worry about replayability as some moves might get stale after repeated play against the same opponent. And for this price tag, that shouldn't happen. Yes, I know, it being a FFG game it will surely be expanded when it can but I'm sinking in enough money as it is. But for now, very, VERY happy. Strong in the Force, this one.
36 
 Thumb up
1.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Schlichting
United States
Elk River
Minnesota
flag msg tools
designer
http://www.popebrain.com
badge
Have you seen me?
mbmbmbmbmb
sucrates wrote:
As Rebel, you need to stay hidden, survive and make the turn-marker meet a predestined 'reputation' marker. While the experience itself is very enjoyable, that last end-condition is a bit of a let-down. thumbsdown
Better (expansion idea?) would it've been to trigger an end-story, be it Luke that shoots the emperor, Darth Vader that is won for the Rebels, a sabotaged Death Star crushing into Coruscant thereby destroying the complete base of power or just a general galaxy wide loyalty shift of 1 per system. Perhaps triggering that a turn or two before the now 'fixed' end-condition of 'you win' is reached.


I'd have to agree, this is one of the few minor bummers for me. I have only played the game 3 times now, and against a new opponent every time that has never played the game. When I teach a game, I always try to remember to start out with the goal. It goes something like:

"If you are the Imperial player, you need to find AND destroy the rebel base. If a single rebel ship or ground troop remains on a system, there is a good chance the rebels will move the base, but they'll be running scared at that point. If you are the Rebel player, you need to have a strong reputation, represented by these two cardboard chits being in the same space..." ... struggle to find a way to make that sound cool... fail... move on...

Fortunately, I play with a lot of Star Wars geeks.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Creepy horrocks
Australia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Nice review, star wars forbidden stars replacement
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Conan Meriadoc
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
If the Rebel end game condition seems weak, there's always the option of using a variant rule : you can only end the game when revealing an objective card, if the reputation marker meets or exceeds the turn marker. Makes the Rebel winning condition active rather than passive, which makes it more satisfying.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Sherlock
United States
Anaheim Hills
California
flag msg tools
Admin @ www.cigargeeks.com
mbmbmbmbmb
99 Euros is pretty expensive. However, in the USA, it can normally be found for ~$75, which is not a bank breaker and is much less expensive then GW games and similar in price to games of similar size.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Sherlock
United States
Anaheim Hills
California
flag msg tools
Admin @ www.cigargeeks.com
mbmbmbmbmb
I, personally, like the Rebel victory conditions. I look at this game as an insurgency/ counter insurgency with asymmetrical play style and victory conditions. The Rebels are trying to destabilize the Empire. There should be many paths to this goal, not a specific story based one. The story is in how to get to this point.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Fox
United States
Tampa
Florida
flag msg tools
Fear cannot be banished, but it can be calm and without panic; it can be mitigated by reason and evaluation.
badge
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it.
mbmbmbmbmb
I must be the only one that likes the combat system as it seems to be a common complaint.

I find having a 3 rated leader over a 2 rated one to be a pretty big deal because of the cards. The other side holding cards while you assign damage creates an interesting dilemma out of what would normally be routine.

My only complaint about the game is the rebels have too tough a time producing enough x-wings and y-wings. I heavily favor x-wings to enable the path to destroying the Death Star, so I almost never get to produce a y-wing. I think I'd like to see the rebel base produce two small space units along with the small ground unit, with it forced to be an even split of 1 x-wing and 1 y-wing. The empire might have to get a small advantage somewhere else to avoid tipping the balance scale.

The amount of larger space units the rebels get to produce feels about right.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason B
United States
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with most of this, except the deep pockets thing.

Am I really that out of touch?

I mean, it's $65 at a site advertised here on this site. Is even $75 a lot for a piece of entertainment that you can use for 100+ hours? I see People in the ghetto have iPhone 7's nowadays...so I may not get it. Any big box game will be at least $50, I think. If you are into card games only, then I can see this appearing expensive.

The review is pretty dead on, though. I think anyone disappointed in this, bought it in hype and didn't know what they were getting into. I can see doing that. If you look at the pictures, you may be expected a beer and pretzels Risk. It's certainly not that complex, but combat is not the 100% focus of the game, and that may throw some folks.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stuart Tonge
United Kingdom
Rotherham
South Yorkshire
flag msg tools
mbmb
I like the combat system too. I think it's fine for the scale of the game. The game isn't really about combat and making it too in-depth would surely distract from everything else?

Money? I've played 40+ hours of this game. For £70. That's a good deal.

I do agree with the victory conditions. It's the only slight let down. It's not uncommon for the Rebels to know they've won with an hour left in the game (say two turns left) and all they have to do is sit pretty and wait - an alternate ending would have been nice.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sucrates wrote:


Player count is 2. Don't believe the box.



Oh gosh not this crap again. What's with the Star Wars community hating co-op games? 4 player is fine. It's a lot easier for the empire to keep track of things. I highly suggest it for new players. There is literally no complaint that can be levied against 4 player that can't also be levied against the entire co-op genre.

At least bring up an argument if you're wanting to ridicule the most popular board game genre right now.

So there are only 2 sides. So what? Learn to work as a team and git gud you filthy casuals.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't think hating on the 3-4 player count has anything to do with hating co-op games. I enjoy co-op games, but I would not recommend the 3-4 player game of Rebellion, having played it myself. It feels tacked on to me.

I don't know if I'd go to the point of "never play it", but if I had a group of 3 or 4, it would be low on my list of games I'd want to play, regardless of whether I'm in the mood for co-op/team or competitive.

It's all subjective, of course - some people are going to like it more than others. But one thing I will strongly disagree with is the idea that it was originally made for 3-4 players. Whether it feels "tacked on" or not is going to vary from group to group, but 3-4 players certainly wasn't the main focus of development.

As a 2-player game, I find this game to be excellent. As a 3-4 player game, it's just "ok".
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Terence Lee
United States
Arcadia
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I actually bought this game and haven't gotten it to the table yet, but I've actually been looking forward to playing it 2 vs 2.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug DeMoss
United States
Stillwater
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't entirely agree. Although I enjoy 4-player Rebellion, I wouldn't recommend it for newbies simply because there are more subtleties that crop up as consequences of the changed sequence of play.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
demoss1 wrote:
I don't entirely agree. Although I enjoy 4-player Rebellion, I wouldn't recommend it for newbies simply because there are more subtleties that crop up as consequences of the changed sequence of play.


Maybe I should have specified. A great way to teach two new people is with two experienced players playing against each other in a 4 player game. You get all the same problems you get in other co-op games but it avoids the huge disadvantage that new players get by not knowing the cards.

It's enough to have to teach them the game. Having to teach them all possible cards the opponents could play is just too much.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
arandom Canadian
msg tools
mb
My group has played this game over twenty times. We almost exclusively play with 4 players. It is excellent with four because of the additional complexity added in the assignment phase.

Doubling up on a mission is extra important because it can allow a first turn play of a car that would otherwise be unplayable by the Rebel Admiral.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sigmazero13 wrote:
I don't think hating on the 3-4 player count has anything to do with hating co-op games.


The 3-4 player game is literally co-op. By definition. Two players have to cooperate. co-op is short for cooperate. co-op is just another term for team games. It just also implies you go against a brainless preprogramed set of arbitrary challenges. Not another team. Now what sounds like more fun?

Nobody talks crap at Fury of Dracula or Letters from Whitechappel for being a team game.


Sorry... I kinda get triggered when people talk badly about the 4 player game. I shouldn't. It's just a game after all.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
arandomcanadian1984 wrote:
My group has played this game over twenty times. We almost exclusively play with 4 players. It is excellent with four because of the additional complexity added in the assignment phase.

Doubling up on a mission is extra important because it can allow a first turn play of a car that would otherwise be unplayable by the Rebel Admiral.



This

also having an extra player to keep track of the probe cards is really nice.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel van Tiel
Netherlands
Nijmegen
Gelderland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
David Umstattd wrote:
sucrates wrote:


Player count is 2. Don't believe the box.



Oh gosh not this crap again. What's with the Star Wars community hating co-op games? 4 player is fine. It's a lot easier for the empire to keep track of things. I highly suggest it for new players. There is literally no complaint that can be levied against 4 player that can't also be levied against the entire co-op genre.

At least bring up an argument if you're wanting to ridicule the most popular board game genre right now.

So there are only 2 sides. So what? Learn to work as a team and git gud you filthy casuals.


First off, strong language is not necessary. Let's keep it civil.

Second, glad you like it with 4. To me, I just want to be in control when playing one of the sides, as I'm too deeply engrossed in what is happening that it is hard for me letting parts go out of my control. Being Imperial, the Rebel player is frustration enough for me to have to worry about 'the fleet' or 'the groundtroops' doing the right stuff. As Rebel, life is hard enough already, without having to worry about some critical things potentially going wrong on your own side!

With this game I feel the same way about 4p War of the Ring: it doesn't add to the game, it just makes it less appealing. To me, this is a 2p only experience. The theme is a diametrical opposition: good vs evil, Dark side vs Light side, Imperial vs Rebellion. To me that boils down to 'you vs me'. I WANT to feel that I represent 'all that is good' or 'the consummate evil' as it adds to the theme that much more. And I value this game above all by the theme.

As your conclusion about 'ridicule the most popular board game genre'..
I do enjoy coops. Pandemic, Defenders of the Realm, Arkham Horror, World of Warcraft: The Boardgame (coop variant), Sentinels of the Multiverse and Mistfall being regular favorites I put out on the table. 2p was not an argument against coops, it was an argument to show I find 4p detracts from the theme of this game. I will update my review to reflect that.

Finally, you were clearly triggered by the strong 2p endorsment. It is clear that some are enjoying this as a 4p 2vs2 competitive coop. I'll make sure to also note that in my review. This so people can make an even better judgement on whether they should consider to get this game.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sucrates wrote:
David Umstattd wrote:
sucrates wrote:


Player count is 2. Don't believe the box.



Oh gosh not this crap again. What's with the Star Wars community hating co-op games? 4 player is fine. It's a lot easier for the empire to keep track of things. I highly suggest it for new players. There is literally no complaint that can be levied against 4 player that can't also be levied against the entire co-op genre.

At least bring up an argument if you're wanting to ridicule the most popular board game genre right now.

So there are only 2 sides. So what? Learn to work as a team and git gud you filthy casuals.


First off, strong language is not necessary. Let's keep it civil.


You're joking right? Just making sure.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel van Tiel
Netherlands
Nijmegen
Gelderland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
jasonbaz77 wrote:
I agree with most of this, except the deep pockets thing.

Am I really that out of touch?

I mean, it's $65 at a site advertised here on this site. Is even $75 a lot for a piece of entertainment that you can use for 100+ hours? I see People in the ghetto have iPhone 7's nowadays...so I may not get it. Any big box game will be at least $50, I think. If you are into card games only, then I can see this appearing expensive.

The review is pretty dead on, though. I think anyone disappointed in this, bought it in hype and didn't know what they were getting into. I can see doing that. If you look at the pictures, you may be expected a beer and pretzels Risk. It's certainly not that complex, but combat is not the 100% focus of the game, and that may throw some folks.


Hi Jason,

thanks for your comment about my review. As for the price, 'Euro' equivalent price if I would have to pay in dollars would be $110, almost double your price.

Second, as about anyone on this site, I find boardgames a MUCH better investment as going out, going to the movies, getting a smartphone or basically anything else. However, along that reasoning a pricetag of $500 should be ok, as for 100+ hours you will spend less than $5/hour on something you like, which is cheaper as most other entertainment. I sure hope the gaming industry never moves in THAT direction.

Finally, I'm comparing this to other boardgames. And then, I DO find it a hefty pricetag. Not necessarily for what you get, but if you spend that money, you should be sure that you will enjoy the game. That is what I try to convey. Because of that price-tag, this is not a game you can spend a few bucks on and try if you like it. And not everyone that would be interested in playing this game (think teenagers) will have that money to spend. The real question here is: IS it really better as 2 other games? If so, go ahead. If not, rethink spending money.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sucrates wrote:
David Umstattd wrote:
sucrates wrote:


Player count is 2. Don't believe the box.



Oh gosh not this crap again. What's with the Star Wars community hating co-op games? 4 player is fine. It's a lot easier for the empire to keep track of things. I highly suggest it for new players. There is literally no complaint that can be levied against 4 player that can't also be levied against the entire co-op genre.

At least bring up an argument if you're wanting to ridicule the most popular board game genre right now.

So there are only 2 sides. So what? Learn to work as a team and git gud you filthy casuals.


Second, glad you like it with 4. To me, I just want to be in control when playing one of the sides, as I'm too deeply engrossed in what is happening that it is hard for me letting parts go out of my control. Being Imperial, the Rebel player is frustration enough for me to have to worry about 'the fleet' or 'the groundtroops' doing the right stuff. As Rebel, life is hard enough already, without having to worry about some critical things potentially going wrong on your own side!

With this game I feel the same way about 4p War of the Ring: it doesn't add to the game, it just makes it less appealing. To me, this is a 2p only experience. The theme is a diametrical opposition: good vs evil, Dark side vs Light side, Imperial vs Rebellion. To me that boils down to 'you vs me'. I WANT to feel that I represent 'all that is good' or 'the consummate evil' as it adds to the theme that much more. And I value this game above all by the theme.

As your conclusion about 'ridicule the most popular board game genre'..
I do enjoy coops. Pandemic, Defenders of the Realm, Arkham Horror, World of Warcraft: The Boardgame (coop variant), Sentinels of the Multiverse and Mistfall being regular favorites I put out on the table. 2p was not an argument against coops, it was an argument to show I find 4p detracts from the theme of this game. I will update my review to reflect that.



I'm confused how you can enjoy Coop games and then talk about how you want to be all in control.

Oh dammit... Are you an alpha gamer? D-: Cause you're talking like you're an Alpha gamer.

It's fine to like games where you're all in control of everything and make all the decisions. That's the opposite of coop games though. And it's ok to not like coop games. Lots of people don't. But don't go saying "I like to control everything." and then also say "but I also like coop games" unless you're making the argument that you like different things in different circumstances. In which case you're in no place to argue against 4 player Rebellion as it's identical to a coop game in that mechanic of multiple people controlling one side.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Lewis
United States
Thornton
Colorado
flag msg tools
NFHS Football & Basketball
badge
Dread Our Coming, Suffer Our Presence, Embrace Our Glory (Solonavi War Cry)
mbmbmbmbmb
David Umstattd wrote:
sigmazero13 wrote:
I don't think hating on the 3-4 player count has anything to do with hating co-op games.


The 3-4 player game is literally co-op. By definition. Two players have to cooperate. co-op is short for cooperate. co-op is just another term for team games.

I never said otherwise. It's not an all-or-nothing, as it's possible to like co-op/team games in general, but dislike the way that Rebellion implements it. That's how it is for me - I just feel that the way Rebellion tries to do the team game falls flat, and turns a great game into a mediocre one. For me, it's much better as a 1v1 game.

All personal opinion, of course, but for me, it has nothing to do with it being co-op/team or not, just that for me, it's clunky and less fun that way.

But I think we're straying from the point of the review. This game is still an excellent game, and whether some people like it better as a 1v1 game, or as a team game, it doesn't matter - as long as people are enjoying it, that's the key.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel van Tiel
Netherlands
Nijmegen
Gelderland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
David Umstattd wrote:
I'm confused how you can enjoy Coop games and then talk about how you want to be all in control.

Oh dammit... Are you an alpha gamer? D-: Cause you're talking like you're an Alpha gamer.

It's fine to like games where you're all in control of everything and make all the decisions. That's the opposite of coop games though.


Has it occurred to you that some people actually prefer this NOT to be a coop? In other games, theme might be less strong and you might all be individuals preventing a common doom. Fine by me. I can imagine a very fine cooperative Star Wars game with everyone playing an iconic character doing all sorts of teamwork in order to prevent bad stuff from happening. Oh wait, that game already exists: "Star Wars: Imperial Assault", which is an EXCELLENT game of itself.

Here, I don't work towards a common goal, I'm ruling the galaxy! And if I'm impersonating an evil mastermind ruling the galaxy.. of course I don't want to share power. And as a Rebel, I find things to be too dire to 'enjoy' the intricacies of teamplay as well.

I stand with Scott Lewis here, agree fully to his post. We're straying from the point of the review. The game is so good, it calls upon emotions. Strong emotions. That point alone is something worth of note. I'm happy you can enjoy the game with 4. Please be happy that other people prefer 2 instead. As long as we're all enjoying the game, that is what matters.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Fox
United States
Tampa
Florida
flag msg tools
Fear cannot be banished, but it can be calm and without panic; it can be mitigated by reason and evaluation.
badge
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it.
mbmbmbmbmb
The 4 player game's minor changes actually have a huge effect on the game, making it feel different than the 2 player version. The biggest change is in how the turn order works, with each side getting double moves.

Adding friction on each side (teammates with slightly different agendas) is quite "historical" for a strategic game. More detailed games like Empire of the Sun have rules built in to simulate the fact that different organizations on the same side often got in each other's way while perusing their own goals.

I can understand someone not liking the 4 player game, but the rules enabling it are well done and do make the game different enough to make it worth while trying them out.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thomas with Subtrendy
msg tools
mbmbmb
What sucates said: "I don't like this game as a co-op game."

What everyone heard, apparently: "I hate all co-op games."


Let's all just take a minute to calm down.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.