$20.00
$30.00
$5.00
$15.00
Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
32 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Star Wars: Rebellion» Forums » General

Subject: 5 games down - very good game but a few issues. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
J Vomkrieg
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
So I really enjoy the game, but i'm seeking clarity on a few things that have bugged me with it, just little things, but they sorta irk me. I won 4 of the 5 games, so this certainly isn't someone moaning about things being OP because they lost

1.) I don't think i've ever played a game where I missed so many rules on our first play-throughs, and the flicking back and forth between the two rule books seems awkward. This is the 2nd FFG game ive got with the 2 rulebook system, and the same thing happened last time.

2.) Big battles seem a bit awkward and slow. with special dice, multiple hits, card play, leaders, picking up new cards, assigning hits, countering hits. It's very very busy, and probably a little too busy for what it is. And, you also have to swap between Space and ground theaters midstream, recounting cards, dice etc. its a lot going on in a big fight.

And all that guff also means that when you drop your big army on one dude, you still have to assemble dice, draw cards, etc etc. I feel that it could have gotten away with special dice or cards, but both makes it a bit clunky.

3.)Leader drawing, the fact it must be one of the dudes you draw can divert you away from a game plan you had. Basically, you can be holding a bunch of cool Luke cards, and never get the chance to play the guy thanks to the leader drawing mechanic.

4.) Rebels place models in the build phase first...... This one i really don't understand. I don't get why the rebels have to show their hand with deployment before the empire. Clearly its helped balance the game, but it feels seriously wrong that the Empire can plop down a Super Star destroyer after seeing where the rebel fleet is.

5.) A system is only controlled if you have both space and ground. In 2 games, the following happened. AT-AT and assorted troops in the rebel base, Rebel base is fine because there is an X-wing in orbit, so they relocate. Massive pile of troops on one Imperial planet, but leader can't be rescued as their is a tie fighter in orbit. That just seemed off to me, and it was part of my opponents strategy, leave 1 little thing in orbit to block ninja actions. I started doing it as well, and it just felt "gamey".

6.) Only drawing 2 missions a turn means your strategy has to be adaptive and reactionary a lot of the time, and it really does come down to luck as to what is in your toolbox. If the Empire is capturing, carbonizing, interrogating and luring your characters and you don't get any rescue cards, too bad (for the record, in that game, i was the one who was playing Empire).

It's fine as long as you know you will likely never have the right tools to do what you want, but instead have to do the best of "what you can". Same thing as the leader drawing, as you can have a bunch of characters you don't have special cards. If you opponent draws better than you in that regard, it can be quite swingy as virtually unblockable hits come in. Compare to other card driven games, and you normally have more options to play around with in your turn.

So yeah, great game, very enjoyable, but just a few pain points that bug me.




4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kristo Vaher
Estonia
Tallinn
Harjumaa
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It seems a matter of taste, I could not find any points I really agree with :/

1) Didn't have this issue at all, it's not a complicated game in my opinion. I didn't even have to turn to reference book.

2) I disagree. Combat plays a huge role in Star Wars, making it quick and simple takes away the epic nature of the game. I find it sad that someone always complains when a game about war has slow combat. It's not slow and it is thematic. I find it important paetyof the game.

3) This also makes sure it makes you think outside the box. Rebellion happens if Luke was found or not.

4) It adds to claustrophobia of the Rebel side. Rebels have a secret deployment area already - the base. So getting even bigger deployment advantage as a guerilla warfare group makes no thematic sense. In the movies the Imperials constantly outmanouvered Rebels in large scale strategy. Without these force heroics, Imperials would have won.

5) I don't mind this either. One TIE Fighter is not ONE TIE Fighter. It's a large group that causes a lot of mess in terms of suppression.

6) Again, this makes you think outside the box. It makes the game more tactical and repayable. I've had a game with no Death Star cards and it was still very close
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Vomkrieg
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I wasn't really looking for a point by point "nah, your wrong" response, but cheers. These were things that made me stop and think "hmmm, don't know if i like that" during the game and seeing if we had got them right. Nothing more.

I still really really like the game. I'd probably rate it 2nd after WOTR as far as mini strategy games go. I've scored it a 9 and will certainly play more games to get a better feel for it. These are simply some minor issues I had after 5 plays.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Larouche
Canada
Longueuil
Quebec
flag msg tools
Melting souls with cuteness since 2007
badge
Lovin' N-16
mbmbmbmbmb
Your number 5 is the reason i am not interested in those big complex games as much as i used to.

The first few games are always awesome... then you find flaws in various mechanics, or in their interactions, and then you start to "gimmick the system". As soon as i see that occuring, the game loses most of it's interest to me.

This process occured with me for Twilight Imperium 3, Starcraft: tbg, Doom: tbg, Imperial Assault, Agricola and many, many more.

This is why i now prefer streamlined and less complex games. I found that less complex and streamlined rules does not need to equal "lighter" in strategy and tactics.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Angelus Seniores
Belgium
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
5) isnt an issue, you only have a limited number of actions and using these to move single ships to block a system isnt your most likely choice of action. the rebels often have few ships that dispersing them wont acomplish much. and once you know this is your opponents tactic, leaving a ship of your own will easily stop this.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evan Duly
Canada
Langley
BC
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
deedob wrote:
Your number 5 is the reason i am not interested in those big complex games as much as i used to.

The first few games are always awesome... then you find flaws in various mechanics, or in their interactions, and then you start to "gimmick the system". As soon as i see that occuring, the game loses most of it's interest to me.

This process occured with me for Twilight Imperium 3, Starcraft: tbg, Doom: tbg, Imperial Assault, Agricola and many, many more.

This is why i now prefer streamlined and less complex games. I found that less complex and streamlined rules does not need to equal "lighter" in strategy and tactics.


Just curious, how do you "gimmick the system" in Agricola?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Vomkrieg
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Angelsenior wrote:
5) isnt an issue, you only have a limited number of actions and using these to move single ships to block a system isnt your most likely choice of action. the rebels often have few ships that dispersing them wont acomplish much. and once you know this is your opponents tactic, leaving a ship of your own will easily stop this.


Um, it wouldn't be using a move up. Due to the "only 2 units per system" deployment rule, its really easy to end up with 1 random tie fighter in a system. Or when you move away, to leave 1 unit behind.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Miller
United States
Saint Charles
Missouri
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb

Ithkrall wrote:
... and the flicking back and forth between the two rule books seems awkward. This is the 2nd FFG game ive got with the 2 rulebook system, and the same thing happened last time.

Not to be snarky, but the best advice is to just simply not do this! Use the Learn to Play book for your first game if you must, but after that, put it in the box and keep it there. From then on, use only the Rules Reference book.

Every rule is in the Rules Reference, and given its organization, makes each rule much easier to look up. So again, for your first game, use the LtP to get yourself used to the flow of the game & turn structure. After that, player aid cards provide the same (as does the Rules Reference, for that matter).

For the remainder of your games, the Rules Reference is the only resource you need. This is why I personally LOVE the new FFG system of two rulebooks!

9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Vomkrieg
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
bgm1961 wrote:

Ithkrall wrote:
... and the flicking back and forth between the two rule books seems awkward. This is the 2nd FFG game ive got with the 2 rulebook system, and the same thing happened last time.

Not to be snarky, but the best advice is to just simply not do this! Use the Learn to Play book for your first game if you must, but after that, put it in the box and keep it there. From then on, use only the Rules Reference book.

Every rule is in the Rules Reference, and given its organization, makes each rule much easier to look up. So again, for your first game, use the LtP to get yourself used to the flow of the game & turn structure. After that, player aid cards provide the same (as does the Rules Reference, for that matter).

For the remainder of your games, the Rules Reference is the only resource you need. This is why I personally LOVE the new FFG system of two rulebooks!



not snarky at all, that's actually pretty good advice. I'll chuck the other book in the box fopr the next game and try it(except the back page maybe, as that turn order sheet is handy)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ithkrall wrote:
bgm1961 wrote:

Ithkrall wrote:
... and the flicking back and forth between the two rule books seems awkward. This is the 2nd FFG game ive got with the 2 rulebook system, and the same thing happened last time.

Not to be snarky, but the best advice is to just simply not do this! Use the Learn to Play book for your first game if you must, but after that, put it in the box and keep it there. From then on, use only the Rules Reference book.

Every rule is in the Rules Reference, and given its organization, makes each rule much easier to look up. So again, for your first game, use the LtP to get yourself used to the flow of the game & turn structure. After that, player aid cards provide the same (as does the Rules Reference, for that matter).

For the remainder of your games, the Rules Reference is the only resource you need. This is why I personally LOVE the new FFG system of two rulebooks!



There is a pretty good reference sheet someone uploaded to the files section that solves that. Check it out.


not snarky at all, that's actually pretty good advice. I'll chuck the other book in the box fopr the next game and try it(except the back page maybe, as that turn order sheet is handy)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Larouche
Canada
Longueuil
Quebec
flag msg tools
Melting souls with cuteness since 2007
badge
Lovin' N-16
mbmbmbmbmb
EvanDevan wrote:
deedob wrote:
Your number 5 is the reason i am not interested in those big complex games as much as i used to.

The first few games are always awesome... then you find flaws in various mechanics, or in their interactions, and then you start to "gimmick the system". As soon as i see that occuring, the game loses most of it's interest to me.

This process occured with me for Twilight Imperium 3, Starcraft: tbg, Doom: tbg, Imperial Assault, Agricola and many, many more.

This is why i now prefer streamlined and less complex games. I found that less complex and streamlined rules does not need to equal "lighter" in strategy and tactics.


Just curious, how do you "gimmick the system" in Agricola?


Just an example... in the final turn, you wouldn't get a sheep, because you already have 1 and getting a second one doesn't give you points. You also would not take a veggie, because you are already maxed out and have 4 points. Instead, you'll get a wheat because you would overcome a threshold to get one more point.
At this point, you're not trying to build the best farm (which is the goal of the game). You're instead playing the mechanics of the game to maximize the number of points you'll get at the end.

Likewise, it's often more effective to add more rooms to your house and THEN upgrade it than upgrade it first and then build more rooms. Because doing the former takes less time than the second option. This is completely illogical... as building the room twice taking overall less time than just building it once with the proper materials.
This is not playing the game within it's spirit and/or theme. It's instead an exercise in mathematical efficiency.

You also shouldn't upgrade your house at the beginning of the game. You should wait for as late as possible to do it. Because upgrading your house doesn't do anything outside give points in the end. Spend your resources doing other things which will benefit you during the entire game at first. Nearer the end, THEN you upgrade your house as you have less time left to benefit from long term investments.
This is another "not playing to build the best farm" and more playing a meta-game about tinkering with the game's mechanics to get the most of arbitrary points within an arbitrary time limit.

This is what i call "gimmicking the system".

Lighter games usually don't have that problem as they revolve around just one or two key mechanism. For example, there's no gimmicking the game itself in For Sale or Carcassonne.
However, taking the For Sale or Carcassonne examples, playing with friends and family, i ALWAYS win at those games (or i win something like 9 times out of 10). So while luck can play a factor, there is a strong level of depth there that's not apparent at first. Length of play and rules complexity is not related to depth of play.

meeple
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
deedob wrote:
EvanDevan wrote:
deedob wrote:
Your number 5 is the reason i am not interested in those big complex games as much as i used to.

The first few games are always awesome... then you find flaws in various mechanics, or in their interactions, and then you start to "gimmick the system". As soon as i see that occuring, the game loses most of it's interest to me.

This process occured with me for Twilight Imperium 3, Starcraft: tbg, Doom: tbg, Imperial Assault, Agricola and many, many more.

This is why i now prefer streamlined and less complex games. I found that less complex and streamlined rules does not need to equal "lighter" in strategy and tactics.


Just curious, how do you "gimmick the system" in Agricola?


Just an example... in the final turn, you wouldn't get a sheep, because you already have 1 and getting a second one doesn't give you points. You also would not take a veggie, because you are already maxed out and have 4 points. Instead, you'll get a wheat because you would overcome a threshold to get one more point.
At this point, you're not trying to build the best farm (which is the goal of the game). You're instead playing the mechanics of the game to maximize the number of points you'll get at the end.

Likewise, it's often more effective to add more rooms to your house and THEN upgrade it than upgrade it first and then build more rooms. Because doing the former takes less time than the second option. This is completely illogical... as building the room twice taking overall less time than just building it once with the proper materials.
This is not playing the game within it's spirit and/or theme. It's instead an exercise in mathematical efficiency.

You also shouldn't upgrade your house at the beginning of the game. You should wait for as late as possible to do it. Because upgrading your house doesn't do anything outside give points in the end. Spend your resources doing other things which will benefit you during the entire game at first. Nearer the end, THEN you upgrade your house as you have less time left to benefit from long term investments.
This is another "not playing to build the best farm" and more playing a meta-game about tinkering with the game's mechanics to get the most of arbitrary points within an arbitrary time limit.

This is what i call "gimmicking the system".

Lighter games usually don't have that problem as they revolve around just one or two key mechanism. For example, there's no gimmicking the game itself in For Sale or Carcassonne.
However, taking the For Sale or Carcassonne examples, playing with friends and family, i ALWAYS win at those games (or i win something like 9 times out of 10). So while luck can play a factor, there is a strong level of depth there that's not apparent at first. Length of play and rules complexity is not related to depth of play.

meeple


I know you were answering the question about agricula, but I fail to see the relation or parallels to SW:R?!

Leaving ground and space units behind as the empire to secure a subjugated world makes a whole lot of thematic sense, also you are giving something up to do this (the units). the ground units on the ground are susceptible to a local uprising, but if the system is blockaded that makes it harder.
The blockade works just the same from the rebel point of view. You got a fleet of X-wings hovering above your planet, you are probably not going to produce any units to the Empire.

I really think this is foremost thematic, and second adds a bunch of strategy to the game.

The only point on your list that makes sense to me is the question regarding why the rebels deploy first, and the answer to that is cause it helps the balance and the consistency of the rules (the rebels always go first except in setup)
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug DeMoss
United States
Stillwater
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
bgm1961 wrote:

Ithkrall wrote:
... and the flicking back and forth between the two rule books seems awkward. This is the 2nd FFG game ive got with the 2 rulebook system, and the same thing happened last time.

Not to be snarky, but the best advice is to just simply not do this! Use the Learn to Play book for your first game if you must, but after that, put it in the box and keep it there. From then on, use only the Rules Reference book.

Every rule is in the Rules Reference, and given its organization, makes each rule much easier to look up. So again, for your first game, use the LtP to get yourself used to the flow of the game & turn structure. After that, player aid cards provide the same (as does the Rules Reference, for that matter).

For the remainder of your games, the Rules Reference is the only resource you need. This is why I personally LOVE the new FFG system of two rulebooks!



The main exception is that if you want to look up who does what in a four-player game in the Rules Reference, good luck. It's there but scattered all over the place.
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
Ithkrall wrote:
3.)Leader drawing, the fact it must be one of the dudes you draw can divert you away from a game plan you had. Basically, you can be holding a bunch of cool Luke cards, and never get the chance to play the guy thanks to the leader drawing mechanic.

This is a pretty exaggerated viewpoint. It's not possible to have a "bunch of cool Luke cards" without having the chance to have Luke. There is only ONE mission card that has Luke's picture on it (Seek Yoda), and you don't have to have Luke to use it (though it is obviously better with Luke), and only ONE objective that does anything different with Luke (Return of the Jedi), and in that case, the points, I think, are far more important than the possibility of killing the leader (and you don't need Luke for the points).

Sure, there are a couple of action cards with Luke's picture on it - but having either or both of those in-hand means that you had the opportunity to take Luke by definition!

I think the game is designed rather well in that while some cards are boosted by certain leaders, those boosts aren't so prolific that you have to depend on getting a specific leader.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thomas with Subtrendy
msg tools
mbmbmb
Regarding #5, I think it's actually very thematic. Consider two examples from Star Wars canon-

Example A: Before the ground invasion of Naboo in Episode I, the planet was contested. The Queen held the planet's surface, but the Trade Federation's blockade had them in a chokehold- so, really, neither side really fully held the planet.

Example B: During the Battle of Hoth, Imperial troops decimated the Rebel ground forces, but transports escaping prevented a complete Imperial victory (as in, the complete destruction of the Rebel forces stationed there). So, even though the Rebels did eventually retreat, the Empire couldn't really be said to have had the planet until they were gone.

Example C: Almost a meta-acknowledgment of this theme, the Battle of Endor required that the Rebels win the fight at the Shield Generator and the fight against the Death Star to claim victory. Losing either of these (very intertwined) fights would prevent a victory.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Matthews
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hey J,

I'm on your side 100% with the combat, #3. Having combat in a game that is smooth and intuitive is absolutely not mutually exclusive with epicness. Frankly, if they had simply used standard dice with numbers on it instead of the symbols this would be already make combat more accessible. And if they had included the dice results table on player sheets or the board it would help as well.

Neither of those changes would "dumb down" combat or take away from the epicness, but would make combat (and missions) suddenly easier for people to get. Icons in games are great of they work as shorthand; but when icons are used to mean two different things in different situations then defauting to numbers is better because people are already used to using numbers.

E
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
All Hail Lelouch
mbmbmbmbmb
Ganybyte wrote:
Hey J,

I'm on your side 100% with the combat, #3. Having combat in a game that is smooth and intuitive is absolutely not mutually exclusive with epicness. Frankly, if they had simply used standard dice with numbers on it instead of the symbols this would be already make combat more accessible. And if they had included the dice results table on player sheets or the board it would help as well.

Neither of those changes would "dumb down" combat or take away from the epicness, but would make combat (and missions) suddenly easier for people to get. Icons in games are great of they work as shorthand; but when icons are used to mean two different things in different situations then defauting to numbers is better because people are already used to using numbers.

E


Oh goodness no. By using standard dice you have to consult charts and graphs to see what numbers are "hits" and what are "misses" using custom dice is a lot more intuitive and easy to pick up.

The only problem is not with the combat system but with the fact the force symbol is used for totally different things in combat as opposed to missions. It's annoying but eventually you remember the difference.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Chiddicks
msg tools
If the game was a few dollars more expensive it could have different dice for missions and combat.

The mission dice should be all one colour and have numbers on them - a two, 3 ones and 2 blanks.

I may even try to source 10 dice with these numbers.

This leaves the special dice for combat, where the colours and symbols actually mean something
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
KinginAmber wrote:
If the game was a few dollars more expensive it could have different dice for missions and combat.

The mission dice should be all one colour and have numbers on them - a two, 3 ones and 2 blanks.

I may even try to source 10 dice with these numbers.

This leaves the special dice for combat, where the colours and symbols actually mean something


I think you are over thinking it.

The dice are fun, I like them, the symbols are not complicated, especially compared to the tons of stuff you need to remember
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Hope
United States
Woodside
California
flag msg tools
Likes: Mountains, Tundra Turn-offs: Serpents, Marsh
mbmbmbmbmb
You know what bugs me about this game?

The damage markers. I have no idea why they thought we would need ~40 damage markers.

EDIT: Grr, someone told me that if I just left the subject line alone it wouldn't show up, but for some reason I'm still the doofus whose subject line always shows up.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold G
Poland
Bytom
flag msg tools
stephenhope wrote:
EDIT: Grr, someone told me that if I just left the subject line alone it wouldn't show up, but for some reason I'm still the doofus whose subject line always shows up.


Don't worry, it will always show up immediately after you submit a post. That's because after you click "Submit", it links directly to your post.

If you go back to this thread in any way that won't reference your post in the address line (for example: simply clicking on link with thread name at the top), the subject line disappears.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Cheng
Taiwan
Taipei City
n/a
flag msg tools
mb
stephenhope wrote:
You know what bugs me about this game?

The damage markers. I have no idea why they thought we would need ~40 damage markers.

EDIT: Grr, someone told me that if I just left the subject line alone it wouldn't show up, but for some reason I'm still the doofus whose subject line always shows up.


They are actually pretty helpful when the Empire is doing their building phase. I use the damage marker to mark the system that I had produced.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
All Hail Lelouch
mbmbmbmbmb
eunoia wrote:
stephenhope wrote:
You know what bugs me about this game?

The damage markers. I have no idea why they thought we would need ~40 damage markers.

EDIT: Grr, someone told me that if I just left the subject line alone it wouldn't show up, but for some reason I'm still the doofus whose subject line always shows up.


They are actually pretty helpful when the Empire is doing their building phase. I use the damage marker to mark the system that I had produced.


And then you remove them when you deploy to a system to keep track of which systems have placed units already. It's really a great system that I'm surprised isn't suggested in the rulebook.

As for in combat it's important to just assign hits to different units with the chips other than dice. Makes it easier to track.

What I would have liked would be for the damage chips to be red and black so you can draw the number and type of damage you rolled and assign it as you see fit. But that gets complicated with wild dice. Maybe the system they have now is fine.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Cheng
Taiwan
Taipei City
n/a
flag msg tools
mb
Hey, that's a good system. for now I assign the unit on the System's name, so I know how many and what I'd assigned in case I change my mind and had to switch around a bit. After finalize, I move the unit to their respective theater.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Vomkrieg
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Played another game after thinking this stuff over using Tabletop simulator with a friend online.

Oddly enough, that solved problem 2 for me, as I could conjure as many dice as needed. Rare that an online version of play would be so much smoother. I think what I really want is a 2nd set of dice to speed up play.

We debated 4, and agree that its needed for game balance. So I can handle that, even if it feels wrong because lumbering Imperial industry should be slower than sneaky rebel deployment. But we thought it over, and having the rebels place 2nd would be massive as they move first in the next phase.

Point 6 I solved for myself by choosing not to do some missions as they came up. In fact, due to various effects I only used 3 of the core missions on turn 1 and 2 (1, i moved a fleet. 2, I moved a fleet and han recruited chewy). By turn 3 I had plenty of options which made me feel better. I think in future, unless a card is an absolute "must play" on turn 1, I will continue to do this. Its given me way more flex in the mid game.

Point 3 still irked me during the game. As I was in the situation where both action cards i drew were people i had, so I was forced to take the next draw with no choice. I almost wish that in that situation, you could recruit anyone, but take the cool action card for the guy you already have.

Point 1 has been solved. The quick play book didn't leave the box.

Point 5, now we have the handle on it is less frustrating. But both of us are gaming this to a small extent. I think our issues were, at the time, that we had both pulled off moves that didn't take it into account, and the net result was flat (like the time i guessed where the base was and sent veers in, only to have 1 x-wing escape and for the rebel to move his base next turn)
1 
 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.