Recommend
9 
 Thumb up
 Hide
41 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Star Wars: Rebellion – Rise of the Empire» Forums » News

Subject: Rules Available rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Robb Minneman
United States
Tacoma
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Jackasses? You let a whole column get stalled and strafed on account of a couple of jackasses? What the hell's the matter with you?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Go to town:

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2017/8/10/a-rebel...
9 
 Thumb up
0.80
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Running
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Anyone else notice how the example for playing one of the new Objective cards (Raid Imperial Factory) is actually impossible?

I thought it was kinda funny.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrii Chabykin
United States
San Jose
California
flag msg tools
mb
Which means it should hit the shelves soon.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robb Minneman
United States
Tacoma
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Jackasses? You let a whole column get stalled and strafed on account of a couple of jackasses? What the hell's the matter with you?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chabster wrote:
Which means it should hit the shelves soon.


Rules for Rebellion were released 10 days before the game was available.

Of course, ten days from now is a Saturday. So it might be a little more or a little less. But probably not exactly ten days.
 
 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)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm going to guess the release will coincide with Gencon.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel K
msg tools
robbbbbb wrote:
Chabster wrote:
Which means it should hit the shelves soon.


Rules for Rebellion were released 10 days before the game was available.

Of course, ten days from now is a Saturday.

Ten days from now is actually a Sunday.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Meng
msg tools
I couldn't help but notice the rather glaring omission from the Rebel starting unit deployment rules. You can still deploy to a neutral system, but they forgot to add an exception for the DSUC system.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Meng
msg tools
Some other things that are interesting:

The change to the auto-destruct rules for structures is interesting. Obviously this was made because of the Golan Arms Turret, which can attack opposing units if it survives. Would've been silly for it to just blow up automatically if all non-structure units were to disappear.

However, this has implications for the other structures as well, namely the Shield Bunker and Shield Generator.

With the Shield Bunker, that's one more round that it survives, so if you came in with a space force as well, and the Shield Bunker is keeping a DS or DSUC safe in the system, having it survive an extra round (assuming it had other ground units defending it) could be make or break for the Rebels. Of course, the more logical play would be to attack with ground first, then attack with space, but in certain situations, that might not be viable.

As for the Shield Generator, it means you get one more round to take back a tactic, possibly even one that could finish off any opposing ground units, allowing the Generator to survive.

Another thing that I found interesting was the rule about preventing damage with tactic abilities. Instead of removing or preventing damage that was assigned (like in the base game), you instead simply reduce the total damage that the attacker rolls, but before they get to assign it, so they still have complete knowledge about what they can potentially destroy, barring the fact that the other player (if they're defending) could still roll sabers to remove that damage. That really seems to put the attacker even further in a hole.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jared Trisciuzzi
United States
Riverside
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
One more thing to add to the list of interesting changes:

It seems the defender has a slight advantage during the first round of space and ground combat. If I recall the regular rules right, the attacker resolves their dice first...

1. The attacker rolls 1 saber side on a die but since there is no damage for them to remove (1st round of combat), it's a dead die. So they continue and distribute their hits on the defender.

2. The defender rolls and gets a saber side. Since he (most likely) has damage to remove that die can be used.

3. During the 2nd round of combat and on is when the attacker has the opportunity to use his saber sides to remove damage.

Please correct me if I'm missing something here but I think it's a neat way to give the defender a slight, initial advantage. Could make a big difference in even fights on smaller scales. Might be an unintentional side effect but I kinda like it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
KerenskyTheRed wrote:
One more thing to add to the list of interesting changes:

It seems the defender has a slight advantage during the first round of space and ground combat. If I recall the regular rules right, the attacker resolves their dice first...

1. The attacker rolls 1 saber side on a die but since there is no damage for them to remove (1st round of combat), it's a dead die. So they continue and distribute their hits on the defender.

2. The defender rolls and gets a saber side. Since he (most likely) has damage to remove that die can be used.

3. During the 2nd round of combat and on is when the attacker has the opportunity to use his saber sides to remove damage.

Please correct me if I'm missing something here but I think it's a neat way to give the defender a slight, initial advantage. Could make a big difference in even fights on smaller scales. Might be an unintentional side effect but I kinda like it.


You are correct,
But I wouldn't call it slight.
 
 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)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would. I think people are making a bigger deal out of it than it will be in practice.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
All Hail Lelouch
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
The new starting unit setup looks interesting. You have to have both players use the alternate setup right? You can't have empire choose original and rebels choose alternate or something?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
David Umstattd wrote:
The new starting unit setup looks interesting. You have to have both players use the alternate setup right? You can't have empire choose original and rebels choose alternate or something?


no it doesn't seem that way.
I can't help but feel like the rebels got the short end of the stick. their ability to attack a star destroyer has all but diminished. I really thought (up until the last few weeks when info came out) that they would start with 1 frigate to emulate that they had that in the movie, and possibly even more fighters (like movie).

I guess it is balanced, trust corey we will
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold G
Poland
Bytom
flag msg tools
Avatar
I don't think the so-called "attacker's advantage" is really one of the core ideas that needs to be preserved. It's rather "the potential for Rebels to perform hit-and-run attacks even if outnumbered".

Besides, we don't even know full context yet, i.e. all abilities on tactic cards. However, just to give one example, ability to switch the order of dice resolution until the end of combat is a secondary ability, so relatively easy to play.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold G
Poland
Bytom
flag msg tools
Avatar
bigfomlof wrote:
Anyone else notice how the example for playing one of the new Objective cards (Raid Imperial Factory) is actually impossible?

I thought it was kinda funny.

Not sure what you mean? 2 Vanguards destroy 1 AT-AT, thus winning a battle.


trekkienz wrote:
I couldn't help but notice the rather glaring omission from the Rebel starting unit deployment rules. You can still deploy to a neutral system, but they forgot to add an exception for the DSUC system.

Yup, this along with lack of explicit rules for Shield Bunkers in destroyed systems are two things I noticed within a few moments from reading the rulebook leaked in Dice Tower video. Discussed elsewhere and everyone involved (all two of them) agreed it's just a proofreading mistake, but it's still quite weird for FFG to not immediately notice something that is hardly an edge case.


trekkienz wrote:
The change to the auto-destruct rules for structures is interesting.

Structure vs. structure battles might look interesting, especially if they won't involve Golan Turrets. If one side won't manage to destroy the other with tactic card(s) during that one round, then I guess it's automatic destruction of both? laugh
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Meng
msg tools
Perf wrote:
bigfomlof wrote:
Anyone else notice how the example for playing one of the new Objective cards (Raid Imperial Factory) is actually impossible?

I thought it was kinda funny.

Not sure what you mean? 2 Vanguards destroy 1 AT-AT, thus winning a battle.


Mustafar has no square resource icon, so the objective in the example can't legally be played.

Perf wrote:
trekkienz wrote:
The change to the auto-destruct rules for structures is interesting.

Structure vs. structure battles might look interesting, especially if they won't involve Golan Turrets. If one side won't manage to destroy the other with tactic card(s) during that one round, then I guess it's automatic destruction of both? laugh


It would certainly be interesting. Sadly, however, there's no legal way for opposing structures to enter battle together.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold G
Poland
Bytom
flag msg tools
Avatar
trekkienz wrote:
Mustafar has no square resource icon, so the objective in the example can't legally be played.

Hmm, I see Sullust in the article.

trekkienz wrote:
It would certainly be interesting. Sadly, however, there's no legal way for opposing structures to enter battle together.

Off the top of my head, from easiest to hardest (most of them involve dropping a unit into a hidden Rebel base's system): Public Uprising, Oversee Project, Imperial Might, Base Defenses...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Perf wrote:
trekkienz wrote:
Mustafar has no square resource icon, so the objective in the example can't legally be played.

Hmm, I see Sullust in the article.

trekkienz wrote:
It would certainly be interesting. Sadly, however, there's no legal way for opposing structures to enter battle together.

Off the top of my head, from easiest to hardest (most of them involve dropping a unit into a hidden Rebel base's system): Public Uprising, Oversee Project, Imperial Might, Base Defenses...


Actually possibly the easiest way is to play Secret Facility


this could be pretty useful for the Empire to ensure the rebels don't score the 3 structures in 1 system objective.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Meng
msg tools
Perf wrote:
trekkienz wrote:
Mustafar has no square resource icon, so the objective in the example can't legally be played.

Hmm, I see Sullust in the article.


Ha, they must've seen the mistake and changed it. It was Mustafar previously.

Perf wrote:
trekkienz wrote:
It would certainly be interesting. Sadly, however, there's no legal way for opposing structures to enter battle together.

Off the top of my head, from easiest to hardest (most of them involve dropping a unit into a hidden Rebel base's system): Public Uprising, Oversee Project, Imperial Might, Base Defenses...


Fair enough, although Base Defenses wouldn't trigger a battle unless the base was already revealed, and it would be impossible for the Imperial player to get a structure there once it is revealed, so that wouldn't work. However, I can see how the others can work now with the expansion... and a very awful Rebel player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold G
Poland
Bytom
flag msg tools
Avatar
Yeah, this won't be too frequent.

Even with Secret Facility, you get it in the first 4 game rounds and you don't know the card is coming, so you will have limited possibilities for the choice of probe.

Base Defenses would be a little complicated:
- drop Bunker into hidden Rebel base first (with Oversee Project for example),
- after combat we have Rebel space units and Bunker in revealed base,
- reveal Base Defenses.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Umstattd
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
All Hail Lelouch
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Perf wrote:
bigfomlof wrote:



[q="trekkienz"]I couldn't help but notice the rather glaring omission from the Rebel starting unit deployment rules. You can still deploy to a neutral system, but they forgot to add an exception for the DSUC system.

Yup, this along with lack of explicit rules for Shield Bunkers in destroyed systems are two things I noticed within a few moments from reading the rulebook leaked in Dice Tower video. Discussed elsewhere and everyone involved (all two of them) agreed it's just a proofreading mistake, but it's still quite weird for FFG to not immediately notice something that is hardly an edge case.



Don't the base rules say the rebels can do their starting deployment to the rebel base +any system that does not contain imperial units? Now I wanna go check.

But I'm lazy tho...
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)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
David Umstattd wrote:
Perf wrote:
bigfomlof wrote:



[q="trekkienz"]I couldn't help but notice the rather glaring omission from the Rebel starting unit deployment rules. You can still deploy to a neutral system, but they forgot to add an exception for the DSUC system.

Yup, this along with lack of explicit rules for Shield Bunkers in destroyed systems are two things I noticed within a few moments from reading the rulebook leaked in Dice Tower video. Discussed elsewhere and everyone involved (all two of them) agreed it's just a proofreading mistake, but it's still quite weird for FFG to not immediately notice something that is hardly an edge case.



Don't the base rules say the rebels can do their starting deployment to the rebel base +any system that does not contain imperial units? Now I wanna go check.

But I'm lazy tho...

The rules say "He can place these units on the “Rebel Base” space and/or any one Rebel or neutral system." A neutral system is one with no Rebel or Imperial Loyalty or Subjugation. By definition, this includes all remote systems, regardless of presence.

However, in the base game, the Empire couldn't start out deployed in a remote system anyway, so that part was not a problem.

Regardless, I'm sure the ruling will be that the Rebels cannot deploy to the DSUC system
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
- -
Poland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Place Starting Units and Loyalty: After placing starting loyalty
during step 8 of setup, players must agree on whether to use
the starting unit list from the base game or the Rise of the Empire
starting units (see next column).

The obvious question is: what to do if players cannot do that? Which side has the decisive voice here? Rules don't explain that at all.

Looking solely at units, for me it's quite clear that the Empire player/team is a trading side here thus the choice should belong to it. However, depending on results and preferences, sooner or later this will lead to excluding the worse option, whatever it could be... Perhaps the best way is to choose a starting set of units randomly if needed, using mission cards similarly as described for choosing mission card sets.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derry Salewski
United States
Augusta
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
I'm only happy when it rains...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cyb3k wrote:
Quote:
Place Starting Units and Loyalty: After placing starting loyalty
during step 8 of setup, players must agree on whether to use
the starting unit list from the base game or the Rise of the Empire
starting units (see next column).

The obvious question is: what to do if players cannot do that? Which side has the decisive voice here? Rules don't explain that at all.

Looking solely at units, for me it's quite clear that the Empire player/team is a trading side here thus the choice should belong to it. However, depending on results and preferences, sooner or later this will lead to excluding the worse option, whatever it could be... Perhaps the best way is to choose a starting set of units randomly if needed, using mission cards similarly as described for choosing mission card sets.


it's just telling you to decide if you want to play with the expansion or not.

the same way you have decided to use an expansion or not in every other game you've ever played. sword fight. discussion. wrestling. coin flip. whatever.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
- -
Poland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
scifiantihero wrote:

it's just telling you to decide if you want to play with the expansion or not.

It's not that simple since using both expansion cards and units' setup is not obligatory. You have to choose mission card sets in earlier step of game setup and this choice does not predetermine your starting units.
 
 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.