Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

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

Subject: Deploying DSUC from build queue early? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Roger Reisinger
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Hi guys,

Just played my first game with the expansion and Im a bit /meh on it, which is dissapointing as I was really excited to try it out.

I like the combat cards. I think taking a bit of the randomness out, or rather changing the way the randomness worked, was a good decision. I also liked the new variable setup. The rest Im not sold on yet.

The new leaders I didn't really like, or the new units. I just felt as the Rebel player the original leaders were better. Also, capping leaders at 8 made 'an old friend' and promotion kind of a waste of time. I even killed an Emperial leader in the first turn with 'confrontation' but he was quickly replaced.

Missions I thought were ok.

I haven't seen very many negative reviews on the expansion, it seems very wll received which Im a bit surprised by right now, but I need more plays to have any stronger feelings.

Onto my question:

I was playing Rebels so I dont know the name of the card, but the Empire moved 4 units from space 1 on the build queue to a controlled system. One of the units they chose was a DSUC. I know that you cant delay a DSUC from being built, but was it correct to let it be built early from the production queue?

Thx!
Roger
 
 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
Lowecore wrote:
I was playing Rebels so I dont know the name of the card, but the Empire moved 4 units from space 1 on the build queue to a controlled system. One of the units they chose was a DSUC. I know that you cant delay a DSUC from being built, but was it correct to let it be built early from the production queue?

I think the mission you are referring to is Imperial Might, and the way it's worded, choosing the Death Star to be one of the 4 units seems perfectly legal, as long as it's on space 1 of the track. There are other missions that allow early deployment of the Death Star as well (such as Oversee Project).
3 
 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
You stated that recruiting extras leaders was a negative, but then that when you eliminated one it was quickly replaced . . . which I get was still a negative for you as the rebels, but you're kinda complaining both ways there
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger Reisinger
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
scifiantihero wrote:
You stated that recruiting extras leaders was a negative, but then that when you eliminated one it was quickly replaced . . . which I get was still a negative for you as the rebels, but you're kinda complaining both ways there



I dont think I get what you mean. The leader cap of 8 I think is negative because even if you eliminate a leader, because of the cap, it is easy to get back to 8 again. Maybe I didnt explain it clearly.

The way I see it, it isn't an efficient use of actions to kill/ capture leaders as there are enough recruiting cards to offset any losses quickly. I think there are 3 recruiting cards on top of your normal recruits.

I've only played once so these are just initial impressions but I prefer no cap on leaders as in the standard game. Losing a leader as the Rebels to capture hurt more, and getting an extra leader was fantastic. Now I feel some of the tension is lost as you can basically bank on not being short on leaders for any length of time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Niall Smyth
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Lowecore wrote:
scifiantihero wrote:
You stated that recruiting extras leaders was a negative, but then that when you eliminated one it was quickly replaced . . . which I get was still a negative for you as the rebels, but you're kinda complaining both ways there



I dont think I get what you mean. The leader cap of 8 I think is negative because even if you eliminate a leader, because of the cap, it is easy to get back to 8 again. Maybe I didnt explain it clearly.

The way I see it, it isn't an efficient use of actions to kill/ capture leaders as there are enough recruiting cards to offset any losses quickly. I think there are 3 recruiting cards on top of your normal recruits.

I've only played once so these are just initial impressions but I prefer no cap on leaders as in the standard game. Losing a leader as the Rebels to capture hurt more, and getting an extra leader was fantastic. Now I feel some of the tension is lost as you can basically bank on not being short on leaders for any length of time.


The leader cap of 8 reduces the power of 'An Old Friend' and similar new cards.

'An Old Friend' and similar cards reduce the power of capturing, turning, and eliminating leaders.

They're separate effects, but I like both. Both An Old Friend and Capturing were overpowered in the base game - they were no-brainers - and so it's good to weaken them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Witold G
Poland
Bytom
flag msg tools
Avatar
Lowecore wrote:
The way I see it, it isn't an efficient use of actions to kill/ capture leaders as there are enough recruiting cards to offset any losses quickly.

This simply means there's a limited benefit to eliminating just any random leader with it. Now I need to think which use of the card will be most beneficial in the particular situation (which I like).

Eliminate Vader or Emperor? Nice, almost any leader they can replace it with is weaker overall.
Eliminate Ozzel? Imperials cannot use Catch Them by Surprise.
Eliminate Jerjerrod? Well, not so much... but even this can still be useful to ensure Empire cannot play Fully Operational when you plan to attack Death Star with a single Nebulon-B as support (so you can play its tactic to save a fighter).


Lowecore wrote:
capping leaders at 8 made 'an old friend' and promotion kind of a waste of time.

I'd say "situational" (which I also like). I recently used Promotion to recruit Wedge, so I could regain the possibility to use One in A Million, after Luke was fed to Sarlacc.

One thing that wasn't mentioned in this thread is that it makes Noble Sacrifice (Obi-Wan's action card) stronger, so this change balances abilities both ways, so to speak.

I'd probably even go as far as saying that leader cap was my favourite change, mechanics-wise, even though I don't like the perfunctory way it was implemented.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Perf wrote:
Lowecore wrote:
The way I see it, it isn't an efficient use of actions to kill/ capture leaders as there are enough recruiting cards to offset any losses quickly.

This simply means there's a limited benefit to eliminating just any random leader with it. Now I need to think which use of the card will be most beneficial in the particular situation (which I like).

Eliminate Vader or Emperor? Nice, almost any leader they can replace it with is weaker overall.
Eliminate Ozzel? Imperials cannot use Catch Them by Surprise.
Eliminate Jerjerrod? Well, not so much... but even this can still be useful to ensure Empire cannot play Fully Operational when you plan to attack Death Star with a single Nebulon-B as support (so you can play its tactic to save a fighter).


Lowecore wrote:
capping leaders at 8 made 'an old friend' and promotion kind of a waste of time.

I'd say "situational" (which I also like). I recently used Promotion to recruit Wedge, so I could regain the possibility to use One in A Million, after Luke was fed to Sarlacc.

One thing that wasn't mentioned in this thread is that it makes Noble Sacrifice (Obi-Wan's action card) stronger, so this change balances abilities both ways, so to speak.

I'd probably even go as far as saying that leader cap was my favourite change, mechanics-wise, even though I don't like the perfunctory way it was implemented.


Pool luke

I dont mind the cap, but I would have much preferred it to be at 9, or at least that an old friend let u go up to 9
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Genestealer Patriarch
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Perf wrote:
One thing that wasn't mentioned in this thread is that it makes Noble Sacrifice (Obi-Wan's action card) stronger, so this change balances abilities both ways, so to speak.

Have you seen Obi-Wan captured in any RotE games though? It already feels like trying to do so is a mistake for the Imperials in the base game, and is even worse in RotE, as the Rebels have options to replace him.

As an Imperial, I wouldn't even try capturing Obi-Wan unless I was certain that he didn't have Noble Sacrifice. The cost (l less turn to find and crush the base) isn't worth the gain (1 less Rebel leader... for now). Never mind the effort of using an Imperial leader (or Vader's action card, or a Star Destroyer tactic) to do so.

In which case Noble Sacrifice hasn't directly become more powerful (since it's even less likely the Empire will let him play it), more that it slightly extends Obi-Wan's ability to roam around Imperial space without fear.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Yan Bertrand
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Lowecore wrote:

The way I see it, it isn't an efficient use of actions to kill/ capture leaders as there are enough recruiting cards to offset any losses quickly.

Don't captured leaders count towards the 8 cap for the Rebels?
Even if they don't, you could play with "no limit to just 1 captured leader", if you want capture to become mundane...
robot
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jooice ZP
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Herman92 wrote:
Lowecore wrote:

The way I see it, it isn't an efficient use of actions to kill/ capture leaders as there are enough recruiting cards to offset any losses quickly.

Don't captured leaders count towards the 8 cap for the Rebels?
Even if they don't, you could play with "no limit to just 1 captured leader", if you want capture to become mundane...
robot


no captured leaders dont count, thats why the rule speaks of a limit of 8 leaders in the pool
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Private Blinky
msg tools
sigmazero13 wrote:
Lowecore wrote:
I was playing Rebels so I dont know the name of the card, but the Empire moved 4 units from space 1 on the build queue to a controlled system. One of the units they chose was a DSUC. I know that you cant delay a DSUC from being built, but was it correct to let it be built early from the production queue?

I think the mission you are referring to is Imperial Might, and the way it's worded, choosing the Death Star to be one of the 4 units seems perfectly legal, as long as it's on space 1 of the track. There are other missions that allow early deployment of the Death Star as well (such as Oversee Project).


Going back to the original question, I would agree with Scott's statement. However, I would anticipate (until it is officialy clarified in an expansion faq) that alongside Oversee Project's restriction...

SW Rebellion FAQ wrote:
Q: Can the Imperial player use the “Oversee Project” card to
accelerate the production of a new Death Star?
A: Yes, but only if the mission is resolved in the Death Star
Under Construction’s system.


You would not be able to pick the Death Star off the build track with Imperial Might unless you were resolving it directly in the DSUC's system to begin with, thereby pinning the DS for the round. At least with the expansion mission you can get out of that restriction if you've assigned 2 leaders to it.


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
I would definitely agree with that.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Niall Smyth
Japan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Patriarchxyz wrote:
Perf wrote:
One thing that wasn't mentioned in this thread is that it makes Noble Sacrifice (Obi-Wan's action card) stronger, so this change balances abilities both ways, so to speak.

Have you seen Obi-Wan captured in any RotE games though? It already feels like trying to do so is a mistake for the Imperials in the base game, and is even worse in RotE, as the Rebels have options to replace him.

As an Imperial, I wouldn't even try capturing Obi-Wan unless I was certain that he didn't have Noble Sacrifice. The cost (l less turn to find and crush the base) isn't worth the gain (1 less Rebel leader... for now). Never mind the effort of using an Imperial leader (or Vader's action card, or a Star Destroyer tactic) to do so.

In which case Noble Sacrifice hasn't directly become more powerful (since it's even less likely the Empire will let him play it), more that it slightly extends Obi-Wan's ability to roam around Imperial space without fear.


Yes, all the time. My opponents usually think it's better to capture him and get it over with than to let him become a free agent. And many Rebel players think the Reputation isn't worth losing a leader for, especially early 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.