D.Knight Sevus said:
The risk is to great because if you lose the game, and thus earn a 0 for a tie-breaker, you've conceded the whole round. As your opponent would have to be completely dominated in return, to the point of scoring not a single objective for you to just even the score. I mean it isn't hard for the LS to kill one objective even if soundly beaten in a straight up game, but in a game where they knew all they had to do was take one? Just keep attacking out regardless of how open it leaves you because you only need on objective.
The second game under such a system will be completely perverted. It will not be about atttempting to win the game, it is only about losing it not as bad. That is going to lead the savy player into doing some stupid stuff that will gain in the short term but hand the game to thier opponent, because they don't need to try and win the game at all. The tournament rules for a card game should not change the game that much.
If you lose the game. Only having to inflict 10 damage to win is such a massive advantage that if you can start swinging at Heart or the Death Star on turn 1, it is far more likely that you'll win the game than playing it normally. What I will concede that it does is narrow the window during which attacking Heart and the Dial are viable, but at least in the case of Trench Run, it's still got 2 Force icons for the Edge battle, making it one of the Rebel Alliance's better edge cards.
Additionally, to win the match on tiebreakers, you must do better than your opponent did while actively trying to win the match. If you win as the Light Side player with the dial at 8, you still must play well enough to advance the dial to 9 or higher. If you win as the Dark with two destroyed objectives, you must win the game outright to win the match.
Finally, looking at Netrunner's prestige system, which is very likely to be implemented in Star Wars, winning a match 2-0 gives you 6 prestige, while winning 1-1 on tie breakers only gives you 4, and affords your opponent 2. If you're actively trying to win the tournament (which you ought to be, if you're a savvy tournament player), then it is in your best interests to win every game in the match.
Netrunner's prestige system is exactly what I do not want for this game. In the prestige system your final placement has no strict connection to your win/loss record. In a 4 round tournament a player could win every round and sit at only 16 prestige while another player could beat him in the standings with only three wins for 18 points, while having lost to the exact player he just beat in placement. That shouldn't happen in a tournament. You should not be rewarded in the overall placement by getting easier match-ups. Also Netrunner, as far as I'm aware, works off players accumulating agenda points to an end goal, on both sides. SW has different win conditions for each side, thus being less supportive of tiebreakers.
In regards to the Trench Run, I could already find an number of people that question if the Trench Run is worth every playing. I don't agree with them, but it clearly has its own built in downsides that force you to judge the risk/reward. It isn't a no brainer even first turn. If you further enchance the risk, and a 0 for a tie-breaker is a huge risk, you now tip the scales completely.