Jump to content



Photo

The rules are up.


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 I. J. Thompson

I. J. Thompson

    Member

  • Members
  • 963 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 06:01 AM

 And here they are!



#2 Agrivar

Agrivar

    Member

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 06:13 AM

 ¡Shiny!



#3 IG-58

IG-58

    Member

  • Members
  • 368 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 06:35 AM

Good snag, IJT! On the ball as usual. You readin' it while they demolish your bathroom?



#4 haslo

haslo

    Member

  • Members
  • 582 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 07:16 AM

Very awesome

There are indeed no collisions, but there are clear-cut and concise rules for what to do when there would be overlapping bases. I like that, collisions would have reduced the playing space to a 2D plane, it still feels slightly 3D like that.


Imperials: 13 TIE Fighter, 5 TIE Advanced, 15 TIE Interceptor, 4 Slave I, 6 TIE Bomber, 5 Lambda Shuttle, 3 TIE Defender, 4 TIE Phantom

Rebels: 1 Tantive IV, 1 Rebel Transport, 7 X-Wing, 5 Y-Wing, 4 YT-1300, 6 A-Wing, 5 B-Wing, 5 HWK-290, 6 Z-95, 3 E-Wing


#5 I. J. Thompson

I. J. Thompson

    Member

  • Members
  • 963 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 09:18 AM

IG-58 said:

Good snag, IJT! On the ball as usual. You readin' it while they demolish your bathroom?

Ha! It's chaos over here. :P

Interesting that a TIE can't perform a distance-1 straight move or bank. I guess those guys aren't getting paid by the hour! :D



#6 haslo

haslo

    Member

  • Members
  • 582 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 10:01 AM

I. J. Thompson said:

Interesting that a TIE can't perform a distance-1 straight move or bank. I guess those guys aren't getting paid by the hour! :D

Ah, but they can! They only need a nearby Y-Wing with an Ion Cannon…


Imperials: 13 TIE Fighter, 5 TIE Advanced, 15 TIE Interceptor, 4 Slave I, 6 TIE Bomber, 5 Lambda Shuttle, 3 TIE Defender, 4 TIE Phantom

Rebels: 1 Tantive IV, 1 Rebel Transport, 7 X-Wing, 5 Y-Wing, 4 YT-1300, 6 A-Wing, 5 B-Wing, 5 HWK-290, 6 Z-95, 3 E-Wing


#7 dvang

dvang

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,239 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 10:44 AM

I. J. Thompson said:

IG-58 said:

 

Good snag, IJT! On the ball as usual. You readin' it while they demolish your bathroom?

 

 

Ha! It's chaos over here. :P

Interesting that a TIE can't perform a distance-1 straight move or bank. I guess those guys aren't getting paid by the hour! :D

I'm curious, but how do you know that? Have you seen the movement dial for the Tie Fighter?

We do know for sure that a Tie Fighter can perform a 1-move Turn (as seen on the dial in the Tie Expansion preview and the Core rulebook), and a difficult 3-move Koiogran Turn (as seen in the rulebook).  I haven't seen anything else, though.

Of course, I do expect that you are correct and that a Tie Fighter cannot do a 1-move straight, simply because they move so fast.  I was just curious how you knew for a fact that they couldn't.



#8 vadersson

vadersson

    Member

  • Members
  • 112 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 10:57 AM

 The rule book lists the entire manuver dial for both the X-Wing and the TIE fighter.  Speed 2 Banks are the shortest a TIE can pull, though it can do speed 1 turns.

 

Thanks,

Duncan

 


Gold 109 (ret.)

Wesa need Gungans!


#9 I. J. Thompson

I. J. Thompson

    Member

  • Members
  • 963 posts

Posted 09 August 2012 - 11:02 AM

 Yup, what vadersson said. :)

16 maneuvers on that TIE dial… I hope we've all got good eyesight!



#10 bsmith13

bsmith13

    Member

  • Members
  • 266 posts

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:27 AM

Kudos to FFG for a well-done rules booklet.  Easy to understand, good examples, repetition of concepts at key points to reinforce basic ideas, and and index!



#11 sverigesson

sverigesson

    Member

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 10 August 2012 - 04:02 AM

 I went over the rulebook and tournament rules last night (while watching Usain Bolt win without hardly trying). As a player of Warhammer 40k, I have to say that I am extremely happy with this clear concise rule set. There is little ambiguity in these rules, and every it seems like every major problem that the fan base came up with since the early demos has been explicitly dealt with. I am definitely putting in my pre-order now. In fact, my only regret about this game is that I won't be able to attend GenCon for the first ever tournament, even though it is only 3 hours away from where I live! Suck.



#12 dvang

dvang

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,239 posts

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:29 PM

vadersson said:

 The rule book lists the entire manuver dial for both the X-Wing and the TIE fighter.  Speed 2 Banks are the shortest a TIE can pull, though it can do speed 1 turns.

 

Thanks,

Duncan

 

Aha, its on the last page, the quick reference sheet, which I only glanced at.  Thanks.



#13 NathanPButler

NathanPButler

    Member

  • Members
  • 70 posts

Posted 10 August 2012 - 03:24 PM

Speaking as someone familiar with TCG/CCG's and, to a lesser extent, RPGs, but almost entirely ignorant of miniature games, I read through the full rules last night and find that it all seems to cover all obvious contingencies and does so in a very clear fashion. I'm even more excited for the game, and I think it'll be a great entry point for new players. I may have to do some demo vids for our podcast (Star Wars Beyond the Films over at starwarsreport.com) when the game is released, in hopes of getting some of our more reluctant listeners to give the game a fair try. It sounds great.



#14 Budgernaut

Budgernaut

    The Uncanny One

  • Members
  • 1,506 posts

Posted 10 August 2012 - 04:44 PM

 One rule I'm not happy with is how to move your fighter if another ship is in the way of your movement dial. They want us to estimate where it lands by holding the movement dial over the other ship? Common! How about placing an unused movement guide against the front of the ship that's in the way. Then remove that ship(s) and have that ship's owner hold the movement dial securely. Next, the active ship moves and can lay it's movement dial flat on the table with only a possibility of being slightly elevated by the other movement dial. After placing the active ship, remove it's movement dial. Then place the non active ship(s). That leaves no room for ambiguity.

I'm also a little disappointed with no collisions, but oh well.

EDIT: Also notice that squad building requires more ship than are in the core set. At least the starter decks in Android: Netrunner are tournament legal. I can't believe they make you pay more to build a legitimate squad. Not really an issue for me since I'll have more ships, but I feel bad for anybody who just buys a core set and then gets to that part of the rules.


"There is a fine line between neutral and amoral. In fact, there may be no line there at all."

--Count Dooku


#15 NathanPButler

NathanPButler

    Member

  • Members
  • 70 posts

Posted 10 August 2012 - 05:29 PM

Budgernaut said:

 

EDIT: Also notice that squad building requires more ship than are in the core set. At least the starter decks in Android: Netrunner are tournament legal. I can't believe they make you pay more to build a legitimate squad. Not really an issue for me since I'll have more ships, but I feel bad for anybody who just buys a core set and then gets to that part of the rules.

 

 

How is there a requirement of buying expansions or more than one core set in order to use squad building?

In a *tournament*, squads are based on 100 points, but in casual play, it is based on whatever the two players agree upon, and the rulebook repeatedly notes that you can use squad building with the core set, but you'd want to make your total points 31, instead of 100. That's a smaller squad building point pool for the core set, but, by definition, squad building with 31 points *is* squad building.

If I may paraphrase for the amusement factor: "I feel bad for anybody who gripes about needing to buy more than the core set because they got to that part of the rules and ignored what it actually said." ;)



#16 Budgernaut

Budgernaut

    The Uncanny One

  • Members
  • 1,506 posts

Posted 10 August 2012 - 05:40 PM

NathanPButler said:

Budgernaut said:

 

EDIT: Also notice that squad building requires more ship than are in the core set. At least the starter decks in Android: Netrunner are tournament legal. I can't believe they make you pay more to build a legitimate squad. Not really an issue for me since I'll have more ships, but I feel bad for anybody who just buys a core set and then gets to that part of the rules.

 

 

How is there a requirement of buying expansions or more than one core set in order to use squad building?

In a *tournament*, squads are based on 100 points, but in casual play, it is based on whatever the two players agree upon, and the rulebook repeatedly notes that you can use squad building with the core set, but you'd want to make your total points 31, instead of 100. That's a smaller squad building point pool for the core set, but, by definition, squad building with 31 points *is* squad building.

If I may paraphrase for the amusement factor: "I feel bad for anybody who gripes about needing to buy more than the core set because they got to that part of the rules and ignored what it actually said." ;)

Yeah, I get what you're saying, but LotR has a tournament deck rule requiring 50-card decks. Almost NOBODY plays with less than 50 cards even though there is no tournament. There are tournaments for this game so it seems natural to want to construct those sorts of decks, even if not competing in tournaments.

You're absolutely right, though. I absolutely, 100% acknowledge that the rules state you are welcome to set whatever point total you'd like for squad building.


"There is a fine line between neutral and amoral. In fact, there may be no line there at all."

--Count Dooku


#17 Hrathen

Hrathen

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,436 posts

Posted 10 August 2012 - 06:32 PM

 I have played a number of miniture games, and the starting set is never really more than the bare minimum to play.  Who players Warhammer 40K with just the Black Reach Box set.  Sure you could if you wanted to, and it is a great way to get started, and see if you like the game.  But it just isn't the way most people play.  

Remember the Wizkids Constructable Pirates game, you were supposed to be able to play that game with single pack.

But half of the fun for miniture games is collecting the models and building your force.  That is really just how these sort of games work.

I was a little disapointed when I realized that the starter set only had one x-wing and 2 tie fighters.  But it could be worse; the game could be collectable and you might have to shell out tons of $$$ just trying to get the ships you want.


Putting an end to this distructive conflict and bringing order to the galaxy.

#18 ironman

ironman

    Member

  • Members
  • 82 posts

Posted 11 August 2012 - 04:16 AM

i cant ever see GW putting 2 1500pt armies in 1 box.

 



#19 Budgernaut

Budgernaut

    The Uncanny One

  • Members
  • 1,506 posts

Posted 11 August 2012 - 05:20 AM

What I love about this game is that it's so thematic. Next to nothing seems like an add-on just for mechanics. It's all so grounded in the Star Wars lore. I am super excited to play this game. The only reason I voiced my gripes is because I am looking forward to it so much. But I'm really pleased with a lot of the decisions they made. Like fighters not obstructing shots but objects do. It's just how I would have designed it. Good on you, FFG.


"There is a fine line between neutral and amoral. In fact, there may be no line there at all."

--Count Dooku


#20 sverigesson

sverigesson

    Member

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 11 August 2012 - 11:48 AM

Budgernaut said:

 One rule I'm not happy with is how to move your fighter if another ship is in the way of your movement dial. They want us to estimate where it lands by holding the movement dial over the other ship? Common! How about placing an unused movement guide against the front of the ship that's in the way. Then remove that ship(s) and have that ship's owner hold the movement dial securely. Next, the active ship moves and can lay it's movement dial flat on the table with only a possibility of being slightly elevated by the other movement dial. After placing the active ship, remove it's movement dial. Then place the non active ship(s). That leaves no room for ambiguity.

I assume when you keep saying "movement dial" you actually mean "base"? Or do you mean "maneuver template"? Either way, I don't really know what you are talking about here, because I think the rules for overlapping ships is very concise and easy to follow.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS