Jump to content

David Spangler

Members
  • Content Count

    323
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from jimsowter in LOTR/AH style LCG solo card game   
    The original Star Wars LCG card game was an adventure game modeled after LOTR in which one or two players executed dangerous missions, explorations, etc. against the Empire; after being demoed at Gen Con, it was canceled and replaced by the current 2-player version.
     
    But now that FFG has come out with an LCG Arkham Horror adventure card game using a streamlined version of the LOTR card game engine, I'd like to see this trend continue and the solitaire/2-player co-op card game resurrected.  As a player who can rarely find other to play against, almost all the FFG Star Wars games are relatively useless to me (though I have them anyway--go figure!).  I'd really like to see a Star Wars LCG for one or two players to join the excellent company of LOTR and AH adventure card games.
  2. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from Aldus in HoT engine for Star Wars   
    I love Heroes of Terrinoth for its ease of play and quick adventuring. I would love to see this game engine used to do a similar solo/coop Star Wars adventure game.  Aside from Imperial Assault, which can be time-consuming to play, there is no good , quick, relatively simple solo/cooperative Star Wars game from FFG.  As someone who plays solitaire more often than not due to a lack of opponents, a Star Wars themed adventure game like HoT would be ideal. 
    Just saying.....
  3. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from Flobio in HoT engine for Star Wars   
    I love Heroes of Terrinoth for its ease of play and quick adventuring. I would love to see this game engine used to do a similar solo/coop Star Wars adventure game.  Aside from Imperial Assault, which can be time-consuming to play, there is no good , quick, relatively simple solo/cooperative Star Wars game from FFG.  As someone who plays solitaire more often than not due to a lack of opponents, a Star Wars themed adventure game like HoT would be ideal. 
    Just saying.....
  4. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from tibia in HoT engine for Star Wars   
    Wow!  We've come a long way with this topic! 😁  All very interesting comments and discussions.
    Thinking about Descent, Mansions of Madness, and Imperial Assault, I've played all of them with their apps, and the co-op feature these apps provide is one my family prefers.  No one ever wants to play the Overlord or the Bad Guys or the Empire!
    From a solo standpoint, though, it takes time and energy to run any of these games by myself even with the app.  With HoT, however, the solo game is wonderful, quick, easy to set up and take down, etc.  Just what I need these days.  So my original post was really a desire for some kind of equivalent SW game that could be played solo with the same ease that HoT provides.  
     
  5. Sad
    David Spangler got a reaction from tibia in HoT engine for Star Wars   
    I love Heroes of Terrinoth for its ease of play and quick adventuring. I would love to see this game engine used to do a similar solo/coop Star Wars adventure game.  Aside from Imperial Assault, which can be time-consuming to play, there is no good , quick, relatively simple solo/cooperative Star Wars game from FFG.  As someone who plays solitaire more often than not due to a lack of opponents, a Star Wars themed adventure game like HoT would be ideal. 
    Just saying.....
  6. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from Juan4aigle in Can we have an expansion now please?   
    I would like to see extra players, including a Celtic or British (UK) player.
    Also, space tech--satellites, space station, colonies, etc.  Bring Civ into space.
  7. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from RLogue177 in App assisted Imperial Assault   
    OK, we've now got apps for Descent and for Mansions of Madness which turn these games into genuine cooperative adventures capable of being played solo as well.  I'd love to see a similar app developed for Imperial Assault.  A more challenging game to create an AI for, I'm sure, but I have faith FFG could do it.  As it is, my Imperial Assault sits unused on my shelf as no one I know wants to play it, or if they do, they want it to be a co-op game, not a competitive one with one player against another,  An Descent or MoM type app would solve that problem!
  8. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from Lifer4700 in RtL - Custom campaigns and side quests?   
    If replayability and side quests are going to be based on which expansions you own, then it makes sense--if you don't own any or many of them--to wait until the digital campaign is up for sale and see what expansions it demands in order to be completed.  Personally,  I don't think the app should demand any additional physical content to do the campaign, but fleshing out the randomized side quests is another matter.
     
    We love this app in our family as Descent has languished on our game shelf for years now since no one--and I mean no one--ever wanted to play the OL.  So this app gave us a chance to get the box down and enjoy a game of Descent.  However, I'd hate to be forced into having to buy physical expansions just to be able to finish a campaign on the app.  Yet we will buy some in order to enrich the experience--there are two or three we've had our eye on as a family.  Paradox:  we're willing to buy expansions but don't want to be told which expansions we have to have!  Rebels, the whole lot of us!
     
    Speaking of rebels, we do enjoy Imperial Assault, since one player, usually me, doesn't mind being the Empire. But I'd much prefer if we could all be rebels against the empire, so maybe FFG will come up with a similar app for Imperial Assault that takes over the role of the Empire.  That would be sweet.
  9. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from I. J. Thompson in Great Additiion to Star Wars Line, but one more game needed   
    Actually, yes, that would be terrific.  And if it truly were an adaptation of these RPGs, it would allow for a wide range of non-iconic characters, but there could also be a "classic trilogy" version with the characters from the movies and even a Star Wars Rebels version.  I think such a game would have many possible expansions.  (Frankly, I'm still bummed that the Star Wars card game wasn't a solitaire/two player game along the lines of the LotR Living card game, as it was originally designed and demoed at Gen Con some years back---keep hoping that FFG will come out with an equivalent SW product).
     
    I want to stress that I really enjoyed Rebellion.  But my situation is such that I don't always have opponents to play with and prefer games with a smaller footprint that can be set up and taken down very quickly so you can get into the gameplay without a lot of prep time or clean up afterwards.  Hence my preference at the moment for card games.
  10. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from DarthBadger6 in ***MAKE A WALK-THROUGH VIDEO***   
    Yes, the more I play this, the more I not only like it but appreciate Corey's design work. It's elegant, with lots of subtle depth.  A real winner in my book!
  11. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from kmanweiss in Mixed Feelings   
    Nicely put, kmanweiss.  Yes, that's pretty much how I play games solo anyway:  creative, controlled schizophrenia!
     
    Your analysis of the play effects is a good one, and I appreciate it.  I can absolutely see the logic here.  I just miss more of the personal dramatic element, I think (which is what IA provides anyway) and would have liked to see the missions more meaty.  It's why I'd like to see a Star Wars version of WFACG.
     
    Thanks again, everyone.
  12. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from Conundrum Eternal in Mixed Feelings   
    As Rebellion Week continues, I confess to having some mixed feelings about this game.  I have it pre-ordered and I know I'll have fun with it, but....
     
    First, due to a chronic lack of opponents, I have to play most games solitaire.  With so much secret information involved in this game, this will be difficult.  Unlike many other game companies these days who seem to make an effort to include solitaire gameplay in their products, FFG on the whole leaves the solo player high and dry with most of their designs.  That's their right, of course, but I wish it were otherwise.  I still want to see a solo-playable, character-oriented Star Wars game--like the original card game was going to be until they redesigned it for two players--maybe a Star Wars version of the Warhammer Fantasy Adventure Card game, or something entirely new and innovative. With all the two-player and multi-player Star Wars games FFG now has out, surely it can put some design effort and production money into something for the legions of solo gamers to enjoy?
     
    Second, the whole mission procedure seems a bit light and potentially boring.  Being skill-oriented is one thing, but having you automatically succeed if you're not opposed takes so much drama and narrative out of the process.  At the cost of a little more rules weight and game time, I think I'd have preferred using Mission cards, much like the combat cards, to determine what a hero confronts on a planet:  difficult environment, angry mobs, double agents, malfunctioning equipment, special items, etc.  Something that gave the mission some story content other than "match a skill icon and succeed, unless opposed by another leader, in which case, simply roll dice".  I'm sure a lot of thought went into this, but for me, this is one area I feel there was too much simplification, perhaps to make the rules simpler or to speed up the game.  The missions need more depth.
     
    Third, where is the Force? How is it manifested in the game?  Luke, Darth Vader, and Palpatine are all Force users; in Luke's case, it's an essential plot element.  Just giving Luke as hero some skills and a tactical rating for space and ground doesn't cut it; he needs to have some access to Force powers, as does Vader.  The Force is an essential part of Star Wars.
     
    Fourth, what about the Jedi?  Are Obi-Wan and Yoda in this game?  How could they be left out?  It's like leaving out Gandalf in LotR!  Specifically, are there two Luke heroes, one pre-Yoda before he gains control of his Force powers, and one post-Yoda, the Luke we see in Return of the Jedi acting as a true Jedi and able to call upon the Force?  What we've seen of the game so far doesn't seem to include this.  Just having a card that says, "Force Powers, add an extra die roll or make a re-roll" or something like this (assuming such a card exists) doesn't cut it, in my opinion.  Luke isn't simply another leader or hero, nor is Darth Vader.  They are Jedi and Sith, for heaven's sake, and should have some special status or power in any game claiming to represent Star Wars.
     
    I recognize there's still more to be revealed about the game, and it may be that my questions and mixed feelings will be resolved.  I have great confidence in Corey as a designer; he has produced awesome games in the past, so I've got my fingers crossed. Still, as much as I've been looking forward to this game (for years, really), I'm beginning to feel this is Star Wars Lite and will fail to do one of the great story/myths of our time the justice it deserves.  Obviously just one person's opinion, and I figure when I play it, on the rare occasions I can find n opponent, I'll enjoy it for what it is.  But unless I'm mistaken (and I hope I am), I think I'll still be waiting and longing for the true Star Wars game.
     
    (Of course, if my fears pan out, there's still room for expansions to add to the game and turn Star Wars Lite and Shallow into Star Wars Full and Deep.)
  13. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from MarthWMaster in Mixed Feelings   
    Deadwolf, thanks.  I appreciate your comments, and I'll definitely give it a shot.  Your comments give me "a New Hope"!     A question:  Where did you read about the "Seek Yoda" mission and the more powerful upgraded Luke as Jedi?  Obviously, I've missed this, and I thought I'd read everything about this game!
  14. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from MarthWMaster in Not As Excited As I Was   
    I think I agree with kmanweiss, but I agree with MarthWMaster, too.  I need Luke and Vader to feel qualitatively different in this game, as they are Force users.  Icons and numbers are not sufficient.  I would have liked to see more depth to the missions, that is, more story-content, much as there was in Freedom in the Galaxy.  In that game, you really feel as if your heroes are going on an adventurous story in which they might encounter any number of events or obstacles in trying to complete their mission.  I'm sure this would have added time and rules weight to Rebellion, but I think it would have been worth it.  As I said in another posting, this game is feeling a bit shallow to me, even though I appreciate the good elements such as kmanweiss was pointing out.  I may feel differently when it comes to actually playing it, though.
  15. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from thereisnotry in The Force Awakens   
    I imagine it will just be a matter of time until expansions--or even a new core set--show up incorporating the characters and scenarios from the new SWTFA.  They've already arrived for X-Wing.  Personally, I'd love to see this to expand the playable SW universe into the new trilogy.
  16. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from I. J. Thompson in Freedom In The Galaxy--Inspiration?   
    I used to play FITG quite a bit and loved it.  It's a huge, sprawling game, and for time's sake, we usually limited outselves to one of the shorter scenarios.  However, for the sheer fun of capturing hero-level individual adventures and quests coupled with massive battles with troops and fleets of ships, there was nothing quite like it.  It remains one of my favorite games of all times even if it could be a monster to play.
     
    Rebellion looks like a streamlined version of FITG.  Just from reading what's currently available, it has many of the same features, so I think the play of the game will be similar.  In both games, you have heroes who have to undertake missions which in turn affect the loyalty/submission of planets, which in turn affects resources, which in turn affects how many ships and troops you can put into play for battle.  One difference seems to be that in Rebellion the mission/quests are entirely resolved by card play or are mainly represented by cards which was not the case in Freedom.  There were a series of charts and a paragraph book that told you what you would encounter on a mission based on planet type, terrain, type of mission, etc.  You then played out the combat situations the mission created.  Also planets were more complex in FitG in that they could have a dominant environment (urban, wild, liquid, barren, etc.) which affected both missions and the kinds of troops that could fight successfully there.  Troops were also distinguished by the kind of environments in which they could battle without suffering some die roll modification.  So the galaxy may have been richer.  Freedom in the Galaxy also had individual ships and special robots as characters, analogs of the Millennium Falcon and C3PO and R2D2, and there were special rules for their use.  John Butterfield, the designer, did a lot to add individualization and character to the game in order to build up a sense of a unique universe, since he couldn't use any of the familiar Star Wars characters.  I think he succeeded, bringing his universe and his characters to life, but at times at the cost of adding a lot of rules weight.  Biggest loss to FitG:  he couldn't use anything like the Force!
     
    From what I've read, I think Rebellion will be an easier and faster game to play, which in today's market is a plus.  I miss some of the depth of hero interaction in missions that FitG has, but as a previous writer said, it's hard to say until we have the rules and can see for ourselves just how "heroic" and "cinematic" it is.  Personally, I'm delighted at a chance to play a strategic game of Star Wars, so hooray for Rebellion and for FFG for finally bringing this out, and if a lot of the design is reminiscent of FitG, I see it as homage.
     
    By the way, John Butterfield did design a strategic Star Wars boardgame for West End Games.  i was one of the playtesters for it, and it was very different from both Rebellion and FitG.  It had some wonderful concepts and was a unique take on the Galactic Civil War.  I don't remember now why it was never produced.  I think West End either went out of business about then or it turned out it couldn't secure the license.  But I was always sorry that John's game never made it to the light of day.
  17. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from GodRob in Freedom In The Galaxy--Inspiration?   
    I used to play FITG quite a bit and loved it.  It's a huge, sprawling game, and for time's sake, we usually limited outselves to one of the shorter scenarios.  However, for the sheer fun of capturing hero-level individual adventures and quests coupled with massive battles with troops and fleets of ships, there was nothing quite like it.  It remains one of my favorite games of all times even if it could be a monster to play.
     
    Rebellion looks like a streamlined version of FITG.  Just from reading what's currently available, it has many of the same features, so I think the play of the game will be similar.  In both games, you have heroes who have to undertake missions which in turn affect the loyalty/submission of planets, which in turn affects resources, which in turn affects how many ships and troops you can put into play for battle.  One difference seems to be that in Rebellion the mission/quests are entirely resolved by card play or are mainly represented by cards which was not the case in Freedom.  There were a series of charts and a paragraph book that told you what you would encounter on a mission based on planet type, terrain, type of mission, etc.  You then played out the combat situations the mission created.  Also planets were more complex in FitG in that they could have a dominant environment (urban, wild, liquid, barren, etc.) which affected both missions and the kinds of troops that could fight successfully there.  Troops were also distinguished by the kind of environments in which they could battle without suffering some die roll modification.  So the galaxy may have been richer.  Freedom in the Galaxy also had individual ships and special robots as characters, analogs of the Millennium Falcon and C3PO and R2D2, and there were special rules for their use.  John Butterfield, the designer, did a lot to add individualization and character to the game in order to build up a sense of a unique universe, since he couldn't use any of the familiar Star Wars characters.  I think he succeeded, bringing his universe and his characters to life, but at times at the cost of adding a lot of rules weight.  Biggest loss to FitG:  he couldn't use anything like the Force!
     
    From what I've read, I think Rebellion will be an easier and faster game to play, which in today's market is a plus.  I miss some of the depth of hero interaction in missions that FitG has, but as a previous writer said, it's hard to say until we have the rules and can see for ourselves just how "heroic" and "cinematic" it is.  Personally, I'm delighted at a chance to play a strategic game of Star Wars, so hooray for Rebellion and for FFG for finally bringing this out, and if a lot of the design is reminiscent of FitG, I see it as homage.
     
    By the way, John Butterfield did design a strategic Star Wars boardgame for West End Games.  i was one of the playtesters for it, and it was very different from both Rebellion and FitG.  It had some wonderful concepts and was a unique take on the Galactic Civil War.  I don't remember now why it was never produced.  I think West End either went out of business about then or it turned out it couldn't secure the license.  But I was always sorry that John's game never made it to the light of day.
  18. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from Invictus5000 in Is this "really" 4 players?   
    Well, there could be an expansion adding the Scum and Villany!
     
    In addition to designing Freedom in the Galaxy, John Butterfield designed an actual strategic Star Wars board game way back in the day for, I believe, West End Games who had gotten a license.  I know because I was a playtester for the game, and I think I still have all the playtest materials in a box somewhere. West End went under before the game could be produced or it didn't get the license in the end, or something--I forget why the game never came out.  It was a very different approach than FitG, much more streamlined and, of course, with the iconic Star Wars characters, and was designed for two to four players.  As I rememer, there was one Imperial Player, one Rebel Player, one Underworld player (mainly representing the Hutts and their criminal network), and I forget who the fourth were but I think they were unaligned planets or possibly a different criminal group, smugglers and  bounty hunters. 
  19. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from weaponxmerc in About time!   
    Well, well.  I've been waiting a couple of years for this to happen ever since FFG began producing Star Wars products!  Hooray!  It looks like the classic SPI/John Butterfield game Freedom in the Galaxy brought up to date and streamlined, with, finally, the real Star Wars characters included.  This is an instant buy for me.  
     
    There could be ways to tie this game into IA as well as Armada and X-Wing for those who want the ultimate in living out a Star Wars adventure.
  20. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from Invictus5000 in Freedom In The Galaxy--Inspiration?   
    I should add that the victory conditions appear to be the same.  In FitG, the Empire had to discover and destroy the secret rebel base while the Rebels had to bring a majority of planets into rebellion and inflict a major military defeat on the Imperials, as I recall.
  21. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from Invictus5000 in Freedom In The Galaxy--Inspiration?   
    I used to play FITG quite a bit and loved it.  It's a huge, sprawling game, and for time's sake, we usually limited outselves to one of the shorter scenarios.  However, for the sheer fun of capturing hero-level individual adventures and quests coupled with massive battles with troops and fleets of ships, there was nothing quite like it.  It remains one of my favorite games of all times even if it could be a monster to play.
     
    Rebellion looks like a streamlined version of FITG.  Just from reading what's currently available, it has many of the same features, so I think the play of the game will be similar.  In both games, you have heroes who have to undertake missions which in turn affect the loyalty/submission of planets, which in turn affects resources, which in turn affects how many ships and troops you can put into play for battle.  One difference seems to be that in Rebellion the mission/quests are entirely resolved by card play or are mainly represented by cards which was not the case in Freedom.  There were a series of charts and a paragraph book that told you what you would encounter on a mission based on planet type, terrain, type of mission, etc.  You then played out the combat situations the mission created.  Also planets were more complex in FitG in that they could have a dominant environment (urban, wild, liquid, barren, etc.) which affected both missions and the kinds of troops that could fight successfully there.  Troops were also distinguished by the kind of environments in which they could battle without suffering some die roll modification.  So the galaxy may have been richer.  Freedom in the Galaxy also had individual ships and special robots as characters, analogs of the Millennium Falcon and C3PO and R2D2, and there were special rules for their use.  John Butterfield, the designer, did a lot to add individualization and character to the game in order to build up a sense of a unique universe, since he couldn't use any of the familiar Star Wars characters.  I think he succeeded, bringing his universe and his characters to life, but at times at the cost of adding a lot of rules weight.  Biggest loss to FitG:  he couldn't use anything like the Force!
     
    From what I've read, I think Rebellion will be an easier and faster game to play, which in today's market is a plus.  I miss some of the depth of hero interaction in missions that FitG has, but as a previous writer said, it's hard to say until we have the rules and can see for ourselves just how "heroic" and "cinematic" it is.  Personally, I'm delighted at a chance to play a strategic game of Star Wars, so hooray for Rebellion and for FFG for finally bringing this out, and if a lot of the design is reminiscent of FitG, I see it as homage.
     
    By the way, John Butterfield did design a strategic Star Wars boardgame for West End Games.  i was one of the playtesters for it, and it was very different from both Rebellion and FitG.  It had some wonderful concepts and was a unique take on the Galactic Civil War.  I don't remember now why it was never produced.  I think West End either went out of business about then or it turned out it couldn't secure the license.  But I was always sorry that John's game never made it to the light of day.
  22. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from usgrandprix in Solo Scenario   
    Descent has come out with solitaire scenarios.  As someone who can't always find opponents to play the game, I'd love to see something similar for IA.
  23. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from admat in NEW HEROES +Yoda and Obi-Wan   
    I agree, more female heroes and a droid hero or hero with droid.  yes.
  24. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from admat in NEW HEROES +Yoda and Obi-Wan   
    Yikes!  My Bad!  Obviously I meant to say, "What is Firefly without Obi-Wan and Yoda?"
     

  25. Like
    David Spangler got a reaction from atr127 in NEW HEROES +Yoda and Obi-Wan   
    Yikes!  My Bad!  Obviously I meant to say, "What is Firefly without Obi-Wan and Yoda?"
     

×
×
  • Create New...