• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cremate

  • Rank
  • Birthday 01/04/1977

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Haarlem, the Netherlands
  1. Agent Blaise's Adapt ability is one such mandatory effect, that it is very easy to miss (because it is triggered out-of-schedule, so to speak, at any random moment during the game), which is why it has led to lengthy discussions of this in the past. My take on this, besides trying to avoid missing the trigger in the first place, has been to allow my opponent to add that Hidden condition retroactively once we realised we had missed the trigger, with one caveat: to not place it on a figure that is in the middle of activating or just about to be shot at. This is to try to minimise the risk anyone of us having taking tactical decisions on a 'surprise' board state.
  2. Yes, you would technically be cheating if you intentionally ignore a mandatory effect, regardless of whom it would benefit. Intent is very hard to prove though, unless you outright admit to it. And you should correct it if a mandatory effect has been forgotten, however there are no real clear guidelines on how to do that (and such would be very hard to write), as it is difficult to retroactively correct it without one player or another getting an advantage (from decisions made on an assumed board state that is no longer the case). Rewinding a game is probably not easy, remembering what was where when, just as it would be unhandy if playing a timed match at a tournament. This basically leaves it a grey area for the players to solve in a somewhat fair manner considering the circumstances, or making it the call of a judge, if unable to.
  3. No, as you are not adjacent to your own space. Companions are, for most purposes figures, and they are adjacent to you while in the same space, however, Rush still shouldn't apply. Because talks of adjacent spaces and not adjacent figures, so while a companion might be adjacent to you, it is not in an adjacent space.
  4. Some of the waves were out at the same times as a box expansion (with more map tiles, a new campaign, and - typically - some added rule elements). Twin Shadows w/ Wave 2 Return to Hoth w/ Wave 5 Bespin Gambit w/ Wave 6 Jabba's Realm w/ Wave 8 Wave 4, though, was delayed as far as I recall and was thus not chronologically between 3 and 5.
  5. There are waves, just as with the other two Star Wars miniature games. Check out the Boardwars image database here
  6. For my part, because I feel it makes it less abstract. It detracts from the imagination and immersion of those involved, and makes the story less fluid. It risks the danger of making it more of a tactical game with focus on roll-playing rather than role-playing - and I would rather turn to IA for that. Disclaimer: there is absolutely nothing wrong with mini-based roleplaying games. They are probably the oldest and most wide-spread version of the roleplaying hobby. It's purely a matter of preferences - and I prefer something else.
  7. I like roleplaying and I like Imperial Assault, but mixing them would not work for me. I thoroughly enjoy the tactical element in IA, but I strongly dislike miniatures in roleplaying games. I can see how it would be interesting if into a genre of roleplaying games that already use miniatures, though. I do try to create a sense of theme and atmosphere when running IA, to some degree inspired from a life-time of roleplaying and that is about it. About the intro boxes for the FFG Star Wars roleplaying games. The games themselves have something interesting going for them, but I think the intros in those beginner boxes are a bit mixed. I was very disappointed with the one linked to Force & Destiny, but I've heard better of the previous two. Either way, they are still so dirt cheap you might as well buy one, if you plan to get into the game at large, regardless of whether you want to use the intro session or not.
  8. Yes, this! What will be next? Some sort of fan fiction that Darth Vader actually made one or more of them!?!
  9. Actually, you never could. The only reason anyone have been doing otherwise is because a referee mistakenly allowed it at Worlds - a decision later reversed.
  10. Exactly, and I find that to be the best litmus test when facing an ambiguous special abilility. Asking yourself when uncertain, "I think that this ability works like X, but if X was the intended way for it to work, how would it then have been worded?". Sure, Fly-By could have been worded a tiny bit more precise, to avoid people reading all sorts of other intentions into it, but there was never a shadow of doubt in my mind, that it would have been two separate abilities, if the second part wasn't conditional on the first.
  11. And this can cut both ways, in not trying to take down the Villain, when that is the best tactical choice.
  12. I experimented with a 3-activation (3-4 figures in total!) list to test the new scoring rules in the extreme. It was very swingy and not something I would recommend anyone for doing if they want to do well. It was fun, though.
  13. Arc Blasters on Hired Guns is amongst one of the most annoying value-per-points in the game. Experimental Arms not only increase your chance of getting a stun in (and you can even use it on their Parting Shot), it might even allow you to attack a second time if it kills you off. Hidden Detonators and you can do even more damage and grief. fact the strength of this combination is so strong that it can create a negative play experience you don't want in the first place, so the best advice might even be to not use this, the most lethal combination with Technological Superiority.
  14. And you can also deploy it out of reach of them - either in the direction they eventually have to move in or by using the extra movement points and/or stalling mechanics from some of the other class upgrade cards to be able to strike at them when the Villain is ready.