Jump to content

Bitterman

Members
  • Content count

    241
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bitterman

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Leics, United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think they're a tiny bit smaller in scale, and definitely not as detailed / well sculpted, but the base size is almost exactly the same.
  2. I find some of the old Star War Miniatures models are great for neutral figures / mission tokens. We've had Ewoks, Twi'leks and all sorts of other things as civilians, hostages, targets and objectives.
  3. Bitterman

    Imperial Assault has amazing characters

    Yeah, I broadly agree, between Rebels and Imperial Assault it shows that it's possible to make awesome Star Wars experiences without either desperately hanging off the coat-tails of the OT, or shoehorning in complete nonsense that doesn't make any sense - there's a middle ground where it works beautifully. The IA characters are easy to just "get"; way back in the beginning they wrote a couple of pages of fluff for a couple of the heroes (Gideon and one of the others, I think) and I wondered at the time why they didn't do that for all the heroes. But it's actually amazing how evocative they manage to get with just one picture, a model, a two-word class description, and maybe a few clues in the player prompts for their personal mission. Turns out pages and pages of fluff just aren't needed when your character design is that well thought out. My hero players get quite attached to their characters knowing only that they're a Twi'lek with a plasteel staff who's looking for her master's lightsaber, or a guy with big muscles and half a suit of looted Stormtrooper armour. It's very clever. At risk of derailing things, it's why I'm so **** angry about the recent movies (even if that does make me part of a shrieking hysterical chorus 🙄). This game, Rebels, and even the first half of TFA, show how much fun it's still possible for Star Wars to be, and that it's still possible to have genuinely interesting characters in the Star Wars setting. But the second half of TFA, along with the whole of Solo and TLJ (RO was tolerable), were just complete rubbish and there's no inherent inevitability about that, if only they weren't able to rely on shoveling any old crap and knowing a good number of people will lap it up. [edit] Seriously? This forum censors the word "da-mn"? Unbelievable.
  4. Bitterman

    Homebrew Characters Thread

    Not used it in anger yet, no, and it's true that I didn't necessarily think carefully about what might happen with multiple Gonks. OTOH, they only hand out power tokens (which are inherently limited to 2), not dice - so not sure where 6 dice come from? [edit] Wait... unless you're referring to an older version? I don't remember what that looked like if so, maybe it did grant extra dice. If so then yeah, that's likely to be too much. [/edit]
  5. Bitterman

    Nerf Daniel Taylor

    I petition to make that the card he designs for winning.
  6. Yeah, I'd like to see one, none, many, or all of: Gideon and/or C-3PO's abilities (and perhaps Hera and others too?) changed to only affect <Rebel> figures. Gideon and/or C-3PO's deployment costs increased by +1. Gideon's abilities changed to have a maximum range of 2 or 3 spaces. Temporary Alliance to only allow bringing in non-Unique units. Temporary Alliance made non-Unique but Elite, and changed to allow bringing in only 1 unit, not 2. (In other words, you have to take it twice if you want to bring in two allied units, paying 2 points instead of 1). Temporary Alliance (Scum version, or both) to be completely removed. ...but there might be other balance stuff that's needed at the same time. Gideon and C-3PO (with or without Temporary Alliance) are maybe the most egregious examples because they're so cheap and so efficient they can fit into just about any list, and I think that's the main problem with them - they end up appearing in every list, or that's the way it feels sometimes.
  7. Bitterman

    New Character Ideas

    Something like this? I've riffed off your ideas but made a few tweaks of my own. I like the ghost idea though, so I ran with it!
  8. Bitterman

    Starting our first campaign tomorrow night.

    Good point. We pretty much always play with four heroes (only once with three) but I can see how it would make a difference with fewer.
  9. Maybe. The risk with it is that we just end up with even more units we'll never use. Something else comes along that's intended as competition for, but actually ends up plain better than, C-3PO/Gideon? Well, I guess we won't see C-3PO/Gideon any more, then (nor the stuff that's currently left out in favour of C-3PO/Gideon). If new stuff keeps getting better to provide "competition" to the stuff that's currently too good, the old stuff just doesn't get used. In an ideal world (and I recognise how difficult this is to actually achieve) pretty much any unit should be usable under the right conditions, used well, at least situationally. As it is... there's a very large selection of units available, and a very small subset of units that you might actually choose to take. Surely it'd be better to buff the weak units, and nerf the too-strong units, than just add more units? The best you can hope to do with that is make "too strong" the new "standard", and maybe if you get that right you'll only see C-3PO/Gideon one game in four or five, instead of every game; but all those Stormtroopers and AT-STs and Nexu and everything else will still remain very firmly in the box, gathering yet more dust.
  10. Bitterman

    New Character Ideas

    Whatever Yoda ends up looking like, he should be a Non-combatant (cannot attack) with no offense dice and definitely no pierce. "Wars not make one great!"
  11. Bitterman

    Starting our first campaign tomorrow night.

    Wait - really!? We've been getting that wrong all along, in that case!
  12. Bitterman

    Hypothetical IA 2nd edition

    Oooh, ooh, ooh! Just thought - there is something I would like to see, but that wouldn't need a new edition to do it; but it does fulfil the criteria in the original post about advancing the gameplay or adding a new system in some way. Why on earth isn't there a set of "movie challenge" scenarios? Say... one player gets Obi-wan, Luke, Solo, Chewie, C-3PO and R2-D2. The other player gets Darth Vader and an infinite supply of Stormtroopers. The board is laid out like a part of the Death Star, and the Rebels must try to escape. Or... it's Luke, Leia, and Lando versus Jabba, a Rancor and various Scum, in Jabba's Palace. Or... well, you get the idea. Scenes from the movies for us to replay and see if we can do as well as the "historical" result. Some of this you could sort of fudge by picking appropriate Skirmish lists for each side, but I don't think that'd be very satisfactory. Specific scenarios really could be. This would make a fourth game mode (after Skirmish, Campaign, and the app), it'd probably be really good for introducing new players, and they could put up a new scenario PDF on the website every month. Might even encourage people to buy more models to be able to play through the latest scenario.
  13. Bitterman

    Hypothetical IA 2nd edition

    Working on the assumption that in this context "2nd Edition" means "rules changes", I'd like to see: Points adjustments for various units (when was the last time you saw anyone use a Nexu in Skirmish? When was the last time you saw a tournament without eWeequays everywhere?). This could equally be in an errata though. Time periods restored. Just change the rule to say "this is an optional rule, for a more open-ended experience ignore it". Then provide time periods for the stuff that didn't bother with it. This could also be in an errata. A couple of Imperial classes (Hutt Mercenaries, and the one that deals out Strain, can't remember what it's called) are just broken good, and no fun. Again... this could be errata'd. Changes to Allies and Villains. My group of Rebel players never want to take Allies because of the Threat bonus it would give me, so they don't really want to do Ally Side Missions either. And as the Imperial player, I feel much the same way about Villains. The entire mechanic needs a fresh look. Line of Sight... I mean, personally, I think it's brilliant. I think it's a really clever way to resolve something that I've never seen done well in any square-based boardgame. I also find it fairly simple to resolve. But my rebel players (who don't religiously pore over the rules and appendices), and probably half my opponents in tournaments, just don't get it. The single most commonly asked question that I hear constantly while playing this game is, "can I see him from here?", and often the answer is unexpected. That's a bad sign, so again, this needs an overhaul. Command Cards. Again, I like them as they are, but a really common complaint I hear from people I try to introduce to Skirmish is that choosing units to 40 points is easy, then they have to build this entire second list of other cards that (despite how many of them there are) you probably know exactly which ones you're going to take every time, so why have them at all? And the inaccessibility of them (I have every expansion yet released for this game, so I'm fine; new players won't have that) is a real blocker to getting people to pick the game up. To get started, they need at least one Core Set, at least one big-box expansion with the tiles for the current tournament missions, all the units they want to use, and a bunch more unit packs they don't want to use but will be handicapped if they don't pick them up for the Command Cards. That's not ideal... as it stands, there's a very, very hard limit on how popular/successful IA Skirmish and Tournaments are ever going to be. Overall though... I just don't see much need for a 2nd Ed. Effectively, Imperial Assault is already Descent 3rd Ed (and it's a much better game than Descent 2nd) so it's already had two previous editions full of mistakes to learn from, it's already pretty polished. More expansion packs? Yes please. A mission designer? Yes please! More for the app? Sure, I guess. Campaign books (not full boxes) that don't need more models etc.? Yeah, that sounds good. But a second edition...? I don't really see enough wrong with what we have, for that to be worthwhile.
×