That's the same one we've used in my group several times, seems to work fine. Though there is a little problem with some of the fast and warlike Civs like Mongols being in center spot. Otherwise it doesn't have any obvious problems and is easier to set up.

So now that the final trailers are dropping, I'm just so morbidly curious, who's going to see it in let's say the first week?
Vote by reacting to this post, comment and discuss POLITELY if you'd like below.
Laughing face = Going for SURE.
Confused face = Definitely NOT going.
Sad face = Don't make me choose.
Like Heart = You have no opinion but are curious about the poll results.
Thanks Trophy = Instructions unclear, crashed Space ship in swamp.

Actually, I'm tempted to say that, from the point of view of 90% of Scenarios, Strange's job as Earth's Sorcerer Supreme is irrelevant.  Come to think of it, when it comes to foiling villains, Dr Strange is the Hero and Sorcerer Supreme of Earth is the Alter Ego.  In fact, it could be a hindrance, or maybe even an Obligation:
Extra-Dimensional Infiltration Give this card to the Doctor Strange player.  You may flip to Alter Ego. Either exhaust Sorcerer Supreme to remove this card from the game or exhaust all Magic upgrades in play to discard it. And then Baron Mordo is his Nemesis.

Fundamentally, the only difference between hero and alter-ego is being out in the field and being back at base. For Tony that whether he's wearing the armour or being CEO, for Stephen that's whether he's fighting Dormammu or in the Sanctum researching and recovering.

Could be Thor (hero)/Odinson (alter-ego) for a Midgard/Asgard split.

Personally, I am irked by the automatic assumption that some people have that any mention of gender fluidity, non binary, or non cis het sexualities are an "in your face activism", and not simply writing that reflects reality. Writing that refuses to accept the reality of humanity and force gender stereotypes and roles on people they don't apply to is in your face activism, imo.  

Greek letters, not Latin, since Latin used our same alphabet. But yea, otherwise this is how it is.  "As" and "X's" of Star Wars are like our Greek symbols for Alpha, Omega, and everything in between.
 
Of course they are going to defect, the blurb even strongly suggests it.  Did Inferno Squad (at least Iden and Meeko) teach you nothing?

Here's the issue: the Imperials are authoritarian space fascists that stamp out non-conformity.  This means "model" Imperials are minimally characters, they're all falling in line and being obedient and conforming like crazy.  That doesn't make for characters, that makes for cogs.  And cogs are not interesting protagonists.  It's also the case that the Empire, post-Alderaan, has clearly and publicly embraced atrocity as their modus operandi.  Star Wars has, at its fairly tale roots, always been a story about very clearly delineated GOOD vs EVIL.  The Empire doesn't just subjugate species, oppress planets, torture prisoners, and blow up planets, it even names the elements of its operation things like "Death Star," "Death Squadron," "Devastator," "Tyrant," "Dominator," "Executor," and the like... you would have to be delusional to view the Imperials as the "real" good guys... as they make no pretesenses to whitewash their atrocities as the "greater good," as the preservers of peace and justice and order... after the Death Star, after the dissolution of the Senate, after Tarkin's Doctrine of Fear, the Empire are full out publicly fascists and brutal.  To be a loyal Imperial, at that point, you're EITHER an immoral and heinous POS who either enjoys the subjugation of others or is willing to participate in it for personal gain OR a totally terrified and coerced subject who is too scared to sabotage or defect so goes along with evil for self-preservation.  If the former, you're a monster. If the latter, a pathetic coward.  Again, it's hard to find a compelling protagonist here.

So you're left with looking for the disgruntled and disloyal Imperial grunts as the only compelling case for protagonists.  There's an argument to be made for telling stories about "high ranking" Imperials like the Emperor, Vader, or even Thrawn, because it's like a peak behind the curtain, an opportunity for seeing by whom and how the orders are given; it's a way to further understand the villain of the story.  But if you're telling stories about low-level grunts like TIE Pilots, you're either telling a story about monsters or cowards who blindly follow the orders of their superiors, or you're telling a story about the conflicted disloyalists looking for another path.  And story-tellers will always go with the latter, because there are no characters in the former.  Welcome to Star Wars.

What's weird to me is the disparity between the various disadvantages when they're all effectively mechanically identical. It really feels like they just need to be renamed/downgraded, like blind should be poor eyesight and missing leg should be limp. When you compare them to some of the less out there disadvantages like clumsy or bluntness, they sound extreme but they have the same mechanical penalties. It would also make the Earth assessment ability seem a little less absurd than if you're suddenly curing people's blindness and missing limbs.

Personally, I've found hit and run tactics to be very useful for the Rebels. It forces the Imperial player to either defend his fleet but lock it down, or chose to take the hits and hope it's not too much damage. Assuming the Interdictors prevent retreating, they can be useful for protecting smaller fleets.

Personally, I've found hit and run tactics to be very useful for the Rebels. It forces the Imperial player to either defend his fleet but lock it down, or chose to take the hits and hope it's not too much damage. Assuming the Interdictors prevent retreating, they can be useful for protecting smaller fleets.

Personally, I've found hit and run tactics to be very useful for the Rebels. It forces the Imperial player to either defend his fleet but lock it down, or chose to take the hits and hope it's not too much damage. Assuming the Interdictors prevent retreating, they can be useful for protecting smaller fleets.

Personally, I've found hit and run tactics to be very useful for the Rebels. It forces the Imperial player to either defend his fleet but lock it down, or chose to take the hits and hope it's not too much damage. Assuming the Interdictors prevent retreating, they can be useful for protecting smaller fleets.

Personally, I've found hit and run tactics to be very useful for the Rebels. It forces the Imperial player to either defend his fleet but lock it down, or chose to take the hits and hope it's not too much damage. Assuming the Interdictors prevent retreating, they can be useful for protecting smaller fleets.