Didn't play Hoth yet so I'm not sure, why did he screw up the reinforcement wave? Where did the "10 the first time and 8 the second" come from? Wave 1: 10pts, 2 cards Wave 2: 10pts, 1 card Wave 3: 3pts, 1 card Total deployment cost of all 3 wave = 23

No, I do not take offense to it. The way I noticed was that I specifically told my opponent to simply have fun and not lookup skirmish strategies online (nor do I). What I'm worried about is eventually we'll reach the equilibrium where we'd both be playing competitive tournament lists in order to beat each other, which is the main problem that I want to fix! I do not want to play competitive tournament lists at home So the problem now is: phase 1 - my opponent doesn't look up strategy & tournament meta lists online, I don't play killer lists (ex. Han + Chewie/Vader...) phase 2 - my opponent starts picking up the game and notices "Hey these units are good!", I step up my game and no longer plays silly lists (right now) phase 3 - my opponent is well-versed in all the rules, unit abilities, command card selections...well he's trying to beat me so he starts picking up meta lists (ex. Jedi Luke + eRangers) even without looking up lists online (I assume he's not lying to me). So now we're trying to beat each other and if he's playing competitive tournament lists, then I must also start playing competitive lists I'm trying to move the "home meta" from phase 3 back to phase 1 or phase 2 TL;DR: I don't want to turn casual at-home skirmish into competitive tournament scene, will this bound to happen if I don't do anything? If yes, any suggestions on what can I do?

Normally we talk about "the meta list(s)" when we're referring to competitive tournament scenes, as in those lists will do very well in those 3 skirmish map (and 6 skirmish mission) currently in rotation BUT, is this also the case for any skirmish map? I'm not sure but my guts says no: the meta lists are well-suited for combat in those 3 skirmish maps, but might not do so well if we pick, say, Darth Vader's map or Wookiee Warrior's map. Yes the missions & deployment zones in those might not be exactly balanced, the point is they might be crushed by some other not-well-known lists in those maps My questions: 1. Would those "meta lists" perform equally well if we randomly pick a non-tournament map? 2. For those that never play competitive tournaments, should we care about tournament meta? 3. If given the choice, which one offers more randomization: construct list after map is chosen, or construct map after list is chosen? Which one would you prefer? I know in the tournament scene it's the latter case The reason is because I never play tournaments, but I want to punish/discourage a specific build when we're playing at home. I want to make it such that understanding the current tournament meta lists will NOT help either of us

Which is why I (with my group's permission) told my group that choosing 3/4 heroes as Diala + Fenn + Gideon warrants me to either play cutthroat Subversive Tactics or go down REAL hard & adjust missions as I see fit (ex. mission says to bring out rProbe, I bring out eProbe)

I'm not exactly sure if you meant what you said: are you playing as Rebel or Imperial? Heroes, allies, villains all have different meanings 1. I'm assuming you're Rebel: No, you choose the ally in the beginning of the mission, and they can never be redeployed (only Imp deploy/reinforce troops) 2. I'm assuming you're Imp: You spend influence to buy agenda cards, which you draw 4 in each upgrade stage. It's generally deemed to be unsportsmanlike and frowned upon for Imp to smack down a bazillion agenda cards in the finale

I look it as the same ruling as Lando's map: you wouldn't be able to spend VPs from the "count as" pool, they're here only for the final scoring (40 VP) Although I have to say unlike Lando, you can't actually lose VPs from Obi's map (in Lando you no longer have those "count as" if you no longer control it)

Blaise skirmish map requires Bespin. Bantha & Obi-Wan only require tiles from Core Anchorhead is from Obi-wan pack Correct, they rotate out the oldest map so (I think) it's the Bantha one People usually don't post command cards because they're either 1) private info or 2) fairly obvious. For example if you have a Rebel Ranger list you'd start off with Negation, Element of surprise, Grenadier or Reinforcement, probably those 2 that gives you extra MP, maybe throw in Squad swarm, assassinate...that's like 7/15 cards right there

Well, how competitive is your local scene, and what faction do you intend to play with? I'm assuming you want to sign up for FFG official tournaments (store/regional/national/world) and not just a casual game with some random stranger in your FLGS and they do not allow proxy figures/cards You'll need Bantha, Obi-wan, Agent Blaise (pack) + Bespin (expansion) as the bare minimum for the instruction & map tiles to actually construct the 3 official skirmish maps in rotation The rest depends on which faction do you actually want to play. Roughly speaking Rebels = big individual hitters, good synergy among figures. Imperial = raw firepower (ex. multi-figure eStorm), spies, flexible with movement (Imp Officer is still good even after nerf). Mercenary = dirty tricks, heavy melee/medium/long range shooters

I'll assume you're talking about the Campaign mode: 1. However many physical cards the game/pack comes with it, unless explicitly specified. So you can field 2 rProbe + 1eProbe (have 3 probe droids) at the same time, but you cannot have 2 eStorm at the same time because Stormtrooper pack specifically said no. Follow this logic you can field: 1 Bantha, 1 rHeavy trooper + 1 eHeavy trooper, 1 rRoyal Guard + 1 eRoyal Guard.... Jabba is another special one, I don't have rulebook in front of me but something about 2 groups at once (so "1 rJet + 1eJet", or "2 rJet" but not "2rJet + 1eJet") 2. Yes as long as you win his respective mission. Note not all packs come with an agenda mission though (ex. ISB, Hired Gun, Bantha pack). In those packs you may field those figures as open groups without having to win any prereq missions 3. Deployment cards? No. Every mission will have initial + reserved + open groups & those deployment cards goes back into your hand once entire card/group is defeated, with the exception of unique figures (ex. Vader) You might be thinking of Agenda cards: Jabba came with a new rule that says "Imp may only have 4 agenda cards, both secret and public, in place at the same time" to prevent Imp smacking down like 8 one-shot 1-influence nasty-surprise agenda cards in the finale, but I never play like that so ymmv

I think the confusion here is simply because "Blocking terrain blocks counting space and is only adj for the purpose of attacking" Even though it's not officially said in the rulebook, I'm 99% confident the correct ruling should be along the lines of "can the target figure be legally placed there? Yes = you can move it, No = choose another space then". So you may place a eProbe on that tree since it's a legal spot for it to be, but you cannot whip a Stormie up to that tree I agree with a1bert's logic, but feel free to send an inquiry for an official response

If you look closely to the 7-steps of attack (found in RRG pg. 5), you'll see "apply modifiers" happen in step 4 but "apply damage" is resolved at the very end. So the figure must have already suffered at least 1 damage for you to trigger Merciless Merciless is good against a "big bad wolf", and "Rapid Fire" is good against "many small minions". I can't count how many times my rHeavy survived and managed to shoot once because Rebels only did 5 damage, or having 2/3 of my rStorm at 2 damage (they only have 3HP each)

Are you looking for this? if you don't have BGG account, this will also work

Note that card says "Imperial Group", so you can disrupt Rebel's plan if they have a badly damaged hero from previous round (planning to go first & double rest), and you slam that card down to give 3 attacks from nearby Stormies (basically you get a free activation from one of your deploy card, 3 Stormies each gets to move + shoot) Very situational yes, but it's a pretty harsh surprise

or you know...you can shoot first

They're easily justified if you think them as "denying a slot for Rebel side missions" Also slash all wave 1's costing more than 10 by 4 (ATST = 10, Vader = 14, Han = 8, Chewie = 11...) to make it actually worthwhile, unless you're playing the new JR's Nemeses deck

I disagree with that logic, iirc JR's rulebook simply says you may not go below 0. Otherwise now we're talking about "yay! free VP" from Lando/Obi map even the wording specifically said "count as having X VP" rather than "gain X VP". I'm certain that's not how it's intended to play out Try to pretend "count as having" as one single English word rather than "having" vs. "gain" Might be a good idea to send an inquiry to FFG though, I'm happy to be corrected but I for now I'd stand with my original interpretation

well, (using same example as before) say we're playing on Lando's map I control the relic with a rStorm, I "count as having 6VP" now I spend 2VP for Jabba You killed my rStorm, I no longer "count as having 6VP" how much VP do I have? 0? -2? Hence I conclude you cannot spend VPs from those "count as have" pool, they're used for score-counting purposes only

That is not how this mission works. There is no mechanism for you to lose the patron VPs. You only need control of the Patron to be able to interact with them - doing so places the token on the Patron. From that point forward that token will remain on the Patron until end of game. The reason they state the rule the way they do is because the amount of VPs you get scales as you gain more Patrons. This is needed because there isn't anything that prevents you from putting multiple tokens on a single patron, but they only want you to gain points for each patron that has at least 1 token (there is no point in putting a 2nd token on a patron). I can see why you would argue that, since there's no way to lose those "count as having" VPs But still there's difference between the two, say Darth Vader's map - Leave no evidence ("to gain 6 VP") vs. Lando's map - Priceless relics ("count as having an additional 6 VP") For this map though I'd rule it as "You may not use Jabba to spend 2VP from your "count as having VP" pool". So you cannot use Order Hit just because you got 1 patron, but of course once you killed some dudes you can just say "I'll spend the 2VP from my "gained VP" pool"

From what I understand, "count as having VP" is simply a way of saying "temporarily, pretend it counts towards your score". Remember the game ends immediately once any player's got 40VP? That's what it's used for But "pretend it counts towards your score" is not the same as "you actually have it and cannot lose it". So no you cannot spend it with Jabba since you do not actually have the VP Where did you get this from? Any official ruling? I don't see anything in the rules that suggest you cannot spend those VPs. No, I don't have official rulings, I arrived at that conclusion simply by its wordings in which you may not spend VPs from "count as having" Otherwise, how would you deal with this case? Mission rule: A player that controls the patron count as having an additional 5VP I control it with a rStormie I spend 2VP with Jabba You then killed my rStormie, I no longer control it The explanation that makes the most sense to me is you flat out may not spend them

From what I understand, "count as having VP" is simply a way of saying "temporarily, pretend it counts towards your score". Remember the game ends immediately once any player's got 40VP? That's what it's used for But "pretend it counts towards your score" is not the same as "you actually have it and cannot lose it". So no you cannot spend it with Jabba since you do not actually have the VP

I'm confused, are you saying you cheat to punish min-maxers? Well it's not cheating if it's accepted by the group. That's why I said to make sure your Rebel players are fine with it, otherwise yeah it's cheating I'd much prefer to play with a dynamic difficulty (both as Rebel and Imperial player) than playing unbalanced missions and getting stomped (as Rebel and Imperial). Some examples includes A New Threat, Fly Solo, High Moon, Target of opportunity, Desperate Hour. I'd consider these as borderline broken/unwinnable Mission spoilers for High Moon to show what I'm talking about: Besides, if I notice you're going for min-max build (ex. Gideon Diala Fenn Gaark are all going for optimal build), then there's really no point of me playing because I know I'll get stomped, and we'd be playing as "who can come up with the most optimal strategy" rather than "let's have a good time playing as Star Wars heroes". Each one to their own taste (maybe all of you like to play competitively) but I don't find that fun: leave the competitive/cutthroat play to skirmish mode, campaign is about story-telling

What would I do if I were you: play "A New Threat" by the book and go really cutthroat, just to punch the Rebels in the face and let them know the might of Galactic Empire After that, ask if your Rebels wants to play "thematically" or "not always play by book". Unless it's your first campaign as Imperial you'll usually have a pretty good sense of how to balance it out/which mission to change, but make sure to run it through your Rebel players & everyone agrees Campaign is much more fun imo if you don't always play by the book, it allows me to heavily punish min-maxers + adjust mission difficulty + potentially make up my own stories on the fly bottom line: it's much easier to be powerful then go easy on Rebels, than being stomped by Rebels then trying to come back

"playing strictly by the books" means that you guys are doing exactly what the campaign guide says (ex. book says to bring out eStorm once this door opens, you bring out eStorm once it opens). Some missions are ridiculously hard/borderline impossible to win as Imperial/Rebel if you play by the book, and your next mission "A New Threat" is one of them it sounds like you're going the droid route (the other route would be trooper). I'd say don't worry about it, try to win "A New Threat" (you shouldn't have too much trouble). Right now you have 3xp (2 mission = 2, houserule +1) - 1 = 2xp left. Win it and you'll have 4xp then get one of those 3/4xp ones As a side note: iirc the houserule xp bonus is supposed to be "lose 3 mission in a row" or "lose 2 story mission in a row", not just any "lose 2 mission in a row", because the winner gets an extra +1 xp for winning Story missions (except Aftermath)

I'm not too familiar with TechSup deck, have you bought anything yet? I've heard some good stuff about TS's 3xp and 4xp cards Don't worry about losing too much, if you guys are playing strictly by the books, they'll most likely be crushed next mission

I'd say Desperate Hour is the most imbalanced mission I've ever played, he needs some insider information to even have a chance to put up a fight (even that I didn't say "chance to win", I said "to put up a fight") Normally we would consider "wound all 4 on last dice roll" as "balanced". Desperate Hour I've killed off (i.e. withdraw) 3/4 heroes without even thinking