Should the damage cards from two boxed sets be combined into one deck? Or is that a bad idea? Are there any particularly mean criticals that should only be seen once in a deck of damage cards?

It is not a bad idea to have a combined damage deck as C-3PO will still say that the probabilities of a certain card will be the same. But as a general rule it is best to just use one complete deck.

It's against the tournament rules to have anything other than a single standard damage deck for each player. With two core sets, each player can use their own deck.

A standard deck has two each of the Pilot and Ship cards, and seven of the Direct Hit (double damage) cards.

Standard approach is not to mix damage decks. In most play, each player will have their own deck. Mixing them may not screw with the distribution, but it will certainly change the maximum (which is 7 Direct Hits, and 2 for everything else).

A deck for each player! That's awesome.

Thanks!

I had a player roll up to a tournament with an "expanded" damage deck. He routinely likes to play 300-500 point games so he'd combined three decks. As TO, I just ruled it out straight away as I wasn't prepared to make the rest of the players wait while he sifted out one deck and then have me check it. We decided that each game would have just one deck for both players, and it worked fine.

Combining decks is more trouble than it's worth. Anyone that buys a second core set, should just leave one complete deck in the box.

Should the damage cards from two boxed sets be combined into one deck? Or is that a bad idea? Are there any particularly mean criticals that should only be seen once in a deck of damage cards?

NO!! It messes with card distribution after the first card is drawn. What someone considered a "mean critical" will vary from squadron to squadron as some would considered the one dropping PS to 0 to be death on a high PS ship or "so what" on a low PS ship.

The damage deck is 33 specific cards: 7 direct hit cards and 2 of each of the other cards. The problem with mixing them is it chances the chances after the first card is drawn. Ignoring the direct hit cards there is a 2/33 chance of drawing a given card as the first card; this is actually the same as the 4/66 chance with two decks. The problem is that after you have drawn that first card the odds of drawing a second card of that same kind drops to 1/32 with one deck (3.13%) but is still 3/65 (4.62%) if you have two decks mixed together which is significantly higher. Mixing decks DEFINITELY screws up distribution as soon as the first card is drawn.

If for some reason one damage deck will not have enough cards the game rules say you ignore [crits] and just use tokens to represent cards that should be drawn. I'll say you could just use some other kind of token to represent any face-down card that is dealt; if a face-up card is dealt that comes from the deck and if anything would flip a token/face-down card you replace the token with an actual card which then stays in play. As the only "known" cards are actual cards the distribution of cards in the damage check remains unchanged because you have no way of knowing what an unrevealed card should be. If by some miracle you manage to get 33 "known" damage cards being in play at the same time then you can go back to ignoring crits although I'm not sure how you'd get to that state in any real game.

The damage deck is 35 specific cards: 7 direct hit cards and 2 of each of the other cards.

33, not 35.

The damage deck is 35 specific cards: 7 direct hit cards and 2 of each of the other cards.

33, not 35.

Oops. Not paying enough attention although I knew the numbers are odd. Need to fix some stuff although the general idea is still the same.

I know the tournament rules allow one deck per player, but my personal preference is one deck for both players.

I know the tournament rules allow one deck per player, but my personal preference is one deck for both players.

The tournament rules don't allow one deck per player - they require it.

The TO can (of course) modify for his local event as he sees fit, but it's worth being clear about what the baseline is.

I know the tournament rules allow one deck per player, but my personal preference is one deck for both players.

The tournament rules don't allow one deck per player - they require it.

The TO can (of course) modify for his local event as he sees fit, but it's worth being clear about what the baseline is.

While that's true, when I get a player pull out a damage deck of 99 cards, an on-the-spot ruling is the easiest way to go. And down in my neck of the woods, there's no such thing as an official FFG tournament. I think the nearest FFG tournament is likely to be in Australia. That doesn't mean we don't play by the tournament rules, though.

I just attended a major wargaming event at Wellington, NZ and the best they could scrape up for a competition was 6 players. Unfortunately, the lack of player support down here is probably leading FFG to think the New Zealand market is too small to worry about.

I know the tournament rules allow one deck per player, but my personal preference is one deck for both players.

I don't believe that using one deck for both players will alter the probabilities of a certain card anytime a face-up card is called for.

Now before someone asks how two players having their own deck would be different from from two players drawing from two decks shuffled together it is simply that one deck operates with complete disregard to the other deck. Drawing 30 cards from one deck does nothing to alter the probabilities in the other deck.

I don't care too much about the probabilities changing depending on the number decks used. None of the regular players I play with are number crunchers. We just find it more convenient to use one deck. It's never been an issue for us.

I don't care too much about the probabilities changing depending on the number decks used. None of the regular players I play with are number crunchers. We just find it more convenient to use one deck. It's never been an issue for us.

I'm just pointing out that using one deck does NOT cause any issues. At least no issues beyond "whose cards are these?" when everything is done. Using one deck is definitely better than mixing two decks.

If both decks are yours, it works just fine. Same percentage to pull a certain card. There is, of course, the very very VERY small chance of pulling 10 direct hits in a row, but at that point I'm not even mad. That's just amazing

If both decks are yours, it works just fine. Same percentage to pull a certain card. There is, of course, the very very VERY small chance of pulling 10 direct hits in a row, but at that point I'm not even mad. That's just amazing

It also "works" if you rig a deck by taking out all of those Direct Hit cards and replacing them with something more forgiving to whatever you are flying.

If you mix two decks together you have the same percentage chance of pulling a certain card ONLY with the first card you pull. After that card is pulled your odds are vastly different. Pull a Direct Hit card with one deck the odds of then next card you see being a Direct Hit are 6/32 or 18.75% but mix two decks and your odds are 13/65 or 20%; the difference there isn't quite as bad with any other card but they certainly are NOT "the same."

I know the tournament rules allow one deck per player, but my personal preference is one deck for both players.

The tournament rules don't allow one deck per player - they require it.

The TO can (of course) modify for his local event as he sees fit, but it's worth being clear about what the baseline is.

While that's true, when I get a player pull out a damage deck of 99 cards, an on-the-spot ruling is the easiest way to go. And down in my neck of the woods, there's no such thing as an official FFG tournament. I think the nearest FFG tournament is likely to be in Australia. That doesn't mean we don't play by the tournament rules, though.

I just attended a major wargaming event at Wellington, NZ and the best they could scrape up for a competition was 6 players. Unfortunately, the lack of player support down here is probably leading FFG to think the New Zealand market is too small to worry about.

Wow, the Wellington scene sounds bad- tournaments down here in Chch fill up pretty quick. Hell, there's a tournament on the west coast in November which I guarantee will have a decent number of players (though the fact it's being held in Monteiths Brewery probably helps)

Yeah, that was at Call to Arms, hosted by the Warlords. I was a little surprised at the low numbers for the X-Wing comp. The rest of the comps had good numbers and there were a couple of big demo games. The X-Wing was all over on the Saturday, so there were a couple of empty tables on Sunday. Good convention otherwise.

The Warlords Facebook page has some good pics, as did NZ Wargaming News.

@Two-Hands: have you seen NZ Wargaming News' page?