I was looking over the possibilities of round 1 expansions using Shattered Empires SC's. It is 3 player game so everyone gets 2 SC's. If I can get Imperial II and production ( using the secondary of production would work too) I can potentially benefit from my Sarween tools 3 times with a single spacedock right? Once for Using option B on Imperial II , once for Production, and again if I activate my system.

Although trade would be pretty good, I am using the Jol-Nar and my best production world is Resource 2+ 2 from space dock + 1 Environmental Comp= 5 units I can produce, so I could easily get more resources than I can use from trade and my planets. My limiting factor I think is my production cap. especially since I already have 2 carriers but only 2 GFs.

Can I use Sarween tools on each production? If I build nothing else that can be 2 free GFs?

I doubt I can pull it off but the other 2 players are not real savvy, so maybe. I can see doing it, if I go early and can get the Production SC, they may overlook the Imperial II. And I doubt trade will last long with Hacan playing, and I think production is more valuable to me.

Yes, you can do that.

For what is worth, if going by the book you shouldn't be using Imperial (1 or 2) and Production in the same game.

Of course, you can house rule it, but having duplicate effects is part of why the rules prevent such.

Oh, is "production" the white card #8? I haven't played with them much. When he said he was selecting both I assumed production was #4 or something.

I will have to see where that is illegal I thought it was legit.

Forgotten Lore: production is #4. But #8 can be Imperial I, Imperial II, or Bueracracy. the secondary of imperial II allows you to produce at a Space Dock without activating the system, similar to the primary of Production except without the +2 RES.

Production is from Shards of the Throne and Imperial II is from Shattered Empires.

Production is the #4 card.

The reason it's "illegal" is that if you are playing by the rules as written, you start by choosing either the "base game" set of strategy cards, or the "expansion" set of strategy cards, and you can then swap out any cards that have another version with the same name. You do not just choose number-by-number independently. The rules for this are in the section in Shattered Empire which I think is called "Variant Strategy Cards" or "Alternate Strategy Cards". Basically, those with same-name can be swapped out, those without are used as a "set".

So if you chose the base set of cards, you'd have Initiative, Diplomacy*, Political@, Logistics, Trade*@, Warfare*, Technology*, and Imperial*. All the *'d ones have same-name cards with a II, so you could mix-and-match the I's and II's as you see fit (IE, you could use Diplomacy II, Trade II, and Imperial II but leave Warfare and Technology). The two marked with @ have alternates in Shards of the Throne with the same name, too (Political II and Trade III).

If you choose the expansion set of cards, you'd have Leadership, Diplomacy II*, Assembly@, Production, Trade II*@, Warfare II*, Technology II* and Bureaucracy. Again, the *'d ones have same-name cards in the base set that you could swap out, and the @ ones have alternates in Shards that you could use.

So, if going by the rules, there is no "official" way to have Imperial and Production in the same game. Of course, you can make a house rule to do whatever you want, but going by the book, if you have Imperial, you are also going to have Logistics; if you have Production, you are going to have Bureaucracy.

Essentially, the 1-2-4-8 cards are going to be used as a group, either Initiative-Political-Logistics-Imperial, or Leadership-Assembly-Production-Bureaucracy.

I hope that makes sense

Yeah I looked it up. Imperial II is only used as alt to imperial I when using the base set. Sad really since beuracracy is garbage. It also interferes when using age of empires option since the objective card reveal is pointless since they are all are revealed anyway. Or do I have to use that option with the base set of cards only?

I agree the Bureaucracy as-written is not compatible with Age of Empire, but there are some simple house-rule variants for that.

I disagree that it's garbage - I like it a lot more than Imperial, especially in the middle-and-late games. Being able to choose the next objective is very handy, especially if you are in the lead and Imperium Rex is coming up. Plus, it lets you claim an objective immediately (as well as one at the end of the turn). While Imperial II does let you claim multiple objectives also, you must wait until the end of the turn, and sometimes it's nice to claim it "right now", because game state could change (such as "I now control Mecatol Rex").

I would happily play with either set, but I do prefer Bureaucracy over Imperial - I just find it to be a lot more interesting.

One of the things I liked about Imperial I from the original set was that if you wanted that SC you had to wait until initiative 8 to go and the secondary was an awesome effect for your enemies. Basically you really paid for that awesome primary ability. And every round it was a tough decision to take it or not to take it.

One thing I hated about Diplomacy I was that, especially early game, the primary really sucked and the secondary was really nice. Made that SC gather bonus counters in the early game. Even late game it was rarely selected.

I feel that bureaucracy is more closer to Diplomacy I than Imperial I in usefulness and it falls all the way at the end of initiate order too. The primary is so so until you get past the empire building stage to focus on objectives and even then you are revealing that objective for everyone else as well to qualify in the Status phase (yes you get an advantage to claim an Objective immediately and in the status phase). The secondary is meager too with 1 action and 1 political card it is not a real contender for my strategy counters. Heck I may even save my Counter for the next round even if there was no other viable use for my Strategy counters that round. If you use the SC too early you will reveal objectives for which you may not qualify but your opponents, who are gobbling up tech advances or building their stack of TGs, may. And they did not even have to waste their choice of SC to reveal the objective.

Imperial II on the other hand requires more contention for control of Mecatol Rex. Other player may grab the SC to deny the controller of MR the VP or wrestle for control of MR. It is good to grab on any round of the game even if it is just to have exclusive use of its awesome secondary ability. If you use the VP primary you are giving your opponents access to the nice secondary. It is not as powerful as Imperial I's +2 VP ,but that seemed a bit over the top and made it a must have card with the contenders for vistory being the ones who could grab that card the most.

Overlap of abilities? Yes, Imperial II's secondary overlaps with production but you are not losing out on a lot since the political cards and action cards you lose from bureaucracy you can get from Assembly anyway. probably another viable build could be to replace production and leadership with Logistics and Initiative although you would have to reconcile the speaker token since assembly and Initiative both allow a player to claim it. And yes, those would need to be house ruled.

Sorry for the rant, bureaucracy just seems so bland to me although I recognized that Imperial II is a round peg in a square hole somewhat.

If you want multiple builds, the most common SC switch is keeping Warfare I card instead of using Warfare II card.

You build at your space dock. Use Warfare I to remove the counter. Then use Production to build again. Then later, build again at your space dock.

If you are going to replace Leadership and Production with Leadership Initiative and Logistics, along with using Imperial, you may as well just stick with Political anyway.

I do agree Imperial II is better than Imperial I, but since it doesn't mesh as well with Leadership/Assembly/Production, I like Bureaucracy much better in the sense of a set, plus I like the ability to control what the next objective is. Sure, Assembly can give you AC/PCs, but if you don't use Bureaucracy the ONLY way to get more ACs is at the end of round, or to actually take Assembly; the only way to get PCs is to actually take Assembly.

Granted, it's all a matter of personal taste, of course And you can always house rule it however you want for your group

Actually I said if you replace production with logistics you should use use initiative instead of leadership. Otherwise you have 2 cards giving you command counters.

Why do you think it is an issue to only get action or political cards from assembly or the end of the round? In the base set you only got action cards from 1 SC (political)and status phase anyway? If you like action cards considered using politics, since you get way more from that one card that from assembly and bureaucracy combined. Personally I am not sure a Strategy Counter is worth spending on an AC and a potential trade good.

Most times the political card is a Trade Good

Actually I said if you replace production with logistics you should use use initiative instead of leadership. Otherwise you have 2 cards giving you command counters.

Why do you think it is an issue to only get action or political cards from assembly or the end of the round? In the base set you only got action cards from 1 SC (political)and status phase anyway? If you like action cards considered using politics, since you get way more from that one card that from assembly and bureaucracy combined. Personally I am not sure a Strategy Counter is worth spending on an AC and a potential trade good.

Most times the political card is a Trade Good

Re the first sentence: That was a typo on my part I put "Leadership" in there twice, the second one should be Initiative. Basically my point was, at that point you are already switching 3 of the 4 cards may as well just use the whole set of 4 and do it "by the book" at that point.

Why do I think it's an issue? Because it changes the dynamics of the game. Whether that's something you want or not is up to you, but I don't think the game is improved by reducing the amount of Action Cards in play, and can make the Yssaril even stronger because with less AC's, their extra AC means that much more. They certainly don't need more power.

As for whether a Strategy Counter is worth the AC, it can be hit or miss, and it may depend on what race you are (races that use CC's to power their abilities have a higher premium on their worth), but I'm rarely disappointed by drawing an extra AC when I can. I don't always use it if I'm short on CCs that round, but if I'm doing well in that department, I almost always take it. But it's the OPTION of taking it that I like - a player who is falling behind on ACs is more likely to want another one so they can at least have the show of strength. A player with no ACs in hand tends to get targeted by stuff a lot because the other players know they can't do much about it.

But again, it could just depend on personal preference. I definitely do NOT like the idea that the only way to get ACs is to take the Assembly card and activate its primary.

It all comes down to preference. The game won't break by introducing a house rule to mix-and-match the non-same-name cards, but I personally would not enjoy it as much with the overlaps and missing bits that comes from that.

Good points. But I was actually thinking the opposite with the Yssaril. I was thinking a Yssaril a small hand of cards was better than a whole grip of cards in his hand (good for others). He won't need to sacrifice his agents since he is bound to have multiple sabotage cards with a large hand of cards making your cards useless while he has a card for any circumstance and spam them out making your sabotage cards more useless.

Definitely some things to consider and I know that it is a tricky game to mix the strategy cards and maintain balance.

The Yssaril will pretty much always have more cards than anyone else - they get twice as many at the end of the round, and have no hand limit. So while reducing the amount people get does impact them, it won't be that bad for them. And if they get the racial tech that lets them steal cards from other players, it makes having a lower hand-limit all around that much more painful for everyone else, and every time they steal a card, it boosts them AND hurts the other player that much more.

Since players are going to be hard-pressed to out-card the Yssaril, the best way to counter it is to have a good hand of cards yourself.