I have been on the Rebel train this whole time and won a regional with it. I think you need to mid round attack or deep strike turn one. The squad is not amazing but the rebel curve is not as big as people think.

You also have to factor in that the Chicago guys are more layed back and they like to play a lot of fun stuff like AT-ST x2. So I knew testing something a little different would be the perfect place to do it. This might be a big reason why you didn't see Zero Vader or 9 act or 4/4.

I am a light player and love how the Sabs play from my WOTC days so I will play them even if I didn't think they would do well anyway. I like the Rebel list because its a theme build to the point also.

I had Explostive Weaponly x2 early vs the imperial build 8 act build I played. Vs Imperials when we played Smuggled goods I got Urgency , and Change of plans turn 1. I also got off a good Blast turn 1. Yes I got really good draws and Missions both games when I needed it. You also have to understand I played a build like sabs back in the minis days. They were gungans and played a lot like sabs. My skill level playing sabs I think is a lot higher than most.

In round 1 I made like 9 dodges and 4-5 in a row. I was really rusty from not playing. Yes I got really good draws in game 2 and 3 but they weren't even close and I am not sure it was going to matter.

In a four+ round tournament and 20+ players I think Rebels are better since odds the best players are playing each other and the matchups will be more all over the map.

On top of EW x2 I have two other ways to take away the dice of the officers and its not that hard to get double Surge. You can also setup luke a lot of time. also you really only need to take out one officer or two since you do have 7 acts.

I fail to understand how this can be held up as evidence "Imperial is not that bad". What I read here is if you play the right Rebel list and get really lucky then you can beat them. You played 1 Imperial list with 8+ Acts and basically enabled God mode via your rolls. How can that be held up as evidence everything is fine?

Doesn't this really just further my point?

I am not calling play skill or anything into question. Just that everything you typed since sarcastically saying "lol nerf E Sabs" really just shows just how a combinatiin of play skill + casual competition + low round count + luck is basically the best Rebels can hope for, to make no mention of Scum. The point of this thread is to create an environment where play skill is the only factor that causes the outcome.

I fail to understand how this can be held up as evidence "Imperial is not that bad". What I read here is if you play the right Rebel list and get really lucky then you can beat them. You played 1 Imperial list with 8+ Acts and basically enabled God mode via your rolls. How can that be held up as evidence everything is fine?

Doesn't this really just further my point?

I am not calling play skill or anything into question. Just that everything you typed since sarcastically saying "lol nerf E Sabs" really just shows just how a combinatiin of play skill + casual competition + low round count + luck is basically the best Rebels can hope for, to make no mention of Scum. The point of this thread is to create an environment where play skill is the only factor that causes the outcome.

You're right, anecdotal evidence is terrible. Instead let's consider the winning regionals lists so far as an alternative form of evidence; four out of the eleven winners recorded in the other thread are Rebels. That's just a little more substantive, and also proves that the sky isn't falling in near so terrible a fashion as you're making out.

We may not know, but I strongly suspect (and I doubt you will disagree), that neither of them will have an ability like "prevents Imperial Officers using their Command action".

And even if they have something even better, and the meta becomes nothing but dozens of Hired Guns instead of Imperial Officers: is that really an improvement? You have to buy the latest, greatest units because the Core Set is hugely imbalanced in favour of Officers and the only way to top that is to buy some other specific unit instead? What is this, 40K?

That's boba's ability, if the officers order someone adjacent to boba the figure will take 2 damage. This plus all the new ways to get past cower give a clear indication that FFG take the imperial officer balance seriously. But because these will have been in development since before the core set was released they will have been tested against 2 cost IO's, FFG won't errata the officer unless these new releases fail to balance the meta.

The current problem is that good imperial RG + IO lists can be built from a single core set.

Sabs May provide the best counter to IO's but they cost additional £'s for each unit you use.

This skews the meta towards IO builds and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, this does not mean that the officer is broken because it would have been tested against the full range of rebel builds (no £ barrier).

Some missions may be NPE in the current environment against certain matchups but that may change when the mission list changes for the next OP season.

Have faith that things will get better.

You also have to factor in that the Chicago guys are more layed back and they like to play a lot of fun stuff like AT-ST x2. So I knew testing something a little different would be the perfect place to do it. This might be a big reason why you didn't see Zero Vader or 9 act or 4/4.

So wait. Rebels won Chicago because everyone was playing softball? (Which is a fine way to play, don't get me wrong, when not at tournaments I do exactly the same). That puts things in a slightly different light.

You're right, anecdotal evidence is terrible. Instead let's consider the winning regionals lists so far as an alternative form of evidence; four out of the eleven winners recorded in the other thread are Rebels. That's just a little more substantive, and also proves that the sky isn't falling in near so terrible a fashion as you're making out.

OK, let's look at those lists .

In 11 winning lists, 7 of which were Imperial, we see 20 Imperial Officers. 12 (8) and 23 including the top seed in Ohio. 4/4 appears three times. So we're seeing twice as many Imperial Officers as winning lists, or an average of 3 per winning Imperial list. Doesn't that suggest they're a bit too much like an auto-include?

Rebel victories included Chicago where (if Jonnyb815 is correct) nobody turned up with a hard Imperial list like 9Act or 4/4; Seattle where there were only 3 players total; and Ohio where a player with an Officer-heavy list had already beaten the top four (including the eventual winner) but had to leave before he could complete his victory. That leaves one Rebel winner (and, by the way, zero Scum) that can't be discounted out of hand. All that shows is that it's not impossible to win with Rebels (did anyone suggest it was?)... it's still hugely, heavily imbalanced in favour of Imperials with plenty of Officers. That's what the evidence shows.

It doesn't matter how good a figures ability is if they are dead, the people who kill the officers early have less of a problem with them. That's why the counters to cower are important.

Boba, like any figure, is intended to be used intelligently.

This is not an LCG, you don't just buy one of everything and have access to a complete playset. If you want a complete play set you have to buy some figure packs up to 6 times. People who throw more money at the game can build better (or at least different) squads. That business model was clear from the very start.

There are a lot if things to take into account when deciding if a figure needs an errata:

Missions

Command cards

Pool of figures

Meta answers

Barriers to entry

Things in development

Is the figure actually broken

You seem to have jumped to the last one on the list when you should first consider what else could be done to fix the problem.

Officer heavy lists will always be a thing, because even years from now a new player will start out with just a core set which railroads them down the imperial route and encourages the use of officers.

4 officers is only 20% of your points, even if they stay popular as the range of figures increases you still have 80% of your points to customize a squad. Increasing them to 3 points might nerf them but if they stay popular 4xIO lists will only have 70% to customize their squads. This could backfire and make IO lists even more samey.

Mid round attacking and early round striking is how you beat a officer build. Since they are so use to doing to same think early this is when you strike. They aren't that use to getting hit mid round since they have board control.

Just because there was zero Vader or 4/4 and 9 act has not shown up for some reason at nationals even though its pretty easy to build and I think is one of the answers to 4/4 doesnt mean the skill level or the level of squads was that much lower. RGC or Vader 7 act or the 4 act RGC/RG is deadly if you can get the right map. Jim took fifth with it at KC and 2nd at the may the 4th event. All three players I played are top players once they get use to the game. They understand the basics of other games.

My Sab list can beat Vader 6-0 with it. It can beat RGC but its harder since he can get that extra attack if I am not ready for it. 4/4 is the biggest problem for my squad but if they group together and not spread out I think my squad can win.

OK, let's look at those lists .

In 11 winning lists, 7 of which were Imperial, we see 20 Imperial Officers. 12 (8) and 23 including the top seed in Ohio. 4/4 appears three times. So we're seeing twice as many Imperial Officers as winning lists, or an average of 3 per winning Imperial list. Doesn't that suggest they're a bit too much like an auto-include?

Sure? It's a limited pool of figures, and some are better than others. That's going to happen, and we're still on wave 1. Have a little faith, and some patience.

Rebel victories included Chicago where (if Jonnyb815 is correct) nobody turned up with a hard Imperial list like 9Act or 4/4; Seattle where there were only 3 players total; and Ohio where a player with an Officer-heavy list had already beaten the top four (including the eventual winner) but had to leave before he could complete his victory. That leaves one Rebel winner (and, by the way, zero Scum) that can't be discounted out of hand. All that shows is that it's not impossible to win with Rebels (did anyone suggest it was?)... it's still hugely, heavily imbalanced in favour of Imperials with plenty of Officers. That's what the evidence shows.

What the evidence shows is a generally casual community with fairly limited interest in playing skirmish at a competitive level, if at all. We could attribute those qualities to many factors, not the least of which is the relative newness of Imperial Assault. The game isn't falling apart because of IO spam, and it's not going to disappear off the face of the planet any time soon because of it either. To declare that the game is "hugely, heavily imbalanced" because of a meta decision to spam certain figures (people drive the game, not the cards themselves) is more than a little a subjective, and a bit hyperbolic as well.

OK, let's look at those lists .

In 11 winning lists, 7 of which were Imperial, we see 20 Imperial Officers. 12 (8) and 23 including the top seed in Ohio. 4/4 appears three times. So we're seeing twice as many Imperial Officers as winning lists, or an average of 3 per winning Imperial list. Doesn't that suggest they're a bit too much like an auto-include?

Sure? It's a limited pool of figures, and some are better than others. That's going to happen, and we're still on wave 1. Have a little faith, and some patience.

Rebel victories included Chicago where (if Jonnyb815 is correct) nobody turned up with a hard Imperial list like 9Act or 4/4; Seattle where there were only 3 players total; and Ohio where a player with an Officer-heavy list had already beaten the top four (including the eventual winner) but had to leave before he could complete his victory. That leaves one Rebel winner (and, by the way, zero Scum) that can't be discounted out of hand. All that shows is that it's not impossible to win with Rebels (did anyone suggest it was?)... it's still hugely, heavily imbalanced in favour of Imperials with plenty of Officers. That's what the evidence shows.

What the evidence shows is a generally casual community with fairly limited interest in playing skirmish at a competitive level, if at all. We could attribute those qualities to many factors, not the least of which is the relative newness of Imperial Assault. The game isn't falling apart because of IO spam, and it's not going to disappear off the face of the planet any time soon because of it either. To declare that the game is "hugely, heavily imbalanced" because of a meta decision to spam certain figures (people drive the game, not the cards themselves) is more than a little a subjective, and a bit hyperbolic as well.

The problem is the relatively small group of players playing skirmish regularly currently are all turned off if not quitting outright because of nothing being done to curb Imperial. The point remains that you can't simply hope that a year from now when the environment is (hopefully) better that all of a sudden everyone will come rushing back. I know I won't, if it comes to that.

Players do drive the meta from a theoretical standpoint, but there is also a component that is driven by the game state. People did not just will Dash/Decimator lists in X-Wing into being the meta. They started with a ship that was generally good and then built something around it that made it the strongest. The compounded it with testing until the lists we currently see were identified as being the meta. The same can be said about the Officer here. I seriously doubt that a group of players just decided to play spam Officers (one of the least iconic minis in the range) and that they happened to be the loudest group or something. The officer was ridiculous and a lot of people noticed and are now capitalizing on it, to the detriment of the other factions and many players.

You're also discounting the rampant net-decking that occurs, in part because of discussions like these. This thread is drawing way too much positive attention to a card or figure that people are in no way obliged to use in order to earn a win, when what we could be doing is exploring other avenues toward victory. That seems a more viable, proactive approach than scoffing at players who've actually won regionals with a Rebel list.

Keep up the doomsaying, if you like. This game is still in its infancy, and if you can bring yourself to give other players a little bit of credit you might realize that we're smart enough to not give up on a game only 6 months after launch.

High level players don't have to play the best squads to do well. Louis is one of the best players in the Chicago area. Matt is one of the better players in the madison area. Nate is new to the game but the level of play was not low.

4/4 and 9 act are good but I think rebels are the best squads to beat them it'd just the speed missions that cause them kind of a problem but I got all the cards I needed when it was drawn.

Sounds like to me... extra sets of rebel saboteurs.. combats a bunch of officers... money solves the problem. And its cheap, probably just one set of saboteurs cures the issue. If you can't spend some $$ to fix the balance then playing this game isn't for you.

Sounds like to me... extra sets of rebel saboteurs.. combats a bunch of officers... money solves the problem. And its cheap, probably just one set of saboteurs cures the issue. If you can't spend some $$ to fix the balance then playing this game isn't for you.

...........

I own four squads of Saboteurs and have since the day Wave 1 released. I own four because Johnny and I discussed his list a week before wave 1 came out. I have played Johnny's list easily 15+ times against Imperials 8+Act lists. I just have not seen even half of the success he has. Take from that what you will, but please do not assume I am just missing something.

Sounds like to me... extra sets of rebel saboteurs.. combats a bunch of officers... money solves the problem. And its cheap, probably just one set of saboteurs cures the issue. If you can't spend some $$ to fix the balance then playing this game isn't for you.

...........

I own four squads of Saboteurs and have since the day Wave 1 released. I own four because Johnny and I discussed his list a week before wave 1 came out. I have played Johnny's list easily 15+ times against Imperials 8+Act lists. I just have not seen even half of the success he has. Take from that what you will, but please do not assume I am just missing something.

Luck might be a factor, but so is skill. Accurate comparisons between lists can only be made if all other factors are equal. Let's assume that you've both played enough games that your dice rolls have regressed fairly close to the mean, thereby eliminating luck as a factor. Can you compare your relative skill levels?

---

More on topic, here's another idea for "fixing" the Imperial Officer: the stunned condition permits a figure to use only non-special actions for a turn, except to clear the condition.

I'm new to this forum. Before coming here, I had the idea, that i'm doing something wrong, or maybe don't understand the rules correctly or something. I googled my issue and came up here. I've read a lot, Now I know, I understand he rules correctly. The Imperial Officer is just unbalanced. And it's a no-brainer.

My first game was the tutorial Mission. I saw that the Vader list was only 38 Points, so I put the Officer in. I won the game by Vader and the Officer alone.

Therefore, for my second game I removed 1 Stormtrooper and used 3 more Imperial Officers instead. It was a massacre. But my Opponent played well and focused all attacks on Vader. Vader was down to 3 health and my opponent showed me the celebration card on his hand after the game.

So for game 3, I just wanted to remove the unique deployment card. I replaced Vader with 2 Probe Droids and 1 Royal Guard. Activation management was not my aim, just coincidence. It was a mess. I don't think, that this friend of mine will ever play IA again.

And it's a no-brainer. Everybody can come up with this within 3 games, when even me can do so ...

I really love this game and I hope that FFG fixes the Imperial Officer.

But I hate house rules per se.

Just my oppinion.

What's the value of an opinion formed after only four games?

I did not say, that I only played four games till now . I can assure you that till now I played a lot more games than that. I just said that the unbalance of the Imperial Officer is so obvious that everybody can see it after 3 games.

In my opinion no opinion is of any value (including my own), if you can't support it with facts. Therefore let me add some facts to support what I said:

We are talking about a figure that costs 2 points, which has the ability to spend one of ist own actions to give a move action to any other figure. As the Imperial Officer is the cheapest figure in the game, the figure that receives the move action can not be a cheaper figure. Most likely it will be a far more expensive figure. This alone can not be balanced. The most expensive figure is 9 times as expensive. Honestly, how could it be fair, that one spends an action with a 2-point figure to get a free action for an 18-point figure.

It's like earning 180.000$ a year, but paying taxes for only 20.000$ a year. What do you think would the IRS do, if you do that?

But the Imperial Officer's order is even better than that: The figure that receives the move action does not spend it during its activation. This allows figures to move in situations, where they would not want to activate.

E.g.: Vader want's to activate later that turn but has to move out of some danger now. Vader can move out without wasting his activation. Any strategic advantage the opponent might have build up against Vader is destroyed by 1 activation of a 2-point figure.

E.g.: An E-Web wants to move and shoot in the same turn. The only disadvantage the e-Web has is countered by this 2-point figure.

The tactical advantage of this fact is immense.

Furthermore, the Imperial Officer is the cheapest figure with the leader keyword. Some of the best command cards have the leader keyword. Most of these cards give benefits to other figures. Again, as the Imperial Officer is the cheapest figure in the game, the figures that get the benefit are most likely way more expensive. This is already brilliant.

To use the same cards, a Rebel Player has to pay for Gideon Argus (150% as expensive), Fenn Signis (450% as expensive) or Han Solo (600% as expensive). How can that be fair?

All that describes just one ability of this figure: Being a leader/giving orders.

Even if the rest of this figure would totally s**k, this ability alone would be worth more than that 2 points.

But let's ignore the keyword and the order ability for just one moment.

I think the regular Stormtrooper is perfectly balanced and I assume that noone will argue that. So let's compare the Imperial Officer to a regular Stormtrooper, ignoring keyword and order ability: Same cost, same health, same move, two surges the same, the Imperial Officer has a great additional surge, both of them roll 1 defense die (I don't want to argue if black or white is better), both roll 1 blue and 1 additional attack die. Usually I'd argue, that the green die is better than the yellow one, but the additional surge ability makes up for that. The Imperial Officer rerolls 1 defense die, if your positioning is good. The Stormtrooper rerolls 1 attack die, if your positioning is good.

At that point, still ignoring keyword and order, I would say that these to figures are more or less equally good.

On top of that, the Imperial Officer gives you one activation for two points. Having more activations than the oppont definitly is really good in this game. It gives you tactical advantage. I guess we do not need to argue that?

So at this point the Imperial Officer is already better than the Stormtrooper.

And now let's put the keyword and the order ability back into the equation.

What will be the result of this equation?

The goodness of an activation for just 2 points can't be stressed enough. I'd probably pay 2 points for a blank card that simply lets me pass a turn back to my opponent.

But actually, I don't like to just point out a problem. I'd rather come up with solutions:

In my opinion something has to be done about that issue. Without changing the officer, everyone will play 4 officers all the time forever. Or the game will die, because everyone is bored to death.

The order ability could be errata'ed. E.g. "Choose an adjacent friendly figure. That figure may perform an additional move action during its next activation. Limit once per activation." or the order ability could cost 2 actions. Or something like that.

But to errata a deployment card is the least thing I would want to do, if I was the game designer. This just confuses players, especially casual gamers.

An easy way to balance this, would be to release a rebel officer and a merc officer of equal stats. I think, this would make things more balanced, but not less boring: 3 factions coming up with 4 officers all the time is not what I would want.

The Army Building section in the tournament rules could be updated. "It is not allowed to include more than 2 regular Imperial Officers and/or more than 1 elite Imperial Officer." or something like that. In that case, maybe I would additionally release the said rebel officer and merc officer and limit them in the same way. I would prefer this solution. It's not perfect, but easyly done and solves the Problem in a convenient way.

The rest of the game is great. Compared to Trandoshans and Wookies, the Royal Guard is balanced. I would not want to change them. Without the officers, they are not the problem.

I sincerly love this game and I want to play it for the years to come. I want to spend a lot of money on expansions and Ally-/Villain-Packs.

PLEASE, FFG, errata the Imperial Officer!

But there is another obvious point, why there are more playable Imperial lists than lists of the other factions:

The number of list-building Options:

The Empire has 14 different deployment cards, only 3 of them unique, 6 elite and 5 regular. This gives you 35 deployment cards to choose from. (Even ignoring Merc Allys.)

Rebels have 13 different deployment Cards, 9 of them unique, 2 elite and 2 regular. This gives you 21 deployment cards to choose from.

Assuming that all figures are perfectly balanced, math tells us, that there must be a lot more different lists for the Empire than for the Rebels.

To solve this problem, please , FFG, release more Ally-/Villain-Packs for Rebels and Mercs.

If you want to release Packs for the Empire at the same time, please do packs like the Stormtroopers or the AT-ST. I sincerly need more E-Webs, Royal Guards and Probe Droids. Add some good cards, and be garanteed, that we all will buy these packs. Please do not even design alternate sculpts. The ones we have are already perfect.

Please , FFG, do not release other new Imperial Packs till balance of the force is achieved.

The Fanboy in me screams so loud, I can't hear myself talking. Therefore: I want Yoda! With a Lightsaber!!! And Endor Rebel Commandos (same stats as Stormtroopers, just with an other ability)! and Heavy Rebel Commandos! And Rebel Commando E-Webs!!!

Repeating myself: Please , FFG, release more Rebel Ally-Packs.

But there is another obvious point, why there are more playable Imperial lists than lists of the other factions:

The number of list-building Options:

The Empire has 14 different deployment cards, only 3 of them unique, 6 elite and 5 regular. This gives you 35 deployment cards to choose from. (Even ignoring Merc Allys.)

Rebels have 13 different deployment Cards, 9 of them unique, 2 elite and 2 regular. This gives you 21 deployment cards to choose from.

Assuming that all figures are perfectly balanced, math tells us, that there must be a lot more different lists for the Empire than for the Rebels.

To solve this problem, please , FFG, release more Ally-/Villain-Packs for Rebels and Mercs.

If you want to release Packs for the Empire at the same time, please do packs like the Stormtroopers or the AT-ST. I sincerly need more E-Webs, Royal Guards and Probe Droids. Add some good cards, and be garanteed, that we all will buy these packs. Please do not even design alternate sculpts. The ones we have are already perfect.

Please , FFG, do not release other new Imperial Packs till balance of the force is achieved.

The Fanboy in me screams so loud, I can't hear myself talking. Therefore: I want Yoda! With a Lightsaber!!! And Endor Rebel Commandos (same stats as Stormtroopers, just with an other ability)! and Heavy Rebel Commandos! And Rebel Commando E-Webs!!!

Repeating myself: Please , FFG, release more Rebel Ally-Packs.

The simple answer to your first question is that we are still on the core set of the game effectively (Wave 1 adding scenarios for campaign and a couple of 'elite' versions of units already in the core). The core game is designed to be focused primarily on the campaign, which involves a small group of rebel heroes fighting against the odds, hence the imbalance in the number of Empire vs Rebel units.

The irony is that if the skirmish game garners no interest because people are all busy throwing their toys out of the pram re: Imperial Officers, this will disincline FFG to continue to focus on the skirmish game side, and stick to the campaign, which will mean even further imbalance.

Seriously, the game has been available for a little over six months and we have basically only had the core release. Everyone needs to calm their beans and stop declaring that the sky is falling and the game is broken. Waves 2 and 3 are looking good. We have no idea what Wave 4 will even look like. Let's let the game have some time to actually develop first eh? Patience is a virtue and all that jazz.

In my opinion no opinion is of any value (including my own), if you can't support it with facts. Therefore let me add some facts to support what I said:

...

And now let's put the keyword and the order ability back into the equation.

What will be the result of this equation?

This summary is superb, you covered pretty much everything and explained the problem perfectly. Spot on.

The simple answer to your first question is that we are still on the core set of the game effectively (Wave 1 adding scenarios for campaign and a couple of 'elite' versions of units already in the core). The core game is designed to be focused primarily on the campaign, which involves a small group of rebel heroes fighting against the odds, hence the imbalance in the number of Empire vs Rebel units.

The irony is that if the skirmish game garners no interest because people are all busy throwing their toys out of the pram re: Imperial Officers, this will disincline FFG to continue to focus on the skirmish game side, and stick to the campaign, which will mean even further imbalance.

Seriously, the game has been available for a little over six months and we have basically only had the core release. Everyone needs to calm their beans and stop declaring that the sky is falling and the game is broken. Waves 2 and 3 are looking good. We have no idea what Wave 4 will even look like. Let's let the game have some time to actually develop first eh? Patience is a virtue and all that jazz.

This summary is superb, you covered pretty much everything and explained the problem perfectly. Spot on.

Actually, when I buy a product, I want it to be developed to a point, where it serves its purpose. I bought Imperial Assault solely for the skirmish game. I have ZERO interest in the campaign. And I want to play a balanced game competitivly. Because of the unbalance of the Imperial Officer this game does not serve its purpose for me. It's a great product, but it came with a broken piece. I as a customer want that broken piece fixed. I don't want to wait for a long time to buy another product that might fix the broken piece of the first product. Is that so hard to understand?

It's like buying a new car, but the engine does not work at full power because of a leaky hose. And then you suggest, that I wait till next year, because maybe then there will be a new turbocharger on the market, that might bypass that leaky hose? I don't think that I would be to satisfied with my new car ... would you?

And, as I already said before, there are so many problems caused by that single piece, I cannot imagine a way to fix them all solely by buying new releases.

Actually, when I buy a product, I want it to be developed to a point, where it serves its purpose. I bought Imperial Assault solely for the skirmish game. I have ZERO interest in the campaign. And I want to play a balanced game competitivly. Because of the unbalance of the Imperial Officer this game does not serve its purpose for me. It's a great product, but it came with a broken piece. I as a customer want that broken piece fixed. I don't want to wait for a long time to buy another product that might fix the broken piece of the first product. Is that so hard to understand?

It's like buying a new car, but the engine does not work at full power because of a leaky hose. And then you suggest, that I wait till next year, because maybe then there will be a new turbocharger on the market, that might bypass that leaky hose? I don't think that I would be to satisfied with my new car ... would you?

And, as I already said before, there are so many problems caused by that single piece, I cannot imagine a way to fix them all solely by buying new releases.

I think the crucial point that you are missing is the distinction between the game 'serving *its* purpose', and 'serving the specific purpose that *you* want it to. You say yourself that you bought the game purely for skirmish, so you bought the game to only play half of it. Essentially you are complaining that they haven't spent enough time on the bit *you* wanted them to.

This makes your car analogy invalid. The 'engine' of the game - its core rules mechanics - works absolutely fine. A better analogy would be that you bought a hybrid car purely because you wanted to stop spending money on petrol, and now you are annoyed because the hybrid car still requires petrol and you really wanted an electric car. It's actually a fairy stupid analogy, but I would argue it is slightly more relevant to the point than yours.

Put it another way - Skirmish hasn't exactly been massively promoted by FFG as a feature of the game. Certainly not as the MAIN feature of it. It's been peripherally mentioned in the marketing as one way to play the game. To the extent that I - a confirmed fan of FFG's work with the SW licence, didn't have any idea about it until about a month ago, and I was confused as to how they were running tournaments with a campaign-focused game. And make no mistake, Imperial Assault IS a campaign-focused game that just happens to have a fun two player element as an aside. You bought the game purely on the strength of wanting to focus solely on that aside and you're annoyed because it hasn't lived up to your expectations. That's your lookout, and I wouldn't seek to tell you how you should or shouldn't feel. But at the same time, I would respectfully suggest that instead of unilaterally declaring that the game is broken less than a year after it has been released and with still only the core contents of the game effectively available, you perhaps exercise a little patience and see what the next two announced waves bring to the game.

Or alternatively, play one of the other many skirmish level direct combat tabletop games available. Hell, FFG will sell you X Wing or Armada for starters, both of which should somewhat scratch that itch for you.

As far as the issues caused by Imperial Officer in the current meta (such as one exists this early in the life of the game), I am quite sure that there are many ways in which they may be addressed:

- different skirmish scenarios with a focus less on mobility and more on other factors, like killing the opponent, avoiding direct contact with the opponent etc.

- A tournament ruling clarifying the effects of IO as already suggested by several other people - to the effect that order can only be used once on a character per turn, or perhaps can only be issued to lower ranks such as regular stormtroopers, trandos etc (which would fit thematically anyway).

But again, this applies solely to the tournament level meta, and it shouldn't (I suggest) really impact your ability to enjoy the game at your local club or gaming group. For example, I played last weekend and took IG88, elite Trandos, regular Trandos, Elite Nexu and regular Nexu. I got slaughtered by an Empire list, but I still had fun. It's as much about how you approach the game and who you play with as it is about what list you run.

Bottom line, if it makes you that unhappy and you feel you must vent about it, then by all means carry on. I was just trying to offer an alternative point of view that might help you feel not quite so mad about it all.

Peace out

G