Let's face it, you spend too much time on an imperial star destroyer and you have to worry about more than 9 storm troopers showing up. So they were welcome to methodically kill everything and only move when it's safe, we'll see how that goes for them.

Yeah, if you run around on a Death Star eventually you will be overwhelmed by... oh, wait...

Because they methodically took cover and killed every storm trooper that crossed their path right

Yeah, I actually think the game as it is gets the feeling of Star Wars about right. The characters are not special forces who form perimeters or anything similar. They blunder about, improvising on the run, and survive by moving, not by fighting. I don't think Han's charging of the Stormtroopers could really be judged as a tactically sound decision. Yes, I do feel some of the missions are a little too "dash ahead with little care for anything else", but it isn't always the case. The difficulty is often judging how much to kill guys and how much to run, as you usually have to do a little of both to be able to win, and it often isn't very obvious how much of each you should have done until after the mission.

However, as people have been saying, the skirmish is quite different thematically from the campaign. It is actually quite chess like in many ways, with the fixed moves, the flattened probability of the dice rolls, and the judge of which units to move at what point.

I don't really mind the running around. It's not dissimilar to the Star Wars movies OR the way Descent sometimes plays, so I was expecting some of that. I can also deal with the fact that it seems to be a large tactical mistake not to rush the door (that only Diala can open) in the "lightsaber mission". We played that one last night, and while it was more than a little difficult, I can swallow that one and except that we probably dawdled too much.

The biggest problem that a friend of mine and I had was in the mission where (I think) you first encounter Weiss. IIRC, the game ended after seven rounds and none of us had any idea about that condition. We just thought we were blowing up doors and getting to terminals, and then -boom-.... you loose! Seems like that mission could have mentioned that timer, and I'm still not sure we could have won it, but I don't see why the rebels wouldn't have that info... even if we're going for a more RP style boardgame.

Hell, maybe our Impy player is a genius and we just stink.

I don't really mind the running around. It's not dissimilar to the Star Wars movies OR the way Descent sometimes plays, so I was expecting some of that. I can also deal with the fact that it seems to be a large tactical mistake not to rush the door (that only Diala can open) in the "lightsaber mission". We played that one last night, and while it was more than a little difficult, I can swallow that one and except that we probably dawdled too much.

The biggest problem that a friend of mine and I had was in the mission where (I think) you first encounter Weiss. IIRC, the game ended after seven rounds and none of us had any idea about that condition. We just thought we were blowing up doors and getting to terminals, and then -boom-.... you loose! Seems like that mission could have mentioned that timer, and I'm still not sure we could have won it, but I don't see why the rebels wouldn't have that info... even if we're going for a more RP style boardgame.

Hell, maybe our Impy player is just a genius and we just stink.

Imperial player should have told you the mission timer

I love the game. Descent 1st edition was ok, but IA got it right. Wish I would have played the demo at Gen Con 2014 instead of waiting til this year.

The biggest problem that a friend of mine and I had was in the mission where (I think) you first encounter Weiss. IIRC, the game ended after seven rounds and none of us had any idea about that condition. We just thought we were blowing up doors and getting to terminals, and then -boom-.... you loose! Seems like that mission could have mentioned that timer, and I'm still not sure we could have won it, but I don't see why the rebels wouldn't have that info... even if we're going for a more RP style boardgame.

I'm fine with the balance for the most part, although i do think the game generally slants a bit to the Imperial side. That being said the mission referenced above seems completely broken. I have taken to exposing each terminals color at the beginning of the mission so the rebels can at least plan and send the right hero to the room where they have the best chance of passing the terminal roll. This mission is crazy hard, the last thing you need is to get into a room and have virtually no chance to win the roll with the hero you sent in. On top of that there's now a big cat in your face and the imp has a bunch more threat!

I really enjoy the game. However I'd certainly welcome future campaigns that have more varied win conditions.

So, maybe I'm thinking far too tactically - and maybe I've played only two missions. But my impression of the game so far is hitting rock bottom after huge excitement.

We played the first mission - destroy all the beacons. We lost. Not miserably, but because the conditions mean that taking a tactically sound effort is a losing strategy.

The idea of rushing through the mission, leaving viable enemies to attack you on multiple fronts and just *taking damage because you can handle it* is a completely unsound tactical process. It plays like someone who coded a video game, with no understanding of squad tactics at all, wrote it. I was very, very disappointed.

Then we took a side mission to find the lightsaber for Diala - same problem.

Both missions seem to require the *completely unsound* tactical process of "run at your enemies like you don't value your life in the least" and "take as much damage as you possibly can, because, you know, you can only die from "death of a thousand paper cuts" - and then face off against a "boss" that is so outpowers you that *if* you manage to get a hit against him, you all slap hands before realizing you have to do that *20+ times* just to injure him.

Please tell me that this is not how all the missions are? Because, quite frankly, if I was the Rebel commander, I'd court martial the characters we had for their miserable results even though their actions were completely tactically sound.

It's just not making sense. No logical combat would *ever* take place like the rules are written. The Imperials are too powerful, there is no means of closing off their entry points and securing a perimeter, what person would logically just run into a hail of blast fire, not take cover, leave viable, shooting enemies behind while he just runs willy-nilly around the battlefield shooting at targets that don't mean him any harm and ignore real threats.

Please, please, please tell me that this is not the level of "tactical genius" found in the rest of the game. Because right now I'm really, really, disappointed in the game that I've been pumped up to play for months - and have a jedi character that doesn't have a lightsaber (what is the point of playing a jedi with a frickin' *staff* and no possibility to find the coolest piece of hardware in the game *ever* because the "ghost mission" was failed because first level characters were facing off against Dark Frickin' Vader amped up on speed simply because we operated in a valid, tactical manner?

I was planning to buy this for my kiddos to play - but now I'm nixing the whole idea based on bad writing, bad tactics and overpowered enemies.

I'm giving FFG a chance to address these concerns in this post - but at this point, I'm done with the game. *PLEASE* say something to allay my concerns. I *WANT* to like this game. I've been a Star Wars fan since I was 8 years old and saw it on opening night at midnight in 1977.

This is not how the missions work. At all. Ever.

You must have done something terribly wrong. Our rebels beat the crap out of poor me (Imperial). I occasionally win some missions but it's mostly because of the surprise elements of the missions.

On the "A New Threat" mission: I don't think it is balanced to presume that the rebel playerswill get all 3 of the terminals. I think the rebels are meant to get 1-2, and are mostly aiming to not totally fail by failing to get any of the terminals.

Weiss's appearance in the mission is kind of irrelevant. He arrives too late to make any difference (except if the rebel players are dumb). I think it is just to introduce your Nemisis for future missions.

On the "A New Threat" mission: I don't think it is balanced to presume that the rebel playerswill get all 3 of the terminals. I think the rebels are meant to get 1-2, and are mostly aiming to not totally fail by failing to get any of the terminals.

Weiss's appearance in the mission is kind of irrelevant. He arrives too late to make any difference (except if the rebel players are dumb). I think it is just to introduce your Nemisis for future missions.

True on the Weiss part. By the time he shows up it's pretty close to the timer anyway. None of us (as the rebels) had any desire to charge the AT-ST.

However, I guess I'm not sure I agree with the whole idea of a boardgame that's supposed to be imbalanced. Heck, I'm not sure I'd enjoy an RPG where the GM/DM/Storyteller said "Time's up! You loose!!!". I know that the game is trying to introduce characters throughout the missions and such, but it's supposed to be a competitive game (I think?). It seems extra weird that a game would be designed so one person would win and 2-4 would loose.

Now I know people will read this as "sour grapes", but I'm just making a point... If I want loose rules and no worries about balance, I'd look elsewhere. Just my pennies.

I don't really mind the running around. It's not dissimilar to the Star Wars movies OR the way Descent sometimes plays, so I was expecting some of that. I can also deal with the fact that it seems to be a large tactical mistake not to rush the door (that only Diala can open) in the "lightsaber mission". We played that one last night, and while it was more than a little difficult, I can swallow that one and except that we probably dawdled too much.

The biggest problem that a friend of mine and I had was in the mission where (I think) you first encounter Weiss. IIRC, the game ended after seven rounds and none of us had any idea about that condition. We just thought we were blowing up doors and getting to terminals, and then -boom-.... you loose! Seems like that mission could have mentioned that timer, and I'm still not sure we could have won it, but I don't see why the rebels wouldn't have that info... even if we're going for a more RP style boardgame.

Hell, maybe our Impy player is just a genius and we just stink.

Imperial player should have told you the mission timer

I don't own the game, but I'm curious as to where this is stated?

I don't really mind the running around. It's not dissimilar to the Star Wars movies OR the way Descent sometimes plays, so I was expecting some of that. I can also deal with the fact that it seems to be a large tactical mistake not to rush the door (that only Diala can open) in the "lightsaber mission". We played that one last night, and while it was more than a little difficult, I can swallow that one and except that we probably dawdled too much.

The biggest problem that a friend of mine and I had was in the mission where (I think) you first encounter Weiss. IIRC, the game ended after seven rounds and none of us had any idea about that condition. We just thought we were blowing up doors and getting to terminals, and then -boom-.... you loose! Seems like that mission could have mentioned that timer, and I'm still not sure we could have won it, but I don't see why the rebels wouldn't have that info... even if we're going for a more RP style boardgame.

Hell, maybe our Impy player is just a genius and we just stink.

Imperial player should have told you the mission timer

I don't own the game, but I'm curious as to where this is stated?

Not sure which you are referring.

The rule is in the start of the campaign guide as to what information is to be shared with the rebel players.

The actual time itself is in the missions description and special rules that are read at the start of each mission.

RRG page 18 "Campaign Mission Setup" requires the Imperial Player to read the "Mission Briefing Section" of the relevant mission (this invariably includes any turn limit).

With respect to RPGs I think I'd be okay with that under a few conditions:

1. It's made clear through flavour that the party needs to hurry.
2. The "You Lose" doesn't take the form of an automatic party wipe.
3. Depending on the "You Lose" the time limit should usually be to stop dawdling rather than something that'll come to pass with PCs are actually trying to make progress.

I don't really mind the running around. It's not dissimilar to the Star Wars movies OR the way Descent sometimes plays, so I was expecting some of that. I can also deal with the fact that it seems to be a large tactical mistake not to rush the door (that only Diala can open) in the "lightsaber mission". We played that one last night, and while it was more than a little difficult, I can swallow that one and except that we probably dawdled too much.

The biggest problem that a friend of mine and I had was in the mission where (I think) you first encounter Weiss. IIRC, the game ended after seven rounds and none of us had any idea about that condition. We just thought we were blowing up doors and getting to terminals, and then -boom-.... you loose! Seems like that mission could have mentioned that timer, and I'm still not sure we could have won it, but I don't see why the rebels wouldn't have that info... even if we're going for a more RP style boardgame.

Hell, maybe our Impy player is just a genius and we just stink.

Imperial player should have told you the mission timer

I don't own the game, but I'm curious as to where this is stated?

Not sure which you are referring.

The rule is in the start of the campaign guide as to what information is to be shared with the rebel players.

The actual time itself is in the missions description and special rules that are read at the start of each mission.

Full disclosure here - I love Descebt 2E and I want to love Imperial Assault, I'm just trying to see if my group got some specifics wrong so we can enjoy the game more. Again, I've never been the imperial player and I don't own the game, but I have skimmed most of the rules. Thanks all for any answers that have already been given.

Imperial player always reads the first part. If there's a timer in the mission, it's always written there so that players always know how much they need to hurry.

Imperial player always reads the first part. If there's a timer in the mission, it's always written there so that players always know how much they need to hurry.

To be perfectly clear, there are often a number of timed events throughout the mission. Most of them are NOT public information, and are only for the imperial to know. The 'game over' timer is, IIRC, always in the mission briefing, usually the last bullet. From Aftermath: "The mission ends when all terminals are destroyed, at the end of round 6, or when all heroes are wounded."

That part is definitely supposed to be read aloud.

The very last section of the Mission Briefing will include text equivalent to as many of the following as are relevant:

The mission will end (or progress) when

• the heroes [complete objective] (Rebel Alliance emblem)
• after round X
• when all heroes are wounded

The very last paragraph of the briefing will always tell you the win/lose/progress conditions for the mission. There are no surprise defeat conditions, though there are surprise deployments/activations/effects that can instantly end a mission based on one of the known defeat conditions.

This is something my rebels had a hard time with. One of them constantly wanted to take entire rounds to double rest. As an Imperial who hates to lose more than I enjoy winning this was fine with me, but I know they won't keep playing if I keep rubbing their nose in it. So, when they started talking about doing that double rest thing, or wasting whole rounds in general, I would point out that they only have 4 rounds left before an entire imperial platoon descends upon them at once and they're forced to bail early.

I often reminded them that their current objective was just to "progress" so they should probably leave a little time to figure out that problem. And finally that I had to wound all 4 of them and even Leia got wounded at the battle of Endor. You're probably not getting away unscathed, but that's what you have Bacta tanks for.

Sounds like OP got cheated by the imperial player on Temptation, Vader should've only had 4 hp, not "20+". I think most of the bad experiences of this game come from the rules being played incorrectly and the poor design of Aftermath. Good game design says you reward players for doing things they like to do (shoot stormtroopers) and Aftermath actively punishes players for doing what feels the most natural and fun.

On the "A New Threat" mission: I don't think it is balanced to presume that the rebel playerswill get all 3 of the terminals. I think the rebels are meant to get 1-2, and are mostly aiming to not totally fail by failing to get any of the terminals.

Weiss's appearance in the mission is kind of irrelevant. He arrives too late to make any difference (except if the rebel players are dumb). I think it is just to introduce your Nemisis for future missions.

True on the Weiss part. By the time he shows up it's pretty close to the timer anyway. None of us (as the rebels) had any desire to charge the AT-ST.

However, I guess I'm not sure I agree with the whole idea of a boardgame that's supposed to be imbalanced. Heck, I'm not sure I'd enjoy an RPG where the GM/DM/Storyteller said "Time's up! You loose!!!". I know that the game is trying to introduce characters throughout the missions and such, but it's supposed to be a competitive game (I think?). It seems extra weird that a game would be designed so one person would win and 2-4 would loose.

Now I know people will read this as "sour grapes", but I'm just making a point... If I want loose rules and no worries about balance, I'd look elsewhere. Just my pennies.

In truth it is meant to be the campaign as a whole that is balanced. Not all the missions are meant to be perfectly balanced. The main story ones are clearly meant to favour one way or another slightly, usually favouring the side that lost the previous story mission. Now, I don't think this necessarily plays out very properly (Fly Solo, I am looking at you), and both sides should have a chance, but "A New Threat" is after the Rebels have won the first story mission, and so should be weighted slightly in the Imperial player's favour. Getting to all the terminals, alive and with the right skilled characters, is quite hard in the time given (especially if, like in our campaign, you keep flubbing your attack rolls to kill the Nexu that is in the way). However, it is technically possible, so isn't entirely unfair.

It plays like someone who coded a video game, with no understanding of squad tactics at all, wrote it. I was very, very disappointed.

I am sorry that you had the impression that this plays more like a boardgame version of the X-Com video game combat part. It just doesn't. It plays more like an MMORPG with heavy resource and action management. Things like cover, firing arcs, supression and other things that are vital in a real squad simulation are not only missing, they are intentionally left out!

Imperial Assault might not be the game for you. It's very good at doing what it aims to do (provide a dungeon crawler with refined resource management) but not more.

To be honest, your experience won't change much over the course of the campaign. If you didn't like the first 2 missions for the stated reasons, you won't like the game in it's current state. You can try to wait 2-3 years and come back, if FFG decides to expand on a more squad simulation approach, but for now, I think you should give up on the game and sell your copy to cut your losses.

I am of the opinion that in some missions the turn limit is too low. I get why they did it, because without a time limit I think the game would become boring.

Every other turn the heroes would rest for both actions and be at full health.

From what I understand, the only action Heroes can do twice in an Activation is Attack.

I am of the opinion that in some missions the turn limit is too low. I get why they did it, because without a time limit I think the game would become boring.

Every other turn the heroes would rest for both actions and be at full health.

From what I understand, the only action Heroes can do twice in an Activation is Attack.

No, they specifically mention that heroes can attack twice because most things can't. Heroes can move twice, interact twice or rest twice as well.

I am of the opinion that in some missions the turn limit is too low. I get why they did it, because without a time limit I think the game would become boring.

Every other turn the heroes would rest for both actions and be at full health.

From what I understand, the only action Heroes can do twice in an Activation is Attack.

No, they specifically mention that heroes can attack twice because most things can't. Heroes can move twice, interact twice or rest twice as well.

In one campaign that I'm running, players expressed a disappointment about the way the game is balanced. They understand that if they want to win, they have to rush to the objective and forget about gunning everyone Rambo style, but they think it makes for a boring game, not the experience they were expecting.

So, since I don't care about losing or winning, I'm thinking about removing the time limit, except in missions where it's really thematic. To try and balance that, I'm thinking about limiting each heroes to one rest per turn. Or should it be a team Rest Pool, say 3 rests per turn.