How about placing obstacles AFTER ships where placed?

I place mine here (right in front of ship), next one here (right in front of other ship)

Ok you do that. I'll run a swarm, I'll place my 3 on the side edge were no one will be around them, ever. Then I can batter you in a no objects map where all we do is roll dice cause we don't have to worry about silly things as asteroids. Hell I'll even take the newest ones so I can uber tiny ones.

See where this gets you?

I usually play with no obstacles and it doesn't devolve into this at all.

What we really need to implement is having both players gather up all of their asteroids and debris fields, and tossing them straight up into the air above the play area. Wherever they land is where they will be during the game.

If any land on the floor or outside of the play area, they are to be burned in a furnace.

Nah, what you do is put 18 asteroids and 9 debris clouds on the field at once.

This was attempted, and played as 3 Alpha Squad vs. 3 Alpha Squad, all with PTL (yes I know they don't have a native EPT slot but they needed the double action to maneuver)

It was fun once, but by the time it was over I had X-Wing fatigue equal to how I felt after my first regionals...

I wouldn't mind Asteroids being allowed to be placed next to the sides of the play area.

But I don't think they should be placeable in the player's deployment zones.

Unless I got my math wrong, I will say this:

1 Range increment is ~4 inches. So with no obstacles being placeable withing 2 increments of the table edge, you're taking about 8" from each end of the mat. So you end up with a 20" by 20" area in the middle of the play area where you are allowed to place obstacles.

That's 400 square inches for 6 obstacles.

Doing it the way I described only takes 4" off of two sides of the mat. So you end up with a 28" by 36" area to place obstacles in.

That's 1008 square inches.

So the first setup gives you one obstacle for every 66 square inches. So in order to get the same overall obstacle density using the second setup, you'd need to use 15 obstacles.

Personally, I would say just call it at 12, and deal with the lesser density.

What we really need to implement is having both players gather up all of their asteroids and debris fields, and tossing them straight up into the air above the play area. Wherever they land is where they will be during the game.

If any land on the floor or outside of the play area, they are to be burned in a furnace.

My son likes to use this method when he cant find a neutral person to play the asteroids. Problem is he'd be out of asteroids pretty quick since most of his land well off the play area.

The change to the tournament rules and both players using their own obstacles has moved the game to a point where we "could" choose to use more rocks if we wanted to. Every player theoretically owns at least 6 obstacles.

I do like the option of using 6 rocks each and not being able to place with range 2 of the deployment zones.

While some don't see the "merry go round" as an issue, that doesn't mean it couldn't still be addressed. I think you will find that forcing your opponent to change his current "this plan always works movement strategy" is a good thing for the game.

I'm all for it. Do I think it makes a massive difference? No, but it's different and I like that. New strategies are good for the game.

I don't see that many merry go rounds with asteroids. If you learn the dial placement you find that going between asteroids is not that hard. But then again I haven't been playing with 3+ big asteroids.

I love flying into an asteroid field. My son goes all C3PO on me and warns about the odds of navigating.... You know the rest. I have gotten pretty good at minimizing damage to my TIEs, even when running a 200 point mega swarm strait into the center of the mess.

The change to the tournament rules and both players using their own obstacles has moved the game to a point where we "could" choose to use more rocks if we wanted to. Every player theoretically owns at least 6 obstacles.

I do like the option of using 6 rocks each and not being able to place with range 2 of the deployment zones.

While some don't see the "merry go round" as an issue, that doesn't mean it couldn't still be addressed. I think you will find that forcing your opponent to change his current "this plan always works movement strategy" is a good thing for the game.

I'm all for it. Do I think it makes a massive difference? No, but it's different and I like that. New strategies are good for the game.

Except for the fact that the merry go round effect has absolutely nothing to do with obstacles.

I've never played a game with a merry go round.

I like the idea of allowing Epic ships as your 3 obstacles in tournament play and the dead ship = debris token. I've played with both in casual/campaign formats and it just adds so much good to the game IMO.

On paper I like the thought of allowing obstacles on the edges of the map, I'm just not sure that it wouldn't fix one 'problem' to create another. I've played fun games where the two deployment areas were the only places obstacles weren't allowed to be placed and each obstacle had to be range 2 from each other but then you placed as many as you could fit with those constraints. Also a fun play IMO, but not sure how that would translate to tourney play.

I wouldn't mind Asteroids being allowed to be placed next to the sides of the play area.

But I don't think they should be placeable in the player's deployment zones.

Unless I got my math wrong, I will say this:

1 Range increment is ~4 inches. So with no obstacles being placeable withing 2 increments of the table edge, you're taking about 8" from each end of the mat. So you end up with a 20" by 20" area in the middle of the play area where you are allowed to place obstacles.

That's 400 square inches for 6 obstacles.

Doing it the way I described only takes 4" off of two sides of the mat. So you end up with a 28" by 36" area to place obstacles in.

That's 1008 square inches.

So the first setup gives you one obstacle for every 66 square inches. So in order to get the same overall obstacle density using the second setup, you'd need to use 15 obstacles.

Personally, I would say just call it at 12, and deal with the lesser density.

I think deployment of Debris/ Asteroids / Obstacles should be within range 1 of any edge. That's a 28" x 28" area of about 784 square inches. Just under double the original area. If each player chose 5 Debris/ Asteroids/ Obstacle it would be around the same effect.

It would also stop people from just placing them right on the edge of the play mat where they would do just about nothing to the actual gameplay.

Abolish the joust!

Remove K-turns from the game entirely!

Triple the number of rock placements!

Emancipate the Eschaton!

It would also stop people from just placing them right on the edge of the play mat where they would do just about nothing to the actual gameplay.

I think putting them along the edge would do a lot to change the way the game is played.

And if both players want to put all their rocks along the outside and confine their play in the middle of the map, well, that should be their option. Obviously, neither player wants to deal with obstacles, and they shouldn't have to.

But other players rely on them. And they have the option of throwing theirs in the middle, while another player might place theirs out of the way.

Basically, in my experience, there's just no variety in the way it is now. Required 6 tokens in a 20x20 area in the middle, with the range one they have to keep separate, there's only so much variation you can have in that situation, and very little of it is significant.

I think opening up the deployment and using more tokens would give you more variety. The racetracks we get now. Open corridor down the center. Or a belt of rocks all the way across the middle. There are a lot more potential variations. And I think that's more interesting.

So, instead of going up and down the sides, you change it so they just go back and forth in the deployment zone.

Basically, in my experience, there's just no variety in the way it is now. Required 6 tokens in a 20x20 area in the middle, with the range one they have to keep separate, there's only so much variation you can have in that situation, and very little of it is significant.

I think opening up the deployment and using more tokens would give you more variety. The racetracks we get now. Open corridor down the center. Or a belt of rocks all the way across the middle. There are a lot more potential variations. And I think that's more interesting.

Agreed. There is little variation at the moment. I had posted in this thread earlier sugesting that FFG open up using the huge ships in place of three obstacles as stated in the huge ship rule book for tournament use (as anything is possible in casual play). This does create "racetracks/ Corridors." I've played with them in my old stomping grounds and it was a lot of fun!

In a casual setting obstacles don't have to be used. I don't think we need to change the rules regarding placement at the tournament level in order to satisfy someones need for unrestricted movement during casual play.

The rules are opening up and we will probably see improvement in the near future. The only way to change it is to use it consistently at the local level and post the success in forms, such as these, and email the developers (as I've done in the past) and the more people do that, the faster it will change.

1 killed ship = 1 new debris token. would be good too.

Pretty much every new player I teach the game to thinks this is the way it should go.

I think the game could use a few more obstacles myself. I seldom land on rocks myself (I don't play a lot of large ships and no PWTs) unless I'm Slooping or Tallon Rolling. Don't quite have the eye for those yet for some reason. I think a 3rd class of objects (well 4th if you count epics) would be great. I also think if you made an upgrade card that let you deploy more asteroids for 1-2 pts that it would see a lot of play.

How about 0 cost EPT that lets you place a debris field when you off an enemy ship? How about a crew card that lets you move asteroids after deployment or add objects? A missile that creates a debris field if it kills a ship? Mines that act as asteroids? A force using Pilot with the ability to BR an asteroid at range 1 as an action? LOTS OF OPTIONS. LOTS OF OPEN DESIGN SPACE.

I think the 2 places that FFG can start to develop the game more and add variety to existing ships is to play with the game board. New obstacles and rules around them as well as new deployments would add a lot to the game without taking up much more time. When the faction identities were Imperial with tech and maneuverability with Rebels getting action sharing and shields I was hoping S&V would get debuffs and varied deployments (traps!).

I was just reminded of some analysis I did on the first year or so of the game. I think at every major tournament, with a game video I saw for the first year or so, the player who went through the asteroids first was the winner. I think every player who landed on a rock the first pass also lost.

I think that still tends to hold true outside of the 2 ship meta. If I get through the asteroids first I don't have to deal with them for Kturns and positioning to turn around. My opponent has less options and is more predictable if the turn of engagement or the turn after engagement he is facing multiple objects. I learned this playing a lot of swarm, interceptors, and swarm + Lambda lists.

I'm not so sure it's AS important these days with white kturns, sloops, tallon rolls, and inertial dampners, along with just more maneuverable ships in a mostly 2 ship meta.

The change to the tournament rules and both players using their own obstacles has moved the game to a point where we "could" choose to use more rocks if we wanted to. Every player theoretically owns at least 6 obstacles.

I do like the option of using 6 rocks each and not being able to place with range 2 of the deployment zones.

While some don't see the "merry go round" as an issue, that doesn't mean it couldn't still be addressed. I think you will find that forcing your opponent to change his current "this plan always works movement strategy" is a good thing for the game.

I'm all for it. Do I think it makes a massive difference? No, but it's different and I like that. New strategies are good for the game.

Except for the fact that the merry go round effect has absolutely nothing to do with obstacles.

The change to the tournament rules and both players using their own obstacles has moved the game to a point where we "could" choose to use more rocks if we wanted to. Every player theoretically owns at least 6 obstacles.

I do like the option of using 6 rocks each and not being able to place with range 2 of the deployment zones.

While some don't see the "merry go round" as an issue, that doesn't mean it couldn't still be addressed. I think you will find that forcing your opponent to change his current "this plan always works movement strategy" is a good thing for the game.

I'm all for it. Do I think it makes a massive difference? No, but it's different and I like that. New strategies are good for the game.

Except for the fact that the merry go round effect has absolutely nothing to do with obstacles.

Of course it's not, it's caused by the absence of obstacles.

Even if you increased the area and included more obstacles, you could still wind up with the up and down the sides scenario, which is exactly like the merry go around. Am I the only one who has recalled games where both players went up and down the sides.

Unless you are proposing putting obstacles in the starting zones, at which point it just turns into a really stupid idea.

So, instead of going up and down the sides, you change it so they just go back and forth in the deployment zone.

Possibly. But the deployment zones are half the width of the lanes down the sides we have now.

Why not just make the distance from all edges range 1?

Not any different than a player using 3 debris tokens and super Dash.

Where to begin with you... You are paying for Dash's ability, you want to take advantage of it. Thing is, you now made Dash's enemy, the swarm have just as easy of a time taking him out because of no obstacles hell every lost just got phased out because jousting would be the only way to play just about (arguement could be for boosting past the enemy in things like INs etc etc). So I don't see where your comment even plays into outside of the constant complaining of OPiness of ships that comes from your mouth.

I usually play with no obstacles and it doesn't devolve into this at all.

I am so sorry for this, to not get to explore a good majority of builds because they just got rendered useless by spamming a TIE swarm. I'm so sorry.

All builds have been, or will be, rendered useless by the tie swarm. There are always more of us than you.

For the glory of the empire...