You can call it whatever you want, doesn't change the fact of what they've done. And I don't see how I'm being unreasonable. Sorry, I guess I just have higher standards and care too much about Star Wars to see it's lore butchered like this.

No, you are being unreasonable. The 'lore' is not being butchered in any way. There is no canon reference for how a wing (or whatever) of X-wings would perform against two wings (or whatever) of TIE fighters. Your standards aren't high, they are just arbitrary.

-Will

No canon reference? We see in the movies how these units perform!

Whatever, I can't continue these discussions or else I get banned because people like you can't accept the truth and report me for 'hurting feelings'.

Believe whatever you want, its wrong though.

So to what you are saying if you are getting moderator attention it's because you are crossing the line and not staying on message. Acting like these forums are overly moderated is a disingenuous stance.

Also, you are just off the reservation with just about everything you've posted in this thread. The game you expect them to make isn't practical or even possible to accomplish.

EDIT: Numbers in green circles is probably the carry capacity of each unit

Aren't the numbers in the lower left corenr of the icon (the green in the picture) the carrying capacity of the unit?

Aren't the numbers in the lower left corenr of the icon (the green in the picture) the carrying capacity of the unit?

Nice! Yes that's probably correct.

Aren't the numbers in the lower left corenr of the icon (the green in the picture) the carrying capacity of the unit?

Yep, the assault carrier and rebel transport can carry 4 units, the corvette can carry 2, etc. The little icon Tie fighters, Stormtroopers, etc have means they have to be transported. X-wings and Y-Wings have no icon so they cannot transport units, but do not need to be transported either.

The google maps location icon on the under construction Death Star probably means that that unit can't move. The rebel shield generators and ion cannons have the same icon.

Everything else on that picture looks to be correct.

I am looking forward to seeing unit production tomorrow to see how viable rebel cap ships are compared to mass Y-Wings, as i think the Y-Wings are a major element to how the two factions interact. The Star Destroyers and SSD(s?) will likely crush rebel red hp ships to the point were transports are used to drop troops on planet to get a mission objective with the intention that the ships retreat ASAP. However, because Y's can attack the Imperial capital ships and receive comparatively weak return fire, the Imperial player will have to spam Tie's fairly hard or be forced to retreat from systems to avoid losing Star Destroyers in protracted slugging matches with rebel fighters.

Unit production is also most likely what will force the Imperial player to spread his forces thinner rather than staying concentrated. Due to the Rebels having objectives like "destroy one star destroyer" or "liberate a planet" having Imperial forces spread thin makes it more likely the Rebels will be able to pull off such moves, but I imagine that if the Imperial player doesn't try to subjugate many planets the rebels will be able to amass forces greater than the Imperial player could deal with inside the time limit.

Aren't the numbers in the lower left corenr of the icon (the green in the picture) the carrying capacity of the unit?

Yep, the assault carrier and rebel transport can carry 4 units, the corvette can carry 2, etc. The little icon Tie fighters, Stormtroopers, etc have means they have to be transported. X-wings and Y-Wings have no icon so they cannot transport units, but do not need to be transported either.

Yes, for me that's is the KEY strategic difference between the X-wing and the Y-wing versus the TIE Fighter; the two Rebel fighters can operate independently from capital ships when on the attack, the TIE fighters can't. The Empire will need to be on the look-out for roving Rebel strike wings.... So the most important doctrinal and technological difference is represented very nicely within the rules.

I agree with the rest of your analysis, nice work guys. Can't wait to get this game.

-Will

Hmm, the AT-AT has no carrying capacity, even if the second "T" stands for "Transport." Of course, there's no need for ground transport in the game, so I guess it doesn't really need it.

Yea, in the context of the game the AT-AT wouldn't need transport. In the ground combat it might be lugging some of those Stormtroopers around but that's at a tactical level below what the game would be concerned about.

-Will

Although you could put troopers in the AT-AT and the AT-AT in a Star Destroyer to increase how many ground troops you could transport...

Although you could put troopers in the AT-AT and the AT-AT in a Star Destroyer to increase how many ground troops you could transport...

The Imperial Nesting Doll technique?

-Will

Something like that! But I can see how that would overcomplicate things, so it's not something I'm all that concerned about. Just musing.

Is there a board feature where I can automatically 'like' all of kmanweiss 's posts?

Also, going back a bit, I believe the red and black dice have the same faces. Reason being: the Death Star Plans card says, "roll three dice".

Although you could put troopers in the AT-AT and the AT-AT in a Star Destroyer to increase how many ground troops you could transport...

Well think of it this way.

Clearly each figure is representative of a battalion, task force, wing, assault formation; of whatever general thing they depict. Otherwise it would make no sense for a single Stormtrooper, AT-ST, or AT-AT to subjugate a whole planet. So you could view the AT-AT token as not just representative of a few AT-ATs, but all the stuff that comes with them. Support, mechanics, and even squads of Stormtroopers they carry into the fray. Also think of transport capacity ad not just the ability to carrybthings, but the logistical support of those troops.

Stormtrooper battalions would also necessitate troop transport shuttles like the ones seen in The Force Awakens .

Although you could put troopers in the AT-AT and the AT-AT in a Star Destroyer to increase how many ground troops you could transport...

Well think of it this way.

Clearly each figure is representative of a battalion, task force, wing, assault formation; of whatever general thing they depict. Otherwise it would make no sense for a single Stormtrooper, AT-ST, or AT-AT to subjugate a whole planet. So you could view the AT-AT token as not just representative of a few AT-ATs, but all the stuff that comes with them. Support, mechanics, and even squads of Stormtroopers they carry into the fray. Also think of transport capacity ad not just the ability to carrybthings, but the logistical support of those troops.

Great minds think alike! I was making a similar point in another thread over confusion of how you get an X-wing or a capital ship or trooper in one turn. There is much more than gathering up men and teaching them to shoot in building an army, or fielding a wing of starfighters.

Hmm, Mon Mothma adds no tactics cards. Guess she really is a coward.

You may see it that way. I like to think of her not having any good battle talent, but good diplomacy skills.

I doubt any other rebel character will do as well in diplomacy. Just my two cents. If you want I can give a refund on that.

Hmm, Mon Mothma adds no tactics cards. Guess she really is a coward.

How does not being a good tactician add up to beeing a coward?

Sithborg is referring to one of the new canon stories where it reports that Mon Mothma fled the battle of Endor before the battle was over, indicating that she is a coward. Her lack of tactical ability in this game calls to mind that cowardly act. True, it is not a 1-to-1 correlation; you can be a poor tactician and not be a coward. But if we already know she's a coward, it's little wonder that she's a poor tactician.

The way stormtroopers shoot in the films youl'd think they did train them in one turn.

Sithborg is referring to one of the new canon stories where it reports that Mon Mothma fled the battle of Endor before the battle was over, indicating that she is a coward.

This is not the Rebel leader I knew.

Well to be fair, she isn't at all militarily relevant. So once that DS starts firing if I were Ackbar I would have told your Head of State to get out. I mean I wouldn't have even brought her to begin with.

one of the new canon stories where it reports that Mon Mothma fled the battle of Endor before the battle was over,

I was told that she didn't flee before the cattle was over, but rather that her ship didn't go to the battle in the first place, she diverted it to a different destination.

one of the new canon stories where it reports that Mon Mothma fled the battle of Endor before the battle was over,

I was told that she didn't flee before the cattle was over, but rather that her ship didn't go to the battle in the first place, she diverted it to a different destination.

"Despite Mothma's concerns, which the princess understood, Organa felt it was her destiny to be part of the Battle of Endor and chose to accompany the Rebel forces to the Forest Moon.

Before the Alliance Fleet left for Endor, Mothma's ship departed so she could be taken to a safe location."

Basically she was more of a political leader than a military leader, so sending her to a safe location so that if the worst happened, she still might be able to keep the Rebellion going makes sense.

Before the Alliance Fleet left for Endor, Mothma's ship departed so she could be taken to a safe location."

Basically she was more of a political leader than a military leader, so sending her to a safe location so that if the worst happened, she still might be able to keep the Rebellion going makes sense.

I can get behind that. Plus, if Lucas/Marquand's original intention had been that Mon Monthma had been at the battle of Endor, I bet they would have worked her into the celebration scene somewhere. I mean, Ackbar was there...

Yes, I'd consider Mon Mothma avoiding the battle to simply be sound decision making on the Rebellion's part. You don't want to put every single one of your eggs in one basket. Mon Mothma's value was as a political leader and organizer, not a battlefield commander!

-Will

I haven't read the content mentioned to make a descision, but bringing Mothma to the battle of Endor seems like a poor idea to begin with.

She's a political leader. What role would she have in a massive battle like that.

Beyond that, it would put her in direct threat. Sure, they thought they had the advantage of surprise, but even so, why risk bringing her along.

And, if you did bring her along, at the first sign that your intel was bad and this was all a trap and the enemy had a huge fleet waiting for you, you're probably want to evacuate your political leader that has no role in the battle. It's one of those things where if she didn't want to run and hide, Ackbar probably would have ordered her ship to jump to hyperspace.

Being a former Senator, I have to assume that she was brought along for her high Persuasion bonus, in the hopes that once the Death Star was destroyed she could ask any surviving Imperials to surrender and/or join the Alliance.