TLDW
- It's awesome
- A sprawling galactic scale of cat and mouse that uses the SW theme perfectly
- SW fans will love the game
- Quinns didn't like the combat - thought it was too fiddly and didn't have enough interesting decisions
- Feels that the 'narrative SW experience' has been over-sold. It still has great moments - but it's SW in a blender, rather than you crafting your own original story.
EDIT: Argh.....I cannot for the life of me sort out a link ...
Edited by jonboyjon1990I will take the time to watch this later, when I'm not in a public place where I can't listen to an audio track.
The link should be fixed, btw.
What I'm really curious about is that last bit. I want the ability to 'infer' a story from the game, with the game mechanics determining where the story goes, and then expanding on that story with narrative interpretation. I get the sense that Rebellion would be really good at that.
Am I mistaken? Will this game have instances that produce developments that are too hard to square in terms of a logical narrative?
No, I also get the sense that it would be really good at that. The emphasis on leaders performing missions, and the very abstract way the game handkes those missions, lends itself to a story with main characters performing heroic deeds, and the players filling in the details of those deeds.
Okay, I just had the opportunity to watch the video, and I now understand the story-blender criticism a bit better.
Quinn is saying that you don't really get to tell the story of Star Wars in a different way, but have a lot of the same story elements reappear in a different order than the way they appeared in the movies.
A hilarious review, fairly informative too. I understand the criticism about reusing plot elements, though.
We need new and more plots aka missions aka objectives. A lot like Eldrich Horror. The base game has too few cards, this seems to suffle the same. You see same old missions again and again, Until we get expansions...
See, I'm looking at it a different way. This game lets you RELIVE some of the best moments from the trilogy.
Carbon freezing Han? Check, however you might end up freezing Luke or Lando this time around instead.
Blow up Alderaan? Check, only this time maybe Kashyyyk is a made an example of when demonstrating the Empire's sheer dominance in the galaxy.
It doesn't bother me at all that it doesn't really deviate too much from the movies. After all, if you really want to create your own narrative adventures, isn't that what Imperial Assault is for?
So that's where SU&SD has gone to! Here I was thinking they had stoped doing reviews as I could not find any new ones on Youtube for the last year or so. Looks like I got some catchingup to do.
No interesting decisions in battles? Do I assign a hit to this Stardestroyer and hope to get what I need to finish it of in the next roll or do I take the sure thing and take out this puny tie-fighter instead? Just one example of the top of my head that sounds interesting to me. Oh well, very much looking forvard to this game either way.
There is lots of interesting decisions in battle.
Do I use this hit against a TIE and kill it, or do I use the hit on the SD and hope I can get more later.
What if I retreat, or what if he retreats. Taking out the SD next round is way more important, but taking out the TIE now gets me something.
Does he have a damage clearing card, and if I use the hit against the TIE, can I bait him into using it now.
Should I put 4 or 5 hits against the SD to make sure I kill it, or do I hope he doesn't have a damage clearing card and take out the SD and 2 TIEs?
If combat was devoid of tactic cards, it would be pretty bland, but with the addition of the tactics cards, and the retreat system, damage placement is pretty crucial.