I'm a little confused as to the order of combat when it comes to to the 'theaters'. From the way I understand it, it goes something like this:

I. Space Combat

1. Player A rolls dice.

2. Player A plays cards or takes actions.

3. Player A assigns damage.

4. Player B defends

5. Player B sets 'casualities' aside.

6. Player B rolls dice.

7. Player B plays cards or takes actions.

8. Player B assigns damage.

9. Player A defends.

10. Player A and Player B remove casualities.

II. Ground Combat

1. Player A rolls dice.

2. Player A plays cards or takes actions.

3. Player A assigns damage.

4. Player B defends

5. Player B sets 'casualities' aside.

6. Player B rolls dice.

7. Player B plays cards or takes actions.

8. Player B assigns damage.

9. Player A defends.

10. Player A and Player B remove casualities.

III. Retreat

1. Player A decides if they want to (or can) retreat.

2. Player B decides if they want to (or can) retreat.

IV. Move to next round (back to I) and repeat.

Is this correct?

Sort of.

We do:

Player 1 (attacker) rolls dice.

Player 1 assigns damage.
Player 2 (defender) rolls dice.
Player 2 assigns. damage.

Player 1 plays a card.

Player 2 plays a card.

Player 1 plays a card. (repeat till no more cards are played)
Both players remove casualties.

Repeat for ground. Then decide if there is retreats.

Repeat.

Nominrath is 100% correct.

Baxie is not correct in the combat order.

Huh. This order seems awkward to me for some reason. I would think it would be more fluid to settle each theater separately instead of going back and forth. Maybe something more like:

I. Space Combat.

Steps 1-10 (see previous post)

11. Retreat decision.

12. Repeat steps 1-11 until one side is defeated, or one or both sides retreat. If so, move to Ground Combat (if no ground troops are available, end combat and resolve any post combat effects and details).

II. Ground Combat.

Steps 1-11 (see above)

12. Repeat steps 1-11 until one side is defeated, or one or both sides retreat. If so, end combat and resolve any post combat effects and details.

This could, I think, add an extra layer of tactical and startegic elements as players would not be able to outright land troops in occupied systems, they would have to break through the space blockade first and risk losing their transports (and the units they carry) in the process. This could also add some cool tactic card opportunities as you get boarding cards that allow some certain ships carrying units to board other ships carrying untis and resolve a combat (Think ISD Devastator vs. CC Tantive IV in 'A New Hope') or escape pod cards that allow you to save certain transported units from a doomed transport during the 'Block Damage' step. But maybe that's what the back and forth is taking into account; it's just mish-moshing all the scenarios into a jambalaya stew of steps and rules and letting the players' imaginations sort it out. LoL

Ah well, guess it is what it is. Maybe I've just played too much Axis & Allies and Shogun (a.k.a. Samurai Swords, Ikusa). LoL

Thanks for the clarification!

I think the key to thinking about space battles in Rebellion is that it's about eliminating the transport capabilities, not the inherent space superiority of each side.

Well, except when it comes to the Death Star. That's a bit different.

I think the key to thinking about space battles in Rebellion is that it's about eliminating the transport capabilities, not the inherent space superiority of each side.

Well, except when it comes to the Death Star. That's a bit different.

Yep, and its also about shutting down deploy points and production.

The combat order is also about balance. The Rebels are more often than not, are outmatched in space for most of a game (usually an entire game). However, they can hold their own against the Imperials on the ground. I've had 1 Airspeeder take out 4 of my Stormtroopers before. They were some lucky rolls by the Rebel player and unlucky rolls on my apart. If you did space combat to its finality before you did ground combat, the Rebels would have a hard time winning any ground fights.

Let's say the Rebels only have a Corvette and a Transport in a system. They do however have 3 Troopers and a Airspeeder on the planet. The Imperial Player comes in with a SD and 2 Ties, but only 2 Stormtroopers. If you had to resolve space first, what do you do? You know you are completely outmatched in space with no hope of winning. So do you hope to survive with one of your ships and just retreat everything? That just gives the planet to the Imperials even though your ground force is superior. If you just retreat your ships and leave your troops there, they are stuck and will eventually be destroyed unless you come in with another force.

With the combat order the way it is, you'd have a good chance of destroying both ST's and deny the system subjugation for at least a round or two. Then you could still retreat if you had a ship survive. The combat order also helps the Rebels do hit and runs with just a transport and a bunch of troops. They can move in with the transport and attack lightly garrisoned planets and then retreat.

Yup. Like I said, just thinking like a war-gamer. Just need to remember that Rebellion isn't intended to be a straight-up war board game like Risk, A&A, or others; it's more along the the lines of a complicated board game version of hide & seek. LoL

I suspect they did actually playtest the 'must win in space first' option at some point...and found it wanting.

This is also fairly thematic. Think ROTJ. Endor ground and space battle were fought simultaneous. Actually, if you think about it, so was the Hoth battle in ESB. Mind you, the Rebs kept bring transports and then retreating, but, they were fought at the same time.