So me and my roommate got IP a few months ago and have a played a few campaigns. We very quickly noticed- why would the rebels take allies and give the Imperial player a massive starting of threat? We both have not even thought of taking allies. And I have seen on here that a lot of other players think the same way.

So the main question is, has the community come up with a house rule to make rebel allies a balanced option in the campaign?

Her and I have thought about it and think we have a idea. It is not the amount of threat that is the issue but of how quickly they get it. We are going to try stretching it out as an idea. Basic idea is to take the threat of the rebel allies and divide it by 5, rounding the number up, and that is the amount of extra threat the imperial player gets each turn.

Ex. Chewy is 15 threat, so on a 3 threat mission the Imperial player would get 6 threat each turn for 5 turns. 3 from the mission and 3 from the rebel allies. We went with 5 because that is the shortest mission time we have seen in the campaigns so far, so it ensures that the imperials get the full threat value for allies used, but not all in one shot, allowing tactical use of allies by the rebels to give a benefit.

18 hours ago, Oryan_Winter said:

So the main question is, has the community come up with a house rule to make rebel allies a balanced option in the campaign?

Oh buddy, welcome to the forums.

Alright, so that's actually an extremely common subject of discussion and debate- ally/villain threat costs. Many people argue that they're too high, and personally I can see where they're coming from.

But, in my opinion, the advantage from winning an ally doesn't come from deploying that ally, but having the option to deploy it. Almost no ally will always be an optimal choice, but if the Rebels are smart, they can try to play them optimally. Even Chewie, who admittedly does have a pretty narrow window of use.

Overall, I see my Rebels have some "regulars" they always take along- Leia and the droids. They like having beefier allies as their other two options.

The droids, in my opinion, are the best deal. Winning their mission nets two different heroes that can be played, one for 3 and one for 2 threat (cannot be played at the same time without any additional rewards that would allow it). C-3P0 is one of the cheapest allies in the game, (tied with rSmuggler) but he's an incredible support unit.

Also, once Hera's released, I imagine she and Chopper will take Leia's place.

I have not had a problem with the cost of allies. they are great at focussing enemies and thinning the board, while the heroes run the objective. they are a great distraction and most of the time the heroes win when they bring an ally.

i think some people have made a house rule that you earn the allies you have side missions for, from the start. winning their side mission halves their cost.

On 4/9/2017 at 5:32 PM, Oryan_Winter said:

So me and my roommate got IP a few months ago and have a played a few campaigns. We very quickly noticed- why would the rebels take allies and give the Imperial player a massive starting of threat? We both have not even thought of taking allies. And I have seen on here that a lot of other players think the same way.

So the main question is, has the community come up with a house rule to make rebel allies a balanced option in the campaign?

Her and I have thought about it and think we have a idea. It is not the amount of threat that is the issue but of how quickly they get it. We are going to try stretching it out as an idea. Basic idea is to take the threat of the rebel allies and divide it by 5, rounding the number up, and that is the amount of extra threat the imperial player gets each turn.

Ex. Chewy is 15 threat, so on a 3 threat mission the Imperial player would get 6 threat each turn for 5 turns. 3 from the mission and 3 from the rebel allies. We went with 5 because that is the shortest mission time we have seen in the campaigns so far, so it ensures that the imperials get the full threat value for allies used, but not all in one shot, allowing tactical use of allies by the rebels to give a benefit.

The houserule I use (works pretty well for both sides)

Some of the earliest released allies are insanely overpointed like Han and Chewie and there is nothing you can do other than just not play them. Not all allies are overpointed though, like Allied Troopers are fine, as are C3-PO and a few others, at least early in the campaign. Later in the campaign things like attachments and class card make Imperial threat better so even the "balanced" allies like the troopers become over pointed. You can remedy this somewhat with a side mission reward that lowers ally cost by 2, or when you're playing Murne you can reduce unique ally costs by 5 which will make a few allies like Jedi Luke, Lando, Leia and a few others viable choices.

12 hours ago, Union said:

Some of the earliest released allies are insanely overpointed like Han and Chewie and there is nothing you can do other than just not play them. Not all allies are overpointed though, like Allied Troopers are fine, as are C3-PO and a few others, at least early in the campaign. Later in the campaign things like attachments and class card make Imperial threat better so even the "balanced" allies like the troopers become over pointed. You can remedy this somewhat with a side mission reward that lowers ally cost by 2, or when you're playing Murne you can reduce unique ally costs by 5 which will make a few allies like Jedi Luke, Lando, Leia and a few others viable choices.

Murne's Company of Heroes actually only lowers the deployment cost by 4. Still a nice upgrade though - I am playing Murne in an in progress JR campaign and picked up Company of Heroes immediately after we won Leia. We've brought her to all but one mission (brought Alliance Rangers instead to the mission Leia sat out). Hard to justify not bringing her when her deployment cost is only 4.

Leia for 4 threat is brutal. Empire's really got their work cut out for them with that.

Shhh! Don't spoil it for the Imperial players. I'm the Imperial player in a campaign with the Nemeses deck, and they didn't understand my Cheshire Cat style grin when they got Chewbacca. I barely put up a token resistance and they don't understand why. Next game's turn one Darth Vader will show them...

In all seriousness, they are totally fine in a fun game, but if you are being more competitive about it, I would suggest houseruling the characters one by one as they come up rather than trying a one size fits all approach.

A few examples:

IG-88, play him with his Skirmish "fix" card

Darth Vader: points decrease or swap brutality for Jedi Luke's heroic and maybe make force choke a 3 square pull instead of damage.

Chewbacca: points decrease or give him an auto block and make slam more like choppers ram, letting him move and use it.

Han: give him lucky (from R2) and maybe remove the "if you did not suffer any damage" part of return fire.

Boba Fett: I can't think of anything even close to an elegant fix for him. Maybe make his battle discipline abilities not surges and give him the ability that auto focuses him before an attack.

Edit: this list takes as a basis the thought that there really are only a few pieces that have this problem. They started evening out with Hoth, and in Bespin and Jabba's Realm everything clicks (although a few pieces start to look REALLY overcosted now in comparison to the likes of Jabba and Terro). Boba Fett, IG-88, Vader, Chewbacca and Han are the real standouts as just a little too expensive. Dengar, General Weiss, Royal Guard Champion, and MAYBE Kayn (in light of Capt. Terro) and farmboy Luke occupy a middle ground where it's debatable either way.

The Nemeses class does a lot to "fix" villains and make them actually scary (even alleviates their costs with a few cards), so that leaves you with allies. In that situation, you are really only talking about Han, Chewie, and maybe original Luke (but I think he's fine as is).

On 4/11/2017 at 3:32 PM, subtrendy said:

Leia for 4 threat is brutal. Empire's really got their work cut out for them with that.

The Rebels are about to get that in our campaign. Any advice on dealing with it? I'm using the Nemesis deck, so I can bring out cheap Villains too - but having "I'm on the Leader" exhausted every round before I use it for the rest of the game just sounds miserable.

17 hours ago, FatherTurin said:

Shhh! Don't spoil it for the Imperial players. I'm the Imperial player in a campaign with the Nemeses deck, and they didn't understand my Cheshire Cat style grin when they got Chewbacca. I barely put up a token resistance and they don't understand why. Next game's turn one Darth Vader will show them...

Rebels took Allied Troopers in the Shyla side mission giving me an extra 6 points. With the two cost reducers in Nemeses I was able to bring Vader on in round 2 along with some Royal Guard. Thanks to the choke point the map and the mission giving Imperials free movement, has he was able to dish out some good damage and force the Rebels to run rather than fight. He did reasonably well for a 10 point unit, although pretty horribly for an 18.

47 minutes ago, Stompburger said:

The Rebels are about to get that in our campaign. Any advice on dealing with it? I'm using the Nemesis deck, so I can bring out cheap Villains too - but having "I'm on the Leader" exhausted every round before I use it for the rest of the game just sounds miserable.

Use that extra 4 threat wisely and focus fire on Leia early in the game. It's possible, if you're lucky, to remove her on turn one on some missions. It gives the Rebels an entire turn of breathing room, which is awful, but she's such a strong support character that it's best to get her out of the way ASAP- especially if you're worried about losing those class cards.

On 4/18/2017 at 3:23 PM, FatherTurin said:

A few examples:

IG-88, play him with his Skirmish "fix" card

Darth Vader: points decrease or swap brutality for Jedi Luke's heroic and maybe make force choke a 3 square pull instead of damage.

Chewbacca: points decrease or give him an auto block and make slam more like choppers ram, letting him move and use it.

Han: give him lucky (from R2) and maybe remove the "if you did not suffer any damage" part of return fire.

Boba Fett: I can't think of anything even close to an elegant fix for him. Maybe make his battle discipline abilities not surges and give him the ability that auto focuses him before an attack.

I think modifying the previewed attachment for Vader might work as well; reduce his deploy by 5 and gain the listed changes.

Fett is just too expensive compared to other villains in the campaign. If you are looking at Fett, you are probably using hunters, and he is just not as good as inquisitor even if they cost the same, and when you figure in threat cost he probably comes in behind Bossk, reworked IG-88, and Greedo. Even with the nemesis deck, I would take Bossk over Fett every campaign.

Han: I think giving him block +2 on an evade roll goes a long way. The other change (that I have not tested) is swap his blue die for a red die. It drops his range substantially, but gives him a bit more punch on his attack and his counters.

Chewie: He is the only one I would argue for a straight point decrease. Drop him down to 12 and change his slam to either ram, or give him a modified charge ability.

The Nemesis deck and Murne did a lot to bring allies/villains into balance. Other than Fett and Chewie, none are in the realm of unplayable (and fett is only unplayable because of the comparable options).