I finally completed my collection with the purchase of Greedo. Yesterday I updated the collection section in the app and noticed that in the menu to add Greedo it says somethign like "Adding this Villain pack to your collection will cause this character to show up outside his proper timeline".

Possible spoiler about some characters ... maybe ...

Interesting!

Is it really "Officially defunct" or is it just placeholder text to keep them from getting bug reports on wacko deployments until they get around to fixing them?

41 minutes ago, McTavish said:

Is it really "Officially defunct" or is it just placeholder text to keep them from getting bug reports on wacko deployments until they get around to fixing them?

I see. You are right. I shouldn't have made it sounds like it's a sure thing. But let's say it is "highly likely" the case since after the Return to Hoth expansion.

They removed the concept from latest expansions. To be honest, I don't see them re-introducing it just for the app.

I’ll be positive and be happy they are aware of the fact some people are annoyed by this. Hopefully, they will eventually provide a solution rather than just an acknowledgment.

I never really understood why the concept of "Time Period" is even a consideration in IA.

The designers write the mission scripts (for both the tabletop game and the app). They can just not include characters whose appearances wouldn't make sense at certain times.

In the case of the app, it does semi-random deployments, so I understand the PERCEIVED need for the disclaimer about your playthrough of the game possibly conflicting with Star Wars canon. But just put a disclaimer on the whole game. Why bother with making a decision per-box of "does this need the continuity disclaimer?"

But the larger point is: do people really expect the tabletop and/or app campaigns to perfectly align with established canon?

I guess I just don't understand why anyone would care about this. Can somebody explain it to me?

1 hour ago, Thorvindr2 said:

Can somebody explain it to me?

Probably not.

I don't mean this negatively. It's just that it's a matter of personal opinion. I have a friend whose favorite color is Orange. I don't get it, but that doesn't matter. It's his opinion to be had. I agree with you for the most part but I can understand (and know many) folks that do care that all of the various bits of something must line up neatly. For them, playing the game when it is at odds with the story line is like having a popcorn husk stuck in your teeth. My bug-a-boo in that regard are the Wampas in the desert and other wacky deployments like that. (we had good-ol Palpy teaming up with his favorite Ugnaught to defend a lowly Imp Officer last night. What a nice and warm hearted guy)

5 hours ago, Thorvindr2 said:

I never really understood why the concept of "Time Period" is even a consideration in IA.

The designers write the mission scripts (for both the tabletop game and the app). They can just not include characters whose appearances wouldn't make sense at certain times.

In the case of the app, it does semi-random deployments, so I understand the PERCEIVED need for the disclaimer about your playthrough of the game possibly conflicting with Star Wars canon. But just put a disclaimer on the whole game. Why bother with making a decision per-box of "does this need the continuity disclaimer?"

But the larger point is: do people really expect the tabletop and/or app campaigns to perfectly align with established canon?

I guess I just don't understand why anyone would care about this. Can somebody explain it to me?

For the physical campaign, it's true that the designers can leave some characters aside if it does not make sense. There are however open groups that can throw this away. Of course the imperial player can play thematically to "preserve" the timeline but for those playing competitive it may not be optimal to play like this. This is certainly a good motivation to remove time period.

That being said, I have come to appreciate the lack of time period in the app as it has allowed me to play imperial units that I had not seen on the table for a long time.

In a physical campaign where I would play the imperial player, I will however continue to play thematically in regard to the time period (such as not allowing the rebel players to bring Obi-Wan as an ally in Jedi Luke side mission)

On 8/2/2018 at 2:41 PM, Thorvindr2 said:

But the larger point is: do people really expect the tabletop and/or app campaigns to perfectly align with established canon?

I guess I just don't understand why anyone would care about this. Can somebody explain it to me?

I kinda get it. I describe it as Canon-friendly, as in, "if it doesn't break canon, it's at least friendly with it".

I think of it like Rebels episodes, where someone like Lando or Leia would show up, meet with the Spectres for an episode or two, then go on their way. There isn't anything to say that couldn't have happened, just as there's nothing to say that, for instance, Luke couldn't have helped the heroes in the core campaign.

As someone who plays this game less as a cut throat experience and more as a semi-competitive RPG-lite, I enjoy how the campaign experience feels like it's part of something bigger. When you're on a mission, you're not just adventuring for treasure and fame, you're working for the Rebel Alliance to take down the Galactic Empire. I know that may sound kind of arbitrary, but it is a story-driven game after all- what's the point of playing it if you don't even care about the story?

Regarding time periods, and @Thorvindr2 's question:

Open groups/Allies earned.

If the Rebels bring in Han to Return to Hoth, that's not really canon-friendly, since he'd presumably be in Carbonite during that campaign. That's why his time period doesn't gel with RtH.

Going off of that "canon-friendly" thing, this is the inverse. While maybe there isn't something to say that Han couldn't have helped with the Core campaign, the issues with Hoth are a little more apparent.

Obviously, some groups will care a lot less about that, and I fully encourage them to ignore time period rules, then. It's not really a balance issue, it's more of a guideline for those who want a more canon-friendly experience.

Honestly though, it's a mechanic in the games that seems like it will no longer be added to, and while it was technically used in the past, it didn't really affect much at all. I wrote a brief article about it several months ago, if anyone's interested.

On 8/2/2018 at 5:13 PM, McTavish said:

Probably not.

I don't mean this negatively. It's just that it's a matter of personal opinion. I have a friend whose favorite color is Orange. I don't get it, but that doesn't matter. It's his opinion to be had. I agree with you for the most part but I can understand (and know many) folks that do care that all of the various bits of something must line up neatly. For them, playing the game when it is at odds with the story line is like having a popcorn husk stuck in your teeth. My bug-a-boo in that regard are the Wampas in the desert and other wacky deployments like that. (we had good-ol Palpy teaming up with his favorite Ugnaught to defend a lowly Imp Officer last night. What a nice and warm hearted guy)

Wampas in non-ice biomes have precedence. See Shadows of the Empire (N64).