Hi all,
in case of instruction "Move X to attack <<Name Surname>>" assuming isn't possible to attack that specific figure, should I skip the instruction which may end up in a no-attack imperial activation or do a "best effort" attack choosing another hero?
Thanks!

The latter. Normally it would be the next best character to fill the criteria, but the the case of a specifically named character the attack gets redirected to the closest character.

If the text is in << >>, then you always use targeting priority. If it is without, then you skip if it's not possible.

18 hours ago, a1bert said:

If the text is in << >>, then you always use targeting priority. If it is without, then you skip if it's not possible.

Hold on, actually this confuses me. in Example <<Shyla Varad>> means I have to attack Shyla. Now assuming this is impossible but in example Fenn can be targeted instead, should I skip ending up in "Move X to Reposition Y" or should I attack Fenn?

7 minutes ago, Golan Trevize said:

in Example <<Shyla Varad>> means I have to attack Shyla.

Copying with substitutions from Targeting Priority:

Sometimes, the Imperial figure's intended target is not legal. For example, it might be instructed to attack a named hero but does not have line of sight to that hero. In this situation no criteria was given, the Imperial figure targets the closest Rebel figure.

I.e. giving a name of a hero to target is not a criteria which would allow you to pick a next-best target (unlike something like "a hero with the most tech dice), but because it's between << >>, it is not absolute, so you use targeting priority and thus target the closest rebel figure (hero or ally) instead of the named hero.

22 minutes ago, a1bert said:

Copying with substitutions from Targeting Priority:

Sometimes, the Imperial figure's intended target is not legal. For example, it might be instructed to attack a named hero but does not have line of sight to that hero. In this situation no criteria was given, the Imperial figure targets the closest Rebel figure.

I.e. giving a name of a hero to target is not a criteria which would allow you to pick a next-best target (unlike something like "a hero with the most tech dice), but because it's between << >>, it is not absolute, so you use targeting priority and thus target the closest rebel figure (hero or ally) instead of the named hero.

Ok great, that was my doubt. I assumed a name was absolute and not a criteria but I see your point on <<>>. For the sake of fun I 've always played this as if I was a mean imperial taking the best decision possible for the empire. I find the app too easy to win and I would say it's stupid in many cases, so there's no point to exploiting rules

I love how the app makes ranged units to gain adjacency in most of the cases before an attack. Onar is always focused

I always default to the imperial rule and just pick the next best target. So if it tells me to attack Move 3 and attack <<Fenn>> but he can't get to Fenn, I will move 3 and attack what I would consider as the Imperial Player to be the best target.. so if the choice was Gideon with 1 health to flip who is 4 spaces away or Diala with full health who is 1 space away, I go after Gideon.

That might not be playing it perfectly as intended, but I find the app is way to easy as is so I like to make it as challenging as I can.

13 hours ago, Golan Trevize said:

I love how the app makes ranged units to gain adjacency in most of the cases before an attack. Onar is always focused

I always apply the Imperial Rule here and make sure they have minimum range and that’s it. No need to get close if they don’t need to. Especially when it makes the reposition move afterwards impossible to achieve...

9 hours ago, Majushi said:

I always apply the Imperial Rule here and make sure they have minimum range and that’s it. No need to get close if they don’t need to. Especially when it makes the reposition move afterwards impossible to achieve...

Not knowing the app strategy I can't say what's the best for the imperial rule. If my strategy is to keep everyone under fire I want to get as close as I can, sacrifice cheap units and waste rebels time. If the strategy is hit and run then I agree with you, imperial should get at guaranteed range and step back right after. Of course if looking at following instructions I can see that they would trigger the focus and I can avoid that, I avoid adjacency. However I believe I shouldn't, i ndeed rulebook has clear picture of this cases and it brings units adjacent. Even guards with reach gets adjacent in pictures.

You’re welcome to do it however you want

7 hours ago, Golan Trevize said:

Not  knowing  the app strategy I can't say what's the best for the imperial rul  e     . 

The app doesn’t have a strategy. Just do whatever you least want it to do.

Also, what @Majushi is describing (moving as close as necessary rather than as possible) is not the Imperial Rule. The Imperial Rule is a tie breaker for the “AI.” I only bring this up in hopes of preventing confusion.

As a house rule, however, I think it is valid to call it a modification or extension of the Imperial Rule. The attack will be the same from both locations and it better positions the figure for it’s next action.

yeah, what @Uninvited Guest said.

I'm fully aware that the "Imperial Rule" is a tiebreaker for the AI.

That said, if you're looking for a "gain" by following the AI to the exact letter of the law, you may soon realise you don't need to.

In my experience, unless its a probe droid that wants to self destruct, there is no need to get super close to the Rebels.

In fact, due to most units having a reposition move after attacking, more often than not they would struggle to get to an appropriate distance if they had first moved adjacent to the Rebels.

So, I choose to use the Imperial Rule when positioning also, to make the game a little bit harder. But that is my choice.

3 hours ago, Majushi said:

yeah, what @Uninvited Guest said.

I'm fully aware that the "Imperial Rule" is a tiebreaker for the A  I  .  

I do apologize if I implied otherwise. I didn’t intend to.

7 hours ago, Uninvited Guest said:

I do apologize if I implied otherwise. I didn’t intend to.

You did not. I was merely agreeing and following on from your points

On 8/18/2018 at 7:18 AM, Golan Trevize said:

I love how the app makes ranged units to gain adjacency in most of the cases before an attack. Onar is always focused

You see, that is something i find weird in how the app handle ranged attacks for imperial units. I stick to that rule so the game remains balanced, but i always found it a bit silly.

Basically, enemies run adjacent to you with their blaster, shoot, and then reposition back into cover. In the game, it might be optimal for damage and more challenging so the imperials never miss, but thematically it doesn't make much sense. In real life or movies, nobody does it (or rarely does it). I find it anti-cinematic.

For example, if two guys are shooting at each other behind cover, one wouldn't dash next to his assailant, shoot him and go back behind his original cover. This is way too dangerous and downright suicidal. One would instead try to aim, find a better spot, lure his opponent or anything else like that.

The Descent app used the "Spot" rule which made enemies try to get into line of sight within 3 spaces from their target, then attack it. It does make more sense imho, so i'm not sure why it has been decided otherwise in LotA.

Not sure what others think about this.

1 hour ago, Shirys said:

You see, that is something i find weird in how the app handle ranged attacks for imperial units. I stick to that rule so the game remains balanced, but i always found it a bit silly.

Basically, enemies run adjacent to you with their blaster, shoot, and then reposition back into cover. In the game, it might be optimal for damage and more challenging so the imperials never miss, but thematically it doesn't make much sense. In real life or movies, nobody does it (or rarely does it). I find it anti-cinematic.

For example, if two guys are shooting at each other behind cover, one wouldn't dash next to his assailant, shoot him and go back behind his original cover. This is way too dangerous and downright suicidal. One would instead try to aim, find a better spot, lure his opponent or anything else like that.

The Descent app used the "Spot" rule which made enemies try to get into line of sight within 3 spaces from their target, then attack it. It does make more sense imho, so i'm not sure why it has been decided otherwise in LotA.

Not sure what others think about this.

I house rule that an imperial figure will move until it has reach a space that guarantees it will "hit" from accuracy point of view. For example, a stormtrooper with its Blue-Green die has a minimum of 3 accuracy (2 from the blue die and 1 from the green die). Therefore, when the Stormtrooper is within 3 spaces of a target (assuming LOS obviously) and still has movement points, I do not move it closer and proceed with the attack. I also take into account built in accuracy, but not the one gained on a surge has it can be cancelled out by an evade or the dice roll might not produce any surge to trigger it.

3 minutes ago, IanSolo_FFG said:

I house rule that an imperial figure will move until it has reach a space that guarantees it will "hit" from accuracy point of view. For example, a stormtrooper with its Blue-Green die has a minimum of 3 accuracy (2 from the blue die and 1 from the green die). Therefore, when the Stormtrooper is within 3 spaces of a target (assuming LOS obviously) and still has movement points, I do not move it closer and proceed with the attack. I also take into account built in accuracy, but not the one gained on a surge has it can be cancelled out by an evade or the dice roll might not produce any surge to trigger it. 

I agree with that idea but it requires to calculate every time the minimum range based on the dice the enemy will use.

Do you think a pre-set average based on dice color could be more suitable without breaking game balance?

Also don't forget Hidden and extra accuracy from activation bonuses. It gets mathy fast even with just checking for the minimum accuracy (from dice and modifiers, more complex if accounting for focused and dice from activation bonuses).

3 minutes ago, a1bert said:

Also don't forget Hidden and extra accuracy from activation bonuses. It gets mathy fast even with just checking for the minimum accuracy (from dice and modifiers, more complex if accounting for focused and dice from activation bonuses).

I guess this might be why they decided to make it as it is. To simplify things without resorting to too much math.

2 hours ago, a1bert said:

Also don't forget Hidden and extra accuracy from activation bonuses. It gets mathy fast even with just checking for the minimum accuracy (from dice and modifiers, more complex if accounting for focused and dice from activation bonuses).

Its not exactly difficult to calculate minimum distance quickly.

Blue die is 2 minimum.

Green die is 1 minimum.

Red and Yellow are 0 minimum.

Add on any activation bonus (and quickly review surge priority if Hidden).

(Also make note if the defender has any auto Evades - Like Shyla)

On 10/18/2018 at 2:02 PM, Shirys said:

Basically  , ene  mies run adjacent to you with their blaster      , shoot,  and then reposition ba  ck into co   ve   r     .       

Well... yeah... their stormtroopers. They need all the help with accuracy they can get. ?

On 10/18/2018 at 7:38 PM, Uninvited Guest said:

Well... yeah... their stormtroopers. They need all the help with accuracy they can get. ?

Well now that you mention it, stormtroopers are the imperial figures which tend to miss the most often in my recent IA sessions ?

On 8/19/2018 at 3:01 AM, Golan Trevize said:

Not knowing the app strategy I can't say what's the best for the imperial rule.

Usually you can figure it out if you just look at the "Reposition" instruction following the current one. I will usually move the Imperial figures so that they can A fully execute their reposition instruction after the attack and B trigger any range-based bonuses they have like relentless while also avoiding any range based penalties on the target hero (always prioritizing triggering imperial abilities over avoiding rebel abilities and repositioning).

But that's just me trying to match the spirit of the Imperial rule, I can understand why FFG chose to go with the "move as close as you can rule" to try and reduce the mental load on the player characters who are having to play as both sides.

On 10/18/2018 at 4:22 PM, Majushi said:

Its not exactly difficult to calculate minimum distance quickly.

Blue die is 2 minimum.

Green die is 1 minimum.

Red and Yellow are 0 minimum.

Add on any activation bonus (and quickly review surge priority if Hidden).

(Also make note if the defender has any auto Evades - Like Shyla)

You also need to keep in mind the maximum range. Let's say shyla is 11 away from a stormtrooper and the app says the trooper will move and shoot her. He can get to a spot where she is within maximum range thus the target is a legal target. (max range on a blue/green being 8). They would have to take the shot and ignore the melee character right next to them.

On 2/11/2019 at 5:23 PM, Zrob314 said:

You also need to keep in mind the maximum range. Let's say shyla is 11 away from a stormtrooper and the app says the trooper will move and shoot her. He can get to a spot where she is within maximum range thus the target is a legal target. (max range on a blue/green being 8). They would have to take the shot and ignore the melee character right next to them.

I'd probably take that shot. I've had stormtroopers hit me from irritatingly far away enough times.