28 minutes ago, Tvboy said:

Is there a shorter way to say non-companion figure? I’m at my word limit. XD

How about "When a non-companion figure is defeated, its controller discards their Bounty token."

Okay, I was actually able to adjust the templating to fit everything. Thanks for the catch.

Edit: Fixed "defreated" and syntax.

defreated -> defeated.

(Maybe just in case tie the statements "Pierce 1. Otherwise" -> "Pierce 1, otherwise".)

(For consistency "Anytime" -> "When".)

A figure carrying a crate can enter any deployment zone to gain VPs, not just the player's own. Is there a story hidden behind that?

47 minutes ago, a1bert said:

defreated -> defeated.

(Maybe just in case tie the statements "Pierce 1. Otherwise" -> "Pierce 1, otherwise".)

(For consistency "Anytime" -> "When".)

A figure carrying a crate can enter any deployment zone to gain VPs, not just the player's own. Is there a story hidden behind that?

Thanks for catching the typo. Linking the otherwise with a comma makes sense, although it feels awkward for some reason.

I'm going to keep "anytime" even though I know it goes against the established templating because I want to emphasize to the players that they need to be tracking that throughout the game. I know "when" does that too, just my personal preference and I don't mind letting this be a little bit idiosyncratic since FFG ain't payin me ya know?

It's any deployment zone because I like how that plays out in Concealed Treasures on ME Back Alleys where you can dunk a crate in an opponent's deployment zone. It gives players more options, puts less emphasis on figures bustling back and forth to their own DZ, and hopefully makes scoring a little bit easier/faster so the game doesn't drag out. I realize it's not very thematic and somewhat unintuitive, but I think it makes for better gameplay overall.

Got some good feedback from the competitive skirmish crowd and made the following change to the layout. I'll have to update the OP again and add in the map tile list later.

At the moment, the red DZ has a huge advantage. Its east exit is 5 spaces away from a crate, meaning a 5-speed figure could nab a crate in round 1 and stay somewhat protected due to nearby blocking terrain. All DZ's currently have one exit which requires at least 6 moves to reach a crate. The blue and green DZ's other exits are 7 spaces from any other crates. This basically means that red has crates 5 and 7 spaces from it while the others have crates 6 and 7 spaces from them.

I would suggest adding a 2x1 desert piece between the red DZ and its easternmost tile and replacing the 2x1 desert piece between the L tile and the + tile with a 2x2 piece. Then, each DZ would have crates 6 and 7 spaces away. Just a suggestion, because doing so would result in red being a very bad DZ, especially since it's on the junkyard tile, which in my opinion is one of the worst DZ tile to start in since there's so much blocking terrain.

13 hours ago, GuillotineTE said:

At the moment, the red DZ has a huge advantage. Its east exit is 5 spaces away from a crate, meaning a 5-speed figure could nab a crate in round 1 and stay somewhat protected due to nearby blocking terrain. All DZ's currently have one exit which requires at least 6 moves to reach a crate. The blue and green DZ's other exits are 7 spaces from any other crates. This basically means that red has crates 5 and 7 spaces from it while the others have crates 6 and 7 spaces from them.

I would suggest adding a 2x1 desert piece between the red DZ and its easternmost tile and replacing the 2x1 desert piece between the L tile and the + tile with a 2x2 piece. Then, each DZ would have crates 6 and 7 spaces away. Just a suggestion, because doing so would result in red being a very bad DZ, especially since it's on the junkyard tile, which in my opinion is one of the worst DZ tile to start in since there's so much blocking terrain.

I could also just shift that objective up and to the right and then it would be 6 spaces away from red and green. Good catch, I missed that shortcut from the bottom because I originally had that big tile rotated so the difficult terrain slowed red down, but had to flip it so green couldn't just snipe at red from DZ.

Got a chance to talk to a player at Worlds that had played 2 games on the map (I have currently played 0) who told me that blue and green were heavily incentivized to fight each other early which gave red a huge advantage in both games. I think this can be resolved with just an adjustment to the green deployment zone and to the terminal locations. I have shrunk the green deployment zone in order to slightly increase the distance between green and blue, and I have moved the terminals so that red and blue are less incentivized to move north and more encouraged to move towards the middle. Hopefully this makes the issue better and doesn't just create the same problem with blue instead of red.