Welcome to the Next big Forum game A Galaxy Divided !

This thread will be for the purpose of signing up and discussing the rules of the game and any other out of character conversation or questions that any one may have.

The game will be starting in the next 2 weeks, sign ups permitting.

I will post the rules as they sit now (still WIP a bit) for discussion below, I tried to mark the changes I made with ** for easy reference

Please feel free to ping anyone you think may be interested

@The Jabbawookie

@Bertie Wooster

@FortyInRed

@Matt3412

@LTD

@Lord Preyer

@Ling27

@GhostofNobodyInParticular

@Npmartian

Nothing to see here anymore......

I’m in, naturally.

Count me in.

45 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

I’m in, naturally.

Ditto.

Clon, you might want to add to the rules that a planet can increase its production while blockaded. It was something we agreed upon, I just never edited the rules.

17 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

Ditto.

Clon, you might want to add to the rules that a planet can increase its production while blockaded. It was something we agreed upon, I just never edited the rules.

Ok I will add that

Also just so people are looking at it, I feel pretty good about all of the Ships balance right now, except for the SSD which I am still tweeking.

And I am Also not Sure about the Squadrons, they could probably use a bit more testing before the game starts.

I'm in if I can be on Bertie's side, and if he is playing Rebels...

Oh good point,

If you have a preference for faction please say so as well

Rebels. But I don't care enough to mind being Imps.

Id be down playing Empire, but dont mind either way.

As much as it pains me to say this, I'm going to sit this one out. I have a lot going on in RL right now and I'm trying to remain present in what little family time I have.

No preference.

Currently we have:

Rebs: @LTD

@GhostofNobodyInParticular

Imps: @Ling27

Signed up no preference: @Npmartian

@The Jabbawookie

We need one more to have enough to start

@Bertie Wooster are you going to play this one? I think LTD wants to be on your team haha.

Just now, clontroper5 said:

We need one more to have enough to start

@Bertie Wooster are you going to play this one? I think LTD wants to be on your team haha.

I was actually reading through the rules when you pinged me.

Going to continue reading.

Just now, Bertie Wooster said:

I was actually reading through the rules when you pinged me.

Going to continue reading.

Haha OK,

Btw does anyone have any questions about any of the rules? I think most of them are worded clearly

I am going to write up a full explanation of how combat will happen soonish, seeing as the whole point of my changes was to add more decision making to combat and generally make it better.

Just now, clontroper5 said:

Haha OK,

Btw does anyone have any questions about any of the rules? I think most of them are worded clearly

I am going to write up a full explanation of how combat will happen soonish, seeing as the whole point of my changes was to add more decision making to combat and generally make it better.

Light weapons = Light guns?

Just now, Bertie Wooster said:

Light weapons = Light guns?

Yep, my error will fix that now haha

Does the B-wing have Bomber and Torpedo? Not sure what that lone "B" means.

2 minutes ago, Bertie Wooster said:

b-wing

1

2

2

B, Torpedo

34

Does the B-wing have Bomber and Torpedo? Not sure what that lone "B" means.

Correct

1. I like the new team play rules.

2. Can people use 150% on building GF?

3. Anything that depends on hitting a "6" seems kind of unreliable to me (Torpedo, Bombardment).

4. I haven't done any testing, but B-Wings seem very inefficient for their cost. I'd much rather take X-Wings. Fighter/Bomber seems like a much better combo than Torpedo/Bomber. Why are B-Wings 14 points more than X-Wings? Or 2 points more than TIE Defenders, which are CLEARLY superior (better attack, better HP)?

25 minutes ago, Bertie Wooster said:

. Can people use 150% on building GF?

As written now, yes. I opted for making that rule as simple As possible but I am not opposed to modifying it.

49 minutes ago, Bertie Wooster said:

Anything that depends on hitting a "6" seems kind of unreliable to me (Torpedo, Bombardment).

4. I haven't done any testing, but B-Wings seem very inefficient for their cost. I'd much rather take X-Wings. Fighter/Bomber seems like a much better combo than Torpedo/Bomber. Why are B-Wings 14 points more than X-Wings? Or 2 points more than TIE Defenders, which are CLEARLY superior (better attack, better HP)?

So the way that hits will be determined happens in 3 steps

1) Every ship(or Squadron) adds their Attack to the attack pool

2) the entire attack pool is rolled

3) each ship (or Squadron) can now pull eligible dice out of the attack pool to create hits.

I. E. A fleet has an Mc80 lib (with Warship), an mc30 with Torpedo and a few other ships.

1) all ships add their dice to the pool, let's say the total attack is 12

2) all twelve dice are rolled resulting in the following results:1, 2, 2,2,3, 3,4,4,4,5,5,6

3) now all ships can pull ANY Dice that qualify for hits for that perticular ship (upto their attack value)

So the mc80 lib pulls all three 4s (since Warship let's it hit on 4) and adds 3 damage.

The mc30 pulls the 6 and uses it for a Torpedo hit adding 2 damage

Then the other ships pull the two 5s adding 2 more damage for a total damage of 7.

In short the Torpedo effect is very ineffective on its own, but when it is supported by a large fleet it will consistently add 2 damage. Which is why the b-wing is so expensive (although I do think I want to drop the cost a little)

And regarding bombardment, hitting on a 6, I did that because fleets can have alot of Attack dice (somtimes 20+ with maxed out fleets) and I didn't want the bombardments to be overly devastating.

But I'm thinking we can let the Warship +1 bonus apply to bombardments as well for a compromise (meaning warships would hit on 5+ when bombarding)