Prieview: Stay on Target

By Aahzmandius_Karrde, in X-Wing

vadersson said:

However, what if the number markers are Skill/Initiative boost markers? Maybe a card raises your skill (perm or temp)? I see they seem to start at 10 and 11, so maybe only elite pilots can use it an it bumps you to 10 or 11 for a turn. Other than that, I have no idea.

Interesting thought. The Y-wing expansion seems to come with 16's and 17's. I'm starting to think that each expansion comes with different numbers so that you can collect a whole numerical series. Awesome! And there are duplicates so you can trade with your friends and get the whole collection of numbers even if you don't buy all the expansions. Nice!

But a number sequence for what purpose? Still for numbering ships?

At this point I gotta believe that it is for numbering ships. I wonder is there is a slot of something those numbers would fit into in the base.

Thanks,

Duncan

Baphomet69 said:

But a number sequence for what purpose? Still for numbering ships?

To be collectible, of course! Who doesn't like counting from 10 to 20?

Okay, I admit, I was totally joking when I posted that last comment. I was debating whether or not to put "j/k" at the end of it. It's just weird to me that the numbers are ascending with each expansion they reveal.

And as to vadersson's comment, it could be that they are for numbering ships, but why would they start at 10 and not 1?

I agree with others: can't wait to read the rules!

Parakitor said:

And as to vadersson's comment, it could be that they are for numbering ships, but why would they start at 10 and not 1?

I agree with others: can't wait to read the rules!

Well, we haven't seen the full spread of components from the core set. I suspect that 1-9 are in there.

I was hoping for rules over the Y-Wing preview actually, but… oh well.

We really need to rules posted. How soon is the GenCon tournament? The sooner the rules are posted the sooner questions can be asked and answered ahead of the event. Nothing rules a tournament like a bad on the spot ruling.

Thanks,

Duncan