Hello guys,

I have been thinking about different potential deck strategies and I have had this idea for a DS deck. The deck strategy would be based on a super-defensive playstyle focused on surviving rather than attacking and holding 3 objectives until the dial reaches 12. I am thinking about a deck primarily focused on keeping the force at all times as well as having units with tactics icons to focus the opposing units. Moreover, the deck would act as a counter-action and damage-prevention to the opponent's deck, basically disabling the opponent and incapacitating it.

I would really appreaciate your feedback, comments and suggestions about the idea.

Many thanks in advance.

I'd combine Sith and Scum & Villainy. S&V will let you capture enemy units, taking them out of the picture, while the Sith event cards can deal direct damage to enemy cards, discarding them from play. For the Force Struggle, I'd try to get Vader down and committed to the Force, as well as maybe some Nightsisters. You'll primarily be using Vader for his damage-dealing reaction ability. You'll want to send Palpatine to the frontlines to focus the enemies, but only send him forward if you're pretty sure you can win the edge battles: that gives you 3 focus tokens and means your less likely to see the Emperor take damage. The Cruel Interrogations objective set will also aid in your quest to focus your opponent's units.

Actually, now that I look at the cards, it seems you could get a pretty strong tactics-themed Sith deck without relying on other affiliations. Still, as a first pass I think I'd try:

2x The Emperor's Web
2x Fall of the Jedi
2x Cruel Interrogations
2x The Bespin Exchange
1x Shadows of Dathomir
1x Looking for Droids

But then, I'm pretty partial to the S&V affiliation. You could eassily trade Looking For Droids for another Shadows of Dathomir and add The Heart of the Empire in place of The Bespin Exchange for the added Sith event card.

If turtling becomes a dominant DS strategy, I will lose interest in this game very fast. Super defensive strategy also kills any cinematic flavor or Star Wars feel to the game.

Not to begrudge any player who uses this strategy. I can't fault a player who builds a deck to win. I just hope the designers don't design a game where this is an effective strategy.

Budgernaut said:

While Scum and Villany will certainly have its place in control/stall decks eventually, I don't think it's really worth it now. Capture would be a great way to prevent recursion, but there just isn't that much LS recursion available (and capture actually gives them that chance). I'd much rather kill a unit than capture it currently. All personal opinion, admittedly.

cparadis said:

I would argue that the last sentence more or less contradicts the first two. You're essentially condemning an entire portion of the playerbase based on their preferred playstyle. I'll be the first to admit that I prefer decks that go right for the jugular, as ultra-defensive decks tend to be less interesting IMO, but still, many players enjoy those types of decks. What is wrong with a deck that plays defensively? No, what is wrong with a successful deck that plays defensively?

@MarthMWebster

First, thanks for your response.

I think if you reread my post, you'll see that what I said is not contradictory at all. In my post, I clearly agree with you that there is nothing wrong with decks that plays defensively nor is there anything wrong with a defensive deck that is succesful. This is what I meant when I said I don't begrudge anyone who uses such a deck, and that you cannot fault a player for trying to win.

My next point - that I hope the designers don't design the game this way - was a personal preference issue not an indictment of the game or any players or strategies. Furthermore, I'm not "condemning" anyone. What I meant by this was that if a super defensive DS strategy becomes dominant, I will lose interest in the game … personally. Not that it will be a bad game per se - just that it won't be a game I will end up playing much. So, I personally hope the designers don't design it in that fashion

I'm looking for a fast-paced cinematic Star Wars card game that makes me feel like I'm watching the Star Wars movies. I'm hopeful that this is the type of game FFG is making. Quotes like this from Eric Lang make me hope this is the game we're getting:

"I wanted to make a game that was quick and action-packed, but where every tiny interaction held the promise of greater scope, even if you didn’t see it at the time. I wanted my Star Wars to be a game that captured you in the moment and made you think. More importantly, it needed to make you feel."

For me, a super defensive DS strategy does not give me this feeling. Again, these are all personal preferences. So no, what I said wasn't contradictory, nor am I condemning anyone. I was just voicing my personal preference for how I hope the game is. I only got a chance to play it at GenCon. I hope it lives up to what I'm expecting, but who knows?

That's fair. I do agree that fast-paced gameplay > slow-paced. But isn't it possible for a defensive deck to still produce a fast-paced match? So far, it looks as if the Sith affiliation is the one that lends itself best to a turtle deck, and it's also the one that has access to Palpatine and Vader. Characters with 4+ Force icons. Control of the Force can lead to a rapid dark aide victory, as the dial advances twice as fast should the light side be unable to swing the Force back in his favor.

@MarthMWebster

I totally agree! A dark side turtle could be very quick and result in a quick victory.

I might be wrong. I might enjoy playing or even playing against a "super defensive" deck. But I'm not sure of that yet, and I think it is unlikely that I would enjoy either of those. Only time will tell perhaps.

Not to mention that a Sith turtle deck is very thematic when you consider the slow machinations of the revenge of the Sith over a millennium.

Speaking of which, I must say I applaud the direction FFG has taken in regard to the prequels; i.e. employing subtle nods to the positive elements found in Episodes I-III, such as images of Coruscant, the Old Jedi Order, etc. As a fan of the continuity as a whole, I like looking at an interpretation of the Classic Era as part of a larger storyline, but I also appreciate the fixture of the game firmly in this time period. The only question I have now, is which version of Anakin's spirit they will go with. It seems to me that going the Sebastian Shaw route would be unlikely to get approved by Lucasfilm, given the "current" version of that scene using Hayden Christiansen. The use of Hayden in the DVD version has always bugged me. Not because I have any particular issues with the actor's look per se, but because the makeup crew didn't do anything to make him look like he has "aged" at all during his time trapped in Vader's shell, making him look highly unnatural next to the far older spirits of Obi-Wan and Yoda. The happy medium I would love to see would be a spirit that looks like prequel Anakin would if he were 18 years older than he appears in Episode III.

I have a feeling they will either go with the original ghost Anakin, or just won't make a card for it. Their version of Han Solo makes me think the designers are pre-Special Edition purists (Han's ability might as well be called "Han shot first").

More on topic, the thought of a DS turtle deck has worried me as well. Hopefully they will give the LS as many aggro tools as they give the DS turtle tools. I just hope it doesn't get to the point where the meta revolves around there being one or two variations of a DS turtle deck, and all LS decks having to be composed of answers to that deck. I have faith in the designers at this point, though. They seem to know what they are doing so far.

Even if Sith turtle decks become effective, I just don't think they will take over the DS meta. I could see it reaching a point where the only good Sith deck is a turtle deck, but that's only 1/3 of the Dark Side cards. With Imperial Navy and Scum & Villainy affiliations having such distinct flavors and strategies, I think there will still be quite a variety in player decks.

Han shot first and if I ever see the face of Hayden Christensen in this game I'll quit.

In this forum you have some worried that Sith turtle could be too strong, in another forum someone is worried that Rebel direct damage is too strong. I guess that means it's time for a cage match. Teenage Sith Ninja Turtles vs Rebel Johnny Six-guns this Sunday on pay-per-view.

Andur Saibot said:

You've just managed to fill me with dread thinking about possible future expansions *throws up in his mouth a little*

Question: Whatever other qualms people may have with Hayden Christiansen, what is wrong with his face, per se? He was rated #9 in Glamour's 50 Sexiest Men of 2010. You do realize he's never going to have a spoken role in this game, yes?

MarthWMaster said:

Is not what his face looks like, is what it represents.

Sith bunker is prolly one of the best ways to play them, with Vader out, playing a card like force stasis can Hold up a big chr like Luke from attacking and kill a 1hp chr. Even playing that sith event card for 0 that lets you draw two discard one is a great way to kill troopers. Then you can have Vader just sit commiting to the force as a threat for the light side next round. That in mind Palp is the big sith offencive chr in my mind vader is your defence using tatics icons the emperor can mark targets for force lightning which does 1point of dmg with vader sitting around.

Magni

Magni said:

That's exactly how'd I'd want to use Vader and Palpatine in ideal circumstances as well. With the added bonus that Vader can go on the offensive pretty effectively if needed.