Same here. I've only ever managed to find two people to play this with, both of whom were unimpressed and would rather play something else. It's a real shame because I really like how the game plays. Haven't managed to play any of the Hoth cycle or Edge of Darkness, it makes me sad!

I would love to see a solo version by FFG. Primarily since it is frustrating to find players. I am surprised that there is not more folks playing, especially with the great stuff coming out. At my local store, players still want to play the old Decipher version.

That's why I'm surprised they went with just a 2 player game. If I wanted a 2 player Star Wars card game I'd play the Decipher game too.

I'd like to see a solo game or a 2 player/multiplayer card game that can also be played solo, like the Middle Earth CCG.

Lets hope they can do it while they still have the license.

I would love to see a solo version by FFG. Primarily since it is frustrating to find players. I am surprised that there is not more folks playing, especially with the great stuff coming out. At my local store, players still want to play the old Decipher version.

That's why I'm surprised they went with just a 2 player game. If I wanted a 2 player Star Wars card game I'd play the Decipher game too.

I'd like to see a solo game or a 2 player/multiplayer card game that can also be played solo, like the Middle Earth CCG.

Lets hope they can do it while they still have the license.

Well, we will get the multiplayer version in a month along with a cool sounding one vs two/three. Now......... A cool solo variant for solo and everyone is happy!!!!

SWCCG has been my favorite card game of all time. Innovative system, deep strategies and tactics, tough choice every turn as your ressource was your life (get too much, you'd get punished).

And the greatest universe of them all.

Every game was epic, every game felt like history.

I never thought SWLCG could be better...

In fact, when they announced it wouldn't be a coop game anymore, I was so disappointed, I stopped following its developpement.

1v1? It couldn't beat CCG at its own game...

I would not play this game...

Late may, I watched a review video on my favorite boardgame site.

Next day, was in possession of 2 core sets and 3 force pack.

I now think that, weither this game turns around Magic basis, it has at least 7 things that makes it a lot better :

- Limited mana screw (you always start with at least 4 mana, so far)

- Not just one attack phase (attack/defense is sooooo boring)

- Edge battle (fully integrated bluff Inside!)

- Multifocusing = multitapping (and removing only 1 focus, instead of untapping)

- Limited topdeck (as you could draw an entire hand each turn)

- Force struggle (or the other way to fight)

- Deckbuilding mechanics (each pod has pros and cons)

I'll stop there and get to my point.

A brand new community, a brand new and challenging game, why even continue playing the best game ever, when fewer people plays it everyday?

Moving on is great, especially to something like SWLCG.

And tomorrow, 2v2? Challenge mode? Awesome!

Long lives!

I'll stop there and get to my point.

A brand new community, a brand new and challenging game, why even continue playing the best game ever, when fewer people plays it everyday?

Moving on is great, especially to something like SWLCG.

And tomorrow, 2v2? Challenge mode? Awesome!

Long lives!

My only worry is twofold. First, holding on to the license with Disney involved. Second, is with CCG's and LCG's, finding ways for new players to jump into the game down the road when a sizeable investment would be required to catch up with players that have been with the game from the beginning.

My only worry is twofold. First, holding on to the license with Disney involved. Second, is with CCG's and LCG's, finding ways for new players to jump into the game down the road when a sizeable investment would be required to catch up with players that have been with the game from the beginning.

1. If there is money to be made...

2. The nice thing about this game is that even buying just 1 or 2 copies of a Core Set will set you up for quite a lot of fun. The Recent Gen Con tourney's winner ran a Core Set only Dark Side deck, meaning the Core Set is still competitive after most of the Hoth Cycle and Edge of Darkness being released. This means that you can take your time in buying the expansions. Yes, you may not have every card right away if you jump into the game right now but you're still paying the same amount everyone else did to get everything. Thankfully this game, being an LCG and not a CCG, is not a pay to win type of game.

My only worry is twofold. First, holding on to the license with Disney involved. Second, is with CCG's and LCG's, finding ways for new players to jump into the game down the road when a sizeable investment would be required to catch up with players that have been with the game from the beginning.

1. If there is money to be made...

2. The nice thing about this game is that even buying just 1 or 2 copies of a Core Set will set you up for quite a lot of fun. The Recent Gen Con tourney's winner ran a Core Set only Dark Side deck, meaning the Core Set is still competitive after most of the Hoth Cycle and Edge of Darkness being released. This means that you can take your time in buying the expansions. Yes, you may not have every card right away if you jump into the game right now but you're still paying the same amount everyone else did to get everything. Thankfully this game, being an LCG and not a CCG, is not a pay to win type of game.

In addition, lets say after two more cycles, we may find that new players may not want to pay the price to catch up. I get your point on the two core sets. But I also looked at the GenCon decks and those players just using core sets for their decks were very few and far between. Look at Thrones, very few players are getting into the game because of the cost to catch up. Magic has overcome this with the type 2 block system.

Edit: oops wrong forum

So back to the "playing solo" theme. . . I have actually played solo a few times. For the edge battles, I simply take the three bottom cards from the deck. While it certainly is not the same as playing against a "thinking" character, it does add a bit of mystery and luck. I know some might say that I'm taking away from my deck by using the bottom cards as edge cards, but I have yet to play a game where I get down to the last 5-7 cards.

This was just a small tweak that allows me to test decks by myself. While not fool-proof, it's a nice way for me to play and enjoy the game when I can't find someone to play with.

So back to the "playing solo" theme. . . I have actually played solo a few times. For the edge battles, I simply take the three bottom cards from the deck. While it certainly is not the same as playing against a "thinking" character, it does add a bit of mystery and luck. I know some might say that I'm taking away from my deck by using the bottom cards as edge cards, but I have yet to play a game where I get down to the last 5-7 cards.

This was just a small tweak that allows me to test decks by myself. While not fool-proof, it's a nice way for me to play and enjoy the game when I can't find someone to play with.

Has anyone tried the solo variant I helped work on with Jason Keeping?

So back to the "playing solo" theme. . . I have actually played solo a few times. For the edge battles, I simply take the three bottom cards from the deck. While it certainly is not the same as playing against a "thinking" character, it does add a bit of mystery and luck. I know some might say that I'm taking away from my deck by using the bottom cards as edge cards, but I have yet to play a game where I get down to the last 5-7 cards.

This was just a small tweak that allows me to test decks by myself. While not fool-proof, it's a nice way for me to play and enjoy the game when I can't find someone to play with.

Has anyone tried the solo variant I helped work on with Jason Keeping?

Is that on board game geek?

So back to the "playing solo" theme. . . I have actually played solo a few times. For the edge battles, I simply take the three bottom cards from the deck. While it certainly is not the same as playing against a "thinking" character, it does add a bit of mystery and luck. I know some might say that I'm taking away from my deck by using the bottom cards as edge cards, but I have yet to play a game where I get down to the last 5-7 cards.

This was just a small tweak that allows me to test decks by myself. While not fool-proof, it's a nice way for me to play and enjoy the game when I can't find someone to play with.

Has anyone tried the solo variant I helped work on with Jason Keeping?

Is that on board game geek?

Cosman,

on boardgamegeek there are some attempts to produce a solo gaming set of rules.

I'm the author of one of them and still thinking abour other versions (I'm thinking about a set of solo rules inspired by LOTR lcg).

We at least know there is some type of attempt at solo rules for this game over at BGG.

I'm not keen on a solo variant.

How would edge battles work exactly in a solo game? You can't exactly bluff a deck of cards, how many shadow cards would a player know to draw from the top of the deck, wouldn't that be unfair on the 'event' deck as in star wars, when an opponent runs out of cards, that's game over. How would playing cards work for the dark side deck, since you'd obviously have a hand of 6-7 cards to play with any given turn.

Star Wars LCG wasn't designed for solo play.

The game was originally going to be more like LotR LCG (meaning it would have had a solo variant) but people complained and wanted a 1v1, 1v2/3 and a 2v2 multiplayer experience with the Star Wars license instead.

Making a solo game would defeat the entire purpose of the LCG. There's a reason why Balance of the Force doesn't have a single player variant.

I can respect that point of view. And I can also preface the following post by saying that our solo variant is exactly that, it's a variant . This means that while it uses the same cards and has many of the same rules as a 1vs1 game at its core, it is definitely not the same game in many ways.

And for everyone's convenience, here is the link to the current version of the Solo variant by JK777 & hundreds:

http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/94291/jkssimplified-solo-variant-for-star-wars-lcg

The current version, as of this post, is 1.2. It does get revisions from time to time, but is probably quite close to a finished product. It is definitely very playable and most importantly, enjoyable, even if it is NOT the solo variant that perhaps FFG originally intended for this game. I urge you to at least give it a try and see if it suits you. It even has a nice way of simulating Fate cards AND Edge Battles that works pretty stinking good.

And for even more added fresh convenience, here is the complete rules (as of version 1.2):

---

Setup

Set up the game as normal. You, the player will use the normal rules to play although you can only make one attack each turn i.e. you can only attack one AI objective each turn.

DS player always goes first whether player or AI. The force token always starts on the Light Side and the DS player cannot attack on his first go. This is as per the normal rules.

Your AI opponent will play as per the normal rules with the following amendments:

The Opponents draw stack, fate stack & resources

Create a draw stack of all the cards from all the objective set shuffled together (as per the normal rules).

Next take the top 5 cards from the draw deck. This will form the fate deck and will be used to draw cards during Edge battles.

Each turn the opponent gains resources (tokens) equal to the number of resource icons on objectives, enhancements, affiliation cards etc plus one and can ignore resource matching requirements. Resources are gained at the start of the turn and can be carried over to subsequent turns (this is the same methodology used in my Solo rules). This is termed the resource pool.

In addition, each turn, if the opponent has less than 5 cards in the fate deck then draw additional cards from the top of the draw deck until there are 5 cards in the fate deck. Do not look at these cards simply place them into the fate deck and shuffle the deck.

Drawing cards for the Opponent

On the AI turn draw cards from the opponent's draw deck one at a time turn them over and pay for them from the resources in the resource pool until either resource pool is reduced to zero or you draw a card from the opponents draw deck that there is insufficient resource in the pool to play the card.

Insufficient Resources Rule

When the opponent draws a card and there are insufficient resources available to the opponent to play the card, then the card is placed back on top of the opponent’s draw deck face down.

The Opponent's card draw

For each card drawn do the following.

Fate cards are added to the fate deck and the fate deck is then shuffled.

Enhancements are added to an eligible unit of the player's choosing, unless there is no eligible target for the enhancement, in which case the card is added to the fate deck.

Events are kept in the opponent’s area and are played as soon as they are triggered or capable of being played. A card is only “capable of being played” if it has an impact on play i.e. an event card should not be played if the result is that it has zero impact on the game.

Units are divided into two pools attacking and defending. The first unit drawn will always go into the attacking pool, the second to defence, the third to attack etc.

Blast Rule

At the end of each opponents turn swap the opponent units such that units with the most blast damage are in attack (regardless of whether they are edge enabled or not). It is necessary to consider the most effective attacking group when making the decision on which units to include. For example Speeders may not be the most effective attacking units until a card such as Rogue two is drawn which gives the speeder units blast damage. In this case consider whether an attacking group of speeder units is better than other possible attacking combinations.

Attackers/Defenders Rule

When the opponent has an even number of units then there should always be an equal number of defending and attacking units. If the opponent has an odd number of units then there should be one more attacking unit than defending unit. If, because opponent units were destroyed or removed from play, the balance of attacking and defending units does not meet the above rule then move units (using the blast rule above) until the rule is met.

Attacking Rule

Attacking Opponent units will always make one attack each turn against the player's objectives. Player objectives should be attacked in order that they were drawn from the objective deck. If, however, for whatever reason the blast damage for a unit cannot be applied to an objective, then it must be applied to another legal objective. In the event that blast damage destroys an objective, but there are still attackers that are due to be focused in this conflict phase then the blast damage is applied to the next available objective. In this way it is possible for the opponent to destroy up to three player objectives in a single attack.

Edge Battles

For edge battles the opponent is dealt one card face down from the fate deck to each participating unit. The player decides how many cards to commit to the edge battle. Edge battles are then resolved as normal. If the player plays a "Twist of Fate" into the Edge battle then, the cards in the opponent’s edge deck are discarded as per the normal rules and cards are again drawn from the fate deck until either, there is one card per participating opponent unit, or the fate deck is exhausted.

Unit Damage Rule

Opponent unit damage can be applied to whichever defending unit the player wishes. However, if a defending unit is immune to damage then it must be applied to another defending unit if one is available. If a unit does more damage than is required to destroy a defending unit, then any excess damage is applied to another defending unit if one is available.

Order of focusing units rule

When deciding which opposing unit to strike or defend first. Work out the options and apply the one which results in the most damage to the player and/or delivers the most damage to the player's objectives.

Focus token limits for AI

An opponent unit can have any number of focus tokens on it at any time as a result of card abilities and the use of tactics icons for example. However, if an opponent unit that is committed to the force is focussed to strike in a conflict, then that unit only receives ONE focus token and not two as noted in the normal rules.

Elite opponent units still remove two focus tokens per round.

Reserve rule

If the opponent ever has the ability to increase its reserve. Then instead it will increase its resource production by 1. This will remain in force for as long as the card effect.

AI Force phase rule

The Force phase follows the rules in my solo rules. Commit the unit with the most force points to the force in the first round. In future rounds only units with 2 or more force icons are committed to the force. Always commit the units with the most force icons to the force.

The Other Golden Rule

If there are several different legal methods to apply a card, e.g. several units that an enhancement can be played on then the player chooses how to apply those effects.

I do not understand exactly the meaning of the last post.

I own lot of card and boardgames designed for solo playing or with officially released solo variants and for what I've seen solo variants in general have different mechanisms from multi-player version of the same games.

So I do not think that FFG should release a sort of AI for playing with the same original rules of SW Lcg but should it should release a different set of rules, specifically designed for solo playing.

For example, in my opinion solo games do not usually have separate turns for human player and not human player. Phases for both sides are mixed in a sort of response system where the option for not player side are driven by a more or less intelligent logic (think about LOTR lcg, Race for the Galaxy, ...)

I'm also trying to provide a solo version based on a different set of rules (trying to keep the original sense of the game).

Obviously in both cases it will not be the same (exactly the same!) original game.

About the above quoted unofficial solo version I have to say that I do not like solo games where the player has to choose 'the best option for its opponent'.

I do not remember any solo game or ufficial solo variant where the player has to do so. As I already said above, usually the mechanism of the game decides automatically what to do.

Sorry, the first couple of paragraphs in my post above were SUPPOSED to be quotes.

And in reply to the above, it's clear you are looking for something specific, so I encourage you to keep at it. Post the complete rules here so we can try it.

It is very frustrating. I actually believe that it is impossible to play this game satisfactorily as a solo game, but that's just my opinion. I tried the solo rules, but somehow I felt they fell flat. I think the problem lies in the fact that the game is just too geared for head-to-head combat, so trying other things with cards just leads to the feeling of a sub-par game. But this is just my opinion. I've played games in the past where I basically played both sides to win, and have, in a sense, defeated myself, but with this game it is a bit different.

I had hoped that Balance of the Force, having challenge decks, would somehow manage to inveigle a solo variant into the game, but those hopes are now dashed.

I feel we need to have an actual solo-playable game. I still hold out for a Rune Age-style game, that is perhaps expanded once a year (or twice if we're lucky). Does anyone know if FFG is under a similar contractual restraint as were Wizards that limit the amount of product that can be published in any year?