Quantcast
Channel: Hasbro | BoardGameGeek
Viewing all 118141 articles
Browse latest View live

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: A raft of rules questions from our first play - Rebel Fleet tokens, Emperor, Stormtroopers, "deploy," etc.

$
0
0

by Raithe

kingmob75 wrote:

TRK27 wrote:

I know some of these have been posted in other threads, but I wanted to compile all of the questions my opponent and I had in one post.

1. Basically everything about Rebel Fleet tokens. Does the empire get bonuses from eliminating them - are they considered a “sector” that was cleared, per se? How do ships get from them onto the battlefield? Assuming they do get that bonus then would they get that bonus even if the ships had already moved off? I assume the rebel player can move ships off of them as if they were an adjacent sector, but it doesn’t specifically say anywhere.

2. Can the Emperor keep hitting Luke after Vader is dead in order to get the bonus from killing him, or does killing Vader just end that part of the game entirely? We assumed he could, and rationalized it as the Emperor turning Luke to the dark side and persuading him to take Vader's place, since Luke gave in to his anger.

3. Stormtrooper tokens - can they be stacked? Assuming not. It says to put them on the spaces directly in front of the rebel force… if you add more than three, assuming you can, then do those go after the tokens that are already there, stretching out to as many as nine? I assume that's how it works...

4. Does the empire get a bonus order from emptying a sector with the Death Star? I assume that they do, but nothing explicitly refers to the DS action as an “attack.”

5. Can TIEs that deploy immediately attack? I'm not sure if the deployment counts as an action that's separate from a move / attack action, since the rebels don't have an equivalent action.

6. When you move rebel ships and then attack with them, does it count all ships that are currently in that sector for your attack value, or only the ships of the type you moved (including the ones that were already there), or does it just count the ones you moved? I assumed the middle option but the example didn't help clarify it.

There may have been a few more, I'll post them as I remember them. For all of these we just went with what was commonsensical - they may seem like nitpicking, but the rulebook was very vague in places.



My 2 Cents [after reading the rules, rereading them, then reading them again juuuuust to be sure]:


1. There is no mention anywhere in the rules of Fleet Markers being considered Sectors, nor are there any rules detailing if / how ships are supposed to move OFF of the Fleet Markers in the first place. HOWEVER, since the movement rules explicitly state "...you may move any number of X/Y/B-Wings from one sector to an adjacent one", and it's obviously the intention of the game's designers that you can move the ships off of their starting Fleet Markers [as evidenced by an image of the game on http://www.hasbrotoyshop.com/en/htsusa/-b23550000 that clearly shows the board with 2 of the Fleet Markers EMPTY - it's the 6th image in the gallery], by the strictest interpretation of the rules the Fleet Markers would HAVE to be Sectors, right? In addition to this, the rules in the "Moving Into Sectors" section go on to specify that "...no ship may move through or occupy the same sector as the Death Star." - my point being that an area of the board can have a specific name / special rule / unique function and STILL be considered a Sector [or at least to exist WITHIN a Sector] for game purposes.


2. Yes, the rules are pretty clear on this - page 14, under the 'Emperor [Empire Order]' section, it says "This order cannot be given if Darth Vader has been redeemed." - which to me says that as long as the Rebels didn't specifically play the 'Darth Vader Redeemed' Order and destroy the Emperor, then he's still alive and can keep using his Force lightning even after Vader has been destroyed.


3. No. I read the rules regarding Stormtrooper placement on the Endor track as a simple typo / omission on the part of Hasbro. As written, the rules state:

"...the Empire player places three Stormtrooper tokens on the three spaces directly in front of the Rebel Strike token..."

However, with the simple addition of the words "next" and "empty", I believe we have the actual rule as intended:

"...the Empire player places three Stormtrooper tokens on the next three empty spaces directly in front of the Rebel Strike token..."

As others have noted, the existence of sculpted Stormtroopers in the upcoming Black version pretty much confirms that stacking the tokens was NOT their intention, and the inclusion of 9 Stormtrooper tokens [in both versions of the game] suggests that you can definitely play more than 3 of them [or else why include more than 3?]. So basically, your end assumptions are correct - no stacking, and you could end up with a line of 9 Stormtrooper tokens stretching out in front of the Rebels!


4. From the strictest interpretation of the rules, NO. Pages 9 and 10 of the rule book lists the abilities of the Death Star and all of the other various units in full detail, and every single one of them EXCEPT for the Death Star distinctly mentions attacking and says "See Attacking below for full attack rules". The text for the Death Star itself uses the word "Destroy" several times and in several different ways but never actually mentions "Attack". The Bonus Orders section later in the rules goes on to explicitly state "If an attack clears a sector..." [emphasis mine]. Is this just sloppy writing, or is it the true intention of the designers? We may never know, but based on the fact that the Death Star rules are the only ones that do NOT contain the line stating "See Attacking below for full attack rules", I would conclude that it does not actually attack, which means it also does not fulfill the requirement to gain a Bonus Order. That said, when we play I give the Empire a Bonus Order for clearing a sector because it's thematic and the Empire can use a little extra help!


5. No. The rules relating to the TIE fighter Order pretty clearly state "...you may either deploy... OR move..." then goes on to say "after moving, you may attack...", which under the strictest interpretation means that a deployment action is specifically NOT a move action [it's either deploy OR move], and a move action is explicitly what is required in order to attack. Of course, the rules do go on to state "The Empire may choose not to move a squad of TIE fighters but still attack with it.", but I view that more as a clarification that players don't HAVE to move in order to attack / zero is a legitimate movement.


6. The rules for giving Orders to each type of fighter are admittedly a bit vague here [surprise, surprise], but let's look at what they say [we'll use Y-Wings for this example]: "When this order is given, you may move any number of Y-Wings from one sector to an adjacent one. After moving, you may attack a connected sector by rolling dice for each Y-Wing [up to five dice]." - Now, this could honestly be interpreted as either:

A) you attack with the same units that you moved, OR
B) once you are done with your movement you may attack with up to five of the same type of unit that was activated by the Order.

I tend to side with the latter interpretation, since it is written as two separate, complete sentences and the second part doesn't explicitly state that you MUST attack with the same units that were moved. Thematically speaking, I look at this as the Y-Wing squadron leader saying "Blue 4, Blue 7... form up with the rest of your team in sector BB742 and take out the TIE fighter squadron in your area!"

Honestly though, it IS a bit maddening ["by rolling dice for each Y-Wing" - each Y-Wing WHAT though? Each Y-Wing that I actually moved this turn, or each Y-Wing that's in the sector that I'm attacking from? Each is simply not specific enough!], and trying to interpret intent is a slippery slope, but it seems that simplicity was their goal in all of this, and keeping track of which fighters moved makes everything just a little bit more fiddly. I vote for simplicity!


1. Agree with you for the most part, however, I do not think that the rebel fleet markers are sectors for the following reasons:
- They are removed from the game when destroyed by the Death Star, they cannot be "cleared" if they are no longer in the game
- If they were sectors, then the rebels could move all of their fighters onto the fleet markers, effectively removing them from the battlefield
Therefore, the Empire does not gain a card for eliminating a fleet marker.

2. Agreed

3. Agreed

4. Completely agree.

5. I think that the intention behind this rule is the fact that ( to continue your example) you could move a single Y-wing into a space already containing 4 Y-wings (leaving 3 y-wings behind, unmoved) and then attack with all 5 of the ships now in the "active" sector or, alternately, attack with the 3 you didn't move (but not both, even though both sectors are now "active" )

Just my 2 cents.
- Lee


Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: General:: Re: New version of Star Wars Risk!?

$
0
0

by sigmazero13

gregmolson wrote:

Does anyone know the difference between these Hasbro products -> B2356 B2355? Both named Risk Star Wars edition.
Is one product with models from new movie and the second one from Return of Jedi?

My guess, though I could be wrong, is one of them is the Black edition. (Unless the black edition has a different code altogether).

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: A raft of rules questions from our first play - Rebel Fleet tokens, Emperor, Stormtroopers, "deploy," etc.

$
0
0

by kingmob75

Raithe wrote:

1. Agree with you for the most part, however, I do not think that the rebel fleet markers are sectors for the following reasons:
- They are removed from the game when destroyed by the Death Star, they cannot be "cleared" if they are no longer in the game
- If they were sectors, then the rebels could move all of their fighters onto the fleet markers, effectively removing them from the battlefield
Therefore, the Empire does not gain a card for eliminating a fleet marker.


I'm only basing my conclusion on the following logic:

The rules state "...you may move any number of X/Y/B-Wings from one sector to an adjacent one" - if a Fleet Marker was NOT considered a sector then the Rebel ships would technically never be able to move off of them in the first place, since according to the rules there is no other mention of how / when the ships that start on a Fleet Marker are actually meant to move off of them.

So my line of thinking goes like this:

IF you are intended to move the rebel ships from the Fleet Markers [which I think we can all agree is the intention of the designers]
AND the rules state that 'movement' is defined as moving from one sector to an adjacent sector
THEN Fleet Markers must also be considered sectors.

Not saying that's CORRECT, but that's how I'm interpreting the rules based on the available evidence.

To take your example one step further, the Fleet Markers are NOT removed from the game board when they're destroyed - they're flipped over to a side that actually looks exactly like all of the other sectors on the main board [to quote the rules: "If a Rebel fleet marker is destroyed, flip it over."]. I don't see any reason why the Rebel player COULDN'T move their ships into one of those now 'clear' sectors - there wouldn't really be any point to this, and it would be a terrible play since it would take them farther away from the Death Star AND back them into a corner, but I can't see any particular reason NOT to allow it if someone was foolish enough to want to. As to your point about them moving off of the board [making them un-attackable], I would just say that the Empire could move units to the sector adjacent to the former Fleet Marker and attack as normal.

Please note, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here - no one in their right mind would ever WANT to move back into one of those areas, but to me that doesn't necessarily mean that they can't still be considered sectors. Anyway, it's pretty much a moot point since the only way the Empire can clear those spaces [according to the rules as written] is to use the Death Star, which is NOT an Attack [my interpretation] anyway. Sigh.

Thread: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Rulebook?

$
0
0

by KUMARI


Does anyone know if the rules are post somewhere? Thanks.

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: Rulebook?

$
0
0

by KUMARI

Also, didn't there used to be like a player aid file in the file section?

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: Rulebook?

$
0
0

by cbs42

I've not seen the rulebook online, but the player aid is in the image section:

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: Rulebook?

$
0
0

by KUMARI

cbs42 wrote:

I've not seen the rulebook online, but the player aid is in the image section:



Cool, thought there was another file though.

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: Rulebook?

$
0
0

by lfisher

KUMARI wrote:

cbs42 wrote:

I've not seen the rulebook online, but the player aid is in the image section:



Cool, thought there was another file though.


There is also a file now, he may have reuploaded it.

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Strategy:: Re: Ignore the Luke/Vader Duel

$
0
0

by halbower

EvilPie wrote:



Four consecutive actions are worth way more than 6 alternating actions.


You may be right. I haven't played the game yet. But I don't see this as "6 alternating actions". It strikes me as "6 actions in a row" since your opponent is using his actions on the Luke/Vader duel.

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Strategy:: Re: Ignore the Luke/Vader Duel

$
0
0

by jbbnbsmith

halbower wrote:

EvilPie wrote:



Four consecutive actions are worth way more than 6 alternating actions.


You may be right. I haven't played the game yet. But I don't see this as "6 alternating actions". It strikes me as "6 actions in a row" since your opponent is using his actions on the Luke/Vader duel.
But five actions in a row on the space map is incredibly more powerful. If the shield is down, this almost a guaranteed win for the Rebels. If the shield is still up you can often. Make a run on the Endor track without the Empire being able to play troopers. And again, don't forget that five free cards can easily become 7-9 free cards if you play them well.

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: A raft of rules questions from our first play - Rebel Fleet tokens, Emperor, Stormtroopers, "deploy," etc.

$
0
0

by Raithe

You are right about the removal, I had forgotten that part(and didn't have the rules to reference) We had simply removed them as we could not see the point of having them on the board. The fact that the rules specifically say to flip the tile puts it in a different perspective. Perhaps they were originally intended as sectors?

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: A raft of rules questions from our first play - Rebel Fleet tokens, Emperor, Stormtroopers, "deploy," etc.

$
0
0

by kingmob75

Raithe wrote:

You are right about the removal, I had forgotten that part(and didn't have the rules to reference) We had simply removed them as we could not see the point of having them on the board. The fact that the rules specifically say to flip the tile puts it in a different perspective. Perhaps they were originally intended as sectors?


LOL, we may never know! :D

It IS odd though, right? Why Flip them? Why have the art on the back side of the marker that looks just like the other sectors? Is it an abandoned gameplay element? Poorly written rules? A Rebel conspiracy?!

As it is, we have house ruled it so that:

A] The Fleet Markers are considered Sectors for all game purposes [I think they are anyway, based on my personal interpretation of the rules].
B] The Death Star's special laser destruction action is considered an 'Attack' for all game purposes [which I DON'T honestly think is the intention of the rules, but it gives the Empire a bit of a much-needed boost with Bonus Orders for clearing a sector so I allow it].
C] The Empire can move units adjacent to the Fleet Markers and either Attack Rebel ships as usual, or attack the Fleet Marker itself, destroying it on a roll of 6 [just like the Rebel's chance of destroying the Death Star] - this makes the Empire's task of clearing out all 6 Fleet Markers BEFORE they can start zapping the main battlefield with the Death Star less of a tedious slog.

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: General:: Re: The Star Wars: 'The Black Series' Risk sightings thread

$
0
0

by Frohike

But every time you posit something like that, there will always be that one kid in the back of the class who just cannot resist one last smartassed comment after the whole classroom has gone silent. There's one in every crowd.

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: General:: Re: The Star Wars: 'The Black Series' Risk sightings thread

$
0
0

by EvilEmpire

Frohike wrote:

But every time you posit something like that, there will always be that one kid in the back of the class who just cannot resist one last smartassed comment after the whole classroom has gone silent. There's one in every crowd.


I really doubt that...

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: General:: Re: The Star Wars: 'The Black Series' Risk sightings thread


Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: General:: Re: Favor?, If you log you plays on BGG can you note whether the Imperials or Rebels won?

$
0
0

by jbbnbsmith

The Empire is striking back! We are at 14 to 6, with the Empire winning the last two games. I think if I take only the last 8 games into account it is close to 50-50. And this is with no variants.

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: Rules:: Re: Does the Empire get a Bonus Action upon destroying a Fleet?

$
0
0

by jbbnbsmith

I agree that the rules do not seem to suggest a bonus card for destroying a transport ship.

For what it's worth, we are seeing the Empire beginning to even the score with the Rebels. Our total play record is 14-6 in favor of the Rebels, but over the last 8 or so games it is very close to even. Playing as the Empire is definitely harder to play well, but I'm beginning to think that given strong play by both players the game is balanced right out of the box. Obviously luck plays a significant role as well, particularly with regard to turning Vader.

Reply: Pit:: General:: Re: Rules for Parker Bros. Classic Version?

$
0
0

by Robrun



I have played this game all my life - from about four years old. I recently picked up a more modern set and was both startled and dismayed to find that the rules were wrong - as are the ones in this pdf.

Both sets fail to mention the essential rule that you may not pass both the bull and the bear together (this means either with or without cards of one of the other commodities). Without this rule I cannot see the game working at all. Otherwise, someone passes the bull and the bear and thereafter can refuse to trade with that person - instantly alerting everyone else to the situation so they, too, refuse to trade with that person. This can ruin the game entirely - it goes on and on because no-one can get a corner without trading with the person who has the bull and the bear, but no-one wants to be first and so get the two cards. Deadlock!

If you (or anyone) has been playing without this rule, I recommend strongly you add it to your play.

Reply: Pit:: General:: Re: Rules for Parker Bros. Classic Version?

Reply: Risk: Star Wars Edition:: General:: Re: The Star Wars: 'The Black Series' Risk sightings thread

$
0
0

by chooi

doerrhb wrote:

This post[/url] confirms it will be an Amazon Exclusive, and won't be available for 'some time'.



Do Amazon.com exclusives come out on Amazon.co.uk as well?
Viewing all 118141 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>