Game: Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition - Shattered Empire

Thread: Re: For those of you wanted a little more TI:2nd in your life

sigmazero13 — 2008-11-24T03:41:16+00:00

Just out of curiosity, what does this variant do for the average game length?

Thread: Re: For those of you wanted a little more TI:2nd in your life

Cole Wehrle — 2008-11-23T19:15:46+00:00

It does make the game military oriented. I believe the game balances political, economic, and tech sphere well. These different areas, however, all contribute to military expansion. This simply makes these avenues even more useful for military ends (for example, tech get cheaper).

Leader bashing might happen but often times there are 2 or 3 folks tied at each step.

Thread: Re: Twilight Imperium at the 2009 WBC

godfeather — 2008-11-22T02:58:04+00:00

sigmazero13 wrote:
bnorton916 wrote:
Might want to try posting this on the FFG TI3 forum also.

Bill
Actually, you may want to belay that order until they get the FFG forums actually WORKING...
Well, they are working... sort of.

Thread: Re: Twilight Imperium at the 2009 WBC

sigmazero13 — 2008-11-21T22:22:22+00:00

bnorton916 wrote:
Might want to try posting this on the FFG TI3 forum also.

Bill
Actually, you may want to belay that order until they get the FFG forums actually WORKING...

Thread: Re: Twilight Imperium at the 2009 WBC

bnorton916 — 2008-11-21T20:24:03+00:00

Might want to try posting this on the FFG TI3 forum also.

Bill

Thread: Twilight Imperium at the 2009 WBC

malloc — 2008-11-20T23:58:38+00:00

Hi I am attempting to get Ti3 entered as an event.

I am looking for a little help here.

First I will need at least one assistant GM so PM me if you are interested.
Second Starting Dec 1st you can register for the WBC and Vote for new tournaments. You have to register by dec 31 to vote, but I believe registering early save you a bit on the WBc and allows you to play in a lot of cool online events all year long.

There are only 25 new games that get in so I will need as many votes as I can get. Spread the word to other TI3 fans.

Also keep in mind that you can vote for a game and not play in that event so there is no obligation to play ti3 (not that anyone reading this would NOT play)

Thanks

-M

Thread: Re: A teaser from someone please...

Turek — 2008-10-11T17:44:28+00:00

Use age of the empire variant with imperial II

Thread: Re: First game of TI (4 players)

spazassin — 2008-10-08T23:19:34+00:00

wow! I think i will buy this game it looks really great
i dont know, it look like a mix of axis and allies and civilisation but in the spacial area wich is really appealling me!!! It is fun to read you and it gives me the kick to try that game. I saw many people are playing to and it is well rated so i must confess that all of you guys are temting me in buying that game ASAP lol
ciao and thx again for the session, it is very interresting and it shows how the game look funny and strategic!

Thread: Re: The price of race-specific technologies?

Mad Malthus — 2008-10-07T15:54:34+00:00

malloc wrote:
it is a mixed bag. I wouldn't say they are over priced I would say that so
Some are pricey for what they do but others, like Winnu would be a bargain at 2x the price. Giving them away for free is a mistake. If you do this I will play Winnu every time and rarely lose.

-M

Yes I agree it would be a mistake to give the Winnu tech for free. I think it's a mistake not to house rule that tech anyway to be "at any time" instead of "as an action" so it's not a problem for us.

Thread: Re: The price of race-specific technologies?

sigmazero13 — 2008-10-07T02:00:26+00:00

I dunno. Some of the race techs aren't as useful (The N'orr one comes to mind), but most of the rest I see in pretty much any game I play.

The Winnu one is especially potent, as it gives the Winnu a skip-like ability. The Muaat one is also very nasty. The Saar one can come in quite handy if playing that race. I see the Sol one get used a lot, as well as the Mentak.

Some of them don't get used quite as much, but apart from the N'orr, I think they are all handy.

That being said, I don't know anyone who would spend the 6+x cost for them; most of the time they are acquired, it's via the Primary ability where they only pay the cost on the card.

For what it's worth, there are two variants that I've seen that are interesting with this:

1) For each VP the player has, the racial tech's "extra" cost is reduced by one.
or
2) When the player reaches a number of VP equal to the racial tech's cost, the player automatcially receives the racial tech for free.

I especially am intrigued with #2 - it just seems very thematic to me.

Thread: Re: The price of race-specific technologies?

malloc — 2008-10-07T01:54:08+00:00

it is a mixed bag. I wouldn't say they are over priced I would say that so
Some are pricey for what they do but others, like Winnu would be a bargain at 2x the price. Giving them away for free is a mistake. If you do this I will play Winnu every time and rarely lose.

-M

Thread: Re: The price of race-specific technologies?

Mad Malthus — 2008-10-07T01:04:18+00:00

I agree, I think they are too expensive. We play with a house rule. Each racial tech costs the amount shown on the card.

This means you can buy it for free when executing the primary ability of the technology strategy card, or for the price on the racial tech card if acquired using the secondary ability (or as a second tech acquisition from the primary ability of the technology II strategy card).

Even with this house rule the racial technologies are somewhat uncommon, with certain exceptions (Muaat & Winnu).

Thread: The price of race-specific technologies?

AnttiT — 2008-10-06T23:44:18+00:00

I haven't played much of TI3SE (it feels sometimes hard to find players), but I was still thinking.. aren't the race-specific technologies quite expensive compared to normal technologies? Do they really get used with normal price?

We have often used variants like "you automatically get the RST:s as you reach the equal number of points as their resource cost", but this in other hand seems to make them too easy. I was thinking something like "you get a resource discount equal to your points".

What are your experiences, are those techs worth their original price?

Thread: Re: The Win...who?

Deinodon — 2008-10-02T19:35:22+00:00

Well, as someone that has had to deal with gypsy werewolves all my life, I feel that the department of motor vehicles is....

Oh man, Joseph, you had me laughing so hard.

"To anyone who's ever had to fight Gypsy Werewolves, be honest..."

That is classic.

Yeah, I guess your explanations for imagining the Winnu make them seem a little more interesting. I'll try to give them a better sell next time when introducing them to new players.

Thread: Re: The Win...who?

sigmazero13 — 2008-10-02T14:11:31+00:00

As Joseph kind of hints at, I kind of see the Winnu as the closest thing left, culturally, to the old Lazax. Heck, even the L1Z1X, who were genetically descended from the Lazax, have lost pretty much all the culture and stature of empire they once had. The Winnu even deride their Winnarian brothers on Mecatol for letting themselves slip backwards, while the Winnu kept their pride and culture strong.

Thread: Re: The Win...who?

Vertayk — 2008-10-02T05:37:21+00:00

They are the last adherents to a once-great empire, who hope to restore order and structure to an otherwise chaotic galaxy. (hey, that's how I RP them)

Really, what's hard to explain about that? They're passive-aggressive, violently manipulative egotist bureaucrats (and antiquarians, but that's just icing). In all honesty, most players have never had to fight gypsy werewolves, anyone who's ever needed to file paperwork to get anything done in any government on this (or apparently, any other) planet knows the sublime evil of Bureaucracy.

To anyone who's ever had to fight Gypsy Werewolves, be honest, would you rather fight them or deal with customs/INS/DMV/alphabet soup.

Thread: Re: The Win...who?

KingPut — 2008-10-02T05:29:17+00:00

The Winnu are a great race. Maybe the best in the game. But not for a new player. They're balanced. And their racial technology rules. If a new play gets them, I would describe them as you are the Romans and everyone else is the barbarians.

Thread: The Win...who?

Deinodon — 2008-10-02T05:14:03+00:00

I love this game, and when I invite new players to play, I always let them choose their race. I get a kick out of describing each race.
Would you like to be...
The swarms of humanity from earth,
the deadly warrior bugs,
the mind reading snake women,
the chameleon spy goblins,
the wealthy lion merchants,
the defensive tortoise people,
the brainy fish heads,
the kingdom of subterranean dark elves,
the cyborgs with star destroyers,
the pirates from australia world,
the clone monk zealots,
the gypsy werewolves,
the lava people with deathstars,
or the...
the...
the bureaucrats?
I mean, all the races except the Winnu spark my imagination. How the heck do you describe the Winnu? The guys with earrings? The recyclers? The keepers of the old Empire's fashion sense? The housekeepers of Mecatol Rex?
It almost seems like they were thrown in there as an after thought. There is just no way I can get excited about playing them. What do you think?

Thread: Re: First game of TI (4 players)

MerricB — 2008-09-09T06:27:17+00:00

srhall79 wrote:
Sometimes I think the amount of plastic used in a game is the defining factor for whether or not my group will like a game (Fortress America, Samurai Swords, Axis&Allies, Descent, now TI). It helps that we now have alternating Saturdays for our boardgames, so we can conceivably fit a game of this size in; I don't want to think about trying this after everyone gets off work during the week.

LOL. Yeah, we also have an alternating Saturday for boardgames.

Moving does take a bit of getting used to in TI3. We're intending to have a game this weekend with some friends up from Melbourne; should be interesting.

Cheers,
Merric

Thread: Re: First game of TI (4 players)

srhall79 — 2008-09-09T06:23:45+00:00

MerricB wrote:
Aweberman wrote:
I am, however, a big booster of Imperial II. Personally, I can't stand not knowing what the objectives are; it feels like I'm in the dark for the whole game. Imperial II fixes that and makes Mecatol Rex even more of a conflict zone, which fits in nicely with the theme.

Definitely. The new objectives are also awesome.

Glad to see you're now playing TI, Scott!

Cheers,
Merric

Sometimes I think the amount of plastic used in a game is the defining factor for whether or not my group will like a game (Fortress America, Samurai Swords, Axis&Allies, Descent, now TI). It helps that we now have alternating Saturdays for our boardgames, so we can conceivably fit a game of this size in; I don't want to think about trying this after everyone gets off work during the week.

I meant to include how much time my group spent on the game. I think we got started right about 1pm and finished up just after 8pm. This includes the time to punch out all the pieces and de-tree the ships. Not bad for a first time, I think, and next time should go a little faster without as much hesitation and rules questions ("No, really, you can't move ships into a previously activated hex later in the round. First step of tactical is activate a hex and that's where you move to- if you don't activate, you can't do anything, and once you do, that's your destination. Really. Fine, here's the rules, point out ANYTHING that supports your argument." *sigh* Based on real rules dispute)

Thread: Re: First game of TI (4 players)

MerricB — 2008-09-09T00:21:51+00:00

Aweberman wrote:
I am, however, a big booster of Imperial II. Personally, I can't stand not knowing what the objectives are; it feels like I'm in the dark for the whole game. Imperial II fixes that and makes Mecatol Rex even more of a conflict zone, which fits in nicely with the theme.

Definitely. The new objectives are also awesome.

Glad to see you're now playing TI, Scott!

Cheers,
Merric

Thread: Re: First game of TI (4 players)

Aweberman — 2008-09-07T23:00:12+00:00

I haven't used Simulated Early Turns from the expansion, so I can't comment on that.

I am, however, a big booster of Imperial II. Personally, I can't stand not knowing what the objectives are; it feels like I'm in the dark for the whole game. Imperial II fixes that and makes Mecatol Rex even more of a conflict zone, which fits in nicely with the theme.

Thread: Re: First game of TI (4 players)

srhall79 — 2008-09-07T19:53:43+00:00

Aweberman wrote:
Interesting read!

You seem to have a very solid handle on the mechanics of the game, and even a sizable chunk of the strategy. Many of your comments on Mentak, for example, are spot on: they never "seem" to hit with their pre-combat shots and you definitely need Stasis Capsules.

Thank you. As the only member of my group with an account here, I tend to browse entries before we try out a game, to get a better idea of how the game will go. I found Murphy's Laws of TI in the forum, and one of the rules was the Mentak crusiers never, ever hit. At the time, I thought it was overstating the case, but now I'm not so sure...

The one hole in my research was technology; I hadn't felt like looking over the tech tree, figuring it'd be easy enough to decide on techs once I'd seen things in play. Knowing what I do now, I probably would have grabbed the Tech card first; five cruisers transporting ground forces would have helped me grab a lot of planets very quickly.

You are also correct that the game works best with 6 players. The rulebook version of the 4-player map simply puts everybody too far away from everybody else. I'm surprised you had as much conflict as you did. If you do get a 5-player game going, I would recommend hunting up some variants for galaxy setup, since the rulebook version of the 5-player map gives tons of Trade Goods to three of the players to start the game, and that is most unbalancing.

Most of the conflict was two very aggressive players who sometimes lose sight of the actual victory conditions (I'm reminded of our first game of Britannia, when Bob's Irish went wild conquering a large portion of England- which netted him minimal points because most of the areas weren't on his score card). Sol and I only fought over Mecatol Rex, each needing it for our Secrets, and also wanting it for a public objective.

Although I really like the random galaxy setups (in theory, at least), I might push the group to use one of the setups FFG has posted. I noticed there was a 5 player setup that split up part of the map, inserting wormholes to keep everyone about equidistant.

It's unfortunate that you drew that particular Secret Objective (Industrial, I think?). Building dreadnoughts is not usually a good path to victory, especially for a speedy, guerilla race like Mentak. Sometimes you're better off ignoring your SO; especially so when everybody lets you grab Imperial an extra time, as that extra 2VP could have made up for your inability to claim your SO.

Thanks for the report.

Meeting my SO didn't seem likely, but I figured if I could claim Mecatol Rex and garrison it, I could get the dreadnaughts built. But, it did seem pretty out of character; I was prepared to build up on cruisers (another tip I remembered reading was that dreadnaughts weren't a good buy for their cost), and this landed in my hand.

The more I think about it, the more I want to play this game again, but that's not likely for another 2 weeks. Next game, we'll probably go into more options; leaders seem like an interesting choice, and switching to the Imperial II card and Age of Empires. Even if we haven't picked up Shattered Empire by then, I may see about using the Quick first turn rule from that; turn 1 seemed a little frustrating since there was so little to do, so speeding up the early exploration seems like a good idea.

Thread: Re: First game of TI (4 players)

Aweberman — 2008-09-07T12:09:53+00:00

Interesting read!

You seem to have a very solid handle on the mechanics of the game, and even a sizable chunk of the strategy. Many of your comments on Mentak, for example, are spot on: they never "seem" to hit with their pre-combat shots and you definitely need Stasis Capsules.

Your resource issue would probably have been less severe if you hadn't gotten "stuck" with Imperial two rounds in a row. My first few games went much the same way, as people thought taking Tech or even Logistics(!) was more important than the 1/5 of the total VP you need to win the game. If everybody doesn't buy into the Initiative/Imperial "clock", it doesn't work very well.

You are also correct that the game works best with 6 players. The rulebook version of the 4-player map simply puts everybody too far away from everybody else. I'm surprised you had as much conflict as you did. If you do get a 5-player game going, I would recommend hunting up some variants for galaxy setup, since the rulebook version of the 5-player map gives tons of Trade Goods to three of the players to start the game, and that is most unbalancing.

It's unfortunate that you drew that particular Secret Objective (Industrial, I think?). Building dreadnoughts is not usually a good path to victory, especially for a speedy, guerilla race like Mentak. Sometimes you're better off ignoring your SO; especially so when everybody lets you grab Imperial an extra time, as that extra 2VP could have made up for your inability to claim your SO.

Thanks for the report.

Thread: Re: First game of TI (4 players)

srhall79 — 2008-09-07T10:44:28+00:00

*sigh* Casualty of too many windows open, this should have gone to vanilla TI.

Thread: First game of TI (4 players)

srhall79 — 2008-09-07T09:12:13+00:00

Bob is a blessing to our game group, thanks to having a good amount of disposable income and a short attention span. He was the one with enough interest in Descent that he bought it, then left it in storage at our host's apartment. He's played it three or four times, while the rest of us have played about ten times as often. Work has kept him away for a while, but as his availability increases, he got interested in Twilight Imperium. I took a look through the rules, approved, and the rest of the group followed my lead of giving TI a try instead of our regular Descent game (just as well, as our designated Overlord was sick).

We had six scheduled to show, but one was out sick and one was tapped for volunteer work and so was flying to Florida in the afternoon. So, four of us gathered to punch out cardboard and detach plastic ships. As Rules Guy, I'd read over the rules a few points by the time we actually gathered, prepared for the thankless job of teaching the others.

With just four of us, we did a random draw of two races each, choosing between them. I came away with the Mentak Coalition, which had caught my interest while reading over the game (my other choice was the Naalu, which looks a lot more appealing now that I've seen how the game plays). Clockwise from me, B (our host) had the Federation of Sol , J had L1ZN1X Mindnet , and Bob had the Sardakk N'orr. Next, we built the galaxy. One thing I noticed, this was a little harder to plan than a 6 player game is; with 6 players, you know your home system is directly away from one of the sides of the imperial plane. Mecatol Rext, but with four we were going to be a little off to the side.

Galaxy construction is, I think, the part of the game that won me over. I like the rest of it, but reading how we'd, one at a time, place hexes containing planets or disasters to create the galaxy really intrigued me (similarly, I fell in love with Axis & Allies: Battle of the Bulge because of the bulge markers). However, I think I lost the game here. I did manage to place the supernova to make it difficult for J and Bob to reach Mecatol Rex, but then things got away from me. Other people start playing in "your area" and the good planets you were hoping to place close end up on the other side. Bob ended up with some nice planets in easy reach. J, besides having a 5 resource planet on his home, had systems on either side whose planets added up to 5 resources. Everything within two systems of Sol seemed to be a planet, and most of the stuff within three. Me? Yeah, I had some planets nearby. Planets whose descriptions used terms like "barren", "wasteland", "poor minerals". My highlight was grabbing a 3 resource system two hexes away, but that was delayed when my flank speed was sabotaged, so I had to slowly putter in. At my best, I could count on 11 resources spread through my systems, 4 behind what the L1ZN1X had on homeworld and two adjacent systems. Additionally, my science growth was stunted as I ended up with two blue discounts, while my interests were in yellow and green tech.

As an advantage, I did get to place the first hex of the galaxy, so I also got first choice of strategy cards and went straight for Imperial and the 2VP. Second round, Bob (who had Initiative in turn 1) was confused about which card did what andchose technology as his first choice. I gladly picked up Imperial again for another 2VP. B was smart enough to grab Initiative that turn, to block me from a third turn of Imperial. My early lead of VP held for most of the game (boosted by another round with the Imperial card), but I just didn't have the systems to complete objectives, so Sol caught and passed me.

It was turn three before I acquired any technology. Looking back, I see I should have done everything in my power to get Stasis Capsules ASAP, but I didn't have much power. With Technology played early in a round and Trade played late, I couldn't gather the points needed, so was forced to rely on carriers for colonization.

I also found myself blocked in pretty quickly. I started moving toward one system near Bob, but he loaded up on PDSs; 3-5 shots at 5s or better thanks to his Deep Space Cannons and racial abilities meant too high a risk for my feeble fleet. Looking the other way at a pair of tiny planets (though, planets with tech discounts), Sol quickly countered with four crusiers, a pittance for him, but potentially my entire build for a turn. I did manage to claim Mecatol Rex early on. I held it for a turn, placed a space dock (my secret objective required me to hold Mecatol Rex, and have all my space docks and dreadnaughts in play). The objective to hold Mecatol Rex was turned over, but before I could claim this VP, Sol attacked. It was a near thing, but he was able to send in more than my small fleet (and of course my free cruiser shots were misss), and he killed off my ground units. Ships destroyed, resources invested in a space dock wasted, and Mecatol Rex out of my hands.

So, while I floundered and Sol gobbled up planets left and right, what were the others up to? Bob and J went to war, with J getting his first fleet shredded by PDS fire. So he built another one and sent that in. And another. There weren't any real gains of territory, just one fleet pounding on another. This conflict was one point of the game that really irked me: while J and Bob fought it out, J handed the game over to B. As mentioned, there were four Sol cruisers on my border, more than I could easily match. Meanwhile, the border between Sol and L1ZN1X was undefended- B hadn't even left ground forces behind. When he reacted to J's invasion, he be up against J's dreadnaughts without the +1 combat bonus Bob enjoyed. He could have grabbed a number of systems and at least slowed B down, but he never made a single move in that direction.

As if J wasn't pissing me off enough with letting B walk away with the game, he then pulled a dick move. In the second to last turn, I decided to retake Mecatol Rex, because, hey, one more VP. I had cruisers carrying ground units 2-3 hexes away, a dreadnaught 2 heaxes away, and a carrier loaded with fighters 2 hexes away on the opposite side of an asteroid field. I grabbed the Tech card, learned how to move through asteroids, had shut down Sol's closest fleet. Everything was ready to take and hold Mecatol Rex. I played flank speed to travel there... and J sabotages it. He's on the other side of the board from me, I'm making an attempt to take on the lead player, and he attempts to screw up my whole attack "just because." No logic, no strategy, just a dick move. I did trudge on with my crusiers and won the battle, but lost a lot more valuable units than if I had a fighter screen and a dreadnaught bombardment.

As expected, Sol won the next turn (and the game over card would have come up the turn after, three cards from the bottom). I ended in second, 7 or 8 points, while J and Bob trailed at ~5.

It was fun, despite some frustrations- J deciding to play spoiler at the end when he hadn't lifted a finger against B despite being the best equipped to; my lack of resources; my thankless job of explaining the rules (You pay for strategy cards from the STRATEGY pool, just like you have every round. The strategy part of the name is a little clue!); the fact that Mektat cruisers can't hit pre-combat.

I'm looking forward to trying it again with six, or at least five. The game just doesn't seem right with all eight strategy cards in play each turn. Maybe we'll have the expansion by then- I've read through the rules on that, and it looks to be pretty cool. And maybe, next time, I can get some decent systems.

Thread: Re: Space Mines - Blessing from Heaven or Tool of the Devil?

tawnos76 — 2008-09-02T15:22:45+00:00

I use mines fairly often in my games and have made my share of Carriers hits with them to my benefit. There are the few AC's that can discard mines, but not enough of them. I have a few variants PC and AC cards that I have added that deal with mines both beneficially and negatively. I think setting up a minefield is a good defensive measure and most of the time they do not hit.

Thread: Re: Space Mines - Blessing from Heaven or Tool of the Devil?

Gilby — 2008-09-02T03:52:07+00:00

Mike_Evans wrote:

What you really have to fear are mine hits on carriers. Due to the rules, a carrier that is hit with mines will cause you to lose any fighters that are no longer supported BEFORE space combat. This is a potentially devastating blow, whether you lose a ton of your cannon fodder before the battle begins, or your large invasion force is wiped out instantly. Ouch. Mines were specifically designed to punish players abusing carriers w/fighter swarms and to promote more cruiser/destroyer based fleets.

Or rather, reward those that use fighters and mines to defend an area. Knock out the invading cannon fodder but keep your own. Win every battle easy!

Absolutely broken optional rule that does not have any place in any decent game of TI3. Mines suck, plain and simple.

Thread: Re: My first game of TI

Lovecraft — 2008-09-01T18:46:52+00:00

Nice rundown. Our first game with 5 semi-newbies lasted 7 hours.None of us could stand it any longer.Leading player had 4 VPs. Downtime between turns was incredibly long as players tried to process all the info available before taking their turn. No one wanted to attack because they realized if they lost a few units they would be chewed up by the other players. Not overly complex just tedious. Too much fuss for the amount of fun. Sadly, will not be played again unless the gameplay can be tightened up.

Thread: Re: ISC II - question...

swordwielder — 2008-08-31T08:12:53+00:00

Thank you all!
We're going to play it as it should be played tonight.

Thank you Evgeny, haven't seen that... I think we're going to leave ISC II and take Bureaucracy card because I love the new set of Strategy Cards.

Cheers

]]>

Thread: Re: ISC II - question...

azuredarkness — 2008-08-31T07:55:37+00:00

SE rulebook, page 9, left column, middle, (emphasis mine):
Shattered Empire includes a variant Imperial Strategy
Card for use with the base game, titled “Imperial II.”
To play with the variant ISC, simply use the new
Imperial II Strategy Card in place of the original
Imperial Strategy Card. In addition, to play with the
Imperial II card you must also use the “Age of
Empire” variant described on page 33 of the original
rulebook.
Note that this variant Imperial Strategy Card is only
intended as an optional replacement for the original
Imperial Strategy Card. It is not part of the new set of
8 Strategy Cards discussed in Option 2, below.

SE rulebook, page 17, left column, top:
Note: As discussed on page 9, to play with the
Imperial II Strategy Card you must also use the “Age
of Empire” variant described on page 33 of the original
rulebook. This card is an optional replacement for
the original Imperial Strategy card, and cannot be
swapped out with the Bureaucracy Strategy Card.

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/PDF/TI3_SE_Rules.pdf

It's a very good idea to read the rules regarding the strategy cards themselves, since they add clarifications and restrictions to the text actually printed on the cards.

Thread: Re: ISC II - question...

fastfingers — 2008-08-31T06:36:02+00:00

We always play with the Age of Empires variant and use ISC II. A real benefit of the Age of Empires variant, in my opinion, is that players can study all the available objectives ahead of time and actually include accomplishment of those objectives in their turn strategies.

Thread: Re: ISC II - question...

sigmazero13 — 2008-08-31T04:01:46+00:00

malloc wrote:
That means all cards are face up and you can get any objective (one per turn unless you hold the ISC)
To be exact, you can only claim one per turn unless you hold ISC and use Option A when you execute the card.

Thread: Re: ISC II - question...

malloc — 2008-08-31T01:14:06+00:00

You have to use the Age of Empires rules when playing ISC II

That means all cards are face up and you can get any objective (one per turn unless you hold the ISC)

-M

Thread: Re: ISC II - question...

Strope — 2008-08-31T01:01:50+00:00

There's a variant rule in the main game book. The age of empire variant, you turn over all the cards and all objectives are able to be completed. It is also a turn counter, because the game still ends when you hit the Imperium rex card.

Thread: ISC II - question...

swordwielder — 2008-08-30T22:13:49+00:00

I finally bought SE and dwelled on it two weeks because all of my regular crew were on summer vacation so I decided to get familiarized with rules of SE...
I liked it and couldn't wait the return of my adversaries to try it out!
But the thing was I was looking at all the new bits and pieces for a week and I got fed up of just looking at them , so I put the box away and opened it at the night they all came to play.
Of course I forgot ALL the new rules, so we had to go through rule book again .
We only had one bigger problem... We couldn't find rule regarding Public Objectives being drawn and put in the common play area when playing with ISC II. On the Bureaucracy card it is stated that you pull as many PO cards as there are Bonus counters on it... Original ISC says you immediately pull one PO card and put it face up in the common play area.
But what about ISC II?
We decided to pull one PO card as soon as the ISC II card was played, however ISC II card wasn't chosen until round 3, and than it was chosen becouse of the number of bonus tokens on it...
It was later in the game I started grabbing it every other turn because I was holding Mecatol Rex, and I wasn't sure does the same rule of not being permitted to take the ISC card every round apply in the SA as it did in the original game.
So, the outcome of it all was three or four PO cards being revealed, and it didn't feel right 'cos I really like new PO cards and their combat inflicting essence.

Well that's all I wanted to know

HELP!!!

]]>

Thread: Re: Politics revised

Fargofootball — 2008-08-28T05:45:30+00:00

This is the Political varent we will be using in a 7 player this weekend. Its part of the Shattered Ascension variant.
Credit for these rules goes to PsyComa
http://www.checkwolf.com/ti3/sides.htm#sa

THE GALACTIC COUNCIL MEETS
 The Galactic Council meets under 2 situations:
1. The Assembly Card is played
2. The Political Track accumulates 8 Political Cards

Assembly Card is played
 The Assembly Card instructions should be replaced with:
PRIMARY ABILITY:
Draw 1 Political Card & 2 Action Card & then CHOOSE EITHER A or B (You may not choose Option A if you are the Speaker).
A. Claim Speaker token. Moving clockwise from the Speaker, each player places a Political Card on the Political Track until the Political Track has 8 cards or every player has placed a Political Card. Choose another player to reorganize the Political Cards on the Political Track. The 1st three cards are resolved in order. Once per game round, the Speaker may initiate a “Voice of the Council” vote or a “Readmission to the Council” vote instead of resolving one of the 1st three Political Cards. That vote may come at any time during the resolution of the three Political Cards. Resolved Political Cards are removed from the Political Track. Move remaining Political Cards left to fill the empty slots on the Political Track.
B. Choose any player to become the Speaker. Moving clockwise from the Speaker, each player places a Political Card on the Political Track until the Political Track has 8 cards or every player has placed a Political Card. Reorganize the Political Cards on the Political Track. The 1st three cards are resolved in order. Once per game round, the Speaker may initiate a “Voice of the Council” vote or a “Readmission to the Council” vote instead of resolving one of the 1st three Political Cards. That vote may come at any time during the resolution of the three Political Cards. Resolved Political Cards are removed from the Political Track. Move remaining Political Cards left to fill the newly empty slots on the Political Track.

SECONDARY ABILITY:
Spend 1 Command Counter from Strategy Allocation to refresh any number of planets with combined 6 Resource & Influence

Political Track accumulates 8 Political Cards
 When the Political Track accumulates the 8th Political Card, the Galactic Council convenes an emergency session
 The 1st three cards are resolved in order. Once per game round, the Speaker may initiate a “Voice of the Council” vote or a “Readmission to the Council” vote instead of resolving one of the 1st three Political Cards. That vote may come at any during the resolution of the three Political Cards. Resolved Political Cards are removed from the Political Track. The Speaker reorganizes the Political Cards on the Political Track, moving remaining Political Cards to fill the first slots on the Political Track.

 Voice of the Council RESTRICTIONS
o A vote for the Voice of the Council can be initiated only once per game round
o Once the vote for Voice of the Council has been taken, it cannot be initiated again until the following game round

 Voting Procedures
1. Players receive 1 VOTE chit +1 VOTE chit for each active (face up) planet’s Influence that they currently have.
Example: The Assembly is called.
Player A receives 1 Vote chit automatically.
Player A also has 3 active (face up) planets. The sum of these planets’ Influence is 5. Player A receives 5 Vote chits for these planets.
Player A has a total of 6 Votes to use during the Assembly.
2. The Speaker reads the Political Card.
3. Starting with the Speaker and moving clockwise from the player to the LEFT of the Speaker, vote on the announced Political Card.
4. Voting proceeds in rounds until no additional votes are cast & each player has passed
Example: This example assumes a 4-player game.
The Speaker reads aloud the text of the current Political Card. Player A (the player to the LEFT of the Speaker) decides to cast 2 Votes in favor of this card. Moving clockwise from the speaker, Player B also wants to vote on this Card, and he uses 1 Vote & discards 1 Political Card to increase the votes in favor by 2. Player C does not want to vote during this round, and he passes. Player D casts 3 votes against the card’s proposed agenda.
The second round of voting begins. Player A passes. Player B decides to vote against the proposed agenda, and he casts 3 Votes from his hand. Player C votes this time, adding 3 more votes against. Player D passes. At the end of the 2nd round of voting, there are 5 votes (all cast during the 1st round) in favor and 9 votes against.
The third round of voting begins. Player A passes. Player B passes. Player C passes. Player D, pleased that the card’s agenda will fail, passes.
All players have passed on the voting, and the Political Card is resolved based upon the votes cast.
5. What are Votes:
o Players receive Votes equal to their unexhausted planets plus 1. One Vote equals 1 Influence. You may use as many unexhausted Planet Cards as you have available. Tally the unexhausted cards’ Influence values.
o Discard Political Cards. Each Political Card equals 3 votes. Political Cards may be discarded during voting to gain Votes.
o If a player does NOT have ANY unexhausted Planet Cards AND does NOT have any Political Cards, the player may still cast 1 vote for 1 of the 3 agenda resolved during the Galactic Council meeting.
o Votes may NOT carry over between Galactic Council meetings. Any unused Votes are lost.
6. In the case of voting ties, the Speaker casts the tie-breaking vote.
7. Resolve the Political Card, based upon the players’ voting.
8. Repeat this procedure for the next Political Card, unless 3 political agenda have been voted & resolved.

 Special Rule: Minimum Votes per Galactic Council
1. If a player does NOT have ANY unexhausted Planet Cards AND does NOT have any Political Cards, that player may still cast 1 vote for 1 of the 3 agenda resolved during the Galactic Council meeting.
2. Each player may cast 1 vote for 1 of the 3 Political Cards being resolved during the Galactic Council.
3. If that vote is not cast, it is cannot be saved or added to the players future vote totals.

 Special Rule: Boycotting the Galactic Council’s Vote
 Sometimes players are the target or (unfortunate) recipient of a political agenda.
 A player may refuse to obey any political card that SPECIFICALLY targets the player in any way.
 After a Political Card has been resolved, the targeted player (usually stated ELECT PLAYER on the political agenda) may state that he boycotts the Political Card.
 The player returns all of his Votes immediately to the Vote chit pool.
 The player MAY NOT participate in the remainder of the current Galactic Council and MAY NOT participate in future Galactic Councils until READMITTED TO THE COUNCIL.

Readmission to the Council Vote
 Players that Boycott the Galactic Council may not participate in any Galactic Council Vote until they have been Readmitted to the Galactic Council
 During resolution of the political agenda, the Speaker may initiate a “Readmission to the Council” vote for any player that has Boycotted the Galactic Council, instead of resolving 1 of the Political Cards.
 The Speaker announces the name of the Boycotting player and announces a “yes/no” vote for readmission to the Council.
 Voting begins with the player to the LEFT of the Speaker, proceeding clockwise.
 If the majority of votes are “yes” votes, the Boycotting player has been readmitted to the Galactic Council.
 A readmitted player DOES NOT participate in the current Galactic Council.
 A readmitted player WILL participate in the next Galactic Council.
 Players, who are not readmitted, MAY NOT participate in Galactic Councils until readmitted.

Thread: Re: Politics revised

Hertzog — 2008-08-27T08:13:40+00:00

Update!

We've now played a total of 7 games with the variant I mentioned above, including one 8 player match, and found the rules changes to be easy to implement : they are easy to explain to players and take very little additional time during actual play.

I would recommend other political enthusiasts to try it out for themselves; all of a sudden politics becomes more tangible, without overshadowing any of the game's other aspects, and the game still feels balanced.

Happy gaming!

Thread: Re: Anyone Prefer the Original SCs?

judograal — 2008-08-18T12:36:28+00:00

I prefer use:

1. Initiative
2. Dilpo II
3. Political
4. Logistics
5. Trade II
6. Warfare II
7. Technology II
8. Imperial II

Thread: Re: Trade remade

Cruelsader — 2008-08-08T17:48:38+00:00

Christopher, I do not think it is a good idea. Presumably the agreement is canceled if the player who took trade does not (re)-approve it. This would make the alternative option - cancel two trade agreements - almost defunct (as you can cancel any number you want after taking 3 TG) It also is too powerful. For instance, most players would give up 1 TG to ensure re-approving rather than to loose 2 TGs next trade phase. And you can bully all players - so when there are many 3 TG agreements around you can get many-many TGs.

BORG's variant is interesting but Jason seems to have very good contra arguments.

Thread: Re: Politics revised

Hertzog — 2008-07-28T11:44:14+00:00

I don't think that any house rule should limit players from discarding political cards for trade goods; for some players, politics might not be as interesting, or a situation might call for explosive expansion early on with the aid of trade goods.

There is another option, though, to encourage players to try and stock up on political cards :
- During a vote, a player may discard any amount of political cards (from a maximum hand size of 5) to gain a +2 influence for each card discarded this way for the current vote only.

Note that with the variant I proposed above, there may often be multiple votes in a round, and this ability might not be as powerful as it seems.

Hopefully, political cards can now represent more than a Trade Good, with minimal rules added. (Also, the rule that TGs cannot be converted to votes should strictly be adhered to with this variant.)

Edit : clarification

Thread: Re: Politics revised

Hertzog — 2008-07-28T11:14:44+00:00

I think all the posts have made very vaild points so far, and am looking forward to incorporating some of your suggestions in our next game.

I especially agree with :

- receiving one political card during status phase (but keeping to the hand limit of 5 such cards.) This makes complete sense if you're playing with Public Objectives exposed from the beginning of the game...since using Bureaucracy instead of Imperial II is a dubious choice (unless using the 'red tape' variant mentioned elsewhere). And as others have pointed out, this brings the flow of political cards down to a trickle, and players would rather chuck them for the trade good value.

Let me make another few suggestions, to utilize these political cards without affecting game time or upsetting game balance significantly:

- All players have an amount of political 'slots' in their personal play area open to them equal to the number of strategy cards they can select per round (i.e. 2 slots in a four player game; 1 slot in a 5+ player game.)

- As an action, a player may place a political card, face down, in an available slot : these are now termed 'proposed' political cards. Note that a slot is only considered 'available' if empty...

- When a player activates the Assembly strategy, all face down cards are revealed and voted on, resolved in player order, but voted on from left of speaker, going clockwise (as normal). If a law gets passed, the player with that law in his slot has to put two tokens (usually control markers) on the law ~these act as timers (explained below...)
The player activating Assembly still draws 1 PC and 2 AC, as usual. Options A and B are slightly modified :
-Option a) of Assembly simply reads "Gain control of Speaker token if you don't already have possession of it" (as this now has a HUGE impact on the game, with multiple tie-breakers possible in a single voting round)
-Option b) of Assembly reads : "hand Speaker token to any other player and cancel any one proposed political card" (all of which should now already be revealed).

-The secondary ability of Assembly remains unchanged.

- As mentioned above, if a law gets passed (in whomever's favour / to whomever's disadvantage), the player that proposed the law puts two tokens onto it. At each status phase, a token is removed from each law. If there is no token to remove during the current status phase, a player MAY scrap the law, to free a political slot for himself. This implies that a law will remain in play for at least 3 status phases, even if the player wants to get rid of it sooner! Note that the player may of course elect to not scrap the law, and keep it in play indefinitely. This once again acts as a bargaining chip in negotiations, especially with players willing to bribe the controlling player to annul his irritiating little law(s)...

- Regarding the Xxcha's racial ability; I would suggest letting them scrap one proposed political card per round, exactly as noted under Option b) of Assembly as noted above... their racial ability would probably trigger after activation of the Assembly strategy card.

- Note : with scrapping of a law at any stage, either proposed or established, no trade good is received as compensation.

Edit : spelling

Thread: Re: Anyone Prefer the Original SCs?

Enigmers — 2008-07-22T02:01:11+00:00

I've tried it with both sets and I'd prefer a mix that involves "Imperial II" because my game group doesn't really have the patience to play a full game (Longest we went was to 6 points). And we all love Age of Empire.

Thread: Re: For those of you wanted a little more TI:2nd in your life

Cruelsader — 2008-07-21T19:26:13+00:00

Very interesting...but does not the requirement of system control make the game much more military oriented? (This would favor military races) Also, wouldn't it encourage leader bashing because it is much clearer who is in the best position to claim victory?

Thread: Re: Muaat - racial action when enemy ships present in home system

usagi-san — 2008-07-11T17:02:46+00:00

Thanks fellas for your help! This is such a great community! Have a great weekend

Thread: Re: Muaat - racial action when enemy ships present in home system

ryanhanson — 2008-07-10T21:58:10+00:00

Oh! Well that would be what I was missing. I was looking at the image on BGG.

And now with that, here are my answers:
1. No.
2. Yes, but you have to wait for your next turn to do it again.

Thread: Re: Muaat - racial action when enemy ships present in home system

sigmazero13 — 2008-07-10T21:30:58+00:00

ryanhanson wrote:
Either I'm missing something here, or you are playing this wrong. The Muaat ability says, "...in any system containing one of your War Suns."
You ended the sentence too early. It says, "...in any system containing one of your War Suns or Space Docks." (I think the image in the BGG database is in error; FFG must have made a change after that preview image was released, but before the game was released).

Thread: Re: Muaat - racial action when enemy ships present in home system

ryanhanson — 2008-07-10T21:18:38+00:00

Either I'm missing something here, or you are playing this wrong. The Muaat ability says, "...in any system containing one of your War Suns." And, you are saying that your War Sun is blockaded. How can your War Sun be blockaded? If there are enemy ships in the same system as your War Sun then a space battle should have been resolved during a previous action, before you are able to use your ability to take an action to place the units.

Thread: Re: Anyone Prefer the Original SCs?

bleached_lizard — 2008-07-04T10:02:13+00:00

SaiSaysPlayGo wrote:
Scott,
There's an excellent variant for using Age of Empires with Bureaucracy called "Red Tape" from the Fantasy Flight forums.

::Bureaucracy II::
Note: For use with Age of Empires. Prepare Objective deck as normal, then deal out all Public Objectives in a line. Place Red Tape counters on all but the first Public Objective. No Public Objective with a Red Tape counter may be claimed.

Special: After selecting this Strategy Card, remove Red Tape counters in order equal to the number of Bonus Counters on this card.

Primary ability: Receive 1 Command Counter from your reinforcements. Then, remove one Red Tape counter from the Public Objective of your choice. You may not choose a Stage II Objective in the first three rounds. You may then immediately claim one Public Objective for which you qualify.

Sounds like a good variant! Presumably the game ends if at any time a Red Tape counter should be removed but is unable? Or how else is Imperium Rex dealt with?

Thread: Re: Anyone Prefer the Original SCs?

SaiSaysPlayGo — 2008-07-04T04:27:23+00:00

Scott,
There's an excellent variant for using Age of Empires with Bureaucracy called "Red Tape" from the Fantasy Flight forums.

::Bureaucracy II::
Note: For use with Age of Empires. Prepare Objective deck as normal, then deal out all Public Objectives in a line. Place Red Tape counters on all but the first Public Objective. No Public Objective with a Red Tape counter may be claimed.

Special: After selecting this Strategy Card, remove Red Tape counters in order equal to the number of Bonus Counters on this card.

Primary ability: Receive 1 Command Counter from your reinforcements. Then, remove one Red Tape counter from the Public Objective of your choice. You may not choose a Stage II Objective in the first three rounds. You may then immediately claim one Public Objective for which you qualify.

Image

tawnos76 — 2008-06-18T20:56:59+00:00

My new Added Facility - cost 1 Inf & 1 Res

Image

Typse2Fsat — 2008-05-29T21:34:27+00:00

Artefact tokens

Image

Typse2Fsat — 2008-05-29T20:45:55+00:00

Hmmm, I don't know whether to call them 'space flakes' or 'snow mines'...

Image

Typse2Fsat — 2008-05-29T16:08:21+00:00

Ground Force supplementary counters, includes counters from the base game and the expansion

Image

Typse2Fsat — 2008-05-18T14:17:32+00:00

Command counters of base game and expansion

Image

Gibbo — 2008-05-06T02:51:43+00:00

Perry starts to go after the rule lawyer.

Image

amertner — 2008-05-05T16:29:39+00:00

TI3/SE game for 5 players with split board, end of second turn

Image

Yedaya — 2008-05-04T10:59:44+00:00

Image

Aarontu — 2008-03-17T14:54:47+00:00

Imperial III SC, for variant: www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/299706

Image

Aarontu — 2008-03-16T23:06:43+00:00

Progression chart for variant www.boardgamegeek.com/article/2152547