Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Community-made Unofficial Strategy Guide for SW:TCG

- - - - - Strategy unofficial community

  • Please log in to reply
130 replies to this topic

#1
Fayde

Fayde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts

I posted this at BGG and was pointed to post this topic here, since the community for SW is larger here.

I have always enjoyed reading strategy guides for video games, watching commentary on board/card games, specifically articles relating to the Star Wars LCG.

However, even after well over 100 plays, I still feel like there is so much the game has to offer. So, after browsing for a couple hours for different tips, tricks, strategies and ideas for decks, I have decided to post here with an idea:
The CardgameDB users should compile a comprehensive strategy guide using this forum as a brain storm, and compile them into a single, comprehensive file/document.

I have looked and have yet to find a single article that goes over all subjects including deck building, importance of edge battles and force struggles, resource calculations, combos and different specializations for each of the 6 factions, theory/concepts (such as Faction Splashing) that are not spelled out in the rules. Maybe going over rationale for why Sith typically go well with Scum, and so on. I am imagining something like a user (or even 2) would write a large article on a single subject/aspect of the game. Go over different concepts, examples and combos/issues that are related to the said topic.

As a new player, I would've appreciated it, and with collective knowledge and experience, I think this would be a fun project to do over the summer.

Patrick Brennan's post (https://boardgamegee...oughts-gameplay) went over a good review, but I was hoping to break it down and go into more detail.

Asking too much? Obviously, I would contribute as well, but I wouldn't think about taking on such a project on my own, specifically because it would only be from a single perspective. So, the question becomes, is anyone interested in contributing (or at least posting links for reference)?


  • jrboogie73 likes this

#2
pantsyg

pantsyg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2690 posts

This sounds like a great project! I would be glad to contribute what I've learned over the course of playing the game, though I admit I'd have a hard time figuring out where to start!



#3
TGO

TGO

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2588 posts
According to the foremost authority of Star Wars LCG, America.

LS attacks all the time.
And
DS should never Attack.

Boom. Strategy guide complete.
  • holliday88, hundreds, America and 4 others like this

#4
sdrewthomson

sdrewthomson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 589 posts

I guess the best place to start is with a Table of Contents.

 

Maybe something like:

 

Preface

Chapter 1 - Deck-building

Chapter 2 - The Objective Flop (?)

Chapter 3 - The Mulligan

Chapter 4 - Deployment

Chapter 5 - Conflict

5.1 - The Edge Battle

Chapter 6 - The Balance of the Force

Conclusion



#5
TheMAC

TheMAC

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 194 posts

I guess the best place to start is with a Table of Contents.

 

Maybe something like:

 

Preface

Chapter 1 - Deck-building

Chapter 2 - The Objective Flop (?)

Chapter 3 - The Mulligan

Chapter 4 - Deployment

Chapter 5 - Conflict

5.1 - The Edge Battle

Chapter 6 - The Balance of the Force

Conclusion

 

This looks somehow like the article on BGG.

 

The biggest thing to learn in the game is deckbuilding, a complete guide of each different archetypes would be quite a good job.



#6
sdrewthomson

sdrewthomson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 589 posts

This looks somehow like the article on BGG.

 

 

Guess I should've read the article first. I suppose it proves that great minds think alike.  ;)



#7
Fayde

Fayde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts

Here's some idea generators:
 

Preface/Introduction (Helpful links, video tutorial, terminology, so on).
1: Light Side Factions (specialties, strengths/weaknesses):
1.1: Rebels, 1.2: Jedi, 1.3: Smugglers, 1.4: Neutrals,
2: Dark Side Factions (specialties, strengths/weaknesses):

2.1: Navy, 2.2: Sith, 2.3: Scum, 1.4: Neutrals
3: Deck Building:
3.1: How to build decks using the pod system (this could be a pod vs traditional, pros/cons, so on), 3.2: Mono vs Duel faction decks and how to best run them (like ratios, faction combos, splash, 1 or 2 copies of a pod...), 3.3: Theme Decks vs Functional Decks, 3.4: Considerations, pit-falls, and tips/tricks.

Gameplay:

4: Mulligan
4.1 when and when not to mulligan (I am thinking some personal experience here, more than a “science” of it.
5: Deployment:
5.1: Resource Matching (specifically focusing on the balance of running duel-faction decks), 5.2: Resource calculation (when is a 2-cost 2-resource card worth it? Pros/cons of units producing resources), 5.3: Playing units that use one-time “upon playing” effects, 5.4: The importance of holding onto cards that could win you edge battles instead of playing them as a unit...
6: Combat:
6.1: The Importance of unopposed damage, 6.2: Utilizing combat icons (specifically, when are Tactics more valuable than Unit damage? Blast Damage more important than Tactics?), 6.3: Edge Battles (what's the point? Why are they important?), 6.4: Hand management (holding onto cards for defense during your turn? Dumping your hand into edge battles to draw more cards later...)
7: The Force:
7.1: Why is the Force control important? 7.2: When to dedicate a unit to the force (pros/cons), 7.3: Long Term control consequences (what if the light side had the force the entire game? The dark side controlled it?)

8: Misc:
8.1: Teaching the game to others (MtG comparisons or other card games? Mods/home rule ideas for beginners?), 8.2: The Multiple Layers of SW:LCG (Hand/resource managements, edge battles, the force, combat, deckbuilding, game balance), 8.3: Decks with rationales (what is your deck, and WHY did you build it that way. This could be a fairly large, user based submission with multiple “articles” to give new players into insights that they may not have seen before.


  • yodaman, BayushiSezaru and jrboogie73 like this

#8
Fayde

Fayde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts

Just a quick example:

1.4: Light Side Neutral faction:
Neutral Objective Sets (Pods) are generally intended to fill certain gaps or give boosts to a specific kind of deck/faction. For Example, the Hit and Run (#18) set is meant to give your deck an extra boost of Fate cards, as well as a bonus for attacking Objectives. It features 3 Fate cards, where normally a pod includes 1 Fate card.
In light of the positives, it is an unsaid rule that Neutral pods are not as powerful, being they do not yield faction specific resources and contain generic units/events that can be difficult to place into decks.



#9
theChony

theChony

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 307 posts

Didn't FFG post some articles early into the game about some topics? Could've been propaganda, but I think there was some legit strategy.



#10
Caal

Caal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 608 posts
Any Card Game Strategy Guide should have an entire chapter on Resource Management, and another on Draw and Hand Management. Star Wars should obviously have 1 more around Edge Battle and its effect on Conflict and Hand Management

#11
America

America

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 990 posts

According to the foremost authority of Star Wars LCG, America.

LS attacks all the time.
And
DS should never Attack.

Boom. Strategy guide complete.

 

I came here to post this. 

 

Thanks, TGO.


  • Boreas, chunkygorillas and GroggyGolem like this

#12
tierdal

tierdal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2344 posts

I think this is AMAZING.

 

It would be great if we had both a beginingers/introductary guide and an advance play guide.

 

Imagine if we had a guide for new players to pickup and try the game that really gave them a GOOD idea of all the depth in the game.

 

One of the CORE problems with the Core Set (heh heh) is that it is just the worst. It teaches almost nothing about the game and feels like a game of "do you find that resource for palpatine/vader or do you not". Its in my opinion the worst of the starter sets for the LCG.

 

Imagine a guide that had the following:

 

1) An Introduction to the game and WHY it is so good

2) "Buy these packs to build these decks to get a really good intro experience" section. This could evolve as the card pool does.

 

I've seen so many people pickup the core - say this game is lame an has no depth and give up.

 

We all know this isn't true but the true genius of the design doesn't shine through.

 

Would love to help with the project where I can.


  • Fayde likes this

#13
Fayde

Fayde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts

tierdal, I was thinking about getting an article about which are the most meta changing packs to buy, kind of like a beginners cheat-sheet to get the best of each cycle (1 Force Pack per cycle) to make the game a little less intimidating. Or at LEAST a nice little overview as to what each cycle focuses on.
But yeah, having two separate guides wouldn't be a bad idea. Maybe a page or 2 for beginners. Some quick tips, the above force pack idea, and some "sample" decks from those chosen force packs.
I wonder if there would be people interested in writing to exactly why the Core set is or isn't a good enough reason to judge the core as is (especially buying a single copy). Star Wars specifically, I think, suffers from the Objective Set design in the Core because you REALLY feel the lack of options until you get a second copy, which doesn't seem as true for other LCGs.
I think I wrote an article that I never actually posted about the pros/cons of the Objective Set system. I will dig it up and post it tomorrow or something....


  • tierdal likes this

#14
Fayde

Fayde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts

Apparently, the reason I didn't post it was because it wasn't finished... Hope to get some thoughts though, and maybe to expand the points a bit more. The intention was to look at the Objective Set system, and look at it from both sides of the argument.


 

The concept of Objective Sets in Star Wars: The Card Game has been one of debate as to why or why it isn't a good game design choice. It certainly changes the way decks are built when compared to the traditional 4 copies of a single card in a 60 card deck. Many people point to the fact that it is very limiting in their choices, as the average deck can only have 10 Objective Sets.
So, I hope to go over the design in a pointed, quick way that will hopefully be informative and help the reader decide on whether or not they want to invest in Star Wars: The Card Game.
It should also be noted that I am a big fan of the game and the Objective Set design, so take that information and do what you will.

A Game of Choices:

First, the standards. A typically CCG allows for 60 cards in the deck. A LCG allows for 50 cards. A CCG allows for up to 4 copies of a single card to be included. A LCG allows for 3. So, now way have our standards by which the Objective Set design is competing.
The math comes out to a typical CCG deck having between 15-20 “choices” or slots to fill (a slot may be filled by a single card, or multiple copies of a card), where the typical LCG deck has slightly more with 16-21.
This is where the Objective Set design comes in as the weird uncle. There is only 5-10 choices, with only 2 copies of a single Set being allowed, as opposed to 3 or 4. However, less choices does not default as “bad.” If anything, it makes your deck-building choices more important and heavier. To add to what is already a difficult decision, you must take the cards, good, bad and indifferent, that the Set comes with. You want Darth Vader? You also have to include these other 4 cards. This is easily one of the most arguable aspects of the game that may make the difference between loving it and hating it.

The Limited Pool:
While the game in its current state has quite a bit to offer, it is still limited compared to other LCGs in that you are not “allowed” to include cards that you may want without being able to NOT include cards you don't. Additionally, because of synergy, a Set may not always work with the current pool of Sets at the moment. For contrast, other LCGs typically come with 20 new cards (3 copies of each) in each monthly pack. While Star Wars has lots of new cards per pack, they are again restricted to the Objective Set they are included in. So, while most LCGs are pumping out say, 3 new options per faction per pack, Star Wars only gives you 1 per faction.
The Pool is growing, but much slower than others by comparison. But for the same reasons the deck-building choices are more important, so are the new inclusions in the game. For example, a single Set can alter the meta of the game for months to come (I'm looking at you, May the Force Be With You). When I played Warhammer: Invasion, I only wanted to use maybe 2 or 3 cards out of the 20 new ones in the pack. With Star Wars, even if I use 2 of the Sets, that alters a good portion of my deck at once.

The Good AND The Bad:
Most Sets come with cards that you absolutely WANT in your deck. But then there are the other 2 or 3 cards that you couldn't care less about. In fact, sometimes they're dreadful. However, I have come to the conclusion that this is a very cleaver balancing tactic the designers have used in order to prevent that one amazing, game-bending card from running away with the show. In most games, the balance is determined by rarity and resource cost. While LCGs have no rarity issues, they do typically use resource management to negate the advantage of the card. Star Wars does this as well, but with the Objective Set design, the cards are further balanced and kept in check by including cards that are lack-luster with ones that are show stealers.
That said, I have found that the Sets generally are meant to work together and complement each other. Either by supporting that one main card, or by giving a boost in a general area of the game (low-cost grunts, or extra Fate cards, for example).
 



#15
Majestaat

Majestaat

    Advanced Member

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 1913 posts

GroggyGolem wrote a series of articles aimed at beginners some time ago. You should check that to see if it's worth re-posting.

I wrote a few articles focusing exclusively on Imperial Navy. Maybe there's something to be extracted there.

 

If there's some consensus on what people would like to see and provide a list of titles to get the general idea of what to work on for each, I can rally a group of volunteers from the forums to start working on this project. Post #7 is a good place to start, but I'd rather make sure.


  • GroggyGolem and Fayde like this

#16
Fayde

Fayde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts

I'll check it out, thanks for the tip. If nothing else, I will link the articles, but maybe he'll give permission to use some of them with credit due to him.
If you could, maybe post your articles on this forum? If nothing else, it will be something for discussion. But I was really hoping for an article for each affiliation, especially focused on affiliation strengths, weaknesses and tips that pull the best out of each one.

So far, no one has said anything contrary to the post 7 suggestions. Obviously, if there is something that is NOT on that list and should be (or would prompt some writing) than by all means we could include it. Like I said, I am hoping for a comprehensive strategy guide created by Star Wars players, not just me. Any help would be amazing.



#17
Fayde

Fayde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts

So, finally had a minute to sit down and think of a few things. Specifically, to start, with terminology. Now, I don't play competitive/op, so I may be limited. I do watch regionals/worlds games on youtube though. But I know that the LCG/CCG world has their own terminology and it can be overwhelming/confusing at first to new players (I know I was, especially because I don't have an extensive CCG background). So here are a few terms. PLEASE feel free to correct or add more.
These are in no particular order, but obviously once the finished product is out, there will be organization.

Affiliation Splash ("Splash" or "Splashing"): A concept of deck building. Using the Affiliation Card to compensate the minority Affiliation Objectives/cards used in a deck consisting of more than 1 Affiliation (i.e. a deck with both Navy and Sith objectives).

Drop/Dropping: Paying for and deploying a card, typically a Unit, which is preceded by the cost of the card (i.e. "A 3-drop unit").

Board Control (or just "Control"): Typically refers to preventing your opponent from executing his strategies or using cards. Using Tactics icons on unit cards is a method to acquire board control. Other Events or Enhancements, such as those that cancel card effects. This can also refer to a deck archetype "Control", which uses these effects to lock down their opponent with Focus Tokens.

Aggro (short for aggression): A deck archetype that focuses on doing the most Objective damage in as little time as possible. Generally one with an increased instance of Blast Damage icons, and cards that give bonus damage toward enemy Objectives.

Bounce/Bouncing: An Action/Reaction that moves a card from one place to another. (i.e. Stay on Target Fate card which moves a card from a players discard pile to a target Vehicle.

Mono-Deck: A deck consisting Objective Sets entirely of a single Affiliation (i.e. a deck that consists of only Jedi Objectives).

That's all I could think of off the top of my head. Hope you can add or edit what I've got to make it more consistent or useful.

Edited for corrections



#18
sdrewthomson

sdrewthomson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 589 posts

Isn't aggro short for aggressive?



#19
tierdal

tierdal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2344 posts

aggro is short for aggressive. Its an MMO term. aggro range is what distance a KOS (kill on site) MOB ( mobiles...meaning mostly monsters that can move vs stationary things)



#20
BobaFett

BobaFett

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3037 posts

aggro is short for aggressive. Its an MMO term. aggro range is what distance a KOS (kill on site) MOB ( mobiles...meaning mostly monsters that can move vs stationary things)

 

Aggro is not an MMO term, MMO's  have adopted the term, but aggro decks, for instance, have been around far longer than MMO's have been using it.  Magic has had aggro decks since the early 90's and other card games for possibly longer than that.  The meaning of an aggro deck is an aggressive style deck that usually hits hard and fast.  Often times they are called rush decks, but its essentially the same thing.