The Dark Side wins if their counter gets to 12.

The Light Side wins if they destroy three objectives.

Does anyone know if there are other win conditions though? I've already seen some confusion on if a player (or just the Dark Side) loses if their draw deck runs out.

But also, can the Dark Side win if they destroy three objectives? Or do they just keep getting that cumulative bonus of moving the counter up each time they destroy one?

One of the designers told me that either side would lose if they couldn't draw. The dark side does not automatically win by destroying 3 objectives, but in practicality probably will have (and at 4 will definitely have won).

 Thanks, dbmeboy.

dbmeboy said:

Correct.  When the Dark Side destroys a Light Side Objective, they get a +1 to their Death Star Track.  The second Objective defeated adds +2, and so on, so in effect, by defeating the 4th Light Side Objective, they should have won (+10 to the dial, +however many turns went by, not likely less than 2).  The only other thing I could see is a card or cards allowing the Light Side to roll back the Death Star dial.

So to summarize;

Light Side: Defeat 3 Dark Side Objectives or deplete the Dark Side deck

Dark Side: Get to 12 points on the Death Star dial or deplete the Light Side deck

I wonder why they chose to give each side a different win condition. It seems odd to me somehow, like I'm just questioning how bad it would have been to have the Dark Side win the same way, by destroying three Light Side objectives. If the game had been more asymmetrical I'd understand it, but right now it just feels like an afterthought, like when they were finished with the game, somebody went, "But wait - we didn't put any Star Wars stuff into the game mechanics!" And so they added the Dark Side track and the Force counter to turn their generic system into an authentic Star Wars experience.

MarthWMaster said:

The Death Star track looks like it's been put in there to force interaction by having the Light Side get their act together quickly and start going for Objectives.  It also means that Light Side can't play 100% offense and leave their own Objectives unguarded, lest the Dark Side player start picking them off and advancing even further.

Maybe there'll be rushdown strategies for both sides that forget defense and just steamroll the opposition?  Either way, it means the game has a definitive number of turns involved, 12 maximum, unless cards come out that allow the Light Side to roll back the Death Star track.

The difference may just be more thematic.  Like, the Empire is slowly dominating the galaxy, and the Rebels must stop them before they can complete their plans.  The opposite for the Dark Side is that if they can manage to strike a huge blow to the Rebel war effort along the way, they will eliminate their only opposition and gain control that much faster.

MarthWMaster said:

Yeah, the Death Star counter is the only thing that makes it feel like a Star Wars game.

herozeromes said:

I disagree

ScottieATF said:

 Tell us what you like about the game.

herozeromes said:

And what makes it feel like a Star Wars game.

Hello everyone.

I am new over here, but giving the level of excitement I have about this game I couldn't just sit and watch. I was a hardcore STARWARS Decipher player and I've been expecting a good SW card game game since then, and this one seems to be finally fulfilling the expectations. Or at least, most of them.

Sticking to the thread, I think it is a good idea to have different winning conditions given the differences between Alliance and Empire, but what I think is not so good (given I do not have all the information I would want about the game) is that both conditions do not share a same principle of action. Thus, one is active (destroying 3 objectives) and the other is passive (wait for the dial to hit 12).

With this in mind, if you want to be competitive I only see one option of deck for each faction: Alliance/Light must be rush and Empire/Dark must be stall (what I think, by the way, is much easier given that you not only start the game but have cards like Stasis, Choke and Lightning). This is, in my opinion, a very poor way of designing a strategy for each side, way worse than the "pod" thing for deck building. Why Dark would attack and risk the game only to speed the dial when the dial will hit 12 sooner or later? The Dark side player has only to play characters, commit them to the Force and wait with a full defense and a ton of "direct damage" (I insist, that if I am not skipping something - what I would love to-) to win. And even worse, given that if you launch a full attack with the Light side, the retaliation with a couple of weenies from the Dark side can just finish the game destroying one of your objectives (while you can do nothing to backtrack the dial).

In my opinion, thematic differences in the gameplay should come from the "nature" of the cards in each side, and not from the winning conditions. I remember the evil characters in Decipher's LotR, each faction with a different kind of attack and strategy (Nazgul were fierce, Uruk damage +1, Sauron had direct damage and Moria swarming). This I think should be the way, specially having three different factions on each side of the Force (and no, I do not see Jabba building a Death Star - maybe 12 tentacles for the Sarlacc?-).

Thanks for your time.

Andur Saibot said:

It could still be to your advantage as the Dark Side to go after Light Side Objectives to advance your dial.  If anything, by turtling up and drawing the game out, you're taking the risk that the Light Side might be able to mount a good enough offensive to take you out.  Given that their primary goal is to knock out 3 of your Objectives in 12 turns, you're better off taking turns away from them by beating their Objectives.

That's just another point of view, but it highlights how as the Dark Side player you really have to different ways to play the game, and that's not even looking at the card pools at your disposal.

Andur Saibot said:

I always feel a need to point out the novel Darksaber, one of my absolute favourites, where Durga the Hutt builds a streamlined Death Star (or tries to, anyway). Could be an awesome theme if they ever branch into doing New Republic decks!!!

Andur Saibot said:

We don't know any of the cards for sure at this point. There easily could be Light Side cards that do things like this.

spalanzani said:

Yeah, that is awesome. Though also, I think in one of those demo videos, they said that it's not necessarily the Death Star being built but more "the Dark Side gaining influence over the galaxy" and when it reaches 12, they've reached enough influence to control the galaxy or to crush the Rebellion or to complete one of their main evil plans, etc.

The counter just happens to be Death Star shaped.

You know my initial boredom/frustration over the gencon 2012 demo has been taken over(a little anyway) by the potential i see in the game. I like the art, deckbuilding/podbuilding and the "edge batlle".

But i'm wondering, has the DS an easier time destroying objectives? If you would by chance be playing the first one to score 5 objectives would any side have an unfair advantage? Maybe someone who played the demo would have some insight in this. Currently the winning conditions seem to hinder gameplay rather than encourage different playstyles.