This was touched upon in another thread, but it got me interested.

For the folks who have actually played the game (and I know there are quite a few of ya out there), what percentage of your wins came from Warlord elimination vs Planet acquisition?

Just wondering.

Pretty sure in every game I've played, the winner has won through planet acquisition. I've played less than 10 games though, and mostly with starter decks.

My experience: roughly 80% planets, 20% warlord

Decked exactly one time - using the 35 card, unmodified core decks.

When the warlord is lost defending a game-winning planet in desperation, I usually count that as a planet victory (because the warlord would have retreated, or not gone there, otherwise).

Loss by warlord in a battle that's not game-defining shouldn't really happen that often yet I wouldn't have thought.

Just remembered; I have had my Warlord die once. I forgot because it was a battle for a planet which would have won the game for my opponent anyway (or I'd have retreated).

About 60 % winning planets, 40% Warlord dying.

We've played about 15 or so games so far. About 2/3rds of those were with the starter decks, single-faction, the rest with combined decks but still only using a single Core Set.

I've bloodied a fair number of warlords, but maybe one KO. But getting them bloodied has always turned things for the win. The player can't commit him to much for fear of the KO, but it also brings no ability to the table. I can usually sniff out their play with the warlord and hit Atrox Prime pretty hard. Just makes me think I should go Ragnar when he comes out, lol.