I've been a big fan of FFG's LCG line for some time now. I know that there are some games I just won't be able to fully get into.

i.e. Game of Thrones I'll never catch up on even though I have all the house expansions and a core set...but I really love the HBO version cause it's short and concise.

I've purchased Call of Cthulhu and Lord of the Rings...not bad. I've played Warhammer Invasion...it's cool, but not my cup of tea. The franchises I've been the most invested in are Netrunner and Star Wars. So basically I'm very familiar with the game mechanics of all the LCG games.

But this game...I've really wanted to play this game in its cardboard glory for some time now. I did want to ask the people that have actually purchased the game (even the ones that have played it online) what their thoughts are on it. I've seen the tutorial videos, but you can't really judge a game based on the tutorial...you gotta see how the game flows in its function.

So in a way I'm asking for a review, but not just any review. I'm asking the people that have played it (from GenCon) if it seems worth investing the time and money. I'm already purchasing the base set, but does the game have long term potential? My first impression (from watching the videos) is that this game can be over real quick if one player just places their warlord in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm looking to see if it's got good staying power; Star Wars LCG isn't too long, and can't be dominated in the first couple of turns (typically).

I know it's long winded, but I've looked on the net and I've seen a few reviews, which helps, but I'd like to hear from the people here. Thanks!

I come from Netrunner, and I enjoy the game, design, and mechanics, but Conquest just scratches a whole other itch. It's faster and more brutal, while not sapping out all the intrigue and mind games. It does take playing it to find those intricacies though, and it can't just be explained via text. I thought the game would be pretty one dimensional, but after subsequent playing since Gencon, it starts clicking in your head. The base set will be more than enough for many plays if you try each Warlord, and everyone should. You will start to figure out what the Warlords should be doing, as some of them don't even want to be at a fight and are more to set up for the future for your army to do all the work.

And while sometimes you can look at the board state and say "I can't win" we always play it out and it usually comes down to one last unit with with health left, and it wasn't such a sweep that everyone thought it'd be. That will only become more and more the case as people get multiple cores and War Packs so that they have the deck consistency to allow for come back plays and last ditch assaults that their army is capable of.

So yes, I think the game has staying power. I mean we already know of another 2 factions that will be added after the first cycle, and they have different deck building rules than the other armies. I think this will be replacing Netrunner for my LCG of choice.

I come from Netrunner, and I enjoy the game, design, and mechanics, but Conquest just scratches a whole other itch. It's faster and more brutal, while not sapping out all the intrigue and mind games. It does take playing it to find those intricacies though, and it can't just be explained via text. I thought the game would be pretty one dimensional, but after subsequent playing since Gencon, it starts clicking in your head. The base set will be more than enough for many plays if you try each Warlord, and everyone should. You will start to figure out what the Warlords should be doing, as some of them don't even want to be at a fight and are more to set up for the future for your army to do all the work.

And while sometimes you can look at the board state and say "I can't win" we always play it out and it usually comes down to one last unit with with health left, and it wasn't such a sweep that everyone thought it'd be. That will only become more and more the case as people get multiple cores and War Packs so that they have the deck consistency to allow for come back plays and last ditch assaults that their army is capable of.

So yes, I think the game has staying power. I mean we already know of another 2 factions that will be added after the first cycle, and they have different deck building rules than the other armies. I think this will be replacing Netrunner for my LCG of choice.

Netrunner is an amazing game, but it really takes a lot of headspace and I really need to be invested in a particular game to really get the most out of it. That, and I found that there was a really bad dynamic between groups that I played...one group, I was the best and I wiped the floor with them. Another group, I just got whipped ALL THE TIME. Maybe I wasn't as good as I thought I was...

Still, I hate to admit it, but Star Wars LCG replaced Netrunner for me. I'll still play Netrunner and I'll still get the packs, but I play Star Wars WAY more and so much more easier to teach people (at least in my opinion).

But I appreciate your post. It was exactly what I was looking for in a response!

If anyone else could respond, that would be great.

I still buy netrunner, but I don't play it. Like you said, it takes waaaaay too much headspace. It's a large investment just to even build a deck.

Star Wars replaced for me as well due to easy deckbuilding.

I'm hoping WH40k can fill the gap between the two. I do want to start doing deckbuilding again, but not as heavy as netrunner.

Star Wars replaced Netrunner for me too.

I love this game. It has so much depth to it that is not apparent at first when you start to play. There is a number of important decision points to the game as well but it's not as heavy on the brain as Netrunner or AGoT thankfully.

warhammer invasion is dead! long live warhammer 40k conquest!

Star Wars replaced Netrunner for me too! Though when I moved from Atlanta to here in Austin, there didn't seem to be anyone playing Star Wars, so I sadly haven't played in about a year.

Star Wars replaced Netrunner for me too.

I would love to have Star Wars replace Netrunner for me. Unfortunately, we have almost no Star Wars players here and plenty of Netrunner players. I just hope I can get a decent group for Conquest going.

Just get it. It's super fun, especially if you like 40k at all.

I feel like people enjoy Star Wars, but no one knows that other people enjoy playing it and so they just break out netrunner.

You asked, I deliver:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/1221109/my-sizable-review-w40k-conquest-eagerly-awaited-do

warhammer invasion is dead! long live warhammer 40k conquest!

Totally true. Though, indeed I still enjoy and play Invasion when the occasion arrives.

warhammer invasion is dead! long live warhammer 40k conquest!

Totally true. Though, indeed I still enjoy and play Invasion when the occasion arrives.

Yeah me to, it really sucks that we never got Tomb kings and Ogre Kingdoms...

It's not bad maybe it's just that i've not played enough games but it's missing something, with star wars they got it right a very different card game and a awesome way of deckbuilding, love it.

Interestingly enough, I dislike the SW games mainly because of the annoying Deck-building rules, which I find badly limiting (or at least at launch - maybe it's better now).

I couldn't get my head around SW's Edge battle. I'd deploy away merrily, then find that I had too few cards in my hand to win the Edge...and lose my advantage. I stopped collecting after the 9th little expansion. So far, no such complaints about this game...though it irks me that Exhausted units and use their Action abilities. That just feels wrong.

Interestingly enough, I dislike the SW games mainly because of the annoying Deck-building rules, which I find badly limiting (or at least at launch - maybe it's better now).

I knew it would take time for Star Wars to actually have enough pods to truly have some dynamic, unique decks, but I also started seeing problems because FF started running out of canon universe characters and started using EU characters. It's not a bad thing, I just see it's becoming harder to keep pumping out pods when you're running out of characters to use.

Interestingly enough, I dislike the SW games mainly because of the annoying Deck-building rules, which I find badly limiting (or at least at launch - maybe it's better now).

I knew it would take time for Star Wars to actually have enough pods to truly have some dynamic, unique decks, but I also started seeing problems because FF started running out of canon universe characters and started using EU characters. It's not a bad thing, I just see it's becoming harder to keep pumping out pods when you're running out of characters to use.

Given the popularity of the EU, I would be shocked if FFG hadn't included characters from there.

Yeah not including EU would have been and then they would have run out of characters. With eu they have plenty.

This is the first LCG I've played, having dabbled in a few other card games over the years.

Having only played a few test games with a single core shared between me and my opponent, I really like this game, and how different the factions feel. The main downside is that this will eat into my x wing time

I love the fluff of 40k, but really cant be bothered with learning 7th edition (having been playing since the end of second edition). Reading 40k novels and playing this should satisfy my itch, along with doing the odd bit of modeling.

I've bought a second core set, and eagerly await it so I can build some proper mono decks.

Netrunner was/is my first FFG game and I enjoy it, but it's getting to be too much for me (I'm more of a casual player when it comes to card games, ie only buying a data pack here or there).

I just got Conquest, since I've been excited for it for awhile. Huge fan of the universe. Anyway, I just got my first game in tonight so I can give you my literal first impression.

I loved it. It's a bit faster and more "brutal" and I like the campaign feel of it. I feel like it could replace Netrunner FOR ME. I feel like I could be happy with just the core set (although we all know it never ends at just the core set). That's a big win for me.

Netrunner was/is my first FFG game and I enjoy it, but it's getting to be too much for me (I'm more of a casual player when it comes to card games, ie only buying a data pack here or there).

I just got Conquest, since I've been excited for it for awhile. Huge fan of the universe. Anyway, I just got my first game in tonight so I can give you my literal first impression.

I loved it. It's a bit faster and more "brutal" and I like the campaign feel of it. I feel like it could replace Netrunner FOR ME. I feel like I could be happy with just the core set (although we all know it never ends at just the core set). That's a big win for me.

I've been playing card games for over 20 years, Netrunner is a great game but I find that it takes a lot of headspace cause you're dealing with a lot of bluffing and you need to concentrate on your opponent at all times. Still, it's an amazing game and I'm still getting expansions in the hopes of getting into it again with someone more regular.

Conquest is certainly more casual. As of this writing I've got 1 core set and have played 2 games. I've ordered 2 more cores online and I'm waiting for those while I get to know the game that I have now.

A lot of people here talk about Star Wars, and that's a tad more casual than Conquest, though people have their own opinions about the specifics.

Yeah not including EU would have been and then they would have run out of characters. With eu they have plenty.

I never got into the EU characters. It's certainly good to see new characters, but without any frame of reference, I'm kinda new.

Hi Guys,

I am a FFGamer and have a few LCG's (LOTR, Warhammer: Invasion and AGoT's) and other games (BBTM, Arkham Horror, Elder Sign)

I have read all of your comments and they are making me want to purchase the game in a big way.... all very positive.

But I also love the mythology of H.P. Lovecraft. So my question is this, based on those of you who have purchased / played this and CoC, which one would you invest in?

Cheers,

I'd invest in the game I can find players for, which most likely would be 40k.

I've played CoC in the past but did not like how the story battles resolved. Seemed to create a lot of analysis paralysis, at least with the local play group.

40k's game mechanics flow together well and I have really enjoyed the game. So far most of the games have been close coming down to one climatic battle for the game. I couldn't really ask for more.