The game is broken

By MEGAEINSTEIN, in Warhammer 40,000: Conquest - Strategy

Well, after a few games became obvious that if you always attack the other player Warlord, he does not libe long and you win the game before conquering 3 planets with the same symbol

You know Warlords can retreat instead of attacking as part of their combat turn to avoid getting dog piled right ?

This game is far from broken.

And of course there's no guarantee you'll end up at the same planet as the enemy Warlord. An opponent that knows you're trying to kill the warlord is likely going to be able to set the terms of that fight.

Dear OP,

Shield cards, retreating, deploying your Warlord intelligently and event cards (i.e. Indomitable) are part of the game and they can all solve "your problem".

That is to say, your real problem appears to be a lack of skill and knowledge of the game.

I suggest that you play some more and instead of using your Warlord as a battle-tank, you use it as a support unit. (which it is) :)

Sounds like you're missing a rule or two.

LOL!

Yep, what Keffish said. You being lousy at the game does not make it broken...and trust me, because I am lousy at a ton of games....

BWAHAHHAHHAHAHHAAHHAHAAAAAA!

However i must admit that when i saw the tutorial vid, my first toughts where about wich factions/cards could kill the warlord the quickest.

Edited by Robin Graves

Well, after a few games became obvious that if you always attack the other player Warlord, he does not libe long and you win the game before conquering 3 planets with the same symbol

Megaeinstein LOOOOOOLL

My friends and I didn't realize two rules at first, which made the OP seem correct.

1. There is always a battle at the first planet (we were only doing battles at planets a Warlord was at, making it hard to collect planets).

2. The Warlord can exhaust to retreat in leiu of attacking during combat. (We were waiting til everyone was exhausted before retreating. This made Warlords much easier to kill).

Now that we are playing correctly (we think), it is much harder to kill Warlords before someone gets a planet victory.

I think the OP has now seen that the game is infact not broken at all. However I do like to mention that at first I also had two "difficulties" with the game.

1. Reading the planets, I still feel Im making huge mistakes by underestimating which effects are bigger than others. While it is true that card advantage and resource advantage are key, I feel in my early games planets like Iridial, Plannum and Ferrin where ignored by me and my opponent way to much.

2. Reading and resolving all the options you have available. As mentioned by others this is key in any game but really makes this game so interesting for me. A full knowledge of the phases and Action windows are also essential to playing this game the way it was designed. Former MtG or Netrunner players might get confused else. I know I was.

Another overlooked rule which drastically changes (and breaks) gameplay when played wrong: When your warlord commits to a planet, all units in the HQ accompany him, but they arrive exhausted!

We got this wrong during our first few games, wondering why we should ever go to a different planet than the first... and how this "snowballing effect" of the player with initiative could be stopped because he accumulated more and more troops each turn... :ph34r:

Well, after a few games became obvious that if you always attack the other player Warlord, he does not libe long and you win the game before conquering 3 planets with the same symbol

This is pretty much what happens to me on a regular basis. I don't think it breaks the game but it sure is just irritating.

My regular opponent does play a lot of tournaments and I guess that is what he encounters a lot so it has become his play style.

I'd say that going for the commander isn't my usual tactic, although I've employed it several times once I've decided that taking planets just isn't going to work. However, I try to never make it clear to my opponent. I like to draw them in and find a way to bloody their warlord without them even realizing what's about to happen.

Why would I do this? There are excellent way to protect your warlord, and I'm not about to give them the opportunity. Are some warlords easier to kill than others? Sure. But, they have other ways to win, and should be going all-out for that!

I guess my point is that I appreciate games with multiple victory conditions. My opponent can certainly try the same against me...

Warlord kill is one of the 3 way to win, does require your opponents cooperation though. Another rule which is easy to overlook and defeat yourself with is the Command Struggle, you don't HAVE to take resources or cards (or both) when you win a command struggle, you DO however have to draw in the HQ phase.. no cards also equals lose.

There are "save the warlord" cards in every faction as well as the planets. Tau just got one recently that the space marines and Eldar can use. Also try blooding the Eldar warlord. That is a tall order in itself. I've done it with my Tau Hunter deck but it took me a bunch of games to figure our his position and get the perfect card draw. With the new guy inherently mobile I don't see it happening ever. Ork warlord can be ridiculously hard to kill with all the redirect damage they get. Astra can block armor-bane with some of their supports. Tau have a magnet character that basically can have everything redirected towards them saving the warlord. On the move so Ill be editing this post a lot.

Edited by wikiro

I've played a lot of games, and my warlord rarely get killed, except against the Au'shi deck which I got unlucky. With shield cards and the option to retreat, you can make sure you warlord stay alive, and it's important not to get Bloodied because more often than not, your warlord will be killed easier when it happens.