So I'd hazard a guess and say that the game is dead where I live,

Max # of players we've had at an event was 7, but the norm is 3-4, with constant rescheduling - just to get the events going in the first place.

I am sitting on 2 Cores at the moment (managed to sell 1) and all warpacks except Threat from Beyond.

There seems to be no interest in the game online either for second-hand sales - so selling these is proving to be very hard.

Now my question is,

Do I hold on to the boxes and hope that things change, or cut my losses and sell dirt-cheap?

We only have a small local group, bout 4-5 players max, and it's getting a bit... stale, playing those guys week after week (We're fortunate to be able to meet up weekly to play, as we have a local BG club), but I don't want to stop.

If you genuinely like the game though, I'd shelve it and try to revive later - it'll be a pain trying to jump back in and figure out where the card pool is at later.

Don't worry so much about big 'events' going, just play a match here and there where you can. Keep the spark alive, and if you play in front of other people you might gain converts. Worked for us a couple of times.

So I'd hazard a guess and say that the game is dead where I live,

Max # of players we've had at an event was 7, but the norm is 3-4, with constant rescheduling - just to get the events going in the first place.

I am sitting on 2 Cores at the moment (managed to sell 1) and all warpacks except Threat from Beyond.

There seems to be no interest in the game online either for second-hand sales - so selling these is proving to be very hard.

Now my question is,

Do I hold on to the boxes and hope that things change, or cut my losses and sell dirt-cheap?

We only have a small local group, bout 4-5 players max, and it's getting a bit... stale, playing those guys week after week (We're fortunate to be able to meet up weekly to play, as we have a local BG club), but I don't want to stop.

If you genuinely like the game though, I'd shelve it and try to revive later - it'll be a pain trying to jump back in and figure out where the card pool is at later.

Don't worry so much about big 'events' going, just play a match here and there where you can. Keep the spark alive, and if you play in front of other people you might gain converts. Worked for us a couple of times.

Out of interest where are you guys based?

I live on Hoth.

(Scandinavia)

It's the same (or similar) pattern at my LGS.

We have a group of ~10 players who meet every other weekend to game, mostly boardgames with some miniature gaming as well. Conquest, when it was released, was full of excitement and more. Now, due to the powerful SM decks, games are infrequent.... I'm the only player who changes his deck each week practically, in order to put a fresh face/new deck to face off with my opponent across the table. (my main deck is AM w/SM, and I still like my Tau deck w/Eldar)

Anyways, there are ups and downs in the gaming world. This is all a familiar pattern in my opinion, as the game has a solid design and really engaging.

I live in North Kent, UK

I think netrunner overshadows this game

I stopped playing a few months back due to all SM, all the time, and I just came back to check out the scene. I tune into Team Covenant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6idP3MuktXY&t=10s

Evidently not much has changed? It somehow seems worse even than the year-long dominance of NEH in A:NR.

Now, due to the powerful SM decks, games are infrequent....

I guess it really depends on your local meta? One of my regulars always plays Chaos/Orks, although he loses pretty much all the time. Keep trying to get him to make different decks but he won't do it till the last warpack is out here next week.

Other guy plays Dark Elder/Chaos. He can be toush to beat but he is beatable. He'll sometimes venture to other decks, like Ork/Guard, but DE is his favourite.

The fourth guy, who comes infrequently, has a SM deck, and yeah its powerful but I can beat him. He's not as good as us though as he's newer, so I suspect it'll get harder over time.

Me? I almost exclusively play my Tau and IG decks at the moment. Sometimes I win, sometimes I lose... SM is fun but I've lost with them as well. When the new Elder Warlord comes out I'll be making an Elder Deck with him to try him out.

I guess it depends how you can influence your local group though. If people are only playing SM decks, try and encourage a "no Space Marine" night or something. Be bold, try something knew. I mean I don't ofren stray from my decks because I win AND I lose, it's not a forgone conclusion that I win, but I do have an SM deck ready that I bust out every now and then.

But yeah, rather than sell the game, try and change the game - talk to your guys. If they're not butt-holes they'll be more willing to keep playing the game than keep winning.

I change decks as often as my underpants

An additional bit that made one of our players give his cards away was the following:

He commonly games with an Ork deck, and as soon as he saw this on this site he decided to throw in the towel. Honestly, he was a good player, very nice demeanor and very fun to game with. However, cards like the one above should not be added to SMs. (and with no loyalty, to AM and Tau)

Again, the above is just my opinion.

Am sad to see him go, though. I loved gaming against his deck with my Tau deck.

I guess it depends how you can influence your local group though. If people are only playing SM decks, try and encourage a "no Space Marine" night or something....

But that's the thing: Any card game that is balanced for each faction shouldn't force its given player base to 'ban' a given faction so that the other factions, collectively, can have an even-odds game/tournament against the remaining factions. Right now, in my neck of the woods, this will be the next step (just an opinion here given player feedback) in ensuring balanced gameplay.

And I hate saying "it is what it is," but in this case, it applies.

Yeah, I get it - it sucks that this situation exists. TBH we only have one SM player at the moment. My intuition is screaming that there must be away to deal with SM given the current card-pool. Some faction's strategies simply don't hold up to the firepower, I agree, but I can't help but think there are people like Aun'shi or something that can out-Space Marine the Space Marines. I mean the balance has to be somewhere, right?

But perhaps not. I don't really know.

Back to the point though, I'm trying not to make it sound like a big deal - don't want to 'Ban' Space Marines, but you're all friends (right? RIGHT!?), surely you're all mature enough to go, "Hey guys, so obviously Space Marines are pretty powerful right now. Joe and Dave use them all the time, and they come out on top, which is great, but why don't we make it more interesting where we all try out other factions? We'll stop using the ones we always use, you guys stop using Space Marines for a night, and to keep it fair no one else can choose them either. Let's mix things up for a session."

No fuss, no Banhammer, just a reasonable suggestion to try something different for a session. If you can' handle that then you might as well stop playing everything, ever, for all time. (Kidding, but seriously, let's be mature about this).

That's a lot of kitchen table prophecies of doom.

Community has been gathering results from the Regionals Championships over the last month, and thus far Space Marines are equal on wins with Dark Eldar, which is likely to suggest they are the second strongest faction, if one were to account for the discrepancies in faction popularity between the two. Eldar are only one win behind: http://www.cardgamedb.com/forums/index.php?/topic/21613-road-to-worlds-2015/ Yes, balance could be better with AM having no wins at all, and Orks having a rather controversial one, having happened at a 3-man tournament, but the game seems very much at a point where player skill trumps faction power.

For people quitting over the Predator, that is particularly baffling, and, I would dare suggest, demonstrative of a limited grasp of the flow of the game. 7 resources is more than a full turn's worth, unless you are winning *all* command struggles (in which case the question becomes, how do you do that, when you are playing 7-drops, and the 7-drop is likely unnecessary at that point anyway). This is 7 resources that gets tied up in a single unit that can be killed in a single activation by most armies with an Ion Rifle, dismissed by an Archon's Terror, mauled by a swarm of rock-bottom priced cultists, etc. The game is currently unkind to large units, as many of the best targeted effects affect any size army equally.

There seems to be no interest in the game online either for second-hand sales - so selling these is proving to be very hard.

This is so true.

I had one guy offer me £40 for 3 core sets.

YMMV but that's taking the p!

And it's not like i've been spoilt for choice.

I don't think Conquest has proved that popular on balance.

All we need is for Shut Up & Sit Down to cover it, that'll give it a kick.

Seems like LCGs and CCGs in general all suffer from this same issue. Early on, there is always one faction/group/whatever that is ahead of the rest or perceived to be so. In my experience, this is almost inevitable in the first year or so of a game's existence. Unfortunately, the issue always gets exarcebated by players who only play the easiest deck they can win consistently with. This frustrates other players and even sends some away. It's, I'm afraid, part of most game's growing pains.

Facilier, in his post above made some great points. If I remember correctly, SM did not win at World's last year either, it was DE. The data gathered on that link points to SM being near the top, but far from invincible. However, it is likely that the more casual the environment, the more dominant they are. That's probably due to the fact that they are fairly simple to pilot and it may take a bit more skill and deck tuning to beat them that you may find in many of the casual environments. So, the issue seems to be at the casual level rather than competitive.

Nevertheless, I think that this is an important junction for the game. There will always be some issues showing up early on. It's all about how the designers correct those issues that truly matters. In my opinion, most players are more casual than competitive, so it should matter to FFG if there is a problem at the casual level. Hopefully, it is one that can be remedied fairly quickly.

If I remember correctly, SM did not win at World's last year either, it was DE.

Actually, they did. It was Jeremy vs. Davis playing the finals and they both were piloting Captain Cato Sicarius. Both DE and SM made it into the cut though.

Actually, they did. It was Jeremy vs. Davis playing the finals and they both were piloting Captain Cato Sicarius. Both DE and SM made it into the cut though.

Hmmm, I must have been thinking of something else, then. My mistake.

they both were piloting Captain Cato Sicarius.

So playing the same warlord is acceptable even on tournaments? If so, this is outright stupid.