Jump to content
BuzzsawMF

Conquest System?

Recommended Posts

The faction wheel was a pretty important balance constraint. I could certainly see some excuse in the lore that one faction might only ally with two others, with Nekro Virus occupying the Tyranid slot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Grimwalker said:

How’s the faction balance in Thrones these days?

Dark Eldar was a problem in Conquest from start to end. No faction has dominated AGoT for that long, though different factions have dominated at different times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Khudzlin said:

Dark Eldar was a problem in Conquest from start to end. No faction has dominated AGoT for that long, though different factions have dominated at different times.

And you have similar domination problems in L5R, although we're expecting a reversal of fortunes in the next 2 months.  Scorpion is at the peak while Unicorn brings up the rear.  This next cycle is the first time that the Devs have been able to address the meta since its release last year, and they have gone on the record to say that it is their intent to balance the game.  They released a Restricted List 2 (3?) weeks ago that limits a player to incorporating only one of the listed cards in their deck, up to a playset (3) of that card.  This has taken the wind out of the strongest deck lists that Scorpion or Dragon or Crab can field, which by itself does some interesting rebalancing.

The restricted list was a cleaver way around a very bizarre (IMO) complaint that people make in regards to Role specific cards, "I have cards that I can never play."  The restricted list doesn't remove any card from being played by any faction at any time.  It just doesn't allow them to be used with any other card on the list.  Very sly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The complaint about fixed role cards isn't weird at all. The whole idea is bad, because it's reducing choices instead of opening them (at the moment, choosing your clan locks in your choice of both stronghold and role), and all based on choices made by a handful of players. The closest equivalent that comes to my mind is the house-specific agendas in AGoT 1st ed (and it's really stretching, because you had plenty of other agenda choices for each house and most agendas were usable by all factions - note that there aren't any faction-specific agendas in AGoT 2nd ed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Grimwalker said:

The faction wheel was a pretty important balance constraint. I could certainly see some excuse in the lore that one faction might only ally with two others, with Nekro Virus occupying the Tyranid slot.

Banners in Thrones work pretty well. Presumably the L5R faction mixing works, too.  TI is an open enough universe to allow for just about anything, right? I should expand. I like the general mechanics of choosing which locations to attack and the warlord... but we could even do without warlords. Multiple fronts is the most interesting thing for me to carry on to a new game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heroes of Terrinoth looks to be a re-skin of a game lost to the Warhammer IP fallout.  Maybe the Conquest system could see the light of day again if FFG finds a theme that works with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved Shields for Conquest. It has been reused in Arkham and works as a way for a card to be useful even if it is situational.

The Role cards and Role exclusive cards are fun in L5R, the main complaints are about the restricted use of Role cards. If you could pick any Role card you desire, people would love it.

I don' think it is fair to judge L5R on faction balance, we are only 1 cycle and a year in. In almost all core environments 1 faction stands above the rest. But most outgrew them, except for Conquest. While it did have a shorter time than most, it still had Dark eldar dominance for the life of the game. Although it was pretty diverse towards the end.

I loved several things about the game: the Shields, the planets to go to, Command, And the Warlords.

For TI you could reflavour the Warlords as either leaders more indirectly than combat, or as a Flagship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/6/2018 at 4:08 PM, Khudzlin said:

Dark Eldar was a problem in Conquest from start to end. No faction has dominated AGoT for that long, though different factions have dominated at different times.

Not in Core Set environment. It started with first Cycle when Klaivex plus some cheap cappers like Sslyth Mercenaries were released. :)

Edited by kempy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didnt mind the warlord system or the pod of cards in the deck. I think the biggest issue with Conquest was snowball on resources. If they solved that, a TI conquest would be awesome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah the snowball was a huge issue. I played Kith and despite not having board I just gathered command and choked out the few resources they had. Then I just dominated cause they had nothing.

I actually loved the signature pods. Gave some perosnality. Biggest problem was the 1-ofs. But it was pretty reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/12/2018 at 11:35 PM, Radix2309 said:

Yeah the snowball was a huge issue. I played Kith and despite not having board I just gathered command and choked out the few resources they had. Then I just dominated cause they had nothing.

I actually loved the signature pods. Gave some perosnality. Biggest problem was the 1-ofs. But it was pretty reasonable.

That was more about really bad card design (Kith + many DE cheap cappers and later Astra with Worr's similiar swarming possbiliies) than mechanic. Also VP and RT should be Limited.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I adore the Conquest system and I'd really like to see them use it again. I was hoping for an Elder Scrolls LCG but not seeing how bad things can go with a licensed IP (Netrunner), it's probably best if they used their own IP. I actually think the Star Wars LCG would still be around if it was using the Conquest game system instead.

For their current IPs, TI may be the best fit, with Terrinoth behind that. I'm not too familiar with either of them myself, but I've heard plenty. The TI universe seems interesting and could get more people into the board game as well. 

I was trying to think of how Conquest could be adapted to the Android-verse. Corporation battling for different markets across the world? Warlords being replaced with different powerful individuals from Corporations? Not sure it works but the premise could be neat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KingOfOdonata said:

I was trying to think of how Conquest could be adapted to the Android-verse. Corporation battling for different markets across the world? Warlords being replaced with different powerful individuals from Corporations? Not sure it works but the premise could be neat.

After the sheer epicness that 40K was providing to that system, transposing this into a corporate economic war seems so dull. The conquest system would work better in a Terrinoth setting with full out war between different factions.

Android was too much associated with Netrunner to have any other competitive game system feel natural IMHO. I think that the coop option with multiple runner players teaming up to defeat the plans of a corp would work way better and would still keep a bit of a flavor of the previous game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Hellvlad said:

After the sheer epicness that 40K was providing to that system, transposing this into a corporate economic war seems so dull. The conquest system would work better in a Terrinoth setting with full out war between different factions.

Android was too much associated with Netrunner to have any other competitive game system feel natural IMHO. I think that the coop option with multiple runner players teaming up to defeat the plans of a corp would work way better and would still keep a bit of a flavor of the previous game

The Conquest system may not fit the Android Universe, but there is plenty of content and mythos developed for Android that other competitive LCGs could work. ****, there are three board games in that setting. I was just seeing if there was a way to merge the Conquest system with Android. It's not likely for sure, just ideas.

I do think a Conquest system works best with some sort of game about war and, well, conquest. There are plenty of settings out there that could be used for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a new LCG in the Android setting shouldn't focus on the virtual portion of the world at all.  Focusing on the city of New Angeles, their are street gangs armed with automatic weapons and cyber-enhanced limbs. The police force use robots that could destroy the Robocop initiative.  there are flying cars and crazy drugs.  A cops and robbers game in that setting would be gritty and brutal.  Each player could have a deck focused around a small-time gang, a cartel, a syndicate, or a law enforcement division, all using different tactics and enforcers to tear down their opponents as they try to take over the city.

And that's one untapped portion of the setting.

I would appreciate if they didn't use the AN core identities, instead allowing their mythos to grow as background for the world - getting reports on progress from NBN, or trying to heist the newest Weyland tech before it's delivered to the army (they made weapons, right?).

I think any attempt to salvage the familiar - use of Runner Vs. Corp, or by playing as established characters/corporations - will water down both experiences.  A cleaner break while returning to the setting will better establish it as a separate game (allowing for players who did not play or like Netrunner to more easily approach it), and will set Netrunner aside more respectfully.  The latter would be as though to say, "This was a thing.  It was a good thing.  We'd like to return, but can't.  So let it remain here.  We are respectful enough of this is thing and those who loved it, not to simply cash in on that love.  Now, this new thing is also a thing.  It will continue and interact with the first thing, if only in small ways.  And it too may become a good thing."

This is how I feel.  I look forward to seeing how other people interact and feel on the subject, and ultimately to how the setting is used in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×