Does anyone else think the Conquest is kind of bad?

[thrasymacus]

It's the blandness of Conquest that disappoints me. All that time hyping colossals and then so little effort into making ours interesting. It's such a tremendous wasted opportunity. I really find it hard to believe that the same people who made Stormwall also made Conquest. Did they not put them side by side? One is faster, makes 5 to 9 attacks at RAT 6 with one attack hitting automatically, a disposable model that can be placed to triangulate, to bounce spells and AoE's off of, to block charges and LoS or to set up super slams on small based models, and overall synergises with a broad range of Cygnar Casters and buffs . The other one is Conquest. Disappointment aside, once again, I'm just really curious how PP makes their decisions on these things. The model doesn't do much for me either. I think I'm cancelling my pre order. Normally I'm a completionist and own every other Khador model minus Fenris, but it just seems like they didn't try very hard.
I suspect Conquest is to Behemoth what Demo Corps are to the Great Bears. (except Great Bears are under costed, while Big B seems spot on)

[Madhiggins]

you put into words exactly what i was feeling thrasymacus. just a general sense of disappointment and confusion as to how the bland Conquest came out alongside all the other really neat colossals. what probably makes it feel worse for me is that i've never been disappointed with a PP release before. maybe i'd feel better about the Khador release if at least Vlad3 was top tier instead of what he is. as it is i feel like we're left with two bland releases while other factions got a great colossal AND a superb caster(aka menoth and cygnar).

[ScottEBJJ]

you put into words exactly what i was feeling thrasymacus. just a general sense of disappointment and confusion as to how the bland Conquest came out alongside all the other really neat colossals. what probably makes it feel worse for me is that i've never been disappointed with a PP release before. maybe i'd feel better about the Khador release if at least Vlad3 was top tier instead of what he is. as it is i feel like we're left with two bland releases while other factions got a great colossal AND a superb caster(aka menoth and cygnar).

Vlad3 isn't top tier? Have you even tested him, or Conquest for that matter?

Being skeptical about a model is one thing, even having some initial disappointment happens, but how in the world are you already declaring a model that isn't yet released "not top tier". In the same sentence you are fine with decreeing Menoth and Cygnar the "winners, with Cygnars releases out for a week and Menoths not coming soon. And I'm sure there are even Menoth players bemoaning their releases in the same light.

I am flabbergasted by this type of hubris. Really, and honestly blown away that people make such knee-jerk judgements.

[thrasymacus]

I haven't played Vlad3 yet. He seems pretty good to me. I'm thinking he'll be like Harevich in that his obvious strengths read straight off the card disappoint while his true forte comes out with practice, experimentation and probably an army well removed from his Tier. He seems very original. Zerkova never really panned out as a tip tier wizardy support caster, but Vlad3 could still be a Melee Caster with opportunities to efficiently kill stuff without losing the next turn. I'm very optimistic about him. Also, I chose Stormwall for comparison for emphasis which is a bit unfair as I don't think any of the other Colossals are anywhere near as good nor as original, but I'm really only rules confident on the Kraken, Conquest and Stormwall.

[x3tsniper]

If I wasn't getting mine free, I probably wouldn't be getting him. I have only found him truly useful beyond what other jacks could do, in Harkevich lists, and that isn't to far above what I could get otherwise. I do agree that it is a very hard sell.

[Madhiggins]

Vlad3 isn't top tier? Have you even tested him, or Conquest for that matter?

Being skeptical about a model is one thing, even having some initial disappointment happens, but how in the world are you already declaring a model that isn't yet released "not top tier". In the same sentence you are fine with decreeing Menoth and Cygnar the "winners, with Cygnars releases out for a week and Menoths not coming soon. And I'm sure there are even Menoth players bemoaning their releases in the same light.

I am flabbergasted by this type of hubris. Really, and honestly blown away that people make such knee-jerk judgements.

i'll back away from the vlad topic since at this point i've not really done much with him and really only meant the comment as an aside. to be fair though, it's not like i'm just guessing what their rules are. the models may not be out but their information is. but anyways, i'm still pretty certain conquest isn't that good.

[rivenwyrm]

It's the blandness of Conquest that disappoints me. All that time hyping colossals and then so little effort into making ours interesting. It's such a tremendous wasted opportunity. I really find it hard to believe that the same people who made Stormwall also made Conquest. Did they not put them side by side?

As soon as I saw the rules I had this exact same reaction. In fact as soon as we heard about Crit Dev, I was put off (A 19pt model whose most interesting rule will likely occur about 30%? Uh...). I feel about the same with respect to Hyperion and the Kraken. Galleon seems only slightly more interesting but he also delivers something Mercs really needed. Hearing peoples' batreps has only reinforced my opinions on the matter. It has me feeling as though they're all pretty well balanced (except perhaps stormwall), but for the most part really are just two jacks smooshed together. Which is kinda boring. I desired something more innovative, and perhaps that desire was misplaced. I certainly don't know what I would have done differently to make them stand out more, but then again I don't get paid to make games. I do really like the fact that they don't seem as though they'll unbalance the game, and I admit that combining this level of balance with completely new rules would be very difficult.

My personal reaction to Vlad3 is mixed. I certainly think he's interesting, and probably quite fun, but I am a bit disappointed they just went with giving him back HoF, rather than some new version of that ability. Of course, if they had given him banishing ward I would honestly be salivating and running around singing his praises, so perhaps they're quite close the mark with him. Also, he is admittedly the most "horsey" of the new casters, which is something to help ameliorate the bizarre choice to give S&P to Vengers.

[DemonCalibre]

i'll back away from the vlad topic since at this point i've not really done much with him and really only meant the comment as an aside. to be fair though, it's not like i'm just guessing what their rules are. the models may not be out but their information is. but anyways, i'm still pretty certain conquest isn't that good.

Knowing Rules, and knowing performance are different things.

There are many things that we read the rules for made an assumption and were totally wrong. Greylords are a great example, when we first saw their rules everyone was like "THEY SUCK!" then people played with them and went with Alright. I personally don't cast judgement on a model till I rep them for 10 games against a variety of opponents. There is to many on the table factors, that change how a model performs. Conquest doesn't have any flashy rules, but he really doesn't need them being armor 20 and 62 hit boxes at power 22. That is what you are really paying for. Storm wall on the other hand has more toys, but his raw stats aren't as good, Lower pow on the fists, lower armor, fewer hp. Even a few hp can really make the difference in durability of a model simply by forcing another hit.

[HeroZero]

18 games so far with conquest. As someone said the conquest isn't flashy or burdened by special rules he is justa big beat stick. Best caster by far so far in raw performance has been erusk followed by hark and zerkova.
Look at the khador parade in the art work. Actual performance in game is much like that. Infantry advance. Nipple guns drop template cover. Caster supports the infantry long enough to deliver a fully loaded conquest. So far conquest has killed 3emo, haley, xerxis, ethag, venthrax and ekreoss. Even a mostly scrapped konquest is still a huge threat.

[RevolverAdamska]

You are presuming my opponent will leave what I want to shoot right on my front line so I can shoot it without having to move. This is a bad presumption. You also seem to be under the impression that I don't want to be moving forward to get my flamers and fists into range. That's just silly.

IF I use choir to increase attack and damage it's at RAT 3. Still need 7s to hit the general LOW standard DEF of 10. Any of the plethora of 12/18 heavies out there will require 9s.

And ONE 'caster can increase that to RAT 4. That's what, equal to the base RAT of the Conquest? Support pieces should take something from decent or good to a little bit better. You shouldn't have to stack support bonuses to bring glaring deficiencies up to almost par.

Imho, Deploy 7-10" ,movement first turn spd 4, huge size base, rng 16 x 6 aoe , hardly you won'thave a target .

Your a0e got +2 damage , it mean 6 a0e3" pow 8 > 4 pow 6 a0e3", if you deploy the Vassal we are talking about 9 pow 8 a0e3".

Your army is Menoth, support and buff both good for Jack and troops, is your strenght, so yeah go go go Support.

Best performance for myne as been with p/eVald and one Koldun Lord, gonna try with pIrusk and Old W

[Frege]

Imho, Deploy 7-10" ,movement first turn spd 4, huge size base, rng 16 x 6 aoe , hardly you won'thave a target when you play ona table 48"x48". Your a0e got +2 damage , it mean 6 a0e3" pow 8 > 4 pow 6 a0e3", if you deploy the Vassal we are talking about 9 pow 8 a0e3" or Enliven , a nice free movement of 4" ready to bring you even closer to your enemy.
Your army is Menoth, support and buff both good for Jack and troops, is your strenght, so yeah go go go Support.

Best performance for myne as been with p/eVald and one Koldun Lord, gonna try with pIrusk and Old W

Bit confused by this but if I understand what you are saying properly (correct me if i am wrong) then enliven wont affect colossals since no non-normal movement.

[RevolverAdamska]

Bit confused by this but if I understand what you are saying properly (correct me if i am wrong) then enliven wont affect colossals since no non-normal movement.

Yup apologzie my infamous poor English, Colossal can't be move outside theyr activation, oh well, x9 rng 16 pow 8 aoe

[Revamp]

i just want to know if it can be jackmarshaled. if it can be, its aces in my book.

[John of Arc]

i just want to know if it can be jackmarshaled. if it can be, its aces in my book.

Nope, no marshalling. They can be bonded, though.

[Madhiggins]

if i were a jack marshal in the world of warmachine, i would feel a bit nervous if they put me alone in charge of a colossal. it would be like trying to make one person in the real life navy pilot a battleship by himself.

[Tyr852]

if i were a jack marshal in the world of warmachine, i would feel a bit nervous if they put me alone in charge of a colossal. it would be like trying to make one person in the real life navy pilot a battleship by himself.

Thankfully that will never happen , JM's can't marshall a Colossal , so poor Kovnick will still be fffffffffforever alone.

[Ector]

Being skeptical about a model is one thing, even having some initial disappointment happens, but how in the world are you already declaring a model that isn't yet released "not top tier". In the same sentence you are fine with decreeing Menoth and Cygnar the "winners, with Cygnars releases out for a week and Menoths not coming soon. And I'm sure there are even Menoth players bemoaning their releases in the same light.

I am flabbergasted by this type of hubris. Really, and honestly blown away that people make such knee-jerk judgements.

Oh yes, you would prefer people to buy the models, test them in casual play, then test them in tournaments... then what? Imagine that I've lost 1000 games with Conquest/Vlad3, what would that mean? Would that prove that the models are bad, or I just don't have a needed skill, or my environment is very unattractive for them?
When somebody says that model X is "not top tier" that usually means that he doesn't know how to make it top-tier, nothing else. I openly admit that I don't know how to build an army with Conquest or Vlad3 to win a serious tournament with it. If you know how to make that, please tell us. If you don't, you can share your opinion, but you have no right to prohibit other people from sharing their opinions.

[OrsusSmash]

As soon as I saw the rules I had this exact same reaction. In fact as soon as we heard about Crit Dev, I was put off (A 19pt model whose most interesting rule will likely occur about 30%? Uh...). I feel about the same with respect to Hyperion and the Kraken. Galleon seems only slightly more interesting but he also delivers something Mercs really needed. Hearing peoples' batreps has only reinforced my opinions on the matter. It has me feeling as though they're all pretty well balanced (except perhaps stormwall), but for the most part really are just two jacks smooshed together. Which is kinda boring. I desired something more innovative, and perhaps that desire was misplaced. I certainly don't know what I would have done differently to make them stand out more, but then again I don't get paid to make games. I do really like the fact that they don't seem as though they'll unbalance the game, and I admit that combining this level of balance with completely new rules would be very difficult.

I agree, in that PP leaned on the side of caution with the balance of the colossals (and, looking at the Mountain King, I think they're going for caution with the gargantuans as well.) Initially, I expected the colossals to have a lot more ***-kick for their cost, because otherwise how are they going to make their cost worth it? None of the colossals really kick out that much damage, though Stormwall and Galleon come close to meeting that expectation (which is one of the reasons they're so happily and widely accepted.)

However, after playing with and against colossals a few times, I have to say that PP was right to lean towards caution with the damage output of the colossals. A huge chunk of the value of colossals are the passive rules that they bring to the table, and the power they have as scenario models. They're pretty powerful as territory holding pieces, and I think if they had more offensive output they'd completely dominate the scene (though I think they'll be very popular as-is.)

What's going to be interesting is seeing how indicative the Mountain King is of the power curve of the gargantuans. I think the Mountain King is likely an outlier (slightly overbalanced due to the Whelp spawning rule,) but I wouldn't be surprised if the gargantuans overall are pretty close in terms of power and durability (though of course the Woldwrath will be a ton of bricks.)

18 games so far with conquest. As someone said the conquest isn't flashy or burdened by special rules he is justa big beat stick. Best caster by far so far in raw performance has been erusk followed by hark and zerkova.
Look at the khador parade in the art work. Actual performance in game is much like that. Infantry advance. Nipple guns drop template cover. Caster supports the infantry long enough to deliver a fully loaded conquest. So far conquest has killed 3emo, haley, xerxis, ethag, venthrax and ekreoss. Even a mostly scrapped konquest is still a huge threat.

This has been much my experience as well, though with much less 'caster killing via melee; mine always ends up shooting everything.

Which brings me back to the OT: After 3 games, I kind of love Conquest. It's a great fit for my style of play, and it's a lot of what I've been wanting for warjacks in general for awhile. I can see myself including it in a lot of lists in the future.

[sourclams]

Mathpasta's issue isn't so much with the Warjack-Infantry design interactions as it is with Charge boosting damage dice.

Mathpasta, you can fix almost every single gripe you have about the game if you simply house rule that charging does not boost the damage roll.

[DemonCalibre]

Mathpasta's issue isn't so much with the Warjack-Infantry design interactions as it is with Charge boosting damage dice.

Mathpasta, you can fix almost every single gripe you have about the game if you simply house rule that charging does not boost the damage roll.

and basically making Infantry worthless, knee capping all Warmachine factions in general and allowing Warbeasts to totally dominate.

[Sinsation]

You don't play often against Cryx right mate? 30 infatry for 15 point , and it is just the start... They are gonna Eat Colossal in no time via spells.

Why are you scared of mechanithralls with conquest?

[PG_LunarSol]

Conquest is probably the worst Colossal. He's also probably one of the better Khador jacks. That comes across as sort of a backhanded compliment, but its fairly true. He's not nearly as efficient as Beast, Behemoth or Spriggan, but I still think he ranks up there with the likes of Black Ivan.

I have my disappointments with Conquest. Those POW 6 templates are frankly insulting, but they're also probably going to score more kills than Stormwall's POW 12's in another vaguely backhanded compliment. I'm extremely frustrated that Conquest got hit harder with the base stat reductions, having fewer relative boxes in a 2x heavy contest, a bigger DEF drop as well. He didn't need much. Bucklers on those arms that only protect their arc, POW 13 secondaries, 2 more boxes, arcing fire? Not even all of these, any 2 of them would have made a huge difference to me.

Disappointments aside, it comes back to options, and particularly in a character restricted world, he's still one of our better ones. First off, he doesn't need to do 19 points of damage, ever really and certainly doesn't need to be doing it every turn to be worth his points. Behemoth rarely gets his points back for me, but his consistent shells force the opponent to play my game, which is a pretty big deal all around. Likewise, Beast often sits at the back with my caster and while he usually gets his chance to lop something's head off late in the game, he's not really earning a ton of points back outside of one turn in most games. In fact, quite often with eSorscha I'll run both Beast and Behemoth and neither will see much combat until the 3rd or 4th turn. That's 24 points sitting around, but it works in the layered approach Khador often takes to battle.

That's really where I see Conquest as one of our better options. Most of our jacks suck at something. Even Behemoth lacks reach and is hilariously pillowfisted against a lot of things. There are 2 models in the entire game where AP 12 is better than straight 22. In a lot of ways, Conquest is similar to Behemoth, who probably isn't worth 13 points, but is a steal when the cost for 2 destroyer shots is normally 18. Khador likes bundled deals and we're still getting a bit of a discount on Conquest when you bundle the overpriced options he's built from. Conquest really does have a lot going for him. 2 high pow reach initials, a solid gun, far, far better damage grid placement, better mechanik synergy, the Colossal rules themselves, and a good amount of battlefield presence, even when not in the thick of it. He's disappointing simply because we all want PP to give us a jack that stands up to the challenges that keep Khador jacks off the table, but we shouldn't let that completely blind us to the worthwhile things this model really does.

[OMM_Lukav]

I think you will see Conquest in tournament play, as will all the Colossals. If you know that I am bringing a Conquest for a 1 on 1 game, I bet you can come up with a good list that will neuter him completely. This was true back when i played warhammer fantasy as dwarfs and has never changed since regardless of what game you are playing.

However, if we are playing in a Steamroller tournament, and I can bring multiple lists...i would bet there will be certain match ups where my Conquest will dominate because my opponent is not equipped to handle them properly. There will be certain lists where me bringing a Conquest cripples me. That is how the game works though.

My point is the Conquest is competitive, but not an auto include. I will be interested to see the GenCon lists this year and see what the top players feel is working for them.

[PG_battlemechanik]

Conquest doesn't have any flashy rules, but he really doesn't need them being armor 20 and 62 hit boxes at power 22. That is what you are really paying for. Storm wall on the other hand has more toys, but his raw stats aren't as good, Lower pow on the fists, lower armor, fewer hp. Even a few hp can really make the difference in durability of a model simply by forcing another hit.

You keep emphasizing the durability of Conquest, but I haven't seen it (having only played against it, not with it). The couple of games I played against colossals at L&L, I ignored the colossal if I could (just run chaff into it to keep it from advancing). When I couldn't ignore it, I just put 2 jacks on it and killed it. Conquest is durable in the sense of having a lot of boxes, but it doesn't compare at all to a stormwall with arcane shield or failsafe on it (which is still totally killable in one round). Our jack buffs don't help the conquest's durability at all, aside from hark's feat.

Conquest is comparable in durability to a superiority'ed behemoth (especially when you consider how many models you can get in on it) and comparable in damage output (especially when you consider it can't shoot and melee in the same turn). That's good, but it's not 19 points good. Whether it's worth its points is largely down to the base special rules that all colossals have, which is probably why people are complaining about lack of flashy rules.

[IronComrade]

I see him as everything Khador. Kinda boring rules but really strong stats. I imagine he'll go the way of the Gun Carriage. People will poo poo it for months and slowly it wil creep into most of our lists and people will love it.

[PG_ThatRickGuy]

I have to ask you. Does this REALY not bother you? The idea that warjacks are so weak, that they have to be protected from light infantry-by more light infantry?

I guess, it does kinda bother me, in the same way that I lose at Tic-Tac-Toe if I don't take the center square going first or a corner square going second. Every game has some amount of core strategy, whether you are playing Sorry!, D&D, or 40k, you work in the system to limit your risks and maximize your odds of survival. Warmachine is no different. Part of the game is that anything can kill anything to a large degree. That means playing strategically, protecting your heavy hitters while getting them into position, sacraficing cheap troops where needed, etc... That is part of what makes the game challenging.

Yes I know the stadard "PP never makes mistakes shut up and go away" response is that "We don't want warjacks to dominate the game".

I wouldn't say that PP doesn't make mistakes, but I would say that a group of individuals who have put their career into creating, testing, and balancing a game for fun play have probably put a lot more thought into such things than our average forum users. By no means perfect, but I would venture a guess that in the early MkII phase, probably even before the public test, that they did a lot of work trying out different ways to enhance jacks. What we have now was what they found to be the most balanced given a high level of strategic play.

-Rick

[John of Arc]

It's worth noting that while warjacks aren't unstoppable murder machines, they ARE some of the best assassins in the game. Delivering a warjack with three focus is more likely to kill a caster than a unit of infantry, especially a camping one. Buffs can help infantry out, but a warjack's ability to boost is a pretty big deal.

[MathPasta]

I guess, it does kinda bother me, in the same way that I lose at Tic-Tac-Toe if I don't take the center square going first or a corner square going second. Every game has some amount of core strategy, whether you are playing Sorry!, D&D, or 40k, you work in the system to limit your risks and maximize your odds of survival.

3e D&D had a huge problem where spellcasters completly dominated mundane classes. And you know what people did? They didn't say "Oh, its just part of the game- Lets all play casters". They *****ed about it. They *****ed about it AAAAAALL day long and AAAAAALL night. And you know what the next edition did? It made it very balanced (Granted the next edition was TOO balanced to the point where it was just a stiff tactical board game- then people whined about it being to stiff, and then the next edition is in development trying to find a good balance but thats beyond the point).

I wouldn't say that PP doesn't make mistakes, but I would say that a group of individuals who have put their career into creating, testing, and balancing a game for fun play have probably put a lot more thought into such things than our average forum users. By no means perfect, but I would venture a guess that in the early MkII phase, probably even before the public test, that they did a lot of work trying out different ways to enhance jacks. What we have now was what they found to be the most balanced given a high level of strategic play.

If they did an explanation, showing how each unit, caster and thing can be used competitively and effectively equally well (With lots of evidence and proof) I would be thrilled. But I doubt they could without causing a PR disaster.

One thing I learned from Wizards of the east coast is that just because your in charge of the game, and you get payed for this doesn't mean you automatically know the game better. A Hive mind of thousands of players playtesting your rules every time they play generally know better.

^^Jhon of Arc- Oh sure yes definatly. I wouldn't say infantry can't kill a camping caster but I would say its harder to deliver them all unless they have some ranged attack of sorts. Also I don't WANT unstoppable. Just powerful.

[quindraco]

If they did an explanation, showing how each unit, caster and thing can be used competitively and effectively equally well (With lots of evidence and proof) I would be thrilled.

We have been asking for this for Kossites for as long as I can remember.

[Esper]

One thing I learned from Wizards of the east coast is that just because your in charge of the game, and you get payed for this doesn't mean you automatically know the game better. A Hive mind of thousands of players playtesting your rules every time they play generally know better.

D&D next will be a disaster, and will kill the game completely.

While a "hive mind" as you put it may have a larger test base, the signal to noise ratio often outweighs any useful feedback.

[DoktorVivi]

Conquest is durable in the sense of having a lot of boxes, but it doesn't compare at all to a stormwall with arcane shield or failsafe on it (which is still totally killable in one round).

To be fair, we've never been able to match up to an Arcane Shielded Cygnar jack. Arcane Shield + Centurion = harder to kill than any Khador jack, period. That hasn't changed at all.

[MathPasta]

D&D next will be a disaster, and will kill the game completely.

It probably will. Buts thats more to Wotc starting the edition wars breaking the base SO BAD that nothing outside of the ultimate game will ever glue it back together.

While a "hive mind" as you put it may have a larger test base, the signal to noise ratio often outweighs any useful feedback.

Also DnD has much more elements and much less of a identity. In warmachine its simple. Its a game based apon agression with infantry and tanks. Thus its much easier to sort "Useful complaints" from " Why doesn't 3Vlad have mat8"

[themocaw]

3e D&D had a huge problem where spellcasters completly dominated mundane classes. And you know what people did? They didn't say "Oh, its just part of the game- Lets all play casters". They *****ed about it. They *****ed about it AAAAAALL day long and AAAAAALL night. And you know what the next edition did? It made it very balanced (Granted the next edition was TOO balanced to the point where it was just a stiff tactical board game- then people whined about it being to stiff, and then the next edition is in development trying to find a good balance but thats beyond the point).

Putting aside the fact that discussing balance in a cooperative game where the point is to make sure that everyone has a chance to contribute equally, and in a competitive game where the point is to encourage a certain style or styles of play -

The problem with 3.Xe wasn't that Spellcasters were dominating mundane classes. The problem was that Spellcasters were dominating the DUNGEON MASTER to the point where your only chances to challenge a twinked-out spellcaster was to either play the one-up game of "my spellcaster is better and smarter than yours" or use DM fiat to say "No, you can't do that."

Also I seriously hate the idea that the hive mind knows better than the designers, because honestly, a lot of the time the hive mind has no idea what it really wants. Example: is it better to have lots of choices or fewer ones? The hive mind will usually claim the first. But then they complain that the choices are unbalanced and there's one that outdoes the others. "Well, we had to cut back time on testing, that one slipped through the cracks." So they should have spent more time on testing. So they do and the next book takes longer to put out. Now the company is "dying because its not putting out enough material!"

You can't please the hivemind. It's pointless to try.

[PG_Draxos]

MathPasta are you done trolling yet? We get you don't like the model but you aren't being constructive and often times you are rude to those trying to offer perspective.

Hell, have you even used conquest?

[PG_battlemechanik]

To be fair, we've never been able to match up to an Arcane Shielded Cygnar jack. Arcane Shield + Centurion = harder to kill than any Khador jack, period. That hasn't changed at all.

Sidearms brick with behemoth (never mind a devastator) is actually harder to kill than an arcane shielded centurion. Our best jack defensive buffs (superiority and sidearms) don't work on conquest, that's the point.

[quindraco]

Sidearms brick with behemoth (never mind a devastator) is actually harder to kill than an arcane shielded centurion. Our best jack defensive buffs (superiority and sidearms) don't work on conquest, that's the point.

They actually do, but DEF 9 (superiority) isn't impressive. Sidearms can get Conquest up to DEF 17-19 (I haven't done the arithmetic; I *think* you can do 19, but that's intuition, not crunched numbers) if you're willing to bring the points.

[MathPasta]

You are correct in the sense that Im not being constructie and should probably be off. I have played the conquest 4 times and 4 times I should have taken something else.

I will also agree that I became a bit too smug when I said the hive mind knows better then the developers. the hive mind does not know what it wants:

Case and point: I disagree with you. Fighters feeling like the mage was just killing everything made them feel bad. The mage could do everything. They could just hit stuff. See we disagree.

But that does not mean that the developers are instantly great at the game. I doubt PP knows what its doing as much as we hope it does.

[PG_ThatRickGuy]

They actually do, but DEF 9 (superiority) isn't impressive. Sidearms can get Conquest up to DEF 17-19 (I haven't done the arithmetic; I *think* you can do 19, but that's intuition, not crunched numbers) if you're willing to bring the points.

I lolled a little thinking about a Conquest surrounded by closed clam jacks and Karchev.

A DEF 17 Colossal surrounded by ARM 25 jacks... completely rediculous.

Quick math - Colossal = 120mm base, radius = 60mm + 25mm for 1/2 a 50mm base = 85mm radius (circle through the middle of the surrounding jacks). 85mm radius = 534mm circle. 50mm/surrounding large base = 10 large base models + 1 small base model (Wardog or a Mechanic?).

One of those jacks has to be Karchev, so the list would be Karchev, wardog, 9 Devastators, 1 colossal. So roughly a 100 point list, but it would be virtually uncrackable.

-Rick

[OMM_Lukav]

They actually do, but DEF 9 (superiority) isn't impressive. Sidearms can get Conquest up to DEF 17-19 (I haven't done the arithmetic; I *think* you can do 19, but that's intuition, not crunched numbers) if you're willing to bring the points.

One thing that i have always been unclear of. If I have sidearms case on my battle group, and lets say in a cross formation with Karchev in the middle, obviously Karchev will be touch B2B with all other jacks for a +4 DEF.

Example:

A
BKC
D

Assume D is also touching B and C. Does D get +4 as well, even though he is obvious not directly touching A but is B2B with Karchev, C and B?

[PG_ThatRickGuy]

I don't have the cards handy, but IIRC it's +1 defence for every model from the battle group that a model from the battle group is in base to base with.

So if D is touching B, C, and Karchev, he would get +3.

Karchev touching A, B, C, and D, gets +4.

-Rick