From: minnotte@stat.rice.edu (Michael Minnotte)
Subject: Re: Conquest - Anyone know this one?
Organization: Dept. of Statistics, Rice University
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:17:23 GMT

In article <5219@news.duke.edu> cjs@phy.duke.edu (Carl Schnurr) writes:
>I was in a bookstore the other day and saw a boardgame I'd never
>seen before.  It was called "Conquest" (if I'm remembering right).
>It looked like a two-player wargame set in vaguely roman times,
>with a nice map and plastic playing pieces representing infantry,
>elephants, horses and boats.  The back of the box made a big deal 
>out of the fact that the pieces could "stack", i.e. the plastic
>pieces were designed so that units can actually sit inside the boat,
>on the horse, etc.  It wasn't by any game company I'd ever heard of
>before.  
>
>My question is, has anyone heard of/seen/played this game?  

I've got the four-player version, so I'll try to describe that.
It's been a while since I've played it, so my details may be a 
little fuzzy.

Each player has a large number of pieces (soldiers, chariots, elephants,
ships, galleons, and knights), each of which has a certain movement 
allowance (like soldiers 2, chariots 8, elephants 6, and so on, my numbers 
may be off).  In addition, a soldier can move onto a chariot, elephant, ship, 
or galleon, and a chariot or elephant may move onto a ship or galleon, and be 
carried by the other piece's movement.  So a soldier might move 2 spaces onto 
an elephant, which then might move 6 spaces onto a galleon, which could then 
move 8 spaces, effectively moving the soldier 16 spaces.

Each player has 5 home spaces.  In addition, there are 5 special spaces in the 
center of the board.   Occupying these spaces is key to the game, because they
determine how much movement each player gets.  Each player may move his pieces
(up to their individual limits) up to a total of 20 spaces per turn.  But each
of his home spaces occupied by an enemy piece(s) reduces that movement by 4.  
And each occupied center space reduces by 4 the movement of _every_ player but
the occupier.  The object is to be the last player both with pieces and able to
move.  (Actually, I have dim recollections of wierd results if a player is 
eliminated, so that may not be a valid option.)

Conquest was interesting, but not so much so that I went to great lengths
to try to get others to play it, so I've only tried it once or twice.  One
drawback is that the number of players is pretty much fixed; a three player 
game would be impossible with the set, and 2 (with the 4 person set) would 
be difficult (if not impossible).  It's also definitely closer to an abstract 
game like chess than a true simulation-type game (which may be good, bad,or 
indifferent, depending on your preferences).

I don't know how exactly the two player version differs, other than having a 
different board and only two armies.  The center spaces may change effect.
It's hard to find these days (and the company may be out of business), so if
you're at all interested, I'd pick it up.  It did make the GAMES magazine
GAMES 100 list 8 or 10 years ago (which was why I was interested 2 years ago).

Hope this helps; if you get it, post and let us know what the two-player 
version is like, and what you think of it.

Mike Minnotte



Newsgroups: rec.games.board