"Conquest of the Empire first play... we should have known." Topic

So two of my gaming buddies and I got together last night to try out Conquest of the Empire, the OOP game from defunct Eagle Games, which is a reprint and update of the original game from Milton Bradley in the '80s. (I was lucky to find an original, unopened copy on Amazon at a reduced price just after Christmas.) My son and another boy saw the board and decided to abandon Guitar Hero World Tour in favor of world conquest— so there's hope for the younger generation.

Being newbies to this game, we chose the simpler "Classic" rules and proceeded to divvy up the empire.

If you're not familiar with this game, the basic premise is that each player is a contesting Caesar, out to claim the empire as his own. The board (which is gorgeous and frickin' huge) depicts the extent of the Roman Empire, from Britannia to the Middle East, divided into "provinces," each with a suitably ancient name and a tribute value of either 5 talents or 10 talents. A player begins with control of one 10 talent province, a fortified city on that province (worth 5 more talents in tribute), a Caesar, four Generals, and 5 Infantry (Roman legionnaires with pila). Over the course of the game, you use your Legions to conquer provinces, collect tribute and then purchase more forces, which include Infantry, Cavalry, Catapults!, Galleys (which can carry your Legions across the sea), Cities and Fortifications, and Roads. You win the game by capturing your opponents' Caesars. (This technically means you don't actually have to conquer a lot of territories to win… but good luck with that strategy!)

We chose our starting provinces based just on where around the table we happened to be sitting. The closest potential starting province became the player's home province— no forethought went into it. My son's starting province was Macedonia.

My son's name is Alexander.

Yes, we saw it coming.

Alexander promptly moved across the Bosporus (of course) and built a fortified city. At the same time, he invaded Rome, driving the other boy who held it into the sea. Foolishly, we adults ignored them and went after each other. With virtually no armies left, the other boy tried a brilliant (but risky) gambit and sent his Caesar and largest legion into Rome to capture Alexander's Caesar. It backfired, and Alexander was the first to claim a captured Caesar. As the other boy didn't want to stop playing, they teamed up (since Alexander now had control of the defeated legions anyway). The other boy became Alexander's all too able general.

At this point my friends and I could collect tribute of about 50-60 talents each on our turns. Caesar Alexander Magnificus could collect 145 talents… an amount which triggered unit price inflation in the game, doubling the cost of reinforcements. He spent willy-nilly, buying cavalry and catapults. The others of us were lucky to afford enough infantry just to hope to slow him down.

The dice gods, however, looked favorably on the Son of Macedonia. Within two turns, it was up. Alexander (and his able general) overwhelmed the only remaining Caesar capable of putting up a fight, leaving Caesar Alexander in control of the Empire from Galatia to Britannia, including Hispania and most of Northern Africa. The other two hapless Caesars held Armenia, Palestine and Egypt… and that's about it. Rather than be executed, we yielded the field and lit out for barbarian parts unknown.

Hail, Caesar Alexander Magnificus!

Moral of the story: Never let a kid named Alexander have control of Macedonia. I swear, next time he has to start in Spain!

Sounds like a fun time. I'm glad the other boy didn't get booted from the game so early.

You've got to keep an eye on the younger set. They're dangerous!

I thought it might be hard to get our group to veer away from Risk variants, but I gave 'em a list of what I had, and CotE won out. I think we'll be trying it again, now that we know what we're doing. (He said…)

Wasn't there a problem with catapults being too powerful under the original rules?

I've heard that. But these rules supposedly have taken care of that.

They have two advantages:
1.) They can attack from the reserve, meaning they can damage the enemy without taking damage as long as your "battle line" is filled. (Hard to explain, but simpler than it sounds). Other units in reserve can't attack.

2.) They reduce the ability of fortified cities to defend against attacks (from 2 dice to 1 die).

That's it. There's only one chance on any die that a catapult will hit, they're the most expensive unit aside from fortified cities (which can't move), and you have a limited number available to your forces. Unless you capture another Caesar you can't field more than a handful at a time, if you can even afford them.

But the little plastic arms actually move!

Never roll dice against children.

I dug out my MB copy and played a game with my two sons (14, 8). I did not see any issues with Cataputs, expensive and you need multiple to overcome defending forces and cities.

And you're right, Kids roll sixes like fiends

I wonder how combat differs?

In the new "classic" version, combat occurs when a legion (a group of Infantry and/or cavalry and/or catapults) enters an enemy territory, accompanied by one or more generals and/or a caesar. Both sides are then formed into "battle lines" of 1-5 units, plus 1 additional unit for each general or caesar per side. The maximum possible number of units must be included in the battle line (generals and caesars are not part of the battle line). So if a force has 6 troop units or less and one general it *must* field all of its units in the line. If it has 7 or more with one general, only 6 are in the line and the others are in reserve. Units in the line can be lost to combat; units in reserve cannot (unless the join the battle to replace losses), but only catapults in reserve can attack with the line.

The dice are marked with 2 infantry faces, 1 cavalry, 1 catapult, 1 galley and 1 blank face. Dice are rolled equal to the units participating in the battle. If any faces rolled match units participating (e.g., if Red rolls 2 infantry and a catapult and has two Red infantry and a catapult in his line), then the enemy will lose three line units of the enemy's choosing. Combat is simultaneous.

Fortified cities give the defender two extra combat dice regardless of the number of units in the line (but you can't roll more hits than you have units participating; e.g. 3 Infantry will only cause 3 hits, even if you roll 5 infantry faces). An attacking catapult reduces this defense advantage by one die.

Combat continues until one side retreats or loses all its battle units (not generals or caesar). Retreating triggers a free attack, but only cavalry hits count.

That's it in a nutshell. Any outstanding differences?

Ah, many a game I have come up the middle as my two friends (Christian Rob and Pagan Rob) slugged it out over gaming slights that go back to 1981 because they were the experienced gamers and I was the newcomer.

It took years for them to figure this dynamic out--eventually I started shouting "I win" each time they would engage in combat with one another.

You played your son at a wargame?

That's up there with Marching on Moscow and starting a land war in South East Asia.

The combat system sounds totally different than the old MB version. In that version there was no reserve, and catapults reduced the die roll needed to hit. You used six sided dice (no special dice).

Parz, my sons name is also Alexander and I have a pretty poor record of playing him at Risk. Xander has an uncanny knack of rolling 6's…oh that and being very good at the game.