March Of The Tiny Men: Conquest

By Jim Rossignol on January 10th, 2011 at 9:00 am.


UPDATE: Proxy send of some multiplayer competitions – with prizes! – they are running for this. Check here and here for details.

Hey, you there! Yes, you. You look like you might enjoy a moderately challenging simultaneous turn-based strategy. If that’s true then you might get along with Conquest, which is such a game. It has hexes. And it has a demo. It’s fast and somewhat furious – the games can be over in just a few minutes and are extremely simple in terms of unity types and so forth – but it’s rather elegant, and all about balancing the speed with which you deploy forces against keeping your opponents from using the fog of war against you. Try it out! The multiplayer scene seems dead, but there’s offline AI fun times to be had, plus the tiny men make awesome battles-speak noises when you command them to do stuff.

Related, can anyone think of anything else that plays like this? It seems like a bit of an outlier to me. Video below!

, , .

20 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. Warth0g says:

    My initial reaction when seeing the screenshot was Yay! Possibly the turn-based, hex-using, accessible wargame with production values that I’ve been looking for. But Boo! It’s simultaneous, therefore frantically fast and will probably need me to memorise build orders and other things I have no interest in doing.. I’m old, dammit.. I need time to think….

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      No, it’s extremely simple.

    • Eagle0600 says:

      An excellent example of conclusion-jumping, I must say. And almost completely wrong.

      The game is… streamlined, to say the least, with only three units and NO build orders (build is automatic). You just tell them where to go and utilise certain powers to control the battlefield (once again, there’s only three, and they accrue automatically).

    • Premium User Badge

      TheTourist314 says:

      “No, it’s extremely simple.”

      Sounds like you got owned.

  2. iLag says:

    … and it’s 50% off at the moment!

  3. safetydank says:

    I’ve enjoyed a few hours of greed corp, not sure how similar it is to this but it has fast-paced hex strategy gameplay. And is great multiplayer.

  4. frags says:

    I personally think Greed Corp is better than this. The demo is pretty limited. I heard they’ve added all sorts of new good stuff in the full build.

    • SephiRok says:

      I guess it’s a matter of personal taste, but I tried Greed Corp with a friend and found it dramatically different. What bothered me the most was the slower pace; a slow tutorial, building, non-simultaneous, predefined maps. Apart from being turn-based it doesn’t really have that much in common, I think.

      When we were deciding about the demo limitations we had Defcon pretty heavily in mind, so if you’re familiar with that you can see it being pretty similar. I haven’t gotten much feedback on it, but I think it’s pretty solid. I still remember being able to enjoy Defcon for quite a while before having to purchase it.

    • Rich says:

      I don’t think I ever bought Defcon, I just played the demo. You could argue that it, therefore, failed in it’s primary function, i.e. getting me to part with money. Personally, I see it more like having a free casual game, which you can then spend money on to get a premium version for those who want to really get into it.

  5. SephiRok says:

    For anyone interested in multiplayer fun we’re running two contests.

    Especially worth mentioning is the tournament, which if enough people sign up for, will be awesome. We ran a similar tournament last year while still in beta and it was lots of fun. But the again, I’m a dev. If you need an additional incentive there’s 3 Star Ruler copies to be won just for participation and 3 for the first 3 places. Thanks to Blind Mind Studios. :)

  6. James Allen says:

    Greed Corp vs. Conquest.
    In short, Conquest has slightly more depth.

    • SephiRok says:

      Hey James, could you make a note that we have offline play now?

      Edit: Also, we now do show how units are eliminated.

      And if I’m allowed to comment on the selection part (the most brought up thing with new players): it’s mostly painful on laptops without mouses, in “competitive/proper” play, you don’t move more than 2 or 3 units into the same tile, making the whole box selection thing quite meh. Otherwise it would have been there from the start.

  7. mrjackspade says:

    Probably worth noting the demo let’s you play 1v1 with a friend without many limitations at all.

    Just gave it a go this morning after reading this and I have to say, it’s boatloads of fun! Think risk type game, but with deeper strategy.

  8. -Spooky- says:

    Demo looks fine for me – easy and simple. D&D or A&A miniatures will be fine in this style. :)

  9. kulik says:

    Its fun, when you play it for the first couple of times. But once you read trough the wiki, you will try to calculate every battle outcome and the fun part drifts away by sheer numbers of math you have to make. Maybe after like 100th game you learn the outcome of battle in which one tank two troopers and a bomber attacking three troopers and two tanks on plains and flanked by another trooper from the mountains but it defies the whole purpose of “being accessible”.
    I think that this game aims but totally fails to be kind of game which is easy to learn and hard to master. Did you strengthen your mountain tile by adding a tank unit to your trooper? There goes a bomber destroying both units, while if you’d leaved your trooper alone he would kill the bomber! …oops you fail at math. :P
    Lets take Battle of Wesnoth which is somehow similar, if you attack an unit you’ll get a probability chart of the possible outcome, its great you don’t have to compute the attack bonuses, terrain and resistance penalties etc and can focus on the bigger picture.
    Still, i will try to play it some more to get the hang of it, learn at least the basic battle outcomes and get quicker with counting the battle algorithm, but for now it isn’t much fun. :/

    • SephiRok says:

      Hey kulik, you don’t really have to do any math at all (I certainly don’t and I think I’m pretty competent at the game). You just need to get a feel for the basic RPS system (tanks roll over toopers, bombers over tanks, troopers in greater number shoot down bombers) and memorize a few of the most common combinations. Some are outlined at http://wiki.conquest-game.com/Battle_Guide but you don’t need to know that many, up to a power of 4 is enough in almost all matches.

    • kulik says:

      As i said, i will play it some more and see how it goes.

  10. Giaddon says:

    I’ve played a few games, and so far I really like it. I’ve never been very good/interested in the numbers behind strategy games (I’m more of a chess man) and I’ve been able to do alright at this by following the basic unit relationships. The random maps really change up what kind of game you’re going to get (really mountainous with concentrated cities? Flat with distant cities?) and the nukes and drop pods make sure no one team stays on top for long. A fun game for quick, tactical battles. The demo is a good representation of the game.

  11. liq3 says:

    Played about 10 games of this so far (about half vs humans, half vs AI). I really like it so far. There’s some real depth in this thing. Feels like the kind of game you can play for years and not master.