Conquer Club

Liking Nuclear Spoils as an option, but one concern (apologies if it has already been raised/answered but after a -very- brief scan I couldn't see anything):

What happens when all remaining non-neutral territories are nuked? Who wins? This could potentially happen in a WWII Poland game as detailed below (maybe others but haven't thought about it).

• Player 1 confines player 2 to one remaining region - a plane.
• Player 2 bombards all of player 1's tanks after nuking both player 1's generals as well as the PAF. This may leave player 1 with 1 plane.
• This is a problem in itself, as now neither player can attack anything and must keep building up spoils, waiting for the opponent's plane to pop up as one of them.
• Now, player 1 is forced to cash a set which includes BOTH non-neutral planes.
• Both players are eliminated at exactly the same time... now what happens??

I appreciate this would happen once in a million, but it is possible (I'm almost tempted to get someone to play a few games with me so we can see if we can create the scenario - just to see what happens!!)

My first thought is that it would act in order the spoils are cashed. So if player 1s spoil is before player 2s spoil in the list, player one would be out first and player 2 would win.

If that's the case, it's sufficiently random that in the long run it will act AS a tie.

The cards are played in order as you submit them, I'm told that there would be a winner in that case. I'm in a game which will come down to a cards lottery eventually I think.

In WWII Poland you still can bombard from territories you can't attack from, and so it is just waiting for the right cards to pop up. There is a possibility that each player gets hold of his own territory card, but even then the game will end someday, since 1 of the players will eventually be forced to cash that card and eliminate himself.

There are however also maps with territories that are completely isolated, they can't bombard and attack:
Battle For Iraq! (24 territories: 12 US Army + 12 Baathist)
WWII Ardennes (101 Parachute Division)
San Francisco (Alcatraz)

For WWII Ardennes and San Francisco there is no problem, since only 1 player can get trapped. In Battle For Iraq! however more players can get trapped with Nuclear Spoils, when player 1 traps player 2 in a US/Baathist first and then in the next turn player 2 cashes a set nuking all non-islolated territories of player 1. Then both players are trapped and cannot get any cards any more, so the game is not going to finish ever unless 1 of the players deadbeats.

This could never reasonably happen on Iraq. Because all of the territories are occupied at the beginning of the game. If 1 play is isolated to US or baathist then the other player controls the rest of the map more or less. Cashing a set will not eliminate them to these areas

Chuuuuck wrote:This could never reasonably happen on Iraq. Because all of the territories are occupied at the beginning of the game. If 1 play is isolated to US or baathist then the other player controls the rest of the map more or less. Cashing a set will not eliminate them to these areas

How about if it's 3 player, 1 player controls the map and has the other 2 isolated... and then deadbeats? I've not played this map so tell me if that's wrong?

Thanks for responses so far! Clears up the question about who wins if both players are eliminated

I think it's as Forza said it's stalemate. One player would have to deadbeat. Pretty unlikely tho..

I presume this could theoretically happen in Waterloo all ready.

nippersean wrote:I think it's as Forza said it's stalemate. One player would have to deadbeat. Pretty unlikely tho..

I presume this could theoretically happen in Waterloo all ready.

Waterloo has no completely isolated territories. You can always at least bombard. So in Nuclear Spoils games there will in the end always be a winner.
In other spoils games it can happen after a player deadbeats that all other players are stuck in a territory that can only bombard.

Forza AZ wrote:In WWII Poland you still can bombard from territories you can't attack from, and so it is just waiting for the right cards to pop up. There is a possibility that each player gets hold of his own territory card, but even then the game will end someday, since 1 of the players will eventually be forced to cash that card and eliminate himself.

If a player were to draw his own card in that situation at 3 or 4 cards, I would assume he wouldn't attack/bombard to get to 5 cards and risk eliminating himself. As I understand it, each "card" only exists once, so the other player could therefore never draw his opponent's territory and eliminate him.

If that were to happen to both parties, they would be stuck in a position where neither could attack for fear of eliminating themselves.

As for the Battle for Iraq! discussion, my (limited) experience with nuclear spoils is that they tend to work like No Spoils games (which is practically what they are) except that your total neutral territories keeps increasing. Bearing that in mind, I can feasibly see it happening where 2 players are entirely confined to a non-attack territory and are thus in a truly stalemated game. While it is a very low possibility, it certainly is a possibility. As far as I'm aware, this is the only map where 2 or more players could be trapped as such.

Pander88uk wrote:

Chuuuuck wrote:This could never reasonably happen on Iraq. Because all of the territories are occupied at the beginning of the game. If 1 play is isolated to US or baathist then the other player controls the rest of the map more or less. Cashing a set will not eliminate them to these areas

How about if it's 3 player, 1 player controls the map and has the other 2 isolated... and then deadbeats? I've not played this map so tell me if that's wrong?

Thanks for responses so far! Clears up the question about who wins if both players are eliminated

Yes, it could happen if that was the case. But it's important to point out that same thing could happen without nuclear spoils. 1 player isolates the other 2 then deadbeats. This is really a nonissue because a player wouldn't really ever do that. If he is good enough to get that lead I would think in 3 days he will show up for his turn.

Forza AZ wrote:

nippersean wrote:I think it's as Forza said it's stalemate. One player would have to deadbeat. Pretty unlikely tho..

I presume this could theoretically happen in Waterloo all ready.

Waterloo has no completely isolated territories. You can always at least bombard. So in Nuclear Spoils games there will in the end always be a winner.
In other spoils games it can happen after a player deadbeats that all other players are stuck in a territory that can only bombard.

what about no spoils (in waterloo) stalemate is possible?

denominator wrote:

Forza AZ wrote:In WWII Poland you still can bombard from territories you can't attack from, and so it is just waiting for the right cards to pop up. There is a possibility that each player gets hold of his own territory card, but even then the game will end someday, since 1 of the players will eventually be forced to cash that card and eliminate himself.

If a player were to draw his own card in that situation at 3 or 4 cards, I would assume he wouldn't attack/bombard to get to 5 cards and risk eliminating himself. As I understand it, each "card" only exists once, so the other player could therefore never draw his opponent's territory and eliminate him.

If that were to happen to both parties, they would be stuck in a position where neither could attack for fear of eliminating themselves.

As for the Battle for Iraq! discussion, my (limited) experience with nuclear spoils is that they tend to work like No Spoils games (which is practically what they are) except that your total neutral territories keeps increasing. Bearing that in mind, I can feasibly see it happening where 2 players are entirely confined to a non-attack territory and are thus in a truly stalemated game. While it is a very low possibility, it certainly is a possibility. As far as I'm aware, this is the only map where 2 or more players could be trapped as such.

Just theoretical nonsense I know in this thread.
But for info Denom each card doesn't exist only once. There's been a few questions on this and I know you there are dupe cards
but saw in another thread you can only get the same card twice if you inherit one by eliminating another player

nippersean wrote:Just theoretical nonsense I know in this thread.
But for info Denom each card doesn't exist only once. There's been a few questions on this and I know you there are dupe cards
but saw in another thread you can only get the same card twice if you inherit one by eliminating another player

That's only possible in maps with 39 or less territories playing with 7-8 players and in battle royale games where there are more taken cards than territories.

fumandomuerte wrote:

nippersean wrote:Just theoretical nonsense I know in this thread.
But for info Denom each card doesn't exist only once. There's been a few questions on this and I know you there are dupe cards
but saw in another thread you can only get the same card twice if you inherit one by eliminating another player

That's only possible in maps with 39 or less territories playing with 7-8 players and in battle royale games where there are more taken cards than territories.

So you're saying dupe cards only come around when all the others have been used?(Like using a second deck when the first one runs out)

Is this for definite?


Cheers, Nip

No, you get the same card you just cashed in at the end of your turn. It randomly selects from all territories not owned currently in the cards. Presumably in small maps if one of each has gone it'd be based on the ones owned the fewest.

What if there is a game where two people are left, each only having one territory. Player A has 5 cards and has to cash, nuke cards take both Player A and Player B out.

Then it's done (the nuking) in the order of the cards.
I believe the first you receive that gets played nukes first and the other player wins