Conquer Club

Strategy isn't particularly determined by the map, it depends what format you're playing.

escalating spoils is completely different to no spoils,

2 player is completely different to 8 player is completely different to team games e.t.c.

LOL My favourate map xD!!!! This one and feudal O_O

I've been experimenting with this map trying def. things etc. And one that I've found to be a dangerous yet quite effective is to try control Europe ASAP! With a little luck of how everybody places troops (on a 1v8) which isn't that bad, cause somebody always goes for oceana, somebody always goes for china area, a couple is always going for parts of Africa, which leaves 4 players to spread across north america/ south america and Europe... So if you're unlucky you'll have one player to contend with in Europe, and even if you do pull the short stick, you have options... Northern part of north america, eastern part of Asia, northern parts of Africa. from that you should at least be able to create a foot hold. In the event that you're lucky/skilled you can grab control of the whole of Europe in 2 rounds easy. Which Gives you an edge, strong early game to start from. where-as south-america, Asia, oceana normally isn't grabbed completely by somebody yet. After you have Europe, my suggestion is to keep expanding, don't sit in tight and build up, cause you have the advantage, don't rush though either. But don't push in for asia, cause you'll weaken yourself and leave many openings. neither Africa cause you'll have expanding south america to contend with and Asia, I.E. be in the middle of a massive fray. Expand into the northern parts of northern america. Securing bonuses and moving on, Like a slow moving avalanche unstoppable and impenetrable. Or course this all depends on very early dominance in Europe, which isn't always that easily achieved. Best type for this is with fog, Unlimited, Freestyle, automatic{ cause you can better discern where players will concentrate in relation to your own positions and whether it is even viable for the Europe tactic O_O} 4-8 players{ where-as 6 players seems to be the happy medium for the Europe tactic }

These are my thoughts on World 2.1, I would certainly enjoy hearing everybody else's opinion on this tactic? In light that it would help me and others xD. I have other tactics for this map as well, but this is the most profound one for me xD

Lol maybe the 2 rounds is a bit to little, but it has happened before.

I almost only play W2.1 and I have a 44% winning rate. Mostly in games with 4 or more players.
Depending on game settings the map can be played in many different ways.
But a few things are coming back over and over.

First of all, go with the flow of the game. Very seldom you have the power to take on everybody else as an enemy.
Try to figure out who will fight who about what and then go in and take over when both have exhausted their armies.

Use the chat. The pen is mightier than the sword. Used right you can win a game through the chat.

Initially try to get a small bonus, Scandinavia, Australia, Central America are all easy to take and hold if you have a few armies around it, since they only have 3 territories each. USA and The Horn are great too, and I also like La Plata, Amazon, China and Southern Africa as starter bonuses if you have a drop that lets you take them in 1-3 rounds. They are all pretty easy to hold and in many cases can develop to a bigger better bonus.

Make the Neutrals work for you. Don't attack a neutral unless you are "sure" to keep the bonus you gain from it. Remember that attacking a +3 neutral is like giving away 3 of your armies. Use the neutrals as walls and shields for your troops and bonuses as much as you can.

Don't leave too many 1's. Spread out your troops. Spot 2's. Many times players have one big army at every entrance to a continent they have and inside it is all 1's. This signals is many times that the player will attack the continent next to it, and therefore if you have the continent next to it you want to neutralize the threat. If you instead spread out your troops so you have some inside your continent, you divert some of the attention from you, plus that if someone attacks you they wont walk around like an uninterrupted cancer inside your continent. And in sensitive areas, if you leave 2 troops instead of 1, miracles happen and your enemies can get so bad dice they loose 10 to 2. This is the most important and interesting part of the game, how people place their armies. It is very much psychology.

If you play double, triple or quadruple, use msn/yahoo messenger/skype.

If you play manual placement and decide to put all your troops in one spot, make sure you put them so you have more than one way out. You might find the grass greener on the other side of the fence.

How do you break a build game? Everyone has 1000 plus troops?

Zivel wrote:How do you break a build game? Everyone has 1000 plus troops?

With diplomacy. Either suggest/demand that someone does something, get into an alliance (Remember that the one asking first for an alliance has the upper hand.) and agree on a truce until someone else is out (+1 regroup turn).

Or, finally, as it was in a tiering build game (I had over 10.000 troops) where we were 3 people left and it was obvious that the one first attacking would loose, we agreed on settling it with another game. Well, that was a bad option for me, got a bad start in the other game and lost both games because of the agreement.

Do not butt heads.

So does everyone think NA is the best option when holding Europe early in the game?

If you are in Europe or NA, you can't have a strong force in the other one, without a truce.


I have played numerous times on larger (6 player +) 2.1 and have never until recently tried to start in Russia in a regular or Terminator game...I recently tried it and it sucks.

Still 3-0 starting in Maghreb in large games though.

What if you got north america with not so big troops, somebody got south america with regular troop count, and there's an almost dead player in the middle of both? Would you kill it, or just let for the other one to do so? (no spoils|manual troops)

Rih0 wrote:What if you got north america with not so big troops, somebody got south america with regular troop count, and there's an almost dead player in the middle of both? Would you kill it, or just let for the other one to do so? (no spoils|manual troops)

lol man kill me
you already killed us both

World 2.1 is also my favorite, and id like to agree that Europe is the best place to start from on this map, but dont count Africa out. ive found that with either starting (south africa or anywhere in europe) that it is a fast way to get get a good foothold. my only suggestion from there is to take whichever you dont have. ie: if you get Europe, move south and if you get africa move north. if you can take both then you have a virtual fortress of roughly 5 entrances with a great troop supply that can move into all other continents easily. just be sure you also take middle east because having iran and moska is part of the "5 entrance" plan.

Hmmm.... For world 2.1, freestyle is the best. If not, the guy who goes last should win. for freestyle, wait for your opponent to attack. After he does, attack everything he previously attacked. It should be easy cuz he should spend a lot of troops attacking.

Start with a small region first. Don't try going out to conquer Asia or North America right away; go for La Plata, Horn of Africa, Australia. Smaller regions that still give a good bonus. Also don't try making North America a base. It can be attacked by too many regions. For example, a person in Oceania could assault you through Hawaii-Mexico; a European player through Greenland-Iceland; South American player through Central America; or a player based in Asia, who has two attacking points: Hawaii-Mexico and Sakha-Alaska.

In this map, I think that East Asia is probably the best option, followed by S America and N America.
Oceania has the problem of the Hawai territory, necessary for the full bonus, but stuck between America and Asia players. You can end easily wasting too many troops in the 3 North boarders.
Europe has the problem that almost all the bonus goes away if one territory is lost, usually Iberia. This makes the possibility of attacking Europe very attractive compared to other continents.
Africa is too chaotic to put secondary defences. If a line is broken, the player may easily end up in trouble defending his remaining bonuses.

Dunk90 wrote:World 2.1 is hard as hell to play!!!! Help!!!!!!!!!

1 thing I would like to point out, you have about 50-50 chance of winning playing using this map if you're the first to move. If you're playing 1vs1, never place more than 30 troops in single Territory, but rather spread it out evenly but have 1 place with about 20 troops where you want to conquer the whole continent. Don't be over ambitious and try to conquer the big continents but rather conquer the small ones first, like Australia or South America.

o my gosh lol

BaldAdonis wrote:The opposite is true: on smaller maps, you should get a bonus, even if it means killing neutrals. On larger maps, you shouldn't bother. That's just how the numbers work (taking 3 from your opponent reduces their deployment, but only until they have 11 territories, which happens a lot faster on a smaller map, so the territory gains aren't worth as much).

Your inexperience is showing when you claim World 2.1 games last a long time. With an evenly matched opponent, you might have a longer battle (in your case, where both of you attack neutrals and build up an army in one continent), but most of the time, the winner is determined in the first 4 rounds. Lets play some games and we'll see how well your theory works.

Its your inexperience that is showing here not his.

Your strategy is certainly generally the plan, but ignores most of the real strategy of the board which is absolutely to take bonuses, all while taking territories.

The key to the map and the reason it is better than most mid sized maps is that there is a much larger number of armies to work with, and it is that sheer number of armies, and the number of decisions you can make with them, that allows for a strategic advantage. Further, with two even players, with even dice, the game is hardly always decided on 4 rounds. It can go back and forth for 10 rounds, and Ive had them last 20, though that is rare.

The important thing to know about world is that every game actually is different. In general, you have to play aggressive, and territories are very important on 1v1, however, it is breaking bonuses that is important above all, and by strategically taking a bonus, even for one round, a player can swing the scale of the game. You just have to know which bonus at which time, and it changes on nearly every board. If you get great dice, it wont really matter, but if its even throughout the game, the fighting for the bonuses often is the game, and often the first person to hold one wins.

As far as playing some games and seeing how my theory works...well. we already did that. You lost of course.

My best advice after playing thousands and reading Adonis' advice, is to ignore his advice. Its based on guessing, not playing. He was making up strategy when he had played it a few games as well. Listen to the many players that actually frequent the map, and succeed at it, and there are a great many.

And AAFitz has the largest point gain of any player on that map so although I fancy myself a decent W2.1 player I would listen to him.

rockfist wrote:And AAFitz has the largest point gain of any player on that map so although I fancy myself a decent W2.1 player I would listen to him.

Well, I am experienced on the map and my win rates are pretty damn good. The point gain is really just a function of quantity though. I have however played nearly all settings on world, and some, hundreds or thousands. I believe it is the most fair map on CC simply because of its size, and straightforward play. The dice do still decide many, but with repeated perfect turns, with no mistakes whatsoever, and utilizing every army deployed and on the board to maximum usage, a better strategy will allow for a much higher win rate on 1v1 than nearly any other map, because it gives you time and opportunity to overcome going second, or some bad dice.

The biggest mistake most people make is not playing the whole map, or using every single army perfectly, either on offense or defense, and it is those mistakes that allow perfect play to succeed, sometimes so often as to surprise me, and often. Many who have not played it enough, discount or simply underestimate this fact, assuming its like any other map, but ignore the factor of size, and its increased proportion of armies dropped to impact on the game. On world 1v1, you drop 12 which is considerable, but can only typically knock your opponent down to 11 or 10, which is only one or 2 less than they dropped themselves, meaning one good roll, can even things up again after going first.

While on some maps, this is also true, if you drop 8, and knock your opponent down to 6, the amount the percentage of damage is much greater, meaning going first is a much greater advantage.

I personally think the perfect map would be very similar to World 2.1, but 3% larger, but with a handicap of 2 or 3 armies on the drop. This would much less of an advantage to going first. Still the dice would be a factor as it always will, but strategy will trump the dice far more often than not. Until then, World is the best map we have for a real fight, that isnt just a coin toss, most of the time.

I've really only played 2.1 on 8 person singles both terminator and regular, 8 person Doubles, Triples, or Quads.

8 Person Doubles on 2.1 with Flat Rate cards and fog is my favorite setting of any in CC - on that setting I think its all about reading the drop and the game log to predict what your opponents are going to do. The competition in 8 person Doubles is much stiffer than in 8 person singles IMO people just seem more aware and talkative than in 8 person singles, but its a similar skill set IMO. But these comments are based on only dozens of games not hundreds so if you have corrections or additional comments I would be interested to hear them.

1v1 would have nuances that would be different and I would anticipate not doing well against experts in that setting.

This map requires a couple of skills.
Skill #1- Know when to cut your losses. It doesn't help if you completely lose an attack, and have only one territories. Especially later in the game, when others will have lots of troops to deploy, they can take you out in a single sweep.
Skill #2- Diplomacy- If someone just has a random army in your way, convince them to move it. Tell them about how it benefits them to move it. Also making an alliance might be worthwhile. Just be careful on who you ally yourself with.
Skill #3- Keep a balance of power until you can destroy your opponets. Keeping a balance of power keeps one player from knocking everyone off the board, and it keeps you from being attacked by everyone else for being too powerful.
Skill #4- Never lose sight of your goal. That is to conquer the world. Do whatever necessary to achieve this.
This is for multiple players. I've never done 1v1 so I can't help there.

shadowguynick wrote:This map requires a couple of skills.
Skill #1- Know when to cut your losses. It doesn't help if you completely lose an attack, and have only one territories. Especially later in the game, when others will have lots of troops to deploy, they can take you out in a single sweep.
Skill #2- Diplomacy- If someone just has a random army in your way, convince them to move it. Tell them about how it benefits them to move it. Also making an alliance might be worthwhile. Just be careful on who you ally yourself with.
Skill #3- Keep a balance of power until you can destroy your opponets. Keeping a balance of power keeps one player from knocking everyone off the board, and it keeps you from being attacked by everyone else for being too powerful.
Skill #4- Never lose sight of your goal. That is to conquer the world. Do whatever necessary to achieve this.
This is for multiple players. I've never done 1v1 so I can't help there.

But you haven't played it.

Or maybe you learned it in three rounds lol.

If you are in a game with 4-6 players I would say go for Central America (Unless troop deployment is automatic and you aren't near there) and you have 3 options.
1.) Go for Aussie, which you should only do if no one else seems to be doing. But typically someone will.
2.) Go for South America. Again only do this if no one else is going for it. There's a good chance someone is though.
3.) Go for North America. And ONCE AGAIN only go for it if no one else is going for it.
An essential theory in this game I have found is that you should only attack where no one is defending. Especially since benefits you without angering others. If you don't get into any grueling wars you will have more troops to deter others from attacking you.

Gillipig wrote:

shadowguynick wrote:This map requires a couple of skills.
Skill #1- Know when to cut your losses. It doesn't help if you completely lose an attack, and have only one territories. Especially later in the game, when others will have lots of troops to deploy, they can take you out in a single sweep.
Skill #2- Diplomacy- If someone just has a random army in your way, convince them to move it. Tell them about how it benefits them to move it. Also making an alliance might be worthwhile. Just be careful on who you ally yourself with.
Skill #3- Keep a balance of power until you can destroy your opponets. Keeping a balance of power keeps one player from knocking everyone off the board, and it keeps you from being attacked by everyone else for being too powerful.
Skill #4- Never lose sight of your goal. That is to conquer the world. Do whatever necessary to achieve this.
This is for multiple players. I've never done 1v1 so I can't help there.

But you haven't played it.

Or maybe you learned it in three rounds lol.

Lol this actually should've been under general advice. I've enough risk over the years though so that's where i'm getting this from.