Talk:Strategic Conquest

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

CaseOh (streamer) (7 participants)
List of longest-running video game franchises (7 participants)
Atomas (1 participant)
PLAY: The Games Festival (3 participants)
FloodSim (3 participants)
Kunimitsu and Kunimitsu II (2 participants)
Blast Monkeys (2 participants)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (6 participants)
Free Internet Chess Server (9 participants)
Gilman Louie (3 participants; relisted)
Yoshimitsu (5 participants; relisted)
Emote (3 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Cleanup

I've done some cleanup, but it's going to need more. First, this page is about SC, not every vaguely SC-like game. This is not a free advertising medium - if your game is notable enough to be worth mentioning in WP, it's worth its own article; don't try to sneak it in here via external link. Second, we don't link to warez sites, in this case especially sleazy since Delta Tao is still selling the game. Thirdly, this page needs to stick to facts, not personal ideas about strategy. If a strategy is known to be good, quote Delta Tao or some other website. It's OK to suggest possible strategies by making obvious deductions from the rules ("capturing port cities prevents ship production"), but that's about it. Stan 16:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. The gameplay information in the article needs to be reduced considerably. An encyclopedic treatment should focus on historical fact, impact on society and so on with only as much information about gameplay as is needed to establish context. See e.g. Civilization (computer game). OliAtlason (talk) 20:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added Web-based Version to References

It is absolutely relevant to mention the evolution of this game, and where people might be able to find a modern day version. According to your logic, "Empire" shouldn't be mentioned either. If you do any research into this game, you will see that Strategic Domination IS a web-based version of Strategic Conquest. I have played Strategic Conquest since it first came out for the Mac. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Benar20 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Then make an article for it and connect to it that way. WP is not a link farm; see Wikipedia:External links for details. Stan 22:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History

I've added a History section. I believe this section is of considerable importance, as it is a very early game in the genre. For instance, it predates Civilization by more than 5 years. OliAtlason (talk) 19:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mainframe/Miniframe version: I recall playing this game circa 1981 on a Digital Equipment Corp (DEC) Vax terminal at Widener University in Pennsylvania. I don't recall whether the name was identical but the gameplay and units were the same as StratCon so I'm fairly certain this was the earlier version. Does anyone know of this version? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.219.193 (talk) 03:37, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@71.191.219.193: Strategic Conquest is very heavily based on Empire, which was included along with other DECUS programs on new DEC computers. Would be good to get sources which show how indebted SC is to this game. ‑‑Yodin^T 16:23, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Strategic Conquest. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:44, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Flip wikitable

@Maury Markowitz: This is the new markup that could be used. I do think it would be better. Please check carefully before replacing existing table! Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Item:	Days to Produce	Strength	Attack Range	Captures City?	Moves On	Moves/Turn	Fuel
Tank:	4	2	1	Yes	Land	2	N/A
Artillery:	4	1	4	Yes	Land	1	N/A
Fighter:	6	1	1	No	Any	20	20
Helicopter:	8	1	1	No	Any	10	10
Bomber:	25+	1	1+	No	Any	10	30
Transport:	8	3	1	No	Water	3	N/A
Destroyer:	8	3	1	No	Water	4	N/A
Submarine:	8	3	1	No	Water	3	N/A
Carrier:	10	12	1	No	Water	3	N/A
Battleship:	20	18	4	No	Water	3	N/A