Introduction

Like my occasional reviews tend to be, I am focusing on a game I enjoy which has little knowledge or coverage and one I’d like to draw people’s attention to. In this case, it’s a game that isn’t released, but is due shortly. This game is “Conquest and Consequence” (CnC), the Pacific Theatre sequel to Craig Besinque’s 2015 hit “Triumph and Tragedy” (TnT). 

I note that I am the developer on this game, but will temper this possible bias by noting that I make no money from my role and only aim that people have an enjoyable gaming experience. So, while the following preview is my honest opinion, it’s only fair you have this context in mind.

I will also say that CnC is step up in complexity from TnT. The principal reason is the additional rules required to cover the Chinese civil war. Much like its European counterpart, CnC covers 1936 onwards, as such China is already split between Mao’s communists and Chang’s Nationalists, Japan has already taken Korea and Manchuria. As such, if you didn’t enjoy TnT because it was too complex, CnC will not make it easier for you. I will say that the rules themselves follow on in the vein of Craig’s general philosophy of not being more complex than necessary. So, if you were comfortable with TnT, CnC should be but one small extra step for you.

Much like Craig’s philosophy in TnT which reimagined WW2 in Europe into a three-way struggle of Great Powers/Philosophies, CnC carries this into Asia with the Communist Soviets (comprised of Russian and Chinese communists), the militaristic Imperial Japan, and Capitalist West represented by the USA which comprises of the United States itself as the main faction and its ‘free market’ buddies in the form of Nationalist China and the European colonial powers. 

It’s worth noting that the Chinese sub-factions of the Nationalists and Communists can attack each-other and Japan without triggering a full-blown world war. This means combat aplenty from turn one …at least for those who lean that way.

From the outside in

Folks will notice the difference in art style of the box. Gone is the controversial Chamberlain. Instead, we have a colour photo of US Marines hitting the beach which is sandwiched between forest green bars. This is probably the biggest visual change in the game as the unit and map illustrations have been kept similar to ‘TnT’. Not only is this for ease of use during play, but continuity is a key goal of Craig’s in order to join TnT and CnC into a six-player global game. 

As an aside, I will note that the development of the global game was stalled due to a variety of factors, of which a key one is the ongoing global pandemic. The global game is still a goal, but rather that hold up a perfectly well-formed game, Craig and GMT decided to release CnC with this part omitted for further development and later release. I will also say, that we are needing play testers for this. So, keep your eyes peeled for a call for volunteers in other threads.

Now, back to the components:

Overall, the component quality is that of the 2nd printing of TnT. So, for those who can remember the small chits and light card stock map of 1st edition TnT …don’t worry. We’re up to the 5/8″ chunky chits and a mounted map.

On the map you will note a double thick black border running down the east and west edges of the CnC map. These lines show the cross over to the TnT map otherwise, those familiar with TnT will see much of the color scheme for darker home territories versus colonies for the main factions and more muted tones for neutrals. Key areas of the map with some additional rules (overview below) are China and the Pacific Islands and atolls. 

Blocks are still representing combat units, much as in TnT, they are GMT’s 5/8” blocks with the simplified ‘Nato’ symbols for ground units and silhouettes for sea and air units. Additionally, the Soviet player will also have Partisans in China. I will cover Partisans and the other China specific rules later.

Cards are likewise familiar, but with the many regions of warlord China using the Wade-Giles naming convention for Chinese regions, the first few plays may see you scratching you head as you acquaint yourself with the geography of the orient through the now defunct naming convention. There is yet another sub-system of ‘Soviet tech’, which allows the Soviet player to invest in upskilling their Partisans in China as the game goes on. 

Game Play

Again, much of this is familiar to TnT players. A three-player game of diplomacy and combat starting in 1936 and running for 10 years. What we now call “WW2” has yet to occur, but the powder keg of issues that became the global conflict is there and staring the three players in the face. The additional focus, pretty much central to the board is China. An often-overlooked part of WW2, as its history is interwoven within its own civil war. 

The Capitalist and Soviet player will need to juggle their competing claims to being the true authority in China …all-the-while having to manage the looming threat of a belligerent Japan. Who may (or may not) decide that they are the pre-eminent Asian power and express themselves through the medium of martial prowess… with all the subtly of a 1980’s steroid fuelled action movie. 

Within this civil war we see the most asymmetric faction yet. The ‘Soviets’. The term ‘Soviets’ in this instance is the umbrella term for the combined Russian Communists under direct control from Moscow and their younger sibling in China. The Chinese Communists start with a single region. Sian (today known as Xian, yes, home to the terracotta warriors), where they have set-up camp after their falling out with the Nationalists. They start as a very sorry bunch. However, with sponsorship from their Russian cousins and their ability to spread a new type of hybrid unit/political influence in the form of Partisans with maybe a few buffs in their tech tree, they can become a persistent, irremovable and quite likely winning faction in the war for China.  

As in TnT, the early game sees most of the diplomacy where everyone is looking to exert themselves without pulling the trigger. The neutral regions of warlord China begin to align themselves and even the remote colonial powers soften, or harden their stance towards an increasingly bellicose Imperial Japan. 

All this pretext sets us up for a ‘Pearl Harbour moment’. Sure, Japan is likely to try and give the US Navy and its buddies a bloody nose and buy some time, but if the USA knows this then they’ll likely not park all their units in Hawaii… but isn’t that just what Japan would want!?! And let’s not forget that the strike on Pearl Harbour was in fact synchronised (within the time frames of CnC) with the alliance/annexation of Thailand, and the invasion of British Malaya, Hong Kong and the Philippines. 

Just like TnT, upon formal commencement of hostilities… Pacific-wide, then it’s all hands to the pump… for everyone, where your next steps as well as previous decisions will decide ‘top dog’ in the post war Asia/Pacific. 

Sure, the USA may have plenty of shiny ships and airplanes, but without their British, Indian, Chinese, Canadian, Australian and Kiwi buddies will they have boots on the ground in the right locations to roll back Imperial Japan? Could they have supported the Nationalist Chinese better… or did they throw too many dollars at Chang’s inefficient war for China?

Did Moscow plough enough resources into supporting their red buddies in the face of the Japanese or Nationalists? Did they have to weather an alternate history Northwards push by the Japanese? Did they suffer a second ‘Port Arthur’?

Did Japan push hard enough, or too hard in any of its available directions and the adversaries and rivals they find there? Did they follow a historical ‘southern’ strategy or head north fully honouring their ‘Pact or Iron’ with the European Axis, or lean even more heavily into their ancient rival in China?

Conclusion

CnC is another expression of Craig’s creative outlook on WW2. It’s a metric smidge more complex than its precursor, TnT. However, with the additional rules burden to cover the Chinese civil war, comes additional options and fun. The partisan war in China is a worthy addition to the ruleset. Not only does it add another dimension to the well-worn western narrative of WW2, but the inclusion of the Chinese civil war gives the Soviet player a fledgling Communist Party of China the staying power of a particularity persistent fungus.

Early games will likely see Imperial Japan smash into all and sundry, making fantastic early progress only to be crushed by the combined power of the other two factions. But as with Craig’s earlier TnT, the meta-game and the balance between the players will likely see folks realizing that Japan is not necessarily the greatest threat… but isn’t that what the Emperor wanted all along!?!  

As always Craig likes to force you to interact in this historical sand box where you evolve and manipulate the meta-game with your mates. Is the enemy of your enemy your friend? …or have you just made an epic blunder and helped a rival?

Post script

A serviceable two player option is available which effectively removes the Communist Russians but combines the Communist Chinese with the Chinese Nationalists to be a thorn in Japan’s side. Obviously much of the diplomacy aspect is lost without the third player, but if a USA versus Japan slug fest is what you’re after. 

We will also be asking for volunteers to play test the ‘Global Game’. This will mainly be via ‘Tabletop Simulator’ but I believe a VASSAL module will soon be available too. Keep your eyes peeled on BGG and GMT websites. 

Enjoy! 🙂

---