Strategic Conquest
1984 video game
Strategic Conquest is a turn-based strategy game based on the wargame Empire. It was written by Peter Merrill for the Apple Macintosh and released in 1984 by PBI Software, and later ported to the Apple II in 1986. Delta Tao Software took over distribution for later Classic Mac OS releases. It is sometimes shortened to Stratcon.
Like Empire, the player's objective in Strategic Conquest is to defeat the enemy and conquer the world. The world is divided into islands that contain cities that can be captured to produce military units. Victory is achieved when all enemy cities have been conquered or when either player surrenders. It differed from Empire in a number of details, most notably its system for creating the game map. It can be played against the computer, or by two human players taking turns on one machine or two machines connected over an AppleTalk network.
Though the game has not been updated since 1998, it is fully compatible with Macintosh System Software from 6 to 9, and is also playable under the Classic environment included with PowerPC versions of Mac OS X up to Mac OS X v10.4.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Strategic Conquest” is 1984 video game. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Strategic, Conquest and video, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “1984 video game” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Nov 18, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q2353743. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1984, 1986 and 1998.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Strategic Conquest”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Strategic Conquest primary sources, Strategic Conquest archive and Strategic research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Strategic Conquest”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Strategic Conquest” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.