Don't overreact. Many variants see the light of day and are just re-inventing old ones, I have plenty of examples of 4-player chess, circular chess, hexagonal chess, 3-player chess, decimal chess with 3:1 hoppers (camels), etc. which already existed.
In the case of Conquer, I do not know another variant which is exactly identical. So, yes it may have its raison d'être. I just said that Conquer is only slightly different than several other variants where "The goal of the game is to conquer the opponent's army and to add it to your own army", your motto. Are you aware of them? If yes, you could have mentioned them. If no, now you know, Pritchard's book is available online.
Don't overreact. Many variants see the light of day and are just re-inventing old ones, I have plenty of examples of 4-player chess, circular chess, hexagonal chess, 3-player chess, decimal chess with 3:1 hoppers (camels), etc. which already existed.
In the case of Conquer, I do not know another variant which is exactly identical. So, yes it may have its raison d'être. I just said that Conquer is only slightly different than several other variants where "The goal of the game is to conquer the opponent's army and to add it to your own army", your motto. Are you aware of them? If yes, you could have mentioned them. If no, now you know, Pritchard's book is available online.