61–70 of 242 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes there are better games than Risk. That holds for practically all old games. For example, I don’t consider chess a good game. With good players, it usually ends in a draw which is unsatisfying.
Chess no longer allows draws, and the rules have been updated earlier this year. https://www.chess.com/news/view/breaking-official-rules-of-c...
In our gaming group, we decided Risk just isn't that good of a game. It's old and clunky and extremely long, there are 100 other better board games now. Our main plays have been Dominion, DnD, Gloomhaven, Wingspan, and Crokinole, all of which we greatly prefer.
What does "old" matter to whether a game is good or not? And regardless, are you sure you're not expressing ubiquitous consumerism or ageism? ~50 BP - Othello ~50 BP - DnD ~60 BP - Risk ~60 BP - Diplomacy ~70 BP - Stratego ~100 BP - Contract bridge ~200 BP - Mahjong ~200 BP - Double twelve dominoes ~600 BP - Playing cards ~1300 BP - Chess ~2500 BP - 围棋 (Go) ~5000 BP - Checkers / draughts ~5000 BP - Backgammon
I admit I was kind of the same way at first, plowing through hundreds of modern games and mostly ignoring older games, but if you take another look at the classics there's some real gems there. A few other excellent games you don't mention are Shogi (500 BP), Cribbage (420 BP), Fanorona (340 BP), Crokinole (150 BP), and Acquire (60 BP).
Although IMO, Double 6 dominoes is where it's at, not double 12. "All Fives" Dominoes and Partnership Dominoes are highly underrated amongst modern gamers, imo.
The first part of the article can be summarized as: 1. Initiate as few attacks as possible 2. Let your enemies break up each other’s continents; 3. Take only one country per turn The problem is that it doesn't explain which country to take, and how to attack without being attacked -- which is what makes the game difficult. But, then, the article suggests something new (at least for me): 1. Find a way to grow in stren…
Then there's my personal favorite once you know you can't win: "Turtle up" in Australia to drag the end game out for no reason other than spite.
The first part of the article can be summarized as: 1. Initiate as few attacks as possible 2. Let your enemies break up each other’s continents; 3. Take only one country per turn The problem is that it doesn't explain which country to take, and how to attack without being attacked -- which is what makes the game difficult. But, then, the article suggests something new (at least for me): 1. Find a way to grow in stren…
Its not a great strategy, because it doesn't work. If you are taking only one country a turn and keeping only a small connected corr of reinforced countries with the rest weak, then anyone playing a “grab lots of countries quickly" strategy is going to steamroller your weakly defended territory, and if you are only taking one country per turn, you’ll never recover from that.
A thick shell/thin-core strategy can work (especially if it is “talr Australia, then expand a bubble out in Asia), and otherwise looks a lot like the strategy this recommends, but you just have to accept that if a strategy can work, people are likely to recognize it; you can't reliably avoid balancing feedback unless you are playing against inexperienced players or naive AI.
(Also, contrary to the article, IME while Australia is frequently taken early on, its also a major balancing feedback trigger.)
In our gaming group, we decided Risk just isn't that good of a game. It's old and clunky and extremely long, there are 100 other better board games now. Our main plays have been Dominion, DnD, Gloomhaven, Wingspan, and Crokinole, all of which we greatly prefer.
What does "old" matter to whether a game is good or not? And regardless, are you sure you're not expressing ubiquitous consumerism or ageism? ~50 BP - Othello ~50 BP - DnD ~60 BP - Risk ~60 BP - Diplomacy ~70 BP - Stratego ~100 BP - Contract bridge ~200 BP - Mahjong ~200 BP - Double twelve dominoes ~600 BP - Playing cards ~1300 BP - Chess ~2500 BP - 围棋 (Go) ~5000 BP - Checkers / draughts ~5000 BP - Backgammon
In our gaming group, we decided Risk just isn't that good of a game. It's old and clunky and extremely long, there are 100 other better board games now. Our main plays have been Dominion, DnD, Gloomhaven, Wingspan, and Crokinole, all of which we greatly prefer.
What does "old" matter to whether a game is good or not? And regardless, are you sure you're not expressing ubiquitous consumerism or ageism? ~50 BP - Othello ~50 BP - DnD ~60 BP - Risk ~60 BP - Diplomacy ~70 BP - Stratego ~100 BP - Contract bridge ~200 BP - Mahjong ~200 BP - Double twelve dominoes ~600 BP - Playing cards ~1300 BP - Chess ~2500 BP - 围棋 (Go) ~5000 BP - Checkers / draughts ~5000 BP - Backgammon
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does "old" matter to whether a game is good or not? And regardless, are you sure you're not expressing ubiquitous consumerism or ageism? ~50 BP - Othello ~50 BP - DnD ~60 BP - Risk ~60 BP - Diplomacy ~70 BP - Stratego ~100 BP - Contract bridge ~200 BP - Mahjong ~200 BP - Double twelve dominoes ~600 BP - Playing cards ~1300 BP - Chess ~2500 BP - 围棋 (Go) ~5000 BP - Checkers / draughts ~5000 BP - Backgammon
What is "BP"? I tried searching the Inernet but couldn't find it.