Win at Risk by using systems thinking

Post by jvanderbot » Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 10:13 PM UTC

jvanderbot wrote: post #49

Dumblydorr wrote: post #17

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.

To be fair, we're in a golden age of table top games. I really love Dominion and Inn Fighting. If you can find a copy of Inn Fighting, you'll learn to love its shortcomings because of its rapid pace, dynamic battles, and comic theme.

Post by drited » Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 10:34 PM UTC

hpoe wrote: post #98

callamdelaney wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience players are happy to unite against me. Usually I take Australia and move into Asia when I’ve amassed enough forces. Then my strategy moves to holding asia at 3 points, while I disrupt the continental bonuses of my opponents between turns. Africa, Europe and North America can be disrupted from this position.

So take it from a young man who spent way too much of one summer playing Risk on the computer, you don't want to take Australia, the problem with Australia is that there is no good way to go from Aussie to anywhere else because the only thing next to you is Asia so someone else can solidify gains somewhere else, and Aussie only gives you 2 more reinforcements, not enough to get you a decisive enough edge to move out…

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 10:45 PM UTC

0xRCA wrote: post #130

the_lonely_road wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might just be a friend group thing but I will also add on that very few games of risk I ever played didn’t involve some level of ‘meta’ strategy like a husband/wife not attacking each other or that guy that doesn’t like you refusing an obviously mutually beneficial alliance.

I hate hate HATE that behavior. Games are games. Obviously you can be unnecessarily rude or cruel in a way that will sour someone's taste for playing with you or playing the game again. But the point of games is to win. When people refuse to act in their best interest or are "nice" its so frustrating because it makes the entire game pointless. edit: In a way, it feels like people who wave you on when they have the ri…

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 11:05 PM UTC

drited wrote: post #142

alex_anglin wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience is that capturing and holding smaller continents early on is best. Capturing and keeping North America, Europe or Asia early on tends not to work well when I play.

Agreed! There's often a little jostle during the starting land grab to get Australia: easy to defend and those extra reinforcements really matter in the early game.

Post by pessimizer » Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 11:20 PM UTC

gowld wrote: post #161

j1elo wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Risk Legacy (2011) is ranked in position 368. So if that list is of any use, then this variation of the classic Risk must be immensely better! To be honest I'm curious. The description of the game seems to imply that the game itself changes every time you play it, because some of the cards used should then be destroyed and thrown away from the game box, never to be used again. That, and the game concept covers comple…

Do people actual follow those Legacy game rules that try to trick you into destroying the game?