231–240 of 242 posts
I always beat my sister at Risk as a kid. Then she was on a bus trip that waited out an epic snowstorm, three days holed up in a church. A Risk board was the only amusement, and the winner got to play again. She never left the board. "Start in Australia" is all I remember of my strategy. It's a great metaphor for so many problems. Certainly, for HN, as a startup strategy. What's the "Australia" for your imagined mark…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
You must be fun at parties. Games never exist in a vacuum of their own mechanics. That's what makes them interesting. Learn the meta of your opponents, not just the game's if you're focused on winning.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site to heart, we'd be grateful.
This article suggests that you should not play too aggressive and not take continents too early (maximizing Reinforcing Feedback), because other players will then unite against you (Balancing Feedback). However, this article fails to understand that in Risk, most players are not willing to unite. In fact, if player A and player B decide to unite against me and player A had his turn and stopped me, player B is highly…
Continents are overrated; they are a big source of armies in the early game, but the primary goal of the early game is mere survival, and a skilled player can win without ever owning a continent until the last couple turns. After the early game, cards are where the real threat is in Risk – in particular, the way someone can eliminate an opponent and capture their cards (and when they end up with >5 cards, immediately…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
My experience is that people overvalue Australia heavily. I think South America is the strongest start the way people typically play the game. You just keep taking potshots into Africa and expand into North America and end up with +7 armies a turn and 3 borders. I think if Australia wasn't overvalued it wouldn't be bad because there is no real non-suicidal way to stop the Aussie snowball once it gets going.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you stop on the roundabout to let cyclists enter the roundabout?
No. That is a net negative. But a cyclist in an unsafe position should be given a path to safety regardless of what happens to other traffic. A cyclist that is not on a roundabout yet is perfectly safe, and stopping traffic on a roundabout to yield to traffic that does not have right of way is not ok.
> The driver has the following responsibilities: (...) to do his utmost to ensure that other road users are not endangered, especially the most vulnerable (pedestrians, cyclists and electric scooter riders)
This author doesn't have much experience with competitive gaming and it's quite obvious. This is only a strategy he devised to play against his friends and relatives, most probably. He assumes a lot of player behavior, and what other explanation could there be? His bathtub example is very bad because there ain't no players, and when there's players the meta absolutely depends upon who you are playing against. there's…
This is not the strategy that will win the the most (if you know for sure that your opponent will jump every time, of course you would never aim at walking height), but it is one that cannot be exploited by your opponent deviating from whatever their optimal strategy is.
Of course, improving your skill enough to see these changes in behavior in your opponents takes a long time, which is why we naturally adapt the more exploitative strategies that you mentioned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. That is a net negative. But a cyclist in an unsafe position should be given a path to safety regardless of what happens to other traffic. A cyclist that is not on a roundabout yet is perfectly safe, and stopping traffic on a roundabout to yield to traffic that does not have right of way is not ok.
Ah, OK – that makes sense. In my country, it's not a question of being nice but a part of the road rules. Loosely translated excerpt: > The driver has the following responsibilities: (...) to do his utmost to ensure that other road users are not endangered, especially the most vulnerable (pedestrians, cyclists and electric scooter riders)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've found I actually enjoy Risk when played on the computer. Just speeding up army placements and automating the dice rolls, so you can say "attack until N remain", saves an unbelievable amount of time.
Speaking of games that are much quicker in electronic format, the Star Realms app works great for me, and it's my GF's favorite game. She plays it every day.
This article suggests that you should not play too aggressive and not take continents too early (maximizing Reinforcing Feedback), because other players will then unite against you (Balancing Feedback). However, this article fails to understand that in Risk, most players are not willing to unite. In fact, if player A and player B decide to unite against me and player A had his turn and stopped me, player B is highly…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s also highly dependent on Luck and gambling is dumb.
Check out Diplomacy. It has no RNG and each player writes their moves for the turn, which all get evaluated at the same time. It’s a very long game due to the discussion turns and having to evaluate everyone’s moves… but it allows for exciting politics.