I’ve noticed a lot of people here play Risk. In fact, there’s been some hefty threads over in MPSIMS about it.
So, when I ran into this, a statistical analysis of combat, I figured I should pass it along. Enjoy!
http://www.sciencenews.org/20030712/mathtrek.asp
Lord of the Rings themed RISK is better, IMHO. Part of that is because there are ways to affect battles, such as having a leader (+1 to your highest roll attacking or defending) involved in the battle or defending a stronghold (+1 on highest defense roll). There are also cards that can be played to affect the balance of power in a battle.
Personally, I preferred the nuclear variant, where you could play one of your cards and nuke that territory (killing all armies in it), instead of taking your normal turn.
It discouraged anyone from building up huge armies unless they had those territory cards.
I always loved Castle Risk. It was a variant (I have a board with Regular Risk on one side and Castle Risk on the other) where you basically picked a capitol territory and then had to defend it, IIRC, while doing the usual Risk shenanigans. Very fun.
My biggest problem is finding people to play with.
Thanks for the link. Very informative.
Homebrew, I got the LOTR Risk for Christmas last year. It’s cool! It looked like there was going to be an expansion set, since the map only included territories from FOTR. Has anyone heard anything else about that?
I like LOTR and Castle Risk, but I think the best is Risk 2210. It’s got the leader mechanic from LOTR, plus the familiar map of earth, The separate board for the moon, and undersea colonies that solve the Australia problem and redefine other choke-points as well.
Plus nukes!
In my high school freshman Geography class, we played Risk against the other classes. Mr. Goben would insert specialty cards in the deck, which included a nuke. Each specialty card cost $15, which the class would have to raise on the spot if they wanted to use it (money went to the school’s charity). Nukes would wipe a territory of armies, as well as be unhospitable for 2 weeks (1 round/day). It was a very powerful and strategic play. Taking out Iceland and West Africa made the Americas a nearly perfect stronghold.
Ah, you’ve reminded em of another reason I like 2210. 2 or 3 territories are randomly selected at the start fo the game to be uninhabitable (due to radiation.) So the board is slightly different each game.
Wow, cool! Note to self: ask for RISK 2210 for next birthday. Shanghai friends into playing it with me as part of festivities.
There was a game available a few years ago called Supremacy. It added an economic system, nukes, and satellites to a game system which was a clone of Risk. I spent a lot of money on the game, then it was lost in a move…
If you find a copy I’d recommend it for anyone who likes the Risk variants. If anyone wants to play Risk online, contact me.
That article is interesting, but I thought everyone already knew that.
However, they’re overlooking something. If you have exactly two players, then your best bet is to be aggressive, because as attacker, you have an advantage. However, if there are three or more players, your best bet is to convince the other two to fight each other. IMHO, Risk is flawed in this respect, in that there’s not enough reward for conquering other territories. This encourages long games, and Risk is not complicated and varied enough to justify four-hour games.
ah right, I thought the title of the OP meant that RISK had been solved (i.e. a stragey had been found that would always result in the play going first winning).
D’oh of course it can’t be solved, you use dice in it :slaphead:
Use loaded dice?
Interestingly, Axis & Allies is just a more complex and realistic version of Risk, and it can be “solved” in the sense that there are obvious strategies to pursue, without which you are completely screwed.
The random placement of the opening territories in Risk makes any discussion of strategy kinda moot. You just roll them dice and takes your chances.
I disagree that the random placement makes strategy discussion moot. There are clearly good and bad chokepoints on the map that are cruicial to hold. Deciding where to commit your opening forces is up to you. (also, in some of the variant Risks, you choose some or all of your opening territories.)
Example: I don’t care which territory I get that’s closest to or in Austraila. Unless I have nothing in all of Asia or Australia, I’m going to put the vast majority of my forces in that territory that’s closest, and conquer Australia fast, leaving a large garrison in Siam. The rest of my forces usually go in or near S. America, where I try to grab the continent as quickly as possible while leaving large forces in northern africa and mexico as my borders. (This strategy secures my continent and keeps a strong foothold in the neighboring continents to prevent anyone from conquering them.)
So, it’s not really deep strategy, but it’s strategy nonetheless.
As someone has mentioned A&A (which I hate, but it’s worth mentioning) I’ll also recommend Samurai Swords (AKA Shogun) (Similar to LOTR Risk in Ancient Japan, but with 12 sided dice, a money and bidding system, and a ninja!) and Diplomacy (To hook people in, I’ll describe it as Castle Risk with no dice, but it’s more than that.)
If you like conquering the world (or parts of it), and want a bit more strategy and less luck, try Vinci, Mare Nostrum, or Civilization.
There’s also a game called Attack! which is about halfway between Risk and Axis & Allies.
I have strategies in Risk. I like to try and lock up a continent early, and will aggressively pursue Africa if I can muster any troops at all there. Because once Africa’s taken, you can fortify some of the territories, then expand up through South America pretty easily.
You’re all ignoring the fact that Every. Single. Long Risk game is decided based on sets. That’s what the game is really about. Getting ready to use your sets in a devastating way. That’s why a really good idea is to have Australia or S. A. but also have just a little force somewhere else. A few territories with just enough guys on them to not be worth taking in Asia or Europe. That way you’ll have more than one place to go once the sets get up high.
I want to try fixed sets with my Risk crowd, which is when 3 soldiers for your cards is 4 extra guys, 3 horses is 6, 3 cannons is 8 and 1 of each is 10. That would make it so that sets weren’t such a devastating force late in the game.
I agree, traditional Risk makes the sets extremely powerful towards the end, but if you don’t survive to that point, it doesn’t help you, and even when it you get to that point, a defendable stronghold is still a good idea.
LOTR Risk has the fixed sets variant built in, BTW. And both LOTR and 2210 have built in time limits, so the game rarely ends in total domination, and always ENDS eventually. 