Risk | BoardGameGeek

New Image for Risk

kevintlee — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:14:49 +0000

by kevintlee

1st try at risk - 18 months old (she captured most of the seas on her ...

]]>

New Image for Risk

kevintlee — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:18:16 +0000

by kevintlee

4 years old - first game of risk (lasted about half way through)

]]>

Reply: Risk:: Reviews:: Re: A fan's review with...er...BLUNT responses to criticisms of the game

whac3 — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:32:42 +0000

by whac3

NotMuchofaMuse wrote:
Moshe, thanks for the review.

Out of curiosity, (well, more than just curiosity as someone interested in probability and game mechanics) how does knowing that the dice combinations are based on strict Gaussian probabilities inform your decisions in the game?

I understand the distribution of dice combinations, but I'm having trouble making informed decisions off of that knowledge.

It means in practice I can't predict individual rollsbut I CAN predict the pattern of them. With practice, one can get very good and knowing when one will most likely succeed in taking aregion and when it's a border-line case. In borderline cases, I ask myself about what happens if I lose. Usually, I'll just be facing the same odds asdefender [and therefore in a weaker position] and so I tend to play more aggressively.

New Image for Risk

bottomweavers — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:38:19 +0000

by bottomweavers

My six and nine year old play their first game of Risk.

]]>

Reply: Risk:: Reviews:: Re: A fan's review with...er...BLUNT responses to criticisms of the game

NotMuchofaMuse — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 04:09:17 +0000

by NotMuchofaMuse

Moshe, thanks for the review.

Out of curiosity, (well, more than just curiosity as someone interested in probability and game mechanics) how does knowing that the dice combinations are based on strict Gaussian probabilities inform your decisions in the game?

I understand the distribution of dice combinations, but I'm having trouble making informed decisions off of that knowledge.

Reply: Risk:: General:: Re: risk halo?

Aarontu — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:55:53 +0000

by Aarontu

Risk: Halo Wars Collector’s Edition

Not much info here yet, but it looks like it could be way cool. It's based on the new Risk and has 3 different factions.

Thread: Risk:: General:: risk halo?

Leon_Corona — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 08:40:35 +0000

by Leon_Corona

Anyone have any news on this edition of Risk? I saw a note of it on wikipedia, so i was curious if anyone knew anything? -Leon

At the bottom right above:
Computer implementations and video games

"RISK: Halo Wars Collector's Edition (2009) - Will include UNSC, Covenant, and The Flood. It will have 42 territories and 6 sectors. Its release is scheduled for Fall '09."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_game

Reply: Risk:: Rules:: Re: Looking for some old Risk rules - help!

gurubob — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 06:43:24 +0000

by gurubob

this is the biggest listing of rules I know of
PDF's of most editions are here:
http://boardgames.about.com/od/riskrules/Risk_Rules.htm

the best UK FAQ is here:
http://www.kent.ac.uk/ims/personal/odl/riskfaq.htm

likely you'll be able to contact someone/faq maintainer there who'll be able to hit the nail on the head for you.

cheers,

Bob

Reply: Risk:: Rules:: Re: Looking for some old Risk rules - help!

Valedictor — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:20:32 +0000

by Valedictor

Nope, not those rules.... the ones I am after are quite different....

Thread: Risk:: Rules:: Urgently Wanted: PS1 Risk game Rule Book.

elfrododumbo — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:21:57 +0000

by elfrododumbo

Please, please, if anyone has the PS1 rule book of "Risk", would you make a copy and sell it ?

I bought the game as I think it is better than the PS2 one, but it came without the rule book and I cannot fathom out how to play it. It is one of my favourite board games and I want an A1 to play against.
.
I live in England (GB).

Thanks in advance.

Reply: Risk:: Rules:: Re: Looking for some old Risk rules - help!

elfrododumbo — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:28:12 +0000

by elfrododumbo

http://www.boardgamespub.com/board-games/risk/

Here is the link.

Reply: Risk:: Rules:: Re: Looking for some old Risk rules - help!

elfrododumbo — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:23:59 +0000

by elfrododumbo

John, if you google RISK BOARD GAME RULES FOR 1980s VERSION you will get what you are looking for (I hope !).

Good luck :)

Thread: Risk:: Rules:: Looking for some old Risk rules - help!

Valedictor — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:26:38 +0000

by Valedictor

Hi all,

I am looking for a copy of the rules that came with the UK version of the game around 1980-ish.

These were the rules that allowed 4 armies for 3 cannons, 6, for 3 infantry, 8, for 3 cavalry, etc...

They also had a rule for movement which I believe stated that your turn was over once you had moved 7 armies across a border. (which I always thought was a good rule compared to sweeping across the board in one turn!)

They came with the version of the game that had a photo of a big cannon model sitting on the board on the box cover, and the pieces were the the ones with 'prongs' (3 prongs for 1 army, 4 prongs, for 5 armies, 6 prongs for 10 armies).

Does anyone know the rules I mean? If anyone knows of a link to a pdf or something, I would be extremely grateful!

Many thanks!

John

Thread: Risk:: Variants:: Risk2000 - Varient Everyone should Try

thecheesypig — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 02:11:27 +0000

by thecheesypig

http://risk2000game.googlepages.com/index.html

I have played 2 Games in the last 2 days. Its absolutly incredable. It makes Risk never get boring because there are so many types of alliances that can be made. Economics are equally important as military might. Certain Territories will produce resources which can be used to make a wide variety of things, especially NUKES.

A Couple Notes:
Print of cards before playing for resouces and missles and bombs. It works better than a tracking sheet. (And feels professional!) It will take a couple minuetes to make, but its worth it.

Dont use Bonuses. There is already enough going on. Plus having a couple Nukes on hand should make your opponent tremble.

Use "Deeds" to territories. When you own a territory, take the card to go with it. Have resource producing territories labeled with what the produce with the stickly part of a sticky note. It will speed stuff up.

And play with the rules a little to fit your own house rules. I changed some prices and made new structures. Whatever suits you.

Those notes will make more sence after you read the PFD provided through the above link.

Give this a try. I can see this acually recruiting new Risk fans, specifically those who would like a little more depth.

Reply: Risk:: General:: Re: Same Time Risk on the board

darth_gollum — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 14:04:30 +0000

by darth_gollum

Glad you are still alive :)

I believe I mentioned the formula for connected empires in the manual, but I may have forgotten. I will check later. It's really very simple: whatever your largest number of connected territories, add them up and divide by 3 and round down. So if you have 12 territories and they are all connected, you get a "connected empire bonus" of 4. If you have 20 territories, with 14 connected and the other 6 connected elsewhere, take the largest (14) divide by 3 and round down. Once again, your bonus is 4. Does that make sense? It's basically the same as the territory bonus of Classic Risk where you count how many territories you own and divide by 3. Same-Time Risk just uses both rules for larger bonuses.

As simple a rule as it is, I wouldn't complain if you put a simple chart of both the connected empire bonus and territory bonus on your map. You don't have to, but it might be useful to some to count territories and then just use the chart for reference. And I'm glad that we have the same thoughts with everything else. Hope to hear from you again soon.

Reply: Risk:: Variants:: Re: No Luck Rules

zombie240 — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:25:39 +0000

by zombie240

Hello every one!
I hope someone read this, I know the last post was more than a year ago, but I just read it, and I will like to comment.

In the first place, I like the idea, because sometimes I lose the game entirely by bad luck and viceversa... I don't like that, if I win I want to do it because my strategy es better, no because I just get lucky... and viceversa.

so in the first place, this idea is removing all the luck from the game, I know some said that it is a differet kind of luck, but it is not. Why?... this is why...
In this idea, if I show a 1, 4 or whatever it does not luck, is the number that I choose to show (not luck... is a decision) taking in mind the number that probably show the other player. This scenario have a name in science, it's called "Game Theory".

The thing with this method, is that is not have a Nash equilibrium, that is what make the method a great one...

Some facts!

the defender has a 80% of chance of winning... but only kills 1 troop
the attacker has a 20% of chance of winning... but can inflict more damage.

some thing I don't like, If I a person who is very Risk averse (wich I am), if this person is defending... he is probably not likely tho show any 4 or 5 (because the loss it can be to much), even if the attacker can detect this behavior, the defender still have 66% chance of winning, and at the most can lose 3 troops....

maybe is the defender have a less chance of winnign, but making more damage. maybe I will be a better no luck method...

But I like it... thanks for the idea... I probably use it....

se yaaa

zombie 240

Reply: Risk:: General:: Re: Same Time Risk on the board

zombie240 — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 07:34:40 +0000

by zombie240

hey!...

yes, I'm still alive, hahaha... but very busy though...:(

Thanks for the feedback... Actually I was thinking the same thing you say. My idea is that the board will be usefull for anyone who want to play Risk II (no matter if they have standard dice, or 12-sided normal or biased), so I will not include the conversion table in the board, but I will make it, so who anyone who thinks that is convenient to play that way, can do it, but other who have the 12-sided biased dice also can use the same board, and don't have to look a useless table, haha.

All the other thing you mentioned I was in the porcess of including it.
So we are right on track here. :)

Other thing that I want to include, and I think that is a important one, is the bonus for "connected empire" this rule, I think, is essential, specially when you have a few countries but all connected... this bonus can keep you alive long enough, to even win the game.
But I have a problem :(, I don't know what is the "formula" of the connected empire bonus... any idea??... I have searched the "tutorials" and the manual of the game, but I did not find it.

If the rule is not specified anywere, we will have to estimated, and in the ideal case, make a formula that reproduce the rule...

Well that's all... for now.... tun tun tunnnn!! hahahaha :D

see yaaaa...

zombie240

New Image for Risk

henk.rolleman — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 23:58:55 +0000

by henk.rolleman

My Old Risk Board from 1978, The Stones Are Almost Round

]]>

Reply: Risk:: General:: Re: Same Time Risk on the board

darth_gollum — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 22:44:36 +0000

by darth_gollum

Hoping to see an update soon, I thought I might offer a couple of suggestions, even if we've already mentioned them, just to make sure nothing goes missing and also just to keep this discussion going. I recommend placing the following items in the box at the left:

-Continental Bonuses (You've already included these)
-Turn order
-Dice thresholds (in other words, when you change from white die to yellow, etc.)
-Conversion to all the same color die, with the chart you created (I might recommend this as a separate printup that can accompany the game for those who prefer to play the different colors like the original game)
-The card trade rules, as you mentioned before, clarifying that cards do not increase in value with every trade-in, but only vary depending what is traded in.

So I really didn't give much help here, but I check boardgamegeek.com every day to see if you've posted any updates on the map, and I'm anxious to see it. Talk to you soon.

Reply: Risk:: Sessions:: Re: Risk Memories

didaskalos — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:49:28 +0000

by didaskalos

This is why I like Risk. As a minister, I've played Risk with 3 different youth groups from three different churches. Some of our best memories are bonded to the games of Risk we played.

Thanks for a great article!

Reply: Risk:: Sessions:: Re: Risk Memories

elfrododumbo — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 12:12:42 +0000

by elfrododumbo

Yes, many thanks. Bought fond memories of playing this wonderful game on dark and gloomy early evenings with Dad and my two brothers ,after supper. We were sitting cosily in front of the fire with the "poker table" and game all set up and raring to get started. Still love ths game and will not part from it for all the tea in China.
Aaaah, dear Waddington games were simply wonderful. No wonder, I still collect vintage games ! :)

Reply: Risk:: Sessions:: Re: Risk Memories

ooogene — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:25:27 +0000

by ooogene

I'm sorry to hear about your father. My dad also had things that he did to get under my brother's and my skin. I think it is just a dad thing!

Reply: Risk:: Sessions:: Re: Risk Memories

brotherj — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 03:21:07 +0000

by brotherj

Thanks for this story. It brought back memories of the marathon sessions me, my brother, and my dad used to have. My dad had a really annoying way of holding up 2 fingers and softly saying "You lose two" when he would kill 2 of his opponents men while losing none. It was so annoying! It became a catch phrase when ever my brother and I encountered anything annoying.

My dad has been dead a little over a year now...

Cherish those memories.

Session: Risk:: Risk Memories

ooogene — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:07:34 +0000

by ooogene

A good friend of mine, until he met me, had never gotten any deeper in strategy games than Risk. Since we've been hanging out, I've slowly moved him away from the constant request for Risk and into requesting some other games like Agricola or Railroad Tycoon. However, despite him really liking those games and others, the past couple months he has been requesting Risk again. Despite all the great "new" games I've taught him, it still remains one of his absolute favorites. I've also had another couple friends that have been requesting a Tichu night as well. So I got the 4 of us together to play some Risk first and then Tichu.

The reason that I'm writing this session report isn't so much as to write about the game that we played that night, but the good memories that it brought back about playing Risk in junior and senior high school. I remember the 3rd game I had ever played of Risk, I think it was the week in-between Christmas & New Year's Day. My brother, sister, dad, and I played a 11 1/2 hour - two day event! We started one evening, played until we went to bed, then got up and finished the game the next morning. I'm thinking we must have done something wrong for it to go so long and I don't even remember who won. I just remember stacks of cannons on Greenland, Iceland, North Africa, and every other entry point into continents. Another memory I have is yelling at and pleading with my uncle to attack my aunt, because she was getting too strong, but he of course didn't want do it. I remember playing 50-60 games that first year owning it and even keeping track of what continent the winning player first controlled. (I think Australia was the first controlled like 80% of the time). I remember the feel of the dice, the yells of "pair of sixes" or "one 'n' one!" I remember that game that my best friend and I convinced his sister to play with us, where she was attacked down 18 armies to 2 armies and didn't lose a single one. Then she went on to beat us boys. I remember whoever was the first person to attack my brother becoming his mortal enemy - doing everything he could to destroy them. There are plenty of memories that I have from playing this game.

Last night's game wasn't really that exceptional, but it brought back all these memories. Nick thinned himself out too much, I broke my alliance with him to get his cards, there were sweeping attacks, and in the end David conceded to me after I was controlling every continent but Australia. We all had some good laughs, and enjoyed gaming together. I'm not saying Risk is my favorite game, but it is a game that I'll pull out once a year to play for nostalgia's sake and remember the battles lost and friendships won of long ago.

File: Risk:: RISK: Damn Aliens

jetcougar — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:30:42 +0000

by jetcougar

RISK: Damn Aliens for Board Game: Risk ]]>

Reply: Risk:: General:: Re: Very Geeky List of Editions/Versions

Monkatron — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 02:42:20 +0000

by Monkatron

A nice list that would be enhanced by telling us about the pieces - which editions had wood blocks, Roman numerals, Napoleonic armies, Revolutionary war armies, arrows, etc.

Reply: Risk:: General:: Re: How Many Pieces?

ppirilla — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 02:34:53 +0000

by ppirilla

Give or take a few, but I'm pretty sure it's
40 x 1
20 x 5
10 x 10

Hendal — Tue, 26 May 2009 01:03:30 +0000

by Hendal

Interesting report, thanks for sharing,

This might seem weird to you, but I would have so laughed in your face and just attacked? Treaties are made to be Broken ( it is like any partnership - it only works till it doesn't work, and then it really doesn't work ). And yes I have played this one long ago in triple digits myself. I would roll if you don't want to roll you defense dice you forfeit your rolls and I take your guys - as simple at that really. You can not tell me I am not aloud to attack - that is just plain silly - it is a game of WAR ( their are no rules in War ).

Did you see Pirates of the Carribean? I would think Treaties are kinda like the Pirate Code -- and it turns out those codes are more like Guidelines really :D

Game On'

Reply: Risk:: Strategy:: Re: Risk - The Art of Diplomacy

mtpoll — Mon, 25 May 2009 23:58:22 +0000

by mtpoll

All fine and good, except there can be only one winner. There is no such thing as "splitting the win," and if two remaining players tried this, I would insist that they haven't won at all, but rather declared a draw.

All games require the unspoken, unwritten rule that everyone at the table agrees what constitutes the winning condition. Violate this, and you violate a deeper, more philosophical rule: The spirit of competition.

If the OP is some kind of joke, btw, I've missed the point.

Thread: Risk:: Strategy:: Risk - The Art of Diplomacy

pmigas — Mon, 25 May 2009 23:22:45 +0000

by pmigas

Do you want to win at Risk? Here is what you do. Before you set up the game, find one of your friends and say “let’s kill of all the other players units. You don’t attack me, I won’t attack you. Then we will split the win.” If he agrees, you just won the Risk game.

There are three different type of people that just read the above statement. You are probably thinking one of the following:

1. Oh, I wish I knew that earlier. No wonder I never win. I can’t wait to play my next Risk game.
2. Shhhh, why are you telling people that?
3. Hey that’s cheating!

If you are the third type of person, I was just joking. Ha ha. Nobody would really cheat you like that. Risk is all about moving pieces around a board that looks like the world and rolling dice. Hey maybe some time my friend and I could come over and play some Risk. You should probably stop reading this because I am sure you are really busy lobbying the Unite Nations for world peace.

If you are the second type of person, Yes I know you already know that this about the game. The game is about diplomacy. You can win this game regardless of starting position and regardless of how many troops you get each turn. Yes it is easier to win depending on starting position and your number of troops. But if someone wants you to lose, you probably won’t win. If two people don’t want you to win then forget it. The trick is to talk your way through the game and wait for the trade-ins. If you make alliances with the right player you will have a better chance of winning. Remember you are always playing for the next game too. If you upset someone in the first game, they will probably be upset starting the second game or vice versa.

If you are the first type of person, here is what you need to know. The above team agreement is only going to let you win one game, unless you keep switching game groups. If you team up with another player, watch who you are playing against. Some people take games way too serious. I have meet people who call Risk “The Friend Ender Game”. My Risk group has a house rule that any treaties or alliances are made over the board with at least one other player present. That does not mean that the alliance is spoken. In my last game, two of my jerky friends looked at each other, nodded, and that was the team alliance for the game. Don’t worry I will get them next game. So once you do this to someone, they will try and do it back to you. Don’t get offended, you have just changed the dynamic of the game in your group. There is always the next game.

The group that I normally play with will not tolerate a team alliance much. Someone has to either be tricky like in my last game or only limited alliance or treaties during the game. Otherwise every other player will gang up on the team group. I normally play 5-6 player games, so three on two usually wins.

I almost always set up the game with random placement so that you don’t know which position you will need to play. Each continent plays differently. What normally happens is after all players have their starting position, people start talking treaties with adjacent players. A treaty will normally make friends with one person and upset the rest. Try and make treaties so that players need to attack away from you. A good example of this is to make a treaty between Iceland and Greenland. The European or American players now need to fight through multiple territories to attack each other.

Once you have made some treaties, the best tactic is to try not upset anyone. An upset player can decide to attack you, even if they lose the game because of it. If someone is upset over treaties, you need to reassure them. If you are in North America, you could say something like “I only made the Iceland/Greenland treaty so that I can hold North America for a turn. I am just trying not to be the first player out of the game.”

The next thing to do is get all of the rest of the players upset with each other. I will normally point out at the beginning of the game how the jerk, Paul, routinely wins and rubs it in the nice guy Mikes face. Of course I would really like to have the saintly Paul win after hearing all the nasty things Mike has said about Paul’s sister before the game. Yes this tactic can backfire, be careful. Try to be best friends with everyone while convincing the other players that everyone but you is out to get them. The best way is to let the other players get upset by attacking each other. This is one of the reasons in-experienced players find that the Australia player always wins. If Australia player keeps quite long enough, someone will get mad at losing a territory.

Treaties:
Below is a list of my favorite treaties:
Full Alliance: I will not attack you if you do not attack me. Like I said you will probably win by using this strategy. But players will get wise to this tactic. They will either start ganging up on your team or stop playing with you. Plus you cannot really win the game with this type of an alliance. You will eventually either need to cancel the alliance in order to play out the game or agree to a draw. I personally would like to beat everyone.

Turn Treaties: I will not attack you for X turns if you do not attack me for X turns. This is good for you because you do not need to defend against one player. This may be bad because you just announced to all player’s that you are teaming up with someone for a while. It is best to make this only with a player that is about to destroy you and your desperate.

Territory Turn Treaty: I will not attack you in a territory if you do not attack me in this territory for X number of turns. This is better than a full turn treaty because other players won’t think it is a team agreement. This may allow you to pull all of your units away from a territory and reinforce or attack a different direction. But watch out for another players counter attack. The player you have a treaty with can lose the territory you have a treaty between, leaving a border exposed. Or the player could pull out their units away from the territory purposefully leaving it exposed for another player to hit you hard. Also watch the wording on this treaty. Do not agree not to attack a territory. Agree to not attack a player in a specific territory. Otherwise you cannot attack the territory even if another player now occupies it.

Permanent Territory Treaty with Cancelation Clause: I will not attack you in a territory if you do not attack me in this territory until either you or I give a one term warning. Just like a Territory Turn Treaty but it allows you to cancel the agreement if the dynamics of the game changes. If a player cancels a treaty the other player can attack immediately.

Territory Army Match: This is a Permanent Territory Treaty with added clause that the players need to have a certain number of troops on the territory. This ensures that another player does not attack through your boarder. 5 troops is a typical size I use. It also allows you to cancel the treaty just by adding more troops to the space. A tricky player can easily cancel a treaty without anyone noticing until the turn he attacks.

Superpower: This is not as much a treaty as an agreement. As a group you should always attack the person who is winning, unless you want that person to win. This is why in my group the call for “superpower” is always feared. Don’t try and make yourself to powerful quickly in the game. If you become the leader hopefully you already have some treaties in place to protect your boarders.

Card Country: I will attack a territory and leave only one troop. You can then attack the same territory and retreat leaving only one troop. This way we can both get an easy card and not upset anyone. Why work for cards if another player is willing to help you get one easily. This is a really non-threatening agreement to other players. I have even done a three way card country.

Treaty Breaker: My Risk group does not allow a player to break a treaty. If you agree to a treaty, you have to honor the treaty. It is ok if both players mutually agree to cancel the agreement. But you should never cancel an agreement in order to let another player win. All players should agree that treaties cannot be broken. If someone breaks a treaty you should quit the game. Or you can all agree to an all out attack on the offending player. I would not let the player play the next game. Then I would have a hard time trusting them.

Desperate Tactics

The following are some ideas to help if you get in a desperate situation:

Turtle: Concentrate in one non-offensive spot and do nothing. Place your 3 units, do not attack. Asia is a good spot to hide. I have seen a player win from Japan. You need to wait until the trade-ins get big enough to make it possible to win. The biggest trick is to not have any cards for a while you wait. If you have any cards, you are a target.

Bribery: There is no rule against giving your cards to another player so that they do not attack. You can also agree to attack someone else to avoid an attack. You cannot trade player’s troops.

Board Tactics
The larger size trade-ins will help determine the game. Try to stay in the game long enough to benefit from these trade-ins. Hold a continent if you can do it without upsetting another player. Maximize the number of units you can place on the board while minimizing the number your opponent can place. The largest army wins. That why 2 players vs. 1 is a better bet to win.

Remember, the pieces on the board are secondary. You need to talk your other players into leaving you in the game. You are his friend. You can help him. Everyone else want to kill him.

Good luck! I hope you have fun winning your next game of Diplomatic Risk!

Session: Risk:: The Power of Japan

pmigas — Mon, 25 May 2009 23:12:31 +0000

by pmigas

The Power of Japan

I have seen a person holding only one territory win the game a couple of times. Normally it is when a player tries you takes out a opponent for cards but misses by only one territory. The player then trades in for a large amount of units, takes out the player that tried to take him out, and then wins the game. There was one time though that my friend Paul purposefully limited himself from the start to one territory and ended up winning the game.

We had just started a 6 player game. We had set the game up with a random set up using the territory cards. Paul had got a particular bad starting position with 4-5 countries locate in Asia. I figured he would be the first player out since usually there is one player out quick in a 6 player game. Paul dumped all of his troops on one Asian country.

The first 3 rounds went fairly typical. Every player went for a continent, I went for America, someone Europe, someone Australia and so forth. Paul took one territory per tern in Asia and then invaded Japan on his third turn. Then he did nothing for two turns but put down 3 troops in Japan. So he was sitting on about 25 troops on Japan as everyone else turned in their first card sets. Of course no one wanted to attack the Japan’s horde. So when he turned in 10 or 12 guys we figured America or Australia was going to get pounded. Nope he put his troops on the board and quit.

For the next 5 turns Paul did nothing. Every turn he put down 3 troops on Japan and quit. All of his other Territories were destroyed by other players. So the next round of trade-ins came through 15, 20, 25, 30. Everyone else was attacking each other. Paul just sat on Japan with 40+ troops. But they were in all in large denominations. So there were only 5 or 6 blue pieces on the board. Paul said almost nothing all game, except quietly whispering “done” to the player on his left. But everyone knew that if they used a 30 unit trade in against Japan they would gain nothing. Paul had no cards.

At this point one player was gone. I think it was the player that tried for South America. After all remaining players had a second set of trade-ins, Paul made a big move. He put 3 troops down on Japan, attacked China…… and quit. The next 2 turn were the same, one territory and then quit. Another trade in happened 35. The European player got hammered but not taken out.

Now Paul moved. 40 troops for the trade-in + 3 + 40 on Japan, all in the same spot and all started attacking. He attacked through Kamacatca, plowed through Europe, eliminating one player and then took me out in America. At the end of his turn he had 7 cards. He turned one set in for another 45 troops. He also had another trade-in for 50 next turn. The game was over.

I had never seen this tactic used before. One of the main reasons it ended up working was that he held no cards. Every other time someone would have cards and they would get attacked. Plus he made himself small and quite so that no one would think about him. He played a bad position very well and it made this a very memorable game.

darth_gollum — Mon, 18 May 2009 07:31:43 +0000

by darth_gollum

Wow!!! When you showed showed a preview, I thought you might have a nice simple little map. What you have done so far is amazing! It looks so nice and professional! I love the yellow oceans, like an old map. The colors are nice (not too bright, yet not too dull either), and the side bar where you will put all the helpful information is attractive, and it keeps the board looking clean. I really mean it when I say that I am beyond impressed with what you have done. This looks so good!!!

I think that when you are done with the map, we should start a new discussion on this website. That way, we can talk about all the work we've done, and people will see what you've added. Not too many people know that anything is happening anymore with this game. Most people who cared about what I started have stopped paying attention, but if we start a new discussion, people will want to see what's new, and will see that you have added a whole lot. I know I say thank you a lot, and I know it's just a game, but I really appreciate how you have added to the work I have already done. Thank you so much!

PS I will see if I can come up with any suggestions, but right now I can't think of anything.

Reply: Risk:: General:: Re: Same Time Risk on the board

zombie240 — Sun, 17 May 2009 22:19:01 +0000

by zombie240

Hello!!
now as I promised, here it is!!!
a new preview of the board, it is not finish yet, but almost.
note that I'm doing a effect on each country, but I only done it on the countries on Asia and Australia (Oceania).
Well, the preview is only at 20% of the original size, and here it is....

I expect some commentaries and/or feedback. (in the blue space at the left of the board, I plan to put the "trading card rule" and "the game order"), so this space is already spoken for... haha. But if you think there are some other things that are importatn enough to be on the board, don't doubt on tell me...

That's all for now, I hope you like it.

zombie240

PD = I went to the store to check out the 12-side dice, it will be good to use them to play, but I did not buy any yet, there ara a bit expensive for me right now. But soon I will buy them.

New Image for Risk

jotelpe — Sat, 16 May 2009 00:49:55 +0000

by jotelpe

Portuguese version - 2004 - Board

]]>

New Image for Risk

jotelpe — Sat, 16 May 2009 00:18:00 +0000

by jotelpe

Portuguese version - 2004

]]>

File: Risk:: RISK: Modern Combat

jetcougar — Fri, 15 May 2009 14:07:35 +0000

by jetcougar

RISK: Modern Combat for Board Game: Risk ]]>