What keeps you interested??

[Thylacine]

To me, it seems there is a point in Risk in which strategy cannot be further improved. I understand that some of the maps are more complicated, but I still recognize similar limitations in all of them. I'm getting bored quickly, but I think that perhaps speed free-for-all games might provide the next step in strategic potential. What keeps you interested?

[militant]

Finding new and fun game types but the thing that I am primarily staying here for is the wicked mafia community

[wcaclimbing]

I stay for all the graphics-related stuff. Map foundry, layer battles, etc....

[owenshooter]

To me, it seems there is a point in Risk in which strategy cannot be further improved. I understand that some of the maps are more complicated, but I still recognize similar limitations in all of them. I'm getting bored quickly, but I think that perhaps speed free-for-all games might provide the next step in strategic potential. What keeps you interested?

well, you have pretty much played the same types of games, and what, 17 total? you haven't even scratched the surface of the types of games or the maps and their different bonus formats. sooo, this thread is more than premature in my opinion. hell, you have only played 4 or 5 maps!!! you haven't even played a team game!!! how about no cards? fog of war? you have played 17 games, all pretty much the same type of games. poke around before you declare yourself bored with CC... why not set a rank goal or something similar? give yourself something to strive for? good luck!-0

[whitestazn88]

lolz... i was gonna say what O said, but without researching the number of games he's completed.


dude... you still haven't played me... so maybe i'll school you one day and you can be interested in the hopes of ever beating me

[Thylacine]

well, you have pretty much played the same types of games, and what, 17 total? you haven't even scratched the surface of the types of games or the maps and their different bonus formats. sooo, this thread is more than premature in my opinion. hell, you have only played 4 or 5 maps!!! you haven't even played a team game!!! how about no cards? fog of war? you have played 17 games, all pretty much the same type of games. poke around before you declare yourself bored with CC... why not set a rank goal or something similar? give yourself something to strive for? good luck!-0

You can dress a dog in jewelry, but it's still a dog. Renaming the continents and rearranging territories doesn't change anything. It doesn't take much more than a single glimpse to transpose the exact same principles of basic Risk strategy to 85% of the 'different' maps. I can fully appreciate 85% of these maps by simply looking at them. I don't need to play them to see that they function in the exact same manner, with only sophomoric tactical alterations. You're right, though... there are a few distinctive maps that look like they alter game-play/strategy (AoR, Fuedal War, et cetera). I will definitely give these a shot. I've played all card types, with and without FoW. I prefer escalating cards with FoW on a large map with many players.

[whitestazn88]

thats not even true... there is obviously different strategy if you play australia when you compare it to playing malta...

yeah, its the same game, but how you play each and every map is completely different.

get your feet wet playing 2.1 maybe? you'll see where the strategy differs.

what about team games? what about terminator? assassin?

as someone once said... you ain't seen nothin yet! b-b-b-b-baby!!!

don't quote me on that line though...

[Thylacine]

I respectively disagree with there being any different strategy whether playing Australia or Malta. There may be minor differences in tactics, but it doesn't take too much effort to analyze the best probable course of action in a specific situation. The continents have different names, but the game is the same. Take Classic map, for example. Remove Congo and replace it with Uganda and Botswana. Add a bridge between Western Australia and Madagascar. Add another territory to Oceania. Make Oceania worth 3 and Africa worth 4. Do you think this really adds depth or replayability? Strategy remains untouched; tactics are altered slightly, but do not require much effort to translate. If you agree with this example, then apply the same principles to Australia or Malta, or 85% of the available maps. If you don't agree with my illustration, then I will agree to disagree and applaud your ability to find joy making mountains from molehills.

[muy_thaiguy]

I respectively disagree with there being any different strategy whether playing Australia or Malta. There may be minor differences in tactics, but it doesn't take too much effort to analyze the best probable course of action in a specific situation. The continents have different names, but the game is the same. Take Classic map, for example. Remove Congo and replace it with Uganda and Botswana. Add a bridge between Western Australia and Madagascar. Add another territory to Oceania. Make Oceania worth 3 and Africa worth 4. Do you think this really adds depth or replayability? Strategy remains untouched; tactics are altered slightly, but do not require much effort to translate. If you agree with this example, then apply the same principles to Australia or Malta, or 85% of the available maps. If you don't agree with my illustration, then I will agree to disagree and applaud your ability to find joy making mountains from molehills.

Here's a challenge. Play and win 100 games in a row, then come back and review this. Don't keep the game settings the same, mix it up a bit. Each player will have different strategies for the same maps, the question is though, can you beat them?

After playing 100 games, come back and review this and see if you're opinion has changed on it.

[OnlyAmbrose]

To me, it seems there is a point in Risk in which strategy cannot be further improved. I understand that some of the maps are more complicated, but I still recognize similar limitations in all of them. I'm getting bored quickly, but I think that perhaps speed free-for-all games might provide the next step in strategic potential. What keeps you interested?

Well you, like myself, are just a first class corporal! Way I see it that means our strategies can certainly be further improved

[Mr Changsha]

I suspect that the real point of the thread was to tell us all how clever he is.

LOOKING AT YOUR POINTS TO GAMES YOU MUST BE VERY CLEVER INDEED.

Do you feel better now?



How about now?

[Thylacine]

someone finally understands me.

I think most of the disagreement comes down to the difference between strategy and tactics, and how one defines both words. In response to Uncle Rico's challenge, well, I'm not entirely sure what it is. Is it to win one hundred successive games? You ask if I can beat 'them,' meaning a variety of opponents. My answer is 'yes, I can beat them.' That doesn't mean that I will.

[Kemmler]

Buy Premium and start playing some Classic, 8 player, escalating speed freestyle. So much strategy in them, you could write pages about every one...

[Thylacine]

Buy Premium and start playing some Classic, 8 player, escalating speed freestyle. So much strategy in them, you could write pages about every one...

Spot on; it certainly looks that way. Thanks.

[gdeangel]

You'll find freestyle has very little to do with strategy... only if you can keep up in the connection speed and keyboard dexterity department do you then begin to dabble with strategy.

The maps here can be categorized into a few variations. Yes, there are the continent remix maps, where you have to apply the same principles as classic. But size does matter, particular b/c the way territory bonuses work, etc. and playing doodle is nothing like playing classic, which is also quite different from 2.1, even though their all essentially the same structure.

Then you what I call the non-linear continental variations. These maps are larger than a "doodle", but have many break points both attacking into, and attacked by, continents.... here I am talking about Space, Solar System, Madness, King of the Mountains. There is nothing but simple hold X get +Y to the bonus structure, but tactically very different than playing classic.

Then you have the "castle" maps. There would be mainly the AoR maps, Feudal, and New World. Feudal and New World are the the purest example. Again, very different tactics, particularly when you add fog, as each player is removed from everyone else at the start.

You have the Advanced Math Bonus maps. AoR: Magic is another example that fits here.

There are objective maps.

There are other hard-to-categorize maps (e.g., Conquer Man) that are so far from the continent "hold x, get y" model, that you can't even begin to list the differences.

The diversity of maps is why this site is great. I would also have lost interest after 10 games if I played Classic... it's just not an interesting map.

Anyway, try a few from each category above. You will find it tough to become an expert at all.

And then add the human element, because a team game on any map is a whole different ball game.

[muy_thaiguy]

someone finally understands me.

I think most of the disagreement comes down to the difference between strategy and tactics, and how one defines both words. In response to Uncle Rico's challenge, well, I'm not entirely sure what it is. Is it to win one hundred successive games? You ask if I can beat 'them,' meaning a variety of opponents. My answer is 'yes, I can beat them.' That doesn't mean that I will.

Don't call me uncle rico, I lost a bet and normally have AC/DC as my avy.

[Neoteny]

someone finally understands me.

I think most of the disagreement comes down to the difference between strategy and tactics, and how one defines both words. In response to Uncle Rico's challenge, well, I'm not entirely sure what it is. Is it to win one hundred successive games? You ask if I can beat 'them,' meaning a variety of opponents. My answer is 'yes, I can beat them.' That doesn't mean that I will.

Don't call me uncle rico, I lost a bet and normally have AC/DC as my avy.

I was wondering...

[War Dog]

so when i take over the world i know how to d it

[shadowsteel9]

the forums are awesome, and also comparing your views of thinking with people all over the world

[max is gr8]

What keeps me interested is my opponents, I like seeing players with exciting new strategies, some unusual but all you can take something from, in every game I aim to learn something new, I try never to use the same strategy twice, and sometimes players don't like it.

I build up my units in escalating noone likes it, but I try it, see where it leads me. I would hope if someone played me in a series of 10 games I would hope from the next drop that would not know my strategy until it's too late. It doesn't always turn out like that but the reason I stay interested is that. If I gave you an essay to do for homework over the summer for school about how you win each map on CC depending on each drop from each players perspective you would struggle.

At the end of the day see how every player in the game can win, see how their current strategies work and how they fail, take them on and adapt to fit. If you build up a variety of strategies and you change each turn you will be suprised how much fun you can get.

[GrimReaper.]

i constantaly play risk, chess and texas holdem to keep my mind sharp. playing new opponments always challenges me so thats what keeps me intrested so far in this site

[serata]

The assertion that a game with a very simple algorithm for victory doesn't have any variation in strategy is just silly -- the perfect examples in my opinion are Risk, Hold'em and Go -- all have very very easy basic strategies, however the opponent is an x factor, the random placement is an x factor, the dice are an x factor, and with CC, the whole map is an x factor, and you have to deal with these things as they arise... you can't glance at the map turn 1 and say "this will happen in this game." Sure, the basic strategy of risk is (oh no! I'm revealing the secrets of the universe!) 1. get territories 2. get countries 3. get cards - in an 8 player, non FoW, escalating cards setting, but I haven't yet played one game where I could successfully predict how all the x factors would react even in the heat of a game. Do I leave my border open here or there? My opponent might get lucky and break through those 6 neutrals, or maybe he might go the long way around and attack my train of 6 one army territories? The best computer program cannot beat the best human player in chess because there is no set way to play.

There's always a new trick to learn. That's why I'm still a sergeant.

[t-o-m]

Nothing.

[Bruceswar]

Buy Premium and start playing some Classic, 8 player, escalating speed freestyle. So much strategy in them, you could write pages about every one...

Spot on; it certainly looks that way. Thanks.

I agree with Kemmler. Being fast with your hands helps, but you cannot forget there is a good bit of strategy to win. If you can win speed 8 man freestyles all the time, then you are at the top of your game.

[OliverFA]

I think that most members already gave the right answer. First, try to raise your score as highest as possible (then everybody will see that you are really good) and Second, try different variations (then everybody will see you are a true strategyst and not just good at one specific map).