new player order......same time (not freestyle)

[treefiddy]

At least he used the form this time, but I think he needs to learn to edit his posts.

[FlyinHi]

No, actually I was told to properly fill out the form. That's what this is. And I don't use forums ever, so sorry. But I don't, and I'm learning. It's not the end of the world, not even close.

Is there a way to delete old threads?

[mets10]

I tried this version and it is worth it.

[duday53]

I dought this gamestyle would be very popular within the non-premium players as they only have 4 s[pts they do not want to have a game there taking up a spot for a really long time.

[flashleg8]

Much like the variant in Risk II, all the players will take their turns inside the same 24 hour period, without knowing their enemies actions. Once the last person finishes, all the results would be shown and battles would be resolved.

What happens if two players order attacks on each other's same territories, or two players attack the same territory of a third player? Which attack is resolved first? Who gets the defending dice?

Interesting idea (a bit like Diplomacy the board game), and would introduce a "fog of war" but I don't see how it would work in practice.

If you can resolve these issues I would perhaps change to "Yes".

[FlyinHi]

Well, I don't know how much we can take from the Risk II version without slowing down the game too much. But what happens is everyone decides their battles. You can attack from one territory to multiple surrounding territories, just a side note.

If two people send armies against each other, there is no dice advantage, so ties simply get re-rolled. Whoever wins continues on to their destination.

If multiple armies attack the same territory, they act as allies for the moment. Meaning their dice do not attack each other, only the defender. So if the defender beats both attackers, they both lose armies. If the allied attackers defeat the defender, then they have a Spoils of War battle, which could be part of the same phase. This I believe also has no advantage in the dice. Whoever wins that takes over the territory.

It definitely would have to be modified from the Risk II version for sake of time, but it should be able to work along the same timeline as sequential and freestyle.

[flashleg8]

Well, I don't know how much we can take from the Risk II version without slowing down the game too much. But what happens is everyone decides their battles. You can attack from one territory to multiple surrounding territories, just a side note.

If two people send armies against each other, there is no dice advantage, so ties simply get re-rolled. Whoever wins continues on to their destination.

If multiple armies attack the same territory, they act as allies for the moment. Meaning their dice do not attack each other, only the defender. So if the defender beats both attackers, they both lose armies. If the allied attackers defeat the defender, then they have a Spoils of War battle, which could be part of the same phase. This I believe also has no advantage in the dice. Whoever wins that takes over the territory.

It definitely would have to be modified from the Risk II version for sake of time, but it should be able to work along the same timeline as sequential and freestyle.

Personally, the time factor doesn't bother me really as I'm premium. I can see how your (or Risk II's) method of dice determination would resolve any conflicting attacks. It might actually introduce a fair amount of skulldugary in coordinating attacks and alliance backstabbing (which would make some interesting play). I would say it has potential - but as other posters have said (in your other threads about this!) if it creeps too far from the origional version of Risk, you may as well play another game entierly. I personally hate freestyle at the best of times and am quite happy to play the standard type balanced maps with boring old sequential!

[FlyinHi]

Yea, it's definitely moving away from the traditional Risk style. I just thought it would be more realistic, although the programming of such an endeavor may not be.

I do apologize about the other threads, this is the only one that should have been made. My bad.

[austln]

this seems like a good idea to me, this way the over all game experience will have a better feel to it...i think it would be awesome

[paulk]

I wouldn't mind trying it. It sounds intriging. But it also sounds hard to make reality of the idea. Too many loose ends.

What about a version where you plot your moves and when everybody is done plotting you see everyones plots.

Then you can choose if you want to attack to invade, attack to take the opponent down to X armies, attack until you have X armies left, or simply not attack. (Maybe even a choice where you can retreat.)

When everyone has made that choice their choices become action.

[FlyinHi]

I like that retreat option. I did not include it solely because it would add another phase, and also because it was not included in the Risk II version. But maybe to make it a little quicker, the option to retreat can only be offered after the battle is staged, and not during the battle.

And since you brought this up it got me thinking. If an army chooses to retreat, perhaps the other army gets one attack on them. This would simulate the army picking off the stragglers.

[paulk]

If you want to make it even more advanced you could buy spies for X amount of armies and find out some of (not all) whats happening in an area. One spy per round that died after report...

[Bob Janova]

This sounds very interesting, although it is more like Diplomacy than Risk. It would be a whole new style of play for sure. I'd certainly give it a go!

[FlyinHi]

That's the second time I'm hearing the comparison to Diplomacy. It's only a board game right? And how good is it compared to Risk?

[flashleg8]

That's the second time I'm hearing the comparison to Diplomacy. It's only a board game right? And how good is it compared to Risk?

Better. No dice, no luck - only backstabbing deciet and skullduggery!

Wiki it if you want more info, but I've only played the board game (and its hard to get a good game as it goes on for a long time) - still looking for a good website version if anyone knows one?

[The1exile]

That's the second time I'm hearing the comparison to Diplomacy. It's only a board game right? And how good is it compared to Risk?

Better. No dice, no luck - only backstabbing deciet and skullduggery!

Wiki it if you want more info, but I've only played the board game (and its hard to get a good game as it goes on for a long time) - still looking for a good website version if anyone knows one?

I think someone started up a game of diplomacy in the social lounge II when it was still around, actually, but I think it kinda fizzled out.

[flashleg8]

That's the second time I'm hearing the comparison to Diplomacy. It's only a board game right? And how good is it compared to Risk?

Better. No dice, no luck - only backstabbing deciet and skullduggery!

Wiki it if you want more info, but I've only played the board game (and its hard to get a good game as it goes on for a long time) - still looking for a good website version if anyone knows one?

I think someone started up a game of diplomacy in the social lounge II when it was still around, actually, but I think it kinda fizzled out.

It really does take forever to play, its probably well suited to this style of a trun a day type play. I actually remember that thread I think - but I was kind of busy at the time.

[FlyinHi]

Anyone ever try the variants to Risk? Godstorm, 2021, or LOTR.

[flashleg8]

Anyone ever try the variants to Risk? Godstorm, 2021, or LOTR.

I played LOTR - really didn't like it. The map was rubbish (a better one is on this site!) and I thought the turn system was forced.
Never played the others though.

[FlyinHi]

My friend left his LOTR at my house, but never got around to playing it. But 2021 and Godstorm are definitely worth checking out. You can play traditional, or their specific variant which only lasts 5 turns. At first I thought it would be too short, but it works perfectly.

[austln]

i saw a new variant in toys r us the other day... it was risk transformers edition...seemed like a cool idea, but im not sure how good it comes out in practice

[Hermit]

i like this idea, i think it would add a good element to the game.

[Xyl]

That's the second time I'm hearing the comparison to Diplomacy. It's only a board game right? And how good is it compared to Risk?

Better. No dice, no luck - only backstabbing deciet and skullduggery!

Wiki it if you want more info, but I've only played the board game (and its hard to get a good game as it goes on for a long time) - still looking for a good website version if anyone knows one?

The Diplomatic Pouch has a lot of resources on internet Diplomacy games. I don't know of any nice Conquer Club-style websites though.

[FlyinHi]

It's nice to see that there are more votes for yes than no. But does anyone have any suggestions on making this a better idea. Perhaps a way of shortening certain phases.

[AfroDwarf]

I'm not concerned as much about the time (at max each round would take 3 days, that's seems fine to me especially with speed games To-Do) as much about the fact that without the real time animation Risk II had, players will have a bit more trouble figuring out what happened when all the attacks resolve. Also, in Risk II Same Time used 12-siders weighted by army strength to balance the fact that attackers were basically forced to press Auto-Attack. With classic Risk dice rules (all same 6-sided, defender wins ties) it seems to me like it favors turtling.