[GO] No Dice Games

[panicker]

So italians like their risk like their football, defensive.

Dont like the idea, could get boring (as italian football gets 99% of the time ).

totally agree

[Lupo]

So italians like their risk like their football, defensive.

Dont like the idea, could get boring (as italian football gets 99% of the time ).

totally agree

I am starting thinking you're only angry 'cause Italy won the World Cup....
Moreover what you said about Italy is not true: have you wacthed Germany-Italy during the world cup? It was a really great match!

About italian Risk, maybe you should try it, before saying something totally not true!

[panicker]

So italians like their risk like their football, defensive.

Dont like the idea, could get boring (as italian football gets 99% of the time ).

totally agree

I am starting thinking you're only angry 'cause Italy won the World Cup....
Moreover what you said about Italy is not true: have you wacthed Germany-Italy during the world cup? It was a really great match!

About italian Risk, maybe you should try it, before saying something totally not true!

my agreement was based purely on the domestic league in italy and is an opinion

as for the italian rules for risk i wouldnt be totally against that but how would it work when say both teams threw all sixes? defending team still win these battles?

[Lupo]

yes the defender always win in case of tied dice.
(are the same international rules, the only difference is the fact that you could defend with 3 armies)

believe me, it's complitely a different game!

You should try it, at least one time!

[Oz314]

When invading another territory, armies mutually annihilate each other at the ratio of 1:1. In other words, if you have 1 army guarding Kamchatka, I must have at least 3 armies in Alaska in order to take it (from across the Bering Straight) -- 1 army to annihilate (and be annihilated by) your 1 occupying army, 1 army to invade and occupy Kamchatka, and 1 army to remain behind in Alaska.

Perhaps this can be incorporated as a game option on Conquer Club?

I like this idea. In fact, I came to the forum today to suggest a 'no dice' option.

The unequal and/or changing annihilation ratios based on location might be premature at this point as you've said, but the basic 1:1 idea is sound.

As someone pointed out, automatically placing 3 armies on every territory at the start of the game makes this option problematic. A possible solution to this is to allow an army placement phase, as is done by some of us when playing tabletop risk.

Place one army on every territory automatically, then allow players to place their armies manually. The amount of army placement could be set at some optimal number (place 3 per turn, or 5 per turn, or whatever), or could even be a configurable option for the game setup.

Come to think of it, if the site staff takes the time to hack an army placement phase into the code for a 'no dice' option, the Army Placement Phase could become an option enabled for any game on the site.

[cramill]

Italian Risk rules (3 dice defending)

Hm, this sounds interesting, maybe I will try it the next time I play with some friends. Is that the only difference between international and italian rules?

Also, I don't think I would like a no dice game. I agree with those who said that without dice the game isn't Risk.

[Fitz69]

This whole concept sounds very much like The 'gunboat' version of Civilization. So why not throw in some calamity-cards to stir things up a bit?

As to placement in the beginning of the game you could utilize the CIV version of poulation expansion. always doubling the current population to the specific areas limit.

[coolpsp]

[MOD EDIT: The reason this is REJECTED is the possibility of unbreakable stalemates. See here, here and here. Feel free to continue the discussion here, but unless these difficulties can be overcome, this will not be implemented. If you see a thread that should be merged here, please inform a moderator. -- agentcom]

Suggestion:no dice

Suggestion Idea:OK instead of having dice for when you attack to see if you will take the terrotry why not if you have more armies for example 35 vs 29 you end up with 6.This can be adapted so that you roll dice to see how many of the six you loose

35 vs 6
you end up with 6
then you roll dice to see how much more you loose like if you roll a 0 you loose 0 if you roll 10 you can loose upto 1/5 of the attacking army

this is much more fair than the current system

Why it is needed: It is needed because you rarely have bad dice you have exremly bad dice.

like 16vs 5 a player lost 15

Priority=4.75

[RobinJ]

First of all, I hope you are suggesting this as simply an option and, secondly, it has been suggested before

[john1099]

you're trying to change the original risk game, which is moronic.
Terrible idea, and also on a side note, lower the priority, nothing wrong with the current system !

[Steel Panzer]

got to agree that its a terrible idea.

you think from the attackers point of view, but look from the defenders: you have a 6 conutry, continent with lets say 3 borders with 3 armies on each, the attacker comes with 20 armies, he will take your continent (using your formula) and you have to start from scratch or in a normal game you have a chance to at least keep a part of your continent

[Chad22342]

It can be an option...I guess...The only people who would use it would be n00bs and people trying to get some razy amunts of points...

[Spritzking]

no it is a serious option, and you dont act very adultive with your comments. but to go on, i like every option, that balnce winning and losing (armies not games) in a fair way...

[Wisse]

already been suggested, check the stickey called "to-do list"

[RobinJ]

^Yes but is life and real war fair? Sometimes you hear of small forces holding off huge ones when they want it badly enough. Also, I wouldn't like CC to deviate too much from Risk. (Am I allowed to say that?)

[Spritzking]

robin you dont understand, it is not about fairness of a game, of course it is fair after all cuz sometimes you loose and sometimes you win, the only shit is that you cant plan your moves very organized, and that is what should be an option,

@wisse i know the to-do list, but this isn't my thread and i just wanted to explain something to people

[CreepyUncleAndy]

I suggested a "no-dice" alternative months ago: it was called "mutual annihilation"; each attacking army automatically destroys one defender, and each defending army automatically destroys one attacker (so if you want to attack a territory that has 1 defender, you need to attack from a territory where you have 3 armies -- 1 to destroy and be destroyed by the defender, 1 to occupy the new territory, and 1 to stay behind to hold the territory you attacked from).

They didn't like that idea much, either.

[Herakilla]

the only shit is that you cant plan your moves very organized, and that is what should be an option,

if you cant plan your moves, you aint as good a player you thought you were

all my moves are planned, i make it up as i go. when i finish my turn i spend 2 mins or so (not very long) and plan for next turn. when i come into the game again for my next turn i revise my plan according to what other players did, this takes like half a min cuz my plans are very flexible

[christopherfre]

worst idea ever...read the very first line on this website...Risk all your armies on a daring continent grab. the game is called risk for a reason.

[Spritzking]

weel i got some reason to do the no dice:

it saves money. for the site wil use less dice, so lack will see his income rise trough the skies, if he implents no dice

[Generaln7]

i would like to play a game of risk with out dice the solders will be juist killing each other at a 1:1 ratio. I think it would be cool to play and you wont have all the bullshit over riged dice;)
How about it? it would put some more statagie in the game.

[benjikat]

i would like to play a game of risk with out dice the solders will be juist killing each other at a 1:1 ratio. I think it would be cool to play and you wont have all the bullshit over riged dice;)
How about it? it would put some more statagie in the game.

So basically whoever has the good fortune to have a good drop / go first, is likely to win! - no thank you.

When will people realise - it's the dice that make CC great

[firth4eva]

What about no territories either? That would be great.

[chessplaya]

lol

crazy!

Dumb !

ignorant!

[Generaln7]

i dont know but i thought it would be fun what we could do is by the optines where you chose if you want to play with cards or not, ect, ect you could have the optinen to turn dice on or not;)