No More Money From Me

joeyjordison · Post by **joeyjordison** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:16 pm

play 4 player doubles. u simply cannot ally in that sort of game or u would ally against ur own team! also maybe try terminator games coz then u don't hav to win, u just hav to take some1 out to get ur points back

KoolBak · Post by **KoolBak** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:04 pm

Great...G-zan is staying...sigh.

Giants dood...thank for your support - you are a friend indeed. Amazing that I suggested the 2 person game, huh whineydood?

BTW......in my last few HUNDRED games, there have been no alliances and no multis....hmmmm....wonder how dumbass koolbak managed that impossible feat?

*anticipates boatloads of drool from whiney-boy*

Do you complain about other good things in life too?

ps - lack, if he doesnt come back, I'll spot an extra twenty to replace his missing fortunes.....

nyg5680 · Post by **nyg5680** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:07 pm

lol way 2 show em

KoolBak · Post by **KoolBak** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:08 pm

Fireside Poet · Post by **Fireside Poet** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:13 pm

KoolBak wrote:

nyg5680 · Post by **nyg5680** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:17 pm

i think we scared the guy away koolbac i think ur goanna hafta spot lack 20 bucks each year

KoolBak · Post by **KoolBak** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:18 pm

Well at the rate I'm going, that'll put me at about $120 / year...LOL!!

nyg5680 · Post by **nyg5680** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:25 pm

umm hey can u spot me a 20? lol

wick · Post by **wick** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:43 pm

if there wasnt any skill involved i think i would win alot more games...LOL and for mulitis and ciricle jerks "ailance players", i either wont play them or just add them to my ignore list... this a great site lackattack thank you!, ill keep paying and playing cause of guys like koolbak and others that have posted on this thread.

RobinJ · Post by **RobinJ** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:44 pm

lackattack wrote:
Gerazan wrote:There needs to be an option for 2 player games< You could make this a perk for paying players to keep the multis out.

You know about perks right..

Thats extra little things paying players usually get on pay sites but seem to be in short supply here.
This is a decent idea - If both people had to be premium and we also put in a cheat detection script (currently in planning stage), I would be okay with 2-person games. Any objections?

I might just go premium.

DogDoc · Post by **DogDoc** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:49 pm

KoolBak wrote:Great...G-zan is staying...sigh.

That was close. The Titanic just avoided an iceberg . . .

RobinJ · Post by **RobinJ** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:52 pm

stinkycheese · Post by **stinkycheese** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:53 pm

Fireside Poet wrote:
KoolBak wrote:

DogDoc · Post by **DogDoc** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:58 pm

lackattack wrote:
Gerazan wrote:There needs to be an option for 2 player games< You could make this a perk for paying players to keep the multis out.

You know about perks right..

Thats extra little things paying players usually get on pay sites but seem to be in short supply here.
This is a decent idea - If both people had to be premium and we also put in a cheat detection script (currently in planning stage), I would be okay with 2-person games. Any objections?

No objections, just that I find it unnecessary. As a 30+ year veteran of the boardgame, I can assure you that 2-player Risk games are not fun. Risk was meant to be a multiplayer game. If you want to play a 2-player game, try Stratego. Just my $.02 .

As far as Risk having no skill involved, well, that's the line I hear from every Risk player that loses consistently. Sure the dice play a large part (that's where the term "risk" comes into play -- duh!) but the game also has everything to do with where you deploy, where to attack, when do you stop your attacks, when do you turn in cards, etc etc.

As far as multi accounts go, I haven't had a problem that I know of and if I suspected it, I just wouldn't play with them again. If you're really bothered by the possibility of multis, set up private games and invite people you know/trust.

RobinJ · Post by **RobinJ** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:06 pm

^
I like the 2-player games - more strategy and a greater variety of things to do. Could make for very interesting gameplay

qeee1 · Post by **qeee1** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:05 pm

Me no like 2 player risk, it goes against what I see risk as. The main skill in risk is diplomatic not strategic, when it's 1 on 1 it removes the whole diplomatic aspect. I also don't particularly like 2v2 doubles, but at least you've got some added strategic considerations there.

Sargentgeneral · Post by **Sargentgeneral** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:07 pm

same with me, im a more all for one or none for anybody kinda guy.

Ronaldinho · Post by **Ronaldinho** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:27 pm

Gerazan wrote:Theres no skill involved in this game.

To win its all about who can convince someone to help them screw over the leader so they can win.

Unless you make a 2 player game option you wont be seeing any more moola from this ole boy.

no more money ? wtf bro you was paying anyway?. Stfu we dident need YOUR money this site is awesome and there is plenty of skill involved, your just probs a n00bish risk player and need to have a timeout with your toys

XenHu · Post by **XenHu** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:31 pm

Ronaldinho wrote:
Gerazan wrote:Theres no skill involved in this game.

To win its all about who can convince someone to help them screw over the leader so they can win.

Unless you make a 2 player game option you wont be seeing any more moola from this ole boy.

no more money ? wtf bro you was paying anyway?. Stfu we dident need YOUR money this site is awesome and there is plenty of skill involved, your just probs a n00bish risk player and need to have a timeout with your toys

^^^ Speech of the year

honestjohn · Post by **honestjohn** » Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:10 am

No Strategy? I sat in a game with a dude called Koolbak. I learned my first lesson about strategy. It worked for him. Why the hang can't I make it work for me

I think I would probably get a lot of enjoyment in two player Risk. It would bring back some wonderful memories of the first time I ever sat down at a Risk board.

New Years eve, 1961. I had come across the game in a most unlikely store selling everything from dish towels to broom handles.
It was our first new years married and we were celebrating with another couple. Him and I were in the navy and I got the game out just to show him. I hadn't even read the rules right through yet.

The 'kissing hour' came and went and the game went on until about 2:30.
Both wives had gone to bed and in both homes there was nothing served but 'hot tongue and cold shoulder' for about a week.

Thanks Lack for this great site

KoolBak · Post by **KoolBak** » Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:55 am

Excellent story John! You are a fine addition to this site in my humble opinion!!

"Hot tongue (not the good kind!) and cold shoulder"!! LMAO!! Beautiful...I promise I will get a lot of use out of this one in the future

Between the Canadians and the British I have met here, my vocabulary is expanding at an incredible rate! Thanks all!!

nyg5680 · Post by **nyg5680** » Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:56 am

lol it rubs off on all of us

RobinJ · Post by **RobinJ** » Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:26 pm

Ronaldinho wrote:
Gerazan wrote:Theres no skill involved in this game.

To win its all about who can convince someone to help them screw over the leader so they can win.

Unless you make a 2 player game option you wont be seeing any more moola from this ole boy.

no more money ? wtf bro you was paying anyway?. Stfu we dident need YOUR money this site is awesome and there is plenty of skill involved, your just probs a n00bish risk player and need to have a timeout with your toys

Oh that is harsh (but only too true

)

Nous-irons · Post by **Nous-irons** » Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:50 pm

Gerazan wrote:Theres no skill involved in this game.

To win its all about who can convince someone to help them screw over the leader so they can win.

Unless you make a 2 player game option you wont be seeing any more moola from this ole boy.

Dude, it's politics. It's always existing in the world. I suppose the US got into its position with "no skill", because throughout in the history it was always convincing someone to help screw their bigger enemy so they could win.

There was no skill involved in the American Revolution, it was all about the American colonists convincing France to help screw over the British so they could win.

There was no skill involved in the Chinese resistance of the Japanese from 1937-1945. It was all about the CPC getting the KMT to screw over Japan (with some help by the Americans) so they could screw over the KMT and they could win (mainland China).

There was no skill in Bismarck's unification of Germany, it was all about getting some German princes together to suppress his political enemies so he could then suppress those princes so he could win (the First Reich).

Going by your logic.

Please tell me a time in history where there were only two sides in the world.

nyg5680 · Post by **nyg5680** » Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:51 pm

guys i think he left so koolbac is spottin lack 20 bucks a year

No More Money From Me

Re: No More Money From Me

Re: No More Money From Me

Re: No More Money From Me

Re: No More Money From Me