$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 58.85

4,245 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
26.8% of Goal | 29 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
4 Posts

Risk Europe» Forums » Variants

Subject: How would you balance a 5 or 6 player game? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
migue colacho
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi,

I'm having bad luck at achieving a 4 player game (I've only played 3 player variant) because we are always either 3 or 5 people, so I don't know how the game plays with 4 players. However, I have a copy of LOTR Risk (and the expansion) so I can create an army for a 5th and even a 6th player. The question is:

How do I balance it? Maybe the map will get too crowded to collect 7 crowns, or maybe there will be not enough castles available after the setup to make an interesting game (my gamegroup rush them a lot). Maybe any of you, readers, have managed to create a 5 player game that is balanced, so I ask you that question =) Would you leave the game as it is and just add one player, would you reduce the crown goal by one (down to 6 crowns from 7, the standard goal), and would you add any extra castles?

What about adding a 6th player? xD

Regards!!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Webster
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
necroferos wrote:
Hi,

I'm having bad luck at achieving a 4 player game (I've only played 3 player variant) because we are always either 3 or 5 people, so I don't know how the game plays with 4 players. However, I have a copy of LOTR Risk (and the expansion) so I can create an army for a 5th and even a 6th player. The question is:

How do I balance it? Maybe the map will get too crowded to collect 7 crowns, or maybe there will be not enough castles available after the setup to make an interesting game (my gamegroup rush them a lot). Maybe any of you, readers, have managed to create a 5 player game that is balanced, so I ask you that question =) Would you leave the game as it is and just add one player, would you reduce the crown goal by one (down to 6 crowns from 7, the standard goal), and would you add any extra castles?

What about adding a 6th player? xD

Regards!!


I would leave castles as they are. I would reduce crown required try reducing by one. If the game goes long then reduce by 2 crowns. 6 players becomes crowded.

I think the biggest problem with 5 and definitely 6 players is player elimination. If your group doesn't mind that then play on!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
migue colacho
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for your answer =)

I think player elimination won't be a problem ^^ If I get to play with 5 or 6 players I'll update the main post telling my experience!

Btw I'm still eager to read more answers
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
PJ Cunningham
United States
Greenfield
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I've played two 5-player games so far, each with a mercenary 6th army. Unless you use other rules mods to mitigate it, I'd suggest a victory condition of 6 crowns with 5-6 players. The board isn't crowded, per se, but there are fewer easy crowns for the taking.

Furthermore I'd suggest replacing the free one-time tax for Expanding into an unoccupied city with a *penalty* of losing that many units there instead. Lucking into those initial crowns at the start and getting a bonus for doing so can make the game swingy, so applying a penalty forces players to think/plan ahead instead of simply racing to be the first in, and in this way players at the end of the turn order aren't penalized quite as much.

For 7-8 players, further reduce the victory condition to 5 crowns and add a tax value of 1 to all non-city territories to ensure that siege engines remain a viable option. Also I'd remove the option to buy castles.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.