-
Background
The first 2 changes I've never used before, but I plan on suggesting them this Friday at a game night that will likely be dedicated to Risk. The last change I've used many times, and I am very comfortable recommending it (though I'm sure it's widely used already).
Proposed Rule Changes
- Link Eastern Australia to Argentina
- Change Continent Bonuses
2 - Australia
3 - South America (increased from 2)
4 - Africa (increased from 3)
5 - North America
6 - Europe (increased from 5)
7 - Asia
- Cap the book trade-ins (I've usually used 10, 12, or 15 as the cap)
Motivation
Australia/Argentina Link
I've played in a variety of groups and "hiding" out in Australia has always been the dominant strategy. It doesn't always win, but it wins a disproportionate amount of the time.
The problem that I've encountered is that Australia is relatively isolated and only has 1 way in/out. In a game where multiple players are vying for Europe, Africa, N America, and S America, the Australia player will frequently choose to bunker down and make Australia a very unattractive target. An opportunistic player may do more than this, but I've seen cases where this was sufficient for victory.
The remaining players will frequently weaken one another competing over the 4 adjacent continents mentioned above and the Australia player comes out after many turns of growing stronger to dominate them.
If the remaining players are aware of this possibility they may attempt to play more passively against one another so that the Australia player isn't the only one passively growing their armies, but this makes for a boring game IMO.
They could try to attack the Australia player, but this is likely to end with 1 or 2 of them weakening themselves while the others wait to clean up the scraps. Therefore, players are reluctant to be the first to take on the Australia player unless they are nearly assured of taking and defending Australia entirely. In this case they will frequently just resume the strategy of the previous Australia player. The end effect is that the "problem" never goes away.
I make it sound like this is a game killer every time. It's not, but this happens enough, (more in some groups than others no doubt), that connecting Australia to the more strategically relevant parts of the map could do a great deal to improve the game.
Change Continent Bonuses
The Eastern Australia to Argentina connection gives South America a 3rd border, so having 3 reinforcements seems necessary. As for the other changes, in games I've played Australia, South America, and North America have always seemed like more effective power bases. Adding an army to Africa and Europe could balance the continents a little better. I'm not sure it's wise to balance Asia, but maybe it could be fun. If I were to try, I'd have to give it 9 or 10 armies per turn!
Capping the Books
If you don't mind a longer game this is a must. Players getting 40, then 45, then 50 armies per turn flips the game on it's head, and takes away most of the strategy.
Feedback Appreciated!
As I said up front, I've only tried the last modification (capping the books). I may get to try the others on Friday. Has anyone tried these variant or similar variants before? If so, what were your impressions?
Thanks!
-
-
I also think the suggestions for making deals in this thread sound pretty good. I may suggest them as well.
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/723032/risk-is-underrated-ho...
-
Ken Waters
United States
Aloha
Oregon
-
Why Western Australia instead of Eastern Australia? Your link seems to go the wrong way. I've seen proposals to link Eastern Australia to Argentina and to link Western Australia to Madagascar, but never what you're proposing.
-
Josephus
United Kingdom
Llantwit Major
-
By linking Australia to S. America you are making S. America much worse. It's more likely that you are helping the Australian player as it gives him an attacking option for the early to mid game that Asia does not. S. America now has to fight 3 fronts which I can't see him winning. As he is so spread out he is an easy target for the Australian player who has a better chance of keeping S. America with the additional Australian bonus.
Having played Risk many times, I agree that Australa is a powerful base but I don't see the need to change the game. If you must change something to weaken Australia then I would simply make the continent troop bonus 1 instead of 2.
A less disruptive change to overall game strategy would be to link E. Australia to Japan. Whilst it is something I would never do, it creates the second entrance to Australia that you crave without having a knock on effect to the other continents.
-
Los 28
United States
California
-
Your variants look good.
An alternative suggestion that comes to mind, is the following:
Instead of linking Western Australia to Argentina, why not just reduce the continent bonus for Australia from 2 to 1.
Then leave South America at 2.
Africa increase to 4 sounds OK (Not too necessary, especially if leaving South America at 2, but would be nice).
North America at 5.
Europe increased to 6, sounds great ! I never understood how North America and Europe were both the same. Everyone who plays knows that holding Europe is more difficult than holding North America.
But if you increase Europe to 6, you just MUST increase Asia's continent bonus. At least increase Asia to 8, because to have Europe at 6 and Asia with only one more troop bonus with 7, is too small. Taking and holding Asia compared to doing the same with Europe, needs more of a bonus than just a one-troop difference.
"Capping the Books" variant sounds 100% great ! Definitely. (And you are correct, in that many people play with a variant similar/exactly like this one.)
Have fun in your game(s), and PLEASE PLEASE come back after you have tried some of your new variants, and tell us how it went (tell us right here in this same thread).
-
Los 28
United States
California
-
D-Rider wrote: Why Western Australia instead of Eastern Australia? Your link seems to go the wrong way. I've seen proposals to link Eastern Australia to Argentina and to link Western Australia to Madagascar, but never what you're proposing.
Oops.
I'm sure he meant to say, Eastern Australia to Argentina. Must just be a typo on his part.
-
Kevin Youells
United States
Camp Hill
Pennsylvania
I paid 100 geek gold, and all I got was this lousy overtext
-
Just arrange to use three missiles in a battle involving Indonesia, and the continent is trashed. Oops, wrong version
-
Sean Shaw
United States
Georgia
-
Or you could make the Australian bonus require that you have at least one other island to claim the bonus...so either Japan, Madagascar or Great Britain.
-
-
Thanks for the feedback guys. Yes I meant to say Eastern Australia! I must have put my head on backwards this morning. I've fixed it in the OP.
Los 28
I agree that bumping Asia is probably necessary to keep the continents balanced, but it's such an enigma that I wouldn't even consider it balanced until it had at least 9 reinforcements per turn. I'd really be fine with any value for Asia 7-10 since realistically I don't think someone is likely to hold it unless the game is already in hand. Still, if having Asia at 7 while Europe is at 6 seems odd (which it is) maybe bumping Asia to 8 would keep things from looking ridiculous.
Josephus
The disadvantage of adding another border to South America is offset by increasing the continent bonus from 2 to 3. Since Africa gets upgraded from 3 to 4, the ordinal nature of continent values is preserved (Africa has more territories than South America and therefore a greater bonus).
I like the idea of decreasing Australia to 1 as an alternative. Connecting it to Japan seems like a good solution to, though it does less to to fix the isolation issue.
Sean
The Australia +1 island continent is a very interesting idea! I'd like to try that sometime as well.
No matter what you do, I feel like capping the books and increasing the continent bonuses for Africa, Europe, and even Asia can help the game. Thanks for the suggestions. If I get to try the variant on Friday night I'll be sure to report on the results.
-
Josephus
United Kingdom
Llantwit Major
-
Kyle Cactus wrote:
Josephus
The disadvantage of adding another border to South America is offset by increasing the continent bonus from 2 to 3. Since Africa gets upgraded from 3 to 4, the ordinal logic of continent values is preserved (Africa has more territories than South America).
I just feel that when you are in S. America you are always fighting 2 battles vs N. America and Africa. Even though I am getting 1 extra army, the disadvantage of having Australia join the party is awful. I can't imagine ever wanting to invest the resources to keep S. America in these circumstances.
A little tongue in cheek, but also a viable option may be to set up a one way connection from Britain to W. Australia. This route would allow Britain to invade without the option for Australia to enter Europe. This route would also prevent a player from transfering troops from Australia back to Britain if they owned both territories. This feels like a balanced option with the added benefit that it reflects history when the British were sending prisioners to W. Australia during the 17 & 18 hundreds.
-
Los 28
United States
California
-
Kyle Cactus wrote: Los28, I agree that bumping Asia is probably necessary to keep the continents balanced, but it's such an enigma that I wouldn't even consider it balanced until it had at least 9 reinforcements per turn. I'd really be fine with any value for Asia 7-10 since realistically I don't think someone is likely to hold it unless the game is already in hand. Still, if having Asia at 7 while Europe is at 6 seems odd (which it is) maybe bumping Asia to 8 would keep things from looking ridiculous.
Kyle,
Just thinking further. Instead of increasing some of the continent bonuses, you could also just decrease two of them (from their standard amount), and get a "more balanced" and meaningful system.
Here is one such recommendation (based on NO new connections to Austalia) :
Australia worth 1 (reduced from 2 to 1)
South America 2
Africa 3
North America worth 4 (reduced from 5 to 4)
Europe 5
Asia 7
-
Stefano Crespi
Italy
Bologna
Italy
-
We used to modify the board simply linking australia with Argentina the way Alaska is connected with Kamchatka.
EDIT: or use this board! ;-)
-
-
Well we had 4 players for Risk on Friday. I suggested the variant described in the OP. The group agreed to cap books (somehting we always do anyway), and decided to connect West Australia to Madagascar instead of linking East Australia to Argentina. They didn't want to adjust any of the continent values, so we kept them as is.
Overall, adding a connection from Australia to a non-Asia continent seemed to have a big impact on the game. There were several lead changes, and instead of the Australia player watching from afar, they were frequently involved. 1 play with this mod is far from proof that it achieves the desired goal, but I was greatly encouraged.
For those who are interested, a bit of a session report...
Rules and Other Specifics
4 Players. In turn order...
Yellow
Green
Red
Blue (myself)
Play style:
I'd consider this a fairly social/casual group, and some players were willing to pursue objectives that could harm their chance at victory (such as retribution).
Rules:
- Territory Cards Dealt randomly to determine starting position with players taking turns placing individual extra armies
- Books capped at 15 apiece
- West Australia linked to Madagascar
- At most 6 cards could be held before turning in a book.
- No 'double booking' (turning in 2 books simultaneously)
- A book can be traded in mid-turn if another players cards are taken after eliminating them. This does not count as double booking!
(These last 3 came up as questions mid-game and we made a group decision rather than consulting the rule-book. I can't recall if these are consistent with official Risk rules or not.)
Opening Placement
Yellow - Split extras between Africa and North America.
Green - Split extra troops between South America and Australia with a few others in Japan.
Red - Committed all extra troops to South America.
Blue (myself) - Committed all extra troops to Australia.
I thought for sure that green would be devastated on the first turn dealing with both the full load of Red and myself...
Opening Moves
Yellow - Placed 3 reinforcements in North America and took a country (not the entire continent)
Green - Placed 3 reinforcements in Australia, and with an inferior force completely took me out and took hold of Australia!
Red - Placed 3 armies in South America and eliminated Green's forces there, taking control of the continent.
Blue - Stunned, that Green defeated me with a force that was greatly outnumbered, I took some random country in Europe and collected my card.
Early Game - Passive Expansion of Green and Red
Yellow - Expanded slowly in North America and to a lesser extent Africa, without taking a continent.
Green - Expanded slowly out of Australia (owned) into Asia
Red - Expanded slowly out of South America (owned) into North America or Africa, effectively preventing yellow from taking either.
Blue - Mulled around Europe and Asia taking a country a turn and collecting cards. I waited out other players before turning in books to maximize troop bonus (helped to offset the lack of a continent), and kept all my spare troops in 1 country in hopes of being an unattractive target.
Since green and red had continents, they were more powerful than yellow or myself. Red seemed to have a higher troop count since green was exposed to so much combat in the opening round of turns.
At one point Green turned in a book and placed all of the troops adjacent to my 1 huddled mass of armies in Asia. I saw that it was his intention to attack me, so I pointed out that he had little to gain from doing so.
The only reason I could see would be to reduce my threat to Australia (which I clearly was not strong enough to take and defend), but by fighting me he'd only weaken himself and eventually fall victim to Red. It was not possible for him to take me out and get my cards, because my other countries were too widely distributed. Plus, he was outnumbered in the initial battle anyway!
Green was unconvinced by these arguments, so I held up my cards and told him that if he attacked my main force, I'd turn in a book and throw everything I had at Australia.
I'm not one to take myself out just to spite another player, but I thought green's strategy was incredibly bizarre, and I wasn't about to be victimized by it again. The threat of mutual assured destruction was my only chance to maintain what little power I had accumulated. It worked! Green took some country with only 1 army, and collected a card.
Soon after this I struck an alliance of sorts with yellow, since neither of us had a continent. It was actually a lengthy discussion with everyone at the table offering points and counterpoints about the strategic possibilities on the board. I believe it was that discussion more than the actual alliance that shaped the next significant event.
The War Between Green and Red
To recap:
Yellow - Holds a handful of countries in North America and Africa.
Green - Holds Australia.
Red - Holds South America
Blue (myself) - holds a few countries in Europe and Asia.
Red leads the troop count, followed by Green.
Green had begun to creep into Africa through the Western Australia/Madagascar connection. On his next book turn in, he put everything in Africa and went after Red in South America, successfully pegging the continent. Red took the next turn, handing in a book, placing all troops in North America. He went up through Alaska, down through Asia, and into Australia, taking the entire continent. He then spent every available troop trying to take Madagascar from Western Australia. Clearly he was more interested in retribution than improving his own position.
I had the next turn, and I also handed in a book. I used all of the troops to augment an already sizable mass of troops in Asia, and I conquered Australia. On his following turn, Green completed his conquest of South America. This established a new order of sorts, with Green now in South America and myself in Australia.
Mid Game - Blue Emerges
Recap:
Yellow - Holds a handful of countries in North America and Africa.
Green - Owns South America
Red - Holds a few countries in North America and Asia.
Blue (myself) - Owns Australia and most of Europe.
Bizarrely, Red continued to use all his energy to fight Green. Green easily held him off while also fighting intermittently with Yellow to prevent them from taking North America. Meanwhile, I was the forgotten entity, and I started to strengthen my forces in Europe.
I was hesitant to actually conquer Europe, because I know I'd probably become the target once I did. So for I while I just got stronger while Green ran in place skirmishing with Red and trying to prevent Yellow from taking North America.
Despite my early trials with Green I was feeling sorry for him. He had made a fairly understandable move in attacking Red, at the time the biggest obstacle between him and victory, but Red was not releasing his vendetta. I even encouraged Red to pursue another objective, even though it wasn't to my benefit. It didn't work.
After this, I decided I'd try to conquer Europe when I got my next book. Red was very weak, and I considered taking him out for his cards, but he was now split between Africa, North America, and Asia, so I didn't think I could pull it off.
Once I took Europe, Red and Green coordinated an attack against me and succeeded in penetrating the continent and reducing my forces there by about half. It was an impressive collaboration considering the amount of fighting between the two.
The End Game - Predator in Waiting
Recap:
Pretty much the same as the previous recap.
Ultimately, I didn't think I could succeed in trying to take Europe, and Red seemed to be losing interest in attacking Green, who was the next most powerful player. So I bit the bullet and went on the offensive against Green once I got my next book. I succeeded in pegging South America, but again, I wasn't strong enough to defend 2 continents against the type of opposition that I'd face after taking a 2nd continent, so I stopped there. I was still in good position, but I feared 1 possibility...
A few turns later, Yellow turned in a book, and eliminated Red. He traded in another book mid-turn and eliminated Green (after I softened him up in South America!). Then he traded in those cards mid-turn and came after me. He wasn't nearly strong enough to take me out, but swung the tide in his favor.
I had 3 cards but no book, otherwise I could have put him back on his heels. As it was, I split up what continents I could, and he reclaimed them the next turn. In the absence of books, it was clear he had the upper hand in this back-and-forth, so I knew I had to get a book soon. I also couldn't afford to let him hold 'fortress America' where he was becoming increasingly well entrenched.
With 4 cards I again had no book! I placed what reinforcements I had in Africa and went after South America, but ultimately failed (despite superior numbers). I had troops left in Iceland, so I attacked North America, but I was repelled there too, and failed to take a country, in the process.
I'm not sure it would have mattered. On the next turn he took everything but Australia. Even with a book I probably would have lost, but I didn't have one and it was getting late. I conceded victory to Yellow.
Final Thoughts
It was a bizarre game, but ultimately a very enjoyable one. For most of the game, Australia was as involved as any other continent.
The influence of some unconventional strategies and vindictive play affected the game quite a bit, but everyone had a good time. Even Green and Red were getting along fine off the board, despite their apparent blood feud on the board.
-
|
|
Posted Tue Jan 31, 2012 9:51 pm
