Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
16 Posts

Risk Legacy» Forums » General

Subject: Is 1v1 possible? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Alex K.
United States
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Hi,

I noticed after buying this game that 3-5 players are recommended. Well, is it possible to play 1v1?

Thanks
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Risk is best played with 4-5. it works okay with 3, but 2 is a head-to-head deathmatch....
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean McLaughlin
United States
Sacramento
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Does the game include rules for 1v1, or has someone come up with some?

Risk is intended for 3-5 players, but included rules for 2 players. It also sounds like this game would be far better with more players, but it's a lot easier for some of us to find one other players than 2+. In fact, it will probably determine whether or not I buy this game.

So, back to the original question: can you play 1v1?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jordan S.
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
Names and numbers.
badge
I haven't changed this in years and I don't intend to start now.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I haven't seen any variants that allow you to.

The rules don't have a variant for 2. You absolutely need 3 or more by the rules.

This is a game that the rules make for a good game, but the people you play with make it a great game-the more, the better.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jerry Martin
United States
Loveland
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
1 Million Shogoths Killed and Counting.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In old school risk you set up for three players and then the non-player got 2 on every country they had. It always played defense. Haven't played legacy so this may not work.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rochelle
United States
Huntsville
Alabama
flag msg tools
9 92 33 JOFA
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
1v1 is certainly possible; the rules in fact don't say anything about having to have at least 3 players (that's only on the box where it says "3-5 players"), the mechanics don't care if you only have 2 players, and the game specifically permits eliminating all but two players. However, the traditional Risk method of creating a proxy third player doesn't work at all for Legacy, and the two player state above is very much an endgame scenario.

You can play with just two people, but I wouldn't recommend it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vince Lupo
United States
ALEXANDRIA
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lomn wrote:
1v1 is certainly possible; the rules in fact don't say anything about having to have at least 3 players (that's only on the box where it says "3-5 players"), the mechanics don't care if you only have 2 players, and the game specifically permits eliminating all but two players. However, the traditional Risk method of creating a proxy third player doesn't work at all for Legacy, and the two player state above is very much an endgame scenario.

You can play with just two people, but I wouldn't recommend it.




What about if someone creates a Risk Legacy "robot" that decides what to do based on some rules and randomness.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A robot is doable. But it'd take a while to make all those decisions randomly.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rochelle
United States
Huntsville
Alabama
flag msg tools
9 92 33 JOFA
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Neo42 wrote:
What about if someone creates a Risk Legacy "robot" that decides what to do based on some rules and randomness.
Short of an all-up digital version of Legacy, it can't be done. The passive Risk-style robot doesn't fit the Legacy model at all; an active robot that is fair and interesting is far beyond the scope of a pen-and-paper effort.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hmmm... You could use a die roll to make a long string of decisions.

The hardest would be deciding how to get the AI to place troops.

Hmm...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rochelle
United States
Huntsville
Alabama
flag msg tools
9 92 33 JOFA
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Where to start. Where to place troops. Where to expand. Expand vs Attack. What's the value of the territories? Where are the scars? The cities? The fortifications? What about secretly-held info? What about decisions made on secret info? What about missions? What are the relevant special powers in play?

I feel quite confident stating that the only manually-driven fair robot player you'll come up with is one that the humans can safely ignore en route to victory. And if you can ignore that robot, why have it at all?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lomn wrote:
I feel quite confident stating that the only manually-driven fair robot player you'll come up with is one that the humans can safely ignore en route to victory. And if you can ignore that robot, why have it at all?
Well.... lets see what I can whip up.

BTW, for the rest of this post the term ai will be used to stand for "Artificial Idiot". whistle
Quote:
Where to start.
Shuffle the deck and flip a random card? (repeat until you get a legal starting territory)
Quote:
Where to place troops.
not sure yet.
Quote:
Where to expand.
At the beginning of each turn, do a die roll for how aggressive the AI will be that turn.
On a 1(turtle), the ai places troops then ends their turn.
2(cautious expansion): the ai expands enough to leave 2 troops onm it's outer territories. Not really sure how to write the script there. If their is nowhere to expand
Quote:
Expand vs Attack.
Yeah I need to finish that part, but 6 would be berserker assault
Quote:
What's the value of the territories?
same as normal.
Quote:
Where are the scars?
I wouldn't deal one to the ai.
Quote:
The cities?
if the ai has one it gets scored. But for starting... I'd only let them start in a major city if the player that founded the city isn't in the game.
Quote:
The fortifications?
If they control something fortified it works normally, but I can't imagine any situation where the ai would get to place one.
Quote:
What about secretly-held info?
Other than scars that they don't get?
Quote:
What about decisions made on secret info?
what secret info?
Quote:
What about missions?
If the ai qualifies it gets the point.
Quote:
What are the relevant special powers in play?
It'd do a roll in setup to choose an unused faction.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rochelle
United States
Huntsville
Alabama
flag msg tools
9 92 33 JOFA
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It's not whether a basic robot could do any of those things in isolation -- it's whether it could do any of those well as a whole. Do I expand into that Major City this turn, losing troops, or do I leave it empty to force the casualties on an opponent? Do I try to grab a continent troop bonus over here or attack an enemy's bonus over there? Do I risk exposing my defenses to complete a mission? Do I hold cards for a possible star or cash in for extra troops? Do I cash now or hold for a better ratio of extra troops?

That's the sort of thing that leads me to conclude that, short of a major programming effort integrated into an all-up digital version (else the players will be stuck tediously hand-jamming the board state), a fair robot won't be interesting. It won't present a credible threat or obstacle to intelligent players. Thus, it'll just waste their time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, is that really the goal? Previous editions with a neutral player had a punching bag that just sat there as the neutral player. Getting it to do something is better than that. but in leiu of that.... we could do a simpler version that gets a territory every turn and has a few troops on each.

but it's really more of a thought experiment to me. I can't think of any reason to actually play it. I'd rather just do the "teams" approach.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Rochelle
United States
Huntsville
Alabama
flag msg tools
9 92 33 JOFA
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A punching bag is one thing in traditional Risk, where victory is defined as "conquering everything". Even a dumb bag has to be defeated in that case. Moreover, since the punching bag is spread over the entire map in Risk, both players will have to fight it in order to consolidate their own positions. That's not at all the case in Legacy, where multiple viable paths to victory can simply ignore a passive punching bag. Sure, it throws a few more troops on the board. It doesn't actually solve any of the problems with 2-player Legacy -- the players need not interact with a nonthreatening robot in any fashion; in fact, the player that spends troops attacking the punching bag is only serving to weaken his position against the true opponent.

I considered suggesting teams, but I dismissed it for basically the same reason. A player controlling two armies that will never ever attack each other is barely distinguished from a single army. One could argue that you've got added strategic complexity by forcing the players to fight distinct two-front wars or by increasing the number of unique powers; I feel this is really just adding overhead in hopes of masking, rather than solving, the problem.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Try the teams out to see how you like it. It does have the same sort of head-to-head play aspect, but the added complexity of each player controlling 2 factions is enough to distract you from the fact that it's "essentially the same". You're deploying two seperate armies, which also requires 2 seperate plans of attack, and 2 different sets of long-term goals.
 
 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.