GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
9,265 Supporters
$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
17 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

Risk 2210 A.D.» Forums » Variants

Subject: Risk 2210 AD: Oceans - Pacific Expansion Board rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
IG Warmonger
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
We took our first crack at creating a Risk 2210 AD: Oceans boards quite some time ago now. However, as what happens so often we got a little side tracked and this project lost its momentum. Well we've eventually found our way back to it. In an attempt to keep it moving forward, hopefully in the right direction, we thought we'd ask our fellow gamers to weigh in on its development.

Any feedback about the graphics and rules would be grateful appreciated.



A working draft of the rules is included below:

# - # - # - #

1. Controlling an Ocean Zone grants a bonus (additional MODs, Energy, etc.) to the player that control those zones – we had originally played with the idea of control of these zones giving an additional bonus to adjacent Land Continents and/or Water Colonies, but now feel that a) it doesn’t give enough incentive for other players to move into occupy ocean territories and, b) it makes the bonus structure far too complicated.

a) An alternative to this would be to look upon the ocean territories as a "continent" in their own right, affording similar bonuses to that of the existing land territories.

b) This bonus could be separate to the existing water territory continental bonuses or, in some way, connected to it. For example, holding both Pacific water continents and the Pacific Ocean "continent" could give the holding player some sort of additional bonus. This bonus could be that they're allowed to draw an additional command card for free... I think giving them extra reinforcements/energy tokens on top of the large amount that they would already be receiving would tip the game far too much in their favour.

2. Arrows on the board indicate potential port positions or movement between ocean zones.

3. Territories with a Naval Port can be used to move units into and out of an Ocean Zone either to take an uncontested Ocean Zone/territory or to attack enemy units in that Ocean Zone/territory.

4. Naval Port token: Cost 3/4 (no final decision taken) Energy (use port token) and may be purchased and placed on the board during the Hire and Place Commanders and Build Space Stations phase and allow MODs in Ocean Zones to return to land/water.

a) I think that rather than allowing players to buy port token these should be placed semi-randomly at the beginning of the game - there should still be some rules dictating how they are positioned. For example, a random draw could potentially have them all being placed on the east coast of Asia and this would surely prove somewhat pointless.

5. Any player may use a built naval port.

6. Naval Ports may be destroyed by a player when they take control of the land territory/water on which it has been placed – a decision must be taken as soon as that player takes control of that territory.

a) If naval ports were only temporary then this would give an unfair advantage to the player with the most energy tokens.

7. A Naval Port is required to enter an Ocean Zone if there is no existing land territory.

8. Ocean Zones do not count as territories for calculating energy and units during the Collect and Deploy MODs and Energy phase and when calculating the score at the end of the game (we are flexible to changing this rule).

9. Ocean Zones can only be used as part of a “path” during the Fortify Position phase if appropriate Naval Ports are in place.

10. The Naval Commander is required to move/attack into or out of Ocean Zones.

11. The Naval Commander attacks and defends with a d8 while attacking into or out of an Ocean Zone

12. MODs that are sent into Ocean Zones are sea-going units and cannot return to land except via a Naval Port. This includes the Fortify Position phase.

13. Ocean Zones can be counted as contested territories for the purposes of the 3-Territory Bonus if they contained enemy units.

14. There can only be a maximum of 4 (possible 3) Naval Ports at any time (specific to the Pacific Ocean).

a) Naval posts would restrict movement not only to and from land territories, but also to and from water territories. For example, players wouldn't simply be able to move from any water territory to any adjacent ocean territory. Instead they would need to move through a naval port just as they would from a land territory.

# - # - # - #

If you're interested in this or want to know more about our other Risk 2210 AD expansions then visit:

www.insurgencygaming.com
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt
United States
Alabama
flag msg tools
badge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tdyU_gW6WE
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Any feedback about the graphics and rules would be grateful appreciated.


Well, I noticed that the pic you included on BGG had a watermark splattered across it, so I figured maybe the real deal was limited to the Insurgency Gaming site to make sure it got hits.

But... charging for the maps? shake

To me, that doesn't seem like a good idea unless you at least give some info about the board itself. You've covered the rules extensively, but what are the dimensions of the boards? Are they the same thickness and quality of the regular game board, or are they flimsy like the moon map? What about the cards? Same size and thickness as the ones in the game?

I don't like the idea of selling materials for games that aren't yours either, but I'm guessing that's not the type of feedback you're interested in.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Hag
msg tools
The biggest tragedy with this project is that it can't really be used in conjunction with the main board. All of the existing peripherals, including the moon that comes with the normal Risk 2210 set, don't really need to fit anywhere on the board.

The oceans board would feel somewhat weird because while using it with the core game you'd have to sort of set it off to the side, even though the oceans are already sort of depicted on the board.

As demanding as it sounds, some ingenious way to superimpose the new Oceans map onto the core board would make it a neat addition. Say, transparent plastic sheets or something, or even a shaped piece of cardboard.

Also, making a new commander deck to take advantage of the new purely water-based spaces would be a must. Ocean Commander? Naval Commander 2.0?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Coleman
United States
Martinez
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I like the concept and would encourage the enhancement to the core board game. Yes, I imagine it would be a peripheral add-on adjacent to the left coast of the USA with wraparound effect to the Australian coastline as depicted in the image supplied. I'd certainly like to see the same thickness of the Pacific Map as the original board game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
IG Warmonger
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Quote:
You've covered the rules extensively, but what are the dimensions of the boards? Are they the same thickness and quality of the regular game board, or are they flimsy like the moon map? What about the cards? Same size and thickness as the ones in the game?


In answer to your questions I can confirm that the dimension of this add-on board is approximately 27cm x 18cm and will be on a backing of the same thickness and quality as the original. Any territory cards will be to a similar thickness as the existing cards, but will have slightly different dimensions.

What were your thoughts on the rules and potential game dynamics?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
IG Warmonger
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Quote:
...making a new commander deck to take advantage of the new purely water-based spaces would be a must. Ocean Commander? Naval Commander 2.0?


This is an element of the project that we haven't given much consideration to yet. Do you have any suggestions of what might be included in such a deck?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
IG Warmonger
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
rccod wrote:
I like the concept and would encourage the enhancement to the core board game. Yes, I imagine it would be a peripheral add-on adjacent to the left coast of the USA with wraparound effect to the Australian coastline as depicted in the image supplied. I'd certainly like to see the same thickness of the Pacific Map as the original board game.


This image is a first draft and will likely go through quite a bit of change before it's completed. What we really wanted to try and get our heads around was whether or not the rules would work and, if not, how they could be changed or what would need to do to make them work. Any thoughts?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
a) I think that rather than allowing players to buy port token these should be placed semi-randomly at the beginning of the game - there should still be some rules dictating how they are positioned. For example, a random draw could potentially have them all being placed on the east coast of Asia and this would surely prove somewhat pointless.
this could be easily resolved the same way that nuke zones do.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
IG Warmonger
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
marhawkman wrote:
Quote:
a) I think that rather than allowing players to buy port token these should be placed semi-randomly at the beginning of the game - there should still be some rules dictating how they are positioned. For example, a random draw could potentially have them all being placed on the east coast of Asia and this would surely prove somewhat pointless.
this could be easily resolved the same way that nuke zones do.


If you choose to go for random draw post then how would you get around the possibility of all ports being on the one continent? In my mind you'd need some rules to encourage a more even spread...any thoughts?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
IGWarmonger wrote:
marhawkman wrote:
Quote:
a) I think that rather than allowing players to buy port token these should be placed semi-randomly at the beginning of the game - there should still be some rules dictating how they are positioned. For example, a random draw could potentially have them all being placed on the east coast of Asia and this would surely prove somewhat pointless.
this could be easily resolved the same way that nuke zones do.


If you choose to go for random draw post then how would you get around the possibility of all ports being on the one continent? In my mind you'd need some rules to encourage a more even spread...any thoughts?
Well, the way I've always done it, you vote on whether the locations are ok. It's like this:

Flip random territories for the nuke markers
then the players look at the locations and vote on whether it's playable
If not, then one or more locations get redrawn
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant Blackburn
United States
Santa Clara
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I am an avid Risk fan and have been playing since I was little. 2210 AD is a great game and its many expansions, including those created by Insurgency Gaming, make it endlessly exciting and fun to play. Many of the expansions created by Insurgency Gaming are great and fit right into gameplay quite easily. This project however does not seem to follow that pattern.

What exactly does this new "Oceans" board do to make game play better? The 2210 AD map already has water colonies and a Naval Commander. Adding Ocean Zones would seem to make the game longer, more complicated and add to the strategic placement of troops and the decisions of where to defend and attack would change. This can certainly be a plus, but why not just create a whole new board in this case? A brand new board, with new terrain, Oceans, and the like would be great and would be a better fit than an add on board that isn't really an add on.

If we are adding Oceans, which is admittedly an obvious omission to most Risk Games, why not add new tactical units, another glaring omission? Create Naval units such as subs, ships, carriers and cruisers to go with the new Oceans on the new map.

Having more choices in the types of units would increase the strategic and tactical decisions that one could make and really help the game. Normal Risk has only one type of unit: a troop. Later versions added Commanders, but there are only a few of these units. Star Wars Risk added Ships that were not counted as troops but modified die rolls. This was limited as well.

What would be really great for Risk is to create more types of units such as tanks, planes and ships with different abilities to go along with troops (or whatever your imaginations can create) and add those seamlessly into the game. The details that would need to be worked out would be game balance and the relative cost of the units.

New units would fit right into an existing game instead of an Oceans board that would not.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marwan Marwan مروان مروان
Canada
Greater Vancouver
British Columbia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like the discussion so far. There has been good suggestions made.

I'd like to add my thoughts on the map. The map needs to integrate into the current map. The possibility of splitting the current oceans map then having one half attach to the left side (Americas) of the board, and the other half of the oceans map getting attached to the right side (Eastern side of Asia, Japan and Australia) of the original map.

This would expand the original board, and maintain continuity of play.

Thoughts?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mar hawkman
msg tools
For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah better integration would be a great improvement.
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.