| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Risk: military debriefing for game just ended
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Risk: military debriefing for game just ended

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Craze_b0i View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 200
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Craze_b0i Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Risk: military debriefing for game just ended
    Posted: 07 Nov 2009 at 01:33
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=5599311
 
I bet most of you didn't even realise we were still playing, but after a colossal 30 turns we have an outcome. :)
 
There were 7 players. Early game Koit and Hugo started off with the advantage of holding OZ and SA bonuses respectively. I was slowly building up within Europe.
 
Hugo then used his extra manower to try to grab a second continent which was NA. Fortunately Koit and kilroy were awake to the danger, same as me. Between the 3 of us we managed to block him and severely weaken him. It was, in my opinion, a mistake by Hugo to go for a 2nd continent since it made him the obvious target. The threat from Hugo also presuaded Kilroy to join me in a peace-treaty. This was vital since it allowed me to occupy Europe without fear of being attacked on 2 sides.
 
By this time rduncan and Alexios had dropped out, so only 5 ppl were left. Hugo was still weak so I decided it was worth spending some men to knock him out, thus reducing the field to 4. Killing Hugo created one problem though, it left me in possession of 3 continents and too-few men to hold them. Also Koit and Justinianus both had large stacks and sitting on 3 continents would make me a big fat target. My solution was to withdraw to one continent (NA) and concede shares of the other 2 continents to other players.
 
At this point a concerted attack would have crippled me. Fortunately no-one seized the moment and so I was able to keep my +5 NA bonus and build up again very fast. The only problem was that Kilroy didn't take SA which I had given him (probably wasn't reading his messages) and instead he sat on 1 square stacking. Had Kilroy read his messages we both would have benefitted from this arrangement. But by not responding he allowed Koit, who already had alot of land, to invade SA.
 
This breech of truce by Koit sparked of brief a war between us. It ended with me taking back SA and therefore the upper hand. I had both NA and SA. But Justinianus and Koit still had big stacks, plus Koit had alot of land. Kilroy missed his turns and dropped.
 
Now it was a 3-way deadlock, neither Koit or justinianus was interested in an alliance at that moment. I had the most troops so it seemed worth a gamble to try and expand, so I took Europe and fortified it. I just needed to hold the line for 1 turn then I would be able to win without allies. But my gamble was a mistake, Koit moved his stack off Oz and broke my defences. I chased him out again, but we both lost a lot of men in the process so it only benefitted Justinianus.
 
Justinianus still continued stacking as he had done since the start. It was still a 3-way deadlock. So I offered an alliance once again, this time Koit accepted. The terms-of-contract were to kill Justinianus and the neutrals then take 3 continents each. This was done.
 
In the head-to-head Koit got an advantage by attacking first. But I had built up enough troops in the previous rounds to hold out and then win.
Smile
 
The main lessons to draw from this game are:
a) flat-rate spoils takes a hell of a long time
b) flat rate spoils games are all about diplomacy


Edited by Craze_b0i - 07 Nov 2009 at 01:36
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Location: Norwich, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 5520
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Nov 2009 at 05:51
c) Craze's tactics were wrong in creating multiple stacks by the time he came against me. If he had had a single stack, I would not have had any chances (since I could not have attacked your stack, I could only have taken lands and that means nothing but weakining forces).
 
I am proud of my ability to survive and destroy nearly six stacks though (three of Justinian, primarly destroyed by me; two of Crazeat different times and one neutral by Craze and me jointly).
Back to Top
hugoestr View Drop Down
King
King

Most Glorious Leader of Muzhnopia

Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 5190
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hugoestr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Nov 2009 at 10:49
Hi, Craze,

The funny thing about your writing about holding Europe for one turn was that that was also my plan with North America. I thought that if I could hold it for one turn I could quickly build up and give it up later.

So I guess that tactic doesn't work :P

I must congratulate you because you did pull a surprising win. For a while, after you had eliminated me and Kilroy and Justinius didn't respond, Koit could have done a lot of damage to you and eliminated you from the game. Yet you were able to hold onto your territory for enough time to actually build up and win the game :)

Oh, by the way, I believe that every game can have diplomacy in it. It should be a weapon used in every game :)
Back to Top
Craze_b0i View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 200
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Craze_b0i Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Nov 2009 at 20:05
Hugo I agree with your analysis.
 
Koit, I don't see how it weakened me to have 3 stacks instead of 1? If I had only 1 you could have simply knocked off about 33 percent of it.
 
The reason for multiple stacks was precisely that it forced you to attack them to get past. As we know the attack-defence ratio is about 6-7, so a stack of 30 men will cost the attacker about 35 men. A good return for the defender.
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Location: Norwich, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 5520
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Nov 2009 at 02:18
If I had attacked your single stack, I'd have completely lost with taking down 10 armies of you (that's around 65% of chance, if I attacked with 30 armies against 90). Moving past your stack and taking lands is pointless since you could take back *ALL* of the territories I conquer.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.