Subject: Need your opinion on this 2 on 1 attack
Prev Next
Please login to post a reply.

Author Messages
dumbo63User is Offline


11 Aug 2007 11:08 AM  
Hi first time posting on this forum, I want some opinions on the situation i just had this weekend while playing risk with 2 other friends. One being the black deck and one being the green deck. The order of turns was Me (yellow) - Green - Black

I had just successfully taken over all of Europe and as I had expected the other 2 ganged up on me since at this time I was the largest. So i retreated into North America and intended to take it over instead while holding them off in Europe. By this time green had controlled all of Australia and Siam (thus blocking anyone off from Australia), and Black soon after controlled Africa and South America. Green had already controlled Australia since early game and Black took over the other two continents after they had ganged up on me.

Now I would have expected that since I was now the weakest without any control of any continent that their alliance would finally break. But the joint attacks continued until the end of the game. After I took North America green attacks me in Alaska taking it from me. Now I'm crippled again and I didn't even get to hold North America for a single turn. Green's also following every single one of Black's commands and being used to attack me.

Now I have zero control of any continents, and only a few reinforcements per turn, and I'm facing two other players who refuse to attack each other except to gain cards for trade-ins. Finally I just decided to take out Black since he was orchastrating the entire alliance and ganging up on me. With  a card trade in allowing me to get more units I had enough to pull off an offence. So i decided to take out black with everything I had left over the next few turns until we both had literally nothing. This allowed Green his minion to win.

Green took over NA, SA, and then most of Europe, he had most of Asia, and Australia still. He ended his turn and on Blacks next turn he took me out of the game. Green still didn't want to attack Black and tried to let him take back Africa. But in the end Black still won through trading in cards (from his own and from taking my cards) and Green surrendering since he spreaded his units so much.

Both of them said I had ruined the game but I want this forum's opinions did I even stand a chance when they were both trying to cripple me and not even allow me to have a single continent when they both possessed continents and more land after their 2 on 1 attack.
Ehsan HonaryUser is Offline

Site Admin

13 Aug 2007 4:36 PM  
Thanks for sharing your game.

I think you were right on track.When a number of players gang up on you, the standard solution is to divide them. A divided alliance is no longer functional and you can take advantage of the fallout.

In this case, right from the beginning you should have focused on one of the players to put pressure on their alliance. In this case, Black was your ideal choice and you did the right move to attack him eventually. However you should try to use the potential attack as a bargaining tool in diplomacy. Once you commit yourself to attacking him/her, you have literally given the game to the third player. However, no one wants to lose and so your threat, if genuine can become quite powerful. This is usually referred as suicidin, or put another way, if you go down, you take them with you as well!

I don't think you have ruined the game at all. That's just propaganda talk by other players, perhaps teasing you for the next games.

I am surprised that Green didn't win this game. May be Green was new to the game or had limited experience for end-of-game play. Towards the end of the game, it becomes quite critical to think on eliminating other players as opposed to conquering continents. So, you need to watch out for this as well.

I like to know what happens when you play with them next time and how your historical game play is going to influence the diplomacy in the game. Keep us posted

Ehsan Honary
EuropaUser is Offline


21 Nov 2007 5:37 PM  
I agree with Dr. Honary, you need to divide and conquer. What he was illustrating was a kind of flooding defense in which you "flood the zones" to overwhelm one side. In this case you need to overwhelm one of the players and their empire. My first move in this game would not be to establish a continent but to go after one of the member so the alliance quickly and decisively. Once you do that, then you can worry about continents. You see, you need to prioritize your decisions in this case. Continents are great for long-term, but not for short term, especially when you have two players breathing down your neck. Get rid of the immediate threat first and you'll tand a better chance. In a three player game, it is essential you remove or find a way for one player to be removed from the game.

Grant Blackburn
Please login to post a reply.
Forums > RISK > Risk Game Strategies > Need your opinion on this 2 on 1 attack