Risk Game Strategies

Diplomacy In Online Risk

JamieRogers — Sun, 13 Oct 2019 05:04:24 GMT

As most members of my family or my friends dislike playing risk or only play occasionally, I play most of my risk online, on a mobile app called RISK: Global Domination. In this version of risk, there is an option to make alliances. This is the only diplomacy component in this game apart from asking other playing to attack specific players, which isn't very useful.

Anyway, I find that generally, the easiest continents to go for online is South America or Africa, as most other players go for Australia or no continent at all and won't let you hold a continent bonus of one such as North America. However, these continents require alliances or treaties with other players so you don't get attacked from multiple places and can expand elsewhere. The biggest problem with this is that as soon as I put the smallest amount of trust in my ally, at least 60-70% of the time they back-stab me and force me into a much weaker position.

My question is: How should I deal with this problem?

Should I try not to rely on diplomacy as much, but risk having to attack multiple stronger opponents at once, or try to mitigate or prepare for these betrayals? If anyone has other suggestions please list them down below.

How can I win this match?

Pyrux — Tue, 16 Oct 2018 17:36:17 GMT

Hi, I'm an italian guy named Lorenzo.

Today, me and my housemates started a Risiko (Risk in italian) match but we interrupted it because we were just too tired.

Tomorrow we will go back playing it but I'm in big troubles with one of the player.

I'm the violet one and the other player is the blue one. His last move was to place more armies on the northern Asia so he could get power all over it and take more armies each turn. I responded to that move by placing more armies on that front line instead of trying to get control over Europe that I'm slowly gaining.

The next turn the black player, then the red player and lastly the blue player, will move before me.

So, now, what would be your best suggestions? Should I take the sure damage on Asia by the blue army and then reinforce that particular front line or should I try to conquer then Europe? And next?

North America Strategy Help

Shirokiba — Sat, 28 Jan 2017 14:00:43 GMT

So, I just started playing Risk and I try going for North America, it typically works out rather well. Lately, after my second game, my opponents seemed bent on trying to deny me North America, sometimes they'd claim a territory and when placing additional armies, at the start of the game, they'd amass 3 there and one other player would also do this. They managed to stall me long enough that I could not get the continent in a timely manner and they managed to get their continent bonuses quickly, which lost me that game.

I'm going to assume this is going to likely be a common thing I run into. Are there certain territories in North America I should be going for? I always grab Central America and the Western US first. After that, I try to claim Alaska and Greenland.

3 player game: Me vs Husband and Wife team

kumo — Sat, 17 Oct 2015 23:38:26 GMT

So, every time I play against my buddy and his wife, it always turns out to be essentially me against one other player with two forces! He likes to talk a lot and tries to convince his wife to do what he wants to do and she uaully listens to his suggestions, which is understandable in that she is not that experienced of a player, but he still insists on helping his wife out; she is his proxy, more or less. In the short term it is detrimental to my forces to have to take on two players at one time with neither of them attacking the other until I am eliminated. In the short term it's good for my bro's wife because he directs her where and when to attack and defend, but it's my buddy that usually ends up winning because of it. Looking for suggestions on what to do with this strategic problem. How can I get them to fight eachother instead of me?

Mission card: Do I eliminate a player and take the risk?

stynes — Fri, 30 May 2014 18:50:40 GMT

About containing a weaker player within your empire. If, with the use of mission cards one being eliminate a certain player.

INTRODUCTION:

yellow has completly ecompased green to Madagascar. This is greens last stronghold with only 1 Infantry on. You could easily take him out on your next turn, but if you do another player may win with the "Elim Green" card.

Is it worth the risk that your yellow player takes out green?

SCENARIO
You are yellow in the game above, but are playing the 1993 US edition secret mission rules where you must complete a secret mission in order to win the game. (Us edition as eliminating a player can cause a win for another player. Unlike the UK edition where this would cause the opponent with that mission card to have to capture 24 territories instead)

You have the option of killing off green, which would normally be fine. But what if someone else wants them gone? Do you take out green and pray to the RNG gods that someone doesn't have the card that says "Eliminate green"? Or is it better to take the risk of letting green reinforce at least 3 players per turn? (say you let green keep Madagascar as his safe haven.)

THEROY:

MISSION CARD %
With 12 mission cards and 6 players there's a 38%-48% chance that the destroy green card is drawn by one of the 4 enemy players that isn't yourself(yellow) or green. (The percentage range comes from the order in which players pick cards.)
In the best case senario, where you pick your card last and green picks his card second last. There is ~38% that "elim green" is held by another player.

So if you take out green there is a 1/3 chance that you lose the game on the spot as another player claims victory at the start of their turn with the "Elim green card"

THE CHOICE
However if you do not take this risk and allow green to sit in Madagascar(Mad) then he will slowly build up a force. Which you either have to deal with, with your own reinforcements to keep him in check. Or let build up.

Any decent player will deal with him building forces.
So say he has no cards and gets only +3 per turn. He will have 4 men sitting in Mad.
You will gain between 5-6 rein. per turn (going by an average mid game board map) (you control all of africa minus Mad. and let's say for arguments sake. South america.)

REINFORCEMENTS TO KEEP HIM IN CHECK
To keep him in check with minimum losses you need to kill those 3 rein. every turn. allowing him 1 guy in Mad. To do this you need to be sending in 7 guys for a +80% win rate. (We don't need to kill all 4. Just 3 to leave him with 1. so our win rate for our objective raises slightly higher than normal win rates.)

Also, to make sure he dosen't gain a card we need to leave at least 4 men in 2 territories to give him a small 20% win rate.

So within 1 turn (let's say he didn't attack) we need to commit 7 men out of the 2 adj.territories to Mad. (8 total -> 7 = -1 as we need to leave 1 guy in each territory) So already we lose 1 rein. to do this on turn x. The fight to keep his forces to 1 loses us another 2 men, which is a respectable loss. So to stay even during turn x we need to commit 3 rein. to keeping green down and confined to mad while still leaving us with 4 men in 2 territories to stop his rein from gaining a card.

So our cost to keep green down is 3 rein per turn. With +2 surplus to attend our other agendas.

CARDS INTO THE EQUATION
Let's say we have 3 cards on turn x+2. Assuming there is an equal chance of drawing each type. (33%) Excluding the 2 wild cards. There is ~4% chance you have 3 of a kind on x+2 and a ~4% chance you hit the straight (inf. calv. gun.) So 1 in 10 times you wont hit on this turn.

On turn X+3 You have a 37% chance of a 3 of a kind and a 37% of a straight. So a 74% chance you hit.

On turn x + 4 you have a 100% chance to hit.

In a worst case scenario, you dont hit cards until turn x+4. By turn 5 you will have committed +12 rein min. To keep the green insurgence in check in Mad. Your surplus forces in this time will have been around +8-10

and net of -4 -> -2

SO ON TURN X+5 ARE WE UP?
If we hit 3 inf cards (+4). our net gain on surplus to Green rein. is '0 - +2'
3 Calv. cards.(+6) = +6-+8
3 gun. cards (+8) = +8-+10
straight (+10) = +10-+14

Thus by protecting green as well as keeping it's forces low. We will come out slowly ahead on reinforcements by, at the latest turn x+5.

CONCLUSION
Realistically you are going to hit card rein. by x + 4.

During this quell you will stagnate on the board and more than likely lose some presence on your boarders. (as you try and gain a card per turn.)

Not until turn 5 from putting green in Mad. (x + 4) will you be in a better position again on average. But by doing this are you put yourself at a greater disadvantage to win the game than if you had just taken the RNG by killing of green.

and thus. Would you lose more games this way than if you had just killed off the green player? Making that 38% chance that you lose on the spot better than the possible tactical disadvantage of bleeding yourself trying to control green?

Of course there is the player element to this argument. If someone was trying to kill green and they had to go through you, you could tell via verbal pressure on you to kill green. Or board pressure to get to him. Is holding off those 5 turns until you know this information damaging to your chance of winning beyond repair? Assuming your objective was not achievable within these 5 turns.

(Please note out and correct any maths errors I may have made.)

Europe Issues

Singular9 — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 03:08:49 GMT

Hey Guys.

Just some back ground. Not to boast but i very rarely loose risk. Maybe once in 20 games and usualy when i have 2 or more people allied against me. So in a fare game i tend to win.

So recently me and my family (of 3 players) were playing risk. I have the new risk, and in the new rules (unlike in the old rules) players have to use the countries the cards give them, so players dont pick, and each card has stars and the amount of stars on the card is how much men you put in the country, maximum 2. Kind of stupid i know but its more fair for people like my parents who like never play a board game.

So im all over the place but i do have most of europe. I take it and defend it quite well giving away all my other nations without any fighting back. My dad manages to take south america and africa, my sister takes north america (NA and SA are at war pretty much all the time). My mom...with my help (cause she doesnt know what she is doing)...takes australia and owns most of asia.

Thing is, i start getting attacked from africa...and africa takes my southern europe. That ruins my bonus, but i have enough men left to take it all back. Then north america manages to take iceland (i dont know why but my sister and my dad stop the war in the america's which ruins everything!).

That ruins my bonuses again. My mom is literaly doing nothing. Basicaly i end up with all of europe except iceland. I turn in my cards and since i cant go against my sisters 10 or so men, i back stab my dad in africa going all the way and taking all of south america, which my sister then takes the next turn and then!!!! she tries to take me down. After like 3 turns she took me down.

So i guess many of you have noticed, europe is not a good place to be.

Thing is i would like to get better in that location. Any ideas and suggestions as to how to hold europe better?

Ive tried the following

1. Making buffer zones (they are usually taken back)

2. Building up forces in northern europe and taking back any land that i loose.

Also where the heck should i go and how do i defend best when i have only owned europe for one turn aka minimal troops. maybe on average 3 per nation.

Strategic Help

tculler310 — Tue, 24 Sep 2013 02:25:10 GMT

I started an online game with some friends. This is the initial setup and I'm red. Any ideas you wanna bounce off me before I make my own decisions? Thanks

Risk Map: Turn-0 --- Open Copy in Risk Map Editor

Strategic Help

tculler310 — Tue, 24 Sep 2013 02:22:22 GMT

I started an online game with some friends. This is the initial setup and I'm red. Any ideas you wanna bounce off me before I make my own decisions? Thanks

Risk Map: Turn-0 --- Open Copy in Risk Map Editor

What to do when my opponent will receive 45 reinforcement next turn?

hellwarrior — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:43:52 GMT

Hi, I'm playing a Risk online game right now and I don't know what to do. I am the only survivor with my opponent and he controls almost all Asia, most of Europe and all of Australia. Now I control North and South America and I tried to removed one country of Europe, Africa and Asia so he could not have as many reinforcements next turn.

The real problem is that next turn he will have 45 new reinforcements and my borders are ok but not strong. If he puts all his 45 reinforcements in one country, I'm almost done.

What should I do? I am the green team.

Thanks for your help!

i72.servimg.com/u/f72/17/44/60/26/screen13.jpg

Lord of the Rings Risk

hellwarrior — Mon, 11 Feb 2013 21:40:05 GMT

Hi, a few years ago, I played a few games to the Lord of the Rings version of Risk. It was cool but I didn't remember much.

What were the major differences between the traditional Risk and the Lord of the Rings version? Have you ever tried this game? How did you find it?