Version name of Risk?

[Aabraxan]

Risk II also has some new territories, such as the Falkland Islands and Hawaii.

[Dis]

I actually bought risk II for my computer. but it wouldn't work on my system for some reason (the only game I couldn't get to work on my computer), so I turned it back in.

[Aabraxan]

I realize that I'm probably way behind the times, gamewise, but I just got Risk II & I like it.

[Aabraxan]

Well, I finally broke down and ordered Risk 2210. Now I just have to browbeat some friends into playing . . .

[Dis]

yeah it had some cool stuff in there I remember. You'll find more strategy in the game. Though luck of the cards still plays a very important part.

And a time limit can keep the game short (though they will still take a few hours I'm sure)

and you can have territories on the moon.

[Kinjiru]

Lunar territories are HARD to keep, as I recall.

[Aabraxan]

I read through the rules last night and it looks like Risk 2210, in many ways, is an almost entirely different game from the original. No turning in cards for more armies when you get a set of 3? No more getting the cards from any opponent that you wipe out? Nonetheless, it looks good. Can't wait to play.

[Dis]

yep, you armies are based solely on your territory holdings iirc. But the cards still do impart a luck aspect of the game. So that part of the original is unchanged. The cards can be very important. Especially the last turn of the game.

[Aabraxan]

Yeah, but after years of basic Risk, It's going to be tough to get used to not doing that. After all, I've grown accustomed to keeping track of what the next set is worth and planning my strategy accordingly. Perhaps even more important, in Risk 2210, if you wipe out a player, that player's cards are discarded! Seems like a waste to me. I haven't played Risk in a while, but I seem to remember that if you have 6 or more cards you had to immediately turn in a set (this may have been a house rule, I don't recall). At any rate, that rule always led to things like this:

"Hmmm. . . I've 3 cards. Joe's got 4 cards. If I pile all of my armies in Greenland, I can make a long march through Europe and wipe out Joe . . . I'll get his cards and that'll give me 7, so I'll have to turn in cards. That'll give me an extra 12 armies mid-turn and then I can invade Asia from Ural, and keep Bob from getting those extra 7 armies."

[Kinjiru]

The cards in 2210 are very interesting in and of themselves. Especially in the final turn, where some cards advance you so many places on the score chart. Others let you prevent one other player from using any cards that turn.

Therefore, one of the most evil and most fun, tactics in 2210 is to save the card that prevents others from using their cards until the very end. In a close match the cards that advance you on the chart could put you over the top. Imagine how great/awful (depending on which player you are) to be prevented from playing those cards!

Other cards are very much risk/reward... the ability to destroy any three armies on the board, but a bad roll could mean some of those armies are your own!

Plus I really like how the board itself gets modified by randomly selected four 'nuked' territories where no one may pass. Can make Europe actually holdable for instance!

Many I wish i could get my kids into these games...

[Aabraxan]

Originally posted by Kinjiru
Many I wish i could get my kids into these games...

Yeah, my wife and I moved frequently for several years and I kept threatening that if I couldn't find a game group, by golly, we'd just have to make one!

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Risk! is mostly a game of luck with a tiny bit of strategy.

I've won ten in a row over good players, and well over 90 % of my games over the last 25 years. Yea it's a game of luck, like Poker.

I value the continents by assigning them values by dividing the army bonus the continent gives by the number of borders that the continent has. Australia is best vanilla continent here with a 2:1 ratio. This doesn't take into account size (which can be a considerable advantage obviously), but larger continents are harder to take and hold initially, so I think it pretty much evens out.

Of course there are some nice continent clusters that can give better returns, like combining Africa and Europe (and the Middle East) for a total of 8 bonus armies and four borders. Better is the combination of North and South America (7 bonus armies and 3 borders). Note that alliances can be used in the absence of actual control of territories, eg if you have Europe and your partner has Africa you can both concentrate your strengths on your other borders.