Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style)

03-01-2020 , 09:32 PM
OK. Looks like nobody liked that idea.
We'll proceed with things as they are then.
Your first move (or non-move) needs to be in by 5PM EST tomorrow.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 09:34 PM
Your suggestion is at least a start.

If we leave it how it is then many of us will be literally waiting 60-80% of our moves to grind out 5M. I don’t get how that works as a game.

But if I can only sell 1 country for 80M max then I can’t sell any of my 3 100M countries and so I have to sell a 20M country or whatever
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 09:38 PM
It seems I’m the only one who cares about a balanced game or thinks that sitting out most rounds is good so I guess we’ll just play the game as is.

I just think it’s a shame bc this game seems awesome but when the top 10 routes I spend time charting out will take some users a dozen or so days and me 70 days, it seems broken, and I think the first time we run this game is the best so it’s a shame to be so broken when it’s fixable now but not in 2 days.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 09:49 PM
I thought my idea was a good one as it would move the starting $ much closer to one another.
I think there is a way to stop those that will get a good start but we have to be smart.
One person said what they thought would happen: I hope not because that scenario would be playing right into their hands.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 10:06 PM
I can’t even go to ****ing Angola because it costs 30M

Even Ivory ****ing Coast is 25M

I have to sit out the first few rounds while others will go halfway around
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 10:11 PM
Your idea was better than status quo

Not doing it because nobody commented on it when I’m literally the only one looking at the rules so far and providing feedback just makes the game worse

And arbitrarily capping me at 80M so I can only sell a 40M country while someone with 5M less than me gets to sell 100M country doesn’t make sense.


Why do you feel I need to own all of these countries?

When games randomize starting positions, they balance them for a reason. You don’t start monopoly giving one person boardwalk and another Mediterranean. You don’t start risk giving one person 70 armies on 20 countries and another 20 armies on 10 countries.

I don’t get it.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 10:15 PM
Happy to implement ideas to make the game more fair
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 10:33 PM
Think about what Doctor Zeus asked.
He asked if we are allowed to collude.
Of course not.
Now, if any of you are tournament poker players you know that there are times where there is collusion. Perfectly legal collusion.
If anyone ever said "Hey, why don't we all..........." he'd be tossed out of the casino.
However, there are situations where the whole table understands that the smartest way to play your cards may be to the disadvantage of another player. Nobody says a word. Everybody just knows how these situations are played. So, no collusion.
It's the same here. Just play smart. Always play in a way that helps your chance of winning. Therefore, no collusion.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 10:35 PM
im just not commenting because i have no idea about anything. im just here to click buttons. if we find a site that has working buttons

if nichp is drawing dead already that sucks. i'd be happy to trade countries/money with nichp since i don't understand anyway. i don't mind sitting back a few turns. maybe just make sitting out a turn with more than 5 mill? or maybe make it worth more than 5 mill if you're broke and can't afford to move, at least in the first few moves?
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 10:50 PM
Thanks filthy but I don’t want to trade with you; I want it to be a more balanced start for all


I’ve made my concerns known so I’ll be quiet and just play tomorrow based on whatever rules the mod decides.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-01-2020 , 11:12 PM
I've found an alternate map source for the first and last moves.
Use "Calculate the great circle distance between two points"
You can then zoom in on the map to see if your move is legal.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:18 PM
I used that site and it doesn’t draw a line between 0,0 and my target; it just shows a red pin on my target no matter what zoom level I use

I used your link with great circle distance with leaflet map draw


Can you give precise instructions on how to use this to determine if our move is legal or else just post a list of all eligible starting countries?
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:20 PM
Ok, by changing it to 0,1 if worked
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:26 PM
i couldn't get it to work. no way i'll ever be able to understand your instructions either. i'll just have to do my best lol
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:31 PM
From rules:


“A legal move: You can move from any country to any other country if the route crosses only the leaving country + the arriving country + water (if applicable).
You are allowed only 2 moves that are more than 50% water. We waive this water rule if your first move/last move is to swim to/from Africa.”

So if we want to go anywhere but Africa our first move then we have to use up one of our 2 water moves?

And if we go Africa first then we won’t end on Africa so we have to save a water move to end the game?

So either way, we really only have 1 water move max beyond the first/last move?
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholasp27
Ok, by changing it to 0,1 if worked
I used 0,0.00001 and it works.

Unless something is very very close that should be OK.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:33 PM
I haven't looked at anything & don't even have a clue what I own.

But wouldn't it make sense if people could sell back countries they don't want to the bank for like 50% of their cost?
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholasp27
From rules:


“A legal move: You can move from any country to any other country if the route crosses only the leaving country + the arriving country + water (if applicable).
You are allowed only 2 moves that are more than 50% water. We waive this water rule if your first move/last move is to swim to/from Africa.”

So if we want to go anywhere but Africa our first move then we have to use up one of our 2 water moves?

And if we go Africa first then we won’t end on Africa so we have to save a water move to end the game?

So either way, we really only have 1 water move max beyond the first/last move?
Right.
Basically, you're allowed to cross the Atlantic and the Pacific.
This should block any really short route that uses the Indian Ocean.
This way the advantage that those with lots of $ had will be taken away.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMurder3
I haven't looked at anything & don't even have a clue what I own.

But wouldn't it make sense if people could sell back countries they don't want to the bank for like 50% of their cost?
Way too late to change rules now as people have already been doing their planning.
However, for next time we play this, we can revisit everyone's ideas.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:43 PM
No it means I have to go to Africa first or I am stuck.

It means Philippines and Australia and every single island capital in the world are impossible because it takes 2 water moves to go to/from them and we only get 1 water move bc we have to either use 1 going west first or save 1 to jump back in at the end.

And African countries that I can get to are expensive

And then the ones I can move to after are expensive

I am going to literally have to spend 20 turns sitting out in order to move more than 3 countries
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 12:54 PM
Based on rules as described, I can only afford to go to Togo, after which I must go to Benin or Ghana, both of which require at least 3 days of sitting out.


If I don’t go to Africa, then I can’t go to an island so I have to go to South America, which is also expensive and even if I make it to one small country, each next country over to get to the ocean will require me to sit for multiple days. In fact, you can NOT go from Suriname to Guyana because the path is >50% water from capital to capital. So you have to go through a capped out country which is too expensive.


You said before the draft you wanted everyone to have around 100M but you did nothing to ensure that happened. It’s not too late now; we haven’t made the first move and we have been bringing up this issue for days.


At this point, I’ve broken my promise to just play as it stands so rather than fill the thread up I’ll just bow out now. I’m not gonna play a game where I have to sit and do nothing for 80% of the turns because an obviously broken pre-game setup occurred and wasn’t resolved.

I don’t want to ruin the game for the rest of you so even tho this looks like a blast, I’ll sit it out.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 01:01 PM
Yeah, it's not too late now

I'm in favor of JM3's buyback idea; it seems quite fair and would actually reward planning and strategy
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 01:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerencL
Way too late to change rules now as people have already been doing their planning.
However, for next time we play this, we can revisit everyone's ideas.
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 01:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gadarene
Yeah, it's not too late now

I'm in favor of JM3's buyback idea; it seems quite fair and would actually reward planning and strategy
Too late as we already have 3 entrant's first moves.

Nicholasp27's logic is faulty.
I've said this before.
Instead of trying to figure out how to play this properly so that those with money don't have an advantage, people seem to want to just complain instead.

And of course I cannot tell you how to play BECAUSE THAT IS COLLUSION!
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote
03-02-2020 , 01:34 PM
Maybe those entrants would be fine resubmitting their first moves in the name of equitability
Another Around-The-World trek (RISK style) Quote

      
m