Risk strategy

[The Guardian]

So I played the original Risk game the other day with some friends. It was a full game (6 people) and I got beat pretty quick. I didn't have a great start with the territories I had (2 of my countries were among the countries with the most borders) and I really had no options from the get-go. I've never been a fan of games that rely so heavily on dice simply because of the luck involved but I figure if there's any game to play in order to overcome that, it's Risk.

I'm wondering what are some good strategies for playing Risk. Obviously a lot depends on your opening position, number of players, etc so feel free to include as much detail as you want.

One thing I took away from the game was that it pays to sit quietly. The first two players to seize a dominating position were eventually eliminated and the game came down to two players who had been sitting back quietly for most the game.

[Alex_Olijar]

Australia is key.

[Lamborghini_diablo]

Establish a base of operations. Just capture at least one or two countries and hold them. Save your units until your ready to overtake another one.

*goes to see if theres any free online RISK games*

[The Guardian]

In my game, the player who controlled Australia from the start ended up getting 2nd. Easy to defend and those extra armies each turn can really add up.

Other pointers?

[The Guardian]

Establish a base of operations. Just capture at least one or two countries and hold them. Save your units until your ready to overtake another one.

*goes to see if theres any free online RISK games*

That's about what I tried to do. My closest countries were the Eastern Europe countries and Northwest Asia so I had about 4 connected countries. Like I mentioned earlier though, those countries had so many borders that I kept getting invaded.

[Minister Polarius]

Australia wins unless you fail to take the Americas into account.

[TheKarazyvicePresidentRR]

Australia/South america are very good bases of operation and are USUALY ignored so you can grab most of them early. Take over one (or both) and fortify it. If you need cards attacking mexico/the country connecting to austraila works them troop moving back so the opp takes it back.

[The Schaef]

Yeah, just take Australia and then go make a sandwich while the rest of the game plays itself out.

I don't really want to be down on Risk because I have liked it for a long time.  It's just that the original map has a couple of key strategic areas (mentioned in the posts above) which if you take them, you can sweep through the rest of the board.  That combined with massive dice-rolling (chance) removes a lot of strategic thought from the game.  If there's one thing that bugs me, it's the potential to send a 20-army group into a country with 2 defenders and limp home empty-handed for no good reason other than poor dice rolls.

I think that I'm spoiled, though, because I have been exposed to many recent games that have excellent combat systems which add more variety and strategy to the game.  I personally recommend anything based on Richard Borg's "Command and Colors" system, including Battle Cry (Civil War-era game), C&C: Ancients, Memoir '44 (WW2 game), BattleLore (middle-ages era game, but you can also do it in a fantasy setting), or Star Wars: The Queen's Gambit (not designed by Borg, but "borrows" the combat mechanic), in my personal order from least to awesomest.

In those games, you have different forces in different areas of the board, and a deck of command cards which tell you that you can use certain units in certain places per turn.  Choose the cards to play from your hand, move your units, then attack your opponent.  Combat is still resolved by dice, but it's almost never as simple as just rolling 2d6 and adding the numbers; the dice have custom faces with different values/effects, and in M44 for example, terrain can affect movement and firing range, etc.  So there's still the chaos of chance, but it's significantly less, and it's mitigated by the different strategic choices you have available.

[TheKarazyvicePresidentRR]

Queens gambit falls pray to the dice rolls thing though. Our tanks were horrible compaired to our destroyer droids. I will agree it is less than risk though.

[captain btn]

the alaska to kam is a nice connection

[TimMierz]

The fact that so many people have the same advice for a cheap, lame way to nearly ensure victory tells me there's something wrong with the game. I've never been huge on any wargame bigger than Nexus Ops though. The painful length of the game (partially brought on by rewarding "turtling") combined with a too-large luck factor for its size and the fact that I stink at it make Risk and variants (Risk 2210 or whatever) unpleasant.

Nexus Ops rocks.

[The Schaef]

Queens gambit falls pray to the dice rolls thing though. Our tanks were horrible compaired to our destroyer droids. I will agree it is less than risk though.

Well, sure, they all do.  And there's a bit of legitimacy to that because unexpected things happen in wars and in battles, and if everything was rote then you run the risk of having people "solve" the game and boil it down to the same 3-4 strategies.

I'm more forgiving of dice games than a lot of "real" gamers, I think, as long as it's not pure non-negotiable chance.  To Court the King > Yahtzee for that reason: Yahtzee is a chance roll, whereas TCtK allows you to "buy" cards with your roll that allow you to roll more dice, manipulate the results, etc.  So the key reason I encourage the C&C system over Risk is that Risk is pure dicefesting, and C&C has other factors that you can control to make it more than just crossing your fingers and praying.

To be honest, most of them (specifically M44 and BattleLore) are better than Queen's Gambit in that respect; QG still has substantially more chance than those two games.  I list it as my favorite based mostly on the theme. 

... and yes, Nexus Ops rocks.

[soul seeker]

Hey Guardian,
   I would like to chime in because my strategy is two-fold depending on starting position.
     But 1st  (Jonathan's Golden Risk Rule: JGRR):  No matter what my starting position.  I try to avoid turning in cards (my definition of laying back) at all possible in the beginning...make no mistake I earn one every turn, but don't turn them in until it's more beneficial.
              Clearly the ideal situation is limit your fronts in risk but there are a couple of spots where that's just not possible.  I'm sure you are bright enough to know what to do with Australia, south America and North America to a larger extent.  You only lose these games by dice rolling, IMO.
       It is getting stuck in the middle (Asia or Europe) that you have to be more flexible, devious, and careful.  You need to use your "real-life" personable skills.  Intimidate if you have to (like threaten being a spoiler-->most opponents fear the spoiler.)  In the meantime, take at least one country while explaining "I just need to get a card."  During that time, make a drive towards either North America or Africa.  Solidfy that border once you get across.  Create a wedge to break in and try to weasel out of retribution through words.  Think about it:  how much chance to win do you have anyway without securing one of the larger footholds?  Enact JGRR, let other players get the instant gratification of 4, 6, 8 men while you wait for 10 or better...when you get it make your punch through the, possibly, high defended borders of Africa and N. America.  Then do NOT give your foothold up!!! 
     Lastly, if charm and tactics fail...go after the most inexperienced and youngest player...it may be dirty but you're not the first out.   
   To validate my claims, I have never finished less than 2nd in my known memory of Risk.  I have played a variety of players and strategies and I haven't been failed yet.  May this advice help you....CONQUER THE WORLD!!!!

[The Schaef]

But 1st  (Jonathan's Golden Risk Rule: JGRR):  No matter what my starting position.  I try to avoid turning in cards (my definition of laying back) at all possible in the beginning...make no mistake I earn one every turn, but don't turn them in until it's more beneficial.

... or until you draw your fifth card, right?

[Lamborghini_diablo]

Well after playing the computer version on Shockwave.com, i've discovered holding the americas is key.

[soul seeker]

But 1st  (Jonathan's Golden Risk Rule: JGRR):  No matter what my starting position.  I try to avoid turning in cards (my definition of laying back) at all possible in the beginning...make no mistake I earn one every turn, but don't turn them in until it's more beneficial.

... or until you draw your fifth card, right?

well...yeah...especially if people are paying attention.    To be more specific, that's why I said "at all possible."  Sometimes holding off the conquest of the fifth card if it's just for 4 measly men.

[Lamborghini_diablo]

Practice on here: http://www.shockwave.com/gamelanding/risk.jsp

*EDIT* Better version here:

http://gamescene.com/World_Conquest_game.html

[TheKarazyvicePresidentRR]

Also another strat is to grab a continent or country and kill ONE country a turn. Play all the cards you can. Stock pile troops in one country, when your force reaches o....round 300. Rush the world to win.

[sk]

Why is everyone playing without the 12-army limit?  You'd be laughed out of a Risk tournament for saying you win by stockpiling Australia.

Anyhow, a few tips:
- I agree that the America strategy tends to work the best.  Grab SoAm, then work north for NoAm.  If someone else tries for NoAm and ends up too powerful, head to Africa.
- Attack every turn.  You can't afford to fall behind on Risk cards.  Even if you lose the territory the next turn, you can make back the lost armies in Risk cards.
- You seem to already know this, but try to get countries with few borders, and as many countries nearby as you can.
- Always attack the player with the highest income if you have a choice, unless another player is about to go out.  If you can defeat the player, go for his/her Risk cards.

[The Schaef]

Well, mostly because standard rules don't have a 12-army limit, and imposing one sort of negates the premise of conquering multiple continents.

House-ruling a 12-army limit only exemplifies the broken nature of the original map.

[Lamborghini_diablo]

Yeah, if you own both Americas... you only have three territories to defend, and get as many units as if you had Asia.

Also, 12-army limit? what fun is that?

[EmJayBee83]

House-ruling a 12-army limit only exemplifies the broken nature of the original map.

The 12-army limit optional rule is found in the same section as the optional rule allowing you to fortify your position through contiguous countries.

I'm curious, does anyone not play where you can fortify your position at the end?

[Alex_Olijar]

I play one territory move limit usually.

[Prof Underwood]

The main thing that I see left out of this discussion so far is the most important part of RISK.  In my opinion, success at RISK depends on the following:

20% Initial set-up
20% Dice rolling
20% Tactical strategy
40% Personal diplomacy

This is by far what makes RISK a truly enjoyable game among experienced players.  All of the randomness of the dice is completely mitigated by the co-operative effort of all the players.  The basic rule to live by is to always put together a coalition to stop whichever player is winning, unless you are winning, and in that case to prevent any coalition from forming.

[Sean]

I've played many games where the person who got Australia early was the first out.  If you have bad starting position you need to pile all your beginning troops into one place and "hide" in a corner while you collect a card per turn by just taking one country.  Keep all your troops in one country so nobody in their right mind attacks you.  Be the 4th person to turn in cards and then you should be able to expand into a continent that you have a chance of holding. (not necessarily immediately)

Another option is to play mission.  I find that this is the best because you don't have to kill everything to win and it can be difficult to figure out what everyone's mission is.

Also, it is generally wise to stay away from the middle of the map because, just like real life, that's where there is a lot of turmoil.

Sean

[YourMathTeacher]

Ironically, I usually take Europe first (starting position permitting). Most opponents go after the guys in Australia and the Americas first so that the aforementioned strategies don't work. Although there is a lot of give and take early, I eventually secure Europe and have many fronts to battle and win cards from. I typically am ignored early on since the others feel I am not a threat. Noone wins with a base in Europe, right? 

[JSB23]

S. America to Africa = win

[Prof Underwood]

To win consistently it is important to have a win strategy from each continent.

Australia - take on the first turn and leave enough in Indonesia or Siam to hold the continent, use the rest of the troops to have a presence somewhere else in the world.  Follow any of the plans below, and enjoy having a couple extra couple guys each turn to do it.

S.America - take on the first turn, expand into N.America or Africa depending on the situation, then conquer the world.

Africa - take on the first turn, expand into S. America and follow the plan above or make an alliance with that player and both focus on the continents to your North.  In the latter case, let the S.A. player finish taking N.A. first, allow the other players to talk you into ending your alliance with S.A. and work with them to stop the leader.  At the right time, take Europe, weaken the other superpower, then conquer the world.

N.America - take on the turn after someone takes either Europe or the combo of S.America & Africa (on the grounds of balancing the other superpower), strengthen the borders while leading the coalition against the other superpower until they are weakened, then conquer the world.

Europe - take on the first turn or two, put enough armies in Greenland to keep anyone from completing that continent, put the rest of your armies every turn into N.Europe and leave only 1 army on each border with Africa and Asia.  Just stockpile armies in that central territory.  You won't be an immediate threat to anyone as you can't attack from there, but no one will want to attack you because taking any border territory will open them up to your huge force plowing into them.  When the time is right, fortify to the border and conquer the world.

Asia - don't take any continent for a long time.  Sit up around Yakutsk and just take one territory each turn while keeping you entire army in one location.  After about 15 turns, you'll have all but a piece of so of Asia, 2 or 3 people will already be dead, and you'll be ready to make your move.  Take the last piece of Asia and Ukraine (to cut down on borders and prevent European consolidation).  Then conquer the world.

[Lamborghini_diablo]

Yeah, the best thing to do if you get trapped in  Australia is to stockpile units in Indonesia. It can only be attacked from Siam, while Siam can be attacked from two different places. Then, once you have about 20-30 people on Indonesia, attack siam, and keep 10-15 people on indonesia, send the remaining forces out to mess with people.

[The Schaef]

20% Initial set-up
20% Dice rolling
20% Tactical strategy
40% Personal diplomacy

I think this might be my personal bugaboo with Risk and games like it.  I love cooperative games, and games where it is strategic to make mutually beneficial trades that can still be to your advantage.  But negotiation games just tear it for me.  I know it comes as a real surprise to all of you that I wouldn't be a big fan of games that rely on my diplomatic prowess. 

But if you take out the negotiation aspect, then Risk is reduced to who claims the sweet spots and whose tactical decisions are not thwarted by their own dice.  Hence, the less-than-enthusiastic attitude I have towards this game compared to other endeavors.

[Prof Underwood]

Schaef is correct that without the negotiation aspect, RISK becomes a really dull game.

For comparison, here are my stats for another "negotiation based game" called Diplomacy.
15% Country assignment
15% Effect of other players quitting
20% Tactical strategy
50% Personal diplomacy

If you like RISK, but hate the randomness of the dice, then give Diplomacy a try.  It has many of the same aspects of the game as RISK, but with no dice or cards.  On the other hand, if you don't like negotiation like Schaef, then this would be the worst game in the world to you

[TimMierz]

I'm generally bad at negotiation in games, but I love Bohnanza. I can't figure out how or why.

[The Schaef]

15% Effect of other players quitting

Best Line of the Week.

And no, I've never even bothered with Diplomacy.  Two hours of that is plenty for Risk, and large-scale games of Diplomacy can drag on for hours.  A Game of Thrones is the one I tolerate the most, because there are negotiation aspects to it, but the order placement system makes for very intriguing board play.

[Prof Underwood]

large-scale games of Diplomacy can drag on for hours.

This is definitely true.  In fact, most games of Diplomacy are played over email with turn deadlines of every week or every 2 weeks.  A weekly game would probably last for 6 months and a bi-weekly game for a year.

When playing face-to-face games, there is a slightly different breakdown for success:
10% Country assignment
10% Effect of other players quitting
15% Tactical strategy
40% Personal diplomacy
25% Tenacity (ability to remain conscious and think clearly after playing a game for 8 hours straight)

[slugfencer]

LOVE diplomacy!!!! Used to play in college in our gaming society...fun times. We also played pax brittanica and other boardgames.

[redemption99]

Me and my brothers enjoy LOTR risk more than the normal one.

[The Schaef]

Pretty much any variant with alternate victory conditions or missions > plain vanilla Risk (yes I know recent rulesets have missions).

Except maybe Castle Risk.  That just doesn't look appealing at all.

[TheKarazyvicePresidentRR]

Castle risk? Link?

[Prof Underwood]

Castle risk? Link?

Castle RISK was a lot of fun when I played it as a kid (around age 9).  However, I have played several games as an adult and have found it to be really quite poor.  The map is just the continent of Europe (actually quite similar to a Diplomacy board) and the game just goes a bit to quickly and randomly for my taste.

[EmJayBee83]

Is there anything like Cold War Risk or somesuch?  Something where I can have a huge strategic nuclear arsenal and keep threatening total annihiliation while I get other players to have their countries fight proxy battles for me?

That's the kind of "Personal diplomacy" that I'm best at.

[The Schaef]

Twilight Struggle?

[Alex_Olijar]

Is there anything like Cold War Risk or somesuch?  Something where I can have a huge strategic nuclear arsenal and keep threatening total annihiliation while I get other players to have their countries fight proxy battles for me?

That's the kind of "Personal diplomacy" that I'm best at.

I'm sure most people could do that if they had nukes at their disposal. 

[Prof Underwood]

Something where I can have a huge strategic nuclear arsenal and keep threatening total annihiliation while I get other players to have their countries fight proxy battles for me?

Did you read my strategy guide to winning from Europe?

There's not much more intimidating than having 35 guys sitting in N.Europe just waiting for someone to be stupid enough to take your little 1 army in one of your border territories.

And there's not much more fun that listening to the other players try to convince everyone (but themselves) to be the person to go in and tick you off first

[D-man]

The main thing that I see left out of this discussion so far is the most important part of RISK.  In my opinion, success at RISK depends on the following:

20% Initial set-up
20% Dice rolling
20% Tactical strategy
40% Personal diplomacy

I agree somewhat, but I would put rolls as more influential to success.  Many a time I've taken a force twice the size of my opponent's and lost it all.  That can lose the game, especially if said battle happens on the border of a continent you own.

Europe - take on the first turn or two, put enough armies in Greenland to keep anyone from completing that continent, put the rest of your armies every turn into N.Europe and leave only 1 army on each border with Africa and Asia.  Just stockpile armies in that central territory.  You won't be an immediate threat to anyone as you can't attack from there, but no one will want to attack you because taking any border territory will open them up to your huge force plowing into them.  When the time is right, fortify to the border and conquer the world.

It seems to me that since Asia is usually not occupied by any one person until the end of the game,  I could just put a few armies on one of my Asian territories, and attack Ukraine (I may have to attack a few other territoies first, but they are usually fortified by only 1 man).  Then you're free to do what you want with your big force, and hopefully my forces are in the Americas or Australia.  If they are, I won't have to worry about your force.

[Prof Underwood]

It seems to me that since Asia is usually not occupied by any one person until the end of the game,  I could just put a few armies on one of my Asian territories, and attack Ukraine (I may have to attack a few other territories first, but they are usually fortified by only 1 man).  Then you're free to do what you want with your big force, and hopefully my forces are in the Americas or Australia.  If they are, I won't have to worry about your force.

If you are solid in another continent like SA or Aus, then:
1 - you won't have a lot of guys in Asia
2 - you won't really want to weaken Europe because they will be keeping N.America and Africa (who are your primary growth targets) busy.

If you were foolish enough to attack Ukraine, then I would simply send enough guys to wipe out your small forces in Asia and then you would be trapped in SA or Aus where you belong
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are not solid in another continent and therefore have your main forces in Asia, then:
1 - you are having a bad game to begin with
2 - you can't afford to be ticking off the guy with a huge army in the middle of Europe
3 - you also would rather him being all big and scary so that the rest of the world will focus on Europe and leave you alone

If you were foolish enough to attack Ukraine, then I would just wipe you off the board.  I would take your cards, and use you as an example to teach the rest of the players on the board to not attack me.