I hate risk. Too fucking complicated, and this is coming from someone who loves science and mathematics.
Review: Risk: Factions
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Question: is there a way to enable the (Italian only?) defending 3-die rule? It would bother me too much to play differently. Anyway love Risk, but I still play it time to time with my friends, so I don't particularly feel the need for a videogame version of it.
Now, if they were to make a PC version of A Game of Thrones... Or Twilight Imperium! *drools*
Now, if they were to make a PC version of A Game of Thrones... Or Twilight Imperium! *drools*
Sorry dude, but complicated? Risk?ultimateownage said:
Ok, that makes sense. Nothing wrong with it, but it just lacks the kind of longevity that something like Plants vs. Zombie has.Greg Tito said:
Even though to be fair, an added layer of (social) complexity lies in Risk in trying to convince the other players that it's really better for them to attack that other guy, because yeah you may win against me here, but I have 16 points of recruitment in cards (I swear), so then I will have to attack you, and he will win because we weaken each other, but if you attack him, maybe when you finish him you get his cards, and then...Slycne said:
That maybe why I was usually entitled "wormtongue".
I agree completly with this review, i'd like to add though that if you're playing over multiplayer there's already some infuriating tactics and habits developing two of which are most prominant.
If you're playing the "command room" the objective based mode there's normally an objective to take over an enemy HQ, since you win by gathering three objectives whoevers first will irritatingly sotckpile all their resources into one space for an early lead, not cheating but tiresome when it happens most matches.
The other one is rage-quitters, this game's already been hit by them hard. If it even looks like they're not winning or right at the last move they'll quit. Because they disconnected the game doesnt count as a win or loss for the but counts it as a loss for you, there's lists in most gaming forums though compiling names of quitters and non-quitters for better gaming.
Apart from those two gripes i think this game is fantastic, i'd actually never played Risk before but had played a rather hollowed out flash version called Dice Wars.
If you're playing the "command room" the objective based mode there's normally an objective to take over an enemy HQ, since you win by gathering three objectives whoevers first will irritatingly sotckpile all their resources into one space for an early lead, not cheating but tiresome when it happens most matches.
The other one is rage-quitters, this game's already been hit by them hard. If it even looks like they're not winning or right at the last move they'll quit. Because they disconnected the game doesnt count as a win or loss for the but counts it as a loss for you, there's lists in most gaming forums though compiling names of quitters and non-quitters for better gaming.
Apart from those two gripes i think this game is fantastic, i'd actually never played Risk before but had played a rather hollowed out flash version called Dice Wars.
I bought the game the second I noticed it on XBLA. I love me some Risk. However I thought the campaign was a little too short for my taste and I wish we could have gotten some animated battles for Classic Risk. I liked the PC version of Risk 2 for this. You have colonial infantry men and increase your troops would show Cannons and Horses on the battle field... Good times.
That aside though, I still enjoyed this game, I just didn't think it was worth 800ms for such a short campaign.
That aside though, I still enjoyed this game, I just didn't think it was worth 800ms for such a short campaign.
See, I disagree. When the robots eventually rise and rebel, I believe ATMs will lead the charge...samsonguy920 said:
