austraila vs s.america

[MeDeFe]

The reason I only looked at games I won is that if we are going to start debating viable strategies (practically impossible to debate except in the broadest of terms anyway, there are too many details involved in actual gameplay) and starting positions I can only argue from my own perspective. You've mentioned the debate we had at a while back whether Europe is a viable starting position at all, I think it's safe to say that in my personal experience it is. The numbers from my games back me up on that point. Even if Europe does not appear to be a good bet if you take a larger sample of games with other players who prefer different strategies.


And I wouldn't be too sure about 3 player games skewing the results towards larger continents, if there are only a few players in the game your chance of being dropped 3 out of 4 territories on a small continent is also substantially larger. The strategy you outlined earlier relied rather heavily on speed for the person who got the small continent if I remember correctly, and getting the bonus by round 2 definitely qualifies for being included under the label "speed".

[jpliberty]

Forget about what 'FEELS' Right... here's a FACT,,,

in EVERY singles game (100% of the time, except assasin) the winner held NORTH AMERICA!

So NORTH AMERICA is where it's at!!!!




Well actually, by the final round they held ALL the continents... but for now lets just ignore that little detail...

Damn, where are you when I need a win?

Oceania is THE continent on the Classic map. N America, Europe and Asia virtually NEVER figure in the game, unless it is a multiple player game and ONLY if at least one of two things occurs:
1) someone gets all of N America, Europe or Asia on the drop and goes first;
2) at least one player is an idiot and so screws up the game that no one can stop someone from holding N America, Europe or Asia

Simply put, you are WAAAAY off base with your N America strategy and I so very much wish to get your points...any time you want to try your N America strategy against me, Pleeeeze do

LOL

[whitestazn88]

south america for sure has a better choice of where to go in terms of expansion..

i like australia for the fact that theres only one territ to hold as a block, but taking and holding asia after that is tough, whereas if you go for north america after south america, you only add 1 territ to defend really

[mpjh]

Don't have any research but the armies holding aus often seem to do well if not win. Aus loses when the armies on sa can hold it for a couple of turns. I have never seen anyony hold na for any period of time.

[Pippin]

Neither... I chose... Rapture.

(Australia)

[whitestazn88]

Don't have any research but the armies holding aus often seem to do well if not win. Aus loses when the armies on sa can hold it for a couple of turns. I have never seen anyony hold na for any period of time.

never seen anyone hold na for any period of time? its the easiest +5 to hold for sure... and if you already have sa, then its only got 3 defense points for +7...

[MeDeFe]

What's going on? I thought detlef and I had killed this thread.

[whitestazn88]

some guy pulled a 2 week bump on it, so i decided i'd add to the conversation

[Phoenix7]

I would rather do wheelies on my dirt bike or read a book.

Yet a 4 person game always go for NA. Otherwise Oz, I hate that map and do not play it unless there are 7 fools...lol. kisses

[WorldCup4James]

I think that both Australia and South America are good under certain circumstances. If you go for Australia on the Classic map you need to make sure you can control Asia by securing Dubai, Moscow, and Magadan, which can be difficult and easy, depending on whether Europe is colonized and how aggressive the player in North America or Africa is. Australia alone, in my opinion, is not enough to win. If you try securing Australia and another continent not adjacent it could work but often times deploying troops at two different locations of defense can be tough.
South America can be difficult if you´ve got someone bothering you up in North America. You´ve got to make a pact with the guy in Africa, or QUICKLY QUICKLY capture North America and hope you´re not bombarded in Sao Paulo. I wouldn´t go for Africa: you gain another 2 border points, while going for NA only requires you to defend one more border, plus a larger bonus.

[ChopSquad]

On classic map I feel like Australia is always the best continent to start with in the *ideal situation. (*ideal = no one quick rushes another continent in the first few turns and you are playing with experienced opponents)

Why:
i.) Ease of defending Australia.
To hold Australia all you have to hold is a single border country that can only be attacked from one adjacent country, making it especially attractive in chained reinforcement type games. This also means that no more than a single opponent can attack you unlike in South America where you can end up getting sandwiched between two opponents trying to expand.

ii.) Difficulty of conquering Asia.
I have never heard of a viable Asia first strategy. That means that most likely Asia will be a mass of countries that no one particularly wants to hold, making it a great "spoil farm" as long as you advance into it leisurely. On the other hand competition for North America and Africa will likely be fierce and so they will be difficult to expand into. Also, since Asia is so difficult to hold it is extremely difficult for anyone to dedicate troops to Bangkok to keep you trapped inside Australia while at the same time expanding and defending their own borders.

iii.) Having to over commit yourself in South America.
If you do manage to hold South America you will put yourself in a precarious position since you will hold the balance of power between North America and Africa. As soon as an opponent makes a serious attempt for either continent you will need to force them out in order to keep yourself safe. This will put a massive target on your back whereas in Australia you can just sit back and let your opponents weaken each other.

iv.) You can easily stir up trouble with other alliances.
If your opponents start talking about teaming up in order to take you out join the conversation and try to convince one of them that they are getting a bad deal. This should be easy enough to manage since only one opponent can attack you at a time, leaving the other members of the alliance to fortify their positions at the expense of one member. Sow dissent amongst them and then try to ally with the one who would be getting the short end of the stick. On the other hand if your opponent have weakened themselves enough in their infighting just crush them all one at a time for the spoils.

[QoH]

I've played a lot of Risk in my (albeit short) lifetime, and I like SA over Australia. I know a lot of debating can be done with all the pros and cons of both countries, but there are a few reason why I like SA more.

-You have 2 expansion options.
-Because NA and Africa have a lot of territories, it's more unlikely to have a war on 2 fronts.
-You can get a quick 2 extra units to deploy, because a lot of players I play with always fight over Australia.
-If you get stalemated in on expansion rote, odds are there will be a smaller defense to overcome in the other, leading to quick gains.

DOn't know what all you guys think about those reasons, but I found that ANY continent is good to start out on, although I will tend to favor the smaller ones first.

[Army of GOD]

Who said North America wasn't a good choice? =D

Game 7427097

[Robinette]

Forget about what 'FEELS' Right... here's a FACT,,,

in EVERY singles game (100% of the time, except assasin) the winner held NORTH AMERICA!

So NORTH AMERICA is where it's at!!!!




Well actually, by the final round they held ALL the continents... but for now lets just ignore that little detail...

Damn, where are you when I need a win?

Oceania is THE continent on the Classic map. N America, Europe and Asia virtually NEVER figure in the game, unless it is a multiple player game and ONLY if at least one of two things occurs:
1) someone gets all of N America, Europe or Asia on the drop and goes first;
2) at least one player is an idiot and so screws up the game that no one can stop someone from holding N America, Europe or Asia

Simply put, you are WAAAAY off base with your N America strategy and I so very much wish to get your points...any time you want to try your N America strategy against me, Pleeeeze do

LOL

wait wait wait... I just completed even more research,
and i can tell you for a FACT
that in over 90% of singles games (except assasin) the winner held ASIA!

So ASIA is where it's at!!!!

This is an Indisputable FACT!

;o)

[tkr4lf]

While I can't really comment on this website's gameplay as I am new here, I have been playing Risk for a while so I can safely comment on that. If at all possible, I like to take Australia first. Reasons have already been given by previous posts, and most of those reasons are the same as mine. However, I can also say, that when playing the chose your own territories way as opposed to the random deal way, I do my best to get both of them. It gives me a nice steady base in Australia which is simple to hold, and a good place to expand from in South America. It will give me +4 armies each turn, and allow me to eventually take North America for a bonus of +9 each turn and only 4 territories to defend. In any of the games where I manage to do this, I always win. Once you are receiving +9 on every turn, and control nearly half of the map, the game gets easy. Just my two cents.

Edit: Wow I just realized that it says I joined this site back in '08 and thought I should clarify that as I mentioned that I am new here. I now remember joining back then but never playing because I didn't like the whole "wait a day to play" concept. I guess I'm okay with it now. Anyway, I should be around more now.