by tilouboy
What's the difference?↧
Reply: Risk Legacy:: General:: Re: Can this be played with the "no limit on number of attacking soldiers"-home rule?
↧
Reply: Risk Legacy:: General:: Re: Can this be played with the "no limit on number of attacking soldiers"-home rule?
by Faithtoken
It tilts the battle in the favor of the attacker.If you attack with, say 7 units against 4 defending units.
Even if you, as the attacker, lose 2 units in the first round, you still have 3 dice for the next round.
The downside is that you have committed the number of units you attack with to the battle and can't retreat.
↧
↧
Reply: Risk Legacy:: General:: Re: Can this be played with the "no limit on number of attacking soldiers"-home rule?
by tilouboy
I see.I would advise against that variant.
Edit: Just say your brother(s) and sister(s) that you'll have the best gaming time of your life.
↧
Reply: Risk Legacy:: General:: Re: Can this be played with the "no limit on number of attacking soldiers"-home rule?
The way attacking works in Risk the 2 options are fundamentally identical.
-option 1, attack with up to 3 guys. Still defenders left? attack again with up to 3 guys. Do so until it is conquered or you have no attackers left/quit.
-option 2, attack with any number of guys but roll only 3 dice. Keep rolling dice until one side is depleted or the attacker retreats.
While I see the semantical difference, there is literally no functional difference.
both cases have max of 3 dice.
both cases have the option for the attacker to bail.
both cases allow the attacker to continue beyond the initial 3
Now I could see this mattering if you were playing incorrectly and not letting the attacker attack more than once from the same territory. Being limited to 3 guys for a whole attack or turn would be devastatingly bad for game balance, don't do that. That's wrong.
-option 1, attack with up to 3 guys. Still defenders left? attack again with up to 3 guys. Do so until it is conquered or you have no attackers left/quit.
-option 2, attack with any number of guys but roll only 3 dice. Keep rolling dice until one side is depleted or the attacker retreats.
While I see the semantical difference, there is literally no functional difference.
both cases have max of 3 dice.
both cases have the option for the attacker to bail.
both cases allow the attacker to continue beyond the initial 3
Now I could see this mattering if you were playing incorrectly and not letting the attacker attack more than once from the same territory. Being limited to 3 guys for a whole attack or turn would be devastatingly bad for game balance, don't do that. That's wrong.
↧
Reply: SeaFall:: Rules:: Re: Box 3 spoilers
ira212 wrote:
I stop using spoiler tags this far in the thread. :)
Taking a lot of sail actions to get back to where the action is seems wasteful.
Taking a lot of sail actions to get back to where the action is seems wasteful.
So is taking lots of actions to sail home but that is certainly useful. I think the key part is timing. If you can teleport home to set yourself up for a string of high glory turns to close out the game then there's no downside because you never needed to go back out.
I think that's key with this tablet and the Navigator. Do this towards the end of the game when you do not plan on needing to head back out, or at least have a desire to be in the first half of the board again.
Teleport home, buy treasure with goods discount, buy building with goods discount, buy upgrade with goods discount. Boom. 6 gold, 3 glory.
I have the +1 glory for a building sticker too, so I cash out on 4 glory the last turn or so fairly consistently.
↧
↧
Reply: SeaFall:: Sessions:: Re: Sell me on playing out the games post box 4(octopus)
Thanks for replying, just a few notes. I spent the last two games going for the 5 buildings goal only to have one of the explorers get lucky and end the game before I finished. I think raiding or milling for a good adviser is going to be the way to go here. My wife has the chart and has the only good chance of taking Ker out as everyone else is losing 7 or more dice out of the gate. So, I am not sure stealing it is a good idea.
↧
Reply: Risk Legacy:: General:: Re: Can this be played with the "no limit on number of attacking soldiers"-home rule?
by Faithtoken
Oh, so if you attack with three guys, and lose one, you can fill it up to three again before rolling again? Is that the official rules?Well in that case it does not make a difference how you play.
Our interpretation of the rules was like this:
Attacker has country with 10 units
Defender has country with 6 units
Attacker attacks with maximum of three, rolls three dice.
each loses 1 guy, next time attacker only gets to roll 2 dice, both lose a guy. The attacker now only has one dice, defender still 2 dice. Loses his last attacker (seldom kills any defenders). Then decides if he wants to attack with 3 more units.
↧
Reply: SeaFall:: Rules:: Re: Missing Rule 6?
LordXeen wrote:
So last game we found our first portal of the ancients out at sea and are collectively scratching our heads about how they work. We've opened 5 boxes and have most of the rules in the book filled in but we're a bit worried because we had two copies of rule 9 and there's still a blank Rule 6 in the same area as dangerous waters and atolls and such so if someone could tell me a) If rule 6 should already be revealed (Again, boxes 1-5 are open) and if it is b) what the rules are? My gut says go in one portal come out another make and a Sailing Endeavor.
Thanks in advance.
Thanks in advance.
[o]With 5 boxes open, you should have all of the rules. Yes, rule 6 says you can go from one portal to another. If the portal has dangerous waters, you must do the check if you are sailing into the portal. You don't do a dangerous waters check on the portal where you come out. It doesn't cost a move.[/o]
I'm sorry I don't have the exact text for you. I'm not near the box right now.
↧
Reply: Risk Legacy:: General:: Re: Can this be played with the "no limit on number of attacking soldiers"-home rule?
by Faithtoken
tilouboy wrote:
I see.
I would advise against that variant.
Edit: Just say your brother(s) and sister(s) that you'll have the best gaming time of your life.
I would advise against that variant.
Edit: Just say your brother(s) and sister(s) that you'll have the best gaming time of your life.
Yeah, I have two brothers that will probably love this game, I might get my wife and the older sister to play it with me as well.
↧
↧
Reply: SeaFall:: Reviews:: Re: Seafall Review: No Spoilers, 7 Games in, 4 Players
by Lowden025
HerrohGrant wrote:
.....so if you're playing with four or five players, there will be a little downtime.
This is the first time I've come across a review where exactly the opposite wasn't said. You must have a very special play group! I'm jealous.
Thanks for sharing.
↧
Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Sessions:: Re: August Playthrough -- Toledo Tuesdays Gaming Club [spoilers]
by chiefsachem
rmsgrey wrote:
One small point: the July win bonus is intended to only give you one new military base (but makes it permanent) - the reason it says to place a building as well as the sticker is that by the time you apply the bonus (step 9 of setup) you've already passed the step of placing starting structures (way back in step 2) so if it just gave you the sticker, you wouldn't have a military base there that game...
Good point. We spent a lot of time quibbling on that small detail and finally agreed that the bonus only applied to one military structure.
On a similar note, were there any bonuses between Jan and August that permitted you to build a research station anywhere on the board, including rioting cities?
We noticed in August that one of our rioting city still had a research station on it. We can't remember for the life of us if there was a previous bonus action that allowed us to override this restriction. Half of us said yes, the other two players said no.
We couldn't check our bonus cards to verify because they wee all destroyed during the course of the season.
↧
Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: For those who have finished.
by manur
Score: 603Players: 4
10 wins, 8 losses, june and december were lost twice
COdA: Yellow
Ground Zero: Lagos
Bravo Team: No
Package 8: No
Nuclear Option: Yes (Karthoum)
Research Stations: Atlanta, São Paulo, Cairo and Hong Kong.
Destroyed Research Stations: 0
Destroyed Military Base Count: 7 (Chicago, Bogota, Essen, Karthoum, Bagdad, Karachi, Jakarta)
Remaining Military Base: Kinshasa
Vaccine Factories: 1 (Hong Kong)
Destroyed Vaccine Factories: 0
Roadblocks: 5
Fallen City: 15 (all vaccinated)
Collapsing Cities: Johannesburg and Karthoum (already collapsed before nuking)
Characters Dead: Steeve A. (Operations Expert)
All disease upgrades used.
All cities vaccinated.
COdA stockpile not destroyed.
Characters and number of plays :
Researcher (Ms Rose): 17
Quarantine Specialist (Jackie Labelle): 16
Medic (Dr Simon Cussonet): 8
Dispatcher (Gérard Baste): 6
Scientist (Alexandrine Yersin): 6
Colonel (Colonel Gerber): 5
Soldier (Jean Rimbaud): 5 & Traitor!
Operations Expert (Steeve A.): 4 & R.I.P.
Virologist (Maria-Jesus Méyabalpa): 2
Immunologist (Reanu Keeves): 2
Generalist (Doctor No): 1
Played from november 2015 to december 2016.
↧
Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: For those who have finished.
by cheng
manur wrote:
Ground Zero: Lagos
So, was having Ground Zero in a somewhat isolated part of the map a good thing (for limiting the spread of CodA) or a bad thing (making it hard to get to)?
↧
↧
Reply: SeaFall:: Rules:: Re: Missing Rule 6?
by duchamp
I sent a PM with the rules text. :)↧
Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: For those who have finished.
by manur
cheng wrote:
So, was having Ground Zero in a somewhat isolated part of the map a good thing (for limiting the spread of CodA) or a bad thing (making it hard to get to)?
I'd say both, as three roadblocks are enough to (more or less) isolate subsaharian Africa, but it creates difficulties reaching it in later parts of the campaign, when you need to.
↧
Reply: SeaFall:: Rules:: Re: Specific Relic (spoilers)
by Oragog
supraking777 wrote:
[o]We are going into game 9. We only have 3 relics so far in our game and one is the horn that allows you to spend fortune at dangerous sites. I'm beginning to think it may not be working as designed. Ker was conquered after one game because of the horn, for instance. It is rendering dangerous sites meaningless for the player who holds it. It seems like instead of unlimited fortune, it should only allow 1 or 2 fortune to be spent at a site. Also, it should maybe exclude certain story dangerous sites / player provinces. [/o]
[o]Just for a comparison, that relic for us was lost to the seas on game 4ish when an event on one of the islands sank the ship it was on. So even with that relic missing, two games after Ker was discovered it was conquered. It would have happened the game after if someone hadn't found three tablet/relics in sequential explorations ending the game fairly early.[/o]
↧
New Video for SeaFall
by Frikiguias
<div></div>
↧
↧
Reply: Risk Legacy:: General:: Re: Can this be played with the "no limit on number of attacking soldiers"-home rule?
In fact, each attack is an independent procedure. You can attack, attack from some other territory, and again from the first. You can attack with three units, then only with one, and again with three (if you have at least four guys left).
↧
Thread: Stop Thief!:: General:: New Microbadge available
Stop Thief! fan ↧
Thread: Downforce:: General:: New microbadge available
Downforce fan ↧