Settings and Modifiers by Reid Fujiwara

[strange ocean]

Welcome @undone orchid! Any feedback from the community will show up here.
Please note that this thread discussion is not shared with SMG.
It is solely for the RISK Community to discuss ideas & provide constructive feedback!

[shut condor]

I like the approach, but this doesn't really force action, does it?
Something we have tested before is the mode "First to Hold X amount of troops", meaning if one player ends their turn on a specific amount of territories and goes a full turn without falling under, they win the game. This additional win condition forces action and will ensure a certain cap of troops throughout the game.

Maybe you like that?

[undone orchid]

My goal with these rules is to encourage players to be more active with their troops, but not necessarily force them. A lot of players hate it when games reach a standstill with everyone just attacking a single territory for cards and stacking their troops on capitals, but if there’s a limit to how many troops you can have, that strategy will have a limit to its effectiveness. There will be a point where that strategy will provide no benefit compared to doing nothing. Normally if there are two players fighting and a third player doing nothing, the third player will benefit because they are constantly gaining troops while the other two are losing their troops fighting each other, eventually ending with the third player having a massive troop advantage over the other players. But if there is a troop limit in this same situation and one player takes the other’s bonuses, that player will have the advantage because they can lose more troops and still gain troops back to the limit. There will still be situations, however, where the initial players spend too many troops on each other and they can’t gain enough troops in time to reach the limit, giving the third player an opportunity to take them out before they recover. In summary this setting is meant to make active play styles more viable against turtling. Also keep in mind that this is a setting, and thus players can choose whether or not they want to play games with a troop limit, and adding this setting to risk will only give more options for the game.

Also that win via troops condition does sound interesting, it seems like it might lead to aggressive games!

[shut condor]

[clever raft]

Imagine if the cap was 300 troops for example, and everyone is gaining troops equally enough that no one has a big enough advantage to get a profitable kill. Now all 5 players (in this made up scenario) have reached the cap of 300 troops, what happens now? Its the exact same situation as a "perfectly played" caps game. Eventually everyone gets so big that there is no point attacking anyone and the game stalemates until someone basically suicides their troops into someone else.

[shut condor]

You do realize, that progressive card trade values always keep increasing, yes?