38 attacks my 36. I lose all attacker loses 21. Is it just more balanced for castles? Not really seeing that either. I know supposed be more balanced greater number on castles. Just curious as really do not get it.
#Thought dice was more balanced for defender?
fluid iron
sonic river
I believe you should notice it more in capital conquest games with cap hits. Probably won't see that much of a difference with normal territories.
lucid cargo
~14% chance for such an outcome with true random, maybe 5% with balanced blitz
unlikely but can happen
fluid iron
Did happen bb. Wish they would balance dice so defenders had a chance. Just like NFL all offense.
sonic river
Did happen bb. Wish they would balance dice so defenders had a chance. Just like...
Attackers advantage is an important aspect of RISK. If you take that away games will just stall and take forever. The extra dice is important for caps in capital conquest though. Keeps it hard for someone to do a cap run until later in the game.
fluid iron
Then just make attacking army win everytime regardless of numbers. Games be really fast then.
wide whale
You dont make any sense
Bad dice rolls are part of the game. It sucks if it's your own roll, but hilarious when it's your opponents'
pure fable
Attackers advantage is a thing since you have a whole extra die. Also your probability to lose an attack is also a thing. Thats how the game work.
I would argue that attackers have higher advantage when playing the digital game especially when blitz rolling, and i dont hate it.
If you played the board game youd laugh at stupid moments were you lose to a smaller amount of troops when attacking which you couldve won by a mouse click on the digital game.
In conclusion, they try to make the digital game similar to the board game and i think thats great. If you dont like it then i suggest you play the board game and lose that 38 troops to a 36 😂.
Also capitals defend with 3 dice incase you didnt know. Thats why you'd lose more troops when attacking. And they give you troops at the beginning of every turn.
eternal hemlock
Some RISK board variants didn't have the 3v2 behaviour (instead using 3 attackers, letting defender pick between 1-3 defenders to defend with) - so there's a decent chance that they'd gotten accustomed to different mechanics before playing
fluid iron
With advantage to attacker takes away half the game. Rather play board game but can not do that online. Guess I am not in a hurry. I like to smell the roses and stay out of the rat race. Been there and got a tee shirt. Just like NFL everyone wants to see scores so they took away defense. Attackers advantage makes this very unlike the board game. Not sure why everyone is in a hurry. We all going to die so why be in a hurry and want everything to be fast. Tortoise and the hare.
eternal hemlock
If you still want slower games, fixed cards classic capitals usually does the trick
fluid iron
What i play. Just think dice are to biased in favor oft attack. Attacker already has advantage with extra dice. When I first started playing you needed at least double troops attacking castles. Kept tinkering with code and just screwed things up. You would think they would fix connection issues but does not appear they can. Always promising on that one but do not deliver. Just my opinion on dice. Opinions like ah's everyone got one.
steady atlas
This is TR, but it shows the attackers advantage
It's an advantage, not an auto win. In terms of strategy, Risk is a game of probability and balancing those odds. Balanced blitz does not balance in defenders favor, but it evens out the curve
In BB, winning 7v22 is impossible, in TR, it's been done. But it also means losing 12v1 is also impossible in BB, but possible in TR