RISK Domination III: Finished!

[Gustaf]

Now attack Oklahoma and divide the troops evenly between the Oklahoma and Arkansas. Then tactical move from California to Arizona and await further orders.

[Gustaf]

Now attack Oklahoma and divide the troops evenly between the Oklahoma and Arkansas. Then tactical move from California to Arizona and await further orders.

To clarify, once the tactical move is done, that'll be the end of your turn.

Also, if there is an odd number of battalions between AR and OK, where do you want the extra one to go?

1. I kind of understand that...

2. To Oklahoma. I should've added that.

[Gustaf]

Now attack Oklahoma and divide the troops evenly between the Oklahoma and Arkansas. Then tactical move from California to Arizona and await further orders.

To clarify, once the tactical move is done, that'll be the end of your turn.

Also, if there is an odd number of battalions between AR and OK, where do you want the extra one to go?

1. I kind of understand that...

I assumed you did, until I read "and await further orders" after your tactical move instruction.  By all means, I'll await further orders, but they'll be from TN2024.

Yeah, that's what I meant, you moron.









Ehm...I guess I just got used to writing "and await further orders" at the end of every instruction. I was in a terrible hurry as I wrote it, basically. SOrry if I came out as a jerk/idiot. That being said, would it be ok to change the tactical move order, since TN2024 hasn't done anything yet? I had forgotten I had 2 batallions in Oregon and had in mind to move them to Idaho as my tactical move...pleeeeeaase?

[Gustaf]

I don't particularly see why not. 

Thanks a lot!

I'll try and institute a "think before I post" policy for the remainder of the game.

[Gustaf]

Fin

finish?

[Gustaf]

3 in Minnesota

Minnesota --> Wisconsin --> Michigan

Ah, how wonderfully insightful and forceful of you.
Truly you deserve the title of General for your unsurpassed ability to read the game and apply suitable strategy and tactics.

I've been made fun of a lot in this game so far, and I have yet to respond. I do not think I am a terrible player. With that said I do not think I am an amazing one either. I had a strategy, and over the course of the game it got f*ed with. What would you suggest I do over that last term? I am trying to stay alive right now, and taking more states was the only way to do it.

I'm sorry, but you are a terrible player. You had amazing luck with the fight against Lewis and then stabbing Ernest in the back and getting his RIsk cards. If it hadn't been for those two things you would have died even earlier then you will now. This, my friend, was your last turn.

And, TN, I don't get what you mean with strategic pre-screening. Who would do what? I am tempted to say that people should, voluntarily, refrain from criticism until after the moves have been done. It's more fair to let people suffer for their mistakes, IMO. I usually try and do that myself.

[Gustaf]

3 in Minnesota

Minnesota --> Wisconsin --> Michigan

Ah, how wonderfully insightful and forceful of you.
Truly you deserve the title of General for your unsurpassed ability to read the game and apply suitable strategy and tactics.

I've been made fun of a lot in this game so far, and I have yet to respond. I do not think I am a terrible player. With that said I do not think I am an amazing one either. I had a strategy, and over the course of the game it got f*ed with. What would you suggest I do over that last term? I am trying to stay alive right now, and taking more states was the only way to do it.

I'm sorry, but you are a terrible player. You had amazing luck with the fight against Lewis and then stabbing Ernest in the back and getting his RIsk cards. If it hadn't been for those two things you would have died even earlier then you will now. This, my friend, was your last turn.

And, TN, I don't get what you mean with strategic pre-screening. Who would do what? I am tempted to say that people should, voluntarily, refrain from criticism until after the moves have been done. It's more fair to let people suffer for their mistakes, IMO. I usually try and do that myself.

I in my way shape or form stabbed Ernest in the back. Ernest pmed me and said that he was releasing me from our agreement. Know the facts Gustaf.

I'll ignore the fact that the post is entirely unintelligible. Ah, well, you sure stabbed me in the back, at least. Or tried. Anyway, if you did have a strategy I'd be interested in hearing what it was. I couldn't really tell. This last move, btw, made you more vulnerable than you already were.

[Gustaf]

Calm down, guys.  Let's not allow personal frustrations to spill over.

Sorry Joe. With hindsight I went over the line in those last posts. MAS, I didn't mean to rile you up and I'll try and refrain from it.

[Gustaf]

Gustaf, I wouldn't find fault with MAS's strategy last round.  He made the choice to go for the certainty of a RISK card as opposed to trying to take Colorado (and thereby control of the southwest) from you, but not gaining a card if he failed.  Both choices can be defended.  However, the earlier round when he first attacked you, he should have gone MO -> OK -> CO to deny you the region boni for the South and Southwest instead of going after Iowa and states east from Missouri.

I hear you, however, 1) I think it's pretty obvious that he is on the verge of getting wiped out. Weakening me would have increased his chances of survival. More importantly, taking one state would have been sufficient to get his RIsk card. He could then have spread his forces between two states, getting at least two 2-dice rolls that could have been invaluable. As it is, he did nothing to make hiimself harder to get, since an attack on him from me would have had to go through Michigan and Wisconsin anyway.

[Gustaf]

Reinforcements
3 to Illinois
1 to Tennessee

Battle Orders
Do-or-die...
Tennessee to Mississippi
and
Illinois to Missouri

Tactical Move
Move as many as possible from Missouri to Tennessee

I cannot quite say that I follow you here...an elaborate move to transfer your Illinois force to a place where it can make a difference?

[Gustaf]

I cannot quite say that I follow you here...an elaborate move to transfer your Illinois force to a place where it can make a difference?

Yes.

I felt that there were few palatable options open to me.

Attacking TN further would only bring about both our destructions as neither of us have the potential to win all out against the other in the short term. Continuing the agression here is a waste of time and resources at this juncture.
Attacking MAS is only reasonable if I can wipe him out, which I can't do and I'm not inclined to make it a great deal easier for anyone else.
Attacking you is simply not viable in the very short term as it would lead to an inevitable and very strong backlash which would cripple me beyond any possible repair.

Hence a consolidation play.

Yeah, I guess that makes sense. I just wasn't expecting Illinois to come into play this turn so I was a little surprised. But, yes, this move makes sense as far as I can tell.

[Gustaf]

Place everything in Idaho. All attacks this round are do or die, moving maximum number of units unless I say otherwise.

Idaho-->Montana
Oklahoma->Kansas->Nebraska->South Dakota

If the Oklahoma attacks fails to take a state attack that state from Wyoming (Nebraska if it stops there, South Dakota if it stops there).

Await further orders.

[Gustaf]

Montana-->North Dakota-->Minnesota-->Iowa-->Wisconsin-->Michigan-->Indiana

Then await further orders.

I should add that I'll decide the division between Indiana and Michigan when I get there.

[Gustaf]

Montana-->North Dakota-->Minnesota-->Iowa-->Wisconsin-->Michigan-->Indiana

Then await further orders.

I should add that I'll decide the division between Indiana and Michigan when I get there.

Congrats on your win Gustaf.

Thank you, though I wouldn't call it just yet.

To Jas: I actually thought Joe had made a mistake in the map update at first, but then I checked the results...I guess you really haven't had the dice with you this game. In fact, I don't think you did in our last game either. It sucks to play Risk at times, I would have gone mad over a result like that...

[Gustaf]

Is it just me or does one always lose brutal numbers of batallions when trying to wipe someone out? But I've had luck before, so it evens out...I'll never attack WIsconsin again though.

Leave 3 in Michigan and then attack Indiana-->Kentucky. Put minimum number of batallions in Kentucky. Then tactical move New Mexico-->Oklahoma and end turn.

[Gustaf]

Damn TN and his lucky dice.

[Gustaf]

Damn TN and his lucky dice.

Yeah, that went about as well as it could, but it's anyone's game at this point.

We'll see..I can't say that it looks to good atm for me.

[Gustaf]

Lol, did you take the time to construct that yourself?

Seriously though, I don't really think we should bash Joe's dice so much. I've seen real dice perform just as weirdly.

[Gustaf]

I'd like to turn i nthe following cards:

[Gustaf]

I sense a little impatience in that post.

I will post my orders later, but I can't right now, I'm afraid.

[Gustaf]

Ok, of the 26 I can place freely I'd like 8 in Oklahoma and the rest in Kentucky.

Attack Oklahoma--->Texas do or die. I'll determine the division between the states after I see how it went.

Kentucky-->West Virginia-->Pennsylvania-->New York-->Vermont-->New Hampshire--> Maine-->Massachusetts-->Rhode Island-->Connecticut do or die moving maximum number of units all the time.


THen await further orders.

[Gustaf]

Blech. Put 7 in Texas and attack Texas-->New Mexico-->Arizona moving all units. Then tactical move from CT to NY and end turn.

[Gustaf]

I don't get what Jas did at all.  He left Gustaf in charge of three regions, the Northeast, South, and Southwest for an extra 8 battalions beyond what he gets for his States.

If I had been him my orders would have been:

1) Place all available in Missouri.
2) Attack MO -> OK -> NM ->TX, moving the minimum into Texas.
3) Tactical move all available from North Carolina to Virginia.

There may or there may not have been a pact involved. But I'm not saying anything.

(though you may note that I did not attack Jas last turn)

I'd like 1 each in Utah, New Mexico and Texas, 4 in Nevada and the rest in Michigan.

THen attack, do or die,

Nevada-->Oregon
Michigan-->Ohio-->West Virginia-->Virginia-->North Carolina

Then await further orders.

Edit: I should make clear that the Michigan attacks are "moving all units" while I want to put the minimum number in Oregon.

[Gustaf]

Attack North Carolina--Tennessee and as soon as I lose something attack do or die South Carolina-->Georgia-->Florida-->Alabama

[Gustaf]

Attack North Carolina--Tennessee and as soon as I lose something attack do or die South Carolina-->Georgia-->Florida-->Alabama

Sorry, I don't understand.

You want NC to attack TN, and then if successful, attack SC?  If so, that's impossible due to there not being a border between TN and SC.

Also, "do or die" usually implies to attack until either the entire defending army or the entire attacking army is destroyed.  Are your subsequent orders along these lines, or until you lose just 1 battalion?

I think he meant, attack NC->TN until losing 1 or 2 battalions then attack NC->SC->GA->FL->AL do or die.  It lets him wear down TN with 3 battalion attacks before going after the soft 1 battalion States.  If he did NC->SC->GA->FL->AL->TN, he'd be attacking TN with at most 1 battallion, not a good idea.

Of course, given the way your dice like to do things, he should have covered the case where he takes TN without losing anything at all.

Ernest is correct, I seem to always be writing in a hurry, making it harder for me to be fully clear. Also, in the unlikely event that I do take Tennessee, we'll cross that bridge when we get there.

So, attack Tennessee from North Carolina, cease attack as soon as I lose something and then attack, instead, from North Carolina to South Carolina, etc as far as I get. And to answer your last question, yes, the non-Tennessee attacks are do or die.