Page 1 of 2
Holding a Continent
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 10:24 amby iamjhing
I was playing a 1v1 FtF game on the classic board about two weeks ago. I had Europe and was pushing into Africa, my boarder to Asia was solid with men in Ukraine, Southern Europe and Egypt in equal numbers. My oponnent had sat on Australia for a few turns, turned in cards and came right into Southern Europe. Despite my superior numbers I was disorganized and could never kick him out and lost as a result.
I've always avoided the single mass of soldiers, because it invites an attack from your neighbors, but I'm beginning to rethink this mindset.
So my question is: How do you defend your continents?
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 10:40 amby flashleg8
None of the above.
I defend in a two tier system with preferably 4 troops in each line of defence. This allows counterattacks if an attack fails, stops people exploiting a breakthrough and also means I don't have large stacks to make me a bigger target.
I've seen some probability studies (on here I think) that after stacking above 4 troops you start to get limited rates of return on the percentage of defending increase. The troops are better spent elsewhere in my opinion.
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 10:50 amby hammockboy1
I have a main army of about 20 on the most compettitive border and weaker 15s on the rest of the outside borders.
unlike flash my point in defeninding isn't to get the best out of it, it is too hurt the enemy as much as possible so i can launch a quick decisive counter attack
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 10:52 amby iamjhing
Spread your troops out farther? If you first line is broken how do you take it back so scattered?
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 11:35 amby wcaclimbing
What i usually do is try to match my troops to the strength of my opponents borders.
for example, i would have a lot more troops on the borders where my opponent has more troops. and less troops where theres less of a threat.
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 11:44 amby Bodmanbod
well first of all defend using countries out of the continent you are defending.
ie: if you hold NA you need forces on Kamcatcha, iceland and venezuela, not on Alaska, Central America and Greenland. By doing this if they do manage to break you then there is a chance you won't lose you bonus.
Also defend according to the enemies nearby, look at the forces bordering you, if they are large you need a large defense there, and smaller defenses where there are smaller opposing forces. There's no point having 5 on each border country when one is bordering a country with 10 armies and another is bordering one with 1 army. Generally though i like to spread them even if you assume all opposing forces are equal.
Also the best form of defence is offence, make sure you are the one who keeps breaking into someone elses continent not the other way around.
Lessen your borders as much as possible aswell. If you hold asia then expand to the ukraine to have one less border.
There are certain 'Key' countries in the classic map, i won't name them but holding them makes defence much easier.
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 1:38 pmby RobinJ
I would station as many on each border as I feel necessary to repel an attack from another player the next turn. Eg. I'm not going to put 10 armies on each border of S. America on Classic if I have an opponent with 15 on N. Africa and another opponent with just a couple on Central America.
Also, I try to lessen my borders as much as possible, unless of course it means exposing myself to a large enemy army. I always leave a few on the actual borders of the continent so that it isn't completely defenseless if my defence is broken.
And, if I'm low on armies against a big force I use the Sully defence - that is to say I place nearly all my armies on a central territory so that they will be wary of a counter attack. Take the S. America example again - I have 15 armies in total to fortify with but I have an opponent with 10 on each border. I would probably sit 3 or 4 on each border to have some sort of defence but leave a main force of about 10 on Peru so that I can counter easily.
Of course all this depends on the game type. If it isn't unlimited forts then it all becomes more difficult and if its escalating cards then the continents aren't that important
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 1:41 pmby RobinJ
I would station as many on each border as I feel necessary to repel an attack from another player the next turn. Eg. I'm not going to put 10 armies on each border of S. America on Classic if I have an opponent with 15 on N. Africa and another opponent with just a couple on Central America.
Also, I try to lessen my borders as much as possible, unless of course it means exposing myself to a large enemy army. I always leave a few on the actual borders of the continent so that it isn't completely defenseless if my defence is broken.
And, if I'm low on armies against a big force I use the Sully defence - that is to say I place nearly all my armies on a central territory so that they will be wary of a counter attack. Take the S. America example again - I have 15 armies in total to fortify with but I have an opponent with 10 on each border. I would probably sit 3 or 4 on each border to have some sort of defence but leave a main force of about 10 on Peru so that I can counter easily.
Of course all this depends on the game type. If it isn't unlimited forts then it all becomes more difficult and if its escalating cards then the continents aren't that important.
Just one word on one of Bodmanblood's comments. He says to, example N. America, hold Kamchatka, Iceland and Venezuala. This may not always be such a good idea because you are exposing yourself to more direct enemy attacks. It depends on how aggressive you need to be.
Posted:
Wed May 30, 2007 1:55 pmby GrazingCattle
listen to flashleg, he is a solid player who won't steer you wrong!
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 12:28 amby BmoreStrokes
flashleg8 wrote:None of the above.
I defend in a two tier system with preferably 4 troops in each line of defence. This allows counterattacks if an attack fails, stops people exploiting a breakthrough and also means I don't have large stacks to make me a bigger target.
I've seen some probability studies (on here I think) that after stacking above 4 troops you start to get limited rates of return on the percentage of defending increase. The troops are better spent elsewhere in my opinion.
I use this method sometimes. It can be effective but can also hold you back if your armies arent able to attack
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 12:34 amby safariguy5
Obviously, I try to defend borders that aren't directly in my continent. For example, to hold S.America, I would try to defend Central America and N. Africa. Also, I sometimes have "buffer zones" of 1 army controlled territories adjacent to my borders. Not only do the 1's actually kill an attacker before they are destroyed, they spread out the strength of the attacker and forces him/her to string the troops out more, diluting the power in numbers. After that, it's all luck...
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 9:49 amby Optimus Prime
wcaclimbing wrote:What i usually do is try to match my troops to the strength of my opponents borders.
for example, i would have a lot more troops on the borders where my opponent has more troops. and less troops where theres less of a threat.
I follow this principle as well, however, I make sure to keep an eye on how many cards those bordering players have and if there is a chance they have a set, I'll up the border armies a little above their's just to be safe.
Re: Holding a Continent
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 9:52 amby chessplaya
iamjhing wrote:I was playing a 1v1 FtF game on the classic board about two weeks ago. I had Europe and was pushing into Africa, my boarder to Asia was solid with men in Ukraine, Southern Europe and Egypt in equal numbers. My oponnent had sat on Australia for a few turns, turned in cards and came right into Southern Europe. Despite my superior numbers I was disorganized and could never kick him out and lost as a result.
I've always avoided the single mass of soldiers, because it invites an attack from your neighbors, but I'm beginning to rethink this mindset.
So my question is: How do you defend your continents?
1 vs 1 ...2 weeks ago....something tells me that something isnt correct about this
oh and i had to say contis who cares cuz i really dont care about holding a conti...
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 9:54 amby DiM
he probably means he was in a game where there were only 2 players left.
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 10:14 amby nekroman
I start in australia on classic games, and put everything I have on Siam, Never move them. Everytime I deploy, I just put my armies out on a further country, take a country and get a card, fortify back to siam, then once I get cards I take out the weakest player with the most cards, and usually can cash in his set to take out the next player, and so on. I call it the lazy mans approach, let everyone else duke it out and cash in for the win in the end.
Seems like it works for me at least 75% of the time if I get good dice.
Re: Holding a Continent
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 10:19 amby RobinJ
chessplaya wrote:iamjhing wrote:I was playing a 1v1 FtF game on the classic board about two weeks ago. I had Europe and was pushing into Africa, my boarder to Asia was solid with men in Ukraine, Southern Europe and Egypt in equal numbers. My oponnent had sat on Australia for a few turns, turned in cards and came right into Southern Europe. Despite my superior numbers I was disorganized and could never kick him out and lost as a result.
I've always avoided the single mass of soldiers, because it invites an attack from your neighbors, but I'm beginning to rethink this mindset.
So my question is: How do you defend your continents?
1 vs 1 ...2 weeks ago....something tells me that something isnt correct about this
oh and i had to say contis who cares cuz i really dont care about holding a conti...
I think he meant that he played on an actual risk board - not on a computer, especially since he's only been here 2 days
Re: Holding a Continent
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 11:19 amby iamjhing
[quote]1 vs 1 ...2 weeks ago....something tells me that something isnt correct about this :? :? :?
quote]
FTF = Face to Face, aka not on a computer
and thank you to everyone else who is not trying to flame me
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 2:32 pmby gimil
Australias the holly grail of CC on classic ive won 99.99999999999999% of ma games on classic when i get australia
Posted:
Thu May 31, 2007 3:26 pmby alster
flashleg8 wrote:None of the above.
I defend in a two tier system with preferably 4 troops in each line of defence. This allows counterattacks if an attack fails, stops people exploiting a breakthrough and also means I don't have large stacks to make me a bigger target.
I've seen some probability studies (on here I think) that after stacking above 4 troops you start to get limited rates of return on the percentage of defending increase. The troops are better spent elsewhere in my opinion.
Hmm... such a two-tier approach seems interesting. Can't remember seeing it being used. And good if holding 12+ areas I guess, to keep the extra turn bonus even if beaing broken through.
But, stacking. After 2 defending troops, you get no extra leverage on defese. It's the increase from 1 to 2 troops that brings in a good increase in defense probability. Then, whether 2, 3, 4, 5 etc. doesn't really matter statistically since you can't defend with more than two dices. But of course, one can play around with it, looking at the number of attacking armies etc. But that's just probability looking at each individual attack/defense.
Posted:
Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:04 pmby Stormur
Continents are not that important in my opinion, like stated before if u have one protected with 4 to 6 units at key points, the key factor is to have an attack force (proportional to u r units on the board), these should be moved according to what is happing on the map, opponents card count/number of units and possible clashes between players when the break hits go after the cards of a (weakling) by cashing out your own cards, and never ever get u r self in a positions with to many cards connected to a player with an large attack force.
Stormur
Posted:
Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:41 pmby alster
Depends. If playing escalating cards, probably not as much after 10-15 rounds. But if playing no cards, continents are essential.
good stuff, thanks.
Posted:
Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:52 amby rondosocal
flashleg8 wrote:None of the above.
I defend in a two tier system with preferably 4 troops in each line of defence. This allows counterattacks if an attack fails, stops people exploiting a breakthrough and also means I don't have large stacks to make me a bigger target.
I've seen some probability studies (on here I think) that after stacking above 4 troops you start to get limited rates of return on the percentage of defending increase. The troops are better spent elsewhere in my opinion.
Posted:
Thu Aug 09, 2007 11:18 pmby klinlin
Just a thought,
if you hold continents aus or SA
peru or new guinea are good to stack on becuase if they break the bonus you can instantly counterattack
Posted:
Fri Aug 10, 2007 8:16 amby MR. Nate
I think I've used every method at some point. Since no border is impenetrable, I like to use a blend as much as possible. If your playing a big map though, the best defense is space. Every country you can move your borders from your continent is the same as a single win with the dice.
Depends on situation.
Posted:
Fri Aug 10, 2007 8:16 amby NESconqueror
If you are defending australia and have siam, I would dump all troops into the siam territory.
If I had Asia, I would basically do a wall strategy.
Africa, Strong at the north, weak at south.
South america, Brazil and venezuela is the two to focus on
If north america is owned, then I would have some alaskan troops along with greenlanders and central america troops.
Europe, I would have some at southern and western europe along with the eastern territories and iceland.
That is assuming you use the classical map.
That is my scoop.