Conquer Club

Description:Whenever you conquer a territory, you move 2 troops into that territory (to make it less confusing, it means that there are now 2 troops in TOTAL in that territory). This is often done because the defender can do more potential damage (with 2 dice rather than 1 die) to any attacker.
I try to use this tactic whenever I have a good amount of troops...
What are you opinions on this kind of tactic? Do you consider it to be "cheap"? In what map/game type do you think this tactic can be best used?

It's a logical tactic... when you can't leave more, but in recent games it hasn't mattered
because single defenders have been kicking my butt and taking no prisoners.

Joodoo wrote:What are you opinions on this kind of tactic? Do you consider it to be "cheap"? In what map/game type do you think this tactic can be best used?

Seems like a legitimate move, I don't think anyone could consider it "cheap". It would play out alright in a mutiplayer flat rate game, but I'd think you were dumb doing it anywhere else, unless your strategy is "don't get killed" (ie. at the end of an escalating game, when you've taken most of the board but your opponent can come back at you with a set). It's a waste of armies in two player/team games, and it's just annoying in escalating.

oVo wrote:It's a logical tactic... when you can't leave more, but in recent games it hasn't mattered
because single defenders have been kicking my butt and taking no prisoners.

Hey I am not the only one noticing... That last few singles are kicking everybody's butt I think.

Disagree Baldadonis, in Freestyle games (1v1) I quite often leave trails of 2's, t hey are just too good at defending

LFAW wrote:Disagree Baldadonis, in Freestyle games (1v1) I quite often leave trails of 2's, t hey are just too good at defending

In any 1v1 games 2's are important...otherwise any smart opponent is gonna take away your territory army bonus down as low as possible.

It will be a sad day when this is seen as a "low" tactic. It's a habit for me to leave even numbers of armies on territories now, for example I'd rather leave a 4 and a 2 than a 5 and 1 if I need to defend.

Very good thing to do in most situations , when I first seen it done against me, I applied it to some other games and it works most of the time

there arent any rules stating u cant leave behind 2 men to safeguard ur territory. and i do quite agree that they are good at defending.

also if ur looking at a situation where ur going after terts for cards with u having been forced to att a 4 or 5 for a card, leaving that newly conquered tert defenseless for someone else to grab an easy card is not good strategy.

I've always preferred to leave three armies in that sort of instance. Plays out quite similarly to the 2 armies, but if the opponent happens to win the two on his first roll (or better yet, splits a 1-and-1, then you've still got some chance at life. Basically, they've got to win two rolls at least in order to take the territory.

Joodoo wrote:Description:Whenever you conquer a territory, you move 2 troops into that territory (to make it less confusing, it means that there are now 2 troops in TOTAL in that territory). This is often done because the defender can do more potential damage (with 2 dice rather than 1 die) to any attacker.
I try to use this tactic whenever I have a good amount of troops...
What are you opinions on this kind of tactic? Do you consider it to be "cheap"? In what map/game type do you think this tactic can be best used?

There's no point to it in many situations. Many people will just attack the territory anyways. Are you really willing to lose DOUBLE the amount of troops you would have lost otherwise?

Sure it helps in 1v1 games, because you want to do whatever you can to reduce enemy troops. But in a 6 player game, if you are just forcing another player to kill your armies anyways, are YOU really benefitting from leaving 2's? No, all that happens is that you lose double the amount of armies, you're weakening yourself and the player that attacks you and thus you're causing the other 4 players on the map to be in a stronger position. Also since you're leaving 1 extra army behind each time, your overall stack of main armies will be smaller, and you'll be able to exert less pressure on your opponents and accomplish less (for example, you want to go in for a kill, you have less armies to do so now, or you want to break a bonus in flat rate, you no longer can).

So it's very situational.

Hotdoggie wrote:

LFAW wrote:Disagree Baldadonis, in Freestyle games (1v1) I quite often leave trails of 2's, t hey are just too good at defending

In any 1v1 games 2's are important...otherwise any smart opponent is gonna take away your territory army bonus down as low as possible.

If you were the smart player in this situation, you would have combined your 2s into an attacking force and taken their territory bonus down. The math is not there to support defense plays like this. One or two 2s on the front lines is fine, but leaving a trail is wasteful.

It doesn't surprise me that people aren't playing optimally in freestyle games, because you can make up for it by clicking fast. You ought to look into what you're doing though.

Woodruff wrote:I've always preferred to leave three armies in that sort of instance. Plays out quite similarly to the 2 armies, but if the opponent happens to win the two on his first roll (or better yet, splits a 1-and-1, then you've still got some chance at life. Basically, they've got to win two rolls at least in order to take the territory.

This is a bad move. Your expected loss when attacking a single army is 0.51 armies. The loss when attacking two is 1.54. When attacking three, it's 2.30. For four, it's 3.20. The differences going from one level to the next (1.03, 0.76, 0.9) should show you that leaving even numbers is much better than leaving odd numbers. When it gets higher, the differences tend towards 0.85, so even/odd doesn't matter as much. But given a choice between two 3s and a 4,2 defense, you should pick 4,2.

Usually, I balance it out, half stay and half go...unless I'm on a runaway and know I can win.

i like to stack and attack quickly before they deploy

From a statistical standpoint, you always want to leave 2 troops on a country as one country with 2 troops can take out more enemy troops than two countries with 1 each. Also two countries with 2 and 4 can take out more than two countries with 3 and 3.

It isn't all that useful in escalating games as you want your stacks to be as large as possible in order to have a better chance of taking that stack and killing a player. As someone stated earlier, the best time to use it is when you have to defend, such as taking over a continent or late in an escalating game where your only goal is to survive until your next turn so that you can cash a huge set.

maniacmath17 wrote:From a statistical standpoint, you always want to leave 2 troops on a country as one country with 2 troops can take out more enemy troops than two countries with 1 each. Also two countries with 2 and 4 can take out more than two countries with 3 and 3.

It isn't all that useful in escalating games as you want your stacks to be as large as possible in order to have a better chance of taking that stack and killing a player. As someone stated earlier, the best time to use it is when you have to defend, such as taking over a continent or late in an escalating game where your only goal is to survive until your next turn so that you can cash a huge set.

This is just a small sample of what you'll receive as MM's premium sponsor...

Bruceswar wrote:

oVo wrote:It's a logical tactic... when you can't leave more, but in recent games it hasn't mattered
because single defenders have been kicking my butt and taking no prisoners.

Hey I am not the only one noticing... That last few singles are kicking everybody's butt I think.

the singles are always kicking my butt...not just recently...

Robinette wrote:

maniacmath17 wrote:From a statistical standpoint, you always want to leave 2 troops on a country as one country with 2 troops can take out more enemy troops than two countries with 1 each. Also two countries with 2 and 4 can take out more than two countries with 3 and 3.

It isn't all that useful in escalating games as you want your stacks to be as large as possible in order to have a better chance of taking that stack and killing a player. As someone stated earlier, the best time to use it is when you have to defend, such as taking over a continent or late in an escalating game where your only goal is to survive until your next turn so that you can cash a huge set.

This is just a small sample of what you'll receive as MM's premium sponsor...

Good point Robinette. There are many other statistical facts about Risk based games that you should know, and will know if you accept my offer of unlimited lessons in return for sponsoring my premium membership. More information can be found here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=30114