In a recent game a better player chided me for playing in a suicidal manner.  I thought that my play was a reasonable response to a hopeless situation.

Here is my tactic.  If I feel that I am locked in a hopeless armwrestle which I am bound to lose, particularly if elsewhere there is a clear leader and the board does not have large card bonuses, I will "go kamikaze" and throw everything I can into breaking bonuses for the player that I am losing to.

My reasoning is that I have nothing to lose because I was going to lose either by losing the duel, or by someone else (likely the leader I am concerned about) rolling over our remains.  But by playing this way I have a small chance of winning the duel, consolidating something, and possibly winning the game.  It is a low percentage play, but low percentage is better than no percentage.  Plus, as a bonus, people will learn that I play that way and will avoid getting into such duels with me.  Which helps me win future games.

However I know that my tactic is unusual, and I'm curious about what alternate strategies other people recommend for this basic situation, and why they do it.

(Confession mode, this is the first place that I've played online Risk variants, and I know that I have a lot to learn.)

If someone tanks my game with theirs in such a fashion, it does not discourage me from getting into "duels" with them in future games.  If anything I start to think that this player plays recklessly and I should make it a point to keep them weak from the get go if I can, and then to eliminate them as soon as I get the chance.

I think one mistake that you might be making, however, is to think that "dueling" creates even a small winning percentage in the first place when it's in a large multiplayer game.  There are many ways to win such games, and a death match with one of those opponents is rarely that successful, and far less successful then the many options available to you.  Sometimes when I know I am "out matched" and in such a position, I often think "where does nobody fight for space on this map"?  Then, if I have some territory in that area I start to slowly build up in that less competitive part of the map till I build up an army that can allow me to seize some bonus somewhere and get back into the game.  Sometimes you can also take a look and see that their are places that are actually even considered decent, just not being competed for yet, and you can try to pick away at that area instead of the cancerous area that no one fights for.  If the others have been fighting evenly and no one was able to run away with the game then it can often be enough to get you back into things. 

Another idea might be to turtle on one bonus elsewhere from the bully that you were entangled with earlier and even neglect taking cards to make you a very un-tempting target for elimination as you build up by avoiding losing any more troops to fighting. 

I know it's nice to have a lot of bonus and to wield the big stick, but in many games it does not even end up being about what bonus you hold, but in having a big enough army to do a serial elimination.  So, you need not always fight tooth and nail to hold bonus, when all you might actually be doing is setting yourself and the other person up for successive eliminations at the hands of a more patient player.  And, like I said before, I think you're only fooling yourself into thinking you're sending a message that will result in positive results in future games.

I don't know if my thoughts help at all, but the gist of what I'm trying to say is that it's better to play patiently and tactically then with an off the cusp "I'll show them for the next game" attitude.

Cheers!

Erick

berickf wrote:

If someone tanks my game with theirs in such a fashion, it does not discourage me from getting into "duels" with them in future games.  If anything I start to think that this player plays recklessly and I should make it a point to keep them weak from the get go if I can, and then to eliminate them as soon as I get the chance.

I think one mistake that you might be making, however, is to think that "dueling" creates even a small winning percentage in the first place when it's in a large multiplayer game.  There are many ways to win such games, and a death match with one of those opponents is rarely that successful, and far less successful then the many options available to you.  Sometimes when I know I am "out matched" and in such a position, I often think "where does nobody fight for space on this map"?  Then, if I have some territory in that area I start to slowly build up in that less competitive part of the map till I build up an army that can allow me to seize some bonus somewhere and get back into the game.  Sometimes you can also take a look and see that their are places that are actually even considered decent, just not being competed for yet, and you can try to pick away at that area instead of the cancerous area that no one fights for.  If the others have been fighting evenly and no one was able to run away with the game then it can often be enough to get you back into things. 

Another idea might be to turtle on one bonus elsewhere from the bully that you were entangled with earlier and even neglect taking cards to make you a very un-tempting target for elimination as you build up by avoiding losing any more troops to fighting. 

I know it's nice to have a lot of bonus and to wield the big stick, but in many games it does not even end up being about what bonus you hold, but in having a big enough army to do a serial elimination.  So, you need not always fight tooth and nail to hold bonus, when all you might actually be doing is setting yourself and the other person up for successive eliminations at the hands of a more patient player.  And, like I said before, I think you're only fooling yourself into thinking you're sending a message that will result in positive results in future games.

I don't know if my thoughts help at all, but the gist of what I'm trying to say is that it's better to play patiently and tactically then with an off the cusp "I'll show them for the next game" attitude.

Cheers!

Erick

Those are good suggestions.  In the early game I definitely will try to move elsewhere.  It is only later when there is no elsewhere that I take the more active strategy.

However turtling is a good idea.  I know that I need to add that to my strategy mix, and thanks for the suggestion that this is a scenario where I should be actively consider doing that.

I will have to think about this more.

As for strategy, I normally play similarly to how berickf described, although I think there are a few maps and times to where what you did btilly may make sense.  That said I think it's normally tough calling out someone's strategy...especially before everyone is completely gone.

+1 to berickf's comments.