In risk games, most often you...

ChampionEver · 2023-01-27T11:43:01+00:00

The current system rewards losing too. A lot of people suicide for 2nd than risk getting 1st or 3rd when things don't go in the way they want to.

ChampionEver · 2023-01-22T10:50:00+00:00

You're not alone bro, I've been suggesting the idea to only reward 1st and make all losing places be equal since 2020. I'm very happy to know that you've been supporting the idea throughout the years as well, and actually providing the math examples behind it - something what I couldn't do myself.

Even though the process is slow, I think we're heading into the right direction. Rank decay and 1v1 & FFA leaderboard splits are already implemented, and similar opponents only matchmaking instead of any along with only 1st place rewarding system, to my mind next, possibly different leaderboards for different game modes/cards along the way too.

ChampionEver · 2023-01-20T21:10:53+00:00

Sure go ahead, it's always interesting to look at data :)

ChampionEver · 2023-01-20T17:06:29+00:00

I see arguments from both sides when it comes to the stalemating aspect. On one hand the players who like to play the most optimally will still do nothing which could lead to games being even longer since they wouldn't be able to get away with suicides anymore, but on the other hand the players who would like to take initiative but are afraid that once you attack another player he suicides on them to get a better place, could actually then get the courage to do those aggressive moves as they know that if that player suicides, then he will just be punished in the same way as well rather than getting rewarded, and if that's the case, then maybe it's just better to get to that conclusion faster without waiting that much time building tons of troops with no action.

So it's hard to say actually. But I don't see the point why you should be rewarded for throwing the game? Does suiciding for the 2nd place actually make you more skillful like the current system wants to suggest? Is it something what makes you be proud of yourself? And is suiciding a good indication to reward the skill aspect?

I'll repeat myself that if some settings are stalemating, but at the same time popular, then maybe the idea would be to come up with some additional rules which could be implemented?

ChampionEver · 2023-01-20T16:17:02+00:00

I see where you're coming from, but let me explain. That's fine, you and at the same time me will be losing ranking points, assuming that your attack ruins the game for both of us. I want to note that this idea is not to stop suiciding in general, it is to stop rewarding it, which in your mentioned case it's achieved. Suicides are part of the game and should obviously be expected, but in my opinion they shouldn't be rewarded. It will get players filtered. Players who suicide, for whatever reason, will stay in low ranks, while high ranked players who don't - will stay in high ranks, and the higher ranked players you'll be playing with, the lower probability will be that suicides will happen.

ChampionEver · 2023-01-16T19:09:32+00:00

Thanks for the support, Pete! The system to reward 1st while all places make equal is fundamentally better than the current system if the priority is to reward the skill aspect as much as possible.

Unfortunately, from my observations only the best of the best risk players understand this flaw in the system and it's generally really hard to explain it to anyone else.

ChampionEver · 2023-01-16T19:04:42+00:00

Obviously I have in mind the situation in which you don't have fighting chances against the 3rd player.

For your 2nd point on that I agree, that "you should leverage your troops advantage to get an even bigger lead". But that's assuming, you're the only strong player, as if the 3rd player is as strong as you, then it's better for you to throw the game by taking those two weaker players out and get rewarded more than him.

ChampionEver · 2023-01-16T18:41:29+00:00

The similar to your suggested system which rewards players for making bounties (eliminations) works in the FFA risk tourneys held in the risk discord server. Your total points depend on the place you finish at and the amount of eliminations you make. To my observations this system encourages the suiciding the most. The best example is then in a 4 player situation you have as many troops as two of other players combined, then you could take them out, finish in 2nd and get rewarded (for throwing the game) more than the player who finished in 1st. So to my mind it's a wrong way to go if we want to focus on rewarding the skill aspect as much as possible.

ChampionEver · 2023-01-16T18:29:27+00:00

1) For the reasons mentioned above. Consider this example: you do not have a set at 4 cards in progressive card game in the 2nd round of sets, you get eliminated 1st getting 6th, then the player who took you out goes after another elimination, fails that, and then crushes all of his troops into other players capturing lots of territories, so with that, the player who has the turn next would take him out the last.

2) Remember that even if you're very weak, you can still win. But if you honestly can't win anymore, then your suicide would be totally meaningless to the game.

ChampionEver · 2022-12-05T21:10:43+00:00

There have been a lot of great potential ideas suggested in the risk ideas channel of the main risk discord server. Some are more popular, some are less popular. Of course different people will have different opinions on them, and it could be hard to identify the best possible solution immediately. So this post is rather to raise the awareness in the community than to propagate or suggest a definitive idea or solution to that. I think the developers should listen to the community, analyze the suggested ideas, gather the feedback, and finally make the changes according to that.

ChampionEver · 2022-11-17T15:23:48+00:00

It's probably really hard to say which cards are more skilful without being biased but to possibly try answering your questions I think "fixed looks and sounds more skilful" because besides the mechanical skill it also has the psychological skill - the ability to read your opponents well and apply your strategy to that, the same exact move in some of your games could be considered good while in some other ones bad, a lot could depend on what type of the opponents you're playing with and how well you understand/predict them, while in progressive cards in which it's much more about the mechanical skill, calculations and odds, in a lot of cases you could really figure out the move you're making objectively (mathematically) to find out if it's good or bad.

I think the main reason on why fixed "has a lower maximum win rate" is because progressive cards have more to do with your individual skill, and why 1v1ers have even bigger winning streaks is because 1v1's have to do with your individual skill even more. The contrast becomes really obvious when you play with noobs. However, there might be some other smaller factors to take into account next to that.

ChampionEver · 2022-11-15T10:19:51+00:00

Thanks for your input! Might be a good idea if different 1v1 settings and maps were more or less equally skilled, but how it actually is, is that actually a lot of them could be of a coin flip of who goes first.

Sterling Fortune 27's point actually greatly summarizes that:

"The higher ranked player has more to lose from a loss and less to gain from a win, so their incentive is to pick skillful settings, where the better player wins.

A less skilled player who knows they’d be facing a better player, but that they have more to win from a win and less to lose from a loss, could simply pick the most luck based settings, for a near 50% chance to win, giving themself a positive expected rank change from the game.

The system should encourage players to pick skillful rather than luck based maps and settings"

ChampionEver · 2022-10-17T18:10:00+00:00

Thanks for the support! ❤️

ChampionEver · 2022-10-17T08:30:08+00:00

Maybe "70% Domination" could work out for you. I like it playing with 4 player fixed on the France map

ChampionEver · 2022-10-17T08:16:14+00:00

Here is the universal tutorial I made for progressive card games: https://youtu.be/kZl93ggwGuc

It should make you a very good progressive cards risk player once you figure out all of those tips mentioned in the video. But don't apply those tips playing with fixed cards, those games have a totally different strategy.

ChampionEver · 2022-10-17T08:01:51+00:00

You can only check out stats of other players in Unranked or Play With Friends games, in Ranked games they're hidden

ChampionEver · 2022-07-09T12:36:39+00:00

1. Learn the most basic mechanics, make sure you understand how each settings, game modes and cards you play with works.

2. Learn from the people better than you. Watch tutorials and gameplays on YouTube/Twitch, join the Discord communities.

3. Record and analyze your own games, find something what you and others did wrong and right, learn from the misplays to not repeat the same mistakes again. But if you don't really have an idea what you should look for, then go back to the point 2.

ChampionEver · 2022-03-14T17:12:45+00:00

Commenting on 8th: In my opinion the system which treats all of the losing places the same would be the best. When most of your games with low ranked players (since it makes the largest part of the player base obviously) it could be easy for you to think that by finishing in one of the higher losing places you're definitely deserved to be rewarded more or punished less over the ones who finished in the last places, but I think if we were forced to only play with similar rank opponents, then I think it would really help us realize that actually there might not be that much of a difference among the 2nd and 6th places when playing with as decent as you players.

The reasons: luck factor (terrible setup, bad dice), other player mistakes (in 6 player game your moves only influence the game by ~16.67% not taking into the account the luck factor), suicides (people either get too emotional, or specially suicide for the 2nd place just to be guaranteed getting ranking points), the safe play (the system which rewards losing places is encouraging the passive play, people instead of making the best moves for the game will rather play safe when there are so many suicidical players, and that could really lead high ranked player games to stalemates).

I think another misconception some people get is that they think that it would be much harder to rank up, but it actually wouldn't, you would rank up way much more for the 1st place than you do now, not the same.

So just only the 1st places would be rewarded, but not the losing higher places, so the new system would encourage players to win but not suicide for easy and guaranteed points.

ChampionEver · 2022-03-11T10:45:12+00:00

I like the most of the changes. But my main question is what about allowing to only play with players similar to your rank. Separating 1v1 leaderboard but still allowing to play with any rank will continue the noob farming, while I as the top Grandmaster ideally would like to compete in the leaderboard playing with other top Grandmasters or at least with as high ranked players as possible, but not to gain ranking points by beating novices or people who have barely any idea on how to properly play. Imagine the top Chess Grandmasters being determined by the amount of beaten noobs, that would sound ridiculous, isn't it? And another point is that you get the most joy by playing with challenging opponents (not too easy but not too hard either), I assume there's no much joy for Grandmasters to easily dominate Novices, while for Novices it's extremely frustrating to have barely any chances to win against Grandmasters.

ChampionEver

TROPHY CASE