Conquer Club

This poll relates to something I see in freestyle play sometimes. I enter a game to find that some tool has spread himself so thin that he has only one man on each space but holds virtually every continent. I think to myself "Hah! what an idiot, I can easily break these continenents up. But then upon hitting my start turn button, the player with the spread out armies immediately hits start on his turn and gets the continent bonuses for all these continents that he doesn't really deserve. Basically the player has just been sitting in front of his computer hitting refresh over and over waiting for someone else to go so that he can get all the bonuses for continents. I find this type of behavior cheap, unsporting and essentially cheating. What do you guys think.
(I know I can just play sequential. You don't need to mention it.)

edit: I know it's not actually cheating.

Kugelblitz22 wrote:This poll relates to something I see in freestyle play sometimes. I enter a game to find that some tool has spread himself so thin that he has only one man on each space but holds virtually every continent. I think to myself "Hah! what an idiot, I can easily break these continenents up. But then upon hitting my start turn button, the player with the spread out armies immediately hits start on his turn and gets the continent bonuses for all these continents that he doesn't really deserve. Basically the player has just been sitting in front of his computer hitting refresh over and over waiting for someone else to go so that he can get all the bonuses for continents. I find this type of behavior cheap, unsporting and essentially cheating. What do you guys think.
(I know I can just play sequential. You don't need to mention it.)

I started a thread a while ago about how freestyle benefits those with more time in front of the 'puter. It is what it is, but it's not cheap.

Cheap means inexpensive.

HoustonNutt wrote:

Kugelblitz22 wrote:This poll relates to something I see in freestyle play sometimes. I enter a game to find that some tool has spread himself so thin that he has only one man on each space but holds virtually every continent. I think to myself "Hah! what an idiot, I can easily break these continenents up. But then upon hitting my start turn button, the player with the spread out armies immediately hits start on his turn and gets the continent bonuses for all these continents that he doesn't really deserve. Basically the player has just been sitting in front of his computer hitting refresh over and over waiting for someone else to go so that he can get all the bonuses for continents. I find this type of behavior cheap, unsporting and essentially cheating. What do you guys think.
(I know I can just play sequential. You don't need to mention it.)

I started a thread a while ago about how freestyle benefits those with more time in front of the 'puter. It is what it is, but it's not cheap.

I hear what your saying but should Risk be about who has the fastest internet connection?

Why would it be cheating? Everybody has their stratagy. If your opponent has the will to hit refresh all the time than more power to him.

Kugelblitz22 wrote:

HoustonNutt wrote:

Kugelblitz22 wrote:This poll relates to something I see in freestyle play sometimes. I enter a game to find that some tool has spread himself so thin that he has only one man on each space but holds virtually every continent. I think to myself "Hah! what an idiot, I can easily break these continenents up. But then upon hitting my start turn button, the player with the spread out armies immediately hits start on his turn and gets the continent bonuses for all these continents that he doesn't really deserve. Basically the player has just been sitting in front of his computer hitting refresh over and over waiting for someone else to go so that he can get all the bonuses for continents. I find this type of behavior cheap, unsporting and essentially cheating. What do you guys think.
(I know I can just play sequential. You don't need to mention it.)

I started a thread a while ago about how freestyle benefits those with more time in front of the 'puter. It is what it is, but it's not cheap.

I hear what your saying but should Risk be about who has the fastest internet connection?

In a freestyle game (which is not really "Risk"), the game is as much about who has enough free time (read: lack of life) to time his/her moves perfectly.

In sequential, talent trumps timing (except, I suppose, with respect to cards).

yeah, its not cheap, its just freestyle. you cant say not to mention sequential, when its obviously what you would prefer. dont ask a question and ban the correct answer

HoustonNutt wrote:In a freestyle game (which is not really "Risk"), the game is as much about who has enough free time (read: lack of life) to time his/her moves perfectly.

In sequential, talent trumps timing (except, I suppose, with respect to cards).

We can have this debate a million times and I will still disagree with most of the sentiment in your post.

Sitting in front of the computer all day CAN benefit you in freestyle, but most often that is not how good timing is beneficial. The game is much more about timing when to cash your cards and take your turns in relation to the other players. In that respect freestyle takes more skill because you have more control over the game. Whereas in sequential if the guy after me does something dumb or unexpected I would have no ability to capitalize on the fact, even if I know what needs to be done. Instead I would have to sit and wait my turn as all the other players make their moves first and consequently could end the game (and it would be no fault of my own). That can't happen in freestyle. You decide to play early or late in the round....cash your set immediately or wait for a higher cash in? It all depends, but the fact that you have a CHOICE over more of your own destiny eliminates a lot of the luck that I notice in sequential escalating games.


Anyway, back to the original topic: That is an inherent part of the way freestyle games are currently set up, so if you want to play them you need to get used to it. You may consider it to be 'cheap' but it is certainly not cheating. Some have proposed a type of compromise game where you can play at any time you want during the round, but once you hit begin turn no one else can play until your turn is over. That seems to be a system you would be more comfortable with. I would like to be able to play them both, but would probably play this new system more. And with that I don't think I would ever play sequential again if I could get high quality games on the new system.

I am new to the website but I read somewhere that the rules for freestlye were changed several months back so that you couldn't take two turns right in a row. Essentially when you do this, that is what you are doing. Just because someone techincally hit their start button doesn't mean you aren't taking two turns right in a row. The other player hasn't deployed armies or done anything yet. Obviously someone thought taking two turns right in a row was bullshit or the rule wouldn't have been changed. Why is taking two turns in a row unnacceptable but a de-facto two turns in a row just part of the game. That's what these people are doing, taking two turns in a row.

P.S. So far I see I am being shouted down. If everyone really disagrees I guess maybe I will go to sequential.

HoustonNutt wrote:In a freestyle game (which is not really "Risk"), the game is as much about who has enough free time (read: lack of life) to time his/her moves perfectly.

Risk is a game of many variations, freestyle is a variation. Freestyle gives every player in the game a chance to play in any 24 hour period as opposed to sequential where you can wait for days to take a turn.

Sometimes in freestyle it is better to let the other player go first, let them take all the continents and then bust the bonus on your turn.

As far as "lack of life" there are people who's job keeps them on the computer alot. If they have one of the notifiers installed it isn't that hard to see when their turn comes up.

HoustonNutt wrote:in sequential, talent trumps timing (except, I suppose, with respect to cards).

You forgot to mention the dice roll results.

Choose your poison freestyle or sequential.

It's part of freestyle, get used to it.
A few months ago, there were two types of freestyle.
1. Freestyle(double turns allowed)
-You could be the last person to take their turn in a round then immediately take another turn for the next round
2. Freestyle(no double turns)
-The last person to take a turn in the last round must wait for somebody else to start their turn before they can make another turn

Freestyle(double turns allowed) was very unpopular and was rarely used, so lack took out that option.

But anyways, this is the way Freestyle goes. One day you might happen to use it to your advantage.

I voted for the tools. If it's not a secret alliance or a h4x0r, then it ain't cheating. Nothing wrong with using the system to your advantage. Hell, if anything it's being smart.

I love freestyle games but I've stopped playin' 'em since I just don't have the time (or patience) to sit around.

Thats Freestyle for you.....

The good news is..

there is always sequential to play..

Exactly. I won't play anymore freestyle games because of things like that. Sequential is much better.

Freestyle isnt even risk. I dont know why we have it on the site and I think it's total crap. I full heatedly agree with you that losers who sit in front of their comps all day need to get a life as well

Rahm Es Hestos wrote:Freestyle isnt even risk. I dont know why we have it on the site and I think it's total crap. I full heatedly agree with you that losers who sit in front of their comps all day need to get a life as well

Would you give us a definition of what "Risk" is? Are team games considered "Risk"? Are unlimited troop transfers considered "Risk"? If you don't play the Classic map is it not considered "Risk"?

Just because you don't like the rules of a particular version of the game doesn't make it "isnt even risk".

I am sure the "losers who sit in front of their comps all day need to get a life as well" might think people who complain about different rules for the game of Risk need to get a life. The game of Risk has evolved, people have adapted the rules to make it more fun for them.

If it bothers you that much just don't play freestyle.

hawkeye wrote:Cheap means inexpensive.

I love it when people say this. Look up cheap in the dictionary. There is more than one definition for it...
3. Shoddy or inferior
5. Mean or contemptible: a cheap joke
6. Of little account or value Life was cheap
8. Stingy, Miserly

Source: Random House Webster's College Dictionary

Just a note: Nothing on this site is "risk".

It's all a conquer club variant!

Anyway, when I play risk on the board it has always been escalating, adjacent forts, sequential, classic map, real time, place troops in beginning and must advance # of troops = to number of dice you attacked with. Those last three components don't even exist on this site! However we have doubles, triples, terminator, freestyle, 26 other maps, chained and unlimited forts, no cards and flat rate. Are those all 'not Risk'? No! They are all just risk variants because the game can be played in many different ways. If you don't enjoy the thrill and anticipation that freestyle can grant (while you try to take someone out before they cash their set for example) then you should avoid it. But I enjoy that part of risk more than anything else, except for the large amount of strategy any version of this game requires.

Freestyle needs to be perfected.

I would like to propose that in free style, continent bonuses do not apply until a whole turn has passed since the capturing of that continent.

However, sequential can be strangling in terms of escalating cards, because there is often a rigid order of who cashes in, to the benefit of a single player in the right order (depending on the exact game).

Sully, real time doesn't exist on this site? What are you smoking man? People arrange real time games all the time.

I would also like to clarify if that you're playing real time freestyle (really chaotic, but really fun, but not necessarily "fair") people are inclined to be there when you try to attack their continent(s), naturally.

As far as the current model goes, it is not unethical or "cheating" for me to claim my continent when you start attacking me. What am I supposed to do? Just stand there?

It's not cheating. It's just a balance issue. For example, if there's a continent that is relatively easy to get but dispenses lots of armies (disproportionately), then the player who happens to have the most territories on that continent is likely to win. Is it unethical of him to capture that continent? No. Is it unbalanced? Yes.

But if my suggestion is implemented, then the balance issues will be resolved.

Freestyle helps expedite the game, but it shouldn't give an advantage to those who check their turns incessantly.

No, I disagree with this suggestion because then freestyle wouldn't really be freestyle

Nous-irons wrote:I would like to propose that in free style, continent bonuses do not apply until a whole turn has passed since the capturing of that continent.

Why penalize someone because their tatics were good or because they were a little more aggressive than you? If you don't want them to get the bonus then break their hold on the continent.

Nous-irons wrote:It's not cheating. It's just a balance issue. For example, if there's a continent that is relatively easy to get but dispenses lots of armies (disproportionately), then the player who happens to have the most territories on that continent is likely to win. Is it unethical of him to capture that continent? No. Is it unbalanced? Yes.

You get the same advantages for holding a continent in both sequential and freestyle. Why is it considered unbalanced in freestyle and not sequential?

You have misinterpreted my point. I think you have missed it totally.

In Freestyle, a player can claim a bunch of continents with his armies (and do it weakly), end his turn, and then when the next player starts his turn, he jumps up and CLAIMS HIS BONUSES before anyone has had a chance to break a hold on it.

In Sequential, a whole array of other plays get a chance to break his continent before he can play his bonuses.

You have also misused my "amount of bonuses" continent analogy. It would be unbalanced to say, have Australia dispense four armies rather than two, freestyle or not.

If you don't want them to get the bonus then break their hold on the continent.

Dude, you can't break their hold on the continent if THEY CLAIM THE BONUS BEFORE YOU HAVE A CHANCE.

Remember how they abolished double turns in freestyle? The idea is the same.

How can you NOT see that the advantages are VASTLY DIFFERENT in freestyle than in sequential. Can you not read?

RobinJ wrote:No, I disagree with this suggestion because then freestyle wouldn't really be freestyle

Well, why not? You can still play in the same manner. In fact, I think this maks freestyle more freestylish, because people will no longer refrain from playing a turn at a particular moment in order to gain an advantage so they can play it later (except to miss a turn in order to prevent oneself from cashing in cards).

For example, I had to refrain from playing my turn right after my opponent had ended his turn and conquered a bunch of continents and territories (we were the only one left), because I feared he would claim his bonuses if I started right away. I waited four hours, then I proceeded to attack all over the map, in order to get the same advantage as it would in sequential.

If it were truly "good tactics" or "a little more aggressive than me", then the timing of the moves (that is, the time of day I choose to play my turn, not when I choose to attack) wouldn't matter. But clearly I've done some chronoacrobatics in order to resolve this advantage. If it were truly a balanced advantage, it would not be circumvented so easily by merely choosing to play later.

How does not make it "not really freestyle"? It greatly helps the playing style a lot.

Note that there are people who choose to wait until there is 1 minute left on the clock (after having waited 23 hours and 59 minutes), so they can gobble up continents and make their move, get their cards and such, while everyone else "misses their turn" because they can't play until he plays (if they are on the same team). The result? The player who does this gets to play two conseceutive turns in a row, including getting his continent and territorial bonuses without anyone having a chance to intercede.

Only in freestyle do you have this.

I had to do this myself, in order to guard myself against someone who did a similar thing earlier.

Resolving this would allow us to keep the freestyling, while eliminating such a tactic. Why? If you delay bonuses, it's roughly the same as in sequential: a person who does the thing above won't get the appropriate bonuses for playing his second consecutive turn in a row nor will he disrupt the other player's bonuses by using such a tactic.

EDIT: sorry for the double post, connection timed out on me

Nous-irons wrote:You have misinterpreted my point. I think you have missed it totally.

In Freestyle, a player can claim a bunch of continents with his armies (and do it weakly), end his turn, and then when the next player starts his turn, he jumps up and CLAIMS HIS BONUSES before anyone has had a chance to break a hold on it.

I should have said be proactive and look at the board. If it looks like someone has a good chance to capture a continent then head him off at the pass. Get troops in there and make it more costly for him to take control of it.

Nous-irons wrote:You have also misused my "amount of bonuses" continent analogy. It would be unbalanced to say, have Australia dispense four armies rather than two, freestyle or not.

I did misunderstand what you meant on the bonus part.

Nous-irons wrote:How can you NOT see that the advantages are VASTLY DIFFERENT in freestyle than in sequential.

I can see the advantages are different, but thats freestyle. Just like there are advantages to flat rate and escalating cards in games. Either learn to play that style or stick to one that you can play.

Nous-irons wrote:Can you not read?

Just because I don't agree with you means I can't read?