The premise of the majority of maps on conquer club is to, well, simply, CONQUER. However, in all conflict extraneous victims (people, places, lands, internet service can all be blacked out) can become sacrificed to the war effort. When you hit that 'auto assault' button on China to India on World 2.1, do you happen to think that history, families or political stability are also being torn apart as a result of your mouseclick? And, should you think about this as you're clicking, after you're clicking, or never, ever?
The concept of RISK! is simple. Take over the world by eliminating your opponents. This is usually aided by conquering important lands, grabbing spoils of war and bringing in reinforcements. Kill or be killed in standard-type games. While to us, it looks like numbers on the screen, but what about the actual people involved in the battles? My opinion is that the numbers off the screen or those on the margin, - the ones we think of as tangential or we don't think of at all - are the most important.
The valuable lesson here is that as commanders, officers and battle-designers we only value the final outcome of a war. We hold the final outcome of each battle with some degree of importance, but at some point, the pixels on the screen, and the number on the side of your account are what you are killing for.
Should we also consider that we're losing every time we're battling?
- Livestock.
Books.
Regional Histories.
Families and their homes.
Colouring books.
Progress.
Education.
Science books.
Morality.
Cook books.
Etc.
I look forward to the ensuing conversation and hope to get involved in a debate.
-----
*The Original Poster, BexXx, may decide as a result of this understanding to disavow all future "games" and battles and focus, instead his own interest on finding and helping those innocent victims of war and bringing to them the security that so many conquer club users stole from them in effort to increase their colonial powers.