anyone ever consider this strategy

[wolfram15]

It's not much of a strategy-more like something that humans have done in every game played since there were games. Also, it seems that you, like many others here, are completely mystified by the possibility that many "new recruits" have indeed played Risk before. Quick way to lose points.

[Bones2484]

It's not much of a strategy-more like something that humans have done in every game played since there were games. Also, it seems that you, like many others here, are completely mystified by the possibility that many "new recruits" have indeed played Risk before. Quick way to lose points.

You are great at useless necro bumps.

[God Emperor Q]

i join games with high ranks to
A- test myself
and
B- gain more points

Q

[Phlaim]

you can try it. But chances are you won't benefit.

Atm on average I get like 5 points from a cook and lose about 55 points from them. So if I win 11 and lose 1 I break even. Not worth it.

I see the point you are making, but your maths is flawed unless you are playing 2 player. In an 8 player game with 7 cooks - you need to win maybe 3 games out of every 5, still terrible odds but not 11 in 12!

It can also be applied to a game of 7 colonels and 1 cook, you just need to join after the cook.

[zeractal]

The stratergy has two sides to it, on one hand (as a generalisation) cooks are most likely to make a mistake and hand you an easy victory.
The other side to this is relying on others mistakes rather then your own stratergy/skill will start to provide dull and tedious games for you (or atleast it would for me) and what is the point of solely playing to acheive a high rank anyway? Also the stratergy has a slight weakness that games with low ranked players will get you little points but if a diffrent player messes up and hands the game to the cook you lose a lot of points. also cooks are not necessarily bad (often just unlucky) or have improved considerably after becoming cooks.

[Onmyway]

I always join games with higher ranking players so I'll lose less if I lose and win more if I win. In all modesty, I think that I'm better than my rank shows, so I have a good chance of winning even if they are a higher rank.

That's a great tactic. Not only is the point-risk better, but you'll also be able to learn from the better players.

Good about CC is that you can play with players from all levels in Public games... Playing against a major and a cook at the same time makes the game far more interesting!

[ralphcptc]

And you must consider this. What if the noob's mistake is against you. Then you are horribly weakened and out of the game. Then next in line gets you and the noob. Play as if everyone is the game leader and the conqueror. do not underestimate anyone.

[Timminz]

And you must consider this. What if the noob's mistake is against you. Then you are horribly weakened and out of the game. Then next in line gets you and the noob. Play as if everyone is the game leader and the conqueror. do not underestimate anyone.

If the "noob" is just as likely to attack everyone, you have a 1 in 5 chance of being the person that gets hit (in a 6 way game). If you go right after the "noob" when they make a mess, you'll have a 4 in 5 chance of being the one to clean it up.

[xelabale]

And you must consider this. What if the noob's mistake is against you. Then you are horribly weakened and out of the game. Then next in line gets you and the noob. Play as if everyone is the game leader and the conqueror. do not underestimate anyone.

If the "noob" is just as likely to attack everyone, you have a 1 in 5 chance of being the person that gets hit (in a 6 way game). If you go right after the "noob" when they make a mess, you'll have a 4 in 5 chance of being the one to clean it up.

Yes but you only have a 1 in 5 chance of being right behind the noob.

[oVo]

I'd actually just rather avoid that sort of game entirely.

The fun is spoiled for me when the outcome is altered by a stupid move. There's enough luck as it is, I don't want to add the element of random stupidity to the mix if I can help it.

I pretty much lean this way too and tend to avoid games with a lot of cooks and recruits. My preference is for a good game and not to seek out players who might deadbeat or get frustrated and turn suicidal. There's plenty of excellent players with lower ranks on this site so I will never ignore them completely, just not enter a game where their numbers dominate the map.

I don't consider this idea strategy and it's certainly not the best way to find a quality game.

[Timminz]

Yes but you only have a 1 in 5 chance of being right behind the noob.

joining games after cooks, new recuits, and privates
in order to take advantage of the possible stupid moves they may make?

See, we're talking about specifically joining right after said noobs.

it's certainly not the best way to find a quality game.

Agreed. Wholeheartedly.

[xelabale]

Good point.

[jrf2c]

I never join a game with a cook in it. I've been in several games where they made reckless, completely random moves that handed the game to another player. The best part is, when you try to talk some sense to them, they suicide against you because they think you're trying to trick them.

[markinmarin]

I've learned that playing games with cooks, etc., can be risky. If they win, you can be out big points so I would have to say the strategy is poor. One other thing I have experienced is that by being brave and playing with experienced higher ranking players, I've seen patterns in their strategies that have helped me in future games. Even if you're knocked out early, stick around and watch how the turns are played and learn something.

[Georgerx7di]

I've found that whenever I join a game, I win. : )

[Mr Changsha]

I don't believe a cook has ever won a game I've been involved in.

Not once.

I suppose that's why their cooks, huh?

However, learning to anticipate 'cookish behaviour' and use it to your advantage is a thing to consider. I like to think of it in this way: "If I was loaded on half a bottle of whiskey, a few hash pipes and a strong coffee with a girl waiting for me downstairs and I wanted to do something interesting...what would I do?"

A cook's move can often be anticipated on this basis. Lacking in logical thought but with an innocent desire to do something. Often even anxious to please in a "Daddy, I just shit on my hand!" kind of misguided sense.

Compare and contrast with the solid corporal, who while a sober player, never really does much of anything. I like to imagine myself on prozac or valium if I'm trying to get into the head of such a player. Yep, Mr C on valium is your average corporal.

So the thread asks us to predict a player's play based on his rank and, being serious for just a moment, it is possible to an extent...But far better is to take that cook "Mummy! I just made yellow juice! Look!", study him carefully and then load him into your next game having analysed his crazy horse psychology beforehand. NOW you have the advantage over the other players. You've seen this cook "Daddy! I made a picture with my poo!" before and now you know what to expect.