Star Wars Risk

JEM wrote: Do people think maybe 4/5/6 bonus cards rather than 3/4/5 would make the battle worth fighting?

I think that's one possible solution. I'm hesitant to dive too much into house rules until I'm sure the incentive isn't correct as it stands.

The math is relatively simple though and I'm not buying the Bonus cards are so much stronger because the opponent can't react argument at this point though so I don't know.

My thoughts on a possible house rule were a little different.

Each player has a token in front of them or a card, just needs to be double-sided and each side is different. It starts with side A faceup. At the end of the round flip it to side B if you didn't play at least one lightsaber duel or force lightning action.

if it's on side B and you are supposed to flip it from not playing a duel action, your opponent gets a bonus card to execute immediately. If both players receive a Bonus card from this the Rebel player executes his first.

This condition is checked after all bonus cards already gained are played (so you CAN meet the qualification from using a bonus card in the duel).

If you do play a duel action in the round then flip the token to side A and you are fine.

TLDR - play at least one duel action every two rounds or your opponent gets a bonus card.

This way you're still giving choice and the ability to ignore and it feels a bit more natural and less swingy.

charlest wrote:

First of all, are you playing with the clarified rules from BGG? It sounds like maybe not since you think the Death Star action is weak (your last sentence).

Yes I am. I don't really do dice probabilities, but a 5 or 6 on two dice is pretty hard for me to land. I've never once been able to take the entire 6 fleets out, and really, the bonus actions is nice but being able to fire at any space is the true payoff with the Death Star. I've never seen it done.

charlest wrote: The Death Star action is the strongest action early game. You eliminate a Rebel fleet marker 66% of the time AND gain a bonus card. I think you should be opening with two Death Star attacks and one SSD action as Empire every single game if you have the cards (which you will most of the time).

I fail to see why you're using the SSD so early. Moving it towards the Rebels is foolish that early on, since they'll be getting those ships with the fleets on the board as soon as they can. That's too many ships in close proximity of the SSD. If you lose it, you're fucked. You are aware that it's TIE cards and not SSD cards that spawn TIEs, right? If you're playing that wrong, I can see why you'd say that.

charlest wrote: You will average 1 bonus card on your first turn and if that's another Death Star attack your odds will be 2 bonus cards on the first turn. In that instance Rebel fleet will be in shambles.

One bonus card IF you hit with the Death Star. And I'm still convinced it's a _huge_ if. TIE Fighters can wreak havok on X-Wings, but it's unlikely they'll earn any bonus cards on the first turn against anything else.

charlest wrote: I also don't get the logic that if Luke is worth it for the Rebels the Imperials should then try to stop them. Your progress on the Luke/Vader battle does not impede the other player so it's an all or nothing. If you try and stop Luke and fail, you've wasted multiple actions.

The 5 cards the Rebels would earn is a threat. A huge one. As in "game ending." And seeing as how I win with the Rebels literally every time I play them and I always put actions into the Luke/Vader fight, I'm 100% convinced those actions are worth it. The 5 cards the Imps can't respond to has won me the game on more occassions than not. I can usually finish my progress on the shield generator and get at least one shot in on the Death Star when I time it right. The Rebel fleet can be in shambles but with that many bonus cards, it doesn't really matter. So with that logic, the Empire ensuring those 5 actions don't happen is worth it. And hey, if they get those 4 bonus cards, good on 'em.

I think the thing to look at here is the scale of this game VS QG. It's much smaller, much tighter. 5 cards really does make all the difference.

charlest wrote: Beyond that, when do you start pushing the Luke battle? Early in the game?

Not quite early. Top priority is getting those ships away from the fleets and making big groups of ships, denying the Imps bonus cards. Once I have about 3 of them away, I'll start hammering on Vader. If I have redemption card is a huge factor, too.

charlest wrote: Mathematically this will average out to 4-5 actions to get Vader down to 3 or less health (assuming you roll odds). It will take another action to turn Vader. So again, you're spending 5-6 actions on average to gain 5 bonus cards.

I think you're look at this wrong. Yes, it's 4 to 5 actions...But those and any other actions you would be spending your time on instead are things the Imperials can react to. As I said, actions they can't react to, particularly that many, are worth the game. They don't carry the same way the standard card play does.

charlest wrote: I've seen the argument that the bonus cards are stronger than regular actions because your opponent can't respond. What I haven't seen someone explain though is how a Rebel player spending actions on Luke is not responding to the Imperial player, thus boosting the power of the Imperial player's cards.

Yes, but an Imperial player not pressuring Luke before he starts hitting Vader or not trying to stop him once Vader does start taking damage is not going to fair so well. The Rebels early game should be trying to get their ships out, making bigger groups so that the Imperials a) don't blow them up with the Death Star and b) make huge groups of ships that make it that much harder for the TIEs and SSD to get bonus cards, not to mention rolling 5 dice when you can get the same types together (which is discussed in the clarified rules). Starting to beat up on Luke before the Rebel player might force them into that fight before they're ready, which if they do, that's time you've bought for yourself in the space battle. I like using my bonus cards to hit Luke when I can, especially when Vader has yet to be damaged.

charlest wrote: Are you slowly performing Luke actions? Like once per round?

When it's time to fight Vader, I pretty much make sure the fight will end quickly. If I'm holding a redemption card, 3 rounds of Luke on one turn (if he's not in danger of getting killed) and opening with a redemption card the next round is the way to go.

charlest wrote: Have you played with the Imperial player totally ignoring the Vader track and Endor track? You should totally ignore Endor until near the end, it's a waste of time.

That I do agree with. It's just damned tricky to not wait too long.

charlest wrote: The biggest issue I have is that the Rebel player is spending 5-6 actions on Luke with the ONLY result being 5 bonus cards. Meanwhile, during those 5-6 actions the Imperial player is decimating the Rebel fleet and earning his own bonus cards. Likewise, Imperial bonus cards seem to be slightly more useful, especially late game.

Like I said, actions the other player can't react to > actions they can. Pursuing them is always, always, always worth it. In a game this small and short, denying the opportunity to earn those actions can win you the game.

I wish we could play this easily against each other because if your Imperial player is not bringing the SSD up in front of the Death Star I think he's playing wrong.

Also, it's a flat 66% chance to hit with the Death Star. I wouldn't expect to kill all of the fleet markers and I would stop as soon as they're all cleared.

That's why I'd use heavy Death Star actions just the first two rounds. For every 3 Death Star attacks you should get 2 hits from the probabilities. Two one in three (5 or 6) rolls equals a two thirds chance to hit. Over three Death Star actions you should get two successful attacks and two bonus cards.

The SSD needs to be moved up. I don't think it will die as quick as you are saying. We are using TIE actions to deploy them which is actually better because TIE action cards are heavily prevalent and easy to get out. It also makes Bonus Cards useful.

The huge benefit of the Empire is to use the TIE action to deploy TIEs and get to attack in the same action. If you get the SSD up front you will be attacking with 5 dice every single time you deploy. That SSD space will fill with 20+ TIEs and the Rebs will be crying.

I wouldn't worry about the SSD dying because it won't die before you get a large portion of TIEs out (use your Bonus cards from Death Star in the first two rounds to deploy a crap ton of TIEs). At that point you will have been rocking their spaces with 5 dice attacks decimating them and earning more bonus cards.

Seriously, ignore the side boards, use Death Star 2/3 actions until the fleet spaces are cleared, and move the SSD up. Then do nothing but TIE actions and blow the Rebs the hell up.

I think the Rebels can still win with this happening but it comes down to getting the shield generator down and hoping you can get one of your few remaining ships up and getting a lucky roll.

I'll let you take the Jedi track and I'll use those 5-6 actions to get 25-30 dice of attacking your ships.

Based on this debate, I've decided the game is either lacklustre because some of the options aren't viable, or the game is lacklustre because the timing of when to do so many of the actions are scripted...

Alls I knows is, I'm glad I didn't knee-jerk sell Queen's Gambit when I picked up Risk. It's fun for a quick session, but it's really not that shit hot of a game. I suspect its development was rushed to meet Force Friday.

Let me talk a little bit more about moving the Executor up to the front.

It has 8 health and is hit on a 5+.

The space I'd move it to makes it so you would not be able to attack with your ships moving off the Fleet markers (there'd still be one space in between).

On average needing a 5 or 6 to hit means you will need to roll 3 dice to do one damage. This means you need 24 dice of attack on average to take out the SSD.

That's 5 actions of attacking with 5 dice. Maybe if you manage to not take heavy losses you are rolling 5 dice half the time? More often you'll be rolling 4ish dice. Then we go to 6 actions of attacking to kill it.

During that time period the Imperial player can deploy every single action almost. I'd probably sprinkle 1-2 Death Star attacks in early so lets say 4 actions while you're attacking the SSD where I'm responding with counter-attacks/deployment.

So you're looking at 16 TIEs and 20 dice of my own attacking your ships. I will clear at least one space (probably 2-3 I'd bet) meaning Bonus cards and more TIE attacks probably which chain into more Bonus cards.

Just not sure why there's fear of losing the SSD since you can get out 16-20 TIEs on average (probably more when you factor bonus cards) before it dies.

I know you said you weren't a math guy but it's important to consider average probabilities in stuff like this because those are the normal results that will occur when we're talking about a large number of plays. If we start trying to factor balance from just a few plays with wild swings of luck you can't draw meaningful conclusions. That's why I keep bringing in the basic probabilities because it's the only factual statistics we can discuss.

And to be clear - the above is assuming you are using no actions on Luke. If you do a 3 action Luke turn then the SSD is alive for MUCH longer and pretty much ALL of the TIEs will make it onto the board.

On a different note, I haven't found a reason to activate the Falcon over other ships. What am I missing?

JEM wrote: On a different note, I haven't found a reason to activate the Falcon over other ships. What am I missing?

Yeah it's weak. I wish it allowed all of the ships in its space to attack so it could act as a command-type ship and lead the charge.

As-is I'd use it for spot duty in punching a hole in a weakly defended space (if the opponent has 1 or 2 TIEs in a space), or I'd use it at end game to try and kill the Death Star if it's still alive.

It's much more useful near end game where you're rolling less dice per attack due to losses.

This has been bugging me. It is not a 66% chance to hit a fleet marker from the Death Star. It's 55.55%

It isn't two 33% chances that you sum, because that is counting overlapping results.

There are 36 2D6 combinations:
The right two columns and the bottom two rows are the 2D6 results that will get you one hit.
So the probability is 20/36 = 55.55%
Just over half the time when you attack a fleet marker from the Death Star should you get a hit (given enough rolls).

CONDITIONAL PROBABILITY

Hey, I never said I'm good at math. Thanks for clearing that up.

I still like the odds.

charlest wrote: Also, it's a flat 66% chance to hit with the Death Star. I wouldn't expect to kill all of the fleet markers and I would stop as soon as they're all cleared.
.

That's not quite right because the events aren't independent. It is 1/3 + 1/3 - (1/3)(1/3) = 5/9 = 55.56%


EDIT: I see that wadenels jumped in first, but no reason that we can't all pile on in true nerd fashion.

Never tell me the odds!
-Han Solo

Conditional Probability is why you see people make some weird decisions about their odds to hit.

The trick to calculating it on the fly when rolling against a target number is to count failures instead of successes. Think of the results as a Venn Diagram where successes are in the middle where they overlap. A success on one die negates any other dice, because those don't really matter. Failures never negate though, which makes them countable.

For example for the 5 or 6 on 2D6:
6^2 is 36;
4 or less fails and 4^2 is 16.
So there are 16 ways to fail out of 36 different results, or 20/36 ways to succeed. 5/9 as SpaceGhost pointed out.

So you need a 4+ on 3D6, and you're doing it in your head:
6^3 = 36 * 6 or about 200 because we're lazy.
3^3 failures is 27, but let's 25 because we're lazy.
You've got a 1/8 chance to fail, or 87.5% chance to succeed. The actual result is... 87.5%. Well that was lucky.

I'll stop now.

Am I thinking about this wrong? For the hit-on-4 rolls mentioned above, can't you just think: 1/2 chance to fail on each die, and I'd need to fail on all three dice, so 1/8?

Needing a 5 or 6 on 2d6 is a 2/3 chance to fail, and you need to fail twice to miss, so 4/9 chance of failing. Are we saying the same thing?

jeb wrote: Am I thinking about this wrong? For the hit-on-4 rolls mentioned above, can't you just think: 1/2 chance to fail on each die, and I'd need to fail on all three dice, so 1/8?

Needing a 5 or 6 on 2d6 is a 2/3 chance to fail, and you need to fail twice to miss, so 4/9 chance of failing. Are we saying the same thing?

Yes, same thing