Imported Post
King
Posts:232
 |
| 16 Mar 2007 9:48 AM |
|
I never center in Australia if I can help it. It is the best position on the board for defense, but it is by far the worse position to serve as a base for offensive action.
From Australia you can only attack Siam. Building up an army big enough to conquer Siam can take several turns. In the meantime, you have to sit there hoping and praying that the game isn't determined by the other players who are actually in a position to do something.
Finally you attack and conquer Siam, moving the remains of your army into Siam. So far so good. Now what do you do?
There is no obvious strategy. Therein lies the heart Australia's problem. It has a very defendable border with Siam, but once past Siam, there is no obvious goal in mind.
Compare this to the other places on the map. A North American player can conquer South America and move his frontier force to Brazil. If he is a bit more ambitious, he can try for Europe. He can even pounce on a weakened Australia. A South American player can conquer Africa and keep North America off balance. An African player can conquer South America and swing into Central America. He too could possibly go for Europe. And he can keep an eye on Australia, as well. The European player has Africa to beat up on and Asia to expand into.
The Asian Player? He can go after Australia. He can conquer Ukraine giving him a better western frontier. He can poke holes in Africa and North America.
They all have several clearly defined strategies for offense. The Australian player does not.
Let's consider some of the possiblities for Australian player. Go for Asia? That only works if nobody wants it. And even then it is a bear to do from Australia. Asia is divided up into a jigsaw puzzle of countries that makes creating a defendable frontier hard to do. Unless the conquering army is big enough to conquer the whole thing in one turn, it is forced to split into mulitple pieces in order to defend what was just conquered. This leaves Australia wide open to someone from Europe, Africa, or North America who likes the idea of establishing a colony down under.
Conquer Africa or Europe? Not likely. Africa and Europe are usually hard fought over with large standing armies in a number of territories. About the best hope the Australian player has is poking a hole in Africa, Europe, or North Amerca.
The biggest problem faced by the Australian player is dissapating more and more of your troops in an ever widening frontier that can easily be swept aside by good players. Your only real hope is that the other players make a mistake and leave you free to conquer Africa, Europe, or even North America.
It comes down to this. Centering your game on Australia is a "bide your time and wait for the other people to make mistakes" strategy. Great if you have no choice in the matter and have been forced into it, but hardly the wise move when up against good players. They will make few, if any mistakes.
OldTimer |
|
|
|
|
Imported Post
King
Posts:232
|
| 16 Mar 2007 9:48 AM |
|
| Almost exactly my opinion as well. I can imagine how Australia is seen as the most easily claimed and least easily lost once taken, giving a steady two unit advantage thereafter. But unless subsequent action in Asia can lead to something beneficial (which will require a lot of turmoil among other players, preventing any among them from becoming overly strong), it isn't an easy corner to work your way out of. |
|
|
|
|
Ehsan Honary
Site Admin
King
Posts:268
|
| 16 Mar 2007 9:49 AM |
|
A very good post. Agree with you and personally don't like to start from Australia.
Surprisingly though, a large number of players prefer to start from Australia, especially if there are more players in the game.
Perhaps that shows how people prefer to play defensively than aggressively.
Australia is good in two cases:
1. It is the most ideal for a new player, so he/she can last longer in the game and understand how it all works. Though it may also give him a false sense of pride if he does very well 
2. The other case is when you know in advance that the game is full of expansionist players. You can just reside in Australia, wait for them to fight it out and then, at exactly the right moment come out of the fortress and expand. |
|
Ehsan Honary
|
|
|
Imported Post
King
Posts:232
|
| 15 Apr 2007 4:41 PM |
|
I disagree. When th cards are delt in the beginning you could have places in both australlia and S. america. then you have two places and can double flank africa and then you have 3 continets . Personaly this is my fav strat to do because its a defensive offense.
Riskaddict5 |
|
|
|
|
Imported Post
King
Posts:232
|
| 15 Apr 2007 4:41 PM |
|
I only like Australia to hold for the two extra renforcements.
Building up a boarder agreement between Australia and Siam usually helps. It gives the player who wants to conquer Asia a little breather that he has to defend one less boarder. |
|
|
|
|
Imported Post
King
Posts:232
|
| 15 Apr 2007 4:42 PM |
|
My favorite strategy for taking Australia early-game is to build up a territory away from Siam while two idiots duke it out. Of course, I usually easily slam the victor. So, Australia really is a tar-pit that contains the bones of many Risk 'dinosaurs.'
Australia doesn't have to be isolationist. An entrance into NA can be a powerful beginning if Africa thinks South America would make a tasty breakfast.
Kikuichimonji |
|
|
|
|
cyray7
Diplomat
Posts:121
|
| 03 Jun 2007 5:49 PM |
|
| I see Australia as a great place to start, if you are playing with 4 or less players, it is easy to take, and expand into Asia. However, don't put too much energy into it when you are in big games, as many of the "pro's" will put all of their effort into it, and, as Kikuichimonji and others have said, it becomes a tar-pit. In big games, if you take Australia there is really no place to expand, as Asia is too large, and the other continents too far away. |
|
|
|
|