Today we played our second game of Risk Legacy. I did not win this time around, so it was a terrible game :)
If you haven't heard about Risk Legacy, it is a very interesting and unique game for quite a decent price. I heavily advise looking into it if you're a fan of Risk, or even if you are not such a big fan. It plays quite differently than the old school game that it shares a name with.
The basic overall structure of the game is the same as the old one. You have a map of the world, divided up into continents and countries. You march your little plastic men across the world, killing enemies and capturing territories in order to bring about your victory. You still get new troops each turn based on the number of countries you hold, still roll 3 dice to attack and 2 to defend, still get one free move for reinforcements, and still get a card for capturing an enemy held country.
The details are where the differences start to appear. First, the biggest difference and my favorite one is the play time. This version plays in about 45-60 minutes, as opposed to the 4-5 hours of normal Risk. How does it accomplish this amazing feat? Well victory is no longer about world domination, it is about gaining four Red Stars (victory points). To make things even faster and easier everyone starts with a capitol HQ, which counts as one Red Star, and if you haven't won a game yet you get a bonus Red Star token, so you are halfway to victory. This makes for very quick games once you realize it. Heck all you have to do is capture one other player's HQ and then turn in 4 cards for an additional Red Star token and you've won.
Another thing that really makes this Risk version unique, and that I also really like, is that the game is constantly being changed and customized to your group as you play it over the course of the 15 game campaign that it is intended to be played for. You end up making changes to and adding lots of cool stuff to the map, the cards, the rules, and the game itself. Both as a reward at the end of each game and as a result of various conditions and triggers being met you will do things like add custom named cities to the board, increase the value of various territory cards, name continents, change the continent bonuses up or down, fortify cities, add powers to the various factions, and even change the basic rules of the game. By the end of 15 games you will have a very unique and highly customized Risk game that has been shaped and formed by the creative minds and hard efforts of your gaming group. A gaming artifact of extraordinary personal value.
Of course a certain type of gamer will not be able to accept the coolness of this unique feature of Risk Legacy. Those who hold the physical components of their games to be sacred and inviolate have shown themselves to be utterly aghast at the concept of such travesties as WRITING ON THE BOARD or TEARING UP CARDS. The horror! Why even the owner of our copy is unwilling to actual destroy any portion of the game, even when it instructs us to do so. We will just be setting aside anything that should be "destroyed". Which is totally fine by me. I don't really feel that there will be much to gained from physically destroying game pieces. Doing things like naming cities and continents, and recording your name on the victory track are enough for me. I founded the city of Asgard in Scandinavia first game, and the city of Spiel-ville in Northern Europe the second game.
There are a plethora of other minor things that make this game different from classic Risk. Each player plays a faction with specific plastic minis and special powers (well only one power right now, but there will be more later). If you've won a game and don't get a bonus Red Star token any more, you get a missle token that you can use to change a die in any combat to a 6. There are things called Scars that can make certain territories harder or easier to defend. You only start with one country at the beginning of the game, so there is lots of expanding into empty territories at the beginning of the game. And more interesting changes should be coming up as we open some of the various boxes and envelopes in the box. Like if either John or I win the next time then we will open the envelope that says "Open when someone signs the board for a second time."
I have to say I'm really a big fan of this game so far, and I think my opinion will only go up as more facets of it are revealed. I love the super fast play time, I love the customizing, and I love the cool theme and flavor of it. It still has the same failing of any Risk game to some degree, in that victory can largely be determined by being the first one to trade in a good set of cards for a large chunk of troops. But that is not going to be the only way that people win. John won this one by saving his cards and trading in for that fourth Red Star token. I think the game will promote people playing harder and taking more risks, since games can go from a stalemate to a victory so quickly, easily in a single turn.
Sounds like fun. I would love to play sometime.
ReplyDeleteI also think my opinion will go up as we play, but the whims of the dice drive me a little crazy.
ReplyDeleteThe dice? Heck, I think the dice ADD predictability. In a SINGLE turn we had separate players go from Scandinavia to E Australia, Middle East to Scandinavia, and Egypt to Scandinavia. What a bizarre way to fight a war, sure (John won by freely abandoning his own capital), but you get the sinking feeling, as massive armies pop out of the ground and immediately cross Earth like a quiet street, like the map is irrelevant and you're in a chaotic game of abstract set collection.
ReplyDeleteThis is thematically much closer to factions fighting over a city, but that's not the lesson here. The lesson is that I DO think a good wargame should take "4-5 hours" and that bringing it down to 1 chops it into a choking hazard I can't recognize or even understand.
That said, this is way too interesting not to play. The first game was flawed, usual Risk and the second absolute chaos. Hopefully it equilibrizes sooner rather than later.
I definitely think that a wargame that is supposed to be more simulationist and "realistic" should take a longer amount of time. The problem with games that take a long time though is that you usually have to deal with a lot of downtime, a lot of the time you can see the end hours before you can reach it, and people can lose their ability to participate (get eliminated).
ReplyDeleteI very much think this game is not meant to be thought of as a simulation of war in any real way. It definitely leans more to the abstract. But then most war games lean heavily to the abstract when you really think about it.
I see this as simulating a boxing/martial arts fight more than anything else really. Jabs, blocks, dodges, feints, all sorts of testing of the other person, their defences and capabilities; all until that opening for the final knock out punch comes up. Then you have to have the perception and ability to see it and then take advantage of it.
For me I could easily see myself getting tired of it if it was a longer or more difficult game, or even if it wasn't after a few more rounds. But I'm really chomping at the bit to see how it develops, and I absolutely love the customization portion of the game. I may have to make a game that does that as well in the future.