CM: Risk - version 2.0

Rico

FGM Brigadier
REGISTERED USER
Messages
7,947
Likes
2,626
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
#1
Been doing a little bit of work on a version 2.0 of the Risk Europa campaign for after when this is concluded.

Toying with expanding the teams to 3 players?

Also expanding the range of units and change the way the QB battles are fought and incorporate casualties.



Teams can chose from Armour, Mech Infantry and Infantry Divisions.
- each allows the player to purchase a set amount points worth of troops and equipment for the QB battle.
A QB size battle is set up to allow for the maximum points needed by the players -- all still played on mostly medium maps.

If a unit suffers more than 50% percent casualties in the battle (tank units count vehicles, Inf nits count men), then it loses a strength point - or is eliminated if already at half strength.

If an attacker wins a Total or Major Victory - the defender is usually pretty much destroyed.

If an attacker wins a Tactical or Minor Victory -- any surviving forces may retreat, if any survive the 50% casualty cut-off.

Units can be replenished during the purchase phase.

I have some ideas of how casualties can be tracked -- still need to see if this is too complicated to be practical.

To avoid battle getting too big, the cost of buying units and supplying them might go up a bit.

AIR SUPPORT - this is purchased and used up when deployed, and then needs to be repurchase (it'll be relatively cheap)

ARTILLERY -- these are permanent units (probably quite expensive to supply) -- and are lost if a defending side is eliminated or forced to retreat.

This is all still in development.

All suggestions welcome.
 

poesel71

FGM 2nd Lieutenant
REGISTERED USER
Messages
1,441
Likes
440
Location
Dortmund, Germany
#2
I suggest to restrict the ability to b able to build everywhere. You don't need railways if you can build right at the front.

Maybe a stacking limit so that you cannot build one super army group that waltzes everything down.
 

poesel71

FGM 2nd Lieutenant
REGISTERED USER
Messages
1,441
Likes
440
Location
Dortmund, Germany
#3
Sorry, another suggestion. :)

Diplomacy has this nice mechanic of being able to 'support' other units.
You can support an attack of another unit if you could attack the target of the supported unit yourself. You can support to defend a unit if you could (in theory) attack that unit (including own units of course).

Useful for alliances and defence.
 

Rico

FGM Brigadier
REGISTERED USER
Messages
7,947
Likes
2,626
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
#4
Sorry, another suggestion. :)

Diplomacy has this nice mechanic of being able to 'support' other units.
You can support an attack of another unit if you could attack the target of the supported unit yourself. You can support to defend a unit if you could (in theory) attack that unit (including own units of course).

Useful for alliances and defence.
Not sure how that would work out in practice on the CM level.
 

poesel71

FGM 2nd Lieutenant
REGISTERED USER
Messages
1,441
Likes
440
Location
Dortmund, Germany
#5
Ok, example (with the current map there is no good one, this is a bit contrieved):

Andalusia attacks Catalonia - 1 vs. 1
Now Seville supports Andalusia into Catalonia - 2 vs. 1
But Provence supports Catalonia - 2 vs. 2

OR

Provence attacks Sevilla - cuts support and Andalusia attacks alone (ok, not possible because Provence could only attack with 1 vs 2).

Simple rule that adds a whole lot of possibilities and maneuvering to the game.
If a support adds a whole unit to the attack is debatable. Lesser effects may make more sense.
 

Odin

FGM Company Sergeant Major
REGISTERED USER
Messages
616
Likes
183
Location
United Kingdom
#6
@Rico, nice suggestions. I have a few more:

1. At the moment I think the attacker gets too great a CM points purchase advantage in a CM battle where there are an equal number of defending and attacking risk units taking part. I think attackers currently get close to double what the defender receives and to rebalance this pro-attacker bias, I'd suggest the attacker receives a CM purchase points handicap of 30% or so, in the CM setup phase if they are attacking with the same number of units that the defender is defending with. This would also create a bigger difference in a 2 v 1 risk unit battle. Currently I think the attacker only receives a couple of hundred extra CM purchase points for having double the risk units that the defender has, so there isn't much of an advantage to do more than match the defender's risk units when planning an attack. In my mind this undermines campaign strategy.

2. I like your idea of incorporating armoured infantry units, and restricting risk infantry units to CM only infantry. Currently German infantry units get a significant advantage over the Commonwealth and American units - given the greater vehicle OOB options they have at their disposal. Plus infantry should mean infantry ;)!

3. I think armoured and fleet units are currently not worth the extra purchase points, given the extra cost to purchase and then supply them. I'd cut their supply value to 2 points instead of 3, and given they are motorised allow them to move 2 territory spaces rather than 1. If you decide to incorporate armoured infantry I'd also allow those units to move 2 territory spaces rather than 1, as again a motorised unit should have a movement advantage over an unmotorised one.

4. My only comment regarding the creation of air support and artillery units, is given how the CM QB setup system doesn't allow players to specify the exact purchase point allocations, how could we specify an additional 1000 points for air support or artillery support? Air support is also currently terrible in WWII CM, it's too slow to be deployed for a 30 minute battle, and in my experience just as likely to result in the destruction of my own units, as the enemies. With this in mind I'd maybe allow players to utilise air support units outside of CM eg attack units on the risk map instead. I'd also allow air units to move further on the campaign level maybe 3-4 territories, so they can conduct a bombing run over enemy territory before returning to base in the same turn.

5. You could incorporate paratroop units into the game. These are great fun to play with in CM and could be great fun to use at a Risk campaign level. For example paratroop units could travel 2-3 territories rather than the infantry's standard one. They could also move across sea spaces and across an enemy territory (unless there is an enemy air support unit in the way), to drop behind enemy lines. Players could carry out a landbased/seaborne invasion of the territory adjacent to the them, while dropping some paratroops behind enemy lines in a Market Garden style attack. However, the paratroop supply value could be limited if surrounded by enemy territory, so should the troops on ground fail to link up :panzer: with the paras, the attacker could end up playing out Arnhem 2.0 :eek:.

6. Fleets are currently too limited in their abilities, which is why I think we've seen so little use of them in the campaign. To help improve their use in the game, could you allow fleets to bombard enemy seaboard territories? This could be conducted at the campaign level of the game in a similar manner to how sea battles are played out. EG the GM roles a dice for the side conducting the bombardment, and should the bombarding side role over a certain number on the dice it results in the destruction of an enemy risk unit? You could alternatively give an attacking side an additional CM percentage purchase points advantage to be spent on artillery if they are conducting an attack on an enemy seaboard territory which neighbours the attacker's fleet. With the incorporation of air units you could allow air units to attack and possibly sink fleets, and or give air units a zone of control to prevent enemy fleets moving within a square of the air unit.

7. If you are to include additional units like air support and artillery, I think teams need to receive more Risk purchase points. Most sides are currently right at the limit of what they can spend - so artillery and air units would be off the cards for the vast majority of players without additional Risk PPs being incorporated into the game.

8. If a team delivers the knock blow to a rival, allow the vistorious side to utilise his defeated opponents CM nation. This could give a little joie de vivre to being the bastards that take out another team!

Apologies for the length of the list, hope it can be of of some use.
 
Last edited:

Rico

FGM Brigadier
REGISTERED USER
Messages
7,947
Likes
2,626
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
#8
4. My only comment regarding the creation of air support and artillery units, is given how the CM QB setup system doesn't allow players to specify the exact purchase point allocations, how could we specify an additional 1000 points for air support or artillery support? Air support is also currently terrible in WWII CM, it's too slow to be deployed for a 30 minute battle, and in my experience just as likely to result in the destruction of my own units, as the enemies. With this in mind I'd maybe allow players to utilise air support units outside of CM eg attack units on the risk map instead. I'd also allow air units to move further on the campaign level maybe 3-4 territories, so they can conduct a bombing run over enemy territory before returning to base in the same turn.
The way the QB battle set up would work is like the following example:



ORANGE attacks BLUE with:
1x Full Strength Arm Div (1500 Armor Only QB points)
1x half strength Mech Inf Div (750 Mech Infantry Only QB points)
1x Air Support (1000 Air Support QB points)


BLUE defends with:
1x Full strength Inf Div (1000 Inf only QB points)
1x Half Strength Inf Div (500 points Inf Only QB points)
1x Artillery Support (1000 Artillery QB points)

We would set up a LARGE probe battle (5118 vs 3445) so we have enough points to use for the force builds (still on a medium map - 30 turns - just to maintain a fun pace)

ORANGE would then purchase according to the points available above:
Unit 1: A tank force (probably based on a company) using up to a max of 1500 points using vehicles from the Armour ONLY menu.
Unit 2: A Inf force (based on a PzGr company) using 750 points for troops, guns and vehicles available in the Mech Infantry Only Menu
Unit 3: 1000 points worth of air support

BLUE would also then purchase according to the points available above:
Unit 1: An Infantry force (based on a company) using 1000 points for troops, guns and vehicles available in the Infantry Only Menu
Unit 2: An Infantry force (based on a company) using 500 points for troops, guns and vehicles available in the Infantry Only Menu
Unit 3: 1000 points worth from the Artillery Menu

Any surplus QB points will remain unused -- this will rely on the players' honesty and a bit of work with calculators and slide rules :)

The reason for breaking up the force purchase into units corresponding to the RISK counters is so we can track casualties -- 50% + casualties on any unit will result in the loss of a strength point or elimination if already at half strength.

Hope this makes sense so far.

PS: as to air support being too slow -- only way to make it work, is to allocate it as Turn 1 attacks, giving it area attack commands on the opponent's side of the map -- and they will find their own targets. Can be quite disruptive.
 

Odin

FGM Company Sergeant Major
REGISTERED USER
Messages
616
Likes
183
Location
United Kingdom
#9
The way the QB battle set up would work is like the following example:



ORANGE attacks BLUE with:
1x Full Strength Arm Div (1500 Armor Only QB points)
1x half strength Mech Inf Div (750 Mech Infantry Only QB points)
1x Air Support (1000 Air Support QB points)


BLUE defends with:
1x Full strength Inf Div (1000 Inf only QB points)
1x Half Strength Inf Div (500 points Inf Only QB points)
1x Artillery Support (1000 Artillery QB points)

We would set up a LARGE probe battle (5118 vs 3445) so we have enough points to use for the force builds (still on a medium map - 30 turns - just to maintain a fun pace)

ORANGE would then purchase according to the points available above:
Unit 1: A tank force (probably based on a company) using up to a max of 1500 points using vehicles from the Armour ONLY menu.
Unit 2: A Inf force (based on a PzGr company) using 750 points for troops, guns and vehicles available in the Mech Infantry Only Menu
Unit 3: 1000 points worth of air support

BLUE would also then purchase according to the points available above:
Unit 1: An Infantry force (based on a company) using 1000 points for troops, guns and vehicles available in the Infantry Only Menu
Unit 2: An Infantry force (based on a company) using 500 points for troops, guns and vehicles available in the Infantry Only Menu
Unit 3: 1000 points worth from the Artillery Menu

Any surplus QB points will remain unused -- this will rely on the players' honesty and a bit of work with calculators and slide rules :)

The reason for breaking up the force purchase into units corresponding to the RISK counters is so we can track casualties -- 50% + casualties on any unit will result in the loss of a strength point or elimination if already at half strength.

Hope this makes sense so far.

PS: as to air support being too slow -- only way to make it work, is to allocate it as Turn 1 attacks, giving it area attack commands on the opponent's side of the map -- and they will find their own targets. Can be quite disruptive.
I see where you're coming from, and I don't like to put a downer of things, (here comes the...) but your current system to translate Risk units to CM battles is a beautifully simple one. Adding an additional artillery and air level to CM purchasing may detract from this great system and remove some of the fun from battles when these units (particularly artillery) are not available.
 

Rico

FGM Brigadier
REGISTERED USER
Messages
7,947
Likes
2,626
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
#10
I see where you're coming from, and I don't like to put a downer of things, (here comes the...) but your current system to translate Risk units to CM battles is a beautifully simple one. Adding an additional artillery and air level to CM purchasing may detract from this great system and remove some of the fun from battles when these units (particularly artillery) are not available.
The current system is simple & elegant -- I was trying to add some more flavour and variety into the CM battles and kind of makes sure there is always a reasonably fair CM battle.

This new system you would get on to the battle field what is on the map -- 3000 points of tanks on the Risk Map = 3000 points of tanks in the CM battle.
Tracking casualties would mean that even losing battles may attrition the winner ... the battle may be lost, but inflict enough casualties and the winning side will have to halt and rebuild his tank divisions etc etc.

BTW: like the idea of making Mech & Tank units more mobile in the movement phase.
 

eniced73

FGM Lieutenant
REGISTERED USER
Messages
1,709
Likes
311
Location
Pennslyvania, USA
#11
6. Fleets are currently too limited in their abilities, which is why I think we've seen so little use of them in the campaign. To help improve their use in the game, could you allow fleets to bombard enemy seaboard territories?
How about you setup a quick battle for this and allow the defending units to setup on the map at any point. The setup zone would span the whole map. The attacker gets a FO and some decent artillery. He sets up his artillery to fire on turn one trying to guess where the defender has placed his units. You play it out until the artillery runs dry (only a couple turns) and then calculate casualties. Quick and fun to watch.
 

poesel71

FGM 2nd Lieutenant
REGISTERED USER
Messages
1,441
Likes
440
Location
Dortmund, Germany
#12
That sounds like fun but is very exploitable for the defender.
First thing I would do is buy a FO, a bunker and spend the rest on foxholes. FO in bunker and lets see if you can hit it directly with something that can harm it. Or buy several to spread the risk.
How big is the map and what is on it? Huge discussion to get a fair setup.

IMHO not workable unless there is a real CM battle.
 

eniced73

FGM Lieutenant
REGISTERED USER
Messages
1,709
Likes
311
Location
Pennslyvania, USA
#13
Rico would have to do some testing on it. I am confident he could get it set up with applying some restrictions. Only allow foxholes and no bunkers for instance.
 
C

Coolbreeze

Guest
#14
To add onto Odin's points about Paratroopers. I think air superiority should be an important issue. The attacker should have to commit at least one type of air unit to "shuttle" the paratrooper division into the defenders territory. However, if the defender has air units in the province (or maybe even AA guns?) combat would be conducted by the GM (similar to naval combat) to determine wether or not the air unit and accompanying is destroyed or injured en route to its target. in fear of being intercepted, the attacker could then assign escort fighters to protect the paratroopers. That would create an additional need/role for air units.

For supply of paratroopers and other units, I would propose that any unit that has a completely friendly link (could be multiple provinces long) to their capital or an ally's capital (supply costs would then be at that ally's expense) would be supplied. That would cover instances of amphibious assualts, para drops, and provinces being cut off. If a unit were to become cut off from supply, perhaps it would start to fight at a reduced efficiency. Either by lowering the amount of ammo giving to the unit during a battle through the scenario editor. Or by reducing the amount of points that division would be worth.

For the issue of allies attacking a province together. One could simply appoint a supreme commander for that battle, and temporary merge the two allied armies into one. The losses would be split between them.
Example: The attackers lose one infantry division and have an armored division reduced to 50% combat strength. Each ally would have an infantry division reduced to 50%. And the ally that brought the armored division would be reduced. While this would resolve the combat issue, dividing the province and it's production points would be another issue.

The last two points would allow for a greater diplomatic offers and machinations, as allies can offer to support/supply allied armies. Wouldn't it be great if you could offer to supply an ally paratrooper division or support an allied attack and when your turn comes, you allow your ally to attack alone and be potentially destroyed. Imagine the horror/anger of your former ally as his units run out of supply or are gunned down in an doomed assault.

Great Game idea Rico! and looking forward to seeing alot more Europa campaigns.
 

Odin

FGM Company Sergeant Major
REGISTERED USER
Messages
616
Likes
183
Location
United Kingdom
#15
Rico would have to do some testing on it. I am confident he could get it set up with applying some restrictions. Only allow foxholes and no bunkers for instance.
I might be in the minority, but for me I'd rather a GM rolled a dice, than as a player role play out a bombardment in a CM battle. The attacker wouldn't see the results of what took place, and I don't think it'd be much fun for the defender either having to setup and then sit out a bombardment.
 

Rico

FGM Brigadier
REGISTERED USER
Messages
7,947
Likes
2,626
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
#16
To add onto Odin's points about Paratroopers. I think air superiority should be an important issue. The attacker should have to commit at least one type of air unit to "shuttle" the paratrooper division into the defenders territory. However, if the defender has air units in the province (or maybe even AA guns?) combat would be conducted by the GM (similar to naval combat) to determine wether or not the air unit and accompanying is destroyed or injured en route to its target. in fear of being intercepted, the attacker could then assign escort fighters to protect the paratroopers. That would create an additional need/role for air units.

For supply of paratroopers and other units, I would propose that any unit that has a completely friendly link (could be multiple provinces long) to their capital or an ally's capital (supply costs would then be at that ally's expense) would be supplied. That would cover instances of amphibious assualts, para drops, and provinces being cut off. If a unit were to become cut off from supply, perhaps it would start to fight at a reduced efficiency. Either by lowering the amount of ammo giving to the unit during a battle through the scenario editor. Or by reducing the amount of points that division would be worth.

For the issue of allies attacking a province together. One could simply appoint a supreme commander for that battle, and temporary merge the two allied armies into one. The losses would be split between them.
Example: The attackers lose one infantry division and have an armored division reduced to 50% combat strength. Each ally would have an infantry division reduced to 50%. And the ally that brought the armored division would be reduced. While this would resolve the combat issue, dividing the province and it's production points would be another issue.

The last two points would allow for a greater diplomatic offers and machinations, as allies can offer to support/supply allied armies. Wouldn't it be great if you could offer to supply an ally paratrooper division or support an allied attack and when your turn comes, you allow your ally to attack alone and be potentially destroyed. Imagine the horror/anger of your former ally as his units run out of supply or are gunned down in an doomed assault.

Great Game idea Rico! and looking forward to seeing alot more Europa campaigns.
Nice ideas here @Coolbreeze -- although probably will add too much complexity -- like to keep a tricky balance between playability and simplicity and flavour.
Never easy to get right.
 

Rico

FGM Brigadier
REGISTERED USER
Messages
7,947
Likes
2,626
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
#19
Found this in the archives ... worked this up a couple of months ago for a possible return to WORLD domination for CM RISK vers. 2.0 instead of limiting it to the now familiar Europa battlefield.
Based on original Risk map, but with added territories to expand total to 60 ... and sea and ocean zones for naval combat...oil fields to keep the mechanised armies going... more variety armies/units ... once we get close to finishing the current campaign, we can discuss further. :D