the rigth/duty to turn in is just with 5 or more cards, isn't true?
  • 303 posts
  • Page 1 of 21
The_Bishop wrote:
When a player eliminates another player and gets his cards, he can turn in if he has 5 or more cards. So he chooses 3 cards to play, but if he still has 5 or more cards he can choose other 3 cards to play. Simply a player plays 2 sets just when, after eliminating a player, he has got 8 or more cards (3 sets are not possible because 11 cards are not possible).
I have always played in this way but I noticed that here at D12 is not so. It happened 2 times in my last 2 games that I've played 2 sets with less than 8 cards. For example I had 3 cards and I eliminated a player with 4 cards. I chose 3 cards to play from the total 7, then it rest 4 cards with a playble set (not 5 or more!) and the game program asked me again to play another set. Is that normal or is it a program mistake?
What do you think about this rule?
«God doesn't play dice with the World» ~ Albert Einstein
Matty wrote:
It is normal - if you have 5 or more cards, you can turn in.
If you have the cards to turn in two sets, than you've played very well, and you deserve to be able to turn in both sets, dont you?

Sometimes its not smart to turn in, because you can kill another player without the extra set, and if you would turn in you wouldnt be able to turn in the next turn.
But usually, yes, you should turn in.
"Strength doesn't lie in numbers, strength doesn't lie in wealth. Strength lies in nights of peaceful slumbers." ~Maria
The_Bishop wrote:
Well, thank you Matty. I don't want to discuss strategy here, just rules.

Why, after an elimination, with 4 cards you can't turn in (also if you have the set) and with 6 you even can have a double turn in? It is not unfair?

I usually play in this way: after elimination there are 3 cases:
- 4 cards or less: you can't turn in;
- 5 to 7 cards: you must turn in;
- 8 or 9 cards: you must turn in double.
The rule is easy: with 5+ cards you must turn in. With less than 5 you can't turn in (except at beggining of your turn, that's clear)

Maybe how you play at D12 is smarter. But, if we decide that after an eliminition one can turn in how he wants, so he could turn in also with 3 or 4 cards if he has a playble set. I think it would be more fair.
«God doesn't play dice with the World» ~ Albert Einstein
Holt wrote:
The rule is you must have a forced turn in which means 5 or more cards in order to turn in during your turn. That is how traditional Risk is played and that is how we play on this site. We will not be changing the rules of the game to make it to where you can turn in with less than 5 cards after taking a player out.
Vexer wrote:
This is the official rule from the board game that copied from Hasbro's website:


Eliminating an opponent:  If during your turn you eliminate an
opponent by defeating his or her last army on the game board, you win any RISK cards that player has collected.

If winning them gives you 6 or more cards, you must immediately trade in enough sets to reduce your hand to 4 or fewer cards, but once your hand is reduced to 4, 3, or 2 cards, you must stop trading.

But if winning them gives you fewer than 6, you must wait until the
beginning of your next turn to trade in a set.

Note: When you draw a card from the deck at the end of your turn (for having won a battle), if this brings your total to 6, you must wait until your next turn to trade in.



This rule is inconsistent with the rule that says you can't ever hold more than 5 cards--which is the rule everyone remembers.

To be consistent and make sense the rule should be if you have 5 or more cards after killing someone you must trade until you have 4 or less cards.

With the original rules you would not be able to turn in 2 sets with only 6 or 7 cards.

But this is where our website improves on the rules.
This is not a program mistake. It was intention. The double turn in at 6 or 7 cards is crucial. Some games would go on forever without this.

Let's say Player A has 3 cards, B has 4, C has 5 and D has 2. It's Player A's turn. How does Player A win this game if he doesn't have enough armies to kill player C or D even with turning in cards but he does have enough to kill player B without turning in cards. So he holds his cards, kills player B and turns in a double set. Then he has enough to kill Player C and turn in again to weaken player D and maybe kill him and Player D having only 2 cards cannot win.

Without the ability to turn in twice at 6 or 7 cards games take much longer to finish and games with very experienced players might never finish. When nobody attacks each other it's impossible to kill anyone without the double turn in at 6 or 7 cards and in some games it takes a triple turn in with 9 cards to be able to sweep the board.

Trust me, I have played nearly 900 games with the rules this way and I speak from experience when I say that without the double turn at 6 or 7 cards many off those games would have stalemated. Playing online is different than the board game. People attack less, time isn't an issue in Long Term games and there are no cumbersome armies to move around. Games with experienced players online will have a greater number of total armies on the map than if those same players played on a board. People play differently because of the interface and therefore the rules must accommodate.
Vexer wrote:
While I was reading the rules I also noticed another difference. On the board game you can only get a maximum of two extra armies for owning a territory that you have the card for no matter how many you own. So if you own more than one you have to pick which territory is getting a plus 2 and which is not.

I personally think it's better the way it is on the site.
The_Bishop wrote:
Thanks Vexer for your answer. You explained me the reason of this rule. I just wanted to be sure that was not a mistake.

The game has many versions. It looks the common rule is mine. Wikipedia says: <<If the conquering player then holds five or more cards, the player must trade in sets until the player has fewer than five>>.
Hasbro is more clear and specify <<once your hand is reduced to 4, 3, or 2 cards, you must stop trading>>. But they put the limit to 6 or more cards, I don't know why.

You surely are more expert than me and you know how the game can stalemate so you convince me. I changed my mind a bit on this rule.

Speaking about strategy wanna just let notice 6 cards give a double set with a probability near to 60%, I thougth 10% or less! And 7 cards always (100%).

Wanna calculate these result better. I just need to know what percent of wild cards there is, please. And... (now i'm giving you another rule problem) if you let to trade in a set with 2 wild cards and 1 other card.

I like to play Risk and strategy games in the large, and I like to study them. I am happy to have found this site and I like the nice people here such experts of Risk. Thanks to Fendi, Thorpe and Holt.
«God doesn't play dice with the World» ~ Albert Einstein
Thorpe wrote:
Expert! Bishop, you were in that game with Fendi, Holt and I in it and the experts were Fendi and Holt! Boy did I do a "Newbie" play that cost me the game! So those two are the EXPERTS!
95.5% of the time you kill a players cap before your 2nd turn in... you fail or die next
Thorpe wrote:
Expert! Bishop, you were in that game with Fendi, Holt and I in it and the experts were Fendi and Holt! Boy did I do a "Newbie" play that cost me the game! So those two are the EXPERTS!
95.5% of the time you kill a players cap before your 2nd turn in... you fail or die next
Holt wrote:
Thorpe you need to let that go I have had plenty of mistakes in games but I always bounce back... You will be fine and you are no "Newbie" lol...
The_Bishop wrote:
Newbie? It is not long time that I play Risk. Thorpe you gave me an easy shot against Holt, that was a trap for me. I was not prepared to play with a blocked capital. You and Fendi were free to move, it was not so easy for me make an attack. In spite of that I was so near to the goal! grrrr... Fendi! :[

Really I didn't want to refer to the match. You can't believe me if I say it was just a case if I mentioned you. The messagge was written yestarday and I have decided to post it today.
«God doesn't play dice with the World» ~ Albert Einstein
Vexer wrote:
We did an analysis of the likelihood of double turn ins with 7 cards before and we couldn't agree on the math so lucide wrote a program to simulate several thousand sets of 7 cards and he came up with 93% i think. But I don't think he knew exactly how many wilds there are. Some maps have a higher percentage of wilds due to the number of territories. It's a little different probability with each map. I still need to find the code that determines how many wilds are on a map so we can know exactly how it works.

But the probability certainly isn't 100% You can have 5 of one color and 2 of another which would only be one set. Unlikely but i have seen it happen. When i play i just assume that i am going to get a double turn in with 7 and go for it anyway.

Now about turning in two wilds in a set. I am aware that this is not allowed on the board game. But if you are dumb enough in the beginning of a game to do that then you deserve to lose both wilds and if you are so desperate in the end game to have a set that you use two wilds then why not allow it? If you don't turn in both wilds then whoever kills you will get quite a treat and a big advantage. I think the game would be better if are allowed to use two wilds in one set. I am sure there might be a reason why we should disallow 2 wilds in a set but just from a tech support aspect, i don't want to get a bunch of messages from players telling me that there is a bug because they can't turn in their set.
Votazap wrote:
I have gotten 7 cards and no double set a bunch of times.
Matty wrote:
Wow, you are right actually.
If you have 5 red ones, and 2 blue ones, you can only turn in one set (of 3 reds) o_O.

I mean, whats the chance of that - you would need bad luck in votazap-proportions - but still, it is possible.
"Strength doesn't lie in numbers, strength doesn't lie in wealth. Strength lies in nights of peaceful slumbers." ~Maria
The_Bishop wrote:
Stupid me, what I have said! Sure, it is not 100% with 7!
«God doesn't play dice with the World» ~ Albert Einstein