A humble suggestion from the observer of a few years, in this "fixed" strategy discussion. I think the optimal move after black killed yellow would be to *not* kill black. You burnt a significant portion of your lead by doing that... for cards. This feels like a prog strategy that I think is holding your wins back. Relying on blue to kill black, and thus cementing your troop lead would have been better. For some maths, you had 135 with 9 cards to blues 187. Even if you got 30 troops with those cards, he still has a troop lead. This is what made blue win.
blue was playing, a) very passive so there was no reason to think he would kill black, and b) very noob-like with how he was arraying his troops, so going into an endgame with him at a slight troop deficit isn't an error especially when he had a 79 stack locked, it just turned out blue was a lot better than he appeared to be.
Yeah that was a huge lesson. Cold wars with natural allies are the worst, and I can never figure out the right way to counter them. Can't wait to bring this strategy to my games.
@@thenonsequitur yea i think this is a better way to defuse a situation where you may avoid matching your neighbour in an ever escalating stakes game.. its also not ignoring the threat as it allows you to counter attack if they decide to break you
Agreed. Blue may have turtled, but it would have left him at a clear disadvantage. There really wasn't a reason that he should have won. He didn't prioritize his Asia position at any time either so Yellow could have slow-rolled or eventually eliminated it.
Pete! Another fantastic video. I just had to let you know that I was able to win a ranked progressive match on Deutschland by watching your videos! Everyone was trying to secure the continents while I spread out into three big stacks and then secured every bounty instead! The speed you are able to take the territories is incredible. Your videos are the perfect balance between educational and entertainment. Thank you for all the effort and time you put in to both channels and streaming. It is much appreciated ^_^
Hey Pete, I took a lot of stock in your stance on hitting GM in Classic Fixed WD when I picked up the game. (It being the highest form of GM) Took it as a challenge to find out if I'm any good. I did hit it after watching probably a 100 of your videos. Really appreciate all the insight you provide, it's been a fun ride watching you learn and then learning myself through practice!
Yeah but yellow could’ve forced blue to either completely passive card skip, or forced conflict, by eliminating blue’s exterior Yellow played like an absolute fool, and blue ended up winning just by staying out of the way to the max 🤷🏼♂️
@@joelwillems4081 I just thought it was funny since he said in the video, that he used to think this game settings was simply about patience, but that he realized there’s ‘more to it’ than that And……. Not really 😂 As perfectly shown by this game, as long as you have a continent (any continent) you’re going to win if you can stay out of the way while the others fight it out In rare cases your opponents may successfully team against you by mutually throwing ‘small’ armies at you to whittle you down, I’ve occasionally seen this, and it seems like the ‘correct’ strategy But it still (usually) doesn’t happen, I’ve watched probably over a hundred risk videos and only seen this occur a handful of times
@@ifbfmto9338 you say "if you can stay out of the way while the others fight it out" as if this such a simple proposition to pull off successfully. sure, it's great if you end up in that position (as demonstrated by blue winning this game), but it's often hard to get into a position like that.
@@thenonsequiturI’m not saying it’s always ‘easy’ to force such a position obviously I am saying, it’s (usually) what the entire game boils down to It matters significantly more than continent bonuses/anything like that
Well played. You killed black at the right time to guarantee 2nd and maybe with good dice and blue being slow get 1st. I did wonder if you could have made a deal with black for their 2nd, taken out the blue Asia pocket and opened black's 66 to the locked blue 79, but it was too risky as blue could full send their 75 into your stack for an equal game and black could do something dumb and betray you, so better to lock in 2nd. Another option is to do nothing and keep black in the game and try to make the deal with them to suicide blue for 2nd. Maybe blue kills black for 2nd after combining their stacks later. I don't think they would suicide you for a less certain 2nd on their next turn with split stacks, most likely they would do nothing and the outcome of the game depends on black. These classic fixed situations are very interesting. It does seem that playing for at least 2nd is the easiest way, but you have to choose whether to invest more time in 3 player endgames, which are notoriously tricky. GG and hope you get the hardest GM title.
At 1:04:45 why not use his own troop blocks to make taking the board harder? Drop a small guard in aus like 6, drop the rest in the 3 in na, knock his bonus off sa, leave small guard like 5, then move the rest of the stack to guard NA? Would that not leave you with the best chance of holding the 2 bonuses to try and catch back up in troops using his own lines against him?
Love your channel. Got me to start playing Risk again. Does Risk have a large enough user base to create a good ranking system? Like how in chess you have to beat many really great players many times to become a GM.
There is a massive amount of players playing ranked. If the devs prioritized skill based match making for ranked we could have something that better approximates what you would expect a top risk player to look like.
I appreciate the mind games that are played with the type of risk since you are unable to actually tell the other players exactly why you are doing things
Serious question, why would you add to the 2 to "get it out"? The one possible troop there would be required to take a territory, enabling you to move none into a stack once connected. Where the two 3s, you would be able to move 2 out to a stack if you lost none on rolls, so i can see adding to these to make them 100% (4 troops above what is required to occupy territories and 2 territories to conquer leaving 2 mobile). I would think the rule of thumb would be if it requires all or more of your troops to get them out, they aren't worth consolidating (maybe having another position, maybe using to take territories later, or what have you). Is my logic wrong here?
Yellow was obviously a beginner. He should have wanted to eliminate Blue from getting cards in Asia. Blue probably would have just turtled instead of starting a war, but if he didn't, that was a chance. Then, he should have taken Africa when Black broke EU and NA while leaving his stack in NA. Maybe that was Black's strategy to draw him out of AUS, but it was an impatient move.
I'm curious about the turning point of this game. When did you go from "tied up with everyone" to "not winning". When did that happen? Its a hard point for a noob to notice.
if you think the player is angry that he/she is showing😠. then you forget to think about the advantage of influencing the opponent to believe that you are angry because you see people often choose to react first to avoid being attacked or gather their troops etc
I actually prefer Australian position instead of south America. The Australian positions only job is to remove the south American position in asia and worrie about nothing else. then you disrupt the power balance in the risk world forcing south America to either go bad neighbour or card-skip while you most likely will be able to take a card in Asia since no one almost never holds it, either way that makes you're position stronger. and depending on witch continent players hold, either its the north Amerika or Afrika, the Europe player will view them as a bigger threat then you and someone always starts instigate handing you the win. Australia is a good continent to hold and the only real danger to it is in the beginning if you get noobslammed.
:D and thats why you shouldn't type shit before watching the whole video, you said it with fewer words :P don't text and drive should be rephrased to don't text and watch
Well getting noob-slammed early isn't the only danger you face. You also face the possibility that the SA player gets pissed at you after you remove his asia position and suicides into you. In this particular game, blue was being so passive that wouldn't have been a big threat, but do this to someone more aggressive and your game might be over.
not positioning the black kill into a preemtive strike on blue to get attackers advantage lost you the game. putting your stack next to his stack in south america was the worst possible reinforce you could do. should have put it next to the 1 in africa so you would have the attacker advantage
you say 'check' a lot when you are talking about how you are meeting your opponents escalation but wouldn't that be more like a 'call'? Checking means you make no bet at all, and once someone makes a bet, you can't check. It's either call, fold, or raise.
Blue doesn't have a real choice. If he's going to put troops in SA and have them be open they have to threaten either black or myself. Or as in this case I was actually happy he decided to threaten both. Seems more fair.
I personally don’t like fixed. It’s literally waiting for others to hit each other to win the game. Not much skill involved and is boring. But that’s just my opinion
A humble suggestion from the observer of a few years, in this "fixed" strategy discussion. I think the optimal move after black killed yellow would be to *not* kill black. You burnt a significant portion of your lead by doing that... for cards. This feels like a prog strategy that I think is holding your wins back. Relying on blue to kill black, and thus cementing your troop lead would have been better.
For some maths, you had 135 with 9 cards to blues 187. Even if you got 30 troops with those cards, he still has a troop lead. This is what made blue win.
blue was playing, a) very passive so there was no reason to think he would kill black, and b) very noob-like with how he was arraying his troops, so going into an endgame with him at a slight troop deficit isn't an error especially when he had a 79 stack locked, it just turned out blue was a lot better than he appeared to be.
That 'What' sound when your volume setting is maxed while using headphones.
Pete is ruthless💀
58:02
💀
It’s surprising that this channel haven’t exploded yet
❤️❤️❤️ I'm very grateful that so many are enjoying my work
It's my turn to be the spoiler blocker 😌
You are appreciated❤
The most honest of work
Your classic fixed videos are my favorite
How you defused the cold war with purple was a brilliant move. Learning so much from watching these Classic Fixed
Yeah that was a huge lesson. Cold wars with natural allies are the worst, and I can never figure out the right way to counter them. Can't wait to bring this strategy to my games.
@@thenonsequitur yea i think this is a better way to defuse a situation where you may avoid matching your neighbour in an ever escalating stakes game.. its also not ignoring the threat as it allows you to counter attack if they decide to break you
Yellow should've taken out blue's Asia stack as soon as people were establishing bonuses, since he's the only one who isn't affected by his cards.
Agreed. Blue may have turtled, but it would have left him at a clear disadvantage. There really wasn't a reason that he should have won. He didn't prioritize his Asia position at any time either so Yellow could have slow-rolled or eventually eliminated it.
Pete! Another fantastic video. I just had to let you know that I was able to win a ranked progressive match on Deutschland by watching your videos! Everyone was trying to secure the continents while I spread out into three big stacks and then secured every bounty instead! The speed you are able to take the territories is incredible. Your videos are the perfect balance between educational and entertainment. Thank you for all the effort and time you put in to both channels and streaming. It is much appreciated ^_^
When he told yellow to do sumn bout it. Oh he sure did alright😂
Hey Pete, I took a lot of stock in your stance on hitting GM in Classic Fixed WD when I picked up the game. (It being the highest form of GM) Took it as a challenge to find out if I'm any good. I did hit it after watching probably a 100 of your videos. Really appreciate all the insight you provide, it's been a fun ride watching you learn and then learning myself through practice!
42:12 As yellow here I delete blue's Asia position.
Yellow is pissed around the 40-41 min mark because he was likely jockeying with Purple and Blue to get them to attack you.
Yeah but yellow could’ve forced blue to either completely passive card skip, or forced conflict, by eliminating blue’s exterior
Yellow played like an absolute fool, and blue ended up winning just by staying out of the way to the max 🤷🏼♂️
@@ifbfmto9338 Yellow was a beginner and played like one. Blue really should not have won that game.
@@joelwillems4081 I just thought it was funny since he said in the video, that he used to think this game settings was simply about patience, but that he realized there’s ‘more to it’ than that
And……. Not really 😂 As perfectly shown by this game, as long as you have a continent (any continent) you’re going to win if you can stay out of the way while the others fight it out
In rare cases your opponents may successfully team against you by mutually throwing ‘small’ armies at you to whittle you down, I’ve occasionally seen this, and it seems like the ‘correct’ strategy
But it still (usually) doesn’t happen, I’ve watched probably over a hundred risk videos and only seen this occur a handful of times
@@ifbfmto9338 you say "if you can stay out of the way while the others fight it out" as if this such a simple proposition to pull off successfully. sure, it's great if you end up in that position (as demonstrated by blue winning this game), but it's often hard to get into a position like that.
@@thenonsequiturI’m not saying it’s always ‘easy’ to force such a position obviously
I am saying, it’s (usually) what the entire game boils down to
It matters significantly more than continent bonuses/anything like that
Well played. You killed black at the right time to guarantee 2nd and maybe with good dice and blue being slow get 1st. I did wonder if you could have made a deal with black for their 2nd, taken out the blue Asia pocket and opened black's 66 to the locked blue 79, but it was too risky as blue could full send their 75 into your stack for an equal game and black could do something dumb and betray you, so better to lock in 2nd. Another option is to do nothing and keep black in the game and try to make the deal with them to suicide blue for 2nd. Maybe blue kills black for 2nd after combining their stacks later. I don't think they would suicide you for a less certain 2nd on their next turn with split stacks, most likely they would do nothing and the outcome of the game depends on black. These classic fixed situations are very interesting. It does seem that playing for at least 2nd is the easiest way, but you have to choose whether to invest more time in 3 player endgames, which are notoriously tricky. GG and hope you get the hardest GM title.
At 1:04:45 why not use his own troop blocks to make taking the board harder? Drop a small guard in aus like 6, drop the rest in the 3 in na, knock his bonus off sa, leave small guard like 5, then move the rest of the stack to guard NA? Would that not leave you with the best chance of holding the 2 bonuses to try and catch back up in troops using his own lines against him?
Love your channel. Got me to start playing Risk again.
Does Risk have a large enough user base to create a good ranking system? Like how in chess you have to beat many really great players many times to become a GM.
There is a massive amount of players playing ranked. If the devs prioritized skill based match making for ranked we could have something that better approximates what you would expect a top risk player to look like.
32:32 i think it would have been pretty cool if you added "Jaws soundtrack" as he's rushing towards you.
I appreciate the mind games that are played with the type of risk since you are unable to actually tell the other players exactly why you are doing things
Serious question, why would you add to the 2 to "get it out"? The one possible troop there would be required to take a territory, enabling you to move none into a stack once connected. Where the two 3s, you would be able to move 2 out to a stack if you lost none on rolls, so i can see adding to these to make them 100% (4 troops above what is required to occupy territories and 2 territories to conquer leaving 2 mobile). I would think the rule of thumb would be if it requires all or more of your troops to get them out, they aren't worth consolidating (maybe having another position, maybe using to take territories later, or what have you). Is my logic wrong here?
Yellow was obviously a beginner. He should have wanted to eliminate Blue from getting cards in Asia. Blue probably would have just turtled instead of starting a war, but if he didn't, that was a chance. Then, he should have taken Africa when Black broke EU and NA while leaving his stack in NA. Maybe that was Black's strategy to draw him out of AUS, but it was an impatient move.
Pete your left handed! Unless your camera is flipped, or your mouse and keyboard is flipped, or your arms are flipped
It is flipped! It makes it appear that I'm looking at the game and not looking away from it which I think looks like a much better composed shot.
@@FreePete ahhh makes sense, it does make it look better
27:07 why does blue get 4th, doesnt he have less troops than yellow? Theyre both +2s if im correct. Pls some1 explain, im confusion
Because blue is in two places they're harder to kill.
Black knew who you were, they dabbed on 69 for blue at the end.
Haha maybe
I'm curious about the turning point of this game. When did you go from "tied up with everyone" to "not winning". When did that happen? Its a hard point for a noob to notice.
When white beat a 66 with a 58 that tipped the balance.
if you think the player is angry that he/she is showing😠. then you forget to think about the advantage of influencing the opponent to believe that you are angry because you see people often choose to react first to avoid being attacked or gather their troops etc
I actually prefer Australian position instead of south America. The Australian positions only job is to remove the south American position in asia and worrie about nothing else. then you disrupt the power balance in the risk world forcing south America to either go bad neighbour or card-skip while you most likely will be able to take a card in Asia since no one almost never holds it, either way that makes you're position stronger. and depending on witch continent players hold, either its the north Amerika or Afrika, the Europe player will view them as a bigger threat then you and someone always starts instigate handing you the win. Australia is a good continent to hold and the only real danger to it is in the beginning if you get noobslammed.
:D and thats why you shouldn't type shit before watching the whole video, you said it with fewer words :P don't text and drive should be rephrased to don't text and watch
Saying it with fewer words is what I'm all about bro! The game is complicated enough to explain as is
Well getting noob-slammed early isn't the only danger you face. You also face the possibility that the SA player gets pissed at you after you remove his asia position and suicides into you. In this particular game, blue was being so passive that wouldn't have been a big threat, but do this to someone more aggressive and your game might be over.
Not that I'm a good player, but if I was yellow I would have taken Africa when black when on his rampage.
Yellow was angy 🤡
not positioning the black kill into a preemtive strike on blue to get attackers advantage lost you the game. putting your stack next to his stack in south america was the worst possible reinforce you could do. should have put it next to the 1 in africa so you would have the attacker advantage
you say 'check' a lot when you are talking about how you are meeting your opponents escalation but wouldn't that be more like a 'call'? Checking means you make no bet at all, and once someone makes a bet, you can't check. It's either call, fold, or raise.
Is it difficult to switch your brain from fixed to progressive? I’d imagine those are 2 totally different gameplays
Why did you care about purple stacking on your border but not blue?
Blue doesn't have a real choice. If he's going to put troops in SA and have them be open they have to threaten either black or myself. Or as in this case I was actually happy he decided to threaten both. Seems more fair.
I personally don’t like fixed. It’s literally waiting for others to hit each other to win the game. Not much skill involved and is boring. But that’s just my opinion
Oh you're not alone. I have two different playlist on the main channel of only progressive games.
Surely first comment
Indeed so. And don’t call me Shirley.