NationStates Jolt Archive

Don't ask me what a strategy-gasm is, 'cause I don't quite know myself.

http://www.beust.com/pics/dicewars.jpg

Anyway, a few weeks ago, Cannot think of a name introduced me (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11940241&postcount=15) to the Flash strategy game Dice Wars (http://www.gamedesign.jp/flash/dice/dice.html). It is strategy in its purest form, the perfect combination of skill and luck. Basically, it's a simplified version of the board game Risk. You have a board of randomly-generated hexagonal-based territories, each controlled by an equal number of players (you choose how many). Each player has an equal number of dice spread out amongst their territories (up to eight on a single space).

To play, you direct all the dice of one space (at least two) against someone else's space. The victor is determined by a roll of the dice -- all the dice on the attacker's and defender's space are rolled, and whoever has the most wins. A win means all the attacking dice but one are moved onto the conquered space. A loss means all the dice but one disappear from the attacking space. A tie acts as a loss for the attacker.

At the end of each turn, a number of reinforcement dice equal to the greatest number of contiguous spaces you own is randomly distributed throughout your territories. This encourages players to consolidate their forces into a single entity -- divided territories receive fewer reinforcements and are easily conquered.

There are two versions of the game available for free online:

Dice Wars (http://www.gamedesign.jp/flash/dice/dice.html): the original, full-screen, single-player game

Kdice (http://www.kdice.com/): a somewhat drabber-looking multiplayer version with rankings and such

Beware of this game, for it will consume your soul... It's also a great time-killer. :cool:

I dun like that game, the computer always wins. I think it cheats. Stupid AIs.

Anyway, I was just thinking, and there needs to be more violent Biblical games. Like a RTS in which you control one of two gameplay-balanced factions: the Christians and the Romans/Jews. Depending on your side, you get to crucify Jesus.

Or an exciting first-person adventure mini-game, in which you play as a small child, and get to insult Elijah the prophet - the better the insult, the higher the score. But then to defend your score you have to survive the 42 she-bears God sends to kill you and all the other children.

I wouldn't consider a game that has to do with luck as "strategy in its purest form". Chess or Diplomacy, now there's games were luck plays either a miniscule role or no role at all.

I dun like that game, the computer always wins. I think it cheats. Stupid AIs.

Anyway, I was just thinking, and there needs to be more violent Biblical games. Like a RTS in which you control one of two gameplay-balanced factions: the Christians and the Romans/Jews. Depending on your side, you get to crucify Jesus.

Or an exciting first-person adventure mini-game, in which you play as a small child, and get to insult Elijah the prophet - the better the insult, the higher the score. But then to defend your score you have to survive the 42 she-bears God sends to kill you and all the other children.

Yeah, but we had better not make the "Spread Islam By The Sword" game, or "Grand Theft Auto 622 AD - Muhammed Gets It On Baby" or there will be riots and stuff...

I wouldn't consider a game that has to do with luck as "strategy in its purest form". Chess or Diplomacy, now there's games were luck plays either a miniscule role or no role at all.
Well, there's actually quite a bit of strategy in terms of moving your armies, deciding when to attack, what direction to attack in, relative army strength, etc. But I guess you're right about it not being pure strategy. I was going more for the "total simplicity" of it all...

Dice Wars = Amazing

Dice Wars = Amazing

Dice Wars = Bloody hard!

Dice Wars = Bloody hard!

Just gotta know when to hold you chips and when to put it all on the table.

Just gotta know when to hold you chips and when to put it all on the table.

Can i just ask, what determines how many dice you get each turn?

Thank you for the new addiction....!

Can i just ask, what determines how many dice you get each turn?

It appears to be the number of owned territories that determines reinforcements.

In fact, that's the only thing about the game that at first I didn't like -- I can't control where the reinforcements go. However, that becomes part of your attack strategy -- there's no reallocation of forces once you attack, and no way to attack at fractional strength. Great, simple game (the best usually are simple...).

Can i just ask, what determines how many dice you get each turn?

the amount of neighboring territory you control.

the amount of neighboring territory you control.
Right -- so if you have six territories, but only four of them touch eachother, you'll only get four extra dice.

This is sooooo awesome. There goes my life.

This is sooooo awesome. There goes my life.

My productivity has collapsed in the past hour since I found this.

Not bad. And I managed to win my first game. My area were eventually limited to an impenetrable stronghold of a few territories in a corner of the map, which I then slowly expanded. Once it had grown in size, I could take over chunk after chunk of the map. Once I had taken over most of it, I could further speed the process up, as all my territories got filled up at the end of each round. Muhahahahahaaa!

My area were eventually limited to an impenetrable stronghold of a few territories in a corner of the map, which I then slowly expanded. Once it had grown in size, I could take over chunk after chunk of the map. Once I had taken over most of it, I could further speed the process up, as all my territories got filled up at the end of each round. Muhahahahahaaa!
Heh... it's like Nazi Germany in dice form. :p

Yes! I won! I won!
*celebrates!*

Hmm, worth a shot, but this (http://game.ijji.com/stratego.nhn) is more my way of things

Thank you, I now have no life. Not that I had one before, obviously.

Hmm, worth a shot, but this (http://game.ijji.com/stratego.nhn) is more my way of things

Mister Orange dice got a bit too uppity. I won.

Yay! Victory!
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/Anabasis/owningallurbases.jpg

This game is now awesome.

Don't ask me what a strategy-gasm is, 'cause I don't quite know myself.

http://www.beust.com/pics/dicewars.jpg

Anyway, a few weeks ago, Cannot think of a name introduced me (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11940241&postcount=15) to the Flash strategy game Dice Wars (http://www.gamedesign.jp/flash/dice/dice.html). It is strategy in its purest form, the perfect combination of skill and luck. Basically, it's a simplified version of the board game Risk. You have a board of randomly-generated hexagonal-based territories, each controlled by an equal number of players (you choose how many). Each player has an equal number of dice spread out amongst their territories (up to eight on a single space).

To play, you direct all the dice of one space (at least two) against someone else's space. The victor is determined by a roll of the dice -- all the dice on the attacker's and defender's space are rolled, and whoever has the most wins. A win means all the attacking dice but one are moved onto the conquered space. A loss means all the dice but one disappear from the attacking space. A tie acts as a loss for the attacker.

At the end of each turn, a number of reinforcement dice equal to the greatest number of contiguous spaces you own is randomly distributed throughout your territories. This encourages players to consolidate their forces into a single entity -- divided territories receive fewer reinforcements and are easily conquered.

There are two versions of the game available for free online:

Dice Wars (http://www.gamedesign.jp/flash/dice/dice.html): the original, full-screen, single-player game

Kdice (http://www.kdice.com/): a somewhat drabber-looking multiplayer version with rankings and such

Beware of this game, for it will consume your soul... It's also a great time-killer. :cool:

uber addictive! I found this a few months ago. it's just as easy to get on kazaa and download Risk 2, though, which is what this game made me want to do.

I wouldn't consider a game that has to do with luck as "strategy in its purest form". Chess or Diplomacy, now there's games were luck plays either a miniscule role or no role at all.

aw, this is strategy too. and more realistic. in real life you don't get to pick everything that happens. strategy is about dealing with luck, not just manipulating things from the get-go.

http://members.cox.net/rgettman/

Great game from the 80s, now in Java format online!

Suggestion: Play a game with one each Agressive, Defensive and Passive AI player to get the hang of it. :)

I don't enjoy this game much. I played it a couple of times and it usually ended in a stalemate that would take ages before one side or the other would have enough luck to obliterate the opponent.

I much prefer risk because of the human element. You have to grow your territory without looking like a threat. This usually means conquering a few territories each turn and avoiding near total possesion of continents. And securing non-aggression pacts when another player looks like they're gaining an upper hand, and choosing the best time to break that pact. It has a large psychological element to it. The dice rolling is a mere formality. I very much like the idea of the 'objective cards' as it adds another level of analysis, you have to judge what you think your opponents objectives are and how best you can achieve yours.

aw, this is strategy too. and more realistic. in real life you don't get to pick everything that happens. strategy is about dealing with luck, not just manipulating things from the get-go.

No (http://game.ijji.com/stratego.nhn), it's about dealing with (http://game.ijji.com/stratego.nhn) unknowns, not luck (http://game.ijji.com/stratego.nhn). It's far too much luck in this game, especially at the end;. when it's a big 8 dice v 8-dice thing.

I much prefer risk because of the human element...

Then second game, with other people, helps that a bit, but it still ends in the luck-mate.

Then second game, with other people, helps that a bit, but it still ends in the luck-mate.

Case in point.

Tech defeated 38/48 -> 31/48
Tech defeated 30/48 -> 28/48

Tech's turn
rajington defeated 36/48 -> 24/48
rajington defeated 30/48 -> 29/48

rajington's turn
Tech defended 25/48 -> 28/48
Tech defended 19/48 -> 26/48
Tech defeated 28/48 -> 17/48

Tech's turn
rajington defended 27/48 -> 31/48
rajington defeated 27/48 -> 21/48

rajington's turn
Tech defended 25/48 -> 26/48
Tech defeated 25/48 -> 21/48

Tech's turn
rajington defeated 26/48 -> 24/48
rajington defended 28/48 -> 37/48

rajington's turn
Tech defended 25/48 -> 27/48
Tech defended 28/48 -> 30/48
Tech defended 24/48 -> 26/48

Tech's turn
rajington defeated 29/48 -> 25/36

rajington's turn
Tech defended 23/48 -> 30/48

Tech's turn
rajington defended 29/48 -> 38/48
rajington defeated 24/48 -> 22/48

rajington's turn
Tech defended 24/48 -> 38/48
Tech defended 25/48 -> 30/48

I wouldn't consider a game that has to do with luck as "strategy in its purest form". Chess or Diplomacy, now there's games were luck plays either a miniscule role or no role at all.

Ah, but the use of dice actually increases the strategy involved. Limiting the available valid moves according to chance/probabilities actually increases the necessity of careful concentration in order to find and exploit the best available move. Sure, this doesn't necessarily guarantee victory (a series of unfortunate/un"lucky" roles) -- but this only makes the strategy more realistic, i.e. "*hit happens" :D

I enjoy Backgammon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backgammon) myself, although Murphy's Law seems to mostly operate against me. :mad: :p

Excellent game. Best with only a few players.

I just lost Poland! :eek:

I played a game of this last night, went on for 1 and a half hours, it was i and the last opponent and we couldn't knock each other's pieces out of a swing position, it was a single link surrounded by 2 others on each side.
You had to win that position and then another 2 and then defend them or it would be back where you started.:mad:

Alright, I've played kdice a bit more. To counter act the excessive luck, there's a third element involved. Diplomacy. Not many people bother about the two player stale mate, it's a game for second.

I played a game of this last night, went on for 1 and a half hours, it was i and the last opponent and we couldn't knock each other's pieces out of a swing position, it was a single link surrounded by 2 others on each side.
You had to win that position and then another 2 and then defend them or it would be back where you started.:mad:

I know that map. Don't play there, srsly.

Dicewars is a strategy-game designed for people who hate strategy in much the same way that National Socialism was an ideology designed for people who were annoyed by Jews. Its like Risk, without even the pretense of strategy that bluffing and redeploying forces gives you. For your illumination, my own two-part strategy guide to winning every game of DW you ever play:

1: Don't go first, and don't go last, both of those guys get smacked down early. Ideally, you want 3rd or 4th place in turn order (assuming a 6 to 8 player game)
2: If a square has more than one die and borders an enemy territory, attack. The only thinking that is required is to a few seconds of counting to figure out which bordering territory has the least dice in it.

For your illumination, my own two-part strategy guide to winning every game of DW you ever play:

1: Don't go first, and don't go last, both of those guys get smacked down early. Ideally, you want 3rd or 4th place in turn order (assuming a 6 to 8 player game)
2: If a square has more than one die and borders an enemy territory, attack. The only thinking that is required is to a few seconds of counting to figure out which bordering territory has the least dice in it.

I just tried that.

I lost.

So the strategy, especially in the mid-game, seems to be not allowing your enemy to "unlock" their big deposits of dice in the middle of their territory.
How are you supposed to combat that, though, when it comes to killing them off? Surrounding them, or what?

2: If a square has more than one die and borders an enemy territory, attack. The only thinking that is required is to a few seconds of counting to figure out which bordering territory has the least dice in it.
Wrong. Attack too much and you'll overextend your forces, ending up with an expansive but poorly-defended region that will easily fall to more concentrated opponents in the next turn.

The best strategy, I find, is to consolidate your forces in a single, solid region (preferably on a coast to minimize the opportunity for enemy offenses), then skip the following turns until you've built up the maximum force possible. Then roll out unstoppably, cackling madly along the way.

I just got wiped out before I even got to make a turn...

I dun like that game, the computer always wins. I think it cheats. Stupid AIs.

Anyway, I was just thinking, and there needs to be more violent Biblical games. Like a RTS in which you control one of two gameplay-balanced factions: the Christians and the Romans/Jews. Depending on your side, you get to crucify Jesus.

Or an exciting first-person adventure mini-game, in which you play as a small child, and get to insult Elijah the prophet - the better the insult, the higher the score. But then to defend your score you have to survive the 42 she-bears God sends to kill you and all the other children.

I find that so incredibly offencive I hope you know.

Wrong. Attack too much and you'll overextend your forces, ending up with an expansive but poorly-defended region that will easily fall to more concentrated opponents in the next turn.
Incorrect, the lack of any mechanism to reliably consalidate one's forces means that any effort to maintain defense is inherently wasted.
Moreover, due to the fact that reinforcements are rewarded at the end of your turn, those little 1-die areas will end up as 3 or 4-dice areas, which is generally a good enough defense to keep the utterly moronic AIs beating the snot out of each other.
Its like Russian Roulette: 20% luck, 80% balls, and your brains are your biggest weakness.

Rhaomi, you have just stolen every last ounce of productivity I ever had. This game will be played to the hilt!

Its like Russian Roulette: 20% luck, 80% balls, and your brains are your biggest weakness.
Sounds like life:D

I love the Dice Game but aint tryed out the multiplayer version yet.

I just got wiped out before I even got to make a turn...

I know that map. Don't play there, srsly.
I found another map with the same problem.:p

Wrong. Attack too much and you'll overextend your forces, ending up with an expansive but poorly-defended region that will easily fall to more concentrated opponents in the next turn.

A relatively sane amount of 'over'-extending can be very useful: it invites the OPFOR to grind itself slowly down against your tiny stacks, only to find that it has allowed you to bring your eight-stacks on your safe distant coastline into play.

A relatively sane amount of 'over'-extending can be very useful: it invites the OPFOR to grind itself slowly down against your tiny stacks, only to find that it has allowed you to bring your eight-stacks on your safe distant coastline into play.
True, true... it gets frustrating when you have an eight-stack trapped behind some lowly twos, and it's nice to see the enemy unwittingly release them. It's got that a great "disturbing the sleeping giant/smashing a hornet's nest/opening Pandora's box" vibe to it.

True, true... it gets frustrating when you have an eight-stack trapped behind some lowly twos, and it's nice to see the enemy unwittingly release them. It's got that a great "disturbing the sleeping giant/smashing a hornet's nest/opening Pandora's box" vibe to it.
Are you talking about the first or second game?

Defence in depth is good.*nods*

Are you talking about the first or second game?

Defence in depth is good.*nods*
The first one, with the AI. Most people aren't shortsighted enough to do that.

The game is crack-a-lactic.
True, true... it gets frustrating when you have an eight-stack trapped behind some lowly twos, and it's nice to see the enemy unwittingly release them. It's got that a great "disturbing the sleeping giant/smashing a hornet's nest/opening Pandora's box" vibe to it.

There's a couple AI strategies, I've noticed. There's the 'Cold Warrior' who will build up a reserve (If you get your reward dice and already have full stacks on all territories, the remaining dice will be put into a reserve up to 64 dice that will go out next turn.) until it can expand with full stacks on all new territories or if the surroundings get weak.

There's the 'expand until they can't,' which I like because I can coax it into over extending itself.

The anti-bully, who will only attack the leader. A cool one to have around because you can cold war while he harasses the leader. Figuring out which ones which helps.

Sometimes they'll sacrifice, whether it's strategy or just coincidence, some lead territories to drain your reserves by constant deep invasions (why I quoted you). They'll invade in to 'release' double stacks in the back so that you don't have any 'powerhouse' territories.

The full stack back markers are good for two reasons. A strong invasion stops there and it's a territory where reinforcements won't go, either creating a reserve or sending reinforcements to the front lines. When you have 7 territories you can do one invasion and still be full stacked.

The only way to break a luck mate is to have been expanding with a reserve so that when it happens you can press the attack, rolling 7 and sometimes even 6 against 8. If you've built up reserve you've gained more than he's likely to earn back in the same round. There's still a lot of luck in that, but that's why it's good to know when to go into a cold war and build up forces.

I'm stoked that there a multiplayer version, I'm gonna have to try it.

For those who blame me by proxy for killing your free time, blame StumbleUpon, it's their fault.