66 of 75 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars
How to mess up a great game, 20 Jan. 2012
I am a huge fan of Risk. I'm aware that there are a few variations on the rules in different versions of the game, including a few errors, although I've never worked out why. As far as I am aware, neither Monopoly nor Cluedo have messed about with the rules.
What I don't understand is why, when the makers must surely be aware about how their product is perceived, they appear to go out of their way to annoy their customers.
1. Why are there now only 5 players? This is probably the most annoying. Risk has always taken 6 players. The basic structure of the game has not changed so much as to warrant the removal of a player.
2. Why are most of the colours so similar? Orange has a definite disadvantage because everyone can spot where it is place; no so the others, because they all look roughly the same. Obviously, the planners have never actually played the game.
3. Why change the dice colours. Everyone knows that Red is the attacking dice.
4. Why change the card cash in policy. Are they so unsure of their product?
5. Why remove the Missions? Actually, the most annoying. Whilst I personally prefer global domination, the time factor means many more people play Mission Risk.
The renaming Congo to Central Africa is silly, particularly as Central Africa is actually a bit further North. One of the good bit about using country/region names is that it does serve a mildly educational purpose.
I bought this game as a Christmas gift for an avid Risk playing family whose own game was getting a bit tatty. The disappointment on their faces was plainly visible.
As I've said in the marking above, 2/10 and could do a lot better.