3 Warfish.net gameplay videos:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfF5jaSXJDY
(gameplay on a continental US map) -> this one seems to be the most useful for understanding gameplayhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3pDu6vzuPM
(on the Wii)
My current understanding is that Warfish attacks just use Risk mechanics, with an auto-assault (or continual attack) feature like on Conquer Club. MunnaRaja might still need to clarify when the continual attack stops; I know it stops when the defending armies are killed (and auto-transfers surviving attacking armies onto the target territory) if the attack succeeds, but I don't know what happens when the attack fails. Will it keep going until the attacker has only 1 army left, or- like Conquer Club- will it stop the continual attacks when the attacker has fewer than 3 armies available to attack with? I.e., will a failed attack leave the attacking territory with 1 army or with 1-3 armies?
There's already a few challenges to getting the same behavior- in Warzone, all
(often more than 2) defending armies are used in each attack. So the army distribution outcomes for after the attack are going to look a bit different (the attacker might be left with more than 3 if the attack fails). We could have a mod that limits defending armies to 2 at a time if this matters.
Almost all this gap is just going to come from the vast rift between Warzone's attack mechanics and classical Risk mechanics. If the mechanics are a really big deal, it might be worthwhile to just try one of the other online Risk sites (WarGear, LandGrab, Major Command, Dominating Twelve, or Conquer Club) because their mechanics for attacking/defending are already like those of Warfish since they all just copy Risk mechanics. I would personally recommend just getting used to Warzone's mechanics because imo they're a vast improvement over Risk mechanics; Risk mechanics had to do the 3v2 dice stuff because they were built for a board game to be played IRL, while Warzone took advantage of available technology to build cleaner, more predictable, and easier-to-explain/model mechanics that result (imo) in an overall superior strategic experience.
I think I made two oversights in my analysis above:
1. We can probably simply create a mod to allow for Risk-like attack mechanics in Warzone (dice, 3v2's and all)
2. The 5 other Risk-like online multiplayer sites are all much less active than Warzone (Conquer Club comes the closest but Warzone dwarfs it in terms of monthly games played and all-time sign-ups). I don't think any of them has a non-Flash client out of beta yet, so the Flash end-of-life at the end of this year might destroy them. Warfish, Pogo's Risk, and Art-of-War all seem like they're about to die (or already dead) for the same reason.
So the online Risk community might end up just having to adopt Warzone as its new home. In light of that, having mods to make Risk-like mechanics achievable in Warzone could be a really good idea. We can have mods for:
1) Switching turns between players -> Fizzer already implemented this with the Take Turns mod
2) Deploy/attack/transfer phases (like Risk's phases)
3) Multi-transfer (to mimic Risk's fortify/transfer 3rd phase) -> I suspect a mod might already exist for this case
4) Risk-like attack mechanics, where you can have repeated 3v2's
We can probably package 1/2/4 into a Risk-in-Warzone mod. I think one exciting possibility is that by decoupling these mechanics and allowing for some customization (e.g., ties could resolve in favor of the attacker
rather than the defender, or the number of attack/defense dice can be changed), we could add a ton of new customization possibilities to the Warzone engine and possibly add a new strategic frontier, maybe making FFAs more viable as a strategic format.
1) One-way connections -> Looks like dabo1 already implemented this
2) Kill rates that vary by territory -> TBest's Better Cities mod sort of achieves this, although (afaict) not at game-creation time and not in a stable way
Edited 8/2/2020 20:21:59