Just to piss people off, you should call: Purple - Violet Red - Scarlet Yellow - Gold White - Ivory Black - Ebony Green - Jade Blue - Azure Orange - Tangerine
yooo, my first time being early just wanna say i love your videos man, i’ve been playing risk for a while, focusing on ranked recently (went from beginner to expert in two weeks lol!), and i just wanna say i definitely learned a lot from watching your games (mainly classic fixed, gotta love them) or even just by your comments (it normally goes like “oh huh, i never saw it that way” XD) anyway love what you do, you’re goated 🐐
What do you think of blue? They knew you where the strongest and together they could defeat you. Hopefully having a relationship at that point to stay 2 vs 1 untill you die. That would also give him second with a chance of winning. Or could you see them thinking they would lose agianst you even 2 vs 1?
I'd have loved to see the 2 vs 1, but I think Blue would have been worried by the prospect. Green was alright but not great, and Blue would have had time to see that. I suspect they decided their partner wasn't strong enough to make a fight of it.
blue could’ve fought for 1st with green and risked 3rd, or practically guarantee 2nd by playing like he did. he clearly had a good read that pete was a good player, which makes it more likely pete would give him second if he rolled over before green did. he also likely had a read that green was a bad player after being right next to him the whole game and seeing everything green did, and therefore thought that maybe green wasn’t good enough to team with against pete.
Agree with all the above. Rank points also have a big impact on that decision. 2nd to a fellow GM loses him very few points, fighting Pete and getting third behind a beginner would lose a lot more. (Or expert in this case but hard to tell)
I usually like players playing for second in these kinds of scenarios because if they play for first the game stalemates if they do not know how to card block, even if they do it would take another hour to win the game
Hey Pete, have you considered making a scripted guide video? I see a lot of the same tactical questions on a lot of your videos. I think it's hard for some people to get a holistic view on the tactics you employ because a lot of the advice is buried in videos and it's daunting for a lot of people to just watch hours of games to absorb the advice. For example, it just finally saw the logic on why you wouldn't outright kill red after he was reduced to that singular position. My instinct would be to just off him immediately so he couldn't keep building up troops there. I've seen you play similarly in the past, but didn't understand the logic of it until you explained it this game. I think one singular video that could just be linked to might be helpful to people and would probably get good views to boot.
I have two videos on these settings in the beginners playlist. One for general beginners on the meta settings and one for cap choice specifically. I also have a bunch of playlists for different settings which is what I recommend. Depending on what you like to play you can see me go through many iterations. There isn't a one size fits all strategy for risk because you're playing multiple opponents and different positions every time so the context matters.
Hi Pete! Been following you now for a while and I really like your content. I was wondering why you gave blue 2nd instead of green cause green was being a homie all game?
Great question. It came down to caps. Blue has one big cap so whereas I can kill green in stages I would have had to save up 2x the troops on blue to take him out in one shot and that would have taken longer and increased the risk of them starting to fight me and successfully team on me. All things being equal I would want to give green the higher placement but all things were not in this case and he was much easier to kill
So just out of curiosity, but why is Iceland a bad cap? Just getting back into risk and very noob to the cap game so trying to understand what makes a bad or good cap. Thanks for any actual advice.
Essentially later in the game your cap is completely locked off, it’s easy for your opponents to break you or set up a card block without opening your big stack. So you can’t really use your troops to fight back, or more importantly, make kills. Sequencing kills at the right moment is often the key to winning games on these settings
Sorry, but because it's in the corner, tells me nothing. What I want to know is the reason so I can make better choices. Cause to me capping in a corner and I can get a one point guard seems good to me
@@norrisbubba Caps defend your bonus and if your caps right in a corner it can't defend. If you have to defend with troops off cap then you're missing the defensive bonus you get from your cap which is the point of caps. A retaliation cap or a cap that locks off a good portion of the board are better and create bigger threats. It took me a while to figure this out too because Pete always says "Don't cap in a corner" and only ever explained it as it's a bad/noob thing to do.
Generally speaking, you want your cap to be touching multiple territories. If you cap Iceland, your next move is to take Britain. Then your cap is behind your front-line. Meaning that you can’t actually use the troops. Also guarding a +2 is not that consequential in the game
Hey yall, new to the game here. Just wondering why at the start of the round, Pete only chose to roll with a couple of troops, Can anyone explain it to me?
I found the answer in another vid. The total amount of troops commited determines the maximum losses. This means you ideally want to always commit exactly enough troops to 100% the territory, but not more to keep losses ata minimum.
@@TheKillPeteStrategy Actually, it depends on the spawn and blizzards. Sometimes it is the best course of action. Would you like to try these settings with me and some PRT members?
I really dislike the fact risk players cheat by working in collaboration not attacking each other all game until It just those two remaining players and your strategies help but the issue i deal with is each match I get ganged up on, the last match I had each player allowed each other to gain territorial bonuses and hardly placed troops to defend their capitals and allowed certain party or specific territories to remain defenseless while they stack troops and build cards and my cap was no where near a noob corner. Risk mods should do something to ban those particular players some even use hacks!
Collaborating IN-GAME, not in real life, is not cheating. That's called strategy. So long as you don't know the players you're playing with, ranked free for all games are fair game to work out mutually beneficial positions. Often having large off-cap stacks is to setup card blocking. It is highly possible the people you played against just both saw making you die was a way to ensure going 1st and 2nd, rather than allowing you to gain anything and them risking 3rd.
Cap in the corner, not too deep in the corner, enough to protect a good bonus. Don't cap directly in the middle, easy to get teamed on, or attacked by bots.
Just to piss people off, you should call:
Purple - Violet
Red - Scarlet
Yellow - Gold
White - Ivory
Black - Ebony
Green - Jade
Blue - Azure
Orange - Tangerine
You forgot magenta = pink. Hit them when they least expect
@@nimrodkadish he alr does that
@@nimrodkadish he already does that though
Ebony is absolutely the worst one lmao
@@beepboop9848 that was my point lol, that he should change magenta back to pink to throw everyone off
I thought that cap on Spain guards that pocket. I'm dumb
yooo, my first time being early
just wanna say i love your videos man, i’ve been playing risk for a while, focusing on ranked recently (went from beginner to expert in two weeks lol!), and i just wanna say i definitely learned a lot from watching your games (mainly classic fixed, gotta love them) or even just by your comments (it normally goes like “oh huh, i never saw it that way” XD) anyway love what you do, you’re goated 🐐
What do you think of blue?
They knew you where the strongest and together they could defeat you. Hopefully having a relationship at that point to stay 2 vs 1 untill you die.
That would also give him second with a chance of winning.
Or could you see them thinking they would lose agianst you even 2 vs 1?
I'd have loved to see the 2 vs 1, but I think Blue would have been worried by the prospect. Green was alright but not great, and Blue would have had time to see that. I suspect they decided their partner wasn't strong enough to make a fight of it.
blue could’ve fought for 1st with green and risked 3rd, or practically guarantee 2nd by playing like he did. he clearly had a good read that pete was a good player, which makes it more likely pete would give him second if he rolled over before green did. he also likely had a read that green was a bad player after being right next to him the whole game and seeing everything green did, and therefore thought that maybe green wasn’t good enough to team with against pete.
Agree with all the above. Rank points also have a big impact on that decision. 2nd to a fellow GM loses him very few points, fighting Pete and getting third behind a beginner would lose a lot more. (Or expert in this case but hard to tell)
I usually like players playing for second in these kinds of scenarios because if they play for first the game stalemates if they do not know how to card block, even if they do it would take another hour to win the game
Also this does not necessariliy mean second place, if the strongest player messes up the kill and has too few troops, they could fight for first
PUT TROOPS ON YOUR CAPITALS
I love the extremely happy Pete face in the thumbnail 😂😂😂
Hey Pete, have you considered making a scripted guide video? I see a lot of the same tactical questions on a lot of your videos. I think it's hard for some people to get a holistic view on the tactics you employ because a lot of the advice is buried in videos and it's daunting for a lot of people to just watch hours of games to absorb the advice. For example, it just finally saw the logic on why you wouldn't outright kill red after he was reduced to that singular position. My instinct would be to just off him immediately so he couldn't keep building up troops there. I've seen you play similarly in the past, but didn't understand the logic of it until you explained it this game. I think one singular video that could just be linked to might be helpful to people and would probably get good views to boot.
I have two videos on these settings in the beginners playlist. One for general beginners on the meta settings and one for cap choice specifically.
I also have a bunch of playlists for different settings which is what I recommend. Depending on what you like to play you can see me go through many iterations.
There isn't a one size fits all strategy for risk because you're playing multiple opponents and different positions every time so the context matters.
Hi Pete! Been following you now for a while and I really like your content. I was wondering why you gave blue 2nd instead of green cause green was being a homie all game?
Great question. It came down to caps. Blue has one big cap so whereas I can kill green in stages I would have had to save up 2x the troops on blue to take him out in one shot and that would have taken longer and increased the risk of them starting to fight me and successfully team on me.
All things being equal I would want to give green the higher placement but all things were not in this case and he was much easier to kill
begging Pete to do fixed caps on europe advanced that’s what i played all the way to Master 18k so far
Every Thursday homie!
@@TheKillPeteStrategy oh crap i am very dumb then thank you 😂 btw been watching the show every night for like 2 months love the stuff man
@@TheKillPeteStrategyoh it’s the negotiation game how did i forget LOL
The Sneaky Spoiler Block!
Apparently, 17v10 against a capital is 50/50 with true dice. But white also lost so few troops. Just wow.
Free Yellow!
Can’t believe white took cards in West Africa for two turns to build up that stack in Spain rather than breaking you in Gascony… GG Pete
Pete can you please respond to the oil up quotes
I have many times! ;)
Blocked some weird dudes comment 😂😅
So just out of curiosity, but why is Iceland a bad cap? Just getting back into risk and very noob to the cap game so trying to understand what makes a bad or good cap. Thanks for any actual advice.
Essentially later in the game your cap is completely locked off, it’s easy for your opponents to break you or set up a card block without opening your big stack. So you can’t really use your troops to fight back, or more importantly, make kills. Sequencing kills at the right moment is often the key to winning games on these settings
Because it's in the corner
Sorry, but because it's in the corner, tells me nothing. What I want to know is the reason so I can make better choices. Cause to me capping in a corner and I can get a one point guard seems good to me
@@norrisbubba Caps defend your bonus and if your caps right in a corner it can't defend. If you have to defend with troops off cap then you're missing the defensive bonus you get from your cap which is the point of caps. A retaliation cap or a cap that locks off a good portion of the board are better and create bigger threats.
It took me a while to figure this out too because Pete always says "Don't cap in a corner" and only ever explained it as it's a bad/noob thing to do.
Generally speaking, you want your cap to be touching multiple territories. If you cap Iceland, your next move is to take Britain. Then your cap is behind your front-line. Meaning that you can’t actually use the troops. Also guarding a +2 is not that consequential in the game
Hey yall,
new to the game here. Just wondering why at the start of the round, Pete only chose to roll with a couple of troops, Can anyone explain it to me?
I found the answer in another vid. The total amount of troops commited determines the maximum losses. This means you ideally want to always commit exactly enough troops to 100% the territory, but not more to keep losses ata minimum.
I really like EU advanced progressive world domination with fog, blizzards and unstable portals!
Sounds crazy. I bet you avoid the noob corner every game
@@TheKillPeteStrategy Actually, it depends on the spawn and blizzards. Sometimes it is the best course of action. Would you like to try these settings with me and some PRT members?
@@AllHailMafakas I'm down to try anything man
😮
Spoiler block, but i'm late
EURR'UP
Day 36 of asking Pete to oil up 🤤
😅
Lol you're still going, keep it up!
when
One day bilboMc, one day …
🫤
I don't know if it's the lighting, or the shirt, but you look kind of unwell. Hope, if there is something, that you'll prevail.
Aw damn. I thought I looked ok in this vid
@@TheKillPeteStrategy i thought you looked pretty buff
@@TheKillPeteStrategy If you're feeling good, that's what matters. Glad to be wrong on that.
I really dislike the fact risk players cheat by working in collaboration not attacking each other all game until It just those two remaining players and your strategies help but the issue i deal with is each match I get ganged up on, the last match I had each player allowed each other to gain territorial bonuses and hardly placed troops to defend their capitals and allowed certain party or specific territories to remain defenseless while they stack troops and build cards and my cap was no where near a noob corner. Risk mods should do something to ban those particular players some even use hacks!
Collaborating IN-GAME, not in real life, is not cheating. That's called strategy. So long as you don't know the players you're playing with, ranked free for all games are fair game to work out mutually beneficial positions.
Often having large off-cap stacks is to setup card blocking. It is highly possible the people you played against just both saw making you die was a way to ensure going 1st and 2nd, rather than allowing you to gain anything and them risking 3rd.
Collaborating only IN - GAME and not IRL is NOT cheating. It is a huge part of risk.
Cap in the corner, not too deep in the corner, enough to protect a good bonus. Don't cap directly in the middle, easy to get teamed on, or attacked by bots.
@@TheModeler99 dont cap in corner.
@@TheModeler99 Never cap in a corner what?