You said it though:

Logic 1
OSU education 0

sleeper wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: That's funny that you disagree, being a genius since you go OSU at all.

I can't change your mind, you've already got a pretty strong stance on the subject so essentially it'd be a waste of my time to try and prove you wrong. Even if I post evidence that completely RUINS your position on the matter, you'll then spend time trying to rationalize your broken stance.

Trust me, I didn't get into Ohio State because I'm super sexy, I got in because I'm super sexy and ridiculously intelligent.

See above.

sleeper wrote:

sleeper wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: That's funny that you disagree, being a genius since you go OSU at all.

I can't change your mind, you've already got a pretty strong stance on the subject so essentially it'd be a waste of my time to try and prove you wrong. Even if I post evidence that completely RUINS your position on the matter, you'll then spend time trying to rationalize your broken stance.

Trust me, I didn't get into Ohio State because I'm super sexy, I got in because I'm super sexy and ridiculously intelligent.

See above.

LMAO.

If I say that this white paper is white, and you present an argument that it's green, why should I change my mind?

Played so much Risk when I was at Ashland. Love the game.

SQ_Crazies wrote:

sleeper wrote:

sleeper wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: That's funny that you disagree, being a genius since you go OSU at all.

I can't change your mind, you've already got a pretty strong stance on the subject so essentially it'd be a waste of my time to try and prove you wrong. Even if I post evidence that completely RUINS your position on the matter, you'll then spend time trying to rationalize your broken stance.

Trust me, I didn't get into Ohio State because I'm super sexy, I got in because I'm super sexy and ridiculously intelligent.

See above.

LMAO.

If I say that this white paper is white, and you present an argument that it's green, why should I change my mind?

You are trying to argue against the laws of probability, I can't help you.

There is a probability of you winning 40,000 dollars on that. The name of it is Feelin' Lucky. It's luck to get the ticket with the winning numbers printed on it. Probability doesn't take luck out of the equation. When you're rolling 3 against 1 in risk, you know your probability is worse and maybe you don't roll. Like I said, probability is part of the strategy. There is a probability that you'll roll the number you need, there is a probability that you won't. That's plain luck.

I'm not saying that Risk is entirely luck. I am saying that the "strategy" is quickly mastered by anyone with half a brain (even SEC grads, sleeper). That means that we Big 10 grads, as brilliant as we are, often see our fortunes change on the roll of dice.

If the best player in the world will lose a good percentage of the games to someone just picking it up, it's not a game of great strategy. That's not to say that there is no strategy and no skill, but only that the skill components in a game like Risk are significantly less than in other games.

There are plenty of strategy games--the old Avalon Hill classics like PanzerBlitz, Panzer Leader, Third Reich, War & Peace, etc. In those games, a seasoned grognard will have a huge advantage over a newbie. Not so much in Risk--while it's true that there is strategy in determining appropriate levels of force to maximize dice probabilities, that doesn't necessarily make the game appreciably strategic.

Like I said, there are a number of entry-level strategy games that I posted above. They're balanced, quick, and never get stale from lack of replayability. And if you want to move on to something more complicated, there are a lot of great games that can make for a fun and inexpensive evening with friends.