Well said, yellowmole. When I'm in the dominant position on the board I'll usually try to take out the away people first, but a lot of players don't even do that.

Another problem with away players is that, at least at the beginning of the game, when everyone else is making an effort to take more territory, they are spreading their dice out and have maybe 3 or 4 dice on any given territory while an away player may have 8 dice on his one territory within the first 5 turns. Even if he is easily accessible, he may not be easy, or even possible to take out for quite a while into the game and weaker players who are actually playing are liable to be taken out first.

in your examples you were all outplayed by someone who did absolutely nothing. at least you had a chance at first, the away player didn't, better luck next time?

Not necessarily out played, position has alot to do with it. An away tucked away in a far corner can survive for a long time, where as the middle is a battlefield. You probably could have one had you had the same corner as the away.

No, joby not outplayed. The point of the game is to win. The "away" approach is never going to win, but it's also not going to go out 6th or 7th either. Anyone could just sit there collecting dice and wait until other people lose, but that's not any fun? Why have a game that encourages people to play in a way that's not fun?

"Not necessarily out played, position has alot to do with it. An away tucked away in a far corner can survive for a long time, where as the middle is a battlefield. You probably could have one had you had the same corner as the away."

Then go get a corner. That's the strategy part.

But what I saying is that away has an advantage for "outlasting" by starting in that corner, losing to them is not necessarily being out played.

"No, joby not outplayed. The point of the game is to win. The "away" approach is never going to win,"

Considering the ELO ranking system, the point of the game is to not lose badly, to people with distinctly lower points

i asked "better luck next time?" and don't believe the current replies address that

the only idea i see here is to give a bonus for eliminating players. the away players are *harder* targets (based on the current replies). this idea helps *them* get a *better* ranking because everyone shall rush to kill the people who have "unlucky position", this is the opposite of the desired result. plus there'd be people begging "let me kill you so i can beat the leader"


* my previous reply should have stated "chance at first place" instead of "chance at first"

"Considering the ELO ranking system, the point of the game is to not lose badly, to people with distinctly lower points"