Re: [risk] Risk Communications

[Jacob Winters <sir_tuba@juno.com>]

Certainly adds another element of "risk" to the game...I'm for it...

On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 10:50:40 -0600 (CST) Douglas Zander
<dzander@solaria.sol.net> writes:
> Subject: Risk Communications
> 
> Read the subject of this message very carefully.
> 
> While riding on the city bus just a few minutes ago, I was thinking
> about the game of Risk I am currently playing and the messages I was
> sending to my opponents in an attempt to make alliances, deals, 
> contracts,
> and promises.  Then I thought to myself, what if so-and-so player 
> were to find out about my deal with that other player?  How would it
> affect the game?  So I thought, it would be kinda neat if our 
> messages
> that we sent to other players in a specific game that concerned the
> current board we were playing was somehow subject to interception by
> one or more enemy players.  I wonder how others feel about a new
> command specifically for Risk, call it "riskmessage";
> riskmessage <boardnumber> <fromplayerid> <password> <toplayerid>
> Now here is the catch, this message has a small possiblity of being
> intercepted by one or more random opponents who are playing in the
> same boardnumber.  Use of this command would have to rely on the 
> honor
> system; all players would have to agree that any and all 
> communication
> concerning playing the gameboard must go through the riskmessage 
> command.
> You are not allowed to send email directly to another player if it
> concerns pacts, deals, promises, or any other subject matter 
> concerning
> strategy for this particular risk game.  Also, you may not encrypt 
> the
> message in any way *except* to use codewords for players and 
> continents
> that each pair of players has agreed upon before the first move of 
> the 
> game (the initial turn 1 deployment).  This means that each player 
> would
> have to write down (totalnumberofplayers - 1) [five in a six player 
> game]
> sets of codewords for each other player and that other player would
> share your codewords that pertained to them.  i.e. player1 and 
> player2
> would have the Set-A-Codewords while player1 and player3 would have
> Set-B-Codewords and player2 and player3 would have Set-C-Codewords.
> Note that using codewords would be optional; but wise, just in case
> player2 intercepts the riskmessage that player1 has sent to player3.
> The determination of what codes to use could be automated by the 
> server;
> the server could simply randomly choose codewords from a list of 
> words
> and then send them to each player after the challenge command was 
> issued.
> Concerning the interception of a message;  each player would have to 
> 
> add a command to the end of their riskmessage so the server would be
> able to remove any signatures that certain webmailers add to the end 
> of
> email.  Then the player who intercepts the message (he was spying 
> with
> radio equipment  :-) will receive it anonymously from the server 
> without
> knowing who the sender was nor who the receiver was meant to be:
> ------------------------------------------------
> From: pbmserver@gamerz.net
> Subject: Riskmessage Intercepted from board 123
> 
> Bluebeard, please do not attack my army at Bedrock and I agree
> to withdraw my armies from Rollinghills.  Do you agree?  
> signed, Twoface.
> 
> Endriskmessage
> ------------------------------------------------
> 
> Now read the subject of this message again.  :-)
> 
> --
>  Douglas Zander                |  Watch "FarScape" on the SciFi 
> Channel
>  dzander@solaria.sol.net       |  Fridays 7:00pm Central
>  Shorewood, Wisconsin, USA     |  
> 
> 
> 

________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.