Post originally by CerealKil at 2004-06-28 10:01:07
Converted from Phorums BB System

Since the games are completely different, it's difficult to answer that question, but I will try anyway. If I knew about other board games you have played it would have been easier.

The biggest difference between the games is randomness. Some games, like RISK, involves a lot of randomness. This means a strong player can lose the game because of a roll of a die (or a weak player can win). You can also start with almost no chance of winning because of the territories you are dealt at the beginning. Games without randomness (and scarcity) tend to be played the same way every time, which make them time killers instead of games. The only random element in a game of thrones is the westeros cards. These cards make sure the game is not played the same way every time. They also affect all players equally, so they should not tip a game.

This game is much like RISK when it comes to agreements and alliances. Both games require them, and both games tend towards short-term alliances (or attacking your ally unannounced).

Unlike RISK, this game has a lot of balancing mechanisms, which slow down strong players and help weaker players. You cannot build an infinite army, for instance. Although a player was knocked out of the game the reviewer played, I have never seen this. People gang up on the leading player, when he's no longer close to winning, the other players will not allow him to be knocked out because that means someone else will be close to winning.

Without going into too much detail, this is a great game. Much better than RISK in my opinion. The rules and mechanisms are easy to understand, which means you can win against experienced players the first time you play (I did). You will definately enjoy this game if you also like the German (influenced) games, which are usually very even and have little randomness. The most famous of these games is The settlers of Catan.