RISK

The version of RISK we played in class mirrors world politics quite well. It can be seen as a simulation of diplomacy and conflicts. It really mirrors the way a war works. For example, if red has less pieces on Ukraine than blue has in South Europe, it will be easier for blue to get Ukraine as well. It shows that if a country has more troops in one place, the odds of it winning a war against a neighboring nation with less armies increases. Even, though in the real world, countries do not get turns acting, the council seemed realistic with sanctions and votes on motions. It seemed to incorporate well the institutions part of international relations. It also seemed realistic how the teams talked behind the scenes, especially when turning against another team behind their back.

However, this version of RISK had its flaws. The way one had to go from war to neutral before going to an alliance does not really happen in the real world. It made it more difficult to negotiate with other countries because it took too long to get the benefits of an alliance and make a deal with another team, whereas, in the real world, one could simply make an alliance and end a war. It was also unrealistic that we used dice to decide how a war plays out and who gets a territory. With dice, there is no technique, it is all about luck, since the odds of a certain number coming up is unlikely. In real life, countries do not get turns acting. The super powers also were not realistic, because some of them were too much. For example, the yellow teams super power was to make any team win a war, but that does not really happen.

If I had to change anything, I would change how alliances and wars work. I would make it easier for a team to change from an alliance to war and vice versa. It would make the game move faster but also make it more realistic. I would change some of the super powers to make it less unrealistic, even though a few were fine.