elimination and cards

when i played risk at home we played it as if you had a match then you could play it regardless of how many cards you have. i never even knew that the rules are not the same in till i joined this site. i think it would be great adding at least an option for this. 

So, say we have 1 card, and we take out someone who has 2. Then, if we have a set, we can turn it in? I love it!

That would make for some quick games... especially in capitals....

well heres my 2 cents 
keep it the standard risk rules like on the original board game
like they say if it aint broke just leave it alone cause youll probably break it by trying to fix it.
trust me im a profesional at the breaking thing and i know
ok ok the old dog new tricks thing is all part of it too
 

Now I know why people were sending messages about the cards, this makes more sense, just like Vexer said.
Thank you jamesjulius for the information.

I dont really have a problem with the card system we have now and dont mind if a game takes too long to finish, its just fun (most times) but if others like it and think it will help with the 'never ending' games then I think we should definitely add it.

If it would be too fast for capitals you could always make it an option so that the capital games last longer, but I think it is a good idea to change the card rule.

As I own one of the "Old Games" rule books...I found it in a garage sale and just read it!!!!  Wow! This is a step in the right way! But why did they change it in the later games? Did it cause problems?

I see only one problem with it...you die quicker! Boy it will be a risk to hold cards after the other players have two cards...will it cause players to attack sooner? You might be cut down to almost nothing for that one card and will give the game "away"...I see this as a major problem in "cap" games. Do you want to field those comments on a newbies giving the game away? Maybe that is why they changed the rules when the "caps game play" came on board...

I really do like the trade in after you kill some-one.
Maybe call it the "pre-70" rules option or something like it.

I know that would be they only games I would play from that point on...I think...well maybe not...just another risky option!

Personally I do not want an option here. it's not user friendly. It needs to be one way or the other. No room for confusion. New players would have an even harder time learning how to win an increasing card game if the rules about cards change depending on an option someone chooses. I vote to change it so that you don't have to have 5 cards to turn in after a kill.

As far as it making capitals games too quick.. if you are worried about noobs making dumb moves in caps games, well they do that anyway--nothing new here. If it's a problem for you then password protect your game. I've had many more caps games become never ending games than deathmatch. I think this will improve caps game significantly.

All this being said, after the change is implemented if we all decide it was for the worse then switching it back would be trivial.

So now I am wondering if everyone who supported this change would still support it if it's not a game option but a rule change.

I actually assumed it would be a rule change and not an option

Same here, I also thought it would be a rule change.

Anyway, I still stand behind what I said.

I vote for the rule change..I agree this should not be an option..

i agree but i think it should be an option. however i do see your point about making it user friendly. so i will agree with either option or rule change

Let's try the change out and see how it goes.

I say we try it...30 days. If it goes well we implement it. Another reason why I see it as a plus is comparing to other sights. Another thing that just sets us aside from the others. We do not have to put it into law just yet, let's see how it is played for awhile. If we as a society thinks it should remain, then we put it up for vote in 30 days.

A couple reasons why I think just a 30 day trial run is good. First alot of players don't even read the forums, so they may not even know that we are discussing this. 30 days will give them time to see, and all of us actually a chance to take it for a test drive.

In 30 days we put it to a vote. Should it stay or should it go. I too am kind of concerned how capital games will play out. Thorpe has a good point about why did Hasbro change it, it may have had something to do with capital games. I say 30 days... Put it to a vote. Could have the vote on Halloween easy day to remember in the states.

I'm fine with a rule change