Rules of Risk

After two full class periods of scheming, alliances, and even a little backstabbing, I think we actually can say we know more about how the international political world works. It was a great test of how we can make deals and react under pressure, as well as our strategic abilities.

I think what seemed to be the most realistic about the exercise was the interaction between members of the various teams. Sometimes the heads of states completely ignored their teams and just made snap decisions (I heard about that happening in the other class more frequently than I saw it during our game). Others worked well with their teams (I think our team, or blue, did that pretty well the entire time. It was almost like various government types - for example, in a republic, the decision has to go through and be approved by more people, sort of like the team working well together. When a member of the group or the head of state was sort of dominating the group dynamics, it was more of a centralized political authority. The relationships internal to teams were almost as interesting as the alliances that were built.

The combination of the different IR theories was interesting as well - some groups have a realist view where they need to conquer as much land as possible. However, everyone realized the need for alliances in a more liberal way and weren't trying to go at it alone. Every team, at the en of the fourth round, was at least aligned with the Blue team. With the constructivism, we had to stay close to the country history we were given, those identities. A lot of the deal making was accurate, like giving up something you have to gain another advantage and to make a deal. There was also the aspect of being really unable to trust or know what others are thinking - you have to take a shot and understand that you need to have a back up plan (although our team sort of failed with the second part of that).

The only major differences I saw were inherent with the structure of the game. It's complex enough now that you really can't add many more details to it without causing problems/taking way too long to complete a round, let alone win the game. I guess the biggest was the additional aspects that go into making decisions on the political stage - for example, the will of the people of your country, social issues, economic things, etc. Of course, the bureaucracy must be cut out, so decisions were made a lot quicker and without going through as many people as they would on the real political stage. Still, it was an excellent simulation of the world political experience. We learned that it takes more than luck to succeed in the game of Risk (or in world politics). It's all about developing relationships and determining a logical strategy.