Hello,

I'm looking for online reviews for this game...

How much is the game different from RISK and other similar games? Does it have a distinct feel?

Where I could find such information?

Thanks!
 

 A short answer would be to say that yes, it is significantly different from Risk, but in a good way.  It's a fantastic game, and if you want some more detailed info then go here.

Well, the feedback I've received from this game was lukewarm, so I'm still trying to make up my mind...

What is it you want from this game? If you want great fun with 4 to 6 players and dont expect an luckfree tactic- or wargame, than dust could be something for you. It has its downsides, so the best way to figure out if you like it, would be, go ot your FLGS and ask if you can play it there. My golden rule is, i will never ever buy games i didnot play.

I was thinking Risk as well when I read the description. I may have to look into this but this may be on my game table for next years game night.

I was thinking Risk as well when I read the description. I may have to look into this but this may be on my game table for next years game night.

Hi,

DUST is a lot more tactical and less depends on luck then Risk. (I know it does pretty much, but not that hard as Risk!)

The tactic cards highly change the way you play, because you really have to use them correctly to win. Exspecially with Full House (6 players) the game is full of action because everyone needs to conquer to have economical success, and to find in the late game. So from the beginning on players fight, defend and conquer like hell - for a Twilight Imperium veteran like me it was a real great fun to see that! DUST just makes fun.

All the best, Alex

The game is Risk-like but, as another poster said, more tactical in its demands due to the cards and the economic centers.  At least in our games, we haven't gotten the huge surges that occur in Risk when someone turns in a set of cards and gets umpteen million armies all at once.  This game requires more careful play.  My main fault with it is that I found it hard to enter into the game world itself; I kept feeling it needed something more to give it a little more depth or context.

However, if you like Risk and want a fun game but one that is a little more demanding in a good way, the Dust is probably the game for you.

What do you mean by "more carefully" exactly?

From my limited number of plays, I found you have to be more careful with Dust in terms of terrain and resources.

First newbie mistake in my part starting in Japan was not building any subs for instance.

If you run low on power sources, it can cause big headaches when trying to produce troops. This usually means it's had to play the Australia strategy of cornering yourself and bunkering down.

 I was also curious to see the similarities between Risk and Dust. Sounds like Dust is more like Axis and Allies than Risk though. Is that a fair assessment?

Definately. People just compare it to Risk b/c it's played more. And makes Dust sound better

Mattr0polis said:

Sort of, it's not as intensive as Axis and Allies, but it definitely is more on that end of the spectrum.

Gatha said:

Sound better as in, it's not as good as Risk? I noticed Dust isn't on your top 5 games chart.

I remember seeing this game a few times and thought about picking it up.  My group loves playing risk, but we all admit it would be nice to play something similar where it wasnt quite as luck based.  I've seen it get pretty mediocre reviews, but the same people give risk pretty low scores....

I am considering buying this game. But I was wondering, what is the average play time? Me and some of the guys I play with can get through a 4 player game of Risk in about 90 minutes. Do you think(after learning the ropes) Dust would take longer or shorter time then that?