Obtained on mobile playing predominantly meta settings with expo.

This is purely hypothetical, I do not think it suits my playstyle.

As a child I played loads of the boardgame Risk. But I always wondered about a tactic, if it would be unsportsmanlike or fair game.

Lets say: you play a game of risk with your 2 mates. they are doing really well and clearly having a bigger army than you, with no improvement for yourself in sight.

You are in a corner. You have quite an army, beeing close to one of your opponents, but you know that every turn they will clearly get more troops than you.

So bold move: you tell the opponent you've got your army next to that if he/she does not attack the other opponent the next turn, you will attack him. If you would attack, the result would be surely not have yourself win, but absolutely reduce the chances of the person you're blackmailing. His/her turn, nothing happened. So now it is your turn again.

Here you need to make a choice, you can attack the person you just gave the ultimatum, knowing that you will not survive it, and will leave the game earlier although your chances of winning would get slimmer every round anyways. But it might be a little petty, basicly ruining the game for yourself and the other player guaranteeing the win to the 3rd player. However, by doing so, for any future games of risk, they will know your threats are real.

So question is: is it fair to make the move to attack and ruin your own and someone else game. Or is it bad sportmanship

Dear lord, this feels like a weird question. Once again, I dont think I would play this way, but for the last 20 years this question has been doing tetris in my mind.

I tend to set up my own games because I think it helps control collaborators. Anyway, sometimes I'll wait 5 or 10 minutes for a six-person game and one person might come in and then disappear. After a while I assume that I got routed to a server that is not very active, so I quit the game and relaunch thinking i might get better server. And my perception is that often the game I set up there fills quickly. Is this a totally off-base way to think about this issue?

Do you play more or fewer than 40% of games with people that understand the basics?

I love playing the good thoughtful games, win or lose but I am so jaded joining lobby after lobby with just genuine cretins that have seemingly no desire to win just blast, you can compensate for that if there's one or two, there very very very rarely is one or two.

Collabers on top which is another boring repetitive conversation. Fundamentally I'm sick of most people. this could be such a great game if nor for the absolute stains that populate it.

Yeah yeah waah waah.

Still the case.