All tapped out for strategies? Is it Game Over?

[Axis4life]

Calculations, odds, and percentages of being victorius are great until Lady Luck strikes.  I’m sure everyone has played in games where they have seen a mathmatically superior force get crushed.  I’ve seen Japan send 1 INF and 5 FIG into India against 1 INF only to lose 4 FIG to AA fire.  It’s the little things like that which make the game fun and I agree with Jennifer if it gets boring try something new.

[U-505]

You guys might want to check out Low Luck. It’s adds all kinds of new dimensions to the game. Like 1 bmb, 2 inf will always take a territory defended by any one unit. And since you won’t lose your bomber, SBR’s become a viable strat. I was saying to myself “My baltic fleet is sunk. Why is the US buying a second bomber? What an idiot!”. Fooled me good he did. I learned that perhaps too late in my DAAK tourney game (thought it was ADS) but I’m getting up to speed pretty quick. And you have to pay close attention to not only what you bring to an attack but also what you leave behind. Like UK/US suicide attacks on Germany could guarantee a Russian follow up victory when in ADS it would lose the game for the Allies to even attempt it. And it’s always comforting to know that victory is certain in Ukr/WR on R1, Egypt on G1, and sz52 on J1. you might lose an extra unit here and there on good defensive rolls but you’ll never see Russia lose 8 inf in the WR attack. I’m not knocking ADS, but I’m beginning to like Low Luck just as much for the novelty.

[rjclayton]

@Jennifer:

Since it was a petty correction and you’re just a lawyer, not a mathemetician.

Mathematician?

@Jennifer:

BTW, for the record, in Math we consider 6 decimal places to be accurate. It’s a Newton thing.

We do, do we?

[losttribe04]

I have found to keep the game fresh and interesting you need to constantly bring new people into it. The up side is they all have their own approach to the game. The down side is if they have never played before you tend to slaughter them without even trying for some time this may lead to their disintres in the game or an overwhelming urge to beat the one who introduced them to it down. So it can be a blessing and a curse.

-LT04

[zosima]

@Jennifer:

Axis and Allies is much more dynamic.  You can attack with 30 fighters and not get a single hit.  Or you can get 15 hits (LL) or you could get 30 hits.Â

But odds are, if you have 24 infantry, 6 Armor and 4 Fighters attacking you will get 9 hits.  And that’s what reactionary, formulaic players count on.  They don’t think for themselves.  They just know that X% infantry + Y% artillery + Z% armor with n-number of fighters and bombers will win the space for them.  They rely too heavily on calculators and not enough on tactics and strategy.  And worse still, they don’t utilize luck.

The best thing you can have happen to these people is get 33% accuracy with your attacking infnatry in round 1 of a major engagement. (I don’t know about you guys, but I’ve been tracking my infantry and fighter accuracy lately, because they seem wrong.  I’ve averaged 32.476215% accurate with Infantry on attack; 12.978248% accurate with attacking fighters over the past 9 games so far.)

BTW, for the record, in Math we consider 6 decimal places to be accurate.  It’s a Newton thing.  Anyway, the point is, sometimes it pays off to attack a superior force with just infantry because you lose 3 IPC units and you might throw his entire strategy off because now his formula is all screwed up.  You’d be surprised how often they count on those infnatry units to sit as a defensive wall ONLY and how surprised they are when you take their stack from a 3:1 ratio of infantry to artillery to a 1:1 ratio and totally discombobulate their entire stack building strategy.

Fun times!  Fun times.

@Nukchebi0:

It is googol, just to correct you.

And Nuk’s right, minus the plex.  But I wasn’t going to mention it.  Since it was a petty correction and you’re just a lawyer, not a mathemetician.

My room mate is once of those guys.  and I get a great joy from discovering his strategy and throwing a wrench into it and then watch him just fall apart.  At this point I’ll be the axis with no bid and beat JUST becasue of this.

[losttribe04]

Some times it can feel like watching a fly with its wings pulled off, but I wouldn’t to that to another A&A player.  :-D  :evil:

[OutsideLime]

Turn on all 6 National Advantages for all 5 nations.  It’s a whole new game, trust me.  (I play LHTR)

~Josh

[Jennifer]

SBR in Low Luck has two agreed upon methods.

1. (Most prevalent): Attacker takes 3.5 IPC in Damage to the Bomber and does 3.5 IPC in damage to the defender.  This one is stupid, IMHO, because 15 IPC / 6 is 2.5 IPC, not 3.5 IPC.  Wheras, the midpoint on a Die 6 is 3.5.  Which leads me to # 2:

2)  Attacker does 3.5 IPC damage to the enemy and sustains 2.5 IPC in damage to repair the bomber.  Much more mathematically accurate and returns a reason for SBR to the game.

And RJ:  Yes.  According to Newton and the modern mathematical community, 6 decimal places for a single variable equation is considered accurate.  More is nice, but it is not necessary to be considered accurate in a single variable equation such as percentage of infantry units that hit on attack or percentage of fighter units that hit on attack.

[losttribe04]

:evil: If your going to add all 6 national advantages you might as well as throw in Nuke’s for the US and Germany.  :evil:

-LT04

[rjclayton]

@Jennifer:

And RJ:  Yes.  According to Newton and the modern mathematical community, 6 decimal places for a single variable equation is considered accurate.  More is nice, but it is not necessary to be considered accurate in a single variable equation such as percentage of infantry units that hit on attack or percentage of fighter units that hit on attack.

But aren’t your examples 8 decimal places?

[Jennifer]

@rjclayton:

@Jennifer:

And RJ:  Yes.  According to Newton and the modern mathematical community, 6 decimal places for a single variable equation is considered accurate.  More is nice, but it is not necessary to be considered accurate in a single variable equation such as percentage of infantry units that hit on attack or percentage of fighter units that hit on attack.

But aren’t your examples 8 decimal places?

No.

I’ve averaged 32.476215% accurate with Infantry on attack; 12.978248% accurate with attacking fighters over the past 9 games so far.

There are two integers followed by six decimal places.  Thousands, Hundreds, Tens and Ones are not decimal places.  Thousandths, Hundredths, Tenths are decimal places.

[rjclayton]

But the probability that you have calculated is .32476215 for Infantry on attack and .12978248 for fighters on attack.  8 decimal places.  That you chose to display them as a percentage does not change the fact that the probability is to 8 decimal places.

@Jennifer:

BTW, for the record, in Math we consider 6 decimal places to be accurate. It’s a Newton thing.

So, you wouldn’t happen to be referring to Newton’s Method, would you?  A guess and check method for calculating the root?  Because I don’t see what this calculation has to do at all with calculating the average number of hits with your infantry?

http://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/AllBrowsers/2413/NewtonsMethod.asp

[newpaintbrush]

@ncscswitch:

Chess has 32 pieces and 64 spaces.

A&A has a LOT more pieces, and more spaces.
A&A adds pieces.
And A&A has dice.

Yes, there are a finite number of moves…
Call it Chess to the Google power (for thsoe who know the meaning of google instead of just the online service).

That same complexity makes it simpler.

[newpaintbrush]

The nice thing about Axis and Allies is that it’s so predictable.

My thought is that people like games because they’re predictable.

Unlike in real life, when NAKED PEOPLE STREAK PAST THE WINDOW SCREAMING.

The unshaved ones quite put you off your morning croissant and latte.

[rjclayton]

I see you found your crack pipe again!

[Baghdaddy]

@Jennifer:

@rjclayton:

But aren’t your examples 8 decimal places?

No.

I’ve averaged 32.476215% accurate with Infantry on attack; 12.978248% accurate with attacking fighters over the past 9 games so far.

There are two integers followed by six decimal places.  Thousands, Hundreds, Tens and Ones are not decimal places.  Thousandths, Hundredths, Tenths are decimal places.

If Thousands, Hundreds, Tens and Ones are not decimal places, what are they?

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0881929.html
http://www.gomath.com/htdocs/lesson/decimal_lesson1.htm
http://www.mathleague.com/help/decwholeexp/decwholeexp.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal

I guess they could be Vigesimals, Duodecimals, Octals or even (my personal favorite) Sexagesimals….

But then I don’t thing we are counting things up quite the same way any more.

[Baghdaddy]

@rjclayton:

I see you found your crack pipe again!

He also seems to be sharing it with the resident MILF…

[Jennifer]

@rjclayton:

But the probability that you have calculated is .32476215 for Infantry on attack and .12978248 for fighters on attack.  8 decimal places.  That you chose to display them as a percentage does not change the fact that the probability is to 8 decimal places.

It’s two integers with 6 decimals.  You could make it a fraction too, does that mean there are NO decimals now?  After all, 32.476215% is just 32476215/100000000 and that is NO decimals.

Hmm……

So yes, decimal places are counted by the number of places filled to the RIGHT of the decimal and not the integers to the LEFT of teh decimal.

I should know, after all, I only TEACH this stuff and have passed numerous state certifications to teach this stuff and classes in learning this stuff.  You can twist it and turn it, but I can just reverse the twists and turns and twist and turn it to the same degree in the other direction.  But it all boils down to 6 decimals (AKA the number of integers to the right of the decimal) is what mathematicians generally consider to be an accurate number.  Does that mean 8 decimals is less accurate?  No.  8 decimals are obviously MORE accurate.  But no one is going to calculate 8 decimals by hand.

[newpaintbrush]

@Jennifer:

@rjclayton:

But the probability that you have calculated is .32476215 for Infantry on attack and .12978248 for fighters on attack.  8 decimal places.  That you chose to display them as a percentage does not change the fact that the probability is to 8 decimal places.

It’s two integers with 6 decimals.  You could make it a fraction too, does that mean there are NO decimals now?  After all, 32.476215% is just 32476215/100000000 and that is NO decimals.

Hmm……

So yes, decimal places are counted by the number of places filled to the RIGHT of the decimal and not the integers to the LEFT of teh decimal.

I should know, after all, I only TEACH this stuff and have passed numerous state certifications to teach this stuff and classes in learning this stuff.  You can twist it and turn it, but I can just reverse the twists and turns and twist and turn it to the same degree in the other direction.  But it all boils down to 6 decimals (AKA the number of integers to the right of the decimal) is what mathematicians generally consider to be an accurate number.  Does that mean 8 decimals is less accurate?  No.  8 decimals are obviously MORE accurate.  But no one is going to calculate 8 decimals by hand.

Oo, I am invited to “twist it and turn it”.  Innuendo aside, is that implied support for state certifications, and thereby, the system upon which state certifications are based?

Who are these mathematicians that consider six decimal places to be accurate?  Obviously those that are constrained by others to limit the precision with which those calculations can be reported.  As such, those mathematicians can no longer really be considered “mathematicians” in the pure sense, can they?

[Jennifer]

@rjclayton:

So, you wouldn’t happen to be referring to Newton’s Method, would you?  A guess and check method for calculating the root?  Because I don’t see what this calculation has to do at all with calculating the average number of hits with your infantry?

The only part of newton I was referring too is the standard practice of using 6 decimals in your result as a standard of accuracy.