Nit picky German Economizer

[Jennifer]

I’ve spoken my mind on this.  If you don’t believe me, then feel free to be less economical with Germany then if you listened to it.  This isn’t a thread about preserving units, it’s a thread about being as economical as possible.  +0.5 is more economical then +0.0.

[frood]

@Cmdr:

I challenged him too.  I don’t see him taking me up.  Guess his bluff has been called.

I’m sorry, please quote the post in which you challenged me, because I missed it. My last challenge to you was at noon today, it’s a little early to say you’ve called my bluff! Check the tournament games section, I’ve just started a game thread.

@Cmdr:

I’ve spoken my mind on this.  If you don’t believe me, then feel free to be less economical with Germany then if you listened to it.  This isn’t a thread about preserving units, it’s a thread about being as economical as possible.  +0.5 is more economical then +0.0.

2ndly, I don’t think anyone in this thread has demonstrated that the Karelia blitz alone is +0. You tank-blitz Karelia and you get 2 IPCs, no?

And what is the difference between being economical and preserving units?

I realize that by asking three questions that put you in a corner, I’ll probably not get a response to either of them.

So, to get the first question out of the way, I’m just going to start a game thread. What bid would you like? I consider anywhere from 7-9 to be reasonable (though I’ve never been in a game with a bid higher than 8 ).

[Jennifer]

reply 164

“I’ll just have to blitz you in our next games to drive the point home that it’s a good move for Germany and a bad move for Russia!”

Net 0.

You lose it without any defense and thus you net nothing for it and you don’t cost Russia anything for it. They collect, you collect, they collect.  No cost to Russia, no net benefit to Germany.

[frood]

@Cmdr:

reply 164

“I’ll just have to blitz you in our next games to drive the point home that it’s a good move for Germany and a bad move for Russia!”

Net 0.

You lose it without any defense and thus you net nothing for it and you don’t cost Russia anything for it. They collect, you collect, they collect.  No cost to Russia, no net benefit to Germany.

That’s a pretty oblique challenge, esp. as I think that post was right after one by trihero or NPB. But no matter, the game’s afoot.

Now, if you are going to offset the gain that the Allies score on the retake, you have to apply the same logic to Russia retaking Archangel. Applying the same thing there means that the Archangel attack goes from netting 0.5 on average to netting -1.5, since Russia retakes it as well.

[Jennifer]

No, because what Russia gets out of it does not effect Germany.  It only effects Russia.  So if Russia retakes Archangelsk they are at -2 for Karelia -3 for the Infantry unit they will most likely lose to the defending tank + 5 for the tank they killed netting them 0.

If they also retake Archangelsk and manage not to lose anything doing it, then they are +2

[trihero]

Which is of stronger use, 1 German Armor in E. Europe or 2 Russian Infantry in W. Russia?

If I could trade an inf for a tank all day with Russia, I would. That would mean Russia alone would entirely stop Germany’s income with their own, and then the other 2 Allies would win without breaking a swat.

You lose it without any defense and thus you net nothing for it and you don’t cost Russia anything for it.

You’re wrong by your own argument. Russia nets nothing for taking Karelia back, because like you said, it’s taking their own territory. Germany gained +2 IPCs there no matter how you look at it. +2 IPCs is more economical than +0.5 IPCs.

You’re also actually wrong twice. If you say that leaving nothing in Karelia nets nothing, then you can’t count Karelia’s +2 in your Archangel math either, because you are also leaving nothing in Karelia in your Archangel example.

You can still hold on to your argument by saying “tri, you’re right in the economic sense, but the larger picture favors me because xxxx.” What you can’t do is hold on by saying +0.5 is better economically than +2.

Tri, you are mis-quoting me when you post

Maybe all I’m really trying to say switch is that you tried to give statistics proving that blitzing Archangel is more economical on the small picture. That was all your 67% nonsense of doing same or better. Not only did I prove you wrong in that small picture using your own statistics, but Jennifer came along later and showed that the chances are even higher of losing a tank without damaging the infantry. You have no further argument to offer other than positioning and the large picture. You tried to show us on the small picture how you were right, but I see no admission of wrong calculation. It just seems like both you and Jen are saying that the small picture still favors Archangel.

Blitzing Archangel can be the right move, but not in the general sense if things are going average. Maybe that’s what we do all agree on.

In what specific case are you actually referring to, Switch? Because now I’m just curious, you keep saying “if so and so happens then it is a wise move” but I never get a good idea of what it is. I’ve heard vague references like if Russia does a Ukraine/W. Russia attack or German stacks Karelia, but what is it really? I don’t see that Germany can really afford to normally stack any of those areas more than 1 inf high early on, and that’s quite manageable for the Russians. With no German Karelia stack, archangel offensive pieces like arm/art are completely unexposed, so you could do something like what Ender said earlier and send 1 inf + 4 arm, and the odds of success there are much better than 2 inf 1 fighter. Those arm aren’t out of position to counterattack German units next turn, nor are they exposed.

[Guest]

@DarthMaximus:

Back when I was still attacking Ukr…  :wink:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=9354.0

No fair picking a game where I under-defended Tokyo!  Tokyo is irrelevant to the discussion at hand :-P
(but I DID make you work for that one, and I DID use a German ARM to blitz to Archangel…  :evil: )

[trihero]

That was a funny game read. Most of it was a blur since I just scanned through it, but that dice reroll in the Pacific was a deathblow to the Japanese O_O

Man how many carriers did Darth buy with the US? I thought I saw like a carrier every round for the first few rounds O_O?!

[frood]

@trihero:

That was a funny game read. Most of it was a blur since I just scanned through it, but that dice reroll in the Pacific was a deathblow to the Japanese O_O

Man how many carriers did Darth buy with the US? I thought I saw like a carrier every round for the first few rounds O_O?!

He built about 8 or 9 (plus the fighters to fill them) in the game I just played against him. Never encountered that before, didn’t know how to handle it, and finally goofed with my fleet positioning such that defeat became inevitable…

[trihero]

He built about 8 or 9 (plus the fighters to fill them) in the game I just played against him. Never encountered that before, didn’t know how to handle it, and finally goofed with my fleet positioning such that defeat became inevitable…

O_O! Quick link to that game? And how would you deal with it now?

Personally I wouldn’t use so many carriers, I mean one carrier can bring in like 4 fighters to a fight if you wanted to. But maybe it’s some insane new strategy!  :lol:

[frood]

@trihero:

He built about 8 or 9 (plus the fighters to fill them) in the game I just played against him. Never encountered that before, didn’t know how to handle it, and finally goofed with my fleet positioning such that defeat became inevitable…

O_O! Quick link to that game? And how would you deal with it now?

Personally I wouldn’t use so many carriers, I mean one carrier can bring in like 4 fighters to a fight if you wanted to. But maybe it’s some insane new strategy!  :lol:

Okay I exaggerated - now that I check, he had 6 ACs in the Pacific by the end. Anyhow, here’s the link: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=10153.90

[Jennifer]

Dealing with carriers just means you need to out position him and use submarines.

Sub kill carrier.  Fighters go splash.

Did this in a game once.  Sailed my subs right under his battleships, sank his aircraft carriers and submerged.  It was beautiful.

[frood]

I built lots of subs, but not enough - wanted to keep producing some land units as well.

[Jennifer]

THat’s how a KJF works.  You force Japan into chosing mainland or navy and when they pick one, you crush the other.  Yup.  Classic.

[frood]

Back on topic to the Archangel blitz…

Check out this map. Germany did the Arc blitz, and after R2, Russia collected $37.

Here’s how it played out:

Germany blitzed to Arc
Ger left 1 Inf in Karelia

UK took Karelia with 1 Inf, 2 Ftrs, 1 Bom and 1 BB. I only sent 1 Inf because if it died in the attack, Russia could still liberate with a tank blitz, and UK saves 1 Inf.

Russia

• With Karelia taken, Archangel is now protected, so I could take it with only 1 Inf and a stack of tanks - no fighters needed.
• Kar. is already liberated, so no Rus. fighters needed for that either

That left Ukr. and Belo each with 1 Ger Inf.

• At first, I planned to attack each with 2 Inf 1 Ftr, but then changed my mind to just 1 Inf 1 Ftr. With 1 Inf 1 Ftr you have a 50% chance of taking the territory. Adding the inf closes some of that remaining 50% gap which is worth 1.5 IPCs, but then I sacrifice a 3 IPC unit for those improved odds.
  As it was, I got lucky and captured both Ukr. and Belo. I would have expected and been happy with just one of those.

• Finally, I blitzed a tank to Norway, for +3 Income to Russia. It may be a net loss if Ger takes it out using a TRN + Ftrs, but I’ll consider that as helpful in that it will bleed more units off from the general Russian offensive.

In addition to this, Japan attacked 6 Russian Inf in Bury with 4 Inf, 1 Arm and 4 Ftrs and 1 BB. I got lucky and survived with 4 Inf, killing 4 Inf 1 Arm. This left Manchuria empty so on Russia 2 I took Man with 1 Inf.

Total Income for Russia after R2: 37 IPCs! Even without the Buryatia windfall, and if one of the Belo / Ukr attacks had failed, Russia would be at 30 or 31 IPCs. 1 Russian Inf is in Archangel where it will only be able to attack Karelia, but all the tanks in Archangel can still hit Ukraine or Belo next turn.

In conclusion, I think that the Arc blitz has not really hampered Russia’s position. It amounted to a trade of 1 Arm for 1 Inf that is not even dead, just slightly out of position, and that will rejoin my main stack next turn along with a bunch of other reinforcements.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Jennifer]

A more realistic result is the Russian’s losing Buryatia and thus Russia would have collected 4 IPC less.  (-3 for Manchuria you should NOT have gotten, -1 for Buryatia that Japan SHOULD have gotten.)

You’ve been lucky all game with the dice though.  98% attacker win rates with 70% attacker wins with A LOT OF UNITS LEFT are resulting in Attacker being completely destroyed with nearly no damage done to the defender.

Hardly a definitive game to base your assertations on, especially after only 1 full game round.

[frood]

@Ender:

Total Income for Russia after R2: 37 IPCs! Even without the Buryatia windfall, and if one of the Belo / Ukr attacks had failed, Russia would be at 30 or 31 IPCs. 1 Russian Inf is in Archangel where it will only be able to attack Karelia, but all the tanks in Archangel can still hit Ukraine or Belo next turn.

In conclusion, I think that the Arc blitz has not really hampered Russia’s position. It amounted to a trade of 1 Arm for 1 Inf that is not even dead, just slightly out of position, and that will rejoin my main stack next turn along with a bunch of other reinforcements.

Note the highlighted part.

“Lucky all game”? There’s been just one full round! Yes, I got lucky in Bury, but that’s not really relevant to the immediate situation on the German front. The fact remains that Russia now has Norway, Karelia, Archangel, West Russia, Belo and Ukraine. The only place I got lucky there was in taking both Belo and Ukr, as both had only a 50% chance.

Where do you get your 98% attack rate?

R1 - yes I had great dice but then I gave you the No Luck result instead to set up the Arc blitz under more reasonable circumstances.

G1: You captured Belo, Karelia, Arc and Egypt, and killed the UK med BB without loss - no bad luck there.

UK1:

• Z59 my DD hit your TRN - no big surprise.
• Z45 our subs killed each other - that’s equally good dice.
• Egypt: your Arm killed one of my attacking Inf, that’s good for you
• Karelia: my BB hit your Inf, not an unusual result, and it was dead anyway with 1 Inf 2 Ftrs 1 Bom attacking as well

J1:

• You killed my Z59 DD without loss (good luck)
• You took China without loss (very good luck)
• You failed to take Bury, attacking 6 Inf with 4 Inf 1 Arm 4 Ftrs - If you look at the numbers, if you play to preserve your fighters, I actually had about a 15% chance of surviving that attack - about the same as rolling 1/6, which happens quite often in this game.

US1: there was no combat and thus no luck

R2:
Liberated Arc wol - not a big surprise with 1 Inf 6 Arm attacking
Belo/Ukr - as I said above, each attack had a 50% chance, and I got a little lucky in making both.

So all in all, the luck has been pretty even, at least as far as the German front is concerned. The only bad dice in this game anywhere have been in your Bury attack, the rest have all been average or good.

And the fact remains that despite pretty normal luck, the Russian front is looking just fine for the Allies. But like you say, one round is a little early to comment.

US1: there was no combat, so no dice

[Jennifer]

It is very relevant to the German front.  Manchuria and Buryatia would not be in your hands.  You’d be 4 IPC lower.  Also, Germany easily recovered from the pitiful advances of the Russian hoardes, and, because you had to use the British navy in SZ 4, you got England completely cut off from Europe before UK 2 resulting in the loss of all your new transports and a blocked Battleship meaning no more England landings for at least a turn.

Now Russia’s going to have to spend tanks to advance or advance much more slowly.  Yes, they have 37 IPC this round due to bad luck to the Axis and good luck to Russia (they really are the only ones having luck, they just seem to be having it on both attack and defense, which compounds the issue.) Meanwhile England’s out of the game for 2 rounds (1 to clear a path to get more troops, and 1 to get them.) and America’s not even set up a shucking program.

Russia is solo because the allies were forced into over extending.  They got lucky with the Russian defenses which means the allies still have a chance to win the game.

[Guest]

Is Jen whining about dice again???
:evil:

Jen…  NO ONE IS THAT UNLUCKY!

The flaw is not in your dice, but in your strategy.  A single set of bad dice should NOT determine the outcome of a game (subsequent bad dice though, especially in the same geographic area) could be the end though…

[frood]

There haven’t been many more Japanese dice in that area, because I haven’t allowed her to hit my units anywhere since then (unless she wants to try a suicide run against Sinkiang, I’m sure she’ll have lots of “bad dice” to complain about after that battle)

If anything, the allies have had some bad luck - I lost 2 UK ftrs and 4 US Ftrs taking out the German fleet. Fortunately the allies now own the Atlantic after US3, the Med is empty, and UK owns ALL of Africa, the only extra forces that the UK used was 1 Inf and 1 TRN from NZ, and the Indian Ftr. Not a bad return on investment.

But that’s not thanks to dice, that’s just because the Germans never landed any units there and moved their Med fleet into the open Ocean.

Oh and India is again in UK hands, as it was only defended with 1 Jap Inf at the start of UK4.

I usually feel lucky with the dice but I think that’s because I avoid situations where the dice can do really bad things to me. The one exception being the naval battles in our game, in which I had to bite the bullet because the German navy was really in my face. End result though even with some bad dice is that I now own the Atlantic, and the Baltic is now wide open with lots of Allied TRNs in range, forcing you to keep units back in Germany to fend off any 1-2 punch.

Now, I won’t claim that this comes from the Arc blitz, since in retrospect my Russian tank blitz to Nor in R2 was just as much a waste (except it kept you from uniting your fleet by tempting you to land units in Nor), but I think I’m coming out ahead because I’m economizing better.

Example: in G3, you defended 3 border territories with 3 Inf 1 Arm each. I strafed all three with favourable economic odds. I actually got luckier than I wanted to and ended up capturing two of the territories with a total loss of 4 Inf, with the result that I then lost net 4 Inf to a counter-strafe in Ukraine, but you on the other hand lost 8 Inf 2 Arm to my strafes with Russia. That diff of 2 Arm (10 IPCs) is a big deal, esp. when Russia is earning 28-31 IPCs each round, it really equalizes the income nicely with Germany’s 40., which has to defend against two other allies as well.

So far, Russia, by playing “economically” has actually gained income from the starting position. Now after UK4 the allies have a beachhead and an almost-working shuck, and Allied income is 96 to Axis 70.