LL v ADS

[Lucifer]

Some tactics and strats may differ from ADS or LL, but still I think most strats and the crucial factors are valid
both for ADS and LL.
The German navy strat could possibly be a tactic which might work in ADS, because of the overkill needed,
this could mean that the fleet will last one, maybe even 2 rnds more than in LL.
As for KJF or KGF, LL or ADS have absolutely no impact of weather the KJF is as good as KGF. And for the balanced strat, switching to Asia midgame, LL or ADS have no impact here either.

Another issue which is a distinct difference from ADS to LL, if you play against someone who is very good then
ADS or LL makes it kind of “another game”. As much as I hate to admit it, this is difference that matters imo.
When discussing different strats and tactics, my experience in revised is both LL and ADS, so that’s why I
see things the way I see it, the most important factors are the same in my eyes, even if not other players agree.
You need fleet protection, inf are good for defending etc, most general issues are the same both in LL and ADS.

The difference from LL to ADS which I can admit to some degree, that makes it “another game”, is when playing
against someone who is a much better player.
In 1vs1 games with LL setting, if you are not a top player, but a newb like me, if you then play against the best
LL players then you have a much lesser chance of winning than if it is an ADS game. This is a huge difference.
I can win against anyone I think, I have not yet played a game with ADS in which an opponent seemed
unbeatable for me. As Switch pointed out, maybe 20% of all ADS games is decided by the dice. This can be both
1% or 100% if 2 players are very equal, or they are not on the same level, then good luck cannot save the allies player if he loses London and make other big mistakes i.e.
So in the context of winning or losing against some other player, then LL makes it another game yes.

[Lucifer]

@Sir:

Interesting thread!

I’ve never understood why people play LL, I think it does take the fun out of the game.

You are right about that, in some situations imo.
I wish there was only one set of rules, would be much easier. About LL or ADS, some players are not
fun to play against with LL. With ADS anyone can possibly beat any opponent, in a single game.
Some of the different opinions on this matter is that, as a LL player I will not want to lose against
a player who’s not playing better than me. As an ADS player I would like to have the possibility to
beat anyone, even if an opponent beat me 8-9 out of 10 games. So this is why different players choose to
play with different rules I guess.

[axis_roll]

@Lucifer:

Some of the different opinions on this matter is that, as a LL player I will not want to lose against
a player who’s not playing better than me. As an ADS player I would like to have the possibility to
beat anyone, even if an opponent beat me 8-9 out of 10 games. So this is why different players choose to play with different rules I guess.

So bad players who can only win with good dice play ADS?  And only the ‘better’ play always wins in LL?

That is how I interpret your post.  It’s not plainly stated, but it certainly is implied if not written between the lines.

[Lucifer]

@axis_roll:

So bad players who can only win with good dice play ADS?  And only the ‘better’ play always wins in LL?

That is how I interpret your post.  It’s not plainly stated, but it certainly is implied if not written between the lines.

How can you interpret my post this way?? I said: against a better LL player, or against a much better LL player.
Some players who will only play with LL are not good with ADS until they prove it, but I think generally the
best LL players will also be better than average in ADS. Jennifer has “34 wins - 13 losses” under her avatar.
She did not achieve 34 wins because of luck, maybe 25-30 wins because of luck, and maybe with average dice she
should win 40-45 games  :wink:
And I specifically stated that I can still not win against the best LL players I have met, that is until I become a
better LL player myself.
I’m also talking about a single game, although I have played several games against better LL players, it’s
very very hard to win against a much better LL player with LL rules in a LL game.
I have said several times that in a league, ladder, or ranking, any series of games, say more than 10 games,
it’s very obvious that no player can achieve many victories (more than 50%) with good luck and bad skills.
Seriously, I would really like to play an ADS game against the best LL players.
I would not expect to win, but who knows….

[Mr Ghoul]

And only the ‘better’ play always wins in LL?

Isn’t that the point?

[Lucifer]

@Lucifer:

She did not achieve 34 wins because of luck, maybe 25-30 wins because of luck, and maybe with average dice she
should win 40-45 games

Hmmmm…I meant to say around 10 games possibly out of 34, not 30 (!) because of luck, more or less, and then it  could be that out of the 34 - 13 record, bad luck happen several times so it could also be 10 games +/- lost which
would be won with average dice.
But with so many games played, chances are that the dice rolls will balance good and bad luck,
although this is not guaranteed with only one player.
It’s a very big difference between luck in a single game, and luck when someone play 10 games or more
and both the wins and losses are recorded.
A difference between LL and ADS is that in a LL game if one of the players are not on the same level,
it’s much harder to win a single game, and there is luck in LL, but not much.

Jennifer, with that 34 - 13 record you would pwn me, even as axis with no bids  :wink:

[Jennifer]

I admit, a few of the games I won were because of luck, but that’s about equal to the number of games I’ve lost because of luck.

Thing that gets me is all of my off the wall, whacked out ideas work perfectly in LL.  But in ADS they normally get shot down.

[trihero]

Thing that gets me is all of my off the wall, whacked out ideas work perfectly in LL.  But in ADS they normally get shot down.

This only because you do not persevere over bad luck. You cannot expect LL’s strategy to manifest itself in ADS as often, but if it’s actually good planning, then it should more often than not.

I admit, a few of the games I won were because of luck, but that’s about equal to the number of games I’ve lost because of luck.

So then how does one learn strategy games are thrown off by both good and bad luck?

[Lucifer]

I use both LL and ADS. Does LL makes it another game from ADS? To me not, generally speaking.
Most strats and tactics that I use, and also other players I have seen playing, are generally the same.
The overkill needed in ADS is not a different tactic imo.
I agree with Bean that in strategic sense the difference is minor, but I disagree with ADS vs LL on
a competitive level.
What is preferred and why? If LL is not fun then we use ADS. And vice versa.

I’m surprised that some players want to re-roll using ADS, what is the point using ADS if you are not happy
with the dice rolls?
I should not need to explain the difference between playing 40 games and playing a single game.
If some of you are in denial or not, weather you like it or hate it, it’s a fact that anything can happen in a dice game.
Maybe thats what make ADS fun to play.
Actually I would prefer that LL didn’t exist :)
It would make A&A gaming easier.
But LL is here is not going away, LL is almost like porn eh…
One difference for me is that I still haven’t played anyone who seemed unbeatable to me in ADS, but with
LL thats different.
There are several players who will beat me more often than 50% in a series of ADS or LL games. 
I’m not the best LL player nor the best ADS player.
The difference from a winning perspective is that you need several games to be sure to beat an opponent in ADS.
This is where LL and ADS differs.
ADS can fun as a fun game, but it’s not competitive compared to LL.
This is because you need a series of games to determine the best player in ADS.
Because there is much more luck in ADS than LL, if two players play 10 games with ADS this will
give numbers that are trustworthy.
In LL sometimes you need only one game against an opponent to know that he’s a much better LL player.
So in ADS you need several games, but in LL you usually need only one game to know
if you are on the same level 'as your opponent.

On a competitive level, LL makes it another game.

[Imperious Leader]

そしてそこに彼はまだ再度ある…. 彼が感じる従って不十分彼が軸線で会員からの注意を必要とした、彼の社会的な必要性を満たされて得るために.orgを同盟するので彼の狂犬病の打撃が本質何でもへ加えないことを身に着けていたが、ポスターとのより多くの問題を起こすこと数週間後後出て来るNuno。

LOL :-D

[trihero]

LL is mostly an attempt to warrant/validate weaker strategic/tactical concepts through rule change

Funny, I think the exact opposite - ADS validates bad strategies because of hot dice. Everyone who defends ADS is so hot on shooting LL but don’t realize their own hypocrisy. How can you have good strategy with good or bad dice canceling it? I think players should be equally skilled in both LL and ADS, being good in just one or the other just isn’t suffcient.

[Guest]

For me it is the adaptability of the player to good and bad dice that happens in ADS that makes me favor it.

In LL your major battles are effectively foregone conclusions, + or - a few units.  Your strafes can be perfectly planned and executed.

In ADS, neither of those is possible.

And personally, I think that the gamer who can best take advantage of both hot AND cold dice is a superior gamer due to their flexibility… which demonstrates a superior tactical and strategic skill in my opinion.

In LL, you end up with Agent Smith’s who have years of work with sims to lock down specific strats that always work.

[trihero]

In LL your major battles are effectively foregone conclusions, + or - a few units.  Your strafes can be perfectly planned and executed.

Hence why it is PERFECT for ANALYZING strategies, not having to toss out every other game due to hot dice.

In ADS, neither of those is possible.

How possible is strategy in ADS? I’m beginning to ignore posts that glorify one side or the other, because it’s hypocritical not to look at how either one damages the game.

And personally, I think that the gamer who can best take advantage of both hot AND cold dice is a superior gamer due to their flexibility… which demonstrates a superior tactical and strategic skill in my opinion.

There’s nothing you can do to adapt to bad dice, except to play in a losing fashion and hope the enemy makes a mistake or take ridiculous chances. There’s nothing tactical about hoping for good dice to correct your game.

[Guest]

That is not true Bean.

You can indeed compensate for bad dice with NCM’s, builds, etc.  And you can also take advantage of hot dice via the same mechanisms.

I have won games after bad R1 dice.
I have lost games after hot R1 dice.

If it were as you say, neither of those should be possible.

And the reason LL is not a viable test for strategy…
At least one dice frack is guaranteed to occur in any given game.  More likely you will have several.  A typical game will roll at least 50 rounds of combat.  That means that over those 50 rounds of combat, the odds of 2% probability dice results is 100% for at least one round of combat.  And a single round of extremely hot or extremely cold dice can make a radical change in a strat (for the good or for the worse).

And since a dice frack for at least one player is a virtual certainty for at least one combat in any given game, a strat test that is contingent on NO dice fracks is invalid in my opinion.

[Jennifer]

As I said, all my off the wall, whacko ideas work flawlessly in LL.

Put them in an ADS game, and the theory of compounding errors will eventually destroy almost every off the wall I have come up with.  But, in LL, there is little to no compounding of errors.

BTW, when I say compounding of errors, I mean when one round of a battle goes exceptionally well or bad (even if trivial like 3 infantry + fighter losing both infantry to the defender with or without killing the defender) and the same result happens multiple times and has to be adjusted for by both sides, and thus negating that move you had perfectly planned 5 game rounds later with your ally nation because the board doesn’t resemble anything like it would in a LL game (where 3 infantry and a fighter almost cannot possibly lose to a defending infantry.)

[Lucifer]

@Cmdr:

As I said, all my off the wall, whacko ideas work flawlessly in LL.

Put them in an ADS game, and the theory of compounding errors will eventually destroy almost every off the wall I have come up with.  But, in LL, there is little to no compounding of errors.

Like KGF? I think this is the best overall strat. I have never lost to a KJF.
How is KGF not working in ADS?
You cannot preplan moves in LL, because every game is different. Even in 10 LL games against same opponent,
playing same side same bids, not one player will do exactly the same moves.
And there is variation in LL games, much less than ADS, but enough to make you lose a game because of dice.
If all your ideas work flawlessly in LL, then you win every single LL game you ever played? no?  :roll:

[Lucifer]

@ncscswitch:

And the reason LL is not a viable test for strategy…

So you cannot test KGF in a LL game?
Giving Afr to Germany may work with LL but not in ADS, or it’s not a problem in an ADS game
if Germany gets 50+ ipc?

[Guest]

As I said, it is my OPINION that a gamer who can work with the dice, good or bad, and consistently win 70%+ of their games is a superior gamer.

In LL, while there is some fluctuation, in the major battles (the game deciding battles) there is little variation.  While in ADS, there can be MASSIVE variation.

I cannot even begin to count the number of times that I have said to a gamer that, in a battle with large numbers of INF, you have to disregard the SIMs because they cannot be counted on in battles with large numbers of low value units.  That statement will never need to be made to a gamer playing LL.

When you know EXACTLY how many hits you will score in a given round of battle, + or - 1 unit, that is hell and gone different from a game where every potential roll of the dice COULD be perfect offense and/or perfect defense.

In LL, you do not have to plan for how to compensate for 9 enemy INF hitting out of 12.  In ADS, you DO have to plan for that possibility… if you want to have a winning record.

[Jennifer]

No, I mean the Australian Complex works in LL.  The S. Africa Complex works in LL.  Kill Japan First has worked 90% of the time for me in LL (only 84% in ADS, but my opponents were not as skilled as the ones I played in LL).  Kill AMERICA first works in LL, not in ADS.  Kill England First works in LL.  German fleet works in LL.

I have not yet tried the Russian Battleship purchase on R1 and R2, but I betcha, I can make it work in LL!

[Lucifer]

Switch, you didn’t answer my question. We all know about the difference of LL and ADS battles.
There’s no need to mention that 12 tanks will always score 6 hits in LL (first rnd of combat),
but in ADS it will often be more than 6 hits, or less than 6 hits.
So what about KGF?