LL v ADS

[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?

[Guest]

KGF as an overall strat works fine in ADS.  It also works in LL.

But it will differ over the course of a game in either mode.

Not sure what you are getting at, but in ADS, you cannot plan on UK and USA having X troops in Eastern, whereas in LL, you CAN plan on that (with minor variation).

[Lucifer]

@Cmdr:

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!

Why is it so hard to agree with my statement that if KJF works better than KGF this will apply for both ADS and LL?
Why have I never lost to a KJF? Because you do not want to use TripleA!!

Kill America first and Kill England first, try to be serious plz.

[trihero]

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

If it were as I say, both players would be of equal skill. There is no coming back from bad dice except to hope for good dice if your opponent makes no mistakes or at least, not more so than you would.

I’m sure you can beat another player of significantly lesser skill when getting badly diced, and I’m sure you will get beaten by another player of significantly higher skill even when you get good dice, because the skill level is of such difference. But that has nothing to do with perfect strategy. Perfect strategy involves fighting someone who makes no obvious mistakes, and eventually you will fight someone like that, and then your dice will not save you but your overall battlefield vision.

[Lucifer]

@ncscswitch:

KGF as an overall strat works fine in ADS.  It also works in LL.

N1. + 1  :-)

But it will differ over the course of a game in either mode.

Not sure what you are getting at, but in ADS, you cannot plan on UK and USA having X troops in Eastern, whereas in LL, you CAN plan on that (with minor variation).

Not one of my LL games are the same, and EE (?) is usually a trading TT or Germany owns it.
The best LL gamers I’ve seen always play according to the opponent moves and buys.
Except for KGF…

I dont think we have very different opinions on the ADS matter. You see gaming as series of games. This is the
same with LL and ADS, but if a player refuses to play ADS or LL, then he can only claim to be good with one
rule setting.
Skill level will matter both in a single LL game and in a series of LL games, but with ADS you can
only claim superiority when winning series of games, not a single game.
So at least we agree that you are a top player, Switch  :mrgreen:

Some LL players will only play LL, imo any player who use only one ruleset, is claiming false OVERALL gaming
skills if not proven with both ADS and LL.

[trihero]

I agree, the best player is the one who wields the dual swords of ADS and LL. They know how to deal with ADS dice (by taking increasing risks when bad luck comes early, and simply sucking it up when the dice are against them) and they know how to suppress the enemy in the long run if things go average or better (LL).

[Jennifer]

I am serious.  I’ve killed both England and America before Russia in LL games before.

Why does KJF work MORE often in LL then ADS?  Because your submarines AUTOMATICALLY score a hit if you have 3 of them.  That means with 6 submarines you have automatically negated the battleship’s primary weapon at sea, their ability to absorb to hits.

Should 6 submarines get 2 hits anyway in ADS?  Yea.  Do they realistically?  Hell fracking no.  In ADS a submarine only has a 33% chance to get a hit.  Period.  It is NOT cumulative.  It is each individual shot getting a hit or missing.  In LL, you add up the punch and that’s what determines your hits.  My experience is it takes 4 or 5 submarines to realistically expect one hit in ADS. Which is why in ADS you have to build more then just submarines with American to win KJF which is why there is that 6% discrepancy between LL and ADS victories.

And I’d show you, if you were not too chicken to get a real man’s gaming platform like Battlemap or Mapview and drop the girlishly little TripleA program.

[Magister]

I’ve lost the original definition: is ADS the “Analog Dice System” ? ;-)

Agree on most analyses comparing Low Luck. Yes, LL makes mistakes more obvious. Yes, strafing is deadly in LL, and avoided by defenders while in ADS the ‘fuzz’ of uncertainty often deters attackers from trying it, and defenders may profit by keeping a territory with a mid-sized force.

Jen had success with different strategies in LL because: 1) they are not much worse than the original, especially if counting own preparedness/opponent shock and 2) she played enough better than opponents met so far ;-)

[Lucifer]

@Cmdr:

I am serious.  I’ve killed both England and America before Russia in LL games before.

A strat doesn’t work if it doesn’t work often against decent players.
I have been sealioned, and I have done sealion unto others, it doesn’t mean that you can win lots of
games with a sealion strat.

Why does KJF work MORE often in LL then ADS?  Because your submarines AUTOMATICALLY score a hit if you have 3 of them.  That means with 6 submarines you have automatically negated the battleship’s primary weapon at sea, their ability to absorb to hits.

Now we’re back to KJF vs KGF, lets forget about KJF it does not work
against decent players. And KJF is building 90% of US ipc in WUS to use against Jap from rnd 1.
A balanced strat may work better than pure KGF, it may depend on the situation on the map.

Should 6 submarines get 2 hits anyway in ADS?  Yea.  Do they realistically?  Hell fracking no.  In ADS a submarine only has a 33% chance to get a hit.  Period.  It is NOT cumulative.  It is each individual shot getting a hit or missing.  In LL, you add up the punch and that’s what determines your hits.  My experience is it takes 4 or 5 submarines to realistically expect one hit in ADS. Which is why in ADS you have to build more then just submarines with American to win KJF which is why there is that 6% discrepancy between LL and ADS victories.

Very few games that I have seen where good players build many subs,
but subs may be usable sometimes though.

And I’d show you, if you were not too chicken to get a real man’s gaming platform like Battlemap or Mapview and drop the girlishly little TripleA program.

I like TripleA and I like schoolgirls…  :-P
Any strat or tactic that has not been tested in TripleA is not a valid theory  :wink:
The theory of evolution and the theory of gravity are both TripleA certified  :-D