Thank you! That makes sense. That’ll make a mess for uk to deal with lol.
How is the balance with the new Alpha 2 changes? Please give your view.
-
@Cow:
we play LL from round 1. fresh. Predetermined calculator odds is a no go. you roll that one die roll out, allies have to do it too.
If you want to use the calculator’s best guess at results for your attacks on round 1 as the allies, go for it. There’s nothing that the allies can hope to achieve with their round 1 attacks anyway except squander their forces against superior forces. /shrug.
We’ll start LL on round 2 and use the calculator’s best odds for success on round 1. I am just trying to avoid that insanity of one unit destroying something that hs 99% odds of victory by using the calculator on round 1.
After all, we want to test the STRATEGY not the DICE, right? Do you really want 1 infantry shooting up 13 tanks, 48 infantry and 3 fighters without being killed? Neither do I. Hence, the R1 results based on the calculator. It assumes each level, gives the statistically best answer and the most likely outcomes (red and highlighted). Ends the argument that “France defended too well, that’s why the Axis lost” or “You killed all the French units and American units in round 1 without losing ANYTHING! That’s why the Axis won!”) This way, it’s the odds on probability for the end results and this way, no one can say the other won because of dice…LL, NL or PL.
-
give me some time to cook dinner. Also you already did the allies turns and buys. I may want to make changes to them. already opened a thread in the gameplay forum. the game may be fine and bearable for me.
I already know I want to edit a buy.
What time zone are you in?
-
@Cmdr:
@Cow:
low luck except round 1??? pick one or the other.
Allied nations use LL on round 1, Axis use the predetermined calculator odds on round 1, then LL on rounds 2 and forward.
I won’t have some weird fluctuation of the dice allow you to snatch victory from the statistical jaws of defeat. We’ll go with the 10,000 battle odds for the Axis attacks and the mutual destruction in SZ 97 (because that battle has so much flux and I have never seen England not attack nor do well in there anyway, the only real thing is if there is a British ship left or an Italian ship left or no ships left, so just end it now and call it a mutual wipe, for it most certainly usually is anyway.)
I suppose, if you do not want to do the SZ 97 battle, you can move your ships out of the Med. /Shrug. But you’d leave the Europeans a lot more stuff and I think you’d be far happier killing it early…of course, you also said to ignore America with Japan, so maybe you don’t want to cripple the Axis air forces?
I think I saw somewhere back that you think the axis are dominating and always win. Well, I would just like to point out you’re not playing axis and allies. So… quit with the bs.
“I won’t have some weird fluctuation of the dice allow you to snatch victory from the statistical jaws of defeat.”
Well, if you knew statistics you would know that low luck skews the statistics. ex. in low luck 2 tanks will always beat one fighter. In low luck, battles that are 70% turn into 100%. So, for the Sea Lion domination reasons that I believe you gave, and probably all of your battle domination as the axis, those just aren’t true. if you play all 100% battles it’s easy. but a 70% battle, with an 85% battle, with a 90% battle actually give you only 53.55% chance of victory for all of them. So if you think the game is unbalanced toward the axis then you may be right. I wouldn’t know, b/c I don’t play Pansy axis and allies for luck wimps. I play a strategy and war game. Taking away luck also takes away strategy, something that I think a lot of people don’t realize
-
I’ll be watching this game with interest.
CJ, your strategies seem sound and well reasoned. I will say this, “If your strategy can be thwarted by one anomolous round of dice, it is not a strategy that the fate of the free world (or 3rd reich) should hang on”. I am anxiousu to see if you can deliver the blow to USA at Hawaii and still contain UKI and ANZAC.
I’ve been wanting to try this in our group.
-
fire knight ll and dice games are totally different and I agree. they are a matter of player preferences and after time we solve the bid riddle. For example in AA50 dice games allies need somewhere 3-9 ipc and in LL aa50 dice games allies need 13 (for 1941).
And jenn can you send me a copy of all the units so you to where on your attacks so i can verify they were 90% + battles at least. I assume they are.
-
Interesting discussion!
I see your point CJ.
My own version of play goes like this.G1 clear both UK BB fleet and take France.
J1 attack Hawaii sz full force, BB CA DD SS to Philip sz, 3TP capture Philip, 1ftr For 2bmb Jap taken down UK BB, Cha Anh Hun FIC and Hong Kong taken.( yup leave the Yunnan open… so what? ). collect 36
Usually US1 will buy heavily in Pacific at this point.G2 prepare for Sea Lion
J2 pick up Hawaii and Islands, prepare to further strength Hawaiian fleet. making ~50.I admit that Japan has to be very careful on which islands to pick. India and ANZ have free hand to strength their fleet, and if they are bold enough, they can put the contest to the Dutch Islands.
But the point is what can US do now? Sea Lion is almost a guaranteed. a all Pacific US 2 buy will allows it to go on pair with Japan Hawaii fleet, but further delay her progress in Atlantic. It might even reach the point that UK can never taken back.
it is really a “putting every problem on US” strategy! :wink:
-
I can understand why you prefer not to roll out R1 even in low luck, subs are pretty random, since usually they aren’t rolled with the rest of your stuff, but you should post me what attacks you did and not just results. I can look at results on the map.
there usually are a 90% here or there and I can see why you want to take avg unit left results. Openers are not standardized for everyone at this point so I got to check.
Are these your results from another game?
-
ok I still can’t open your global .aam file.
which module are you using? I got functionetta’s oob and I believe stoney’s alpha+2 module. Link me the module you use.
~
you didn’t do any out of the ordinary attacks with G1. the italy naval I need to know what was sent and lost. I am curious why you lost air units there with germany/italy or which specific ships were lost by UK.Just can’t open this map. seems like I am missing that particular module. oh well. night. 12:00AM Hawaiian time. didn’t stay out for long saturday night.
~
I got func’s module OOB and TMTM’s alpha+2. -
Interesting discussion Jenn and Cow
Cow you need to be more honorable with a lady in the house.
Jenn you have shown more grace than I could give.
Jenn, your analysis on China is very good- solid points here though I wonder if you go after US on round 1 in full force like you say and China nor Russia is attacked, I would think US could go ALL/MOSTLY Pacific and keep the Japs occupied. The problem with Japan is that they have to go East then West to get the VCs they need. It takes longer than you think. I am doubting this J1 Gambit- I think a lot has to go right for Axis to pull it off- not convinced yet.
You guys need to quit talking and play it out. :-)
-
@Cow:
give me some time to sht shower shave, look over this sht, and cook dinner. Also you already did the allies turns and buys. I may want to make changes to them. already opened a thread in the gameplay forum. the game may be fine and bearable for me.
I already know I want to edit a buy.
What time zone are you in?
I did no allied buys, CMs or NCMs.
I am in Central Time Zone. I take it this is the thread. (http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22551.0)
Once we iron out the details, I will post Germany and you can post Russia. The above map was in reference to how the Axis forces should be aligned at the end of Round 1.
The only issue is that knowing what will occur, ahead of time, the Allies might have a leg up in stopping it. I take that lightly, as NCSCSwitch knew ahead of time in AAR that Russia would go gangbusters on Germany while America stayed out of it for the most part, focusing mostly on Japan, and it did him no good, and he was one of the best players on the forum. Then again, he was a formula player and had a near impossible time making up ways to counter non-traditional strategies. You, on the other hand, I have never played before, so I am not sure how your imagination works.
AFAIK: Game 1: Japan works on establishing naval supremecy, then destroying England and ANZAC before turning on America, China and Russia if any of them.
Game 2: Japan ignores America entirely, perhaps taking Philippines and/or some unprotected Islands on Round 3 or 4 as you wish. (Cow plays axis on game 2.)
The only question here is: Can Japan stop America from being too powerful navally and will stopping it make the game easier in the long run.
or
Will crushing China make it easier?
That is, in essence, what we are attempting, right?
Questioner,
I see what you are saying, but I think you missed the idea. The idea is to remove America as an effective force by crushing it’s naval power early (and thus, preventing them from ever getting a navy of any decent power.)
Since England has only a Cruiser, 2 Destroyers and a Transport, France has a Destroyer and ANZAC only has a Cruiser, Destroyer and Transport at the start of the game, Japan does not really have to invest against them.
By round 3, those two powers will probably only have a few submarines as well which is still not much of an investment.
Now, it is possible for America to have good defending odds, using CAP fighters, so it is, theoretically, possible to keep the fleet in SZ 10. Unfortunately, it will also be trapped in SZ 10, and it will mean locking their fighters in W. USA and investing solely and fully in the Pacific with no aide to Europe.
Japan to will be locked, but honestly, Japan has no need to invest more, just to move surface ships over to counter the Americans, collecting the NO for Hawaii and denying it to America (along with denying them the Philippines NO) and put submarines in the water to sink whatever ANZAC/England put out. (A new carrier and some destroyers to protect a set of 5 transports, of which you should have all 5 by the end of round 1.)
I never said it was easy, but I do feel it is significantly easier than allowing the United States to amass an amazing force of undefeatable naval strength as is generally the case in every game where America is ignored until China and/or England has been conquered.
So I took the challenge, I have to attack America, virtually ignoring China until ANZAC and England are conquered and then focus on China and Cow, on his turn, has to ignore America until China and England are conquered. (By ignore, I take his meaning to be literally make no attacks against any American units or terrain, save for the Philippines.)
I believe my arrangement is far superior to his arrangement.
-
BTW, yes, I do know that LL and NL skew the statistics, Fire Knight, hence why I said run the 10,000 battle calculator and go with the statistically typical results. That way, it is theoretically possible for 1 infantry to stave off 500 infantry, but it won’t be the most typical outcome and thus will not be recorded in the game.
In general, I am attempting to see how waiting for one round might give Japan a better edge against America. I do not really see it being possible, as America has only to put an IC in Mexico and thus produce 6 naval units a round before the War starts. This is an issue because I have found, in naval engagments, you want to have 3 hit points for every 2 hit points the defender has (A battleship and a cruiser have 3 hit points) and you want to have 125% of the punch (a battleship has 4 punch) before attacking.
OBVIOUSLY, that is not a hard and fast rule, it is just a guideline, and one that has been of insurmountable importance in many a game for me, hence the title I have been given as The Fleetkiller (of course, EM gave me the title because I usually won against slightly poor odds and won decisively, because I am lucky in naval engagements and unlucky in land engagments.)
Also, I never said they would ALWAYS win, I said they would generally win. Dice will ruin any game. “Good Dice beat Good Tactics Everyday!” as they say. However scenario:
America is reduced to SZ 10 and mainland USA.
ANZAC/ENGLAND are sunk before getting the Dutch Islands and thus preventing them from collecting an extra 11 IPC over 4 rounds (actually you should take Borneo too, so that would be -15 IPC over 3 rounds and the loss of 11 IPC for the actual islands. You will need 2 rounds to take them, 1 round to get in position, 1 round to take them.)China is strong, but who cares? As I said, China cannot leave China, thus they cannot do anything of consequence to Japan. They can be annoying and they are relatively difficult to destroy, but none of what they have is what Japan needs anyway.
On the otherside of the world, England is beat on Round 3. We all know that, over 10,000 battles the vast majority of the time, Sea Lion is successful. Since America is investing in the Pacific, they obviously cannot then invest in the defense of London nor the liberation of London for quite some time. Therefore, it is safe to assume that London will be firmly in German hands for most, if not the entire, game from Germany 3 on.
With America fighting for dear life in the Pacific, London in German hands, Italians taking out Africa (since African defense forces will slowely dwindle and die off whereas Italian military forces can be replenished, this is safe to assume) and perhaps even a minor Japanese invasion into Russia, it is safe to assume Russian days are numbered.
After all, all Germany need do is sit a submarine in SZ 125, and she should have some to spare for this. Russia, with no destroyers of her own, and no realistic ability to create any, and with their fleet trapped in the Baltic, will never dislodge this submarine and thus, should never have their NO.
With all those floating transports Germany will have, keeping Scandinavia shouldn’t be hard at all. With the Egypt, England and Sweedish NOs, they should quickly consume Russian hegemony and replace it with Socialism.
-
@Cmdr:
Questioner,
I see what you are saying, but I think you missed the idea. The idea is to remove America as an effective force by crushing it’s naval power early (and thus, preventing them from ever getting a navy of any decent power.)
Since England has only a Cruiser, 2 Destroyers and a Transport, France has a Destroyer and ANZAC only has a Cruiser, Destroyer and Transport at the start of the game, Japan does not really have to invest against them.
By round 3, those two powers will probably only have a few submarines as well which is still not much of an investment.
Now, it is possible for America to have good defending odds, using CAP fighters, so it is, theoretically, possible to keep the fleet in SZ 10. Unfortunately, it will also be trapped in SZ 10, and it will mean locking their fighters in W. USA and investing solely and fully in the Pacific with no aide to Europe.
Japan to will be locked, but honestly, Japan has no need to invest more, just to move surface ships over to counter the Americans, collecting the NO for Hawaii and denying it to America (along with denying them the Philippines NO) and put submarines in the water to sink whatever ANZAC/England put out. (A new carrier and some destroyers to protect a set of 5 transports, of which you should have all 5 by the end of round 1.)
No, I got your point, I just haven’t had time to look at the map (starting setup to A2) this weekend- little busy. I’m just going off memory here for the moment.
You know a simple setup change- DD to block in SZ (i forget now) off Hawaii could stop all this. Might be needed if this gambit seems to powerful.
Also the Guaranteed Sealion on round 3 in practice is not as simple as in Alpha1. According to my calculations, Allies have a very slight punch advantage- the extra ftr in Fra- flown back to England makes a huge difference- Britain can stack and make Germany pay. Are you assuming an AC is not bought to get you some extra TTs or aircraft???
Really I’m gonna have to play out your opening moves and see for myself- I think I’ll try that today and see when I get home tonight.
-
The fighters in France should be toast on Germany 1.
Germany should get Normandy, France, Yugoslavia, SZ 111 in Germany 1, leaving them with 70 IPC. (Perhaps SZ 110, but generally, if I hit SZ 110, its because I am not intending on Sea Lion.)
England should have: Fighter in Scotland, 2 Fighters in England (+1 French one), 1 Fighter in Gibraltar, 1 Fighter in Malta and 1 Tactical Bomber in SZ 98. If you move them all to England, you do have a slight edge (assuming you block shore bombardments with a destroyer and move an infantry/armor from canada to england.)
However, this gives Italy a free hand and I have yet to see an England player do this. Generally they might build everything in England, but they do prosecute a fight against Italy and thus, under those circumstances Germany with 10 Aircraft and 22 Ground forces SHOULD be able to win. Indeed, if England does not reinforce from England, the odds of German success goes to 90%. (Still assumes fighters in England and they do not fly cap and thus do not die, assumes Canadian forces go to Brazil or something and some British surface warship is used to block BB/CA bombardments.)
-
@Cmdr:
Germany should get Normandy, France, Yugoslavia, SZ 111 in Germany 1, leaving them with 70 IPC. (Perhaps SZ 110, but generally, if I hit SZ 110, its because I am not intending on Sea Lion.)
Why ? I am really curious because, personally, i do the oposite : sz 110 is my most important target on G1 if i intend sea lion.
-
@Cmdr:
The fighters in France should be toast on Germany 1.
Germany should get Normandy, France, Yugoslavia, SZ 111 in Germany 1, leaving them with 70 IPC. (Perhaps SZ 110, but generally, if I hit SZ 110, its because I am not intending on Sea Lion.)
England should have: Fighter in Scotland, 2 Fighters in England (+1 French one), 1 Fighter in Gibraltar, 1 Fighter in Malta and 1 Tactical Bomber in SZ 98. If you move them all to England, you do have a slight edge (assuming you block shore bombardments with a destroyer and move an infantry/armor from canada to england.)
However, this gives Italy a free hand and I have yet to see an England player do this. Generally they might build everything in England, but they do prosecute a fight against Italy and thus, under those circumstances Germany with 10 Aircraft and 22 Ground forces SHOULD be able to win. Indeed, if England does not reinforce from England, the odds of German success goes to 90%. (Still assumes fighters in England and they do not fly cap and thus do not die, assumes Canadian forces go to Brazil or something and some British surface warship is used to block BB/CA bombardments.)
Jen, you will have to list your Buys, CMs and NCMs for G1 and J1- assume that USSR just builds and NCM of course. I feel like you are leaving something out here. What you describe doesn’t seem to really add up. Just sounds like a lot of ifs to me.
Yeah, I’m already starting to see counters to some of these moves- yet again, a lot of analysis (talk), but no play results. I wanna see some games results that prove this.
-
I want to see a link to the module so I can open up this file so I can start. :\
-
@Cow:
I want to see a link to the module so I can open up this file so I can start. :\
Ask Functionetta, you’ll need his file for it, unfortunately.
Germany 1 Buys are simple enough: Destroyer, Submarine, Aircraft Carrier. You may need the warships to attack SZ 110 later and you’ll need the carrier to defend your transports from British air attack.
Japan 1 buy is also simple, 2 submarines, 2 transports or 3 transports save 5. I generally go with the submarines since you may need them later.
Germany 1 Combats: Normandy, France, SZ 111, Yugoslavia, SZ 106 (off canada), SZ 91 for sure. I’d like to see better odds to stretch Germany thing by hitting SZ 110 too, to be honest.
Anyway, certain things really screw up the game: highly effective British counter fire, highly inaccurate German naval fire or both for one.
-
hmMmmmmMMM… I have all the modules I need and I followed the instructions. Are you using windows 7 or OSX or a linux OS? I am on windows 7, but I also have ubuntu partitioned.
-
Me? Windows 7 / Vista as the need arises. I know there was a second module released a month or two ago that “fixed” some bugs. Since I do not know what “bugs” were fixed, I cannot say it was better or worse, but I know you cannot open the file saved in one module with the older module…and no, I have no frazzin clue why about that either…I hate users, I double hate power users and I am really getting the feeling that 99% of users should pack up their computers in the original packing material and return their computers to the manufacturers with the following note: “This user is to stupid to own a computer.”
But I digress…I’ll never check my email account, and I don’t give out the one I do use to anyway, so I would ask Mollari, Gamerman, JMite or Functionetta for the most recent incarnation of the battlemap module.
For the record, I am not starting our game until I get some games cleared. I need to end my game with Gamerman and my Tournament game…though, I fear I will win my tournament game and be subjected to another, if only to retain my crown as Jennifer, the Omni-Radiant, Queen of Axis and Allies, Consort of Enhanced Axis and Allies and Die Flottenmörderin. lol
-
if only to retain my crown as Jennifer, the Omni-Radiant, Queen of Axis and Allies, Consort of Enhanced Axis and Allies and Die Flottenmörderin. lol
The best part is… you’ll never be The King baby. :P
Suggested Topics
