Hi! I just figured that there already seem to be pretty good summaries of LHTR vs. the original Revised rulebook. LHTR seemed like the best comparison point since those transport rules seemed to revert largely back to the timing in Classic.
The ADS vs. LL debate
-
I’ve learned that the japs need to exersize a little patience!
-
Darth taught me that too MD.
That is why I am unsure that Japan can put a monkey wrench into an Allied SBR strat…
-
Well, Avin’s bombing the hell out of germany and I’m bombing the hell out of russia. Let’s see what gives!! :-o
-
So far, I’d say the bombing has been about equally damaging to both sides in our game, MD. Note that I sacrificed a larger UK transport/unit build in UK2 to buy a bomber on UK1: had you done something similar with Japan you could have had an extra bomber against Russia as well. Next round I don’t think Russia is going to have hardly any money to spend at all in fact (on R5) given the production you’ve reduced me to plus the bombing.
So switch, are you saying that you’re willing to play LL again to contest your claim?
-
@ncscswitch:
We may have to play this one out Darth…
A Russian picket and turtle to slow Japan, while also providing the means to prevent Germany’s income increase from occuring in Europe… Allied BOMs and a few TRNs…
As you have said before, I don;t think Japan can move that fast…
They can’t move that fast to TAKE Moscow but taking territories is different.
Playing for Moscow and playing for M84 are different. I don’t particularly like M84 but it is still and Axis option.
In two games with Avin, without worrying about an Allied bombing strat, he came very close to being able to make an M84 lunge with Japan, even though Mos wasn’t really in jeopardy and I controlled the middle of the board, and in another game it was also a real possibilty when he took HI on J1 but I re-took Hi with the US early and delibrately tried to prevent it him from even having a shot at M84.
I’m not saying M84 would be guaranteed or anything, just that I think you are taking your one game as an example which I don’t think is fair.
I think G1 made some questionable moves that ensured the Allies an advantage and then the SBRs later compounded the early moves.Consider a 22 bid with 5 inf Afr, 2 inf Man.
Ger will be plus 4 in Afr after G1, J will be plus 3 (Chi, HI)
Now in rd 2, Ger will probably be able to pick up 3 more in Afr (lose Fin) and Japan will get SFE (possibly Ind or go directly to Aus from Hi)Now G is up about 5-6 (loss of Fin), Jap will be up 6-7 (Chi, SFE, Ind or Aus)
So after Rd 2 the IPC Chart looks like 77-70 Allies Adv.
But in rd 3 the Germans should still be at about +6-8 overall (with most of Afr or ME), but again, Japan will take Ind or Aus (possibly NZ), and possibly Sin and Japan will be about +10.
Meaning the Axis now have the IPC adv or are close enough to it.
Granted Moscow is in no threat, but in rd 4 Japan can then lurch to Kaz, Eve, Yak, Ala, and Pan or Mex (from nz). And that puts them very close to M84.
It doesn’t matter if the Japanese troops on the East of Russia can be obliterated by the Russians b/c they may never be able to go IF the US CAN’T prevent the M84 on their turn.
-
The other thing about going for M84 is that Germany can theoretically take advantage of the fact that Russia doesn’t get to go again either: Germany can split forces to UKR or maybe even CAU fully knowing that if Russia got another turn their units would be horribly strafed or taken, but does so anyway because the UK or US may not have enough units on the continent to do that attack themselves and therefore Germany claims those IPCs toward the Axis.
I would agree with the sentiment that winning by M84 is not as satisfying as a normal victory, but I would never play without the option of a M84 victory as long as I was Axis because of the fact that merely by THREATENING M84 you can get the Allies to change their strategy slightly, often to the advantage of the Axis player. And while winning by M84 may not be satisfying, winning because you came very close to M84 several times and the Allies were forced to make attacks or defent territories they would not otherwise have done, which allowed you to secure the lead, IS definitely quite satisfying.
-
I definitely agree with that.
When you took HI in our game, it certainly changed some moves of mine.
Also, my comments about M84, I mean I generally don’t delibrately go after it at the start of rd 1, if it is given to me I’ll take it, and for no other reason then to shift the IPC adv to my favor.
I usually feel if I can get close to it say 78-80 for a turn or 2 (or more), then the game is over regardless. It may take more time, but I think I can lean on people once I have the IPC lead and really start to press the action. -
My final thoughts on this matter:
I generally love the idea of eliminating extreme dice rolls. However in the case of sbr, I LOVE extremes. I love seeing my opponent almost have a heart attack when I send 2 bom and roll boxcars. I love seeing my opponent watch me almost have a heart attack when he rolls snakeeyes on the aa fire. Sometimes extreme is good and fun!!! -
And, as I found out in my only LL game, the extremes are NOT elliminated. They still exist, even on sizable battles.
And that is my main argument against LL. It does NOT prevent dice fracks, while at the same time forcing the game into the same old predictable strats that AS was so fond of.
Personally, I simply like keeping it more honest and letting the dice fracks be a real consideration, and happen to everyone, instead of just being an oddity that only happen once in a game. And of course getting rid of the whole SBR fiasco for all of the above (and in previous threads) reasons.
-
I happen to like dice better too.
Low luck creates too many “risky” moves into “non-risky” moves. You will know that Ukraine will be a safe attack if you have X,Y & Z. Two tanks will never lose to 1 infantry. But in dice, these things are not a “given”.
I think it takes more strategy to “overcome” bad dice than it does playing “A&A chess”.
BTW, normally when people lose, it is not because of bad dice. Most people lose because somewhere they made a mistake. Dice crying is just the excuse used.
But surprisingly, the biggest whiner I ever played against cried in a LL game. Imagine that…
Squirecam
-
Actually there are dice in lowluck. Just ask Avin, who in the first round of our game got seriously “dice fracked”. But to his credit, he didn’t whine.
-
I know there is dice. It’s still “chess-like” to me.
Squirecam
-
chess is good!!!
-
chess is good!!!
When each side has equal units, chess is ok.
A&A sides are not equal.
Squirecam
-
Seriously, if you are going to take the dice out of it, take them out completely… go NO luck.
Otherwise, leave the dice in… ALL the way in. Let Yukon Jack hold off the Japan invasion forces. Let the Italian AA batteries shoot down 4 American planes. Let the last German sub evade destruction for several rounds of aerial assault and then nail a couple of unguarded TRNs off New York.
THESE are the situations that a good player can deal with. They can adjust and counter, or they can adjust and take advantage of them. People like Agent Smith, who simply spent a couple of months with SIM programs to work out the averages on a variety of battles, are NOT as adept at adjusting to such change.
And personally, I’d rather play someone who can adjust and STILL win, than to go up against someone who is banking on the odds that they have researched ad infinitum, ad nauseum… and then says “double or nothing” when they lose because something CHANGED due to dice.
And Squire… you start with either a bid, or some other way to balance (such as Russia Restricted AND Axis Advantage) in order to MAKE things equal.
-
@ncscswitch:
Seriously, if you are going to take the dice out of it, take them out completely… go NO luck.
Otherwise, leave the dice in… ALL the way in. Let Yukon Jack hold off the Japan invasion forces. Let the Italian AA batteries shoot down 4 American planes. Let the last German sub evade destruction for several rounds of aerial assault and then nail a couple of unguarded TRNs off New York.
Why do you play No Tech then? :-D
-
Honestly?
Because for AAR I am still working on mastering basic strats.
For Classic, Tech is a MASSIVE Allied advantage.
-
@ncscswitch:
And Squire… you start with either a bid, or some other way to balance (such as Russia Restricted AND Axis Advantage) in order to MAKE things equal.
I know all about bidding. But in LL, given that german planes are easily destroyed prior to them ever moving (with little to no risk) you would need a larger bid. By removing the uncertainty you remove the risk, hence the axis is in an even worse position after R1.
Even so, given the nature of LL (i.e. once you are behind your 45% attack is useless), being “equal” is pretty impossible.
Chess is “exactly” equal.
Squirecam
-
Hey squire- in lowluck ger planes are easily destroyed prior to even moving?? What in the world would you mean by that??
-
Hey squire- in lowluck ger planes are easily destroyed prior to even moving?? What in the world would you mean by that??
In LL, you can destroy 2 german fighters without any risk, if you do your math correctly.
This places germany in a worse position than a “dice” game, where there is risk. Hence a higher bid.
Squirecam
Suggested Topics
